LOST To Be Voted On Today, Get On The Phone

World Net Daily:

The U.S Senate is scheduled to vote today on the ratification of the United Nations' Law of the Sea Treaty, a wide-ranging measure critics say will grant the U.N. control of the 70 percent of the planet under its oceans.

With Democrats in nearly unanimous agreement with the treaty and the Bush administration behind it, it will be up to a handful of determined Republican senators to derail it.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell has indicated he will oppose the plan, and other senators have indicated they have heard from constituents who are afraid of the proposal.

"In the same way that the people prevailed in the Senate in the matter of defeating the illegal alien amnesty bill, it is entirely possible that the U.N. power grab known officially as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) could be rejected," one commentator noted.

"If you want a U.N. on steroids, you want the Law of the Sea Treaty," Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., has said.

A two-thirds vote is required for approval, meaning only 34 "no" votes can kill it.

...

The Heritage Foundation warns the treaty would have unintended consequences for U.S. interests – including a threat to sovereignty.

The conservative think tank says "bureaucracies established by multilateral treaties often lack the transparency and accountability necessary to ensure that they are untainted by corruption, mismanagement or inappropriate claims of authority. The LOST bureaucracy is called the International Seabed Authority Secretariat, which has a strong incentive to enhance its own authority at the expense of state sovereignty."

"For example, this treaty would impose taxes on U.S. companies engaged in extracting resources from the ocean floor," wrote Heritage fellows Baker Spring and Brett D. Schaefer. "This would give the treaty's secretariat an independent revenue stream that would remove a key check on its authority. After all, once a bureaucracy has its own source of funding, it needs answer only to itself."

"The United States should be wary of joining sweeping multilateral treaties negotiated under the auspices of the United Nations," say Spring and Schaefer of Heritage. "Specifically, the benefit to U.S. national interests should be indisputable and clearly outweigh the predictable negative consequences of ratification."

Other critics fear the treaty will be used as a back-door to implement policies against global warming without any accountability to the American people. Parts of the treaty, they say, mandate international regulation of U.S. economic and industrial activities on land. With that in mind, critics of the treaty believe so-called greenhouse gases could be viewed as ocean pollutants.

Read the whole story.

We need to do what is best for the U.S. Giving up our sovereignty is not it.

Get on the phones.

Senate contact numbers can be found here.

RWN: Proof Of Rudy's Bad Intentions On Illegal Immigration

John Hawkins gives his review of this article:

If you turn off the job magnet by cracking down on businesses that knowingly hire illegals, the overwhelming majority of illegals who are already here will leave and the torrent of illegals crossing our Southern border will slow to a trickle.

On the other hand, if you take the Rudy Giuliani approach, then the illegal immigration problem becomes unsolvable because you really can't round up and deport them all. The only practical way to get rid of most of the illegals who are already here is to make life as miserable for them as possible, cut off their sources of income, and thereby force them to self-deport.

Check out the rest of his post here.

We simply cannot afford to put Rudy in the general election.

How Long Does It Take Hillary To Fip Flop?

About 45 seconds:

It is funny to watch the candidates try to answer questions they have not prepared for. The question clearly caught "her thighness" off guard. When she realized what she had said, she tried to save face but it was too late.

Hillary is supposed to be a very smart women. She is not. What she is good at is politics.

Congress Deserves The 11% Approval Rating

From Politico:

In a closed-door meeting before the last vote on the children’s health care bill, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer appealed for the support of about 30 wavering Republican lawmakers. What he got instead was a tongue-lashing, participants said.

The GOP lawmakers, all of whom had expressed interest in a bipartisan deal on the SCHIP legislation, were furious that the Democratic leader from Maryland had not reached out to them in a more serious way early on. They also criticized him and Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois for failing to stop his allies outside Congress from running attack ads in their districts, while they were discussing a bipartisan deal.

The result was a predictable one for this bitterly divided Congress. The House vote for a second SCHIP bill was a healthy majority, but not the two-thirds needed to override another veto vowed by President Bush. Only one Republican switched his vote — to oppose the measure.

Democrats accused Republicans of hurting kids. Republicans howled about a heavy-handed, uncompromising Democratic majority. And another chance at bipartisan consensus slipped away.

“They spent $1.5 million through their various shill outreach groups attacking me and a handful of my colleagues,” Rep. Ric Keller (R-Fla.) said before the Hoyer meeting, “but they did not spend five minutes to approach me to ask for my vote.”

This us-against-them mentality has been an ongoing storyline of the new Democratic­-controlled Congress. On the big items — Iraq, health care and spending — party leaders have shunned compromise.

Democrats are under tremendous pressure from liberal activists to take a hard-line approach against everything Bush. Republicans face similar pressure from their own base to stick with the president and prove they are serious about curtailing spending, even if it means less cash for a popular state-run health care program for children not covered by Medicaid.

Bush has only inflamed those tensions. He has threatened to veto Democratic legislation 46 times this year, according to data compiled by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). House Democrats have circulated a tally that puts the number at 35.

Of course Bush has threatened to veto some of the stuff coming out of Congress.

I agree that the Republicans have grown way to accustomed to big spending. That is the reason they are no longer in control of Congress. That being said the tax cuts have really helped the economy. If they were to cut spending it is hard to tell how good the economy would be.

The Democrats have shown no interest in the bi-partisanship they talked about in the run-up to the last elections. All we have had are investigations and insane legislation from them.

Terrorist Leaders Are Worried About Olmert's Health

From World Net Daily:

Palestinian terrorists today expressed frantic concern for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's health following media reports he would hold a news conference announcing the diagnosis of a medical ailment.

At the news conference, held at 1 p.m. Jerusalem time, Olmert told reporters he will undergo a surgical procedure in the coming months to remove the early stages of a "cancerous tumor" in his prostate.

Olmert told the packed news conference he would continue with his duties as prime minister and will not undergo chemotherapy or radiation. He said the tumor was detected 10 days ago during a routine checkup, shortly before a trip to Russia.

The prime minister's doctors said the microscopic tumor was very treatable and the surgery was not urgent.

Prior to the press conference, television channels and radio networks today dramatically announced Olmert would disclose an unspecified illness.

Following the reports, WND's Jerusalem bureau received calls from almost a dozen terrorists, including senior leaders, asking whether the online news agency had any information about Olmert's illness and expressing concern for the prime minister.

The terrorists were all members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the declared military wing of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party. The Brigades, together with Palestinian Islamic Jihad, took responsibility for every suicide bombing in Israel the past three years and has carried out thousands of shootings, grenade attacks and rocket launchings aimed at Jewish civilian population centers.

"I don't want him to leave office or die before he has the occasion to follow through with his promises of granting amnesty," said one leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.

He may be the only Jew these terrorists do not want to see dead.

I have complained about Olmert time and again on this blog. He is too eager to give up strategic sites inside Israel.

I hope he is alright and makes a full recovery from whatever health issues he has. I also hope that he changes his beliefs that if he gives in to the terrorists, they will suddenly stop wanting to kill the citizens of Israel.

Mark Levin At FRC Values Voters

Listen to Mark's speech here.

The speech is about half an hour, but it is well worth your time.

Fred On International Global Gun Control

Via The Gun Nut:

Last year, the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights declared that international human rights law requires all nations to adopt strict gun control laws. These “minimum” provisions are much more restrictive than any of those on the books anywhere in the U.S. and would almost certainly violate the Second Amendment of our Constitution.

Besides concluding that all nations are obligated under international human rights law to control the small arms and light weapons to which its civilian population has access, the UN report remarkably denied the existence of any human right to self-defense, evidently overlooking the work of Hugo Grotius, the 17th century scholar credited as the founder of international law, who wrote, “It is to be observed that [the] Right of Self-Defence, arises directly and immediately from the Care of our own Preservation, which Nature recommends to every one. . . ,” and that this right is so primary, that it cannot be denied on the basis that it is not “expressly set forth.”

There is another disturbing aspect to this call for international global gun control. Throughout modern history, the forced disarmament of people by its government has often been accompanied or followed by that government’s commission of often massive human rights abuses. In fact, no genocide in the 20th century occurred when the victim population still possessed small arms, legally or illegally, with which to defend themselves.

So now the UN wants to disarm civilians? Where was the UN when the massacres in Rwanda occurred? What did the UN do to protect the victims of ethnic massacres in Bosnia? Disarming civilians under the guise of international human rights law will only lead to more such genocides by ensuring that civilians can never defend themselves! It would be funny if it weren’t so perverse.

Thankfully, the Framers of our Constitution recognized this potential peril to our liberty, and enshrined in our Second Amendment the more basic right of self-defense. The U.N. can say what it likes about other countries’ citizens’ possession of small arms being a violation of human rights law, but so long as the United States is a sovereign nation governed by its Constitution, its words will have no effect here. And I am glad for it.

Once again Fred gets it.

The UN held meetings in July of this year. They have for several years now. The objective of these meetings have been to take guns from the citizens in all nations that are in the UN.

Win, Fred, Win

What Has Happened To The Hurricanes?

The Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies:

Unless a dramatic and perhaps historical flurry of activity occurs in the next 9 weeks, 2007 will rank as a historically inactive TC year for the Northern Hemisphere as a whole. During the past 30 years, only 1977, 1981, and 1983 have had less activity to date (January-TODAY, Accumulated Cyclone Energy). However, the year is not over...

2007 lowest September activity on record since 1977

For the period of June 1 - TODAY, only 1977 has experienced LESS tropical cyclone activity than 2007. There are currently two worldwide tropical cyclones: Tropical Storm Noel and Unnamed Arabian Sea TS...

On average to date (1970-2006), the Eastern Pacific season is 97% completed, Western Pacific 82%, North Atlantic 93% and overall Northern Hemisphere 87%.

Remember how global warming was the cause of Katrina, and it would only get worse. How can this report be true?

The fact is, the change that takes place in the climate is still a mystery. Al Gore does not have it figured out any more than the average Joe on the street. Scientist don't know what is going to occur either.

Trouble In The Democratic Party

It seems a lot of people in the Democratic party are upset with there members in Congress:

An ardent lifelong Democrat, Hillary Keyes thought that when her party took control of Congress, it would finally bring an end to the Iraq war. After all, to her the 2006 election was a mandate on Iraq.

But Keyes is at the 2007 state Democratic Party convention this weekend, still pleading with members of Congress from her own party to end the war.

"It's so frustrating," said Keyes, of Boca Raton. "People I know are frustrated with the Democratic Party."

While the war for most is the biggest issue in America, ending it has become a serious dividing point for Democrats. At the state Democratic Party convention, the division is hard to miss.

While state Democrats were listening to U.S. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., speak on Saturday, anti-war activists were a few miles away demanding an end to the war and expressing doubt that Democrats would stand up and get the job done.

Many Democrats see Hoyer's moderate approach to Iraq as a key reason why Democrats in Congress have settled for modest bipartisan measures to bring incremental change rather than bringing the troops home and challenging Bush more aggressively.

To some Democrats, it looks like their party's leaders are afraid that Republicans will label them as irresponsible if they advocate immediate withdrawal.

That includes the presidential candidates, who some say should be more aggressive in calling for an end to the war.

"The Republicans have been able to play the card calling the Democrats 'soft on terror,' and so most of the candidates haven't come out strong enough against it," said Jim White of Gainesville.

Read the rest at the link.

This may be a good sign for the Republicans in '08. The Democratic party is torn between the anti war crowd and the moderate Democrats that do not want to lose the war. It has been difficult for the democratic candidates to pander to both sides of the argument.

Condoleezza Rice Gets Advice On "Middle East Peace" From Carter And Clinton

Reuters:

Anxious not to repeat mistakes of past Middle East peace-making, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has turned to former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter for tips ahead of her own conference this year.

Rice invited Carter, a vocal critic of Bush administration policies, to the State Department on Wednesday where the two discussed his Arab-Israeli peacemaking efforts in the 1970s, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said on Friday.

Their talks were "good and cordial," he said. They focused on the Middle East and not Carter's recent criticism of President George W. Bush's policies in Iraq and elsewhere.

A Soviet specialist, Rice also telephoned another former Democratic president, Bill Clinton, who tried, and ultimately failed, in his eight years in office to bring the Israelis and Palestinians together.

There never has been and never will be peace between Israel and the Arabs.

If the Bush administration is looking for a "Legacy", they need to look somewhere else. It will not happen.

Another "Proud" Moment For The Democrat Led Congress

Looks like they have set another record:

Today, President announced a new record set by the Democrat-controlled Congress.

"Today Congress set a record they should not be proud of: October the 26th is the latest date in 20 years that Congress has failed to get a single annual appropriations bill to the President's desk."

It looks like they have accomplished giving us the "change" they promised before the election. Unfortunately it has all been change for the worst, not the better. So far all they have given us is stupid investigations and meaningless legislature. Of course they did get a chance to reprimand Rush for nothing. And they got rid of Scooter Libby. Other than that what have they done?

Now we get Rangel wanting to go ahead and destroy job growth, as well as the economy. Nancy and Harry wanting to grow SCHIP into an unsustainable monster. Hillary wanting to give us the health care Cuba has. Etc...

Wonder how long the Democrats are going to enjoy that 11% favorable rating. Single digits can not be far away.

Congress Rebukes BATF For Going After Gun Dealers

From WorldNetDaily:

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has been given a
rebuke by Congress for its aggressive attacks on firearms dealers who may have paperwork errors in their record-keeping.

The citation in the 2008 Appropriations Bill was pointed out by Ryan Horsley, who manages the historic Red's Trading Post in Twin Falls, Idaho, and blogs about 2nd Amendment issues.

As WND has reported, his company is in a court fight now with the federal agency over paperwork errors that largely involved insignificant issues, such as a missing poster or a purchaser failing to provide a county of residence to accompany and street and city address.

Inspectors for the BATFE have been visiting his business regularly in search of records mistakes, he said.

Read it all at the link above.

This kind of thing must be stopped.

What did Congress say?:

"The committee has heard reports that AFT has pursued license revocations and denials against firearms dealers based on violations that consist largely of recordkeeping errors of various types that are unlikely to impede tracing investigations or prosecution of individuals who use firearms in crime," the members of Congress said. "The Committee encourages AFT to consider lesser gradation of sanctions for recordkeeping errors."

Rangel Introduces His Tax Plan

From the Washington Times:

The Democrats' top tax-writer yesterday introduced a massive plan to give tax relief to 90 million working families, a long-anticipated tax-code overhaul that Republicans criticized as the largest proposed tax increase in U.S. history.

The bill would expand income-tax breaks for the middle class while limiting deductions and adding taxes on high-end earners, increase the tax rate on "carried interest" fund managers earn on investments, and cut corporate tax rates. The Democratic plan also would repeal the alternative minimum tax (AMT), because it is set to penalize middle-income families this year.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel, New York Democrat, said the changes would provide Americans a "greater sense of equity and fairness" about the tax system.

...

Republicans say the rewrite of the tax code, which Mr. Rangel touts as the "mother of all tax reforms," would raise taxes $1.3 trillion by itself or more than $2 trillion when coupled with Democrats' plan to let expire President Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner said the bill couldn't come at a worse time — amid a slowing economy and a mortgage lending crisis — and threatened to reverse five years of gains from Republican tax cuts that reaped job growth, rising household incomes and increased federal tax revenue.

"Imposing higher taxes at this time will doom our economy, put people out of work and cost the federal government revenue that is badly needed if we are in fact going to balance the budget," the Ohio Republican said.

If you take it away from the rich and give it to the middle class, who is going to provide the jobs for the middle class? Oh sure you get a couple of hundred dollars more a year from the 'relief' plan, but how does that compare with losing your job?

You Had Better Be Glad That Is A (D), And Not A (R), Beside Your Name

Look what Sen. Joe Biden has said now:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — In what the Washington Post is describing as a "stumble," Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden said in an interview with the paper Wednesday that Washington's high minority population is one of the reasons for the city's education problems.

Explaining why schools in Iowa are performing better than those in Washington, D.C., Biden told the Post, "There's less than one percent of the population of Iowa that is African American. There is probably less than four of five percent that are minorities. What is in Washington? So look, it goes back to what you start off with, what you're dealing with."

"When you have children coming from dysfunctional homes, when you have children coming from homes where there's no books, where the mother from
the time they're born doesn't talk to them — as opposed to the mother in Iowa who's sitting out there and talks to them, the kid starts out with a 300 word larger vocabulary at age three. Half this education gap exists before the kid steps foot in the classroom," the Delaware Democrat added.

The paper reports Biden's campaign quickly sought to clarify the remarks, saying in a statement that the senator was not making a "race-based distinction" but rather a "socio-economic" one.

Check out the statement I have put in bold letters.

No further comment is required.

Brownback To Meet With, Possibly Endorse Rudy

From The Hill:

Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) is considering endorsing Rudy Giuliani for the GOP presidential nomination and will meet with him Thursday in Washington to hear his views on abortion.

Brownback, who ended his White House run last week and is a champion of social conservative issues, said he would consider Giuliani because he had heard that the former New York City mayor had changed his position on partial-birth abortion and has pledged to appoint to the courts strict constructionists who would not overturn anti-abortion laws.

If Brownback pledged his support, it would be a big boost for Giuliani. It might help shore up the biggest perceived weakness of his candidacy — namely, the lack of support among social conservatives because of his stance on abortion.

“I’m going to meet with him and I’m going to talk to him and hear what he is specifically saying now because he’s changed on a number of the abortion issues,” Brownback said in an interview. “He’s changed on partial-birth [abortion] and he … has said he would appoint strict constructionists.”

When asked about Giuliani’s position on allowing women the right to late-term abortions, also known as partial-birth abortions, Brownback said: “He is opposed to it. That’s what I’ve been told indirectly. I want to hear it from him.”

Brownback has not indicated that he is likely to support Giuliani, but he has not ruled it out. He said he is also considering endorsing other top-tier Republican
candidates. Several have asked for his support in telephone conversations, and Brownback has already met with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to discuss a possible endorsement.

Given that Abortion was about all that Brownback was running on, I doubt he would endorse Rudy. Who knows I could be wrong. I hear a lot of people who I thought were social conservatives endorsing him.

The Dream Act Cloture Vote Is Over

It failed 52-44.

Do not rest. I am sure we will see it again.

Those Dems sure a persistent little bunch.

The roll call is here.

Updated: Dream Act

The latest on the Dream Act from Michelle Malkin can be found here.

It looks like it will be voted on for cloture today.

Michelle has the numbers to call up.

Update: Fred ways in on the Dream Act:

After several false starts Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) continues to push the DREAM Act. What is the DREAM Act? A nightmare.

The act would allow any illegal immigrant who entered the country before the age of 16 to receive conditional residency, which could then be converted to a non-conditional residency. These illegal immigrants can apply for this form of amnesty so long as they are under 30 and they weren’t older than 16 when they came to the country. And, of course, there is no way of proving when they illegally entered our country. After all, they are undocumented. Aliens would qualify even if they received and ignored a removal order if that order was received before they were 16.

Essentially, the DREAM Act puts some illegal aliens in a better position for residency than legal aliens who have played by the rules.

Reid Blames California Fires On Global Warming

An inconvenient remark:

Is there a political angle to the wildfires raging through Southern California?

You betcha – at least according to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who said global warming is at least partly responsible for the blazes.

"One reason why we have the fires in California is global warming," the Nevada Democrat told reporters, emphasizing the need to pass the Democrats' comprehensive energy package.

Pressed by astonished reporters on whether he really believed global warming caused the fires, he appeared to back away from his comments, saying there are many factors that contributed to the disaster.

Is there any disaster or bad thing, for that matter, that is not brought about by global warming?

The "Dream Act" Is Coming Back

From World Net Daily:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is reviving and fast-tracking plans to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens already within U.S. boundaries, and a vote is expected as early as tomorrow, according to opponents.

Just a few months after intense pressure from U.S. citizens triggered the rejection of President Bush's comprehensive immigration plan, a compromise supported by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. – the DREAM Act proposal by Sen. Dick Durbin, R-Ill. – is being rushed through the Senate.

Durbin's office refused to return a WND call requesting comment.

"In many ways this bill is worse than Bush-Kennedy because this is blatant deception on the part of the Senate to get a massive amnesty passed," asserted Steve Elliott, president of Grassfire.org.

Read the rest at the link above and then get on the phone. It looks like we need to shut down the lines again.

Fred Set To Unveil His Immigration Plan?

From the AP:

Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson is choosing a county with a large farmworker population to announce an immigration policy Tuesday that will include stripping federal grant money from cities and states that don't report illegal immigrants.

Thompson plans to meet with Collier County Sheriff Don Hunter before announcing details of his border security and immigration enforcement proposal.

A major part of the plan will be to reduce the number of illegal immigrants by increasing enforcement of existing law. Sanctuary cities, where city employees are not required to report illegal immigrants to federal authorities, would lose discretionary federal grants, said a campaign source who didn't want to be named because the plan hasn't been announced.

Thompson will also call for stronger laws to force employers to verify that workers aren't illegal immigrants, a more rigorous system to track who is coming in and out of the country and a plan to increase prosecution of "coyotes," smugglers who bring illegal immigrants across the Mexican border, the source said. He will also talk about border security.

Read the rest at the link above.

Sounds to me like ol' Fred better watch out or he is going to get himself elected.

Win, Fred, Win

The Republican Senators Have Still Not Realized Why They Lost In 2006

The National Examiner:

Democrats might want to keep in mind the old rule in politics that you never stop an opponent while he’s committing suicide. They are about to have the distinct pleasure of watching a slew of Senate Republicans jump off a political cliff. These Republican stalwarts haven’t gotten the message — that the voters who dismissed the GOP majority in November 2006 aren’t going to put the party back in control as long as it keeps voting for more of the earmarks that fueled the “culture of corruption” in Congress. It’s also going to be vastly more difficult to get those same voters to pull the lever for the party’s presidential nominee so long as pork-addicted GOP senators keep sticking their snouts in the trough.

Take for example the roll call vote on Sen. Jim DeMint’s amendment to kill a provision in the Senate Commerce, Justice and Science appropriations bill directing $2 million to three construction projects for a college in Harlem. The South Carolina Republican’s amendment would have struck the provision first inserted in the legislation by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. All three projects are named for Rangel.

But when it came time to vote on this crude effort by Rangel to use tax dollars to promote himself, it was preserved on a 61-34 vote. Two Democrats — Sen. Evan Bayh, Ind., and Sen. Russ Feingold, Wis. — voted for the DeMint amendment, while 16 Republicans voted against it. The 16 were Sens. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Kit Bond of Missouri, Thad Cochran and Trent Lott of Mississippi, Susan Collins of Maine, Larry Craig of Idaho, Pete Domenici of New Mexico, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Orrin Hatch of Utah, Dick Lugar of Indiana, Lisa Murkowski and Ted Stevens of Alaska, Richard Shelby of Alabama, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, George Voinovich of Ohio and John Warner of Virginia.

Quit throwing money away.

If the Republicans ever want to take control of congress again they had better get a grip on their spending habits. While in control of Congress they got used to spending big. This is probably the major issue that caused them to lose in 2006.

Fred on being "Lazy"

The video is here.

Fred is not lazy. He has many accomplishments.

Watch both videos on the post I linked.

Win, Fred, Win

Michael Barone: "We're Not in 2006 Anymore"/ JB: "Say No To Rudy"

Michael Barone:

Things are not working out as Democratic congressional leaders expected. For the first eight months of this year, they struggled to find some way to shut down the American military effort in Iraq.

They took it for granted that we were stuck in a quagmire in Iraq, with continuous high casualties and very little to show for them. They pressed hard to get the Republican votes they needed to block a filibuster in the Senate and were cheered when some Republicans, like John Warner, seemed to lean their way. They worked hard over the August recess to pressure Republican House members to break ranks and vote with them.

But the Republicans mostly held fast. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell skillfully parried their thrusts in the Senate. House Minority Leader John Boehner persuaded most House Republicans to hang on. Then, over the summer, the news out of Iraq started to get better.

Mainstream media types tend to think that, while rising casualties from Iraq are legitimate news, falling casualties are not. But even so the word got out: The surge strategy was producing results. Anbar province, given up for lost in 2006, turned peaceful and cooperative in 2007. U.S. casualties and Iraqi civilian casualties were down. Brookings scholars Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack, no fans of the administration's conduct of the war, announced on July 30 (in the pages of The New York Times, no less) that this was "a war we might just win."

The congressional Democrats got ready for one more push in September. But the testimony of General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker cut the ground from under their feet. Now, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (who declared last spring that the war was lost) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi seem to have thrown in the towel. The Democratic Congress will not use its power to appropriate to end the surge or to bring the soldiers home.

That leaves the left wing of the party angry at its leaders and the party split on the war, much as it was in 2002, when about half of congressional Democrats voted to authorize military action.

Read the rest at the link above.

This is not the time to throw in the towel and elect someone just because they support the war. Rudy Giuliani is exactly opposite on all conservative topics but the war. How can this man be leading the polls.

I know everyone thinks he can steal votes away from Hillary because he is a liberal that supports the war. The only problem is, can he steal enough to make up for the conservative voters who will not vote for him. I do not believe he can. It would take a lot for me to vote for him. I don't know for sure if I could.

A lot has been made about his views on abortion. While this does hurt him with me, it is not my number one concern with Rudy. It is not even number two.

What is number 1?

GUNS. Plain and simple.

The courts are still trying to sort out the mess he made up there. He went after gun manufacturers and that is inexcusable to me.

It would take all I have to vote for someone that has or will screw with the Second Amendment. He can lay all the BS he wants to about what is good for New York might not be good for the rest of the country. I was fortunate enough to attend public schools when they were actually teaching. And one thing I learned was New York is IN the United States. I can even find it on the map. (both NY and the US). I seem to recall The Bill Of Rights applies to ALL American citizens, even the ones in NY.

This alone would prevent me from supporting Giuliani. I can not tell you he would not get my vote over Hillary. But I can promise you I could not boost him up in the general election like I could for Thompson, Huckabee, Hunter, etc...

The Dems are weak and vulnerable. We need to hold to our conservative principles and not elect any more "closet" liberals.

The Debate

I did not get a chance to watch it yet and have not read much about it.

Here is what some have to say about it:

Right Wing News

Power Line

McCain came off with this about Hillary:



In case you did not know, John McCain was being held in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp while Woodstock was going on.

The quote:

"In case you missed it, a few days ago Senator Clinton tried to spend one million dollars on the Woodstock concert museum. Now, my friends, I wasn't there. I'm sure it was a cultural and pharmaceutical event. I was tied up at the time."

MSM Credits Democrats With With Raising $2M From The Anti-Rush Letter

Unfreakin' believable:

Today, Reid was more conciliatory to Limbaugh and whoever is paying for the letter. Though he said on the Senate floor that as he had watched the bidding throughout the week, he never thought it would get to $2 million.

"Now, everyone knows that Rush Limbaugh and I don't agree on everything in life and maybe that is kind of an understatement," Reid said.

"But without qualification Mark May, the owner of the network that has Rush Limbaugh, and Rush Limbaugh should know that this letter that they're auctioning is going to be something that raises money for a worthwhile cause. I don't know what we could do more important than helping to ensure that children of our fallen soldiers and police officers who have fallen in the line of duty have the opportunity for their children to have a good education," he said.

The bidding ends at 1:00p.m. No mater what, Democrats are going to make a ton of money for a charity off their political vitriol.

Read that last line twice. THE DEMOCRATS did what? They wrote a politically charged smear letter. Rush put it up for auction and is matching the bid.

How can anyone mistake ABC for News?

More Fundraising Trouble For Clinton

From Michelle Malkin:

The Los Angeles Times digs into Hillary’s finances and uncovers more mysterious Chinatown donors with dilapidated addresses in NYC and jobs unlikely to put them in the position of maxing out campaign contributions. They include dishwashers, waiters, contributors who deny making contributions, and another who “admitted to lacking the legal-resident status required for giving campaign money.” And more:

Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton’s campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown…

…Of 74 residents of New York’s Chinatown, Flushing, the Bronx or Brooklyn that The Times called or visited, only 24 could be reached for comment.

I am appalled at how much the Democrats can get away with.

Romney On The UN

Fox News:

PAWLEYS ISLAND, S.C. — Republican White House hopeful Mitt Romney called the United Nations a failure on Thursday and said he would support a new coalition of the free nations of the world.

The former Massachusetts governor said the U.N. Human Rights Council has repeatedly condemned Israel while taking no action against nations with repressive regimes.

"The United Nations has been an extraordinary failure of late," Romney said in response to a question at a pancake house along the coast of early voting South Carolina. "We should withdraw from the United Nations Human Rights Council."

Actually, the United States doesn't have a seat on the human rights council, which it has been boycotting.

Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom later clarified the remarks.

"The governor believes we ought to withdraw completely from the U.N. Human Rights Council, and that means ending our financial support in addition to not seeking a seat on the council," Fehrnstrom said. "We should not legitimize the council, either with financial or diplomatic support."

Romney also said he would support a new "coalition of the free nations of the world and bring those nations together so that we can act together."

"We should develop some of our own — if you will — forums and alliances or groups that have the ability to actually watch out for the world and do what's right," Romney said.

I agree we should pull out of the UN. The UN is costing the US billions of dollars and all we get in return is grief.

The UN is corrupt beyond belief. It is time for it to become a thing of the past.

Should we jump into another "coalition"? Only if we ensure the corruption and failures of the UN will not be repeated.

The Roll Call On The Failed SCHIP Veto Override Vote

Here is the roll call. Once again, I am proud to see my representative (David Davis) on the right side.

This was an extremely important vote. The expansion of this program would have steered us toward government health care.

House Republican Leader John Boehner To Democratic Representative Pete Stark

From Drudge:

WASHINGTON, D.C. Ð House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today
issued the following statement regarding remarks made on the House floor by Rep.
Pete Stark (D-CA) during the debate on the State ChildrenÕs Health Insurance
Program (SCHIP):

"Our troops in Iraq are fighting against al-Qaeda and other radical jihadists hellbent on killing the people we are sent here to represent. Congressman StarkÕs statement dishonors not only the Commander-in-Chief, but the thousands of courageous men and women of AmericaÕs armed forces who believe in their mission and are putting their lives on the line for our freedom and security. Congressman Stark should retract his statement and apologize to the House, our Commander-in-Chief, and the families of our soldiers and commanders fighting terror overseas."

In case you don't know why Boehner is calling for this, here is the statement made by Stark:

"You don't have money to fund the war or children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement."

The House floor is hardly the place for these types of attacks. I do not agree with all that Bush does, but I do not think Bush wants to see our soldier's heads "blown off". To suggest this on one of the MSM platforms is bad enough. To say this on the House floor is inexcusable to say the least.

Sam Brownback To Drop Out Of The Race

"Trouble raising money" is to blame for his decision:

Republican Sam Brownback will drop out of the 2008 presidential campaign on Friday, people close to the Kansas senator said Thursday.

Trouble raising money was a main reason for his decision, said one person close to Brownback, who requested anonymity because the candidate had not yet announced his plans.

Brownback, a lesser-known conservative contender, is expected announce his withdrawal in Topeka, Kan.

His support of the Amnesty Bill destroyed any chance of success he had.

H/T: Hot Air

Nothing To See Here, Just Move Along

From Fox News:

DAMASCUS, Syria — A high-ranking Syrian official confirmed that Israel's airstrike last month in northern Syria hit a nuclear facility, according to a document obtained Wednesday by FOX News.

"Israel was the fourth-largest exporter of weapons of mass destruction and a violator of other nations' airspace, and it had taken action against nuclear facilities, including the 6 July attack in Syria," Syrian representative Bassam Darwish is quoted in the document as saying.

Diplomats familiar with the document cannot explain why July 6 was invoked, instead of Sept. 6, the date both countries say an incident occurred. A State Department source tells FOX News the best explanation is that Darwish misspoke.

The document, released by the General Assembly's Department of Public Information, recounted Tuesday's proceedings at the annual gathering of the U.N.'s Disarmament and International Security Committee.

What is clear is that this is the first time Syria has acknowledged its nuclear efforts.

One U.S. delegate told colleagues he could not believe his ears when the Syrian diplomat made his statement and that the resulting document was close to verbatim, and another source told FOX News the document reinforces what people heard [the Syrian representative] say in the actual debate.

Does this report surprise you? If so, wake up. Syria and Iran are major threats to the rest of the world.

I Thought Less Deaths Would Be A Good Thing

But as we see in this report, people can find the bad in any situation:

NAJAF, Iraq — At what's believed to be the world's largest cemetery, where Shiite Muslims aspire to be buried and millions already have been, business isn't good.

A drop in violence around Iraq has cut burials in the huge Wadi al Salam cemetery here by at least one-third in the past six months, and that's cut the pay of thousands of workers who make their living digging graves, washing corpses or selling burial shrouds.

Few people have a better sense of the death rate in Iraq.

"I always think of the increasing and decreasing of the dead," said Sameer Shaaban, 23, one of more than 100 workers who specialize in ceremonially washing the corpses. "People want more and more money, and I am one of them, but most of the workers in this field don't talk frankly, because they wish for more coffins, to earn more and more."

Dhurgham Majed al Malik, 48, whose family has arranged burial services for generations, said that this spring, private cars and taxis with caskets lashed to their roofs arrived at a rate of 6,500 a month. Now it's 4,000 or less, he said.

Read the rest at the link above.

What Rudy Thinks About His Own Politics

So, you think Rudy is the right man for the job. Think he is just conservative enough. Let's see what he has to say about it :



What do you think now.

I am beginning to think President Clinton sounds better than President Giuliani. If the GOP continues down the path they are on a lot of people are going to be alienated from the party.

I would vote for any of the Republican candidates but Ron Paul. I am about to put Rudy on that list too. He is not a Republican. And voting for him will only weaken the party.

The GOP has abandoned the base of the party. How long will this happen before the base deserts the GOP? A Giuliani nomination might just be the straw that breaks the camel's back. It will be for me.

H/T: World Net Daily

Government Sponsored Health Care At Its Best

From Hot Air:

"A father had to deliver his own baby after his wife was twice turned away from an NHS hospital - because it was too full…

The couple dashed to their local maternity hospital at 7am when Elizabeth, 24, started having strong contractions.

But they were amazed to be told: “Sorry, we are full. Come back later.” The pair went home after being reassured the baby would not arrive “for hours”.

When Elizabeth’s contractions became more frequent they returned to the maternity unit at 10am - but were sent home again from the Princess of Wales hospital in Bridgend, near Cardiff…

Paramedics arrived as the baby’s head was coming out - but [the husband] was doing such a good job they supervised him until baby Emily was born at 11am."

That is from this article.

Do you want this for our country? I for one, do not want to deliver a baby because the hospital is "to full".

Say Goodbye To "Mom" And "Dad"

California has banned the terms "mom and dad" and "husband and wife" from being used in schools:

"Mom and Dad" as well as "husband and wife" effectively have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose.

Think this won't effect your kids:

Analysts have warned that schools across the nation will be impacted by the decision, since textbook publishers must cater to their largest purchaser, which often is California, and they will be unlikely to go to the expense of having a separate edition for other states. The bills signed by Schwarzenegger include SB777, which bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as negative toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other alternative lifestyle choices.

There are no similar protections for students with traditional or conservative lifestyles and beliefs, however.

The Campaign for Children and Families are fighting back:

A call is being issued to Christians who have been engaged in the culture wars in California's schools to abandon the system, after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
signed into law a ban on "discriminatory bias" against homosexuals and others with alternative sexual lifestyles.

"We're calling upon every California parent to pull their child out of California's public school system," Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, told WND.

"The so-called 'public schools' are no longer a safe emotional environment for children. Under the new law, schoolchildren as young as kindergarten will be sexually indoctrinated and introduced to homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality, over the protests of parents, teachers and even school districts," he said.

I have been a little under the weather the last couple of days so I am just now getting to this story.

I cannot believe the lengths people are willing to go in order to appease gays. I hope that any parent that does not want their child bombarded with this trash can afford to get them out of the public school system.

Hillbilly White Trash: "Why Giuliani must lose"

Read this post by Hillbilly White Trash. It is a little long but it details exactly why we can not vote Rudy into the presidency.

If you don't want to read the whole thing, at least read the last three paragraphs.

Deficit Heading In The Right Direction

The deficit is at its lowest level in 5 years:

President Bush is crediting his tax cuts with shrinking the federal budget deficit.

The Bush administration reported the deficit had trimmed down to about $163 billion in the recent budget year. That's the lowest amount of red ink in five years, and the president says it represents a below-average 1.2% of the gross domestic product.

After meeting with his economic team,Bush said low taxes can "grow the economy," and that by being "fiscally responsible," the budget can be brought "toward balance."

This year's figure sliced more than 34% off the previous year's deficit, which totaled nearly $250 billion.

Bottom line: Tax cuts work.

Imagine how good these numbers would look if they could get spending under control.

A Question For Al Gore

Now will you debate Global Warming?:

Al Gore has finally won his Nobel Prize, reminiscent of the proverbial little nut that stood his ground, evolving into a giant Oak. Now we can only hope that he runs for President, an office that, given recent history, surely deserves him.

Where else -- except perhaps via the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, which Gore negotiated -- can someone accomplish so little while spending so much? But, to get there, or at least to the Demo nomination, Gore's going to have to do something he has assiduously avoided: debate

Gore's standard rule on live TV has been there will be no live challenge. The last time he ran for President (2000), he succeeded de facto, with George "Carbon Bonoixde" Bush as the token global warming flyweight. This time, debates happen.

That's because Gore represents a party gone global warming ga-ga, with some of the world's goofiest environmental legislation in history awaiting a Bush veto and a Gore signature.

...

The fact is that Al has ducked, feinted, dived away from, or fluffed each and every opportunity for a reasoned debate with any global warming scientist not of his choice, a choice he no longer enjoys. Heartland Institute, a Chicago think tank, spent over a million dollars filing ads in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and their ilk, begging Al to debate. No dice. In a less public venue, my own Gato Institute sent kind and courteous letters asking him to share our pretty auditorium on Washington's Massachusetts Avenue, for a civil discussion with our scholars. Again, no dice.

Here's the rub: if any opposition were so easy to vanquish, Gore would relish the opportunity. Obviously there's a substantive and cogent argument he can't kill.

...

Gore only has one scientist, James Hansen of NASA, whispering the sweet nothings into his ear that sea-level could rise this much or more in the next 92 years, as Greenland's ice sheets are destabilized by climate change.

No other scientist is willing to climb out on this limb, because it is simply not supported by the observed climatic history of Greenland since the end of the last ice age. For much of six millennia, ending 3,000 years ago, it had to be warmer, and yet the ice stuck like glue. Hansen's amazing response, which you can read on his blog, documented at www.realclimate.org (not exactly a peer-reviewed scientific journal!) is that other scientists don't agree with him because they suffer from what he calls "scientific reticence." In other words, all his colleagues are chicken-bleeps because they don't agree with him.

How about the other pole? Every computer model mentioned by the United Nations shows Antarctica gaining ice this century because a slight warming will result in more precipitation which must fall as snow. Would Gore like that out in public? Or how about the fact that Antarctica just set its record maximum for sea-ice extent, as measured by satellite.

The world can only hope that Gore's Nobel propels him into another run for the Presidency. He received it for his climate lunacy. Now he can defend it and the Nobel Prize by merely debating those who must be so easy to defeat.

First of all, was there any doubt he would win? I had no doubt. I would like to see him attend a debate on global warming, but I am not holding my breathe.

If you can prove global warming exists you can win an easy $125,000, here.

Rudy Commited Several Gaffes In The Debate, Fred Did Not Commit Any

From FactCheck.org:

Thompson avoids error at his GOP debate debut. But Giuliani commits multiple gaffes.

Summary

Former Sen. Fred Thompson got the facts straight for his GOP debate debut Oct. 9. But former Mayor Rudy Giuliani added to a lengthening string of exaggerations and misstatements:

Giuliani claimed Sen. Hillary Clinton once called the free-market economy "the most destructive force in modern America." She didn't say that. She quoted another author who said free markets were "disruptive." She also said free markets bring prosperity.

The mayor falsely claimed Clinton proposes to give $1,000 to "everybody." Her proposed subsidies to workers' retirement accounts would be for couples making up to $60,000 a year and would be $500 for those making up to $100,000.

Giuliani falsely claimed that more than 2 percent of the nation's gross domestic product is spent on "frivolous" lawsuits. The figure is from a study about the cost of all lawsuits.

Analysis

The Oct. 9 debate in Dearborn, Michigan, was the first in which former Sen. Fred Thompson appeared with the full array of Republican rivals. That led Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney to quip that the long string of GOP debates had become like the NBC television program "Law & Order": "It has a huge cast, the series seems to go on forever, and Fred Thompson shows up at the end."

But Thompson made it through his first debate without making any false or misleading factual claims that we could detect, while former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani committed multiple factual gaffes, adding to a growing list of misstatements.

As I have said before, I would rather someone calmly tell me the facts behind their position than yell lies at me.

The old "fire in the belly" line on Fred has played itself out with me. I don't care if a candidate is jumping up and down screaming about how much he wants to be president. I would rather hear honest, well thought out answers to the problems we in this country face.

Rudy seems willing to stretch it a little to attack Hillary. While I have no love for Hillary you have to use factual statements against the Clintons. They know politics and can use any mistakes to make you look like an ass.

In case you have not figured it out yet, let me enlighten you. Politicians will tell you anything to get your vote. This is the main goal of all politicians.

This is what sets Fred apart from the rest. It seems to me like he is calling it like he sees it. The rest seem to be trying to get me to vote for them. Of course Fred wants the votes too. He is doing what it takes to get mine.

Win, Fred, Win

The Great One: "Conservative in Which Sense?"

From Mark Levin via NRO:

This "senior moment" and "Fred Thompson-is-lazy" stuff is really starting to irk. I remember hearing the same comments about Ronald Reagan in every campaign in which I participated — 1976 and 1980. And this tactic was especially used against him in 1984. I have spent some time with Thompson. He is intellectually curious and sharp. He is engaging and vigorous. Yes, he chooses his words carefully. He speaks in a southern accent. But the attacks on him appear to have a northeastern-liberal-style feel to them, emanating largely from the NewYork-Washington, D.C axis. This is a man, after all, who worked sixteen hours a day in both television and radio. (By the way, have any of those who promote the "lazy" argument actually analyzed his campaign activities compared to the other candidates? If so, I've not seen any such thing.)

And let me also observe that Rudy is no conservative, despite George Will's pronouncement (the same Will who once said we under-taxed and who advocated spreading democracy throughout the globe). Yes, Rudy takes some conservative positions. And he has taken more conservative positions since seeking the Republican nomination. But he has a record that goes beyond law enforcement and tax-cutting that should cause any conservative some pause. What is his governing philosophy? I am thrilled that as mayor he rid Times Square of hookers and squeegee bums. But he also brought lawsuits against gun manufacturers and to enforce a commuter tax, he was weak on illegal immigration (my opinion), and was wrong on virtually every social issue.

Do yourself a favor and read the rest at the link above.

I have nothing to add.

Guillermo Hernandez To Get Out Of Jail Oct. 15

World Net Daily:

A welcome home party is being planned in Rocksprings, Texas, for a deputy sheriff who was prosecuted and sentenced to prison for shooting at the tires of a van carrying Mexican illegal aliens who had tried to run over him.

The announcement comes from U.S. Border Watch, which has monitored the case of Guillermo Hernandez as well as several other cases involving border security.

"We ask you to join U.S. Border Watch, the Town of Rocksprings, Texas, family members and countless supportive friends [in] a spectacular Welcome Home Party for Gilmer," said the announcement. The event, about which more details will be released later, is set for Oct. 20.

The organization said Hernandez is expected to be released Oct. 15. "This fine young deputy and his family have suffered a great deal as a pawn of our government," said the announcement. "We need to show America we believe in him and what he stands for."

As WND reported, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, whom President Bush identified as a good friend, prosecuted Hernandez for injuring two Mexican illegal aliens in a van. Hernandez fired at the van's tires as the illegals escaped from a routine traffic stop, attempting to run over the officer as they drove away.

Hernandez was sentenced to one year plus one day in prison after Sutton's office had recommended seven years. Hernandez decided not to appeal his case, choosing to serve the short sentence rather than risk another trial and possibly a longer sentence. He reported for his term earlier this year, and it was subject to routine allowances for good behavior and other factors.

U.S. Border Watch raised funds to provide for the deputy's family while he was serving the penalty demanded by the Mexican government.

As WND reported Sutton decided to prosecute Hernandez only after the Mexican consulate wrote letters demanding it. An investigation by the Texas Rangers concluded Hernandez did nothing wrong in discharging his weapon at the fleeing van.

Sutton was the same one that prosecuted U.S. Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean for firing their weapons in pursuit of a fleeing Mexican illegal alien drug smuggler.

It is great he is getting out. I wish him the best of luck in the future, and I am saddened by the way this country treated him for doing his job.

Rasmussen: "51% Of Republicans See Thompson As Conservative"

From Rasmussen:

During Fred Thompson’s first month as a formal candidate for the Republican Presidential Nomination, Republican voters continue to see him as the most conservative candidate in the field. Fifty-one percent (51%) of Republican voters now see the former Tennessee Senator as politically conservative. That’s up from 48% a month ago.

Perceptions of Mitt Romney have moved in the opposite direction. Thirty-six percent (36%) now see him as politically conservative. That’s down from 42% a month ago and little changed from two months ago.

Just 30% of Republican voters see John McCain as politically conservative, down from 33% a month ago. Twenty-six percent (26%) hold that view of Giuliani, little changed over the past month.

Looked at from the other perspective, 68% see Giuliani as moderate or liberal while 56% of Republicans say the same of McCain. Romney is viewed as moderate or liberal by 42% of GOP voters and 35% say the same about Thompson.

A question to all the people attacking Fred for not being conservative enough:

Who are you going to vote for?

Rudy? He is a real conservative, right?
Mitt? He is better than Rudy, I think.
John? Immigration!

Win, Fred, Win

Is This What The Democrats Want For Our Expectant Mothers?

Government ran Healthcare at its best:

Mothers in British Columbia are having a baby boom, but it's the United States that has to deliver, and that has some proud Canadians blasting their highly touted government healthcare system.

"I'm a born-bred Canadian, as well as my daughter and son, and I'm ashamed," Jill Irvine told FOX News. Irvine's daughter, Carri Ash, is one of at least 40 mothers or their babies who've been airlifted from British Columbia to the U.S. this year because Canadian hospitals didn't have room for the preemies in their neonatal
units.

"It's a big number and bigger than the previous capacity of the system to deal with it," said Adrian Dix, a British Columbia legislator, told FOXNews.com. "So when that happens, you can't have a waiting list for a mother having the baby. She just has the baby."

The mothers have been flown to hospitals in Seattle, Everett, Wash., and Spokane, Wash., to receive treatment, as well as hospitals in the neighboring province of Alberta, Dix said. Three mothers were airlifted in the first weekend of October alone, including Carri Ash.

"I just want to go home and see my kids," she said from her Seattle hospital bed. "I think it's stupid I have to be here."

Canada's socialized health care system, hailed as a model by Michael Moore in his documentary, "Sicko," is hurting, government officials admit, citing not enough money for more equipment and staff to handle high risk births.

Sarah Plank, a spokeswoman for the British Columbia Ministry of Health, said a spike in high risk and premature births coupled with the lack of trained nurses prompted the surge in mothers heading across the border for better care.

"The number of transfers in previous years has been quite low," Plank told FOXNews.com. "Before this recent spike we went for more than a year with no transfers to the U.S., so this is something that is happening in other provinces as well."

Critics say these border crossings highlight the dangers of a government-run health care system.

"The Canadian healthcare system has used the United States as a safety net for years," said Michael Turner of the Cato Institute. "In fact, overall about one out of every seven Canadian physicians sends someone to the United States every year for treatment."

Neonatal intensive care units in Alberta and Ontario have also been stretched to capacity, she said.

The cost of these airlifts and treatments, paid to U.S. hospitals by the province under Canada's universal health care system, runs upwards of $1,000 a child.

Is this what Hillary wants for our country?

How Fred Did In The Debate

I think he did a fine job. He did seem a little nervous at first, but he gave a solid performance last night. I would say it was a tie between him and Rudy. Rudy does shine at these types of events. This debate was on economic issues. Most of the candidates argued the need to cut spending and taxes.

Like I said yesterday, Fred did not leave the nay-sayers in awe. He stuttered a couple of times. But he was funny and straightforward with his answers. That is enough for me.

Fred is on the right path. He can take the nomination. I think he would be the best candidate to represent the Republican party in 08.

Erick at Red State has this posted:

I agree with the consensus that Rudy won the debate last night. In fact, I agree with Alexham, Leon, and others that as long as Ron Paul is in the race, Rudy comes out looking the hero. Every time the nutter from Texas denies the realities of September 11th, he sets Rudy up to take him on and win with sane America.

And yet this image remains an indelible part of last night's debate and sets up an advantage that Fred has among the front runners -- as Rudy and Romney quabbled like children over the line item veto, there was "Dad" looking down at them, the statesman between two kids.

Fred is the elephant in the room. Beyond just the solidly Republican voting record on issues like life and taxes that go beyond what the other two (or three if you count McCain) top tier candidates have, here we have an older guy standing between two younger men bickering with each other over a mundane issue like the previously unconstitutional Line Item Veto Act of 1996. Chief Justice Rehnquist, Thomas, Kennedy, Souter, and Stevens found the legislation unconstitutional. And, as Rudy correctly pointed out, he beat Bill Clinton in the Supreme Court.

It made for a very interesting dynamic to see Thompson, who would not get into the weeds and throw a lot of punches at the other guys like the second tier guys tried to do, tower over everyone else and then pull a few unexpected zingers out, calling Chris Matthews "Christopher" and turning Romney's scripted one liner around on him, calling Romney the best actor on stage.

Time will tell if Thompson can really fire himself up for this. He was not great on the first question. But as it stands, the man who the other candidates have been treating as an elephant in the room — dancing around him as best they could without too many acknowledgments of his existence until recently — proved not only is he a very good elephant on taxes, social security, national security, and business issues, but also was willing to do what few candidates are willing to do, give a real "yes" and a real "no."

That last sentence is important. That is what I have been looking for in a candidate.

To Vote Or Not To Vote

On Mark Levin's show yesterday he encourage disgruntled Democrats not to vote. Of course, he encouraged Republicans to vote.

I think you should not vote for a candidate because he is a Democrat or Republican. If you are not willing to examine the candidates and pick the best one for you, you should stay as far away from the voting booth as you can.

I could not tell you how many people I have met that vote for someone whose position on the issues are completely opposite of there own, just because they are voting for a specific party.

Don't allow yourself to fall into this category.

My Take On The Republican Debate

The time has finally come for a debate which includes all Republican candidates.

How will Fred react? Which candidates will go at it? Who will win the debate?

These questions and many more will be answered tonight. It has been a long time coming.

Rudy Giuliani:

I like Rudy. He is an energetic person. I believe he would do alright with the war but that is where it ends. His position on social issues is a major rub for me. He says he will appoint conservative judges, but I have my doubts about that fact. And that is almost as important to me as the war is. With many of the Supreme Court judges quickly approaching retirement. It is likely the next president will appoint several judges. The war is important, but we cannot allow this country to continue on the path we are on, as it relates to social issues. I don't trust him with my guns either. And that is number one with me.

Mitt Romney:

I don't know what it is really, but I do not care for Mitt at all. He reminds me of a used car salesman. I think he would do a pretty good job all in all. I do not believe he has truly changed his position on all the issues he has flip- flopped on. That is his major drawback for me.

John McCain:

I like John as a man. You have to respect the sacrifices he has made for this country. He has been a decent Senator. But he has been involved with several bills that have appalled me. His recent dealings with the immigration issue, as well as McCain - Fiengold has taken away any chance he will get the nomination.

Duncan Hunter:

This is the candidate that ideally win the presidency, but he has failed to gain ground on the top tier candidates. I agree with his positions on nearly all issues. He has done a superb job in his time in Congress.
Too bad he can not compete with the top four.

Mike Huckabee:

He is a good man with no chance of winning the nomination.

Fred Thompson:

If you have read this blog much at all, you know this is who I am backing. So this might be a little biased. I think Fred will do alright tonight. He probably will not live up to the bar they have set for him tonight. On his own admission he is "a little rusty". It seems to me that he is being expected to do three times as much as the other candidates are doing. I guess this is because he got in so late. In all reality he got in about the time these things usually start up. All the others got in too early. He will do fine. I believe he can and will take the nomination. A lot of people got upset with him because he "waited" to get in. I hope they do not allow those feelings to keep them from objectively looking at his positions on the issues.

The rest have no chance at all of winning. They are good men, but will fall by the wayside soon.

Ron Paul is an asshat.

TexasFred's Non-Scientific Polling Place

Texas Fred has a new polling site:

I have started a NEW site, TexasFred's Non-Scientific Polling Place where I will be posing some serious questions, all responses are anonymous, even as blog owner I can't see who votes for what...

He will be adding poll questions daily.
Go over and check it out.

Fred's National Campaign Leadership Team

Former Sen. George Allen (Va.); former Sen. Howard Baker; former Sen. Spencer Abraham; and Liz Cheney:

Among the four chairs -- former Sen. George Allen (Va.).

The one-time presidential hopeful has had warm things to say about Thompson since the Tennessean first considered a bid this summer, and recently had his former colleague on while guest-hosting a radio show in Richmond.

...

Thompson's other national chairs are already-announced supporters: former Sen. Howard Baker, former Sen. Spencer Abraham and Liz Cheney.

Seems like a pretty good team.

Win, Fred, Win

Sandy Berger Advising Hillary

Sandy Berger is now an adviser to presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton:

Sandy Berger, who stole highly classified terrorism documents from the National Archives, destroyed them and lied to investigators, is now an adviser to presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. Berger, who was fired from John Kerry’s presidential campaign when the scandal broke in 2004, has assumed a similar role in Clinton’s campaign, even though his security clearance has been suspended until September 2008. This is raising eyebrows even among Clinton’s admirers. “It shows poor judgment and a lack of regard for Berger’s serious misdeeds,” said law professor Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve University, who nonetheless called Clinton “by far the most impressive candidate in the Democratic field.”

Adler told The Examiner that it is “simply incomprehensible to me that a serious contender for the presidency would rely upon him as a key foreign policy advisor.”

He added: “If Senator Clinton becomes the Democratic nominee, at some point she will begin to receive national security briefings that will include sensitive information. At such a point, continuing to keep Berger on board as a key advisor, where he might have access to sensitive material, would be beyond incomprehensible.”

The Clinton campaign declined to comment.

Berger has admitted stealing documents from the National Archives in advance of the 9/11 Commission hearings in 2003. The documents, written by White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, were a “tough review” of the Clinton administration’s shortcomings in dealing with terrorism, Clarke’s lawyer told the Washington Post.

You can go to the link to read the rest of what Berger did.

Hillary loves to be surrounded by crooks. What does that say about her?

Oh, by the way, sorry about putting two Hillary posts back to back. I know you are probably nauseous but I could not resist either story.

Hillary Gets Another Endorsement

From World Net Daily:

WASHINGTON – With presidential primaries approaching and the race for the White House heating up, Muslim terrorist leaders in the Middle East have offered their endorsement for America's highest office, stating in a new book they hope Sen. Hillary Clinton is victorious in 2008.

"I hope Hillary is elected in order to have the occasion to carry out all the promises she is giving regarding Iraq," stated Ala Senakreh, West Bank chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terrorist group.

Senakreh is one of dozens of terror leaders sounding off about American politics in the new book, "Schmoozing with Terrorists: From Hollywood to the Holy Land, Jihadists Reveal their Global Plans – to a Jew!" by WND Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein.

Abu Hamed, leader of the Al Aqsa Brigades in the northern Gaza Strip, explained in "Schmoozing" Clinton's repeated calls for a withdrawal from Iraq "proves that important leaders are understanding the situation differently and are understanding the price and the consequences of the American policy in Iraq and in the world."

"The Iraqi resistance is succeeding," stated Hamed. "Hillary and the Democrats call for withdrawal. Her popularity shows that the resistance is winning and that the occupation is losing. We just hope that she will go until the end and change the American policy, which is based on oppressing poor and innocent people."

The Brigades, together with the Islamic Jihad terrorist group, took responsibility for every suicide bombing in Israel the past three years. The Brigades also has carried out hundreds of recent shootings and rocket attacks.

Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihad leader in Jenin, said he is "emboldened" by Clinton's calls for an eventual withdrawal from Iraq.

"It is clear that it is the resistance operations of the mujahideen that has brought about these calls for withdrawal," boasted Abu Ayman.

Nasser Abu Aziz, the West Bank deputy commander of the Al Aqsa Brigades, declared it is "very good" there are "voices like Hillary and others who are now attacking the Iraq invasion."

In "Schmoozing," every terrorist leader out of dozens interviewed stated they hope a Democrat becomes president in 2008. Some terror leaders explained their endorsement of Clinton is not necessarily at the expense of other Democratic presidential candidates, whose policies are not as well known to them.

"All Americans must vote Democrat," stated Jihad Jaara, an exiled member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity.

More at the link.

So, terrorists support Democrats. What a surprise.

What does surprise me is they actually have a great chance at winning the election.

October 9th MSNBC Debate Should Be Interesting

With Chris Mathews running the thing you can bet there will be a few fireworks. Of course there will also be a lot of stupid questions being asked to.

It will also be the first debate for Fred. Of course we are going to hear how he isn't exciting. I think he will do good. He just don't do things like the rest of them. Of course a lot of people, myself included, have been complaining about the way things are done now. So Fred not following their lead may be a good thing.

Here is some good advise to all the Republican candidates:

Unless the Republican candidates prepare for what’s coming, the winner of their debate tomorrow will be Hillary Clinton. To prevent that result, the candidates have to do what Republicans’ campaign consultants have always prevented: they need to take on the media itself.

This debate -- important most to Fred Thompson who is making his first appearance -- will soon be forgotten in the tsunami of campaign interviews, speeches and rubber chicken dinners these gents are trying to surf. Unless.

There are two “unlesses” waiting tomorrow: unless the candidates allow moderator Chris Matthews to manhandle them, and unless they seize the opportunity to score with Republican voters on an issue that is lurking behind every debate, every television report and newspaper story.

The most important part of the answer -- and not just for tomorrow -- is for the candidates to take on the reporters as much as they take on each other. It’d be great fun, and it would satisfy a great Republican hunger to see some of the media mentionables poked and prodded on their own biases and foibles.

Shocking as it may seem, the New York Times got it wrong in its effusive coverage of the Clinton campaign. In a political blog last Friday, Patrick Healy wrote, “No one is a louder, zestier cheerleader for Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential prospects than her campaign chairman, Terry McAuliffe…” The host of tomorrow night’s debate, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, at least equals and sometimes surpasses McAuliffe.

Matthews is an over-the-top liberal, a brazen cheerleader for Clinton. He can also be a bully. Remember the incident about two years ago when he reduced Michelle Malkin nearly to tears? And how Zell Miller gained instant hero status for asking Matthews if he wanted to take that discussion outside?

To beat Chris Matthews the candidates don’t need to punch him in the nose. But they need to do two things. First, they need to follow Jon Stewart’s example.

In what left Matthews squealing that it was his worst interview ever, The Daily Show’s hyperactive (but not hyperliberal) Jon Stewart’s interview of Matthews on his new book not-so-gently poked fun at Matthews’ outlook on life. If -- with humor -- any of the candidates can take a few shots at Matthews and the premise of his questions, they can come out as the winner.

Read the rest at the link above. The rest is worth the look.