Pelosi Foreign Travel Illegal Diplomacy?

We'd been thinking about the Logan Act and Pelosi ever since she announced the trip abroad. May be. May be not. Lots of our Congress-critters travel abroad to meet with heads-of-state - just because some may agree with a President in a time of war, or not, on foreign policy shouldn't make them any different than some who disagree...

If the Logan Act is to be applied to one, it should be applied to all...

However, should there be actual negotiations, between Pelosi and whomever head-of-state, that's a different matter altogether.

Until such time, Pelosi shouldn't be rumored guilty...

Pelosi's Syria diplomacy a felony?
Former State Department official sees possible violation of Logan Act
Posted: April 6, 2007


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trip to Damascus this week to discuss foreign policy issues with Syrian President Bashar Assad – against the wishes of President Bush – might be a felony under the Logan Act, according to a former State Department official.

The Logan Act, initiated by President John Adams in 1798, makes it a felony and provides for a prison sentence of up to three years for any American, "without authority of the United States," to communicate with a foreign government in an effort to influence that government's behavior on any "disputes or controversies with the United States," points out Robert F. Turner, former acting assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal today, Turner says the Bush administration "isn't going to want to touch this political hot potato, nor should it become a partisan issue."

"Maybe special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, whose aggressive prosecution of Lewis Libby establishes his independence from White House influence, should be called back," he suggests.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55067

Illegal Diplomacy
Did Nancy Pelosi commit a felony when she went to Syria?
BY ROBERT F. TURNER
Friday, April 6, 2007 11:30 a.m. EDT

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may well have committed a felony in traveling to Damascus this week, against the wishes of the president, to communicate on foreign-policy issues with Syrian President Bashar Assad. The administration isn't going to want to touch this political hot potato, nor should it become a partisan issue. Maybe special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, whose aggressive prosecution of Lewis Libby establishes his independence from White House influence, should be called back.

The Logan Act makes it a felony and provides for a prison sentence of up to three years for any American, "without authority of the United States," to communicate with a foreign government in an effort to influence that government's behavior on any "disputes or controversies with the United States." Some background on this statute helps to understand why Ms. Pelosi may be in serious trouble.

President John Adams requested the statute after a Pennsylvania pacifist named George Logan traveled to France in 1798 to assure the French government that the American people favored peace in the undeclared "Quasi War" being fought on the high seas between the two countries. In proposing the law, Rep. Roger Griswold of Connecticut explained that the object was, as recorded in the Annals of Congress, "to punish a crime which goes to the destruction of the executive power of the government. He meant that description of crime which arises from an interference of individual citizens in the negotiations of our executive with foreign governments."

The debate on this bill ran nearly 150 pages in the Annals. On Jan. 16, 1799, Rep. Isaac Parker of Massachusetts explained, "the people of the United States have given to the executive department the power to negotiate with foreign governments, and to carry on all foreign relations, and that it is therefore an usurpation of that power for an individual to undertake to correspond with any foreign power on any dispute between the two governments, or for any state government, or any other department of the general government, to do it."

Griswold and Parker were Federalists who believed in strong executive power. But consider this statement by Albert Gallatin, the future Secretary of the Treasury under President Thomas Jefferson, who was wary of centralized government: "it would be extremely improper for a member of this House to enter into any correspondence with the French Republic . . . As we are not at war with France, an offence of this kind would not be high treason, yet it would be as criminal an act, as if we were at war." Indeed, the offense is greater when the usurpation of the president's constitutional authority is done by a member of the legislature--all the more so by a Speaker of the House--because it violates not just statutory law but constitutes a usurpation of the powers of a separate branch and a breach of the oath of office Ms. Pelosi took to support the Constitution...

continued

Of course, not all congressional travel to, or communications with representatives of, foreign nations is unlawful. A purely fact-finding trip that involves looking around, visiting American military bases or talking with U.S. diplomats is not a problem. Nor is formal negotiation with foreign representatives if authorized by the president. (FDR appointed Sens. Tom Connally and Arthur Vandenberg to the U.S. delegation that negotiated the U.N. Charter.) Ms. Pelosi's trip was not authorized, and Syria is one of the world's leading sponsors of international terrorism. It has almost certainly been involved in numerous attacks that have claimed the lives of American military personnel from Beirut to Baghdad.

The U.S. is in the midst of two wars authorized by Congress. For Ms. Pelosi to flaunt the Constitution in these circumstances is not only shortsighted; it may well be a felony, as the Logan Act has been part of our criminal law for more than two centuries. Perhaps it is time to enforce the law...

http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009908

Fri Apr 6, 6:56 AM ET

Democrats in Congress have been busy flexing their foreign policy muscles almost from the moment they took power in January, for the most part responsibly. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) crossed a line this week by visiting Syria, where she met with President Bashar Assad. She violated a long-held understanding that the United States should speak with one official voice abroad - even if the country is deeply divided on foreign policy back home...

continued

Pelosi surely knew that as speaker - third in the succession line to the presidency - her high-profile presence in Damascus would be read as a contradiction of Bush's no-talkpolicy. No matter that she claimed to have stuck closely to administration positions in her conversations with Assad, smiling photos of Pelosi and the Syrian president convey the unspoken message that while the U.S. president is unwilling to talk with Syria, another wing of the government is. Assad made good use of the moment.


Also along was House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., who said the meeting was "only the beginning of our constructive dialogue with Syria, and we hope to build on this visit." That suggested Democrats are going beyond unobjectionable fact-finding and getting-to-know-you conversation into something closer to negotiations, undermining U.S. diplomacy.


If there's any justification for Pelosi's trip, it is that foreign travel by members of Congress is important. Many come to office with little knowledge of the world and soon need to make important decisions about it. This was starkly evident in December when the congressman Pelosi chose to head the critical House Intelligence Committee revealed that he didn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites - knowledge critical to understanding Iraq and the war on terrorism.


The speaker presumably is better informed. Pelosi said she made the trip because the bipartisan Iraq Study Group urged greater engagement with Syria. That argument is strengthened by the fact that Assad also got visits this week from several House Republicans, who defied White House requests they not go. "I don't care what the administration says on this," said Rep. Frank Wolf (news, bio, voting record), R-Va. "I want us to be successful in Iraq. I want us to clamp down on Hezbollah."...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20070406/cm_usatoday/pelosistepsoutofbounds

Headlines via Drudge Report

WSJ: 'Pelosi may well have committed a felony in traveling to Damascus'...

USA TODAY: Pelosi steps out of bounds...

Cheat Sheet for Kerry Gingrich Climate Showdown

April 10, 2007 touted as the date Newt Gingrich and John Kerry will meet to debate global warming.

See our post Climate of Fear April 5, 2007

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/04/climate-of-fear.html

The Hill posts on the debate they tag The Climate Showdown

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/kerry-gingrich-announce-climate-showdown-2007-04-05.html

Don't miss our own compilation of information on both sides of the issue. See sidebar Special Issue: Global Warming

Lots of information to get you up to speed and watch carefully just how far apart, or how close, Kerry and Gingrich are on the issue of global warming.

Too bad Ronald Bailey isn't part of the debate, as well as James Spann...

And what about the Priestly Pugilist, cited on Sen. Inhofe's site

Pennsylvania Priest Mocks 'Carbon Offsets' By Offering 'Moral Offsets' To Allow you to 'Sin with Confidence,' "The size of your carbon footprint - and, according to global warming’s true believers, the blackness of your soul - is determined by how many and how much of these evil things you do. But fear not. If you’re rich enough, you can buy your environmental soul clean again by purchasing carbon offsets," Father J. Michael Venditti wrote in a March 2007 blog.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=CommitteeResources.ViewNewsletter&Newsletter_id=147a8bef-802a-23ad-4359-53c1970182c1&SuppressLayouts=true

Link reference

http://home.ix.netcom.com/~stmichael/blog.htm

4/04/07 - Well, here's some news. Priestly Pugilist © has been cited (by name) by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment & Public Works Committee, on the Minority Page of the committee's web site.
          Citing our March 1, 2007, post on Moral Offsets to illustrate how not all religious leaders buy into Al Gore's "global-warming-as-moral-issue" extortion scheme, your's truly is linked with...

http://home.ix.netcom.com/~pugilist/index.htm

March 1, 2007 Post Priestly Pugilist

3/1/07 - The latest blast of hot air from those perpetuating the global warming fraud is the idea of commercially available “carbon offsets.” The theory behind this new entrepreneurial opportunity goes something like this: Everybody has a “carbon footprint” resulting from all the things he or she does which damages the planet - things like driving cars, flying planes, burning garbage, burning electric lights, heating the home, eating beans, detonating thermonuclear devices, breathing and the like. The size of your carbon footprint - and, according to global warming’s true believers, the blackness of your soul - is determined by how many and how much of these evil things you do. But fear not. If you’re rich enough, you can buy your environmental soul clean again by purchasing carbon offsets. For example...

http://home.ix.netcom.com/~pugilist/02.17.07-03.27.07.htm

Lieberman McCain team up global warming law

The We're all global warmers, now crowd ever-pressing (and it's snowing in April where it shouldn't...)

Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 2007 (Introduced in Senate)
Jan. 12, 2007
Introduced by Sens. Lieberman and McCain

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.280:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 12, 2007
Contact: Erika Masonhall, 202-224-4041


Lieberman, McCain Reintroduce Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act

Bill Improvements, Mounting Warming Impacts Attract Co-Sponsors to Bipartisan Measure

WASHINGTON – Senator Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) reintroduced the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act (S. 280) today with his longstanding ally, Senator John McCain (R-AZ). Co-sponsoring the bill are Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME), who had co-sponsored the 2005 version of the bill, and Senators Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Susan Collins (R-ME). The most bipartisan of the Senate proposals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across all major sectors of the US economy, the new bill quickly won endorsements from the National Wildlife Federation, Environmental Defense, and the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

http://lieberman.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=267559


Summary of McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 2005

http://www.pewclimate.org/policy_center/analyses/s_1151_summary.cfm

The Bill's History

First introduced into the Senate in 2003, the Climate Stewardship Act was voted on in October of the same year, receiving surprisingly strong support from senators on both sides of the aisle. Though it didn't pass, the 43-to-55 vote demonstrates that our country is within reach of passing legislation that would protect the Earth's climate without risking economic setbacks.

http://www.environmentaldefense.org/article.cfm?contentid=4315

Don't forget to check out the Great Global Warming Swindle video locate info at sidebar or search feature on this site

Geraldo On Edge

Here we go. Geraldo Rivera finally finally reveals his true beliefs! Pity the illegal alien, they are going to be blamed for Osama bin Laden.

Fox 'n Friends trying to grill him after his appearance on Bill O'Reilly last night when he and O'Reilly screamed their differing opinions at each other.

We can only hope Fox will wake up and can this man's program Geraldo At Large. He did the same thing during the Clinton era with his pity of poor Bill for being asked to testify about lying under oath and to federal investigators. For the people in the hustings, lying to feds is a crime, and if prosecuted, you will serve jail time.

what did Geraldo say about the illegal alien who committed not just one crime, but three crimes. Oops, those were not felonies, a couple were not even misdemeanors. Instead of proving his opinion, he takes a swipe at Lou Dobbs on CNN saying he's trying to revive his failing career on the backs of who - illegal immigrants.

Geraldo said it is we, the United States who are enticing them here with the promise of jobs.

What? We have visa program, documented worker program, and a legal path to citizenship in this nation which is absolutely unparalled around the globe.

The reason many illegal aliens enter illegally people is because they were criminals back in their country of origin, wherever that is.

Geraldo even tried to make Bill O'Reilly's outrage over the case of the illegal alien who killed two young girls - under the age of 21 - in Virginia - look as if he, the illegal alien, was being targeted because he's a Latino.

O'Reilly tried to say no, that's not realistic, but Geraldo kept on and that raised O'Reilly's blood pressure and voice.

The two ended up screaming back and forth.

It isn't that we don't appreciate different viewpoints on the issue. Geraldo has gone over the edge - what he's doing is condoning illegal aliens coming in to our nation - and as long as they don't commit any crime that rises to the level of a felony - well that's ok, that's all right with the world.

No, it isn't all right. And it doesn't matter what their nation of origin. The fact they enter the country illegally, when there are numerous ways to opt into the country legally, shows they are not the kind of person we need to raise our country up, rather than lower our country down.

As bad, and even worse, were his accusations against the MinuteMen

RIVERA: The Minutemen are wearing guns now on the border.

O'REILLY: You listen to me. I will listen to you.

RIVERA: Are they going to start shooting illegal aliens?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,264526,00.html

There goes Geraldo, making it seem as though the law-abiding MinuteMen are worse than the already non-law abiding illegal aliens!

Let's hope the MinuteMen and their supporters write Fox and demand cancellation of Geraldo At Large, once and for all.

Info

Bill O'Reilly transcript of appearance

O'Reilly and Geraldo on Illegals
Friday, April 06, 2007
This is a partial transcript from "The O'Reilly Factor," April 5, 2007, that has been edited for clarity.

BILL O’REILLY, HOST: Now for the "Top Story" tonight: another view of this on the fair and balanced network, FOX News correspondent Geraldo Rivera, seen weekends at 8:00 p.m. Eastern.

GERALDO RIVERA, HOST, "GERALDO AT LARGE": Thank goodness.

O'REILLY: OK. Sanctuary cities, what do you think?

RIVERA: I think you have the story almost exactly wrong, my friend. I think that we're talking about drunk driving. And there were 347 drunk driving fatalities in the Commonwealth of Virginia in the year 2005. I think this may be the first drunk driving story we have done from Virginia.

And the only reason it's news on "The Factor" is because the driver was an illegal alien.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,264526,00.html

NewsBusters includes video clip, thank you...

Geraldo and O'Reilly Almost Come to Blows!! Both Lose Cool
Posted by Warner Todd Huston on April 6, 2007 - 11:18.
Simply wow, is all I can say to the segment on last night's O'Reilly Factor. Both of them lost their cool in the extreme.

O'Reilly screams that Geraldo wants "anarchy", Geraldo yells that O'Reilly wants to take illegal aliens and "do something to them" over the infuriating story of a drunk illegal who killed two teenaged girls in a Virginia Beach car accident.

http://newsbusters.org/taxonomy/term/467

Illegal ignored 'don't drive' warning after drinking
Man in crash that killed 2 teens had previous DUI conviction
Posted: April 4, 2007 2:20 a.m. Eastern
World Net Daily

Alfredo Ramos, a Mexican national in the U.S. illegally, was convicted of driving while intoxicated last year, but that didn't keep him from being behind the wheel after a night of drinking last weekend – and now two teenage girls are dead because of it.

According to police, Ramos, 22, slammed the 1998 Mitsubishi he was driving into the rear of a 1994 Plymouth driven by Allison Kunhardt, 17, Friday night in Virginia Beach, Va. Kunhardt and her best friend Tessa Tranchant, 16, were stopped at a traffic light when they were hit from behind. Although both wore seat belts, both died – one at the scene and one after arriving at the hospital.

Ramos, suffered only minor injuries, the Virginian-Pilot reported.

Police blamed speed and alcohol for the crash.

Ramos, charged with manslaughter for the two deaths, was convicted last year of public drunkenness in Virginia Beach and driving under the influence in Chesapeake.

Ramos brother, also in the U.S. illegally, told the Virginian-Pilot he had spoken with his brother by phone prior to the accident and warned him not to drive after learning he had been drinking.

Ramos told his brother he had no memory of the crash and only learned of Kunhardt's and Tranchant's deaths when police told him he had killed two people...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55032

Virginia Beach leaders strike back at Fox's Bill O'Reilly
By JON FRANK AND DEIRDRE FERNANDES, The Virginian-Pilot
© April 5, 2007 | Last updated 12:18 PM Apr. 6

VIRGINIA BEACH - City leaders launched a counterattack against Fox News personality Bill O'Reilly on Thursday, calling him a "TV show gadfly" after he blamed the city in the deaths of two teenagers and accused local leaders of providing sanctuary to illegal immigrants.

Faced with angry e-mails and a potential black eye just before the start of tourist season, city officials called a news conference to defend themselves in a case that is drawing national attention.

City leaders tried to shift the debate about the recent deaths of Alison Kunhardt, 17, and Tessa Tranchant, 16, away from illegal immigration and onto drunk driving. Alfredo Ramos, 22, the man charged with aggravated involuntary manslaughter in their deaths, had a record of three alcohol-related convictions and was in the country illegally...

http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=122390&ran=23962&tref=po

Climate of Fear

Glenn Beck: Exposed the Climate of Fear

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/gb.html

Hilarious there has not been any more warming of the planet for ten years (a little under, nine years) says the Skeptical Environmentalist author on Beck's program...

but after reading and re-reading do not miss the fact that it isn't President of the United States Al Gore is sweating for, it's President of a New World Order. Don't believe? Just read the original United Nations Charter and material put out by the World Federalists. It's been going on 15 years since I've learned about the plan for a new Constitution of the World. A smattering of my research ongoing, at Truth Online, includes bibliography.

Bloodless Revolution: A More Perfect Treason

http://dirtline.tripod.com/ArticleVbib.html

Al Gore You Tube video testimony Congress

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yo7rmajxxnc

clip and re-read again and again in the early dawn

CNN GLENN BECK
Aired April 5, 2007 - 19:00:00 ET
BECK: At this year`s Academy Awards, Al Gore got nothing by love, riotous applause for his efforts on behalf of Planet Earth. Well, unfortunately for Al, those days seem to be over. The real story is, Al Gore is still getting a vocal reaction during his appearances to warn all of us about the apocalyptic effects on, you know, the warming of the globe, but nowadays the cheers have been replaced with boos, and not just from the right, but from the left, as well.

As I give you this story, I`m going to try really hard not to gloat, but I`m not making any promises. Concordia University, it`s in Montreal, Canada -- remember, Canada, a university. They just gave Al Gore an honorary doctorate. And during his address, he was stopped twice by angry cries of dissension and disbelief from the crowd. Sacrebleu, in Canada, really?

Gore responded by saying, "I don`t know if you guys are from the left or the right wing." You know why that is, Al? Because both sides now know you`re full of bull crap!

Those on the left who do agree with the perceived immediate dangers of global warming think you`re a hypocrite. Not only does your palatial mansion use more electricity in a month than the average American home does in a year, but the meat-eater that he is also contributes to cattle emissions, which are infinitely worse than driving a fully loaded Hummer.

Now, that`s not my opinion. That`s the opinion of those crazy conservatives at the U.N.

Now, those on the right have long believed that, you know, something is going on with the Earth`s climate, but it`s impossible to deny that so much of Al Gore`s science is unsubstantiated and his doomsday language is just out of control and counterproductive.

Even the "New York Times" has said that Al Gore is writing checks that his research couldn`t cash. Usually the only thing you find out about Al Gore in the "New York Times," love letters.

Al, the world is onto you. Your self-promotional, politically motivated science fiction -- I say, forget, you know, the diet, grow the beard back, invite your old friends, Ben and Jerry, over for a little reunion. The jig seems to be up!

Chris Horner, he is the author of the "Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism." Chris, aren`t you absolutely shocked that the mainstream media didn`t pick up a story about protesters at Al Gore`s speech from the left?

CHRIS HORNER, AUTHOR: Well, wait a second. It took the "New York Times" about 15 months to pick up on the fact that his movie was pure science fiction before they found some scientists who were willing to say this, so I expect in another year or so they`ll figure out that maybe it`s worth reporting, because we`ll figure out -- in about a year, it will be almost 10 years since we`ve experienced any warming, Glenn. You have to remember that it hasn`t warmed since 1998.

Maybe on that anniversary that they will notice that, in fact, some college students jeered him. And the reason that`s odd is -- you`re noting he does tend to now speak only before reliably left-wing audiences, sure, but typically elites.

College students may come from the elite strain, but they aren`t yet there. They haven`t figured out that his agenda is really about other people. They realize they`d like to create wealth, and he`s going to make it quite difficult for them.

BECK: Let me go -- because you said it`s been 10 years, almost 10 years, been nine now since we`ve experienced any warming in the globe. Let me show you that we seem to have collective Alzheimer`s. From the "Washington Post," greenhouse doomsday, the year is 2035. Phoenix is in its third week of temperatures over 130 degrees. Holland is under water. Bangladesh has ceased to exist. This is not science fiction. It`s based on current projections.

At what point do the projections start to catch up on them?

HORNER: Well, when they assign years to them. I believe that article assigned 2035, so back then it was a long time in the future. Right now, remember, Al Gore has been saying for nigh on five years that we`ve got 10 years to live, so pretty soon, you know, those chickens are going to come home to roost.

BECK: I don`t know if you saw this, but in "USA Today," I think it was yesterday, the lead story in the "Life" section was scientists say it`s too late, it`s too late to turn this around.

HORNER: Right.

BECK: I thought, "Well, I should go buy the Hummer then."

HORNER: That`s when the schism starts in the movement, because at that point, the funding drives up. What`s the point? Remember, Glenn, we spent $5 billion with a "b" researching this that`s purportedly settled and now it`s too late. Why don`t we spend the money productively to help with adaptation, which is how successful societies have always dealt with something that they always face, climate change.

BECK: Chris, thank you. I want to leave you with one quick quote here. It is from "Discover" magazine. "We have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have," "Discover" magazine, 1989. Seems like the playbook...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0704/05/gb.01.html

And there's more re-read late night to keep you laughing

That`s "The Real Story" tonight. And in the spirit of equal time, I want to give Al Gore a chance to respond, and I mean this sincerely. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AL GORE IMPERSONATOR: I want to talk to you today about global warming. We all know the dangers it presents, so I`m not going to try and scare you. I`m just going to present you with the facts.

Here`s fact number one. If you don`t act soon, the Earth will suffer many, many explosions! Deaths! It`s going to be Hell on Earth. Your skin is going to bubble. You`re going to burn alive, and you`re going to be dead, dead! So dead you won`t even believe how dead you are!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This message brought to you by the Committee to Keep Al Gore`s Ongoing 2012 Presidential Campaign Secret.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0704/05/gb.01.html

Meanwhile

Beware of Newt Gingrich watch closely what he says... April 10 debate...

Don't have to warn of Kerry, he can't tell the difference between a joke and a slur...

Kerry, Gingrich announce climate showdown
By Jeremy Jacobs
April 05, 2007
Former House Speaker and possible presidential candidate Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and 2004 Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry (Mass.) are set to square off on climate change next week, their staffs announced Thursday.
The debate, hosted by New York University’s John Brademas Center for the Study of Congress, will take place next Tuesday, April 10, at 10 a.m. in the Russell Senate Office Building.

Kerry, who bowed out of the 2008 presidential race earlier this year, has been dubbed an “environmental champion” by the non-partisan League of Conservation Voters. His website touts a long record of fighting for the environment. He and his wife Teresa Heinz Kerry also recently wrote This Moment on Earth, which addresses climate change and preserving the environment.

"Newt’s a guy who has spent a lot of time wrestling with climate change and the environment. He reads about it, he teaches about it, he writes about it,” Kerry said Thursday. “We don’t see eye to eye about everything, obviously, but that’s what makes for a good debate.

“As a father, when someone tells me that within the next decade, if we don't deal with global warming, our children and grandchildren may deal with global catastrophe, that tells me I damn well better do whatever I can to help make Washington deal with this responsibly,” Kerry added. “We need these good old-fashioned debates and forums and discussions to get everyone thinking creatively on both sides of the aisle.”

Gingrich, the architect of the “Contract with America” that led to the Republican takeover of the House in 1994, recently teamed up with conservationist Terry Maple to author A Contract with the Earth. Like his Contract with America, A Contract with the Earth, due out Nov. 1, 2007, is based on a 10-point “contract” calling for a bipartisan approach to solving climate issues.


http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/kerry-gingrich-announce-climate-showdown-2007-04-05.html

Rush Holt Bill Due to come up for vote sometime soon as early as April 16, and be aware, there is still opposition to it due to what are perceived flaws in the bill - from non-partisan and even liberal quarters...

Net the Truth Online posts the controversy about the new Holt legislation HR 811 for your information.

As proposed currently, the Holt bill appears to have enough opposition and detailed concerns about security and integrity - and the auditing process as proposed - from those within the election watchdog and voting security community to warrant holding off on the passage of the legislation in its current form. The sad thing would be for the bill to pass as is, over the objections of election community activists, and then have it touted as the final solution to everything related to election problems in the United States.

Just read our coverage of a legal challenge to a candidate's nomination petitions and you can see a big problem remains with the voter registration lists.

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/03/clean-up-voter-registration-rolls.html

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/search?q=voter+registration

The Holt bill does nothing about inaccurate computerized voter registration rolls in every state. Without those being updated and clean of voters who have moved to another state, or are deceased, how can anyone trust the outcome of any election? The debate may rage on for years concerning whether electronic (touchscreen) voting machines malfunction, are tampered with and frauded, or encounter human error as seen in the programming of the wrong date on the machines in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania which necessitated an overhaul of the machines on election day 2006.

But there should be no debate about inaccurate voter registration rolls.

No election is safe if even a handful of names of electors remain on the voter rolls which should not be there for being illegal, deceased, moved, changed address, etc.

Rush Holt website
http://holt.house.gov/voting.shtml

Q: What are the bill’s fundamental requirements?
http://holt.house.gov/HR_811.shtml

Statement

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:-s7tDXhH-u8J:www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/downloads/HR%2520811%2520Statement%2520to%2520Elections%2520Subcomm%2520March%252023%25202007%2520-%2520final.pdf+rush+holt+hr+811+vote&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=17&gl=us

GovTrack.us. H.R. 811--110th Congress (2007): Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007, GovTrack.us (database of federal legislation)

(accessed Apr 5, 2007)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-811

Sponsors and co-sponsors

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR00811:@@@P

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR00811:@@@X

Mark Up

http://www.topix.net/us-house/rush-holt/2007/04/election-reform-bill-gets-committee-action

Press Releases:: March 23, 2007
Subcommittee on Elections Conducts Hearing on the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007 (H.R. 811)
H.R. 811 Promises Optical Solution to Election Reform; Leaves Many in the Dark

http://gop.cha.house.gov/MediaPages/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1450

National Conference of State Legislatures
Office of State-Federal Relations
March 27, 2007

URGE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO OPPOSE H.R. 811, THE “VOTER CONFIDENCE AND INCREASED ACCESSIBILITY ACT OF 2007 “
The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) urges you to speak to members of your congressional delegation during the spring recess and tell them to oppose H.R. 811, which amends the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and preempts state laws governing paper trails for voting machines and post-election audit procedures. This bill would also create an unfunded federal mandate for states because it requires states to pay for completely new or retrofitted voting machines as well to meet the conditions of the bill. H.R. 811 will be marked up in the House Committee on House Administration on Thursday, March 29 and could reach the House floor as early as April 16...

IT IS CRITICAL THAT STATE LEGISLATORS CONTACT THEIR HOUSE DELEGATIONS AND URGE THEM TO OPPOSE THE VOTER CONFIDENCE AND INCREASED ACCESSIBILITY ACT OF 2007...

For more information, please contact Susan Parnas Frederick or Hirsh Kravitz at NCSL at 202-624-5400...

http://www.ncsl.org/standcomm/sclaw/ActionAlertHR811.htm

People for American Way pro Holt Bill

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=23548

Avi Rubin OK with Holt Bill Plugs his new book
Saturday, February 17, 2007
H.R. 811, the new Holt bill
Earlier this month, US Congressman Rush Holt (D, NJ) introduced H.R. 811, a bill to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require a voter-verified paper ballot. I have read the bill, as well as some of the criticism by various activists.

In my opinion, passage of the Holt bill would be the single most positive development in this country this decade to ensure the security, integrity and verifiability of elections. As a federal law, this legislation would establish a baseline for all states that would exceed the security and audit of elections in most states today.

http://avi-rubin.blogspot.com/2007/02/hr-811-new-holt-bill.html

Overall supportive discussion of Holt Bill HR 811

Vote PA

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VotePA/

Includes podcast interview

John Bonifaz makes the case for amending Holt's HR 811
February 22, 2007

http://www.pdamerica.org/articles/news/2007-02-22-13-11-02-news.php

Holes in HR 811 Charted No Leaky Buckets

http://noleakybuckets.org/holt811/holt811detail.shtml

Black Box Voting forum dissects HR 811 and provides links to more material

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/46591/46591.html?1174411717

Serious flaws in the Holt Bill includes link to Bev Harris What's Wrong with Holt more Bruce O'Dell, Nancy Tobi...

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:DKC6MliVScYJ:electionarchive.org/ucvInfo/release/Release4ElectionReformProposal.pdf+rush+holt+hr+811+congress+vote&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=40&gl=us

Same as above with links

Four Election Integrity Groups Release a 'One-Page Concept Proposal...
PRWeb March 29, 2007

- Leaders in four election integrity organizations are delivering a proposal to the Congress calling on the members to sponsor better election reform legislation.

According to leaders of The National Election Data Archive, Black Box Voting, Democracy for New Hampshire, and Citizens' Alliance for Secure Elections, OH, there are serious flaws in current election reform proposals proposed by U.S. Congressman Rush Holt and Senator Bill Nelson (HR 811 & S559) and by Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Senator Hillary Clinton (HR1381 & S804).

Some election officials agree. Douglas A. Kellner, Co-Chair of the New York State Board of Elections in a March 20, 2007 email correspondence said: 'Congress got it wrong when it passed the Help America Vote Act in 2002 and there is a high probability that HR 811 in its current form could create another form of expensive mischief that could interfere with efficient administration of elections.'

The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) and the National Association of Counties (NACo) have also written a joint letter on March 19, 2007 urging members of Congress to oppose HR811/S559.

Yet, federal election reform legislation is critically needed in early 2007 if it is to be in effect in time to assure the accuracy and truth of 2008 federal elections.

http://www.topix.net/content/prweb/2120470182058150523124222284333460296205

Coalition for Visible Ballots issues opposition statement to new Holt Bill
New Version of Holt Bill: A Giant Step Backwards: Position Statement from Coalition for Visible Ballots

http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/3467

www.coalitionforvisibleballots.org

Election Integrity: Fact & Friction

Sunday, March 4, 2007
H.R.811: Fact & Friction -- Part I
Posted by Howard Stanislevic at 10:18 PM

http://e-voter.blogspot.com/2007/03/hr811-fact-friction-part-i.html

Wednesday, March 28, 2007
H.R.811: Fact & Friction – Part III
Posted by Howard Stanislevic at 3:28 PM
By Mark Lindeman, Ph.D. and Howard Stanislevic, Research Consultant

http://e-voter.blogspot.com/2007/03/hr811-fact-friction-part-iii.html

Saturday, March 10, 2007
H.R.811: Fact & Friction -- Part II
Posted by Howard Stanislevic at 2:28 PM
Guest blogged by Mark Lindeman, Ph.D.*

http://e-voter.blogspot.com/2007/03/hr811-fact-friction-part-ii_10.html

I still fail to understand why these organizations continue to promote the idea that the United States is a democracy. It isn't. It is a republic, a nation of laws... just aggravating, since otherwise the material is useful...

Voters Unite
Participate in Protecting Our Democracy!
Help Amend HR 811 to prohibit "electronic ballots."
This page lists a variety of materials you can use, and actions you can take, to work toward informing Congress and others of the reasons why electronic ballots must be prohibited in the United States -- NOW.
These materials are aimed at amending Congressman Rush Holt's bill ("Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007") to ban electronic ballots.

http://www.votersunite.org/info/HR811AmendmentResources.asp

Where's the Paper

http://www.wheresthepaper.org/HR811.html

Discussion on blog

Freedom to Tinker
Protect E-Voting — Support H.R. 811
Monday March 12, 2007 by Ed Felten

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1134

Edward W. Felton Testimony link

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1137

My Supplemental E-Voting Testimony
Friday March 30, 2007 by Ed Felton

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1140

Dan Wallach testified before the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration on February 7

http://accurate-voting.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/dwallach-senate-testimony-7feb07.pdf

http://accurate-voting.org/2007/04/02/other-recent-housesenate-testimony/

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/doc/2007/Felten_evoting_testimony.pdf


More discussion

Use care in reading comments on Brad Blog as many posters just have one-train of thought on Republicans - too bad, as that simply diminishes any arguments they have on the issue of the Holt bill for or against...

Brad Blog

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4316

No comments links to material, articles (better)

Rush Holt Election Reform Bill (HR 811)

http://www.bradblog.com/?page_id=4194

Just one more, promise cause you gotta enjoy reading those comments that are so-o conspiratorial ...

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4317
Continue to use the search feature on Net the Truth Online for more information on this issue

National Popular Vote Compact Among States

National Popular Vote Movement

http://fairvotemd.org/

National Popular Vote Bill Has 284 Sponsors in 47 States
April 2, 2007
National Popular Vote announced that its bill has 284 sponsors in 47 states for the 2007 state legislative sessions.

National Popular Vote is currently in discussions with legislators who may sponsor the National Popular Vote bill in the remaining states. To see status of the National Popular Bill in any state, click on the clickable map on our home page or go to the "States" page.

The National Popular Vote bill would enact the proposed interstate compact entitled the "Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote." The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the election of the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/misc/npvsponsors_284.php

Maryland Senate and House Pass, governor to sign

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/states.php?s=MD

Day after our post

Abolition of Electoral College under way
Change would give control of White House to handful of states
Posted: April 6, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com


A movement is sweeping the nation that could eliminate the Electoral College in national elections, and with it much of this country's republican form of government, instead giving unstoppable control over the White House to any coalition the major population centers would choose to create.

Maryland's state legislature already has given approval to a proposal that would, in conjunction with other states' efforts, eliminate the college, and similar plans have already been approved by single legislative houses in Hawaii, Colorado and Arizona. In seven more states – Washington, Montana, California, New Mexico, Louisiana, West Virginia and Connecticut – the plans have been endorsed by legislative committees.

And in 28 more states the proposals have been introduced while legislative writers in another eight states are working on plans, according to a report from the group called National Popular Vote, which is lobbying for the change.

The procedure to elect a president in the United States, although it had happened in the past, became an issue for activists when in 2000 George W. Bush collected fewer popular votes than Al Gore, but because of the concentration of those votes in key states, collected the necessary 270 electoral college votes for the presidency. Electoral college votes are equal to the size of a state's congressional delegation, and are awarded based largely on the winner of the popular vote in those states.

However, an analysis of the issue by Wallbuilders, a Christian organization with expertise in historical and constitutional issues, said the argument that the electoral college system is unfair to voters and "individual votes are meaningless" doesn't hold up.

"Interestingly, because of the electoral college, the opposite has been true," the group's report said. "As the Florida situation proved, individual votes are tallied – sometimes several times."

And it quoted Curtis Gans, of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate, who said getting rid of the electoral college would reduce political campaigns in the United States to "television advertising" and "tarmac."

"There would be virtually no incentive to try to mobilize constituencies, organize specific interests, or devote any resources to such things as voter registration and education. … What we would have is a political system that combines the worst of network television with the worst of the modern campaign," he concluded.

Wallbuilders noted that given a direct democracy – one person with one vote and winner-take-all – "candidates would logically spend their campaign courting voters in the most populous urban areas such as Chicago, San Francisco, New York City, Washington, D.C., Miami, Seattle, etc., rather than visiting cities in more rural areas – cities like Wichita, Birmingham, Amarillo, Cheyenne, Springfield, Tulsa, etc."

continued

In Colorado, the plan was carried in the state Senate by Majority Leader Ken Gordon.

"It is revolutionary, I admit. It is called democracy. I know some people are concerned. It is a big change … but I believe that if the framers of the Constitution were around now they would favor a woman's right to vote, they would oppose slavery and they would support electing the president by majority vote."

But Wallbuilders noted that – along with proposals to have Congress or the state legislatures choose a president – the idea of a national popular vote was discussed by the authors of the Constitution.

"This idea was rejected not because the framers distrusted the people but rather because the larger populous states would have much greater influence than the smaller states and therefore the interests of those smaller states could be disregarded or trampled," Wallbuilders said. "Additionally, a nationwide election would encourage regionalism since the more populous areas of the country could form coalitions to elect president after president from their own region. With such regional preferentialism, lasting national unity would be nearly impossible."

Wallbuilders said the electoral college specifically was chosen to maintain a republican form of government, as opposed to a strict democracy. And it provides more influence to areas with lesser populations.

For the same reason, Congress was set up with representation based on population in the House, and representation based on the states in the Senate...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55064

Classrooms of Future High-Tech Higher Taxes

Classrooms for the Future everybody gets a laptop... why...

Classrooms for Future are high-tech launchpads
Thursday, April 05, 2007
By David Guo, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

...The most important factoid, Mr. Kinross said, is that Classrooms for the Future's goal is that by 2009, every high school in the state should be equipped with laptops. But "it's not only about the laptops," he added, because "The teachers have to be trained to use the technology, too.

"It's an all-inclusive type of deal."...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07095/775167-57.stm

Natural Way Document Shredding: Bunny Food

Rethink buying a rabbit for your child. The rabbit can live 8 to 12 years. They are nice pets, but it's more an adult pet. You can't leave the domesticated rabbit out in the wilds, or outdoors... this is cool on KDKA 2 the bunny is eating the anchor's paper!

Well if you need a shredder that you have to clean up afterwards, go for it...

According to the guest on KDKA Pittsburgh Today Live there will be speakers scheduled to talk on bunny care at rabbit house

Saturday, April 21 – 1:00 to 3:00 p.m.

http://www.pittsburghhouserabbit.org/meetings.html

pittsburgh house rabbit org

http://www.pittsburghhouserabbit.org/

Bunny Boom Bothers California Town

http://kdka.com/watercooler/watercooler_story_095012446.html

Animal Shelter Info

http://www.animal-friends.org/site/diduno.jsp

John Murtha & Haditha Incident Update Report

Testimony leaves Murtha allegations wilting
Officers defend Marines accused of killing civilians in Iraq ambush
Posted: April 4, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Six officers and a senior enlisted Marine have given sworn statements that there was nothing they saw or heard about a firefight in Iraq in 2005 that would make them think any Marine purposely killed Iraqi civilians, according to a law firm investigating the case.

Officials with the Thomas More Law Center of Ann Arbor, Mich., say they are representing Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, who along with other Marines was accused after Time magazine "misreported" circumstances about the battle in the war on terror that pitted U.S. Marines against Iraqi and foreign terrorists on Nov. 19, 2005.

Chessani is accused of failure to investigate and brief higher command about the situation. The sworn testimony was taken for use at a proposed May Article 32 hearing for Chessani, because the witnesses likely will be out of the country an unavailable then.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55021

North American Supreme Court?

CNN Lou Dobbs asks why more in the media are not focusing on the Security and Prosperity Act of guest Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in Media

this is the story of our lifetimes... a North American Supreme Court is envisioned that could overrule our own Supreme Court, Kincaid says... both political parties are part of the process... this started under President Clinton... continued under the North American Free Trade Agreement... and progressed under President Bush... you have a bipartisan group in support of it for various reasons with both having a vested interest in keeping this going... its true integration by three countries... an effort involved to develop a North American legal system...

Transcript Lou Dobbs Tonight

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ldt.html

Lou dobbs.com

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/

North American Union "Conspiracy" Exposed
By Cliff Kincaid | February 19, 2007
A top Democratic Party foreign policy specialist said on Friday that a "very small group" of conservatives is unfairly accusing him of being at the center of a "vast conspiracy" to implement the idea of a "North American Union" by "stealth." He called the charges "absurd."

But Robert Pastor, a former official of the Carter Administration and director of the Center for North American Studies at American University (CNAS), made the remarks at an all-day February 16 conference devoted to the development of a North American legal system. The holding of the conference was itself evidence that a comprehensive process is underway to merge the economies, and perhaps the social and political systems, of the three countries.

Pastor said that he favors a "North American Community," not a formal union of the three countries, and several speakers at the conference ridiculed the idea of protecting America's borders and suggested that American citizenship was an outmoded concept.

Wearing a lapel pin featuring the flags of the U.S., Canada and Mexico, Pastor told AIM that he favors a $200-billion North American Investment Fund to pull Mexico out of poverty and a national biometric identity card for the purpose of controlling the movement of people in and out of the U.S.

So the "conspiracy" is now very much out in the open, if only the media would pay some attention to it.

Media Cover-Up

Accuracy in Media attended the conference in order to produce this report and shed light on a process that is being conducted largely beyond the scrutiny of the public or the Congress.

AIM has previously documented that Pastor's campaign for a North American Community has received precious little attention from the major media, except for the notable case of CNN's Lou Dobbs, who has called it "utterly mad." In fact, a survey of news coverage discloses that several high-profile mentions of the concept of a North American economic, social or political entity have come from Pastor himself, such as a Newsweek International article that he wrote.

The conference, conducted in cooperation with the American Society of International Law, an organization affiliated with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, was held at the American University Washington College of Law. A large number of speakers came from American University.

Overruling the U.S. Supreme Court

Academic literature distributed in advance to conference participants about a common legal framework for the U.S., Canada and Mexico included proposals for a North American Court of Justice (with the authority to overrule a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court), a North American Trade Tribunal, a North American Court of Justice, and a Charter of Fundamental Human Rights for North America, also dubbed the North American Social Charter...

http://www.aim.org/special_report/5247_0_8_0_C/

More from the Internet

http://www.augustreview.com/c/north_american_union/

11 states oppose so far report

http://arkansasgopwing.blogspot.com/search/label/North%20American%20Union

More on North American Union Supreme Court

http://www.google.com/search?q=north+american+union+supreme+court&btnG=Search&hl=en&rls=GGLD%2CGGLD%3A2006-40%2CGGLD%3Aen

McClatchey photo End of Serenity Lawsuit proceeds

The McClatchey photograph (End of Serenity) has been the subject of conspiracy theories since its publication. We've followed the story at This is Not a Conspiracy Theory.

http://dirtline.tripod.com/talkacrosstown/id33.html

Judge preserves lawsuit over Sept. 11 photo
Tuesday, April 03, 2007

By Milan Simonich, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Valencia McClatchey, an amateur photographer who claims The Associated Press pirated her historic picture of the Sept. 11 attacks, is entitled to her day in court, a Pittsburgh judge has ruled.
Mrs. McClatchey took the picture seconds after hijacked United Airlines Flight 93 crashed near her home in Somerset County.

Her photo shows a blue sky, a red barn and a towering cloud of gray smoke from the downed jet, whose 44 passengers died in the crash near Shanksville.

Mrs. McClatchey received a federal copyright for the photo in January 2002, four months after snapping it.

She says Associated Press photographer Gene Puskar surreptitiously copied the photo later in 2002 and the wire service distributed it to 2,000 news organizations without her permission.

Lawyers for the AP counter that the wire service used the photo with her consent.

"We vigorously disagree with Mrs. McClatchey and will respond in court at the appropriate time," said Michael Berry, an AP attorney.

U.S. District Judge Terrence McVerry last month denied the AP's motion for summary judgment. He told both sides to file summaries of their cases before a pretrial conference April 20.

Mrs. McClatchey, 51, says in her lawsuit that she agreed to be photographed with her picture for an AP story marking the one-year anniversary of the attacks.

She says Mr. Puskar duped her by taking a photograph of her photograph. She claims he also cropped the photo to remove the copyright notice.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07093/774585-85.stm

John Murtha: Draft 'em but not when we're in majority

John Murhta doesn't agree with Iraq war but floats idea of military draft when we're at war, everybody should share in the responsibility... Fox 'n Friends this morning

Here we go again. Democrats want a military draft when they don't support a war engaged in by Republicans. John Murtha let's draft everybody, but wait we're in the majority, how will this fly back home in a short year for the Presidential elections.

Conveniently, everybody forgets that when President, Bill Clinton bombed Iraq.

Clinton knew his base wouldn't support a prolonged war, but he had to show his own power and might, didn't he.

Read Laurie Mylroie's work and your eyes will be opened to the cover-up of 1993 attack on United States soil!

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2006-40,GGLD:en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=1&ct=result&cd=1&q=laurie+mylroie+iraq+1993+world+trade+center&spell=1

Read Clinton's own words explaining his approach and reasoning about guess who Saddam Hussein and his potential to use chemical and biological weapons he was accused back then of possessing.

Transcript: President Clinton explains Iraq strike

CLINTON: Good evening.

Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.

Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.

Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq's capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability.

The inspectors undertook this mission first 7.5 years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire.

The international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.

The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.

The United States has patiently worked to preserve UNSCOM as Iraq has sought to avoid its obligation to cooperate with the inspectors. On occasion, we've had to threaten military force, and Saddam has backed down.

Faced with Saddam's latest act of defiance in late October, we built intensive diplomatic pressure on Iraq backed by overwhelming military force in the region. The UN Security Council voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddam's actions and to demand that he immediately come into compliance.

Eight Arab nations -- Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman -- warned that Iraq alone would bear responsibility for the consequences of defying the UN.

When Saddam still failed to comply, we prepared to act militarily. It was only then at the last possible moment that Iraq backed down. It pledged to the UN that it had made, and I quote, a clear and unconditional decision to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors.

I decided then to call off the attack with our airplanes already in the air because Saddam had given in to our demands. I concluded then that the right thing to do was to use restraint and give Saddam one last chance to prove his willingness to cooperate.

I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq's own commitments. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning.

Now over the past three weeks, the UN weapons inspectors have carried out their plan for testing Iraq's cooperation. The testing period ended this weekend, and last night, UNSCOM's chairman, Richard Butler, reported the results to UN Secretary-General Annan.

The conclusions are stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing.

In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors. Here are some of the particulars.

Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites. For example, it shut off access to the headquarters of its ruling party and said it will deny access to the party's other offices, even though UN resolutions make no exception for them and UNSCOM has inspected them in the past.

Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM's ability to obtain necessary evidence. For example, Iraq obstructed UNSCOM's effort to photograph bombs related to its chemical weapons program.

It tried to stop an UNSCOM biological weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents and prevented Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM's questions.

Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the building, removing not just documents but even the furniture and the equipment.

Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors. Indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.

So Iraq has abused its final chance.

As the UNSCOM reports concludes, and again I quote, "Iraq's conduct ensured that no progress was able to be made in the fields of disarmament.

"In light of this experience, and in the absence of full cooperation by Iraq, it must regrettably be recorded again that the commission is not able to conduct the work mandated to it by the Security Council with respect to Iraq's prohibited weapons program."

In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham.

Saddam's deception has defeated their effectiveness. Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors.

This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has failed to seize the chance.

And so we had to act and act now.

Let me explain why.

First, without a strong inspection system, Iraq would be free to retain and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs in months, not years.

Second, if Saddam can crippled the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community -- led by the United States -- has simply lost its will. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday -- make no mistake -- he will use it again as he has in the past.

Third, in halting our air strikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance, not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination in the region.

That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security team -- including the vice president, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state and the national security adviser -- I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq.

They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors.

At the same time, we are delivering a powerful message to Saddam. If you act recklessly, you will pay a heavy price. We acted today because, in the judgment of my military advisers, a swift response would provide the most surprise and the least opportunity for Saddam to prepare.

If we had delayed for even a matter of days from Chairman Butler's report, we would have given Saddam more time to disperse his forces and protect his weapons...

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html

Clinton first linked al Qaeda to Saddam
By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The Clinton administration talked about firm evidence linking Saddam Hussein's regime to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network years before President Bush made the same statements.
The issue arose again this month after the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States reported there was no "collaborative relationship" between the old Iraqi regime and bin Laden.

Democrats have cited the staff report to accuse Mr. Bush of making inaccurate statements about a linkage. Commission members, including a Democrat and two Republicans, quickly came to the administration's defense by saying there had been such contacts.
In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between Baghdad and al Qaeda. One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan.
Mr. Bush cited the linkage, in part, to justify invading Iraq and ousting Saddam. He said he could not take the risk of Iraq's weapons falling into bin Laden's hands.
The other pronouncement is contained in a Justice Department indictment on Nov. 4, 1998, charging bin Laden with murder in the bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.
The indictment disclosed a close relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam's regime, which included specialists on chemical weapons and all types of bombs, including truck bombs, a favorite weapon of terrorists.
The 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."
Shortly after the embassy bombings, Mr. Clinton ordered air strikes on al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan and on the Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Sudan.
To justify the Sudanese plant as a target, Clinton aides said it was involved in the production of deadly VX nerve gas. Officials further determined that bin Laden owned a stake in the operation and that its manager had traveled to Baghdad to learn bomb-making techniques from Saddam's weapons scientists.
Mr. Cohen elaborated in March in testimony before the September 11 commission.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm

9. Do you think the United States should try to force Iraq's leader Saddam Hussein from power, or would you say this is not the role of the U.S. government?



U.S. should force Not the No
Hussein from power role of U.S. opinion
2/18/98 56 40 4

PA Capitol: DeWeese Co-Sponsor Freshman Open Records Bill

Looks like everybody is just getting along so well in Harrisburg...

Note: there's more than one bill

Note: there's still not going to be access to fill-in-the-blankety-blank

Note: history has a way of repeating itself

Note: whatever bill finally passes everybody will claim as they did in 2002

Note: Office so and such - wonder how many party patronage positions will open up

Note: everybody clap if you believe they'll let us see everything so easily

Press Release: DeWeese co-sponsoring open records bill

HARRISBURG, April 3 -- House Majority Leader Bill DeWeese is co-sponsoring legislation designed to provide more public access to government documents.

“It’s time that we revisit Pennsylvania’s open records law so that the public has easier access to state information. Part of my job as the House majority leader is to garner bipartisan support for legislation that our chamber chooses to move forward. To that end, I already have asked senior members of the House Democratic Caucus and senior staffers in my office to work with Representative Mahoney on refining his proposal,” said DeWeese, D-Greene/Fayette/Washington.

The measure (H.B. 443) was introduced in February by freshman Rep. Tim Mahoney, D-Fayette.

“As a first-term member, it’s exciting to have Majority Leader DeWeese support my legislation. With his influence, we are most certain to see a full discussion on this issue during the coming weeks,” Mahoney said.

DeWeese added: “At some point in the next several months, and before the House recesses after passing the state budget, I plan to set aside an entire day for the House Democratic Caucus to discuss this measure and other competing open records proposals. This will be done in an effort to garner consensus on this issue.”

The open records legislation is the latest reform effort by DeWeese this session. Last month, he and his House colleagues approved more than 30 changes to the House’s internal operating rules, including disallowing substantial amendments in the Rules Committee, prohibiting late-night session after 11 p.m., making all expense reports available electronically by request, and several others.

In addition, DeWeese instructed House Democratic Caucus staff to provide LIVE streaming video coverage of House session via the Internet at www.pahouse.com as well as all House Roll Call votes after session concludes each day.

EDITOR’S NOTE: DeWeese’s name has been added as a co-sponsor to the legislation; however, his name will not appear on the official bill listing until the legislation is changed and a new printer’s number is issued...

http://www.pahouse.com/PR/050040307.asp

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billinfo/billinfo.cfm?syear=2007&sind=0&body=H&type=B&BN=0443

Hot off the presses

http://www.pahouse.com/newsroom.asp?nd=30

Related

The (Uniontown) Herald-Standard, Dec. 19, 2006

Mahoney drafts open records reform bill
By Alison Hawkes
Of the Herald-Standard

Fayette County's representative-elect Tim Mahoney has drafted a bill requiring state government, including the long-exempt Legislature, to open its records to public inspection within 10 business days of a request.

The language, which he intends to introduce as a bill in the first week of the new session in January, has several elements that would radically change the way Harrisburg handles public records requests.

According to a draft of Mahoney's bill, the public would have a presumed right to internal government documents and the government agency would have to prove why a record should remain secret.

That turns the tables on existing law, in which the presumption is on citizens to prove a record should be made public.

Also, the draft bill would establish an "Office of Access to Public Records" where citizens could appeal a government agency's denial of a public records request.

The independent administrative agency, whose executive director would be appointed by the governor, would review and rule on the appeals. Afterward, either aggrieved party could take the issue to court. Currently, the only avenue for citizens to complain about a denied request is a lawsuit.

Mahoney, a Democrat, said his bill, which he is sending out for co-sponsorship to the entire House Dec. 20, has already generated interest.

"I think I'm going to get a good reception," he said. "I have had calls from veteran legislators and freshman wanting to know when it will be done. There are people wanting to sign onto it."

Mahoney said he based the bill off Florida, Kentucky, and Ohio open records laws. Pennsylvania, which is known to have one of the weaker open records laws in the nation, missed out on the chance for meaningful reform in the 2002 update to the 50-year old law, said Barry Kauffman, executive director of the Pennsylvania chapter of Common Cause.

The Legislature tinkered with administrative issues, such as a 10-day timeframe for government agencies to respond as well as copy fees, without taking on the real issue of access, he said...

continued

Mahoney's bill carves out a number of public records exemptions: the part of a record listing Social Security numbers and other personal information or medical histories, records that if disclosed would endanger public safety (except security policies), records pertaining to strategy and negotiations in a legal or collective bargaining dispute, corporate trade secrets, and records that would reveal a governor's policies or courses of action before they are made public.

The bill also explicitly states that a requester cannot be denied access due to their intended use, although it does provide limitations for commercial uses of public records with the exception of media.

Agencies must respond to a written request within 10 business days, unless under specified circumstances, or the request is presumed to be denied. Agencies violating the law could be subject to as much as $1,000 in civil penalty by the court.

Included are state-aided colleges and universities, authorities and inter-governmental agencies, and any organization or board that derives at least 25 percent of its fund from public money. Mahoney said he plans to have the Office of Access to Public Records also fulfill all records requests for state government agencies, although that provision has not yet made it into the draft bill he provided Dec. 18.

The bill also expands the current definition of public record beyond financial transactions and meeting minutes to include "all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs, films, sound recordings, data processing software, database, data or other material .... made or received in connection with or relating to the work of an agency, except those documents exempt or prohibited from disclosure under state or federal law."

Mahoney said he hopes his bill prompts agencies to place more government records on the Internet and in other electronic formats, giving the public a chance to receive documents without coming to Harrisburg...


http://www.headlinesanddeadlines.org/2006/Dec_21_06/open_records.htm

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/house_bio.cfm?id=1100

Dems to rally against lawmaker's 'treason'
Reading state House member breaks party ranks on speaker
Monday, January 01, 2007
By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

State Democrats, still hung over from Republican maneuvering that may continue Rep. John Perzel's hold on the House speaker's chair, will hold rallies today in Reading and tomorrow in Harrisburg to highlight what they're calling the "political treason" of one of their own...

Tim Mahoney, the newly elected Democratic representative from Uniontown, Fayette County, sent a letter to the Reading Democrat urging him to reconsider. He admitted that he voted against Mr. Deweese in the party's caucus for leadership positions, but said the state will benefit from new Democratic leadership in the House, including in the speaker's chair.

"The Republicans have been in control of the House for 12 years, and the voters of Pennsylvania have voiced their opinion. It's time for a change," Mr. Mahoney said. "There's no reform coming down the pike from the Republicans and we really need reform of the open records law and taxes. I think the Democratic leadership can deliver on that and I am going to be pushing for them to do that."

Mr. Mahoney said that as a result of concerns expressed in the party's caucus, five of eight House leadership positions have been changed and Mr. DeWeese, who won a close re-election campaign, recognizes a need to change, too. Mr. DeWeese held the House speaker's post in 1993-94.

"Mr. Caltagirone is just considering his personal grudge by voting for Mr. Perzel and not everyone else in the Democratic Party that he will affect," Mr. Mahoney said. "Hopefully, he'll reconsider."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07001/750447-85.stm

More

Mahoney open records

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=pennsylvania++tim+mahoney+open+records&btnG=Search

More

2002 revision open records in PA touted

Governor signs bill revamping Pennsylvania's open-records law
By The Associated Press,
freedomforum.org staff
07.03.02
HARRISBURG, Pa. — Gov. Mark S. Schweiker signed into law a bill intended to improve the public's access to state and local government records a day after the measure won final approval of the state House of Representatives.

"This legislation makes one thing perfectly clear: Every Pennsylvanian has a right to monitor the public officials they elect to serve the public interest," Schweiker said.

The measure approved June 28 and signed into law the next day overhauls Pennsylvania's 44-year-old public-records law by setting deadlines for agencies to respond to requests for records, requiring government offices to provide reasons for denying access in writing, and imposing fines on individuals and agencies that violate the law. It passed 199-1.

"Pennsylvania's open-records law is going to have greater sunshine on our government than we've had before," said the bill's sponsor, Republican Rep. John A. Maher.

Open-records advocates consider Pennsylvania's current Right to Know Law one of the weakest. It assumes that a government record can be kept from public view unless specifically designated by law as open for inspection...

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=3697

PA Newpaper Assoc.

Open records reform -- Pa. in a crisis of access
PNA members may use this editorial freely for reprint in their own publications.
By Teri Henning, General Counsel
Pennsylvania Newspaper Association

It is well understood that Pennsylvania has one of the worst open records laws in the country. In state-by-state surveys of open records laws, Pennsylvania generally falls within the bottom two or three. What that means for Pennsylvania residents is that we are often unable to monitor the work of our local and state governments or to hold them accountable for their decisions. And it seems to get harder every day.

Laws continue to be passed that prevent access to information, as with the recent slots law -- which exempts much applicant information from disclosure and allows the applicants themselves to designate documents as "confidential."

Recent court decisions have further limited access, as the Pennsylvania appellate courts have ruled that an agency can refuse access to almost all of the information on public officials' cell phone bills and on legal invoices submitted to agencies. In 2001, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that a document that supported the payment of $145 million from public funds to settle a lawsuit was not a public record. The Courts have also ruled that the public has no right to a draft contract or proposal until the contract or proposal is finalized -- which is obviously too late for the public to comment.

In 2002, the Pennsylvania Right to Know Law -- our state's open records act -- was amended to improve the procedural aspects of records requests...

http://www.pa-newspaper.org/web/2006/03/open_records_reform_pa_in_a_crisis_of_access.aspx

PNB SUPPORT TRACKING

LEGISLATIVE NEWS
Bill Status Report
04-03-2007 - 17:37:32

HB 443 Mahoney
Act requiring certain records of the State & its political subdivisions, authorities & agencies & other public bodies to be open for examination, inspection., etc., establishing the Office of Access to Public Records, etc., & making a repeal.
Position: Amend-Support
Remarks: Press conference announcement 2/07 but not submitted for introduction or printed befor return of House 3/12/07; available draft tracks PNA "Brighter PA" with problematic additional language.
Printer Number(s): P0813
Bill History: 02-15-07 H Filed
02-21-07 H Press Conference held
03-13-07 H Introduced and referred to committee on House State Government

http://www.pa-newspaper.com/

More than one bill on the table for consideration

In Harrisburg, 'Open Records' Reforms Underway
by KYW's Tony Romeo

The majority leader of the Pennsylvania state senate has introduced his proposal to strengthen Pennsylvania’s "open records" law.

The bill introduced by Sen. Dominic Pileggi (R-Chester and Delaware counties) would add the state judiciary’s financial records, state-related universities, and community colleges to the list of things covered by the Open Records law. It would also clarify that the state-run student-loan agency, PHEAA, is covered.

The bill, if passed, would shorten the time period state agencies have to respond to right-to-know requests and ease the appeals process.

Pileggi spokesman Erik Arneson says an overhaul of the law is overdue:

http://www.kyw1060.com/pages/329213.php?contentType=4&contentId=393178

Interesting brief about coroner's reports

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/1081874/17187454

http://pennsylvaniaprogressive.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/03/open_recordsope.html

PA State Legislators Reward Appointees

Only they themselves think they are worth this kind of money. The Pennsylvania taxpayers don't believe they are worth this kind of money, yet, even so, as the elections of 2006 showed, statewide, there was not a huge and emphatic turnout of incumbents by an angered electorate. It wasn't as if there was not publicity after the 2005 payraise and unvouchered expense accounts the state legislators gave themselves. The people were well aware of the obscene action to increase salaries of legislators by in many cases some 60 percent.

Still, the voters didn't get off their duffs and go and vote out each and every incumbent. In fact, only three top leadership fell in the Primary, and one top leader in the Fall General Election. 30 state legislators simply retired, leaving the field open for challenge. When all was said and done - 55 newcomers arrived - in total.

And largely the system rests on just this sort of thing - back home - voters want the pork, voters want the government jobs they get locally and they keep putting in school board members who turn around and vote in family members and relatives and friends to well-paying and union protected jobs.

Wait until somebody does a similar listing of what school superintendents are paid in salary, benefits, retirement packages...

Likewise, state jobs are handed out to nice little party supporters...

What's needed to stop the insanity? Not a PA Constitutional convention. Rather, a breakup of government unions, and elimination of public schools run by bureaucrats to be replaced wholly by private management.

The $100,000 club
Monday, April 02, 2007
3,042. That's how many state employees earn more than $100,000 a year. Combined, they earn a total of $368 million.

In a continuing effort to tell you how your tax dollars are spent, staff writer Jan Murphy collected salaries from every state agency and compiled the list of those in the $100,000 club.

You pay the salaries. You may be surprised at some of them. It's up to you to decide if they're worth it...

http://www.pennlive.com/news/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1175512206313850.xml&coll=1

REWARDING JOBS
'Gold-plated benefits' might be enticement to a career Monday, April 02, 2007BY JAN MURPHYOf The Patriot-News
Not too many people earn six figures, but the $100,000 club in state government isn't as exclusive as you might think.

A Patriot-News survey in March found that 3,042 people in state government are pulling in those kinds of salaries.

Topping the list of 106,875 state government employees is State System of Higher Education Chancellor Judy Hample, with a $327,718 salary.

http://www.pennlive.com/news/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1175476205280350.xml&coll=1

Top 10 salary lists
Monday, April 02, 2007
Top 10 salaries in state government

1. Judy Hample, SSHE Chancellor: $327,718

2. Richard Willey, Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency president and CEO: $289,118

3. Tony Atwater, Indiana University of Pennsylvania president: $232,458

4. Peter Gilbert, State Employes' Retirement System chief investment officer: $229,380

5. Madeleine Adler, West Chester University president: $221,224

6. Brian Lecher, Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency executive vice president for information technology: $217,757

6. James Preston, Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency executive vice president for marketing & client services: $217,757

6. Timothy Guenther, Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency executive vice president & chief financial officer: $217,757

9. Angelo Armenti Jr., California University president: $202,312

10. Kelly Logan, Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency executive vice president for public service & marketing: $201,178

CONTINUED 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 Next

http://www.pennlive.com/news/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1175482509123440.xml&coll=1&thispage=10

Discussion forum for Capitol Penn Live

http://www.pennlive.com/forums/capitol/?initial=true

PA House acts on reforming itself

31 of 32 proposed Pennsylvania legislative reform measures passed the House of Representatives in bipartisan support, according to the Herald Standard. Yet further in the article is mention of two measures which did not pass? Sifting through the material to determine what happened. Check back.

Local legislators outline positions on reform efforts
By Amy Zalar, Herald-Standard
04/01/2007
Updated 04/01/2007 01:15:50 AM EDT

While the state House of Representatives has voted in favor of 31 of the 32 recommendations made by the Speaker's Reform Commission to change House rules, a proposal to take away the House Appropriations Committee's power to substantively amend bills was not approved.


A proposal to allow the leadership-controlled Appropriations Committee to amend bills was introduced by state Rep. Dwight Evans, D-Philadelphia, who chairs the committee, and it passed by a vote of 149 to 50.

Ironically, the only local legislator to vote against the amendment was state Rep. Timothy S. Mahoney, D-South Union, who serves on the Appropriations Committee. Mahoney said he voted against retaining the power of the Appropriations Committee to substantively amend bills "so the budget would go a lot smoother."

Local legislators who voted to keep the power to essentially gut and replace language of bills in the hands of the committee were: state Reps. Peter J. Daley, D-California; H. William DeWeese, D-Waynesburg; Deberah Kula, D-North Union; Jess Stairs, R-Acme; and Ted Harhai, D-Monessen.

Explaining why he supported allowing the Appropriations Committee to amend bills, DeWeese said he did so at the request of both Evans and the Republican Appropriations chairman from the Philadelphia area. DeWeese pointed out that while he is the only representative from his corner of the state, the Philadelphia region has more than 50 representatives of both parties.

DeWeese said the House passed 31 out of the 32 recommendations made by the Reform Commission. "The Speaker's Reform Commission offered 32 recommendations and I embraced 31 of them," DeWeese said. "I was privileged to be an engineer of the Speaker's Reform Commission on Jan. 1 when I promised Dennis O'Brien from the confines of a suburban Philadelphia Marriott conference room if he would become Speaker and allow us to maintain a Democratic majority, his legacy would be the Speaker's Reform Commission and a complete change in the way the Pennsylvania House does business," he said.

DeWeese further said that both Mahoney specifically and the many legislative political challengers of the past two years in general have convinced him that there was "an absolute and incontrovertible" need for change...

The majority leader said one thing that was "altered forever" was the ability of the Rules Committee, of which he is chairman, to gut and replace a proposal.

DeWeese said the two other issues that he voted against "flew out of nowhere from the floor by zealous partisans of the issue."

The other two issues that the majority of the House did not embrace included a proposal to ban the use of a lawmaker's name, face or voice on public service announcements during election years.

The other proposal that failed was a vote to allow the House majority and minority leaders to call a voice roll call vote, as opposed to a normal electronic roll call vote, a means of ensuring that lawmakers are present when voting.

Among the 160 opponents of the PSA ban were DeWeese, Daley, Stairs, Harhai, Kula and Mahoney. Harhai was the only local legislator to support allowing a voice roll call vote...

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18155650&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

Meanwhile, in part, Justice Castille is right in his comments about criticism from Mr. Ledewitz.

He said justices are used to criticism, but Mr. Ledewitz crossed the line when he accused them of corruption, which is a crime.

There is a line between accusations of criminality which have not been proven in court, and opinions which may be harsh criticism, even coarse criticism which could involve use of curse or swear words, or unflattering characterizations.

Public officials should be able to take it if they want to serve the public.

However, there is a responsibility to refrain from libel and slander.

At all times, no one should be able to stifle freedom of expression of anyone, but there could be potential repurcussions such as a lawsuit, which unfortunately, the individual must be prepared to lose if it is found indeed statements were libelous or slanderous.

It will remain to be seen whether Justice Castille actually sues Mr. Ledewitz for his commentary or testimony in which he, according to the news item, characterized an opinion Justice Castille wrote in the 2006 pay-raise case as a "judicial swindle."

We'll be watching...

Supreme Court justice, state senator trade brickbats
Thursday, April 05, 2007
By Tracie Mauriello, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau

HARRISBURG -- A state senator and state Supreme Court justice are throwing brickbats at each other over a letter the jurist wrote about a court critic from Duquesne University.

Sen. Jeffrey Piccola, R-Dauphin, and Justice Ronald D. Castille called each other arrogant and self-important during separate telephone interviews last evening.

The feud was spurred by Justice Castille's letter last week assailing Duquesne University for allowing one of its law professors to criticize the judicial system...

continued

The spat first came to light last week when Mr. Ledewitz testified before the Senate State Government Committee on a bill to prevent judges from receiving automatic raises whenever federal judges' pay increases.

Mr. Ledewitz, a frequent court critic, testified that he felt threatened by Justice Castille's letter, which indicated he could be brought before the court's Disciplinary Board for violating the Rules of Professional Conduct when he called the court corrupt and characterized an opinion Justice Castille wrote in the 2006 pay-raise case as a "judicial swindle."

Reached last week, Justice Castille said he had no plans to file a formal complaint, but he is rethinking that.

"Let's just say that of the moment I have not," he said. "It's not often that I refer an attorney to the Disciplinary Board, but this is egregious. It's a personal insult to me and it's a slur on the profession."

He said justices are used to criticism, but Mr. Ledewitz crossed the line when he accused them of corruption, which is a crime.

"We can take our criticism, but it's nice when it's fair. Attorneys can't go around making unfounded, baseless, slanderous allegations they can't support," he said. "I don't like to be called corrupt. ... I have a reputation that I've earned and I'm not going to take it lying down when some liberal law professor goes around charging me and my court with criminal conduct."

Mr. Ledewitz was shown the letter but did not have a copy of it when committee members asked to see it last week...


http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07095/775370-85.stm

Iraq Weapons Mass Destruction

Appearing on the O'Reilly Factor, Debra Saunders said she had to speak out about the distortions on the issue of whether or not Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. He did, she stated.

Saunders pretty much summarized for O'Reilly points she presented in her article.

George W. Bush October 2002 speech

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/bush.transcript/

March 22, 2007
Bush Lied is the Big Lie
By Debra Saunders

Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson wants to impeach President Bush. In arguing that point, he asked Fox News' Bill O'Reilly on Tuesday, "Have you seen the National Intelligence Estimate that was provided in October of 2002, in which the intelligence agency under the State Department said that Iraq was not building up a nuclear capability, that this whole story about the aluminum tubes (reportedly sought by Saddam Hussein in Niger) was completely off base?"

I decided to re-read the NIE excerpts that the administration released. What does the report say? "Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of U.N. restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade." The NIE also reported that Iraq had "expanded its chemical and biological infrastructure under the cover of civilian production," that Baghdad had renewed production of mustard and sarin gases, and that Iraqi missiles could threaten the "U.S. homeland."

Yes, the NIE key judgments reported that some officials in the State Department did not believe Saddam Hussein was pursuing a "comprehensive approach to acquire nuclear weapons." But the report also noted that, "Most agencies assess that Baghdad started reconstituting its nuclear program about the time that (U.N. weapons) inspectors departed -- December 1998."

So let us review the Bush-lied argument that Anderson and other war critics espouse. They say Bush lied about WMD, when, in fact, America's best intelligence presented no doubt about Iraq having chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction. And according to the NIE, most intelligence agencies also believed Iraq had been working on nukes for four years.

Here's another point that the Bush-lied misinformation campaign has forgotten. While war critics point to Bush's inclusion of this sentence -- "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" -- in his 2003 State of the Union Address as proof that Bush misled the country into war, Bush uttered those words three months after Congress voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq.

Bush Lied is the Big Lie. It takes the controversy over one aspect of U.S. intelligence on Iraq's WMD -- the nuclear program question -- to argue that the whole WMD argument was bogus. That is, the president's accusers are guilty of the very sort of dishonest selectivity that they accuse Bush of using.

Now the Bush-lied lie is boomeranging on those Democratic presidential hopefuls -- Sens. Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd and former Sen. John Edwards -- who voted in favor of the Iraq war resolution.

By going along with the Bush-lied spin, by refusing to acknowledge that the intelligence community presented strong reasons to vote for war, these Democrats have boxed themselves into a corner. They now have only one rationale for their vote that they can use -- they were duped by the nincompoop Bush -- or one rationale that they cannot use -- they sent U.S. troops to Iraq against their better judgment but out of naked ambition.

And the dishonesty now has placed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the uncomfortable position of pushing for passage of a bill to continue funding a war into next year that the grassroots believe was based on a lie.

So how does Pelosi plan on getting the House to pass the Iraq spending bill? As The Washington Post reported, the Democratic leadership has larded the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health and Iraq Accountability Act with pork. After all the (deserved) rhetoric decrying Republican big spending, the Democratic leadership inserted $25 million for spinach growers, $75 million for peanut storage, and $120 million for shrimp and Atlantic menhaden fishermen into the supplemental spending bill.

The idea is to sweeten the pot so that war opponents will agree to fund a war they oppose, while war supporters will vote for the bill, despite provisions the seem to be designed solely to undermine the Bush surge...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/bush_lied_is_the_big_lie.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2007/03/22/EDGRJN7BSR1.DTL

Searching for more about that, came across

Democracy Now interview

http://www.democracynow.org/hardball-041124.shtml

and this great discussion

June 21, 2006

http://shrinkwrapped.blogs.com/blog/2006/06/struggling_with.html

Related

Bush: Iraq war plans memo wrong
Tuesday, June 7, 2005 Posted: 9:03 PM EDT (0103 GMT)

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/07/iraq.uk.memo/

Libertarian Party Position

http://www.lp.org/media/article_452.shtml

CNN Duo Lou Dobbs & Anderson Cooper

Anderson Cooper of AC 360 is the man to watch. During his program last night, he and another anchor talked about the Radio and TV Correspondents' Dinner. Anderson asked her if she attended. She replied, no, she isn't in that class to be invited.

Anderson said he's attended once in the past. Now he finds that's not appropriate...

He said exactly what we've been thinking and posting. What kind of professional journalists party with the very people they are supposed to be grilling with questions we, the people out here don't get the opportunity to question?

Lou Dobbs Tonight has been coverning the Ramos and Compean prosecution and conviction nonstop for months, and we're sure he didn't attend. If he had, they'd have probably had to throw him out because he'd have shouted out their names and asked why they were still in prison and why George W. Bush has refused to look at the entirety of the case, not just what his Attorney General, Homeland Security Director, and U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton are telling him happened - none of them were present at the scene.

The prosecution of these men is one of the worst actions our government could have ever taken. It shows an out-of-touch government ready and willing to prosecute our own law enforcement persons on the word of a known drug-smuggler.

That isn't to say that rogue law enforcement and border patrol agents shouldn't be investigated and prosecuted on the evidence when that evidence shows culpability.

The Ramos and Compean case isn't an example of rogue agents out to shoot unarmed people whether they are crossing the border illegally or legally.

In fact, something really smells about the entire case, unfortunately though Dobbs had U.S. Attorney Sutton on his program after he had spokespersons for Ramos and Compean, he failed to ask the really pertinent and provoking question that has been brought up on websites dedicated to the case.

And though Dobbs asked Sutton who referred the case to Justice, or Homeland Security, he failed to press Sutton for more than the mumblings he gave. In several instances during the interview, there's crosstalk so we can't read what was said and we couldn't understand what Sutton said at the time while viewing the interview.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/