Political grapevine

[DOGS THAT BARK]

yet another Clinton Clan "Conviction"--


By Brit Hume



Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:

Informing for the Feds

A top Democratic fundraiser who mingled with presidents has been operating as an undercover FBI informant for the last three years. The New York Sun (search) reports that Ray Reggie (search), brother-in-law to Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy and a close confidante of former President Clinton, secretly recorded conversations among Democratic politicians and operatives for the FBI. Reggie's evidence helped to indict David Rosen (search) on charges of fundraising fraud last year stemming from his efforts to raise money for Senator Hillary Clinton. Reggie himself pleaded guilty yesterday to felony charges of bank fraud and conspiracy.

Predicting Retirement

Vermont Independent Senator Jim Jeffords' (search) retirement announcement this week came as no surprise to Vermont pundit James Dwinell (search), who predicted earlier this month that Jeffords would not seek re-election in 2006 due to health concerns. But it was apparently a big surprise to Jeffords' own staff. A spokesman for the Senator attacked the rumors as partisan bitterness from Republicans still angry over the Senator's defection from the party in 2001.

The spokesman insisted the senator was in "excellent health," and went on to argue that after failing to cast Jeffords as a "turncoat," his political opponents had now "sunk even lower." But then Jeffords did in fact announce his retirement and cited his failing health as a major factor in the decision.

One Nation, Under What?

The principal at a Colorado Middle School has apologized to students after a guidance counselor changed the words to the Pledge of Allegiance, replacing the phrase "one nation, under God" with "one nation under your belief system." Counselor Margo Lucero (search) tells The Denver Post (search) that she changed the pledge because she believes in "separation between church and school." She claims she hadn't planned to alter the pledge, but "it was the anniversary of Columbine, and it was a spur of the moment thing." A spokesman for the school called Lucero's actions "inappropriate."

Thomas Misunderstood?

State Republicans are calling on a New Jersey official to resign after she apparently admitted that she had committed a felony. Secretary of State Regena Thomas (search) told the state Budget Committee that she took a pro bono job with the Kerry Campaign because "I had a commitment from the candidate for a position that I wanted in the federal government." Trouble is, such an arrangement violates federal law. State Republicans have asked U.S. attorneys to launch an investigation, but Thomas now insists she never meant to imply that a promise was made.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Passed Over In Poll

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

By Brit Hume



Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:

Passed Over In Poll

The Washington Post (search) has a front-page headline Tuesday, based on its new poll, that says, "Filibuster Rule Change Opposed." But the poll makes no mention of filibusters, whatsoever. Nor does it mention that new rules would apply to all future Presidents, Democrat or Republican, or to any Senate, Democrat or Republican. Instead the Post/ABC News poll asked, "Would you support or oppose changing Senate rules to make it easier for the Republicans to confirm Bush's judicial nominees?"

To that, 66 percent said no. If you doubt whether the framing of a poll question can influence the outcome, consider this: When a Republican poll said, "Even if they disagree with a judge, Senate Democrats should at least allow the President's nominations to be voted on," 81 percent said they agreed.

GOP Arguments Fail The Smell Test?

The Minneapolis Star Tribune (search) says Republican arguments against filibustering judges are "sheer sophistry," and "fail [the] smell test." But not so long ago it was the filibuster that didn't smell so hot, to the Star Tribune which called GOP filibusters over then-President Clinton's proposals a "putrid flood of verbiage" and a "worsening threat to American democracy."

As the Web log Powerline (search) points out, the paper concluded that politicians should "crusade for changes in Senate procedures that would prevent an obstructionist minority from delaying action indefinitely." The deputy editor of the Star Tribune's editorial page, however, disputes that his paper ever called for a rules change.

Latest Bolton Attack

The latest attack on U.N. Ambassador nominee John Bolton (search) comes from Frederick Vreeland (search), desribed by the AP as "a former U.S. ambassador to Morocco ... who worked with Bolton in the early 1990s." But Vreeland turns out to be quite a bit more than that. He's a noted Bush critic, who's affiliated with the group Diplomats and Commanders for Change, which opposed President Bush's re-election, and says on its web site that it's "deeply concerned by the damage the Bush Administration has caused to our national and international interests." What's more, in 2003, Vreeland wrote an article calling the terrorist bombings in Morocco "collateral damage" from U.S. efforts against terrorism.

"9/11: The Road To Tyranny"?

A professor at North Carolina Wesleyan College (search) in Rocky Mount is defending her course titled, "9/11: The Road to Tyranny," which teaches that the official story of the 9/11 attacks is actually a government cover-up. According to one required text, the attacks were orchestrated and carried out by U-S government elites themselves. Professor Jane Christensen (search) insists, "I teach the truth about 9/11 ... This is a war by the extreme right wing motivated by the Zionists to quash academic freedom." So what does the school think about all this? Well, its President says, "We don't tell professors what to think. We don't tell professor what to teach. ... that's what [Saddam Hussein] did."

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Saw reports where the public has changed drastically where they get there news from in past 5 years.Turning away from newspapers and local tv media to Cable and internet blog sites.
Seems they prefer to view both sides and judge for themselves.
Wonder if steady diet of this has anything to do with it------

Who's Sorry Now?

Thursday, April 28, 2005

By Brit Hume



Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:

Salazar Expresses Regret

Colorado Democratic Senator Ken Salazar (search) this week referred to the Christian group Focus on the Family, which supports President Bush as "the Anti-Christ of the world." But Salazar now says he didn't mean that, saying, "I regret having used [those words]."

Air America Apologizing

In an audio skit about President Bush's Social Security (search) proposal earlier this week, a voice on Air America, the liberal radio network, said, "here's your answer, you ungrateful whelp," and then sounded three shotgun blasts. Air America is now apologizing for that, calling it a "bad" skit and insisting, "our normal vetting process failed."

AP Incorrect

The AP this week quoted the President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Albert Mohler Jr, as saying that putting more evangelicals on the court will mean rulings more in tune with Christian beliefs. But Mohler never said that. The AP now says it "incorrectly paraphrased" him.

NPR: "We Regret Any Error or Confusion"

A National Public Radio (search) host said, "a book by a conservative commentator ... has leveled ... charges [similar]" to those by Republicans that judicial activist judges bring violence upon themselves. But the book, "Men in Black" by Mark Levin, never says that. NPR now says it was just "turn[ing] to a critique of the book" from a previous subject, and "we regret any error or confusion."

"Caught in a Contradiction"

An editorial page editor at the Minneapolis Star Tribune (search) insisted earlier this week that his paper has never advocated a change to Senate filibuster rules. But after some media noted that when President Clinton's proposals were being filibustered, the paper called on politicians to "crusade for changes in Senate procedures," Editorial page deputy editor Jim Boyd now admits his paper has been "caught in a contradiction." He says he and his staff "missed" the old editorial.

"Post"-ed a Correction

And finally, The Washington Post (search) today has a headline saying that Tom DeLay (search) "is likely to be found culpable." But the piece accompanying it doesn't say that, instead saying that Delay is "in danger" of being found in violation of House ethics rules, but could also be "vindicated." The Post now says its headline "overstated" the situation

 

[smurphy]

I can't wait until 2013 when DTB gives equal time to all of the transgressions of the Bush administration.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

I will be taking CLOSE look at his pardon list to see if it contains typical political pardons--or is full of drug felons and pardons for cash. refresher course if you have time----
remeber this is Ocelots great American
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pardonchartlst.htm

and speaking of felons------

Former Cellblock Is a Voting Bloc?

Thursday, May 12, 2005

By Brit Hume



Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:

Rules Were Meant to Be Broken?

Officials in Milwaukee say they've now established that, in their city alone, 4,600 more votes were cast in November elections, than there were voters listed as having gone to the polls. They also found that more than 100 people voted twice, used fake names, or voted in the name of a dead person and hundreds of felons ineligible to vote did so anyway.

In Wisconsin, only felons who have completed probation or parole are allowed to vote. But, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (search), that didn't stop at least 200 felons from voting illegally and that number is likely much higher, since the Sentinel could only review about a third of the 2.98 million votes cast in the state. The Sentinel says most of those who committed fraud might not face any legal action, because city records are too sloppy for prosecutors to put together their cases.

Former Cellblock Is a Voting Bloc?

Speaking of felons voting, a national study ? cited byThe Tacoma News Tribune (search) in Washington state ? shows that, on average, felons vote Democratic by a margin of three to one. What's more, the study, published in the American Sociological Review, shows that if disenfranchised felons were allowed to vote, they would have swung the 2000 presidential race to Al Gore and could swing national and state elections in the future.

 

[smurphy]

That is just as bad as all the Democrat voter registrations that got thrown away here in Las Vegas by the Republican based registration company out of Phoenix.

My only hope is that somehow all the fraud ends up equal. Kinda like bad or missed penalties in a football game. You just hope there kind of even and in the end the game doesn't have to be decided by the officials. ...I guess that's exactly what happened in 2000 though.