Are the Reps Finally Going to Stop Playing and Get Down to Business?

Senator Frist may finally be growing into his role as Senator MAJORITY Leader. So far, he has capitulated in far too many ways, acted like a minority leader, and generally failed to show the backbone of a leader who has the majority in the Senate, is supported by a strong President, and has a similar majority in the House.

Let's just hope this strength of character can extend to the Tax Cut issue as well.

Frist to seek rules change to end filibusters on judges -- The Washington Times

Republicans plan to begin the process today of using their so-called "nuclear option" to end the Democratic filibusters of judicial nominees by changing Senate rules governing how many votes are required to break such blockades.

Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican, plans to introduce the rules change today, according to two Senate aides involved in the Republican planning. . . .

Currently, 60 votes are required to break a filibuster, which is also called invoking cloture. The resolution, co-sponsored by several senators, will require 60 votes only in the first attempt at invoking cloture. In each attempt after that, the vote requirement will drop by three until it reaches a simple majority of 51 votes.

This rule change will apply only to executive nominations, not legislative business. . . .

The idea was first floated by Sen. Zell Miller, Georgia Democrat, in an Op-Ed piece in the Wall Street Journal several months ago. Mr. Miller has consistently voted with Republicans to end the filibusters. In 1995, a similar plan was introduced by Democratic Sens. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Tom Harkin of Iowa.

US to Ask UN to Lift Unnecessary Sanctions

Bloomberg.com: Top Worldwide

``The general mood in the Security Council is that the war we didn't want is over now, so let's not repeat the debate of yesterday,'' said Ambassador Gunter Pleuger of Germany, a council member that was among the main opponents of the war. ``The council is in a constructive and cooperative mood.''

I'll believe it when I see it.

--30--

PATRIOT Act Sunset Still Intact

Now if we can just get some of the provisions repealed. I can't believe I am agreeing with something Senator Schumer said. Ugh. But at least I admit it when the Left says something right.

Senate Deal Kills Effort to Extend Antiterror Act

Senate Republicans backed down today from an effort to make permanent the sweeping antiterrorism powers in a 2001 act, clearing the way for passage of a less divisive measure that would still expand the government's ability to spy on foreign terrorist suspects in the United States. . . .

Under current law, federal officials must establish a link to a foreign terrorist group in order to secure or request a secret warrant . . . .

"There's a delicate balance between liberty and security," said Senator Charles E. Schumer, the New York Democrat who was one of the authors of the so-called "lone wolf" counterterrorism measure. "It's a seesaw, and that's the debate that we're seeing now in Congress. . . ."

--30--

Eco-Nuts Don't Like Safe Drinking Water

Chemical Plant Safety Important . . . So Are the Chemicals

Yet another great Junk Science article by Steven Milloy on Foxnes.com.

FOXNews.com

In sum, Inhofe wants to ensure chemical facilities are secure while Corzine and the eco-scoundrels want to make sure there are no more chemicals at chemical facilities — a regressive goal that would harm public health, reduce the quality of our lives and wreak economic havoc.
What should be debunked first, however, are the EPA's disaster scenarios. They aren't "worst-case" — they're pure fantasy.

In developing the scenarios, the EPA made a number of unrealistic assumptions. The agency, for example, pretended wind would blow in a 360 degree-radius from the site of a chemical release — that is, in all directions at the same time.

The EPA also pretended that the topography of heavily populated areas is flat — no buildings, trees, mountains or other barriers to drifting chemicals — and that chemical facilities have no capabilities for preventing or mitigating releases.

None of these assumptions are true, much less their confluence. The EPA's worst-case scenarios are worthless as policy-making tools.

--30--

Fast Food Lawsuit Comes Up Again

This is Why People Hate Lawyers

GD opportunistic, money-grubbing, frivolous crap. Sorry, but this stuff really makes me mad. Lawyers, smelling a fat paycheck, are once again trying to extort money from the fast food industry.

Ok, let's see a show of hands here: who out there does NOT know that too much fast food is bad for you? Anybody? Who out there has a gun held to their head and is forced to eat burgers and fries?

Check out Overlawyered.com and Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse for more about this sort of thing.

Also, write a letter to your congressman or woman and tell them you want lawsuit reform which moves us to a loser-pays system. That way, people will think twice about filing frivolous lawsuits in hopes of making a big payday.

Lawyers plan new fast food assault

Fast food purveyors McDonald's and Burger King are about to be hit -- again -- with a slew of claims that their burgers and fries cause obesity, and some critics say they even feed an addiction.
Litigators want to charge companies in the business of selling burgers with contributing to the rising obesity rate in the United States.

--30--

Left Reliance on Failure to Find Weapons A Mistake

Blinded by Bush-Hatred

NOTE: This article is found in the notoriously conservative Washington Post and written by the notoriously conservative Jonathon Chaitt of the notoriously conservative New Republic. You should definitely not pay any attention to what he says about how some liberals hate Bush sooooo much that they would gleefully make predictions about how we "won't find any WMD in Iraq."
Blinded by Bush-Hatred (washingtonpost.com)

So Bush's claims should never be taken at face value. But accepting the fact that Iraq had an extensive and continuing program for weapons of mass destruction doesn't require taking Bush at his word. The U.N. Special Commission, when it finished its work in 1999, concluded the same thing. So has Germany's intelligence service. So has the United Kingdom's. Indeed, the only people who seem to doubt it are either allies of Hussein or those who distrust Bush so much that they automatically assume everything he says must be false.

--30--

McCain-Feingold Notes Cont.

More McCain-Feingold Notes

The Miami Herald | 05/08/2003 | Political advocacy vs. freedom of speech

Under that law, after ads have run and their legality has been challenged, the Federal Election Commission shall brood about their intent. But would not fear of an adverse ruling from the FEC's speech police have a chilling effect on political advocacy?

No problem, according to Judge Richard Leon, who complacently suggests: Do you find the McCain-Feingold speech rules vague and confusing? There are two ways to be safe from criminal prosecution. Avoid mentioning a congressional candidate. Or seek an advisory opinion from the FEC about whether the speech you want to engage in is criminal.

--30--

Chem Wepaons in Iraq?

Doesn't Matter . . . the Left won't Believe It Anyway

U.S. sees proof of biolab -- The Washington Times

The Pentagon confirmed yesterday that a tractor-trailer found in northern Iraq is a mobile biological laboratory that could be used to make deadly germ weapons.

--30--

Lieberman's Energy Plan

Lieberman Shows Big Gov't Roots

Senator Lieberman wants to let gov't controlyour energy usages rather than go get the energy that is already waiting for us to retrieve it.

Lieberman lays out a tough energy plan -- The Washington Times

Myron Ebell, director of global-warming policy for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said Mr. Lieberman would "essentially create a centrally planned economy for energy."

"The government would tell people how much energy they could use," he said. "So if you like rationing and higher energy prices, then you should support Mr. Lieberman."

BTW - for those who oppose drilling in ANWR - check out this site.
--30--

The Left Loves Dictators, part 239

Jeff Jacoby on Castro's Cheerleaders

Boston Globe Online / Editorials | Opinions / Castro's cheerleaders

Who could disagree? In a ruthless crackdown just four weeks ago, the Castro regime rounded up 75 peaceful dissidents - economists, journalists, pro-democracy petitioners, even a poet or two - and sentenced them to prison terms of up to 28 years. The combined total of their sentences was a stunning 1,454 years. One US official characterized it as ''the most despicable act of political repression in the Americas in a decade.'' No less barbaric was the fate of three Cubans who attempted to escape Castro's island gulag by hijacking a ferry to Florida: They were killed by firing squad. Of course the whole international community should be condemning Cuba.

But it isn't. Last week Cuba was elected to a new three-year term on the UN Commission on Human Rights. There it will serve with such other human rights luminaries as Libya (which chairs the commission), Sudan, Zimbabwe, and Saudi Arabia. The American ambassador, disgusted by the commission's deference to the foremost human rights violator in the Western Hemisphere, walked out. No other country followed suit, not even the democracies. So much for the outrage of the ''international community.''

Time to Take Off the Gloves

Reps May Trump Dems With Technical Rule

Ohpleaseohpleaseohpleaseohpleaseohplease. I hope they do this.

Question: why is it always Reps that need to compromise?

The article says, at one point, “this proposed tactic is that it might destroy whatever is left of the working relationship between Democrats and Republicans.” So what? The Dems have already declared war and are doing everything they can to block the President’s agenda. They have thwarted the will of the Constitution by requiring a de facto supermajority to approve judicial nominees. They are using a parliamentary trick to deny nominees their opportunity to have a vote in the Senate. So what’s the problem in using a parliamentary trick to stop them from their underhanded moves? NOTHING.

The Democrats have long talked about how the Reps need to play nice and not play hardball. Anybody remember the disaster known as "power sharing" while the Reps were in the majority? What happened when the Dems regained control? Where'd "power sharing" go then? No. When they are in charge, they can do whatever they want and they justify it because what they are doing is too important to compromise. But let the Reps try to advance their agenda and then, all of a sudden, the "working together" lines come out again. Screw 'em. The Reps have lived in this fantasy world for long enough. They are not going to be any different when they get the power back - regardless of whether or not the Reps play nice right now. They will unashamedly advance their agenda. All I suggest is that the Reps do what the Dems have been doing for years.

Hatch group may go ‘nuclear’ on judges=TheHill.com=

Plan would limit use of Rule XXII in Dem filibusters By Alexander Bolton and Geoff Earle
Several senior Republican senators are seeking wider party backing for a bold plan that would break the Democrats’ filibuster of President Bush’s judicial nominees.

Their approach calls for employing a rarely used parliamentary tactic to overturn current Senate procedures.

--30--

CAPTCHAs Gotcha!

Go Earthlink! Kill Spam!

This is probably a variation on the sort of thing you see if you sign up for a free Yahoo mail account. Called CAPTCHAs, these little bits of technology are designed to present tasks that are easy for humans to accomplish but really difficult for computers. They are not perfect, but they can certainly make a dent in the amount of spam that fills email inboxes at earthlink. Find more about this technology at Captcha.net.
EarthLink to Offer Anti-Spam E-Mail System (TechNews.com)

Known as "challenge-response" technology, the system thwarts the ability of spammers to reach their intended audience with millions of automatically generated e-mails. When someone sends an e-mail to a challenge-response user, he or she gets an e-mail back asking to verify that the sender is a live person.

Once the sender does that by replicating a word or picture displayed on the screen, the original e-mail is allowed through. The system automatically recognizes future e-mails from the same sender, so the verification needs only to be performed once. Without the verification, the e-mail is not delivered.

--30--

Dems Change Confirmation Process

An excellent article about the dems judicial shennanigans by Senator John Cornyn

This has been going on for a long time. For my liberal readers: read John Cornyn's article and imagine if the Repubs did this to Clinton's nominees (they did not, by the way).

The Senate is there to vote on confirmation. That means that the whole Senate votes. If more vote for than against, the candidate is confirmed. The Dems know that more than 51 senators would vote for these nominees. Ergo, they are forcing a supermajority vote (60) to end a filibuster and THEN the candidate would get the straight up and down vote needing a 51 or better margin to be confirmed. It's called hijacjing folks. In effect, that means that any candidate needs a 60 vote supermajority just to be confirmed rather than the 51 required by the Constitution.

OpinionJournal - Extra - John Cornyn On Judicial Confirmation Politics

Today, a minority of obstructionist senators are forcing upon the confirmation process a supermajority requirement of 60 votes. They are using the filibuster not simply to ensure adequate debate, but actually to block many of our nation's numerous judicial vacancies from being filled.

--30--

Decriminalizing Marijuana Will Bring About the End of Canada

Decriminalizing Marijuana Will Bring About the End of Canada

If you listen to the shrill plaints of the US Government, Canada's plan to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana will end in our two countries never talking again. A blessing in diguise? The US gets to forget a parasitic northern "ally" who could not vacillate enough on the issue of Saddam Hussein and Canada gets rid of the moralistic complaints of a failed "War on Drugs" from the US? Winners all round! And don't forget: Blame Canada!

Canadian Government to Decriminalize Marijuana

Murray said that if Canada moves to decriminalize,more young people will use marijuana, police resources will be strapped, and the most vulnerable minority communities will be the most negatively affected by the increased accessibility.

--30--

Tell Your Rep You Want Your Money Back

Bush Calls for Calls

President Bush asked voters to contact their representatives in Washington via telephone, email, snail mail, singing telegram, whatever. Why? To let those greedy SOB’s know that we want our money back. Please, give them a call. Send an email. (You’re already on your computer. Take two seconds to do it. You can find your representatives here.

Bush seeks voter rally for tax cuts -- The Washington Times

President Bush directly asked voters for the first time yesterday to pressure Congress into passing the largest possible tax cut as a way of stimulating the lackluster economy.
"I would hope you'd call members of your congressional delegation to let them know what you think, to let them know your opinion," Mr. Bush told a gathering of 2,000 enthusiastic business owners and employees. "Democracy can work, particularly when a lot of people get on the phone, or by e-mail, and just let them know what's on your mind.

--30--

France Gives Passports to Fleeing Iraqis

Vive Le Iraq

Les francaise are at it again. This time we get documents showing that they actively helped Iraqi officials escape to Europe.
France helped Iraqis escape -- The Washington Times

The French government secretly supplied fleeing Iraqi officials with passports in Syria that allowed them to escape to Europe, The Washington Times has learned.
An unknown number of Iraqis who worked for Saddam Hussein's government were given passports by French officials in Syria, U.S. intelligence officials said.

--30--

Taranto on Bennett

UPDATE on Bennett’s Gambling Story

James Taranto brings out a few more facts than I did. Check out his demolition of the left’s Bill Bennett gambling gambit.
OpinionJournal - Best of the Web Today (second story).

You can see why this would be a big scandal. Oh sure, Bennett hasn't actually held public office in over a decade. But still it's news when it turns out he's been violating the law.

Only he hasn't been violating the law. According to The Washington Monthly, "Bennett has made dozens of trips to casinos in Atlantic City and Las Vegas"--places where gambling has been legal for decades.

But still he's a hypocrite, right? After all, he often argues that gambling should be outlawed. Actually, he doesn't. The Washington Monthly reports that "Bennett and his organization, Empower America, oppose the extension of casino gambling in the states." But apparently they take no position on casino gambling where it's already legal. And while he "has opined on everything from drinking to 'homosexual unions' to 'The Ricki Lake Show' to wife-swapping," gambling "has largely escaped Bennett's wrath."

So maybe Bennett has a conflict of interest. After all, the gambling industry has one of the most vigorous lobbies in Washington, the American Gaming Association, and its president, Frank Fahrenkopf, is a former Republican National Committee chairman. But there's no apparent connection here either; Bill Bennett is not a gambling-industry lobbyist.

--30--

Like the Awkward Too Soon Try for a Kiss of the First Date . . . .

Dennis Miller Rants on Norman Mailer

I usually love Dennis Miller’s rants on the lunacy of the left. And I approached this editorial with some anticipation since he was to skewer the odd writings of Norman Mailer’s London Times op/ed last week.

Unfortunately, Dennis comes off as too cute here. His trademark analogies and similies seemed overworked and strained and his logic is more faulty than usual.

Maybe you will like it more than I did. Joe Bob says check it out.
OpinionJournal - Featured Article: 'Why Are We in Iraq?' Meet Norman Mailer, Third Cousin of the Rational Op-Ed.

His basic contention is that we went to war with Iraq because with the dominance of white American men in the boxing ring, the office and the home front eroded, George W. Bush thought they needed to know they were still good at something. Mr. Mailer has a degree in aeronautical engineering from Harvard so he had to know that argument wouldn't fly. But then again, maybe this claptrap is just a grand put-on. The fact that I and many others can't differentiate anymore does not augur well for Norm's legend.

--30--

Surprise - Bush Can Raise Money

Bush’s Campaign Fund Raising

They’re mad again. The left is upset that Bush can outearn them in the trenches. Now they are complaining that individuals, US citizens at least, raised money for him. No complaints that anything illegal was done. Nothing about the fund raisers breaking the law or bending the rules. Nope. Not a peep. Just grousing about the fact that Bush is better at fundraising than they are.

They do try to make it sound ominous (see the second paragraph quoted below). As if these “Pioneers” gave the money themselves or they got the $1000 max from every person they met. Nope. They went and found people to donate as much as they could. Sometimes it would be the maximum $1000 and other times it would be less. This is the same thing that Dems can do and have done.

Campaign Documents Show Depth of Bush Fund-Raising

They also show that more than 500 people signed up to be "Pioneers" by promising to raise at least $100,000 for Mr. Bush from individual donors. Previously, the Bush campaign had said that about 230 people had become Pioneers by raising $100,000. . . .

"If you are a candidate whose supporters are only able to give $25 or $50, they're not going to stand a chance when candidates who have big networks in place are able to haul in the money from large donors in such large increments," Ms. Tenneriello said.

--30--

Bennett Story Meritless

Bennett's Gambling - A Non-Story

And here’s why:

He participated in a legal activity.
He broke no laws whatsoever.
He used his own money and always paid his debts.
He did not, REPEAT DID NOT, say anything bad about gambling in any of his books.

With these facts in mind, the criticisms against him just wither and die. Is he a hypocrite? No, he never said gambling was wrong. Is he a deadbeat who spends money like there’s no tomorrow? He used his own discretionary income to have a good time. Did that good time involve hookers or drugs or any of the things he has railed against in his books and speeches? No, not a one.

He has made millions from his books and speaking engagements. He spent some of that money to have a good time doing a legal activity.

Some religious individuals believe that gambling is wrong but the majority of people in the US see nothing wrong with gambling as a past time. So what’s the big deal?

CNN.com - GOP moralist Bennett gives up gambling - May. 5, 2003

"A number of stories in the media have reported that I have engaged in high stakes gambling over the past decade. It is true that I have gambled large sums of money. I have also complied with all laws on reporting wins and losses," he said.

--30--