A Soldier's Night Before Christmas

...with Mannheim Steamroller's Silent Night as the backdrop...

Merry Christmas from page13news

Looking Forward

Rather than look back at 2007, page13news wants to look forward to what may be the most intriguing, not to mention entertaining, election year in 56 years. It was 1952 when we last had neither a sitting President or Vice President running for the Oval Office. Without an heir-apparent to the throne, the race will be unlike anything this generations has ever seen.

It wasn't that long ago, when prevailing wisdom leaned heavily toward another Clinton presidency. But ever since the Philadelphia debate (irony all over the place), Mrs. Bill Clinton has shown definitive cracks in her armor. The presumed-next-president has made a series of sophomoric mistakes which have resulted in free-falling poll numbers in each of the first 4 primary states.

Rumors of in-fighting at Big Clinton Enterprises, her inability to separate herself from her husband, planted questions, and Obama's ability to seize on Hillary's gaffs, have provided the foundation for a major turn of events in the Democrat race. It is starting to look possible that Clinton may lose all four of the early primaries. If that happens, it's all-but over for the former first lady.

So then what for the Dems and their allies? After all, since Florida and the hanging chads, the left has yearned for, and failed to taste, the sweet resounding victory they need, to get over Gore's loss. They and their buddies in the news/entertainment industry have spent over 8 years mocking, insulting, and attacking Bush in ways that have made some in their own party blush (Leiberman comes to mind). They've abandoned the concept of politics ending at the waters edge, called our troops murderers and rapists, called them losers (remember Kerry?), rooted for and insisted that we were losing in Iraq.

They cheered when Social Security reform didn't happen, they accused the administration of blatantly infringing on our civil liberties, and they pointed fingers after Katrina, when the incompetence was clearly their own. Their most compelling arguments are made by late-night comics, not leaders within the Democrat party.

The GOP isn't in any better shape. Although the top few presidential candidates haven't made any glaring, race-ending mistakes, none of them (except for maybe Rudy) inspire confidence or seem to possess the ability to capture an broad audience. Romney and Huck won't sell with moderate voters; Rudy's plan not to focus on Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, finds himself slipping in his most critical state, Florida; Thompson is no Reagan.

The GOP brand is damaged and not all because of Bush. The republican-lead congress squandered opportunities and lost credibility when they were in power. They have shown a complete inability to communicate their message effectively. They've cut deals with Democrats for re-election sake, instead of understanding the long-term effects of their actions.

So what will 2008 have to offer? Actually, there are a lot of reasons to look positively at the possibilities. Think about it. There is potential to have an actual contest leading up to the convention; both of them. Not one candidate on either side is the prohibitive favorite. The new front-loaded primary schedule has so many potential outcomes, that later contests - in Pennsylvania for example - may become the great equalizers. Hillary way ahead here, so is Rudy. If they both win the Keystone State, delegates of both parties may be divided among multiple candidates.

Suddenly, the normally boring party conventions take on a new life. Interests groups of all stripes will be force to deal with people they wouldn't normally. The winner will be the candidate who finds a way to sell the message, to cut deals, to mend fences. And both parties may emerge with completely different definitions of themselves. The Democrats could emerge as a the socialist they've become or the JFK conservative party they used to be, while the GOP could fall back to the Reagan model or appear more like Ron Paul libertarians. Hopefully they abandon the Specter/Bush/McCain/Graham model they currently seemed determined to become.

Without a clear leader emerging from the 16 contenders we have at our disposal, the potential exists for surprising results to surface. An actual debate on the direction our country wants to take, based solely on issues and common sense, may be one outcome. An outcome not rooted in polarization, but reason. One can dream can't he?

Of course, we could see the entire house of cards tumble as well. 2008 could look more like 1968. Such chaos would create the potential for disastrous outcomes. The polarization could get worse; some may see or claim a constitutional crisis exists. You think we are a divided country now, wait until the dust settles from that storm and see what we have.

The point is, no one will be able to definitively tell you how 2008 race will end. However, with all the possibilities out there, it sure will be fun to watch.

Setting Priorities

After watching GOP Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney's speech yesterday, I come away with a sense of worry. Sure, Mitt delivered a great speech. Inspiring, accurate, and filled with all the buzz words any Christian conservative would want to hear. However, that is exactly the reason why I am worried. While it was loaded with all the necessary qualifiers for a deeply religious man, conservatives need to measure this speech, with some big-picture thinking. Otherwise, we face the distinct possibility of guaranteeing another Clinton presidency. Folks, you need to get your priorities straight.

How do I get there? Out-of-the-box thinking.

Social conservatives define the GOP base and will for the foreseeable future. Their determination and persistence on a candidate with strong moral leadership is indeed a critical issue. However, political savy-ness is not their strong suit and they need to be careful about narrowly insisting on choosing the most social conservative candidate as Commander-in-Chief. There are several reasons why conservatives need to be cautious.

Let's start with the national political atmosphere. Republicans squandered the opportunity they had when they controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency, primarily by becoming exactly what they accused Democrats of being. Now, the general public sees little difference between the two parties. No matter which is office, the perception is they are all corrupt; legislating with their next campaign in mind; spending money like drunken sailors.

Bush ran like a conservative, but governed like an Arlen Specter moderate. Both of them did. So choosing the "conservative" candidate doesn't guarantee you'll get one. W's inability to effectively sell a message, to inspire confidence in his decision-making ability, has hurt the entire GOP brand. It's not all his fault; no other "conservative" politician (currently running for President) has been able to do this either.

But wait, you may be saying, didn't Romney's speech confirm he can sell the message? No.

Mitt did deliver a great speech that even has the local news stations in Philly comparing him to Kennedy, when defending his faith from being the sole definition of his candidacy. Mitt was inspirational in declaring the intentions of the founders about the issue of religious freedom. But here's the problem; it's not all about religion, faith, or moral compass this election cycle.

IT'S ALL ABOUT SECURITY STUPID!

I am NOT saying that Romney isn't right in-line with conservative viewpoints on immigration, defense, and crime. What I AM saying is in both Romney and Huckabee's case, such fervent religious focus scares the snot out of moderate voters; the kind frequently found in places like Southeastern Pennsylvania - a place the GOP must win if it has any hope of keeping the Oval Office.

Remember Santorum?

Here, the ideal conservative candidate (a conservative Catholic), a man who put his head on the chopping block for Terry Schiavo, swayed voters to drop the gauntlet on his rising star by going too far right. He was well spoken, good looking and -unlike Romney - didn't sound like a typical 90's republican candidate.

"Typical 90's republican?", you may be asking. "What's that?" Glad you asked. There's one keyword which is an obvious hint of being such a candidate.

The word, VALUES.

Romney, as with most conservative candidates over the past decade and a half, use this word - pardon the pun - religiously. The word implies somehow that we republicans believe we are superior morally, but the public no longer believes us. Congressman Tom Foley and Utah Senator Larry Craig, among others, helped secure that concept. So continuing to drop the values phrase, usually coupled with family, falls on deaf ears. Additionally, it brings to moderate political minds, the view that abortion is the only issue which matters to the fill-in-the-blank GOP candidate.

And the Democrats know this. They use it consistently in their ads. Romney's speech, if he's nominated as the GOP candidate, gave voters who might be tuning in for the first time, the picture of a candidate that just another religious republican politician. If either he or Huck get the nod, the focus of the opposition will be on the social conservative aspect of the candidate, and not the security aspect.

In most election cycles, this conservative wouldn't have an issue with that debate. But the reality is, now is not the time for abortion or same-sex-marriage, delicate issues which come to mind when religion is the topic, to be the focus of the 2008 Presidential campaign. If it does, Hillary wins.

The focus of next year's election must be security. Immigration, Iran, and the resurgence of Marxist regime's all need to be top priorities, long before reforming the court system or a constitutional convention on securing the sanctity of marriage need to be addressed.

While I like Mitt and don't care about his religious choices, our country can't afford to have the religious distraction take our eyes off of what's really important.

Conservatives need to remember what the real issues are.

A Hero's Welcome

Sharon Hyland Keyser, a newlywed to one of our country's bravest, left a six-figure income to coordinate "personalized" homecomings for our troops returning from the Middle East. Sharon put her life savings on the line to start this venture which focuses on the unique interests of returning soldiers, and customizes their welcome-home celebrations to fit those passions. She invites local school kids to these celebrations so they can meet a real hero in person, and gets local businesses to donate products to help make the soldier's dream become reality.



Leave it up to a Suburban Philly Young Republican (Chairwoman no less) to understand what our troops really need, a Hero's Welcome. See this link to contribute to this worthwhile cause.

Taking the Next Step

Page13news is in the planning stage for a new look and format for 2008. Details will follow, but I am extrememly excited about the prospects that lie ahead.

For those of you who have been checking in regularly, I want to thank you for your support and feedback. Next year will be a BIG year for suburban Philly's alternative opinion. Stay tuned for continued updates and additional posts exposing the left's lunacy.

Fight Like a Man Hillary

The foundation for electing a woman president, according to the left, is based on the assumption that women are capable of doing and handling anything men can. So why is Hillary (Mrs. Bill Clinton) playing the sex card when it comes to the debates?

Clinton Inc. leveled "mudslinging" charges against Tim Russert and the other wanna-be presidential candidates. What caused the boys to be targeted for such slander? It seems that the girl didn't like the fact that Russert dared to challenge Hillary on the flip-flop she uttered in last week's debate in Philadelphia. The issue revolves around Hillary's answer to a seemingly simple question.

New York's (democrat) governor, Elliot Spitzer, was pushing for ILLEGAL ALIENS to be granted driver's licenses. The question was simple, "do you support the plan?" A simple yes or no answer was called for. But somehow, America's "smartest woman" found herself saying two different things in a span of 2 minutes.

John pretty-boy Edwards at least had the jewels to point it out and Russert followed-up by pressing Clinton on her answers. The result; the girl whined about the vicious slinging of mud and compared the boys pointing out her inconsistent remarks to attacks "right out of the Republican playbook".

Mrs. Bill Clinton, if you can't be held accountable for things you say, without whining like a little girl, what makes you think the American voters should trust you are tough enough (a.k.a. the intestinal fortitude) to be President??

Elephant in the Room

A year after his 2006 election loss, former Senator Rick Santorum, is now a guest columnist for the Inky. I can just hear ol' Whitey Ashburn now; "It's hard to believe Harry!"

In his first column, Santorum addresses a key issue those of us on the right often complain about; that opposing points of view should be encouraged in our nation's newspapers.

Some however aren't interested in the debate, though they claim otherwise. One Philly blog (Attytood, a Philly Daily News production written by Will Bunch) makes the claim that Santorum's column in the Inky is a problem because they failed to

"balance his arrival with any new progressive voices".

That thought process is exactly what's wrong with the main-stream, know-it-all media.

Mr. Bunch, your entire newspaper is the progressive's balance you claim is missing. Stop your whinning and read, maybe your thick skull will learn something!

Obama Bin-Lame

I almost don't need to say a word, the picture says it all.

Two questions...

First, besides this picture being published in Time Magazine, why didn't the media cover it? The Obama coverage that day was centered around how much money he was able to raise the previous quarter. Is this a sign of further selective journalism?

Second, why didn't ONE Democrat Presidential candidate or current elected official in Washington call it outrageous?? Yet another sign that the modern day democrats are nothing like their grandfathers who fought in WWII. They've been highjacked by more confident, communist-like, radical leftists; not afraid to show their real colors.

Someone was right about Obama being "Magic"-al.

Razzle Dazzle 'em

In this scene from the movie Chicago (Richard Gere and Renee Zellweger), the screen adaptation of the Broadway musical, I can't help but think of Montgomery County's 2 democrat commissioner candidates.

Joe Hoeffel is the pompous Billy Flynn (Gere) character, a trial lawyer no less, with Ruth played by the timid Roxy (Zellweger), just another victim. The key line from this scene, about one minute in...

(Billy Flynn): It's all a circus, a three ring circus. This whole thing, the trial, the whole world...it's all show business.

It's the way I see the Damsker/Hoeffel team prepping for a debate. Their MO is the same. Use smoke and mirrors, with just a hint of razzle-dazzle, to confuse voters. Attempt to tie Bush (now the cause of everything from Islamic hatred to 25 year old kids being denied health care) to the issues that face Montgomery County. From no-bid contracts, to questionable campaign financing, to incompetent staff, the Democrat challenger Hoeffel (remember Damsker is the incumbent) will attempt to fabricate a scene for the jury (voters) to absorb.

The press plays along, buying into the charade in front of them. Never once challenging Joe on his sweetheart deals; never once asking him about the controversy brewing in Harrisburg; never once asking about Norman Zsu; never once asking if Montgomery County is one of the best places to live in the entire nation, never mind in Pennsylvania; never once asking why in the world voters would risk all that to put his circus in office.

Politicizing Everything

It's a shame. Not one event can pass without a bevie of Democrat yahoos turning it into a political opportunity. In separate statements, (source NationalLedger.com) Democrats Harry Ried, Barbara Boxer, and California Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi all took swipes at President Bush, in the wake of the forest fires in San Diego and LA.

For now, I'll forget the liberal/democrat/environmentalist wackos prevented the clearing our of underbrush in these forests because of thier claims of ecological harm that results from these risk management concepts. Additionally, I lay aside the fact that a lack of pre-Katrina preparation by the local government - not just a lack of movement by the Feds - led to the chaos and higher numbers of deaths in Louisiana.

Instead, I'll focus on these folks, who would have us believe that they care more about the average man (and mother nature too) than Republicans do, don't bother to put politics aside and wrap their arms around the human tragedy in front of them. Instead, they see an opportunity to gobble-up votes, to assign blame, to politicize everything.

It's a clear sign of the difference between risk management which Republicans prefer and crisis management the left chooses. Risk management clear out the underbrush near populated areas; gets residents on school buses prior to an advancing hurricane; and allows for alternative energy resources like coal and nuclear power to offset apparent impact of environmental harm we create. Pay no attention to the failed ideas democrats encouraged which were contributing factors to the size of the fires. Instead, they'd rather us focus on junk science, other natural disasters, and a war they can't seem to stop.

More examples of failed Democrat Leadership.

Inky Shame

There is a continuing saga being played out in Harrisburg, and the Philadelphia Inquirer's website seems to have either no knowledge of the events or is selectively choosing not to print it. Here's the story, that is getting told in Pittsburgh.

According to the Post-Gazette, a judge in Harrisburg is allowing a grand jury to see evidence taken from a Democrat House research office. The office, which is supposed to be used strictly for legislative - not political - purposes, contained boxes of material, clearly meant for political activities. Among the items discovered were files tagged with names like "opposition research," "incumbent protection plan," and "memo on challenger in election."

While the Inquirer has published information about the probe recently, the thrust of their articles have focused on only 2 aspects of the investigation. First is the fact that legislative staffers, both Democrat and Republican the Inky makes sure to point out, received bonuses for campaign work. Of course Democrats want people to believe that the entire investigation is solely political and charge that Attorney General Tom Corbett (a Republican) is targeting them, not the other side of the aisle. The other angle they address is the pending legislation to ban such practices. Nothing like our state legislators acting just in the nick of time, eh?

But the Inky glazes over one important factor about the investigation and selectively chooses not to publish another. Glazing over the disparity between the amounts each party shelled out and (as of this post) omitting the clearly political nature of the evidence found in the Democrat office, indicates to me that the Inky may be allowing its political leanings to cloud its editorial judgement.

Sweet Justice

A follow-up on the Phony Soldier controversy...

Rush was in Philly last week as a part of his "Rush to Excellence Tour". During his speech to a packed house, Rush announced that he would be conducting an auction on ebay. The piece being sold is a letter. Woopdi doo eh? Well, it's not just any letter. It's a letter written by Harry Reid and signed by 41 Democrat United States Senators, including Clinton. See the actual letter here.

These esteemed Senators wrote to the CEO of Clear Channel Communications (a friend of Rush by the way) calling for a censure of Rush because of his comments about Jessie McBeth and other phony soldiers.

The money raised from this auction will go to the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation, a charity for which Rush is a board member. The foundation provides college scholarships for children of marines killed in action.

On his radio show, Rush went further. He said whatever the winning bid is he will match the amount and - this is the best part - called on Reid and each one of the 41 Senator co-signers, to do the same. How many of these cowards do you think will pony up?

See the speech here (click on - Watch the Video: Rush Announces the Auction on Stage in Philadelphia )

Montco Fireworks

Do you need evidence that the race for Montgomery County Commissioner is heating up? See this video from Fox 29 News; story here.

The reason for the argument is a recent 9 month long (important fact) sting by state and county law enforcement. The operation nabbed (among others) Joe Hoeffel's campaign chairwoman, in an illegal video poker machine network covering 9 bars throughout southeastern PA. Hoeffel wants people to believe this is a sign that the DA's office is trying to affect political campaigns. He wants voters to believe that "Bruce Almighty" - as Joe likes to call Bruce Castor - somehow timed this raid to coincide with this November's election.

If this is true, then Mr. Hoeffel wants us to believe that back in February, Castor's office knew that the future chairwoman would be in such a key political position, ripe for targeting. I know Joe thinks Democrats can do a better job in Norristown. But if our DA's office is capable of predicting the future with this kind of accuracy, I think they must be doing a stellar job.

Thanks for the endorsement Joe.

Don't Give Me that SCHIP

What do you consider a needy family? If you think $80,ooo a year income doesn't qualify, then you disagree with modern congressional Democrats. If you think a "child" age 25 is reasonable definition, you'd also disagree with donkeys.

Democrats love larger numbers of citizens on government assistance. Why? Simply because this is their base; those who are always looking for a handout. It's why they originally opposed mid-90's welfare reform; it's why they voted with Bush for expanding prescription drug benefits; and it's why they are fully behind the increased reach that SCHIP program currently offers. The new program will re-define children to include 25 year olds or families making less than $80k.

It's also a primary reason why they can't be allowed to spin the current campaign to expand the SCHIP program and demonize Bush and republicans for opposing this bad legistlation.

"Phony Soldiers" Truth

Who is Jessie McBeth (aka - Rush's "Phony Soldier")?

A classic example of how the dopes in the has-been media operate. It's the sad truth which shows how leftist political front groups like moveon.org and mediamatters.org control opinion, and how traditional outlets have lost their credibility.

I bet prior to this you bought into claims that Rush hated African-American quarterbacks (Donovan McNabb) and victims of Parkinson's disease (Michael J. Fox). That would be what the critics of Limbaugh - who never listen to Limbaugh - also think.

Damsker/Hoeffel Chair Getting Heat

Wait a minute...wait a minute!! The past several days, Joe Hoeffel has been ranting about Jim Matthews recieving campaign contributions from Bob Asher. He uses Matthews running mate Bruce Castor's own words about Asher to emphasize his problem with the relationship. He repeatedly calls on Matthews to return the money; much like Ed Rendell and Hillary Clinton did with Norman Hsu's contributions.

Joe however would be wise to keep a closer eye on those next to him. It seems, from this article from the Philadelphia Inquirer, the cochairwoman to Damsker/Hoeffel campaign has her own issues to deal with, ones which should be resolved if he wants to control Montgomery County.

In a 9 month probe, which spanned 3 suburban counties, over $2 million in cash were seized and 17 search warrants were issued, by state and county law enforcement officials, to people associated to 9 different suburban bars and restaurants. Among those apparently involved, Joanne Cisco Olszewski, owner of Cisco's Bar and Grill in Flourtown.

Olszewski, until yesterday, was co-chairwoman for the Damsker/Hoeffel campaign, democrats for Montgomery County Commissioner. She also serves as a Montgomery County jury commissioner, a position which she, as of the Inquirer article, refuses to resign from.

I wonder what Joe's wit and wisdom will enlighten us with tomorrow?

Who's Reading Page13News?

Page13News would like to welcome two new viewers to Philly's alternative opinion source. It seems as though Montgomery County, PA Commissioner candidates Joe Hoeffel and Ruth Damsker have found this blog and apparently like it so much, they feel compelled to rip it's headlines.

In this press release from Hoeffel/Damsker, titled "If the Hsu Fits..." (I think I've heard that before), an attempt is made to claim that Jim Matthews should follow the lead of Hillary Clinton and Fast-Eddie Rendell. You see, Rendell and Clinton received campaign donations from a fugitive named Norman Hsu (see below article) . While they did eventually donate the money they received to charity, in Rendell's case, it took a second jumping of bail by Hsu, to warrant the cash being surrendered.

Now, Joe and Ruth want Jim Matthews to return money he got from Bob Asher, a long-time Republican donor. Asher was convicted of bribery in 1986 and served 9 months in jail for the offense. Hoeffel and Damsker want voters to believe their is some sort of moral relativism between the Rendell/Clinton relationship with Hsu, and Matthews' relationship with Asher.

One problem, there is no such parallel!! While it is true about Asher's prior conviction, it's also true that he served his time; he paid his debt. Hsu on the other hand, fled to Asia when he was convicted, came back, donated BIG money to Democrats, and tried to flee again when authorities caught up to him.

Now Joe, let's talk about Rendell's appointment of a political cronie (yourself) to a high position in Harrisburg as a political payoff for your bowing out of a run for Lieutenant Governor. Perhaps the tax-payer funded six-figure salary should also be given to charity?? I won't hold my breath.

If the Hsu Fits...

Democrat fundraiser and fugitive from the feds for 15 years, Norman Hsu, was finally captured two weeks ago in Colorado. Despite Hsu's grand-theft conviction in 1991, and a hiatus overseas to avoid jail, he recently appeared on the political scene, representing himself as a New York Businessman. Hsu donated generous amounts of money to many Democrats, including Ed Rendell. But it wasn't until Hsu skipped out of a September 5th, 2007 bail hearing (his second such stunt) that Governor Rendell finally decided to donate the $37,oo0 plus in donations he received from Hsu, to charity. It must have been a difficult choice for Ed, who once called Hsu "one of the 10 best people I've ever met".

The obvious lack of judgement that Eddie's suffering from is overshadowed only by his arrogance. Makes me wonder if the governor thinks he's gone beyond reproach. This often happens when politicians think they've cemented their legacy. But it would be foolish for democrats, including Rendell's heir-apparent Josh Shapiro, to think this won't have ripple effects.

The opportunity for the Dems in Montgomery County is now, or so it seemed. The stars were aligned as late as September 1st for a historic victory in November. After a successful 2006 and low approval ratings for President Bush, democrats state-wide probably feel confident about their chances to take over the crown-jewel in Pennsylvania Politics, the Montgomery County courthouse. And why wouldn't they?

But after round two of HillaryCare, after news that Iraq is improving, after immigration fraud was defeated, and after Hsu/Clinton/Rendell-gate, will democrats in Montco be able to halt the late shift of momentum for the GOP?

And if Southeastern PA Dems fail in their persuit this year, what does it say about their ability to bring home Pennsylvania for a democrat presidential candidate next year?

If the Ad Fits...

They have in small print at the top of their front page the following sentence:

"All the news that's fit to print"

I've always wrestled with this choice of words because it seems odd that the Newspaper of Record, the New York Times, would be in the business of censorship. After all, fit to print, must mean some news isn't.

Apparently, however, the select nature of news reporting is nothing compared to their bargaining power with far leftist groups like moveon.org. It seems the much ballyhooed full-page ad the George Soros backed group purchased, calling General Patreaus "General Betray Us", was bought at a reduced price. This article from the New York Post shows that select reporting and select advertising both exist at the nations most prominent newspaper.

The story, not suprisingly, missed their own front page. I guess it wasn't fit to print.

Which is exactly why page13news and a growing number of other exist, to provide the other side of the record.

...other proof of bias, mis-truths, and plagiarisms here...

A Game of Chess

If you look at the Presidential Candidates on both sides, which one do you suppose would win a chess tournament against the others? Politics is, of course, just one continuous game of skill and slight of hand. But war is played on a field of a higher level. Middle Eastern peoples invented the game of chess, so it's not a stretch to assume they know how to play.

In this article from Pajamas Media, Jules Crittenden shows how the assumed dunce George W. Bush may be better at the game than you may think.

Remembering September 11th

Missing BIG News

Courtesy of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette - The Democrat State Office of "Legislative" Research was searched by state officials last Thursday in an on-going investigation into charges that state employees were used to run campaigns. Additionally (from the Beaver County Times and Allegheny Times - online), former state representative Mike Veon (D-Beaver Falls) is being investigated for his involvement with a nonprofit organization called BIG (Beaver Initiative for Growth) he started and state money the group received.

Two questions I have...

1. Why can't I find this news from last week anywhere in the local news outlets search engines? If you find the magical combo of search terms, please let me know.

2. Will Joe Hoeffel mention the Harrisburg investigations when he tries to draw parallels between Norristown and Washington? Will he dare to draw parallels between his friends in the legislature and Democrat William Jefferson from Louisiana?

Reality Check?

Here's is a perfect example of what anti-war voters, who think their issue sent Patrick Murphy to Congress in 2006, get from their representative long after the results were tabulated.

''They can be adamant, but they have to understand reality," Ceisler said of the anti-war activists. "In terms of Patrick's election, where are they going to go? He's as good as they get on the issue. There are pockets of those people in Bucks County, but nothing that makes a big difference."

- Larry Ceisler Democrat Strategist Philadelphia

Ah, reality, that's the key. But what reality could Dems be hiding from their supporters? Reality that the surge is working? Reality that no matter how much Dems talked about how the election was a "mandate" to brings our troops home, there was never any intention to do so? Reality that the Democrats know they can't tell the President what to do with his troops?

Or is it that the donkeys will dance around the realities in Iraq to appease the hard-left, anti-war lunatics that they believe helped them get elected? Only to then turn around and talk of them as outliers in the political spectrum, because they know Democrat voters "have nowhere else to go". Or perhaps it's the knowledge, the REALITY, that talking like an anti-war hippie of the sixties, in Southeastern Pennsylvania, will result in a one-term run for Democrats like Murphy?

And here I thought the "most honest,ethical, and transparent Congress in history" - Nancy Pelosi - had a mandate. Or was that just not realistic?

It seems to me that Congressman Murphy and Democrats everywhere, like all good used car salesmen, have sold their anti-war supporters a lemon.

I have an answer to Mr. Ceisler's question. The Democrat's hard-core-leftist supporters will stay home, if the donkeys fail to bring the troops home ...that's where they'll go. Sweet dreams Patrick!

Attitude Problem

"They talk and talk about what they're going to do," said Clarence Russ, 64. "There was supposed to be all this money, but where'd it go? None of us got any."

The words of a Katrina victim, 2 years after the storm. Yet another reason not to wait on the government to solve problems and fix things.

Clean Governance?

Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Democrat Commissioner Candidates have signed a "Clean Governance" pledge! This time, it's Bucks County donkeys making these statements which sound vaguely familiar to claims leftist politicians from sea to shining sea (including Montgomery County) are making this election off-season. I'm sensing a pattern here.

First however, let's take a look at history. Many Democrats and media analysts assumed that the war in Iraq was the reason for both the United States House and Senate going Democrat in 2006. However, after numerous failed attempts to force Bush to abandon the troops in Iraq, that myth never materialized. Now that signs of the surge working in Iraq are surfacing, Democrats are quick to qualify "success" by stating that political progress is far from being realized. And calls for withdrawal are being replaced with suggestions (even by some leading Democrats) of how dangerous rushing troops home would be.

The real reason the Dems won last November was because Republican voters revolted against their party for a variety of reasons. The Senate might still be Republican today if George Allen had not made a stupid comment that made him look cocky and gave his opponent much-needed momentum. Tom Foley's email sex scandal, Tom Delay's relationship with Abramoff, Katrina, and even Terry Schaivo, all contributed to a general lack of confidence and/or trust in the GOP.

But Democrats are smart, if not hypocritical, for taking advantage of the slightest appearance of dirty governance. The truth is, perception is reality. Their calls for clean and transparent government is not a new concept, but one they all seem to be making in unison. This obvious strategy on Southeastern PA Democrats part, is a curious concept for them to tackle.

The party with Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) deep in his own scandal, the incompetent House Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and Ed Rendell's "sweetheart" Joe Hoeffel, might want to look in the mirror before they try those tactics.

The Real Civil Right's Leader

In this lengthy but enlightening transcript from the Rush Limbaugh radio show (August 23rd), Rush shows why he and conservatives are right on issues about race - NOT Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, nor Joe Hoeffel!

Another Bad Donkey Idea

"Today we propose fundamental changes in the contracting process," Damsker said, "so taxpayers get what they have been told they already have - a business-like government."

The Democrat candidates for Montgomery County Commissioner outline a 13 point plan (actually a 23 since item #5 had 10 bullet points of it's own) to, as they claim, improve the contracting process.

The points of their argument have several flaws. The most obvious is the assumption (you know what they say about assuming) that none of their "ideas" are currently implemented on county projects.

However, the one point they make which raises my eyebrow involves the "class A apprenticeship" concept (idea #9) that all county contractors' employees are required to possess. The only workers who officially receive this type of training are, of course, union employees.

So are the donkeys' plans real ideas to create a "business-like" government...or are they resolutions to created problems, used to fulfill campaign promises to the Democrat's largest contributors?

Philly, "Goodbye Boy Scouts"

It seems the Boys Scouts just aren't quite the kind of quality organization the City of Philadelphia can accommodate anymore.

Fun and Games?

Here's yet another display of the lengths "peace activists" will go through to intimidate and harass elected officials to get what their Democrat allies in Congress couldn't achieve.

They share this gotcha video in hopes that their cause will receive some sympathy. I share this video because the more this lunacy is exposed, the more people will come to their senses.

Note the ages of the handful of participants. Are they serious activists? Or are they simply trying to capture some of their long-lost-hippie childhoods? Coincidentally, the last time they felt significant.

While our troops are fighting (and winning) in Iraq, these bozo's prefer the "fun and games" approach. One more reason they should never resume power.

Taxpayer's "Sweetheart" Deal

Ruth Damsker claims "only voters will get sweetheart deals" if she and Joe Hoeffel are elected as Montgomery County Commissioners. She is referencing the created controversies trying to claim that Jim Matthews is somehow as dirty as say, I dunno, Mayor Street perhaps.

The claims made by both of the Democrat candidates for Montgomery County Commissioner are just this side of the land of Oz. They don't have any real issues to resolve, largley because Pennsylvania's wealthiest county is in great shape. Their best tag line - conveniently regurgitated by both the local hit-and-run press and some bloggers - is that Republicans have held onto Montgomery County for too long, and change is needed.

One question which immediately comes to this wacky conservative's mind; why don't we ever hear of the same concept applying to Philadelphia?

Let's compare. On one side we have Philadelphia, run by one party since 1951. On the other side Montgomery County, run by one party for the past 100 years. Take your time to think for a second. Time's up. Any doubt where you'd rather live? Any doubt where political corruption rules the day? Any doubt which county delivers better services?

I checked the record (silly notion, I know) to see how the Damsker/Hoeffel team might treat their "sweethearts". This April, Damsker supported the concept of property reassessment, until voter response squashed that idea. The last order by commissioners to have the county reassessed occurred in 1992, when Hoeffel was on the board. Isolated incident or a sign of things to come?

On the created issue of "sweetheart deals", Damsker voted yes to the same lobbying firm Matthews did; voted yes to the same medical examiner as the republicans did; and doesn't have any noted objection to the job that Rendell gave to Hoeffel after foiling Joe's bid for lieutenant governor.

Wait, what was that you say? A sweetheart job for a political operative? A job that was so critical to the state of Pennsylvania, that it sat vacant for 2 years before Joe got the $104, 431 gig? Yet Joe and Ruth want to hammer the current commissioners for giving a $35k county website job to a friend of Tom Ellis?

Seems to me, future Valentines Day might not be as sweet as the donkey's would like voters to think it will, if they run the Montco machine.

Not so Intelligencer

Read this lame attempt, on the website of the suburbs largest newspaper, by a political blogger to report and comment on the GOP debate yesterday. It's riddled with stereotypical connotations about Republicans from someone who obviously wants to be Bill Maher's protege.

The blogger failed to identify the most obvious and curious issue from the debate. Specifically, the "train wreck", was held on a Sunday morning, when most of the GOP base is in church. The writer and the editorial staff (if there is one) missed it.

But the best line is the blogs first. If this reporter has to accidentally see debates for him to report on them, why bother? The Intelligencer is obviously in need of talent.

Shhhhhh

A story that the Montgomery County Democrat machine and the Damsker-Hoeffel team hope stays buried in the PottsMerc...

Viablity of Local "Press"

Watching the hit-and-run-locals dance around the breaking news about the Ocean City Maryland premie murders. The definition of "viable human" just keeps changing.

Inconsistant Truths

If you believe that Bush knew, or was complicit in, the attacks on September 11th...

Why didn't he plant WMDs in Iraq??

If you believe that withdrawing resources from Afghanistan was a mistake in the war on terror (Congressman Murphy, D-PA8)...

Then what makes you think redeploying troops from Iraq will be a success??

If you think humans cause Global Warming because the science is proven to be true...

Then why have so many of the scientists who contributed to the IPCC report Al Gore is tauting, as proof the issue is settled science, asked to have their portions of the report removed?

If you are outraged about the senseless abuse and killing of dogs by Micheal Vick...

Are you consistent by being equally appalled with the killing of baby humans? Or do dogs have more value?

If you think the Philadelphia political machine is corrupt...

They why would you fathom voting for suburban Democrats this fall??

Connecting Dots

First, why won't any news organization, local or otherwise, tell this story?




___________________________________

To summarize the piece...

The surge is working despite countless news stories telling us the exact opposite over the last two weeks. So what could be the reason for this? Why would US Military success be stifled?

Instead, the local networks, took the time to inform us about Cindy -arrest-Cheney-first- Sheehan's visit to Philadelphia today. She is here to announce her candidacy to oust Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and to enlighten us about her plans to impeach Bush.

If it weren't so blatant an attempt by the hit-n-run-locals to tell half of the story, one might confuse it with journalism. But it follows a very familiar pattern to anyone who has studied news coverage of the Vietnam War.

First, you stifle any military success by our guys. Next, make sure you cover any anti-war opinion poll, statement, or activity so it appears the public is against the war effort. Throw in the opinions of politicians who call for withdrawal; claiming we've lost.

The final piece of the puzzle during Nixon's years, of course was Watergate. The break-in and cover-up distracted Nixon at a time when some Vietnam historians think the war had turned in our favor. So far, Bush hasn't had his "I'm not a crook" moment. Not that there hasn't been several attempts to find one.

This is why Democrats (and hopeful Dems like Sheehan) tried to tell us that Bush lied about WMD's; why they blew the terrorist surveillance program out of proportion; and why they called the surge a failure, one month after it was at full strength.

However, the real attempt to find the Watergate moment, was what turned into the Scooter Libby case. Here, CIA non-covert agent Valerie Plame, sent her husband (Joe Wilson) over to Africa to dispute claims Bush made that Iraq sought uranium from North Africa. When the connection between the couple was told to Robert Novak (by Richard Armitage), the Bush White House (Cheney, Rove, et al) was accused for outing a covert agent. Had that actually been the case, the final piece of the Vietnam media template would have been complete.

So it starts with selective news coverage which distorts what's happening. The goal is to create the perception that we are failing, again. It repeats the predictable emotional responses of uninformed (isn't that convenient?) news viewers. It aims to build a consensus that wouldn't exist if the entire story were told. It's déjà vu all over.

Hey Philly, wake up, your being force-fed propaganda, again.

The Democrat Playbook

Last week, Joe Hoeffel and Ruth Damsker released a "plan" for Montgomery County. Damsker - former social worker - and Hoeffel - former commissioner, congressman, and senate candidate - want voters to believe they are concerned about women, kids and senior issues. They are following the nationwide Democrat template for winning elections. If it weren't possible for them to win in Montgomery County this coming fall, then their rhetoric would just be, well, rhetoric.

Here's how the template works...

First, proclaim yourself as being concerned about women, families, and the elderly. Next proclaim only you have the answers to making each of these target groups survive in the evil and unfair world of our GOP controlled county. As Hoeffel says (votedamskerhoeffel.com) ,

"We are determined to deliver better services more efficiently to our county residents."

Finally, announce grandiose plans which cite an "expert" report defining a problem, create a "task force" of some sort to address the report's findings, and introduce a program - like the "Healthy County" program these two are offering - to make it all better.

Hoeffel pointed out that the recent report of the Metropolitan Philadelphia Indicators Project, "Youth: Suburban Children at Risk"

As the caring candidate Damsker says,

"Last year an independent assessment report, authored by Temple University Business Professor of David Barton Smith identified gaps in service delivery, waiting lists, and problems that confront thousands of county residents each year,"

Once the foundation is set, how can anyone argue against it? Those evil Republicans must not care about the poor or they would endorse our ideas enthusiastically. And if the GOP offers similar ideas, they'll ask voters why not elect the original visionaries, the real caring politicians, of these grand plans.

I'll guarantee, before the end of this election, these candidates will proclaim that since Montgomery County is the wealthiest in the state, it must be failed political leadership which denies residents the level of services they are entitled to receive. The assumption that our residents somehow don't already receive top-notch services goes unchallenged by the local press. This typical Democrat approach focuses on the guilt-ridden suburban Philly soccer mom crowd who feel compelled to rely on these used car sales persons to resolve issues for the unfortunate.

Whether or not the results of these programs -like the FAILED programs offered in the Big City- actually prove to help their target victims doesn't matter. Their intentions are good, so we must elect them, or the victims will fall further into decline.

Now, who could be against that?

Top Ten List - Gun Violence

Top ten things that will NOT stop gun violence...

10. making anti-Charlton Heston documentaries
9. gun locks
8. gun amnesty programs (trade old guns for cash)
7. eliminating guns - like they did in the U.K.

6. background checks
5. candlelight vigils
4. stop the violence "walks"
3. one-gun-a-month legislation
2. creating gun-free schools zones
1. This idea

Even though all of the above ideas have been tried, the death rate due to guns in Philly hasn't subsided. The United Kingdom outlawed guns years ago, but with radical Muslims infiltrating their country, how many gun-less Brits could stop a terrorist before he tries blowing up the next local airport? Perhaps the gun violence issue is much larger than these well-intentioned ideas can overcome.

By the way, kudos to the Pennsylvania legislature and the NRA for coming together to approve this common sense law to curb gun violence.

Big Picture Numbers

Most of you have surely heard of President Bush's lagging poll numbers. Currently, the Commander in Chief is at a lowly 39% favorable rating (58 unfavorable) according to Rasmussen Reports (July 16). By the way, this is up 6 points just in the last 5 days.

Other numbers from Rasmussen, some comparable to Bush, some wish they were...

Supreme Court

John Rodgers (Conservative - Chief) 34/26

Sam Alito (Conservative) 35/37

Clarence Thomas (Conservative) 48/36

Antonin Scalia (Conservative) 50/50

Anthony Kennedy (Moderate/liberal) 15/42

Ruth Ginsberg (Liberal ) 37/35

John Paul Stevens (Liberal) 20/28

David Souter (Liberal) 17/38

Steven Breyer (Liberal)18/25

Others

Congress (with "mandate" in hand) 16/46

Hillary Clinton (Senator/wife of Bill) 52/46

Michael Moore (Comedian/film maker) 25/47

Bill Gates (Multi-millionaire/Microsoft founder) 76/20

Jessie Jackson (uh, Reverend?) 23/73

In other Rasmussen poll news...

Bush is right to wait for September

News has liberal bias - gee, I think I saw that somewhere

After immigration debate, Republicans gain in numbers

No Leftist Bias Here

In case you're of the opinion that a leftist bias doesn't exist in the news media, local or otherwise, perhaps you aren't paying attention. These "questions" - I'd call them political advertisments - took place during AM prime-time. Meanwhile, this story wasn't given a single mention by any local media.

With all due respect to Clayton Morris, he seems to be intelligent, witty, and more knowledgable than at least one member of congress. So why is it so tough for him to ask them a single tough question? Instead, he seems to be helping these two politicians make their points.

Some sample tough questions Clay could have used...

-Why didn't the Democrat controlled congress get troop withdrawl done, if there was such a "mandate", by simply getting enough votes to override Bush's veto?

-Why did the Democrat Congress try to tie a withdrawl timeline to funding for the troops?

-Congressmen, I hear there is good news coming from a battle just north of Bahgdad where locals stood side-by-side with Iraqi troops, aided by American jets who took out bridges which pinned the enemy inside the town. The result, some would say, is a sign that the Iraqi's are fighting back against Al Quaeda. Is this, gentlemen, proof of the surge working?

I guess those questions will come the day after a Democrat is in the White House.

Gore Jumping the Shark

Live Aid raised money for famine relief in Africa.
Farm Aid raised money for farmers.
Live 8 raised money for alternative lifestyles.


So exactly who profited from Live Earth's worldwide concert?

Live Earth promoters predicted 2 billion viewers prior to the broadcast. However, the actual numbers were much less impressive.

When you can't get Bob Geldof, Paul McCartney, or David Gilmore to sign on to a "Live____" concert series, your message isn't resonating with the public.

Kinda like the global warming concept he is trying to sell, Gore's movement isn't exactly as massive as advertised.

Priorities Backwards

Anyone else find it amusing that during the Pennsylvania State government shutdown...

Parks, museums, and campgrounds were closed; contractor payments were not made...

Meanwhile, the lottery and liquor operations continued on as planned....

At least the tax collection was halted.

Silly Sestak

Our ports are vulnerable. So, Congressman Joe Sestak (D-PA13) wants to scan every single ship, container, and box that comes across our ports, because that damn evil Bush administration just refuses to protect us, according to him.

Most of the contents in containers that enter our ports have traceable roots to legitimate manufacturers all over the globe. Most are legitimate goods that we use on a daily basis. A good number of these containers - as Sestak told Fox 29 on July 3rd - are already checked at overseas facilities. If, let's say, only 99% of the items brought into our ports are known, wouldn't it be a terrible waste of resources to check 100% of the containers shipped? That is a 99% percent waste of taxpayer funds.

Let me describe it another way. IF the Bush administration traced the calls of 100% of the American people, that would also be a waste of 99% of the resources exhausted. Which is exactly why he only cares about the calls terrorists make to the US. Using an analogy from A Few Good Men, Sestak's idea is - the difference between paper defense and real defense.

As the highest-ranking former military officer ever elected to the U.S. House of Representatives and former Director for Defense Policy at the National Security Council in the Clinton White House, one would have hoped his intelligence would be more concrete.

On a side note...
Why did Sestak's office suddenly have a flurry of press releases (to PoliticsPA for example) and TV appearances last week? Could he be reading early polling data that doesn't look so good?

Someone Check on Schwartz

"The decision of President Bush to commute the prison sentence of Scooter Libby is outrageous. We have long known the President considers himself unaccountable to the American people, and it is now crystal clear: he considers all members of his Administration above the law. This choice by the President demonstrates yet another case of his terrible lack of judgment. Scooter Libby lied to a grand jury and he lied to the FBI, but the President apparently believes Libby's lies were acceptable."
-Allyson Schwartz (D) PA-13th July 5th 2007

Oh Congressperson Schwartz, your memory and recollection are starting to worry me. Perhaps you should see a specialist. I hear the Cuban doctors are swell people.

First - the "leaker" was known to prosecutor Fitzgerald - THE DAY HE ASSUMED THE JOB. His (the leaker) name, as I'm sure you must know, was Richard Armitage. Armitage, a Clinton appointee from the State Department - not the oval office - told Bob Novak about Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson's connection.

Despite this knowledge, Fitzgerald proceeded with the investigation. What he could possibly be investigating, once he knows who the leaker was, is baffling at best. However, that evil Bush administration didn't aim to stop the investigation.

Second - Valerie Plame was NOT covert, undercover, nor unknown to anyone who was remotely interested at the time. However, she is the wife of Wilson, and she sent her husband to Northern Africa to dispute claims by Bush of Iraq seeking yellow cake, as the President did in his famous State of the Union address in '03. Wilson, who was apparently so convinced that Bush had made up the yellow-cake claim, failed to mention this to anyone until a report he wrote 6 months after his visit to the region. After her "outing", the media tour the Wilson's went on sure didn't make Valerie appear like someone wanting her status to be covert.

Third - Bill Clinton pardoned 14o people and commuted the sentences of several others in August of '99 , including 16 members of FALN. This group of Puerto Rican nationalists, was convicted of 120 bombings in New York and Chicago.

Now let's compare. On one hand, we have Scooter Libby. Fact: Libby didn't out Valerie Plame, Richard Armitage did. The investigation that followed was therefore a witch hunt. Without interference from the Bush administration, Libby was still asked to testify under oath. He was found guilty of lying under oath, despite the prosecutor's admission of "no underlying crime of outing (Plame)". Bush commuted his sentence. Still, Libby paid a $250,400 fine.

In the other corner, Bill Clinton (former President of the United States and lawyer) lied under oath and paid a fine. Further, he commuted sentences of criminals which can, at the very least, be seen as curious. Hillary agrees with me on this one; at least she did when she was running for the Senate (link). Would Allyson view these as critically as she does President Bush's communtation? Does the 13th District of Pennsylvania representative understand this action is completely within their constitutional rights as occupant of the oval office?

Now exactly who is "above the law" Mrs. Schwartz??

The Pledge - Red Skelton

Courtesy of Clown Ministry
Click here for the original audio version from the Red Skelton hour (January 14, 1969)

On January 14, 1969, Red Skelton touched the hearts of millions of Americans with his "Pledge Of Allegiance", in which he explained the meaning of each and every word. Red Skelton's recitation of the "Pledge of Allegiance" was twice read into the Congressional Record of the United States and received numerous awards.


RED SKELTON: "I remember this one teacher. To me, he was the greatest teacher, a real sage of my time. He had such wisdom. We were all reciting the Pledge Of Allegiance and he walked over. Mr. Lasswell was his name... He said": "I've been listening to you boys and girls recite the Pledge Of Allegiance all semester and it seems as though it is becoming monotonous to you. If I may, may I recite it and try to explain to you the meaning of each word:

I
Me; an individual; a committee of one.
Pledge
Dedicate all of my worldly goods to give without self-pity.
Allegiance
My love and my devotion.
To the Flag
Our standard; Old Glory ; a symbol of Freedom; wherever she waves there is respect, because your loyalty has given her a dignity that shouts, Freedom is everybody's job.
of the United
That means that we have all come together.
States
Individual communities that have united into forty-eight great states. Forty-eight individual communities with pride and dignity and purpose. All divided with imaginary boundaries, yet united to a common purpose, and that is love for country.
And to the Republic
Republic -- a state in which sovereign power is invested in representatives chosen by the people to govern. And government is the people; and it's from the people to the leaders, not from the leaders to the people.
For which it stands,
One Nation
One Nation -- meaning, so blessed by God.
Indivisible
Incapable of being divided.
With Liberty
Which is Freedom; the right of power to live one's own life, without threats, fear, or some sort of retaliation.
And Justice
The principle, or quality, of dealing fairly with others.
For All
For All -- which means, boys and girls, it's as much your country as it is mine. And now, boys and girls, let me hear you recite the Pledge of Allegiance:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic, for which it stands; one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country, and two words have been added to the Pledge of Allegiance: Under God. Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer, and that would be eliminated from schools, too?"

Editor's note: sadly, Red Skelton was prescient - the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (the most overturned court in the United States of America) has done exactly that.

'Sicko' Paradise

The latest in the Michael Moore docu-comedy series, "Sicko", opened June 29th. However, several pirated copies appeared on YouTube two weeks prior to its release. Sicko's representative's (lawyers) promised at the time to "aggressively protect our film".

If Mike wants to spread the good word to all the little people about the evil health care industry, why wouldn't he encourage giving the movie away for free? It seems this sicko hates capitalism, unless he's the one capitalising.

The sad irony is, Mr. Moore's personal life is classical American success story, which would never have been possible in his Cuban paradise.

Primary Concerns

The panel assigned to consider changing Pennsylvania's primary election date has spoken. They suggest moving the election forward, to match other states vying for significance in deciding who our Presidential candidates will be. I understand the desire to play a role in this process, since most recent Presidential elections have kept Pennsylvania in the also-ran column. However, there is at least one major flaw with this thinking.

If Pennsylvania joins the mad dash to a February 5th, 2008 primary date, one of 3 things could happen.

First possibility: Pennsylvania will join the masses in a one day free-for-all which will definitively provide us with 2 clear choices for President.

Second possibility: no clear winner on the either side. At which point, Minnesota, Mississippi, Ohio, Connecticut, Vermont, Massachusetts, who vote in March, will suddenly have more relevance than PA, FL, TX, IL, and CA combined. These 6 states, in this scenario, hold all the cards. Who feels comfy with that prospect?

Finally, if still not decided by then (unlikely, but possible): Indiana, Kentucky and West Virginia will become more relevant than Pennsylvania, followed by Montana and South Dakota.

If that weren't enough to caution you about consideration of the February primary, think about the average voter. They have a hard enough time remembering the date of primary, let alone a "special election" date held specifically for referendums if your school district needs one. Yep, the already stuck-in-a-quagmire "real estate tax relief" legislation will get its own special trip to the polls. Does this give Fast-Eddie (or any other politician) an angle to clear his bad idea? You bet it will!

Over the last 25 years of working the polls in Philly and it's suburbs, I have noticed a disturbing trend. Voters barely have a basic knowledge of civics. A lot of voters don't realize the role of primaries or which races apply to them. Some of my suburban voters often ask me why they can't vote for Philly's mayor. Others, when I ask them which primary are they participating in (Rep or Dem), proudly admonish me by saying, "...it's none of your business who I am voting for!".

If the voters have a hard time understanding the relevance of this process, how on earth will they be able to grasp the changes this brilliant committee has recommended?

Who honestly thinks a move to February won't result in Pennsylvania voters feeling further separated from their government?

Immigration Fix

Since some would want us to believe that illegal immigrants are "doing the work Americans just won't do".....

And since unemployment has been below 5% (in economic terms, full employment - that is, everyone who wants and is able to work, is working) since November '06....

Then one might conclude we no longer need welfare or other social programs in the grand scale they currently exist.

That damn Bush economy; able to fully support more than 95% of the American people as well as 15 million illegals, all during a time of war. He is some dope, eh?

Oh my!! 106.1

It's 7am. I'm sipping coffee and watching the morning news with my 6 year-old daughter...

There's a new station in town. My106.1 is one of those "office worthy" stations that plays top 40 hits in the typical homogeneous format. They have a commercial out that really caught my attention. Which of course is exactly what their ad execs wanted.

It took me a few seconds to figure out why I was drawn to this commercial, and then it dawned on me. The commercial featured the derriere of several office-type women (and a token dork male as well), who were all shaking their booty to the hits of their "favorite" station. The first shot of office butt, a female in dress pants, didn't really bother me. But that was just a teaser of things to come. The final 10 seconds featured several office-butt-shaking shots; some were the kind you would find performed by dancers at a strip club or in any number of rap videos. I found myself wondering if this would be guaranteed in my office if I tuned into the station later in the day.

It sure seems, in this commercial anyway, women have come a long way in overcoming sexual harassment in the workplace. Thanks My106.1 (and Fox29), that's just what I wanted my 6 year-old to see.