Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Stop the So-Called Global Poverty Act At All Costs!

Senator Barack Hussein Obama's only major legislative accomplishment as a United States Senator -- which according to some conservative leaders is potentially an $845 billion United Nations give away of your hard-earned tax dollars -- could be coming up for a stealth vote any day now!

Please E-mail, Call and/or Fax Congress Now!
Find contact information for members of Congress HERE
E-Mail White House here:
E-Mail Vice-President Cheney here:

Stop the So-Called Global Poverty Act At All Costs!

It is not humane to burden the American taxpayer with billions in additional foreign aid. It is more than unacceptable. And moreover, if history is to be our guide, these monies often wind up lining the pockets of third-world tyrants and bureaucrats who hate America and do very little to help those who are truly in need -- remember the Oil for Food scandal!

Obviously the concept of eliminating poverty around the world would appear, on the surface, to be a good thing. And since no one wants to be on the record as not wanting to combat poverty, you will -- without a doubt -- feel pressure from some of your less courageous peers and the media to let this horrendous bill pass!

The American people will be watching and will not tolerate massive United Nations-inspired giveaways that are passed in the dark of night -- or in broad daylight for that matter.

Expose S. 2433 for what it is; a stealth bill and a dagger aimed at the heart of America’s sovereignty. I urge you to stand firm for what is right and not to buckle under the pressure. Filibuster if you must, but defeat S. 2433 by any means necessary!

Your Name
Your Address

Obama's Global Tax

Posted Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Election '08: A plan by Barack Obama to redistribute American wealth on a global level is moving forward in the Senate. It follows Marxist theology — from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

We are citizens of the world, Sen. Obama told thousands of nonvoting Germans during his recent tour of the Middle East and Europe. And if the Global Poverty Act (S. 2433) he has sponsored becomes law, which is almost certain if he wins in November, we're also going to be taxpayers of the world.

Speaking in Berlin, Obama said: "While the 20th century taught us that we share a common destiny, the 21st has revealed a world more intertwined than at any time in human history."

What the 20th century really showed was a series of totalitarian threats — from fascism to Nazism to communism — defeated by the U.S. military. Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Tojo's Japan and the Soviet Union offered destinies we did not share. Our destiny of peace and freedom through strength was not achieved by a transnationalist fantasy of buying the world a Coke and singing "Kumbaya."

Obama's Global Poverty Act offers us a global socialist destiny we do not want, one that challenges America's very sovereignty. The former "post-racial" candidate obviously intends to be a post-national president.
A statement from Obama's office says: "With billions of people living on just dollars a day around the world, global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges and tragedies the international community faces. It must be a priority of American foreign policy to commit to eliminating extreme poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter and clean drinking water."

These are worthy goals, but note there's no mention of spreading democracy, expanding free trade, promoting entrepreneurial capitalism or ridding the world of despots who rule and ravage countries such as Zimbabwe and Sudan.

Obama would give them all a fish without teaching them how to fish. Pledging to cut global poverty in half on the backs of U.S. taxpayers is a ridiculous and impossible goal.

His legislation refers to the "millennium development goal," a phrase from a declaration adopted by the United Nations Millennium Assembly in 2000 and supported by President Clinton.

It calls for the "eradication of poverty" in part through the "redistribution (of) wealth of land" and "a fair distribution of the earth's resources." In other words: American resources.

It's a mantra of liberals that the U.S. is only a small portion of the world's population yet consumes an unseemly portion of the planet's supposedly finite resources. Never mentioned is the fact that America's population, just 5% of the world's total, also produces a stunning 27% of the world's GDP — to the enormous benefit of other countries. Nonetheless, their solution is to siphon off the product of our free democracy and distribute it.

We already transfer too much national wealth to the United Nations and its busybody agencies. Obama's bill would force U.S. taxpayers to fork over 0.7% of our gross domestic product every year to fund a global war on poverty, spending well above the $16.3 billion in global poverty aid the U.S. already spends.

Over a 13-year period, from 2002, when the U.N.'s Financing for Development Conference was held, to the target year of 2015, when the U.S is expected to meet its part of the U.N. Millennium goals, we would be spending an additional $65 billion annually for a total of $845 billion.
During a time of economic uncertainty, the plan would cost every American taxpayer around $2,500.

If you're worried abut gasoline and heating oil prices now, think what they'll be like when the U.S. is subjected in an Obama administration to global energy consumption and production taxes. Obama's Global Poverty Act is the "international community's" foot in the door.

The U.N. Millennium declaration called for a "currency transfer tax," a "tax on the rental value of land and natural resources," a "royalty on worldwide fossil energy production — oil, natural gas, coal . . . fees for the commercial use of the oceans, fees for the airplane use of the skies, fees for the use of the electromagnetic spectrum, fees on foreign exchange transactions, and a tax on the carbon content of fuels."

Co-sponsors of S. 2433 include Democrats Maria Cantwell of Washington, Dianne Feinstein of California, Richard Durbin of Illinois and Robert Menendez of New Jersey. GOP globalists supporting the bill include Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Richard Lugar of Indiana.

Lugar has worked with Obama to promote more aid to Russia to promote nuclear nonproliferation. Lugar also promotes the Law of the Sea treaty, which turns over the world's oceans to an International Seabed Authority that would charge us to drill offshore and have veto power over the movements and actions of the U.S. Navy.

Obama's agenda sounds like defeated 2004 Democratic candidate John Kerry's "global test" for U.S. foreign policy decisions where "you have to do it in a way that passes the test — that passes the global test — where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."
Obama has called on the U.S. to "lead by example" on global warming and probably would submit to a Kyoto-like agreement that would sock Americans with literally trillions of dollars in costs over the next half century for little or no benefit.

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times . . . and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama has said. "That's not leadership. That's not going to happen."

Oh, really? Who's to say we can't load up our SUV and head out in search of bacon double cheeseburgers at the mall? China? India? Bangladesh? The U.N.?

In an Obama White House, American sovereignty will become an endangered species. The Global Poverty Act is the first toe in the water of global socialism

Monday, July 28, 2008

Can Someone do an Intervention?

Well the circus just goes on....not only is Kwame Kilpatrick being investigated Story Here on a deputy accompanying an investigator for the Wayne County prosecutor Thursday at the home of the mayor's sister.

Now it appears that city workers have siphoned gas from city pumps Story Here and there is a "total lack of control" over the city's nearly $7 million a year gas supply...
since May 2005 and auditors say upper management is not monitoring their gas use at city-owned stations, even though they have the tracking system to do so, according to a report from the Office of the Auditor General.... one city police officer who used the same gas card to get gas seven times in one day for a total of nearly 85 gallons. Some of the fill ups were just minutes apart. "

And what do we hear from Governor Granholm?
Silent as the grave...meanwhile the Kilpatrick Circus plays on

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Belief Growing That Reporters are Trying to Help Obama Win

Speaking of Liberal Media Bias...

Monday, July 21, 2008
Rasmussen Reports

The idea that reporters are trying to help Obama win in November has grown by five percentage points over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey, taken just before the new controversy involving the New York Times erupted, found that 49% of voters believe most reporters will try to help the Democrat with their coverage, up from 44% a month ago.

Just 14% believe most reporters will try to help McCain win, little changed from 13% a month ago. Just one voter in four (24%) believes that most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage.

The New York Times’ refusal to run an op-ed piece by John McCain challenging an article in the paper less than a week ago by Barack Obama is sure to further fuel the belief that much of the major media is biased in favor of the Democratic candidate. At issue is McCain’s response to an article by Obama entitled, “My Plan for Iraq.” Obama was in Afghanistan over the weekend and in Iraq today attempting to build his foreign policy portfolio for the fall campaign.

A Rasmussen Reports survey earlier this year found that just 24% of American voters have a favorable opinion of the New York Times. The paper’s ratings divided sharply along partisan and ideological lines, with liberals far more supportive of the paper than conservatives.
At the time of that survey, the paper was being criticized for an article it had run about McCain’s ties to lobbyists. Sixty-six percent (66%) of those who were aware of the story in question believed it was an attempt by the New York Times to hurt the McCain campaign.

In the latest survey, a plurality of Democrats—37%-- say most reporters try to offer unbiased coverage of the campaign. Twenty-seven percent (27%) believe most reporters are trying to help Obama and 21% in Obama’s party think reporters are trying to help the Republican candidate.

Among Republicans, 78% believe reporters are trying to help Obama and 10% see most offering unbiased coverage.

As for unaffiliated voters, 50% see a pro-Obama bias and 21% see unbiased coverage. Just 12% of those not affiliated with either major party believe the reporters are trying to help McCain.

In a more general sense, 45% say that most reporters would hide information if it hurt the candidate they wanted to win. Just 30% disagree and 25% are not sure. Democrats are evenly divided as to whether a reporter would release such information while Republicans and unaffiliated voters have less confidence in the reporters.

Republicans and unaffiliated voters are more likely to trust campaign information from family and friends than from reporters. Democrats are evenly divided as to who they would trust more.

A separate survey released this morning also found that 50% of voters believe most reporters want to make the economy seem worse than it is. A plurality believes that the media has also tried to make the war in Iraq appear worse that it really is.

A survey conducted earlier this year found that 30% of voters believe having a friendly reporter is more valuable than raising a lot of campaign contributions.. Twenty-nine percent (29%) believe contributions are more important and 40% are not sure.

These results are consistent with earlier surveys finding that large segments of the population believe the media is biased It is also clear that voters select their news sources in a partisan manner. During Election 2004, CNN viewers heavily favored John Kerry while Fox Fans preferred George W. Bush.

Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.

This national telephone survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports July 19, 2008. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

My Interview with Congressman Rogers

I live in the 8th Congressional district and yesterday I actually had the opportunity to speak for a few minutes with my Congressman, Mike Rogers! He was even willing to go on-the-record with me about some current events. The interview is as follows:

AP2: Good afternoon Congressman Rogers, thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to speak with me. As a blogger I appreciate the opportunity.

CMR: It is my pleasure!

AP2: Congressman, you have traveled extensively in Iraq, and have had innumerable in-depth discussions with military, intelligence and civilian officials. What is your opinion of Barack Obama's trip to Iraq?

CMR: What bothers me most me most is he has changed his position, he has padded his plane with reporters and he is not listening to the on-the-ground commanders. He clearly disregarded the commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus. It has become obvious that this is not an unbiased fact finding tour but a campaign opportunity. And it is offensive for the soldiers on the ground, who did not sign up to be a backdrop on an Obama campaign stop.

AP2: Barack Obama seems to be formulating policy as he goes along. He was against the surge. However now that the surge has been successful he has backtracked.

CMR: Barack Obama's campaign positions are always formulated to maximize votes. Yes, he opposed the surge, now he is calling it an "Improved Security Situation." First he's for timetables, and then he isn't. He calls for unilateral military action in Pakistan then backtracks. He vowed to meet with various heads of terror states including Ahmenidjad of Iran—"without preconditions" and then he had to back track. He said what he thinks and then his handlers get a hold of him and he back tracks. He is the most "handled" presidential candidate I have ever seen.

AP2: That includes the media! A case pinpoint would be the New York Times refusal to print an editorial by John McCain in response to a piece by Barack Obama published in the paper last week.

CMR: Oh absolutely! That was incredibly blatant, a complete repudiation of a fair and unbiased media. I recently saw a figure that media coverage for Obama is 65% to 35% coverage for John McCain.

AP2: Its funny, but I had this very same discussion with a liberal relative of mine recently. I did some research and a 2005 study by a UCLA Political Scientist found of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center. Also, surveys from 1978 to 2005 show that journalists are far more likely to say they are liberal than conservative and are far more liberal than the public at large.

CMR: Well it obvious in this campaign. All three network anchors went with Obama to Iraq. So many of his fundamental policies are not being covered. His polices are in direct opposition to what Americans want, low energy costs, and the retreat of terrorists. The evidence clearly points to the liberal media picking a candidate for the voters. It is a terrible disservice not only to the voters but also to our country.

However, the polls are tight, so I believe that Americans are seeing through it. Americans do not want on the job training at their expense and the security of our country.

AP2: Thank you Congressman Rogers, once again, I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you.

CMR: Thank you, Joan.

This article is crossposted on RightMichigan

Monday, July 21, 2008

The bias gets even more blatant

July 21, 2008
American Thinker
Ray Robison

The Drudge Report and Fox News are reporting today that the New York Times has denied an opinion piece from Senator John McCain after publishing Senator Barack Obama's op-ed last week. The Drudge link provides the background and full text of the op-ed article which The New York Times turned down.

This comes as no surprise to media monitors who predicted that the liberal media would provide cover for Obama during his fact-finding tour of Iraq. It is clear that The New York Times does not want to allow McCain to take a swing at the Democratic nominee while he is vulnerable. His high profile tour gives McCain the perfect opportunity to put a punctuation mark next to the erroneous judgment of Barack Obama who called the surge a failure up until a few days ago.

One year and two weeks ago The New York Times declared the Iraq War lost and demanded troops be withdrawn immediately. Just days ago it stated that it cannot define what a victory is so we can not have victory in Iraq:

And it was distressing to hear Mr. McCain still talking about "winning" the war in Iraq and adopting the tedious tactic of accusing Mr. Obama of "giving up" when he talks about a careful withdrawal of troops.

We have no idea what winning means to Mr. McCain.

Fringe leftist liberals have long used this argument. They say there is no definition for victory in Iraq, thus we can not have victory, and therefore we cannot win. It doesn't matter how many times the Bush Administration or John McCain defines victory -- usually along the lines of a secure, democratic Iraqi that is a partner against terrorism -- fringe leftists can't hear it. This "nah, nah, nah, nah....we can't hear you" game is a tiresome one coming from leftist activists. Coming from a standard of American media, it is distressing. How low can they sink?

This low. According to the new reporting, The New York Times responded to the McCain campaign with:

Shipley, who is on vacation this week, explained his decision not to run the editorial.

'The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans.'

Shipley continues: 'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq.' [emphasis added]

So the Times can't find a definition from John McCain on what victory in Iraq means? Maybe they should just look at McCain's website:

The best way to secure long-term peace and security is to establish a stable, prosperous, and democratic state in Iraq that poses no threat to its neighbors and contributes to the defeat of terrorists. When Iraqi forces can safeguard their own country, American troops can return home.

Of course playing the "nah, nana, nah, nah...we can't hear you" game does a lot more to protect Obama doesn't it?

Tell John McCain Not to Get Suckered into Liberal Propaganda on Global Warming


When it comes to perpetrating the MYTH of Global Warming, former Vice President Al Gore may be dispensing the Kool-Aid, but Senator John McCain is certainly swallowing it. The Left is using the MYTH of Global Warming as an excuse to raise taxes on American families, bash business, expand government regulation and revive their discredited socialist ideology.

And John McCain -- a man we respect and honor -- has been falling for it.
This is what The Wall Street Journal says about McCain's stance:
"This is one of those issues where Mr. McCain indulges his 'maverick' tendencies, which usually means taking the liberal line. That was the case yesterday... His plan... requires an expensive, invasive government bureaucracy to interfere with the market."

More on the phoney man-made global warming and other enivromental wackos here

Americans for Prosperity Crashes Al Gore's Speech

Thursday, July 17, 2008

George Bush outperforms entire Democratic National Committee (DNC) in Fundraising Prowess


A recent report shows that for an unpopular president, George Bush is outperforming the entire Democratic National Committee (DNC), in fundraising prowess.They sneak him in, they take no pictures with him and yet since the start of 2007 President George Bush has brought more money in for Republican National Committee (RNC) than the entire Democratic National Committee has been able to raise.

The numbers for this year alone:
He has already clocked 31 political events this year, raising nearly $70 million for GOP candidates and the national and state parties, according to the Republican National Committee. The tally puts the president on track to meet or exceed the amount he raised before the midterm elections in 2006, according to GOP officials.

A man who was a senior adviser to Gore, Michael Feldman, shows what a fine line Bush has to walk with his popularity rating being so low when he says, "His strongest contribution will be going to high-dollar fundraisers and raising as much money for the campaign and the RNC as he can, and staying as far removed as possible from the McCain campaign in the process."

Recently the news came out that the Republican National Committee has 13 times the amount of money in the bank as the Democratic National Committee does and has has outraised the DNC by 5 times in the same time frame.

Based on the numbers so far, the Republican Party appears poised to act as the financial equalizer in the fall campaign. The RNC disclosed that it ended May with $53.5 million in the bank, compared to $3.9 million for the Democratic National Committee, which is headed by Howard Dean.

Thanks to the continuing GOP popularity and fundraising attraction of President Bush, the RNC continued to vastly out-raise the Democratic Party, amassing $24.4 million just in May. Other recent reports have shown that John McCain's fundraising has been on the rise making May his highest contribution month to date with $21.5 million while Barack Obama saw his lowest fundraising month in May bringing in $22 million.

Despite Barack Obama's phenomenal grassroots personal fundraising ability, the DNC has not come close to matching that type of enthusiasm, and the RNC, with considerable help from President George Bush, has managed to level the monetary playing field between Obama and McCain.

The fact Bush's fund raising capabilities, while being limited because of his overall popularity being at the lowest point, has still brought in more monies than the entire Democratic National Committee, just goes to show that despite his problems, his overall fundraising capabilities are a force to be reckoned with still.

The president is not done yet either, as his chief political adviser, Barry Jackson, makes clear when he states that Bush spent the better part of last year laying the groundwork to help whoever the candidate for the GOP would end up being, and Jackson says that Bush will continue to do so for the"candidates from the top of the ticket on down."

Saturday, July 12, 2008

Clinton Appointed Judge Blocks Drilling In Michigan Forest

Saturday , July 12, 2008

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. — A federal judge has overturned a decision by the U.S. Forest Service to allow oil and gas drilling near a forest and a river in Michigan's northern Lower Peninsula.

U.S. District Judge David Lawson of Detroit ruled Thursday the agency had acted "arbitrarily and capriciously" in 2005 by giving Savoy Energy LP of Traverse City a permit to drill an exploratory well near the Au Sable River's south branch.

The proposed wellhead would be located in the Huron-Manistee National Forest about three-tenths of a mile from the Mason Tract, a 4,679-acre wilderness area prized by anglers and other outdoor recreationists.

Forest supervisor Leanne Marten said when approving Savoy's application that the project wouldn't significantly harm the environment and the company would be required to keep noise to a minimum.

But the judge ruled the Forest Service didn't consider how degrading the area could harm tourism, and said the agency did a "woefully inadequate" job of evaluating how the drilling might affect the Kirtland's warbler, an endangered songbird that nests in the area.

Two environmental groups, the Sierra Club and Anglers of the Au Sable, sued the government to halt the drilling. Joining the suit was Tim Mason, whose grandfather, auto executive George Mason, donated the original 1,200 acres to the state upon his death in 1954 and asked that it be maintained as wilderness.

"The ruling supports what my grandfather's vision was. It's a victory," said Mason, a Woodstock, Ill., businessman.

Huron-Manistee spokesman Ken Arbogast referred a request for comment to the U.S. Department of Justice, which represented the Forest Service in court. Andrew Ames, a spokesman for the department, said its attorneys were studying Lawson's ruling and had not decided whether to appeal.
A message seeking comment was left with Savoy.

Leaders of the environmental groups urged the company and the government to look for other places to explore for oil and gas. "We've said from the beginning we didn't want to stop them from drilling," said Marvin Roberson, a forest policy specialist with the Sierra Club. "We want them to drill from a place that won't be harmful to the old-growth forest or the recreational experience."

Although the Mason Tract is state property, the federal government owns rights to minerals beneath it and leased production rights to Savoy. In 2003, the company filed for a permit to drill into one of its lease holdings.
The plan was to clear about 3.5 acres of forest for a well site on federal land, then drill beneath the Mason Tract at an angle. If enough gas or oil was found, the company intended to install a pipeline and build a production facility about a mile east of the well.

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management approved the project shortly after the Forest Service granted the permit. But it has been on hold since Lawson issued an order in December 2005 blocking the company from clearing land to get started.i

David Lawson is a United States District Judge for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. He was nominated by President Bill Clinton on August 5, 1999.

Ok let me see, the BLM approved it. The area in contention is 3.5 acres of 4,679 (maybe 20 acres for the plant) and the Clinton appointed judge is concerned that it MIGHT affect the Kirkland Warbler??
I guess with $4.00 a gallon gas and the highest unemployment in the nation, the welfare of the citizens of Michigan come second to the Kirkland Warbler for Judge Lawson the the enivro's

But then, that's not much of a surprise...however I say DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, PAY LESS

I usually don't add a postscript however the comment left reminded me of information about the habitat requirements of a Kirkland Warbler that I was thinking of including when I posted this article and did not so...

"Adequate" is up for the judge's interpretation

Nevertheless, since you brought it up
Do you know a "whit" about the Kirkland Warbler?

The Kirkland Warbler will ONLY nest in jack Pines of that are young and of a certain height. Therefore, unless they are continuing to burn down older Jack Pines and planting new ones, there are not any Kirkland Warblers in the Mason Tract

What's more there is a disease passed from the Cowbird to the Kirkland Warbler so the Cowbird is "eradicated" from areas that the Kirkland Warbler may be living

With the very, very specific requirements of the Kirkland Warbler, natural selection would find such a species that was unable to adapt becoming extinct. But the enviro's, in their ultimate wisdom would rather "eradicate" another bird and put million of acres off limits for useful purposes

My girlfriend, who lives by the Mason tract, wants a bumper sticker that said, "Save a forest kill a Kirkland Warbler"

I want one that said, "Save a Cowbird, kill a Kirkland"

Tony Snow 1955-2008

Tony Snow, Former White House Press Secretary and FOX News Anchor, Dies at 53
Saturday , July 12, 2008
Fox News

Tony Snow, the former White House press secretary and conservative pundit who bedeviled the press corps and charmed millions as a FOX News television and radio host, died Saturday after a long bout with cancer.
He was 53.

A syndicated columnist, editor, TV anchor, radio show host and musician, Snow worked in nearly every medium in a career that spanned more than 30 years.

"Laura and I are deeply saddened by the death of our dear friend Tony Snow," President Bush said in a written statement. "The Snow family has lost a beloved husband and father. And America has lost a devoted public servant and a man of character."

Snow died at 2 a.m. Saturday at Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, D.C.

Snow joined FOX in 1996 as the original anchor of "FOX News Sunday" and hosted "Weekend Live" and a radio program, "The Tony Snow Show," before departing in 2006.

"It's a tremendous loss for us who knew him, but it's also a loss for the country," Roger Ailes, chairman of FOX News, said Saturday morning about Snow, calling him a "renaissance man."
Click here to watch Brit Hume's tribute to Tony Snow.

As a TV pundit and commentator for FOX News, Snow often was critical of Bush before he became the president's third press secretary, following Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan. He was an instant study in the job, mastering the position — and the White House press corps — with apparent ease.

"One of the reasons I took this job is not only to work with the president, but, believe it or not, to work with all of you," Snow told reporters when he stepped into the post in 2006. "These are times that are going to be very challenging."

During a tenure marked by friendly jousting with journalists, Snow often danced around the press corps, occasionally correcting their grammar and speech even as he responded to their questions.

"Tony did his job with more flair than almost any press secretary before him," said William McGurn, Bush's former chief speechwriter. "He loved the give-and-take. But that was possible only because Tony was a man of substance who had real beliefs and principles that he was more than able to defend."

As he announced Snow as his new press secretary in May 2006, Bush praised him as "a man of courage [and] a man of integrity." Snow presided over some of the toughest fights of Bush's presidency, defending the administration during the Iraq war and the CIA leak investigation.
"I felt comfortable enough to interrupt him when he was BSing, and he kind of knew it, and he'd shut up and move on," Snow said.

His tenure at the White House lasted 17 months and was interrupted by his second bout with cancer.
FOX Facts: Tony Snow's Battle With Cancer

Snow had his colon removed and underwent six months of chemotherapy after he was diagnosed with colon cancer in 2005. In 2007 he announced his cancer had recurred and spread to his liver, and he had a malignant growth removed from his abdominal area.

He resigned from the White House six months later, in September 2007, citing not his health but a need to earn more than the $168,000 a year he was paid in the government post. He was replaced by his deputy, Dana Perino, Bush's current press secretary. After taking time off to recuperate, Snow joined CNN as a political commentator early this year.

At the White House, Snow brought partisan zeal and the skills of a seasoned performer to the task of explaining and defending the president's policies. During daily briefings he challenged reporters, scolded them and questioned their motives as if he were starring in a TV show broadcast live from the West Wing.

"The White House has lost a great friend and a great colleague," said Perino in a statement released to the media. "We all loved watching him at the podium, but most of all we learned how to love our families and treat each other."

Critics suggested Snow was turning the traditionally informational daily briefing into a personality-driven media event short on facts and long on confrontation. He was the first press secretary, by his own accounting, to travel the country raising money for Republican candidates.

As a commentator, he had not always been on the president's side. He once called Bush "something of an embarrassment" in conservative circles and criticized what he called Bush's "lackluster" domestic policy.
A sometime fill-in host for Rush Limbaugh, Snow said he loved the intimacy of his radio audience.

"I don't think you ever arrive," he said. "I think anybody who thinks they've arrived or made it, anywhere in the media — they're nuts."

Robert Anthony Snow was born June 1, 1955, in Berea, Ky., the son of a teacher and nurse. He graduated from Davidson College in 1977 with a bachelor's degree in philosophy, and he taught briefly in Kenya before embarking on his journalism career.

Because of his love for writing, Snow took a job as an editorial writer for the Greensboro Record in North Carolina and went on to run the editorial pages at the Newport News (Virginia) Daily Press, Detroit News and Washington Times. He became a nationally syndicated columnist, and in 1991 he became director of speechwriting for President George H.W. Bush.
"He served people, and we can learn from that. He was kind, and we can learn from that. He was just a good person," the senior Bush told FOX News.
Remembering Tony Snow

Snow played six instruments — saxophone, trombone, flute, piccolo, accordion and guitar — and was in a D.C. cover band called Beats Workin'. He also was a film buff.

"He was a great musician," Ailes said. "And he loved movies."
More than anything, said Snow's colleagues, he was a joy to work with.
"He was a lot of fun," his former FOX News producer Griff Jenkins said. "This is a loss of a family member."

FOX News Chief Washington Correspondent Jim Angle called Snow a "gentleman."
Snow is survived by his wife, Jill Ellen Walker, whom he married in 1987; their son, Robbie; and daughters, Kendall and Kristi.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Last July Tony Snow wrote;

I don’t know why I have cancer, and I don’t much care. It is what it is—a plain and indisputable fact. Yet even while staring into a mirror darkly, great and stunning truths begin to take shape. Our maladies define a central feature of our existence: We are fallen. We are imperfect. Our bodies give out.

But despite this—because of it—God offers the possibility of salvation and grace. We don’t know how the narrative of our lives will end, but we get to choose how to use the interval between now and the moment we meet our Creator face-to-face.

Amen Tony, RIP

Saturday, July 5, 2008

FBI Has Evidence Against Conyers


Our reporting partners at the Detroit News are reporting that the FBI has electronic surveillance that links Detroit City Council President Pro Tem Monica Conyers to the Synagro scandal.

The evidence reportedly proves that Conyers received either a payment or payments in connection with the city-approved sludge contract.Conyers was a vocal opponent of the $47 million a year Synagro contract, but changed her position and eventually voted for the deal when it passed by 5-4 vote in November.

The FBI is also looking into the involvement of, and possible payments to several other people in connection with the Synagro deal. Another, unnamed member of Council is also reportedly the focus of the investigation.

The investigation has also touched Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick and Council President Ken Cockrel, Jr. Cockrel's former chief of staff John Clark resigned after it was reported that he had been videotaped taking a bribe.

Mayor Kilpatrick's father Bernard Kilpatrick (regular family affair!)name has surfaced in the investigation, as has that of Michael Tardif, a member of the Democratic National Committee, and adviser to the mayor. Cockrel has said he is not a target of the investigation, Kilpatrick says he had no involvement in the Synagro deal.

Other names that have surfaced in connection with the scandal include Grand Rapids businessman James Rosendall, who represented Synagro in the deal, and Rayford Jackson, a local business man who was involved in the deal. Since the scandal broke, Rosendall has been suspended by Synagro, which also stopped all payments to Jackson.

Sam Riddle, an ex-aide to Councilwoman Conyers says he has also been investigated by the FBI, but told reporters that he had refused a request to wear a wire. Riddle also says he does not think he has billed Conyers for any work since September or October.

The FBI investigation into the Synagro deal is part of a larger investigation into City hall which is examining contracts that were issued over several year, including contract related to Cobo Hall.

Is there any shady/illegal deal that Kwame and his posse isn't involved in?
Evidently not

And Governor Granholm just watches from the wings while Michigan's largest city disintegrates and becomes fodder for late night talk shows and signs pointing to Indiana become even more inticing!

How about some leadership Governor Granholm?!!

Stay tuned as this "Felliniesque" side show continues...

Friday, July 4, 2008

Happy Birthday America

Chronology of Events


June 7
Congress, meeting in Philadelphia, receives Richard Henry Lee's resolution urging Congress to declare independence.
June 11
Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert R. Livingston appointed to a committee to draft a declaration of independence. American army retreats to Lake Champlain from Canada.
June 12-27
Jefferson, at the request of the committee, drafts a declaration, of which only a fragment exists. Jefferson's clean, or "fair" copy, the "original Rough draught," is reviewed by the committee. Both documents are in the manuscript collections of the Library of Congress.
June 28
A fair copy of the committee draft of the Declaration of Independence is read in Congress.
July 1-4
Congress debates and revises the Declaration of Independence.
July 2
Congress declares independence as the British fleet and army arrive at New York.
July 4
Congress adopts the Declaration of Independence in the morning of a bright, sunny, but cool Philadelphia day. John Dunlap prints the Declaration of Independence. These prints are now called "Dunlap Broadsides." Twenty-four copies are known to exist, two of which are in the Library of Congress. One of these was Washington's personal copy.
July 5
John Hancock, president of the Continental Congress, dispatches the first of Dunlap's broadsides of the Declaration of Independence to the legislatures of New Jersey and Delaware.
July 6
Pennsylvania Evening Post of July 6 prints the first newspaper rendition of the Declaration of Independence.
July 8
The first public reading of the Declaration is in Philadelphia.
July 9
Washington orders that the Declaration of Independence be read before the American army in New York
July 19
Congress orders the Declaration of Independence engrossed (officially inscribed) and signed by members.
August 2
Delegates begin to sign engrossed copy of the Declaration of Independence. A large British reinforcement arrives at New York after being repelled at Charleston, S.C.


January 18
Congress, now sitting in Baltimore, Maryland, orders that signed copies of the Declaration of Independence printed by Mary Katherine Goddard of Baltimore be sent to the states.
Source: Library of Congress

Wednesday, July 2, 2008

Congress = OPEC?

Posted Wednesday, July 02, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Energy: What do the Democratic-led Congress and OPEC have in common? Both sit on vast amounts of oil, and are content to leave it in the ground and let prices soar. Fortunately, Americans are catching on.

New polls show that Americans, far from thinking that we can do nothing, want Congress to drill, and drill some more if necessary, to break the energy crisis.

A Pew Research poll out Wednesday found that 47% say exploring and drilling for more oil and building new power plants should be the top priority for U.S. energy policy, up from 35% in February. And 50% now say they favor drilling in ANWR, up from 42%. That follows a Rasmussen poll in June showing that 67% of Americans support drilling for more oil, and 64% think it will help bring down the price of energy.

President Bush understands this shift.

"We can help alleviate shortages by drilling for oil and gas in our own country, something I've been advocating ever since I've been the president," he said Wednesday. "I've been reminding our people that we can do so in environmentally friendly ways. And yet the Congress, the Democratically controlled Congress, now has refused to budge. It makes no sense."

He's dead right. In fact, Democrats in Congress for nearly two decades have rejected drilling for more oil, building more refineries or developing more nuclear power. Since 1990, there have been 46 attempts to boost America's energy supplies. Only Democratic opposition keeps us from having more.

Alaska's National Wildlife Reserve, for instance, holds 10 billion barrels of oil, enough for 1.5 million barrels of oil a day. That would be a 20% increase in current U.S. oil production. Slam dunk, right?

No. President Clinton refused to OK development of ANWR back in 1995When President Bush brought it up again in 2002, he couldn't get Democrats to support it. So no oil.

Likewise, Democrats have refused to drill for our Outer Continental Shelf oil resources, an estimated 89 billion barrels of crude. Nor do they want to disturb the 1 trillion barrels of oil locked underground in shale deposits stretching across the Rocky Mountains.

It isn't just Congress. In his bid to win the presidency, Barack Obama has flip-flopped on many things, but he stands squarely with Congress' naysaying Democrats in rejecting more drilling. Democrats have failed to live up to their promises, and now we hope the American people hold them accountable.

It was January 2007 that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made her now-infamous "Energy Independence Day" pledge. In it, she vowed to "truly declare our energy independence" by July 4, 2007.

Yet here it is a year later, and, as the Business & Media Institute notes, the price of gasoline has skyrocketed 85% to $4.09 a gallon.

You start to understand that this has been the intent all along. Democrats hate the very stuff — oil — that makes our economy and way of life possible. By doing nothing, they know prices will soar.
Just like Saudi King Abdullah, OPEC's de facto leader, who this week said Americans must "adapt to" high oil prices, Democrats want you to embrace higher prices — and lower standards of living.

That's why Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can call coal and oil a "sickness." He actually believes it, and thinks your suffering from higher prices is therefore noble. It purges the disease — oil.
Americans today face spiraling costs for food and gasoline thanks to the Democrats' ideological nearsightedness.

Higher energy costs are feeding into higher prices for everything, especially food. Americans have to let politicians know they can't get away with ruining our economy, and that Congress' inaction is intolerable.
If you'd like more energy to fuel our economy and lower prices, we have a suggestion: Call your congressperson and tell him or her you want more energy — or you might vote for someone else. It might be the best expenditure of energy you make this year.