Group: pensions flawed at state, local levels
by Damon BoughamerPublic Radio Capitol News, serving PennsylvaniaHarrisburg, Penna.

(PRCN, 26 May 2006) – Potential pension shortfalls have been a concern at the state level for a while, but this past week brought reports of local problems, specifically in Pittsburgh and York.One group thinks both problems – state and local – are serious.The conservative Commonwealth Foundation is calling on policymakers to address fund gaps now, before they get bigger...

Black Box Voting spokesperson makes it to Fox 'n Friends

appearing on Fox 'n Friends this morning Kathleen Wynne Black Box Voting activist

Hursti investigation was mentioned as finding Diebold voting machine problems

How do we know these machines a thousand of them, says Steve, are tampered with?

That's the point, says Wynne, No one can get under the hood

voter groups want to stop equipment use

persons could insert a PC card, say reports, says E.D. Hill (whose book Going Places I want to win!)

5-23-06: Supplmental report adds new concerns to Hursti II On May 11, 2006 the Black Box Voting "Hursti II" report was released, showing devastating security flaws in the Diebold touchscreen machines. This study has now been covered by Newsweek and the New York Times.

A small supplemental report was issued today pointing out additional concerns and high priority areas for further study. The supplemental study can be found here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBVtsxstudy-supp.pdf (many photographs, allow time for download)

5-11-06: Three-level security flaws

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/27675.html

Vote fraud 101: Here is your primer
If you haven't read this, you aren't yet up to speed on how votes can be tampered with using modern voting systems. Chapters download quickly. These will help you hold your own in an informed debate with anyone!

Question should be will Republicans let the illegal aliens win in November

Is GOP losing grip on power?
By Salena ZitoTRIBUNE-REVIEWSunday, May 28, 2006
For the Republican Party, 1994 is the year that was.
The "Republican Revolution" that year gave the GOP its first taste in more than 40 years of being the majority party in both houses of Congress. On that one election day, Republicans gained 54 seats in the House, 8 in the Senate and 12 in governors' mansions around the country.
Now, 12 years later, Republican power -- majorities of 10 seats in the Senate and 20 in the House -- could unravel, or at least begin to, with this year's elections. Already, Pennsylvania's primary showed an anti-Republican incumbent mood. Of 17 incumbent state legislators who lost, 13 were Republicans, including the party's two top state senators.

Polls show that for the first time since 1994, Americans have more faith in Democrats than in Republicans to govern and to guarantee national security. If that attitude persists through the November general elections, Republican power could decline. ...

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/election/s_455756.html

Read the poll very closely

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/February%20Dailies/Dubai%20Ports.htm

NSA DNA DAVINCI

Tap Dance and more

Criminal KinshipSlouching toward a DNA database nation. Ronald Bailey (5/19)Paranoia on Main StreetThe Da Vinci Code befuddles the culture warriors Jesse Walker (5/18)Inconvenient Uncertainties and Moral AmbiguitiesAl Gore's blurry vision of the apocalypse Ronald Bailey (5/17)Hiding in Plain Sight Immigration Minefield... Red State Baiting... and more! Reason Express (5/16)The Mideast's Land of ParadoxWar, peace, and cab rides in the Holy Land Cathy Young (5/16)The Future Is NowThe Tofflers return for more shock therapy Nick Gillespie (5/15)Phone Phollies Reason gives the NSA something to listen to: A roundup of reporting on the NSA's domestic-calls dragnet (5/12)Hizbullah's Double-Edged Deterrent Who wants to take a bullet for Iran? Michael Young (5/11)The Strange Case of Steve Wilson How a fraudulent crusader snookered the left-and is threatening the First Amendment John F. Sugg (5/10)Pop Out The new school beverage policy won’t make students noticeably thinner Jacob Sullum (5/10)Gloss on GossTorture Death Hayden Ride... Make Room! Make Room!... and more! Reason Express (5/9)Defend America, Buy More Iranian OilEnergy independence isn't a good national security strategy Shikha Dalmia (5/8)Dropping Our GuardProtect America's infrastracture? Congress has better things to do Jonathan Rauch (5/8)"Go back to Italy you *&^%&&^% WOP"!Viewers respond to Reason Editor Nick Gillespie's recent O'Reilly Factor appearance (5/5)I Want My IPTVWhy has the United States become a broadband backwater? Andy Glass (5/4)Illegal Immigrants are Paying a Lot More Taxes Than You ThinkEight million illegals pay Social Security, Medicare, and income taxes Shikha Dalmia (5/3)Worse Than a WallThe immigration solution everyone agrees on may end up hurting the most Kerry Howley (5/2)Three Views on Iraq, Three Years Later A trio of analysts debates the current state of the region. Michael Young, Leon Hadar, and Tom G. Palmer (5/1)

Borders Without VisasLet's live up to the promise of NAFTA and allow a free flow of people in North America Tim Cavanaugh (5/23)How Did You Vote During the War, Daddy?Why public disenchantment with the war likely won't matter come November Brian Doherty (5/22)Everything Is Not IlluminatedBe Very, Very Quiet: We're portraying the prophet Muhammad Tim Cavanaugh (5/19)Unliberty BellsPhone guys—fascists or fellow-travelers? Jeff A. Taylor (5/19)Why Did Luttig Quit?How Bush alienated one of his most compliant judges Harvey A. Silverglate (5/18)When Bigots Become ReformersThe Progressive Era's shameful record on race. Damon W. Root (5/18)Nothing PersonalIs the NSA’s phone call database legal because the president says so? Jacob Sullum (5/17)Building a Better DoghouseMainstream liberals take on the media David Weigel (5/16)Bush's Border BuffooneryNon-binding, non-militarized non-solutions to a non-problem Nick Gillespie (5/16)Sleepwalking Into History, Kennedy Style How Patrick Kennedy's dangerous driving became Ambien's fault John Tabin (5/15)The Federal Budget's Long Emergency Got a boondoggle you're not proud of? Stick it in a supplemental appropriations bill Véronique de Rugy (5/15)The Long Arm of the Drug War Washington quashes yet another mild reform in a neighboring country Brian Doherty (5/12)Moonshine MirageGrowing our way to energy independence? Ronald Bailey (5/12)You're Already Part of the Phenomenon Jesus: A conspiracy vaster than anything in The Da Vinci Code Tim Cavanaugh (5/11)Vouching for Newark One of America's most-maligned cities gets set to elect pro-school choice leadership David Weigel (5/9)The Iron Curtain Falls AgainRussia's retreat into fear and repression Cathy Young (5/9)Right-Wing P.C.How conservatives learned to stop worrying and love political correctness Jesse Walker (5/8)

http://reason.com/

Should the Iraqis' Accounts of Marines Killing Innocents Prove False Rep. Murtha and Media Using anonymous sources should suffer

U.S. Congressman John Murtha claims Marines in Iraq have murdered innocent civilians... meanwhile an anonymous source remains anonymous as a Pentagon and NCIS investigation continues... importantly, note accounts of "killings" originate with Iraqis... and Iraqis who are located in Haditha which "is under the control of insurgents that include Tawhid and Jihad, a name that has been used by the terrorist organization of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi..."

In other words, Iraqi witnesses giving accounts of mass murder are living in an area under control of insurgents noted as using a name used by a terrorist organization...

Does nobody check out background any more?

Iraqis' Accounts Link Marines to the Mass Killing of Civilians
By Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Mona Mahmoud The military's investigation into the role of U.S. marines in the November killings may lead to charges including murder.

BAGHDAD, Iraq, May 28 - Hiba Abdullah survived the killings by American troops in Haditha last Nov. 19, but said seven others at her father-in-law's home did not. She said American troops shot and killed her husband, Rashid Abdul Hamid. They killed her father-in-law, Abdul Hamid Hassan Ali, a 77-year-old in a wheelchair, shooting him in the chest and abdomen, she said.

Her sister-in-law, Asma, "collapsed when her husband was killed in front of her eyes," Ms. Abdullah said. As Asma fell, she dropped her 5-month-old infant. Ms. Abdullah said she picked up the baby girl and sprinted out of the house, and when she returned, Asma was dead.

Four people who identified themselves as survivors of the killings in Haditha, including some who had never spoken publicly, described the killings to an Iraqi writer and historian who was recruited by The New York Times to travel to Haditha and interview survivors and witnesses of what military officials have said appear to be unjustified killings of two dozen Iraqis by marines. Some in Congress fear the killings could do greater harm to the image of the United States military around the world than the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.

The four survivors' accounts could not be independently corroborated, and it was unclear in some cases whether they actually saw the killings. But much of what they said was consistent with broad outlines of the events of that day provided by military and government officials who have been briefed on the military's investigations into the killings, which the officials have said are likely to lead to charges that may include murder and a cover-up of what really happened.
The name of the Iraqi who conducted the interviews for The Times is being withheld for his own safety, because insurgents often make a target of Iraqis deemed collaborators...

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,418464,00.html


Marines Could Face Murder Charges in Deaths of Iraqi Civilians in Haditha
Friday, May 26, 2006 Fox News

WASHINGTON — Murder charges may be brought against some Marines for what may be the worst atrocity committed by U.S. military personnel in Iraq, a senior Pentagon official said Friday.

The official said Marines were likely responsible for killing as many as two dozen unarmed civilians, including women and children, in Haditha last November. A separate investigation is under way into whether Marines tried to cover up the killings. The official requested anonymity, citing the ongoing criminal investigation of the incident.

The Marines initially reported that one Marine and 15 Iraqi civilians had been killed in crossfire when U.S. forces responded to an insurgent attack on Nov. 19. The first report to the contrary surfaced in March, when Time magazine quoted witnesses saying the Marines "went on a rampage after the attack, killing 15 unarmed Iraqis in their homes, including seven women and three children."

In addition, photos taken of the scene reportedly do not support the Marines' original account of how the incident evolved.

A Pentagon official said that the Time report was "fairly benign" compared to what the investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service and Multi-National Forces Iraq has uncovered. Lawmakers have been told that the results of the probe will be issued in about 30 days, a congressional official said...

Murtha: Marines Murdered 15 Unarmed Iraqi Civilians

Headliner: Representative John Murtha (This Week-ABC News-transcript)

Posted by smoothsailingOn 05/29/2006 5:33:18 AM PDT

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1640030/posts

Congressman alleges Marines covered up killingsSF Gate via Wash Post ^ 5/29/06 Tom Ricks

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1640020/posts

Newfound Gutsiness Based On Sick Two-Party Majority System

THEY are the problem with the system in Harrisburg. Democrat and Republicans - no matter which political Party of the two majority Parties attain the majority, it is they who become arrogant, settled in their posts of public trust, because, "the people" continue to re-elect them.

See "Bobbleheads vs Good People" which argues for a dramatic alteration of the two-Party system in Pennsylvania rather than an open, unlimited PA Constitutional Convention.

Lawmakers propose Harrisburg reforms in wake of pay raise controversy
By Alison Hawkes, For the Herald-Standard
05/29/2006
HARRISBURG - Rep. Pete Daley said he had a gun to his head last July.

Vote for the pay raise, or risk losing his chairmanship position on the agriculture committee and $350,000 in community and economic development money slated to his Fayette and Washington County districts.

In past pay raises, he said he voted 'no' and paid the legislative price. This time he chose the pay raise. No leader told him he'd get gored, Daley (D-Calilfornia) said. It was just a feeling based on precedent. "I was always a reformer," said the 24-year lawmaker.

"Unfortunately this time around, I was sitting in the corner with a gun to my head with the idea I could get my brains blown out here.

"Daley is now part of a growing cadre of lawmakers proposing legislative reforms to clean up Harrisburg. Spurred on by the public's anti-pay raise sentiment and historic upsets in last week's primary, individual lawmakers and loose coalitions have formed to advance change.

Some say the newfound interest is just election year politics, and these are fair-weather reformers.

"I'm not buying it," said Daley's presumptive GOP opponent Ed Angell. "You need to put someone in that position who has the integrity to do the right thing. Where does he draw the line between right and wrong then if he didn't draw it here?"

But government reform activists working to advance the "Roadmap to Reform," a broad overhaul to the way Harrisburg does business, say they don't need sainthood from lawmakers, they need active partners regardless of their motivations.

Rock the Capitol coordinator Eric Epstein stoked the need for reconciliation at a press conference Thursday.

"I don't have the ability to crawl inside someone's mind and determine when and how they have their epiphanies," he said. "Converts often become fanatics. I welcome reform fanatics to our ranks.

"Some of the reform-minded lawmakers say they've been disgruntled for years but public support now makes their bold moves possible. In the House, a Republican group calling itself the Jefferson Reform Initiative has grown from seven lawmakers in December to an estimated 35 now. They inspired a similar group to form among House Democrats, now comprised of a couple dozen lawmakers. Leaders of the groups said they're not ready to release all the names of the participants.

Their mission is to wrestle away some of the enormous power of leadership and hand it to the rank and file, as well as set up a fairer, more deliberate legislative process by changing the House rules when the new term starts in January.

If they have their way, gone will be midnight hour votes, important changes thrust into bills at the last minute by the leadership-controlled Rules Committee, and committee chairmanships that can last decades.

Some are even calling for an easier ability to recall leaders in mid term.

Change may be possible because while the reform-minded don't have the numbers yet to effectuate an overhaul, nearly 50 newcomers will take office next year with the massive number of retirements and primary election upsets of incumbents...

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16706025&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

PA Primary Republican defeats = 13 Democrat defeats = 3

Republicans who went to the polls ousted 13 Republican incumbents in Pennsylvania.

Only 3 Democrats were sent packing by fellow Party Democrats.

There was also a near record-breaking low voter turnout, according to some reports, only 20 percent. While historically, Primaries don't bring out the Party masses, the norm for voter turnout in non-presidential Primaries has been about 30-34 percent.

While challengers may not have had enormous amounts of money to spend in comparison to the incumbents' war chests, opponents had as valuable a commodity, free publicity.

News media, radio talk shows, and increasingly utilized internet web-blogs and cable network programming all generating daily publicity for the anti-incumbency movement.

Even with the unparalleled attention given to the pay-raise - payjacking - slam to the taxpayers (deserved attention, but nonetheless unparalleled), this primary saw such low voter turnout.

That fact hasn't been factored into much of the follow-up commentaries, let alone follow-up "news" articles.

Such is the case in this piece.


Pay raise leveled field in primary
By Brad BumstedSTATE CAPITOL REPORTERFriday, May 26, 2006
HARRISBURG - Fat political war chests, traditionally an advantage for incumbents, weren't the determining factor in many key primary races for House and Senate seats, a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review analysis shows.

Armed instead with a powerful message -- opposition to incumbents' support of a 16- to 54-percent legislative pay raise in July -- many challengers were able to compete and, in some cases, win with a lot less money than their opponents...

...Money didn't make a difference for Jubelirer and Brightbill, whose races were two of the three most closely watched at the Capitol. But in House Minority Whip Mike Veon's heavily Democratic Beaver County district -- where economic issues trumped the pay raise -- campaign spending remained a factor.

Voters outraged over the pay raise defeated 17 legislative incumbents last week -- 13 of them Republicans. But the pay raise was only one factor in their losses, said former U.S. Rep. Pat Toomey, president of the national Club for Growth.

"Rank-and-file Republicans were upset with the leadership of Republican legislators," Toomey said. "The pay raise was one of the catalysts. It was definitely not the whole story."

A new factor: the money available to little-known challengers, said Toomey, who donated $13,000 to Folmer. ...

...In almost all the races statewide in which incumbents were unseated, they still had a financial advantage, said G. Terry Madonna, political science professor at Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster County.

Veon prevailed, likely because voters in his district believe their incumbent could best deliver jobs and state grants, Madonna said. The Beaver Falls lawmaker, who garnered 60 percent of the Democratic vote against challenger Jay Paisley, spent $664,000 through May 1. Paisley spent about $26,000.

Veon pummeled Paisley with TV ads in Pittsburgh -- spending $326,355 on 556 spots. Two weeks before the primary, Veon saturated the market.

His race "shows a bit of difference between Democrats and Republicans and what they expect from their elected officials," said Matthew Brouillette, president of the Commonwealth Foundation, a conservative think tank. "You saw many Republicans disgruntled with their legislators for acting like Democrats."

Still, voters tossed out rank-and-file Democrats who voted for the pay hike: Rep. Frank Pistella, of Bloomfield; Rep. Kenneth Ruffing, of West Mifflin; and Rep. Frank LaGrotta, of Ellwood City, Lawrence County.

"I think the pay raise overshadowed everything else," said John J. Kennedy, an assistant professor of political science at West Chester State University in Chester County.
Conservative groups were able to "piggyback" on the pay issue with other issues of concern in GOP districts, Kennedy said. ..

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/election/s_455526.html

Interesting PA Political News

May 27, 2006
Voter outrage may be only a sometime thing''I would love to think they punished them because they were on the wrong side of every issue.''

An electorate that finds itself more interested in voting for the ''American Idol'' on Fox TV has finally encountered an issue that has shaken it out of its complacency. The Pennsylvania Legislature has been a disgrace for decades, yet no one has ever really cared. No one bothered to examine the transgressions of this substandard legislative body. Legislators were re-elected year after year, notwithstanding abysmal voting records. Gov. Huey Long (the ''Kingfish'') of Louisiana, was reputed to have made the comment in the 1920s that in order to get voted out of office, he would have to be found in bed with a dead girl or a live boy. Long's comment was a not-so-veiled slap against an electorate that just didn't care what he did, or, at the very least, tacitly approved of everything he did. The Kingfish, arguably until this May's Primary election, would have admired the accommodating and accepting voters of Pennsylvania.The legislators eventually became so contemptuous of the people who kept voting them into office that they gave themselves an outrageous pay hike last year. They assumed no one would care. After all, this pay hike was merely one of a series of outrageous votes, and no one ever seemed to notice anything they did.

The Legislature had become a safe one-party body, run in recent years by Republican bosses.

But the pay hike backfired, and as a result, there has been a bloodletting. Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Jubelirer, Senate Majority Leader David Brightbill, and Rep. Paul Semmel of Lehigh County are among the most notable victims of the voter backlash and booted out of office.

Many incumbent legislators still have to worry about what is going to happen in the November General Election.What happened in Pennsylvania was written about in The New York Times on May 18. It said this ''revolt'' among Pennsylvania conservatives gained national attention after challengers toppled at least 12 state lawmakers they ''deemed insufficiently committed to small government and fiscal restraint.''

The Times article characterized the Pennsylvania Primary Election as a development that does not augur well for the Republican Party nationally. Conservatives still demand fiscal restraint from Republican elected officials. They feel they have not been getting that from their party of late.

According to The Times, this resentment among Pennsylvania conservatives began last summer when the Republican-controlled Legislature approved pay increases of up to 54 percent for elected officials in all three branches of government.Although President Bush and the new brand of evangelical conservatives he leads may find it hard to realize, old-fashioned Republicans in the hinterlands still see themselves primarily as fiscal conservatives.

Although I am overjoyed about this voter revolt in Pennsylvania, it perplexes me nonetheless. With the exception of this one particular pay raise issue, voters remain almost entirely apathetic, and find it difficult to get up out of their easy chairs and go to vote in the typical primary election or general election.

There is something fickle about the pay raise revolt that is disturbing. It merits a much closer look into what happened. Perhaps the question can be posed from a different angle: What if, let's suppose, we had excellent legislators?...

http://www.mcall.com/news/opinion/all-columnmay27,0,1080858.column?coll=all-opiniontop-hed

Diven appears to have won GOP write-in for House race
Friday, May 26, 2006By James O'Toole, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Setting the stage for another act in a protracted political melodrama, state Rep. Michael Diven, R-Brookline, appears to have succeeded in a write-in campaign to win the GOP nomination for another term in his South Hills district...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06146/693373-179.stm

Ruffing's charity began at home
Lawmaker admits 'donating' raise to son
Saturday, May 27, 2006By Mark Belko, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

During a hard-fought primary battle, state Rep. Ken Ruffing insisted that he donated a controversial pay raise to an autism organization he would not identify. Now the legislator says he actually used the money for his son, who is autistic.

The West Mifflin Democrat, who lost his re-election bid to a political newcomer campaigning in part against the pay raise, said two weeks ago that he gave the money, approximately $4,000 in all, to an autism organization. But he refused to identify it despite claiming to have documentation.

In interviews Thursday, Mr. Ruffing, a four-term incumbent, acknowledged that was not the case.

"I gave it to my son Alec. I have to send him to a special school with special needs. And that's where I spent the money. And that's the truth," he told KDKA-TV.

In a separate interview with the McKeesport Daily News, the legislator said the money went to pay his son's tuition. According to the newspaper, Alec currently is enrolled at St. Colman Catholic School in Turtle Creek.

While acknowledging to the Daily News that he should have "come clean" earlier about the actual use of the pay raise, he insisted he "did not lie to the public about this." In the KDKA interview, Mr. Ruffing also justified his earlier statements by saying that "the autism society is Alec Ruffing."

Repeated attempts to reach Mr. Ruffing yesterday were unsuccessful. At his home in West Mifflin, a woman said from a window that the legislator wasn't there and ordered a reporter off the property.

In the primary election, Mr. Ruffing was defeated by political newcomer William C. Kortz II, who was affiliated with PA CleanSweep, the nonpartisan group formed to oust General Assembly incumbents who accepted the late-night pay raise, which was later repealed...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06147/693649-179.stm

Quick on the Draw

Congressman John Murtha was quick to accuse. Should facts show Murtha's charge Marines "killed innocent Iraqi civilians in cold blood" false, Murtha critics should stand aside, and allow the Democrat Pennsylvania United States representative enough rope to hang himself.

Marines killed Iraqi civilians 'in cold blood': US lawmaker
WASHINGTON (AFP) - A US lawmaker and former Marine colonel accused US Marines of killing innocent Iraqi civilians after a Marine comrade had been killed by a roadside bomb...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060518/wl_mideast_afp/usiraqrightsmarines

Murtha: Marines killed Haditha civilians in cold blood
By Christian LoweTimes staff writer
Rep. John Murtha, an influential Pennsylvania lawmaker and outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, said today Marines had “killed innocent civilians in cold blood” after allegedly responding to a roadside bomb ambush that killed a Marine during a patrol in Haditha, Iraq, Nov. 19.
The incident is still under investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service and Multi-National Forces Iraq.

A March 27 Time magazine report published claims by an Iraqi civil rights group that the Marines barged into houses near the bomb strike, throwing grenades and shooting civilians as they cowered in fear. The report prompted calls for a Pentagon probe.

“It’s much worse than was reported in Time magazine,” Murtha, a Democrat, former Marine colonel and Vietnam war veteran, told reporters on Capitol Hill.

“There was no firefight. There was no [bomb] that killed those innocent people,” Murtha explained, adding there were “about twice as many” Iraqis killed than Time had reported.
No official investigation report has been released by the Pentagon and a spokesman for Murtha was unable to add to the congressman’s remarks

“I do not know where Rep. Murtha is obtaining is information,” said Lt. Col. Sean Gibson, a spokesman for Marine Corps Forces Central Command in Tampa, Fla. “Thoroughness will drive the investigation.”…

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1808360.php

Murtha's Republican challenger, Diana Irey is misguided to ask for an apology and state Murtha puts the troops in danger by his lambast.

Irey herself was too quick on the draw and should just let Murtha continue to dis-ass-emble himself. Someone as far gone as Rep. Murtha cannot be rehabilitated.

Campaign 2006: Challenger Irey criticizes Murtha on Iraq comments
Thursday, May 25, 2006By Maeve Reston, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

WASHINGTON - In the first chapter of what is likely to be a blistering campaign, U.S. Rep. John Murtha's Republican challenger, Diana L. Irey, traveled to Washington yesterday to decry Mr. Murtha as one-time patriot who has "lost his way" after his recent comments about a November incident involving U.S. Marines and civilian killings in the city of Haditha, Iraq.

In remarks at the National Press Club, Ms. Irey, a Washington County commissioner, asked Mr. Murtha to apologize for and retract his comments about the incident in Haditha in which 15 unarmed Iraqis and eight insurgents died after a Marine was killed by a roadside bomb.

Though government officials originally said the civilians were killed by the bomb and that the insurgents died after an ensuing firefight, Time Magazine reported in March that witnesses and local officials said the civilians, including women and children, were killed by Marines angry about their colleagues' death. The deaths are still under investigation by the Defense Department.

During a May 17 news conference, Mr. Murtha referenced the incident as he pressed his case to reporters that the U.S. should pull troops out of Iraq. He said a Pentagon investigation would ultimately show that the troops in Haditha "overreacted because of the pressure on them and killed innocent civilians in cold blood."

Mr. Murtha, who has close ties to top defense officials as a retired Marine colonel and the top-ranking Democrat on the House committee that handles defense appropriations, said he had not read the Pentagon report but was basing his information on frequent discussions with "the commanders," he said, "people that know what they're talking about."

Ms. Irey, of Carroll Township, said Mr. Murtha was denying the Marines due process and had put American troops in danger with his remarks...


One report mentions Murtha revealed his sources were “the commanders." The curiosity-challenged media just takes it all in.

Marines Killed Civilians "In Cold Blood"
By Michael Scherer and Mark Benjamin

Senior House Democrat Jack Murtha warns that the details of a reported massacre in Iraq last year will prove "a very bad thing" for the US.

A senior House Democrat with close ties to the military claimed Wednesday that U.S. Marines wantonly killed innocent Iraqi civilians, including women and children, in an early morning raid last November, buttressing a March report by Time.

"Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood," said Jack Murtha of Pennsylvania, a decorated Marine Corps veteran who served in Vietnam and is among the most influential Democratic voices on military matters. "This is going to be a very, very bad thing for the United States."

Asked about his sources during a midday briefing on Iraq policy in the Capitol, Murtha confidently replied, "All the information I get, it comes from the commanders, it comes from people who know what they are talking about." Although Murtha said that he had not read any investigative reports by the military on the incident, he stressed, "It's much worse than reported in Time magazine."

The civilian deaths are under review by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, which is also responsible for the Marine Corps. A Navy spokesman declined to comment on Murtha's claims, saying that the matter is part of an ongoing inquiry. He would also not comment on when the investigation into the incident would be completed.

In March, Time described an incident in the western Iraqi town of Haditha -- the worst alleged case of U.S. troops deliberately killing civilians in Iraq…

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,416816,00.html

Journalists don't press Murtha to provide details and name names.

While USA TODAY's On Deadline Blog accepts anonymous sources, the public should be wary.

USA TODAY
Report to cite Marines

Two of the nation's largest newspapers hit their respective coasts this morning with allegations of U.S. military killings and a cover-up in Iraq.

The New York Times: "A military investigation into the deaths of two dozen Iraqis last November is expected to find that a small number of marines in western Iraq carried out extensive, unprovoked killings of civilians, Congressional, military and Pentagon officials said Thursday."

The Los Angeles Times: "Marines from Camp Pendleton wantonly killed unarmed Iraqi civilians, including women and children, and then tried to cover up the slayings in the insurgent stronghold of Haditha, military investigations have found."

Using extensive anonymous sourcing -- including "officials who have seen the findings," "Marine officials," "Congressional, military and Pentagon officials," "two lawyers involved in discussions about individual marines' defenses," and more -- the papers depict an investigation on the verge of charges that could surpass previous U.S. war crimes allegations in Iraq.

Along with the case, both papers mention a Marine Commandant Gen. Michael Hagee's warning to his troops this week: "We use lethal force only when justified, proportional and, most importantly, lawful."

As the papers note, the situation surrounding the Haditha incident was first reported by Time magazine in March. "Because the incident is officially under investigation, members of the Marine unit that was in Haditha on Nov. 19 are not allowed to speak with reporters," Time reports in the story. "But the military's own reconstruction of events and the accounts of town residents interviewed by Time — including six whose family members were killed that day — paint a picture of a devastatingly violent response by a group of U.S. troops who had lost one of their own to a deadly insurgent attack and believed they were under fire."

The story also mention the comments of Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., after receiving a briefing on the case. Marines had "killed innocent civilians in cold blood," Murtha said. "It's much worse than was reported in Time magazine."

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2006/05/reports_probe_t.html


Items of Interest

PA Spending Limits Discussion

Will have to watch a rebroadcast of the full discussion between Commonwealth Foundation's Matthew Brouillette and PA County Commissioners Association executive director, Doug Hill.

Caught the response to a caller's question: what is the role of government?

MB protect liberties, the common good for limited things like public safety, roads, public infrastructure, and so on.

DH agreed.

See PCN TV
Thursday, May 25 - 7:00 p.m. LIVETopic: State Spending Caps Guests: Douglas Hill, Executive Director, County Commissioners Association of PAMatthew Brouillette, President, Commonwealth Foundation
http://www.pcntv.com/callprogram.htm

Items of interest

CAPS Limit More Than Spending
By Douglas Hill
Executive Director

How strange that just as property tax reform moves forward, the General Assembly is poised to take action on a constitutional budget cap – a proposal that will surely result in the need to increase local property taxes. These imbalanced and incompatible actions quite clearly demonstrate that Pennsylvania has not yet grasped the clear connection between the services constituents’ demand of government, and the need for government to develop revenue streams to pay for those services.

Senate Bill 884 would amend the Pennsylvania Constitution to impose spending caps on future Commonwealth budgets. The County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania (CCAP) expresses opposition to the state spending cap legislation.

CCAP believes a cap on the state budget will result in decreased state funding of vital local services and increase pressure on local property taxes. Caps will result in the Commonwealth balancing its budget on the backs of local governments and local taxpayers. Pennsylvania residents should not be fooled.

The proponents of state spending caps claim the measure will “keep state governments from spending more than they take in,” or forcing government to “live within its means.” On the surface, this has very strong appeal and certainly resonates well with Pennsylvanians. But the flip side is that the artificial limits do hurt the residents who are forced to live under them.

http://www.pacounties.org/commissioners/cwp/view.asp?Q=522749&A=2255

Who supports giving state residents the right to directly initiate public referendums over actions of the Legislature... direct initiative?

Lawmaker asks for panel to update state constitution

Wednesday, September 21, 2005By Tom Barnes, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau

HARRISBURG -- A Philadelphia legislator thinks Pennsylvania should create a commission to "bring the state constitution into the 21st century."

"Let's put everything on the table'' to modernize the constitution, which hasn't been overhauled since a constitutional convention in 1968, state Rep. Dwight Evans said yesterday.

Proposed changes could include giving state residents the right to directly initiate public referendums over actions of the Legislature, like its decision in July to increase its members' salaries and those of judges and the governor's cabinet members.

Evans, a Democrat, said his call for constitutional updating resulted "in part'' from the uproar among voters over the 16 to 34 percent legislative pay raise.

"I want to move the passion [that voters] have demonstrated this summer to a positive and productive end -- a serious examination of the parameters in which we [legislators] work," he said.

He urged Gov. Ed Rendell to appoint the constitutional commission, but Rendell wasn't enthusiastic.

"We will talk to Rep. Evans about his request to look at the constitution, but we have no plans for [a commission] at this point," said press secretary Kate Philips.

Only legislators can put an issue before voters in a referendum, as they did in May when a Growing Greener environmental bond issue was sent to the voters and approved.
The Legislature also approved a 1989 referendum on then-Gov. Robert Casey's plan for tax reform, a plan that was soundly rejected by voters.

State voters cannot, on their own, put a referendum issue on a statewide ballot. The most they can do is vote legislators out of office if lawmakers do something they don't like.

"Much has changed since 1968," Evans said. "Some of it has been dramatic, especially in communication and technology. Men have walked on the moon. Wars have ended and others begun."

Evans said civic groups should have a role in a constitutional commission, including the Pennsylvania Economy League, League of Women Voters, NAACP, Urban League and American Civil Liberties Union.

The League of Women Voters has taken a position in favor of direct referendums by voters. It said that 23 states -- but not Pennsylvania -- have some form of "popular initiative,'' where citizens can place statutes or constitutional amendments directly on the ballot.

But the league's executive director, Bonita Hoke, said there are potential dangers with referendums, which would be expensive on a statewide level.

"It means a huge education job for somebody, and the person with the most money will probably win the public's thinking,'' she said. The outcome of the vote could be determined "by who has the best sound bites'' in commercials, she added.

"But we do applaud Rep. Evans for thinking about these issues,'' she said.

Tim Potts, a former legislative aide who now heads a citizens group called Democracy Rising PA, said giving citizens the power of direct initiative "absolutely ... should be on the agenda for this commission."...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05264/575115.stm

Don't Ask. Tell! Second-Amendment Rights and All Rights Inseparable

On Fox 'n Friends this morning, re-elected head of the National Rifle Association discussed the situation during Hurricane Katrina in Lousianna where guns of law abiding citizens were confiscated by law enforcement.

Steve Doocey said that there were law-breakers who used guns to fire on police during the day.

News highlights on the ticker showed info two guns had been taken by law enforcement from people at the SuperDome.

NRA President said the guns shouldn't have been taken from law-abiding citizens, only from those breaking the law.

She went on to say the NRA was asking that guns not be confiscated in such instances of a declared emergency. She said the second-Amendment right to bear arms is a civil right.

We disagree. The NRA should not be asking that guns not be confiscated from law abiding citizens during a declared emergency.

The NRA should demand adherence to the U.S. Constitution. The NRA should tell law enforcement and the governments of any state and the federal government DO NOT INTRUDE again.

The U.S. Constitution protects and guarantees our inalienable rights.

Law enforcement that takes guns from law abiding citizens is committing an unconstitutional act. Individuals who acted to take guns should be identified, and put on trial for denying law abiding citizens their inalienable rights.

in fact, I would argue that the act of taking guns from law abiding citizens in their own homes was a treasonous act.

What many do not understand is the U.S. Constitution does not "give" us rights. We already possess rights which are inherent to us and inseparable from us.

There are two approaches to these inherent rights: some claim these are natural rights (my view) while others claim these are God-given rights.

Whichever approach is used, it is undeniable that the Founding Framers of the Constitution crafted the Constitution to be the embodiment of a guarantee of all rights to us.

The Bill of Rights only identify those rights the Founders thought needed "extra" attention, not extra protection.

I'm not sure when the term "civil" rights began to be used. Will research further - it seems as though many want to apply the term to rights they believe may be able to be "tweaked."

Libertarian Affiliation Not Important Description in Trivia Question

Fox 'n Friends this morning asked their trivia question for the day: born this day, 1958, stand-up comic with show title same as his name, learned today he's a former Marine.

I'm up early enough most days to catch the question cause I really want to win E.D. Hill's giveaway book, “Going Places”.

Today, I was totally prepared with a listing of famous celebrities born this date. Something made me more organized than on other days with the listing, and I'm gonna use a trick tomorrow.

My listing was short, but I figured I had a good shot with the email at the ready, too.

http://www.famousbirthdays.com/may.html

Unfortunately, there were two choices of celebrities from my listing, so I still had to google with key words, including Steve Ducey's aside hint, a former Marine.

Answer = Drew Carey. Guess who got their answer in first? a Marine from Quantico, so says E.D. Hill in announcing the person who emailed an answer quicker than everybody else.

And that isn't kind of um, coincidental?

Why didn't Fox include the fact the comedian is also: Drew Carey - Libertarian?

Cause Libertarian isn't a well-known political party or philosophy, that's why.

For an actor to reveal a Libertarian Party affiliation is big news. Yet, for Fox 'n Friends, the fact he's a former Marine is bigger.

Quotable
"The less [government] the better. As far as your personal goals are and what you actually want to do with your life, it should never have to do with the government. You should never depend on the government for your retirement, your financial security, for anything. If you do, you're screwed..." -- Drew Carey in Reason (November 1997)

Here's what TV sitcom star Drew Carey doesn't like: censorship, anti-smoking laws, drug laws, immigration laws, "stupid big government in general" -- and award shows. (They're "publicity stunts" for needy actors, he explains.) Here's what Drew Carey does like: freedom, competition, free minds, free markets, and -- he won't deny -- beer, dirty jokes, and gambling.Those likes and dislikes tell you pretty much everything you need to know about Carey. He's not afraid to speak his mind. He's proud of his blue-collar sensibilities. And he's a libertarian.Carey left no doubts about his political philosophy in a November 1997 interview with Reason magazine. He had a quick answer when asked, "What's your basic attitude toward government?" Carey said: "The less the better. As far as your personal goals are and what you actually want to do with your life, it should never have to do with the government. You should never depend on the government for your retirement, your financial security, for anything. If you do, you're screwed."

John Stossel appeared on CNN's Howard Kurtz' "Reliable Sources" for an interview. Stossel's was out and about promoting his new book is entitled: 'Myths, Lies and Downright Stupidity,'

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=1898820&page=1

It was hard to miss the tension or tugging between the two well-known figures.

Here's the introduction from Kurtz:

Plus, are the media scaring people to death? ABC's John Stossel says journalists are scare mongers. Is he stretching the facts?

Do you observe the twist in the question? Is he stretching the facts? The question implies Stossel is stretching the facts, and it's up to Stossel to disprove a negative right from the start.

Here's the section where the two duel, verbally - it's entertaining and enlightening

KURTZ: OK. Now, you say that reporters go along with environmental activists and other activists who you more or less describe as scare mongers. How much of this is influenced by your views about government regulations? You've been critical of the regulatory bureaucracies. You said that you wouldn't mind if the Food and Drug Administration just went away. So how much of this has to do with your own philosophy on these things?

STOSSEL: From my years of consumer reporting I have concluded that almost all government regulation makes life worse, so, yes, I look at life with that spin. I have a point of view.

KURTZ: You write, in fact, that -- or you've said that competition protects us if government gets out of the way. Now, that's...

STOSSEL: Beautifully.

KURTZ: That's a perfectly legitimate viewpoint, but it is a viewpoint. So what I'm asking is, when you talk about these are all myths, are they myths or are they just a view of the world that doesn't agree with your view of the world?

STOSSEL: I think there are myths backed up by facts. And I list the facts and myths lies and stupidity.

KURTZ: Are there exceptions, whether it's dealing with tobacco or superfund toxic waste sites where government regulation is needed?

STOSSEL: Sure. And thank God we've had environmental regulation. I went for a swim in the Hudson River, and that was caused by regulation. But how much do we need? We keep passing more rules. Government's now 40 percent of GDP, and every year we add thousands of pages of regulations. It's time to stick a fork in it and say, it's done.

KURTZ: All right. Now, it seems to me that you set up some straw men in this book and knocked them down. For example, you write, "Myth, businesses rip us off. Truth, most don't. You think reporters are saying that most businesses are dishonest?

STOSSEL: Reporters look at business with great suspicious. And hype Enron and WorldCom as if that's the norm. And in a 10 trillion dollar economy, you're going to have Enrons and WorldComs, but they are the exception. I think reporters cheer on the ignorant politicians, who then pass laws like Sarbanes-Oxley that end up hurting the poor.

KURTZ: You seem to view journalists, from your own description here, as advocates, advocates for government regulation, openly skeptical of business. I mean, it seems to me what makes Enron or WorldCom newsworthy is that it is an aberration, that most corporations are not engaged in multibillion dollar accounting fraud.

STOSSEL: But the intensity of the and the sneering tone, suggests to me yes, they are an advocate, that you're an advocate.

KURTZ: How am I an advocate?

STOSSEL: I -- you did a page and a half on me and found no one positive to quote, at a time when I had 18 million viewers who presumably liked my work. When you profiled Al Hunt, you were filled with gushing quotes.

(should be denoted as Kurtz) STOSSEL: Well, it seems to me that -- that my profile of you 10 years ago was a little more fair on grounds than you remember. But I'll give you your view of it. Another myth cited in the book, "Schools are violent. Truth? Schools are pretty safe." Now, clearly there were thousands of stories about the Columbine massacre, and when there are problems in a particular school, the local press tends to write about that. But are the media really reporting that most schools are dangerous?

STOSSEL: At the time of Columbine, there were stories about how can you protect your child in school? How dangerous is school? Scary as all was "TIME" cover stories, when kids were safer at the time in malls and -- I'm sorry in schools than in malls and at home. But the gist of the reporting was that school violence was up, and it was down.

KURTZ: OK. It seems to me that 10 or 15 years ago, John Stossel, you have a point, there was a lot of alarmist reporting about chemicals and pesticides and the like. My sense in recent years is that the media focus more now on conflicting evidence, on how studies are confusing, whether it's chocolate or coffee or breast cancer tests. Do you not -- would you not agree there's been some improvement...

STOSSEL: Yes.

KURTZ: ... in this reporting?

STOSSEL: Yes, yes. Thank goodness, there's been some.

KURTZ: What do you think accounts for that?

STOSSEL: I think people get smarter. I hope I've had a tiny effect, making fun of people for hyping risks...

KURTZ: I want to come back to your point on journalists being advocates, journalists being anti-business, journalists being perhaps pro-government regulation. Aren't there a lot of journalists, who I read, some of whom I watch on television, who at least are trying to strike a balance and are not pushing an agenda? I mean, it just seems to me that you've concluded that they really are on one side of this debate.

STOSSEL: I don't think journalists are trying to push the agenda. I think most of you think you're right down the middle. But the people you hang around with all think as you do here in New York and Washington. And that leads to a bias.

KURTZ: So you think...

STOSSEL: Not everyone, but most.

KURTZ: So you think it is to some degree subconscious or, at least because -- in other words, you think that journalists are out of touch with ordinary people, who perhaps are and ought to be more skeptical of government regulations?

STOSSEL: Yes. I think we are steeped like tea bags in "The Washington Post" and "The New York Times", and it affects the way we view the world.

KURTZ: Are there people who, at ABC News who don't like what you do or don't like your point of view on all this?

STOSSEL: Yes. But God bless ABC News, they still feel I deserve a place at the table.

KURTZ: Does that make you uncomfortable, that some of your colleagues do not agree with your approach to journalism?

STOSSEL: Yes, very. I would prefer everyone to like me, but they don't.

KURTZ: But it does show that ABC, by putting you on and giving you the airtime that you get, believes in diversity, no?

STOSSEL: And thank goodness, there's one libertarian reporter in the mainstream media.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0605/14/rs.01.html

Unfortunately, Stossel backs down from the facts by this:

STOSSEL: I don't think journalists are trying to push the agenda. I think most of you think you're right down the middle. But the people you hang around with all think as you do here in New York and Washington. And that leads to a bias.

Now that's a myth. Cause journalists are trying to push an agenda, and are not right down the middle. Net the Truth Online is tracking them down, and will provide results of findings to follow.

EXCERPT: 'Myths, Lies and Downright Stupidity'

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=1898820&page=1

REASON Senior Editor Jacob Sullum interviewed Stossel in his office at the ABC News building in Manhattan.

http://www.reason.com/9704/fe.stosselint.shtml

Funny blogger. i laughed throughout what I could read... what were the whoppers?

Turning my attention to "Reliable Sources" (lest I write so long that you decide to skip to something else), his show had a segment where Kurtz interviewed Mr. Whine John Stossel, who complains about anything and everything that doesn't fit his rigid world outlook.

The interview Kurtz had with Stossel was a case study in timidity. Apparently Kurtz wrote an article on Stossel some 10 years ago that Stossel still carries a grudge. And that grudge seemed to have lightened Kurtz's skills as a journalist in his drive to ferret the truth.

There are a hundred different ways one could attack Stossel, and I will leave it to others who have done a fantastic job at it.My concern is the interview today. Stossel laid down several whoppers, all without challenge.

First, Stossel attacked the mainstream press for having a "viewpoint," playing on the tired line of a "liberal" viewpoint, yet quite proudly boasted of his having a "libertarian" viewpoint (one that escaped definition by Kurtz or Stossel). And Stossel's partviewpointiewpont is rigid in its approach to issues about government, the private sector, and the market. For Libertarians, any government regulation is evil because it places an artificial barrier in the relationship between the consumer and the provider. ...

also here http://www.users.muohio.edu/kelleycs/mediablog.html

OTHERS

http://www.mediatransparency.org/personprofileprinterfriendly.php?personID=92

PA Dems = Gleeful Opportunists Partying

Party Democrats who went to the polls Primary election day May 16 kept leadership incumbents in office. Only 3 so-called rank and file were replaced by opponents. I disagree with Mr. Spiegler. The people don't deserve DeWeese. Democrats retained DeWeese when Democrats had the power to kick DeWeese back home. Place the blame where blame belongs.

Come November, DeWeese faces Greg Hopkins, Republican challenger, and hopefully an Independent/Third Party candidate.

Then, and only then, if voters in the General Election retain Rep. DeWeese, will the people deserve what the people wrought.

DeWeese re-election a shame
05/19/2006
Oren M. Spiegler
On a day in which a statewide political revolution has occurred through the ouster of many entrenched, arrogant, corrupt, power-drunk incumbents in the Pennsylvania General Assembly, it is sad and regrettable that the constituents of Democrat Representative H. William DeWeese did not demonstrate the wisdom to oust him from office.
DeWeese, throughout his long reign, has used his office first and foremost to enrich himself, engineering the sleazy, slimy, middle-of-the-night legislative pay grab, which included an unconstitutional provision to provide the raises immediately. DeWeese remained unapologetic about his actions until the bitter end, only after a citizen revolt made it impossible for him to bring the scheme to fruition.


By retaining DeWeese, the public has said that the only criteria they will use in evaluating the worthiness of an elected official to remain in office is the extent to which he "brings home the bacon," how adept he is at bringing back the greatest amount of money to his district through confiscating it from other regions of Pennsylvania. If he gorges at the public trough in the process, garnering an obscene salary and benefits package which is richer than that enjoyed by virtually every constituent, that is all right with them.We get the kind of government we deserve.

Apparently, the people of Fayette, Greene, and Washington counties deserve Mr. DeWeese, and obviously one can fool most of the people most of the time...

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16664070&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6