MAJOR SNOW STORMS FROM JAPAN TO EASTERN CANADA

CANADA.COM:

Snow blankets central, eastern Canada

Central and eastern Canadians continued to shovel out and spread salt after a ferocious winter storm dumped heavy snow and freezing rain on eastern Quebec and Atlantic Canada on Saturday.

Parts of southern and eastern Quebec were hit with between 15 and 35 centimetres of snow.

Snow disrupts traffic on Pacific side of central, east Japan

MIDWEST USA:

A snowstorm made travel treacherous Friday in the Midwest and Northeast and was blamed for at least 10 traffic deaths.

Nearly 7 ½ inches of snow was reported at Chicago O'Hare International Airport before the front moved out of the area Friday. About 500 flights were canceled at O'Hare, which canceled 600 flights Thursday and housed hundreds of stranded travelers who spent the night awaiting planes from other cities also affected by the storm. More than 9 inches of snow delayed flights at Chicago Midway Airport on Friday.

At least 12 inches of snow was reported in Springfield by Friday morning, said National Weather Service meteorologist Gino Izzi.

Ten inches fell in Bloomington, and Southern Illinois saw up to 11 inches dumped near Palmyra northwest of St. Louis.

XINHUA:

Snow fell in several prefectures on the Pacific side of central and east Japan since Sunday morning, causing cancellation of flights, close of highways and delay of trains in the wide areas.

According to the Japan Meteorological Agency, 3 cm of snow had accumulated in central Tokyo and Yokohama, and 18 cm in Yamanashi Prefecture's Kawaguchiko city as of 10 a.m. (0100 GMT).

Tokyo's Haneda airport said more than 20 flights in and out were canceled, while the East Japan Railway Co. said operations of two of its lines were affected by the snow.

Several speedways in the snow region were closed out of security concerns.

The meteorological agency forecasted up to 15 cm of snow in plains of the Kanto region, up to 30 cm in the Koshin region and up to 5 cm in the Tokai region through late Sunday.

• AGW IS BS.
• AL GORE: STFU.

BRITISH LEFT IN AN UPROAR: SCOTLAND YARD BUGGED MUSLIM MP DURING MEETINGS WITH A JAILED CONSTITUENT

ToL:

SCOTLAND YARD’S antiterrorist squad secretly bugged a high-profile Labour Muslim MP during private meetings with one of his constituents.

Sadiq Khan, now a government whip, was recorded by an electronic listening device hidden in a table during visits to the constituent in prison.

The bugging of MPs is a breach of a government edict that has barred law agencies from eavesdropping on politicians since the bugging scandal of Harold Wilson’s government. There was no suspicion of criminal conduct by Khan to justify the operation.

A document seen by The Sunday Times shows there was internal concern about the propriety of bugging an MP, who was also a lawyer, but the operation nevertheless went ahead.

* US pledges 'no death penalty' for British terror suspect

The disclosure will put further pressure on Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan police commissioner, who will be asked to explain why his officers apparently breached government rules – and if he authorised it.

Khan discussed sensitive personal and legal matters during the recorded meeting. The MP was said to be “outraged” yesterday. “From what you have told me, this is an infringement of a citizen’s right to have a private meeting with his MP,” he said.

Last night Jack Straw, the justice secretary, said that he had ordered an immediate inquiry and added that it would be “unacceptable” for such a bugging operation to take place.

Andrew Mackinlay, a Labour colleague, said: “The bugging of Sadiq Khan is very dangerous indeed. It is totally unacceptable that MPs’ conversations with constituents are bugged by the security services or the police.

“It is an affront to democracy and has all the hallmarks of a totalitarian regime. No one is suggesting that MPs should be above the law, but when behaving as MPs and dealing with people’s liberty that must be sacrosanct as it is with lawyers.” Khan, 37, is a rising star in the Labour party and is seen as a key figure in Gordon Brown’s drive to win the hearts and minds of Britain’s Muslims. He is a former chairman of Liberty, the human rights group, and used to be a legal adviser to the Muslim Council of Britain.

BBC: Probe into 'bugging' of Muslim MP

Sadiq Khan Justice Secretary Jack Straw has ordered an inquiry into claims police bugged a senior Muslim MP as he visited a friend and constituent in jail.

Tooting MP Sadiq Khan and Babar Khan were recorded twice in Milton Keynes's Woodhill Prison, the Sunday Times says.

The US is seeking to extradite Mr Ahmad on suspicion of running websites raising funds for the Taleban.

Mr Straw said it would be "completely unacceptable" for an MP to be recorded while discussing constituent matters.

Hollowed-out table

The bugging is said to have been carried out by officers from Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist branch during visits by Mr Khan to the Milton Keynes jail in 2005 and 2006.

The MP and government whip has been campaigning for Mr Ahmad, who faces no charges in the UK, to be released.

According to the newspaper, the bugging device was hidden inside a hollowed-out table in the jail's main visiting hall.

"It is the wrong way for police to act"
Khalid Mahmood

The paper says it has seen a document showing there were internal concerns about bugging the MP, who is also a lawyer, but it went ahead anyway.

Scotland Yard said it was not prepared to comment on the claims.

The Brits seem intent on surrendering to Islam.

I mean - foochissakes - this guy in jail is wanted in the USA for terrorism on charges which would NORMALLY bring the DEATH PENALTY. And he's a pal of the supposedly "moderate" MP from the Labour/left - and a rising star in Brown's government!?!?

Sheesh.

If true, it means that Brown's government is not only sympathetic to jihadism, but infiltrated by it.

ROMNEY WINS MAINE CAUCUSES WITH A MAJORITY OF THE VOTE

Governor Mitt Romney won the Maine caucuses with over 50% of the vote. Turnout was higher than expected and very high. I think this is the first time in this campaign that a state has been won by an actual majority of the votes cast. Perhaps it is a sign of things to come . . .

HAMAS PLANNING TO "JOIN" WITH EGYPT - FATAH OBJECTS

YNET/UPI:

Hamas officials have plans for the Gaza Strip to break monetary ties with Israel and join with Egypt instead, an official told a London newspaper Saturday.

Officials said the organization wants Egypt to become "Gaza's Gateway" to the Muslim and Arab world, Ynetnews reported Saturday.

"Several Arab countries have already expressed marked willingness to trade with Gaza and to fund energy export projects should Egypt prove willing," Hamas leader and Palestinian Prime Minister Senior Adviser Ismail Haniyeh said.

Hamas wants to boost the economy of Gaza by bringing an end to its almost total economic dependence on Israel, the newspaper said.

"Hamas' proposal to lean on Egypt economically via the Rafah Crossing is a decided disaster, and allows Israel to sever the Gaza Strip from the West Bank, thereby dividing the (Palestinian) state as Israel has always longed to do," a Fatah spokesman said.

THIS MAKES SENSE - IF GAZA CAN'T BE PART OF ISRAEL, THEN IT SHOULD BE PART OF EGYPT, AND NOT OF JORDAN OR THE SO-CALLED "WEST BANK".

Clinton Corruption Story #10,874 (and counting)

Glenn Reynolds highlights yet another ethical question, which has more the appearance of something that Vladimir Putin would undertake than an ex-President of the United States--unless of course that President is William Jefferson Clinton:

INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY EDITORIALIZES: "Is it just us, or is there something off about ex-president Bill Clinton using his influence overseas to enrich a pal and then accepting the pal's big donation to his foundation? This looks like a bribery racket."

From the linked story:

... a New York Times report details a 2005 incident of Clinton and a minor Canadian mining financier jetting into Kazakhstan, where the two met with the local strongman. Shortly afterward, Clinton's pal won a huge uranium-mining contract that left competing mining companies astounded.

Anything untoward? Clinton says of course not. After all, doesn't every ex-president jet in to Central Asia from time to time to check up on his charity projects and sample the gourmet cuisine? Nothing to see here, move along.

But the story doesn't end there. Clinton's friend, Frank Giustra, eventually ended up a billionaire from that "lucky" trip. He then donated $31.3 million to Clinton's $208 million foundation as its largest donor in 2006. Any connection? Nada, Clinton's defenders say. ...

Riiight... For all of the complaints (which naturally are not getting a lot of play in Big Media...) about the fact that Bill Clinton is purposefully withholding from the public Library documents which would ostensibly "prove" just how much of a "major player" Hillary Clinton was during her husband's Presidency (as she's claimed repeatedly to have been in her own campaign); when it comes to the Clinton Library, there seems to be a lot more uncharted territory--including the utter lack of information about the people who have donated enormous sums of money to build said library, and just exactly what those donors got in return...

For the sleaziest Administration in American history, the hits just keep on coming.

WHY ISN'T IRAN INTO ALTERNATIVE/RENEWABLE ENERGY?

QUESTION:

IF IRAN WAS REALLY ONLY INTERESTED IN NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY AS A SOURCE OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGY - (BECAUSE THEY WILL RUN OUT OF OIL ONE DAY) - THEN WHY DON'T THEY BUILD SOLAR AND WIND PROJECTS INSTEAD OF, OR IN ADDITION TO, NUCLEAR PROJECTS?




Because they are building nuclear power plants with centrifuges in order to make weapons.

END OF STORY.

Apparently FRANCE has the goods on Iran's weapons program - SEE BELOW.

On June 19, 2005, Mccain said he'd like to give all Gitmo detainees a trial

We blogged it that day, too - a post with many links.

McCain would run the GWOT like a lib: no water-boarding, no NSA intercepts, no SWIFT program, no Gitmo.

McCain cannot be trusted on the war.
McCain cannot be trusted on the war.
McCain cannot be trusted on the war.

ANOTHER TOP AL QAEDA LEADER CAUGHT IN IRAQ

SCOTSMAN: Al-Qaida leader held after raid

COMMANDOS stormed a village in northern Iraq early today, capturing a top al-Qaida figure accused of organising militant operations in the western area of Mosul.

Three wanted men were killed and three others arrested, said Brig Gen Ibrahim al-Jibouri, commander of Tal Afar police.

Today's operation took place around 5am in the village of Polah Pash Police are planning further raids in Mosul.

*******UPDATE:

A source at the Iraqi police told KUNA Iraqi and US forces captured Abdulrahman Al-Mashhadani, the military official of so-called Iraq Islamic State, in Tarmiya town in Salahuddin governorate northern Baghdad.

He is also accused of carrying out suicide operations and sectarian deportation in Al-Adl neighborhood in western Baghdad.

The US army said in a statement the American forces have captured a person financing gangs.

The arrestee is accused of paying wages for terrorist groups in the governorate of Waset in southern Baghdad, it said.

• WE'RE WINNING.
• AND WE CAN WIN - IF WE DON'T ELECT OBAMA OR HILLARY.

BOTTOM-LINE: THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE LAST BEST HOPE FOR AL QAEDA.

DEADLY BLIZZARD IN THE UK

ToL:

EMERGENCY services were at full stretch yesterday coping with the devastation caused by a blast of wintry weather that stranded hundreds of motorists, cut power to thousands and brought havoc to shipping.

At least one person died as a result of the weather that brought sub-zero temperatures, gales and blizzards across large parts of Britain. ... More than 45,000 homes were without electricity in the northeast, Yorkshire and Lincoln-shire following strong winds on Friday, although by last night fewer than 1,000 were still in darkness.

Coastguards were involved in three shipping dramas hundreds of miles apart.

• THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING.
• EUROPE IS HAVING IT'S WORST WINTER IN 50 YEARS.
• ASIA IS HAVING ITS WORST IN 100 YEARS.
  
  
  
  

AGW IS BS.

PAKISTAN ON HIGH ALERT DUE TO BIRD FLU IN KARACHI

PAKISTAN TIMES: High alert in Pakistan after bird flu Confirmation

ISLAMABAD: High alert has been declared in the whole country after bird flu confirmation in Karachi.

According to health ministry, all the hospitals have been issued the directives in this connection and isolation wards have been set up at hospitals.

The ministry sources said a programme worth Rs1.18 billion in this connection has been initiated.

• IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME.
• AND TIME IS RUNNING OUT...

FRANCE: IRAN STILL DEVELOPING NUKE WEAPONS

AFP:

French Defence Minister Herve Morin cast doubt on reports that Iran had halted its suspected nuclear weapons drive, speaking Thursday on a visit to Washington.

"Coordinated information from a number of intelligence services leads us to believe that Iran has not given up its wish to pursue its (nuclear) program," and is "continuing to develop" it, Morin told reporters.

The US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a consensus finding of all 16 US spy agencies, released last month, said that Tehran shelved its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

It also noted however that Tehran has refused to suspend uranium enrichment, which can be a key step towards a nuclear arsenal.

Morin said France wanted the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN nuclear watchdog, to "continue carrying out all the necessary investigations" into Iran's nuclear activities.

Iran has insisted these are aimed at generating power for civilian purposes.

Morin was wrapping up a 36-hour visit to Washington where he met with his US counterpart Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. He gave no details of their talks, describing them as "an exchange of information."

• FRANCE KNOWS SOMETHING - AND THEY JUST SHARED IT.
• I HOPE WE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT - PREEMPTIVELY, AND SOON.

WHAT OR WHO DERAILED MITT?

HUCKABEE. IN IOWA.

Mitt's plan was to win Iowa and NH and the Michigan and seem inevitable and topple the front-runner: RUDY.

Then came that liberal bigot Hucksterbee, and his subtle anti-Mormon campaign to the idiot yokels of Iowa.

That gave McCain an opening in NH, and in NH's OPEN primary McCain was able to get a plurality of votes - though NOT a plurality of GOP votes.

The MSM has been singing his tune ever since: promoting his pluralities as if they were GOP MAJORITIES.

BOTTOM-LINE: McCain is NOT the first choice of MOST Republicans; Mitt is.

And McCain is not even a fifth choice of conservatives.

If he's on the ballot MILLIONS of conservatives like me will stay home.

Which is the result the MSM and the Left prefer - though they'd be pretty effin' happy if McCain won, too.

So why will I stay home? Because if Obama/Hillary is elected at least the GOP in the Congress MIGHT fight back.

Jim Demint, Jeff Flake, and other true conservatives might then rebuild the GOP.

Here's analogy: We're all at a party. We're all drinking. Except one person - the designated driver. Then, at party's end, all the drunks - except me - VOTE to make another drunk the designated driver. I refuse to go along. So I walk home - with the original designated driver. They crash - and die. My hands are clean and I am alive - and me and the original designated driver are able to fight another day.

And make no mistake about it: McCain is just as bad a drunk-driver (drunk-driver = a lib with tax power!) as Hillary and Obama.

Some commentators argue that at the very least McCain's judicial nominations will be better. I AM NOT SO SURE. AND AGAIN: Senate Republicans are more likely to fight a "moderate" SCOTUS nominee nominated by Hillary than by McCain.

GERMANY'S COWARDLY SELFISHNESS PROVES THE LIMITS OF NATO AND MULTI-LATERALISM

BBC:

Germany has rejected a US appeal to send more troops to Afghanistan, amid signs of strain in the Nato mission.

The US defence secretary had used a strongly worded letter to urge larger German deployment to south Afghanistan.

But his German counterpart, Franz Josef Jung, bluntly ruled out deploying any German soldiers to the area, which is at the heart of the Taleban insurgency.

In his letter, Mr Gates warned that without reinforcements the Nato effort could lose credibility in Afghanistan.

Map of main troop deployments

He urged Germany to consider a new mandate which could allow thousands more troops to be deployed.

Blunt response

But the German response was equally blunt.

"I think that we really must keep our focus on the North"
German Defence Minister Franz Josef Jung

• WITHOUT THE USA NATO IS A HOLLOW MEANINGLESS DEFENSELESS BUNCH OF PUSSIFIED WIMPS.
• AND WHEN WE NEED A LITTLE HELP, THEY ARE NOT THERE FOR US.
• EVEN THOUGH WE SAVED THEIR ASSES FROM HITLER AND THE USSR - AT A COST OF TRILLIONS.
• THEY'RE SCUM.

ANYBODY WHO THINKS COZYING UP TO EUROPE - AND STRUCTURING OUR NATIONAL DEFENSE MORE LIKE THEY DO - WILL MAKE US SAFER IS A FREAKY-DEAKY IDIOT.

AND I MEAN OBAMA AND HILLARY.

TRAFFIC HAS BEEN UP EVERY MONTH FOR 8 MONTHS IN ROW: THANKS EVERYONE!

Thanks to my GRRRRRREAT co-bloggers and to the GRRRRRREAT blogs which have frequently linked here:

HOT AIR, GATEWAY, JAWA, MEMEORANDUM, RCP, PATRICK RUFFINI - to name just a few!

Spread the word!

Blogroll us!

A MCCAIN NOMINATION GUARANTEES THE RETURN OF THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE

If McCain wins the nomination, then I guarantee that the next president (either McCain, Obama, or Hillary) will bring back the Orwellian "Fairness Doctrine."

McCain hates talks radio and would LOVE to kill it.

A vote for McCain is a vote for the Stalinist Fairness Doctrine.

ANOTHER OBAMA ENDORSEMENT

Maybe Susan Eisenhower, granddaughter of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, doesn't bring a lot of votes to Obama for Super Tuesday. Nonetheless, she makes her case for Obama in this essay in the February 2, 2008 edition of the Washington Post. Excerpt:

...Deep in America's heart, I believe, is the nagging fear that our best years as a nation may be over. We are disliked overseas and feel insecure at home. We watch as our federal budget hemorrhages red ink and our civil liberties are eroded. Crises in energy, health care and education threaten our way of life and our ability to compete internationally. There are also the issues of a costly, unpopular war; a long-neglected infrastructure; and an aging and increasingly needy population.

I am not alone in worrying that my generation will fail to do what my grandfather's did so well: Leave America a better, stronger place than the one it found.

[...]

The biggest barrier to rolling up our sleeves and preparing for a better future is our own apathy, fear or immobility. We have been living in a zero-sum political environment where all heads have been lowered to avert being lopped off by angry, noisy extremists. I am convinced that Barack Obama is the one presidential candidate today who can encourage ordinary Americans to stand straight again; he is a man who can salve our national wounds and both inspire and pursue genuine bipartisan cooperation. Just as important, Obama can assure the world and Americans that this great nation's impulses are still free, open, fair and broad-minded.

[...]

...If the Democratic Party chooses Obama as its candidate, this lifelong Republican will work to get him elected and encourage him to seek strategic solutions to meet America's greatest challenges. To be successful, our president will need bipartisan help.

Given Obama's support among young people, I believe that he will be most invested in defending the interests of these rising generations and, therefore, the long-term interests of this nation as a whole. Without his leadership, our children and grandchildren are at risk of growing older in a marginalized country that is left to its anger and divisions. Such an outcome would be an unacceptable legacy for any great nation.

Yes, Susan Eisenhower also compares Obama to her grandfather.

I'm sad to say the following: I believe that many Americans, of all Party persuasions, may be thinking in a manner similar to that presented in the above essay. If Obama makes the Democratic Party's ticket, that ticket just might take the election. Of course, one never knows what a voter will do once inside the voting booth. Also, any of the candidates could be swiftboated--if the mainstream media's hold can be broken.

Of this much I'm completely convinced: Conservative voters had better not sit out the 2008 National Elections, as many voters did in November 2006 in order to "teach the politicians a lesson."

MCCAIN: not as smart as Mitt, but meaner and a bigger egomaniac

I'd vote for McCain - in a race for dog-catcher.

But not for POTUS or for Governor or for Mayor or County Excecutive.

And I'd rather work for Mitt than McCain.

McCain is not very smart. He has no managerial experience. And he's mean-spirited. (Ever see him make a joke AT HIS OWN EXPENSE!? Nope: someone else is always the butt of his "humor", his snarkiness.)

And McCain is an egomaniac with loyalty to nothing but his own fat cancer-stricken head.

McCain's Vietnam war stories are ancient history and irrelevant

McCain talking about Vietnam is like JFK talking about WW1 - THAT'S RIGHT: WW1, not WW2.

It's irrelevant. Forty years ago.

We need someone for our future.

If you want a future of higher taxes and more government, then vote McCain or Obam,a or Hillary. NO DIFFERENCE.

If you want lower taxes and less government, then you have one choice: MITT.

IS MITT ROMNEY TOO NICE AND STABLE TO BE POTUS?

NO.

But McCain is too mean and unstable.

McCain's meanness make his attacks on Mitt more effective than Mitt's defense and counter-attacks.

That's where we come in.

McCain is too old, has had cancer too often, has too often bucked the GOP and conservatives.

McCain is unfit to lead - by temperament, age, and health - and basic political outlook.

Hate Speech Claim in Immigration Debate

Being critical of illegal immigration is "hate speech" apparently. At that rate, we seem very close to being unable to criticize anybody for anything without being accused of "hate" -- though criticizing Christians, conservatives, and whites is always OK of course. Many American universities these days have programs of "white studies" - which consist of one long tirade of real hate towards whites

"A national Latino group said Thursday it is fighting back against what it considers to be "hate speech" that has emerged from the debate over immigration. National Council of La Raza President Janet Murguia announced plans to pressure television network executives and candidates seeking their parties' presidential nominations to clamp down on such remarks.

The group launched a Web site to counter the speech, http://www.wecanstopthehate.org, with clips of what it considers offensive comments on television as well as a tracking of hate crimes.

"Hate groups and extremists have taken over the immigration debate in an unprecedented wave of hate," Murguia said. Although some comments could be considered free speech, "there is a line that sometimes can be crossed when it comes to free speech," she said.

Some of the remarks the Hispanic group identified included referring to immigrants as an "army of invaders" or an "invading force," associating immigrants with animals, accusing immigrants of bringing crime and diseases like leprosy to the U.S., and purveying a conspiracy theory that Latinos are trying to take back parts of the United States once ruled by Mexico....

Murguia accused the television networks of cloaking members of hate groups as anti-immigrant experts on their programs. Among those she singled out was Jim Gilchrist, a co-founder of the Minuteman Project.

In response, Gilchrist called the National Council of La Raza a racial supremacy group that "dwarfs the combination of Black Panthers, KKK, American Indian Movement and Asian gangs." "I'm exercising free speech and I'm giving my opinion," Gilchrist said. "My son-in-law is Mexican and two of my three grandchildren are half Mexican. The Minuteman Project is comprised of every race color and creed. ... She has a right to her opinion, but she's wrong."

Source

Posted by John Ray

Greenies attack a scientific conference

There are all sorts of conferences with all sorts of purposes and the Heartland Institute is arranging a conference called "The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change" in New York. The purpose of the conference is to highlight the fact that there is a variety of views on climate change among scientists -- and to debate and discuss those views. And the Greenies seem to be afraid to participate -- knowing of course how many holes and frail assumptions there are in their arguments.

So The Greenie "Real Climate" site has slammed the conference by saying that it is not a routine general meeting for members of a scientific discipline but rather a more publicly available talking shop. It appears that according to them there is only one sort of conference! They also quite plainly imply that scientists who do not agree with them are not real scientists! A nice little circular argument implied there, I think. Below is the response (Comment 47) by James M. Taylor of the Heartland Institute to the Greenie article:

The anonymously authored Real Climate article above is a disappointing smear job - i.e., you have nothing to say substantively, so you attempt to smear your intellectual opponents. Many of the world's leading climate scientists from some of the world's most prestigious universities will be giving presentations. Rather than behaving like children and throwing mud at them, perhaps you might behave like adults and discuss the science. Of course, that will never happen because open and honest debate is what you fear most.

I never thought I would see the day when scientific debate and inquiry, conducted by some of the most credentialed scientists in the world, would be considered a bad thing. But that is what happens when people are afraid of the truth.

Al Gore in one day rakes in more honorarium money than all of our speakers combined. Nevertheless, we have offered to pay his usual honorarium to speak at our conference, but have not heard back from Mr. Gore. We have invited Real Climate's Michael Mann to come and speak at our conference, but Mr. Mann also has failed to respond to our invitation.

Unlike Real Climate, we do not attempt to stifle scientific inquiry. Instead, we encourage it. We are equal opportunity investigators of science. As the Real Climate article above notes, we have invited many members of Real Climate to come and give presentations. It is odd that Real Climate is invited to discuss the science in a professional, scholarly environment, yet throws stones from afar, where they do not have to subject their claims to scientific scrutiny.

Perhaps Real Climate will abandon their fear of public discourse, and will reconsider their decision to decline our invitation to speak at the conference. After all, isn't honest and open scientific discussion a good thing? Please send me an email at taylor@heartland.org and, as my prior emails indicate, I would be happy to add you to our conference lineup.

Real Climate's Gavin Schmidt replied:

The level of chutzpah in your comment is breathtaking. Our 'substantive' additions to the scientific knowledge is well attested to by our publications in the peer reviewed literature and is subject to scientific scrutiny every day. I will even venture to make a prediction that the number of peer-reviewed papers on climate science we have collectively authored in the last 5 years will be substantially more than all of your speakers put together. Honest and open scientific discussion is greatly to be wished for, and in fact, happens all the time. I don't recall ever bumping into you at a real conference (AGU/AMS/EGU), but should you ever go, you'll see it how it works first hand. Your institute plays no role in that because your approach is the anti-thesis of scientific inquiry - your conclusions have been decided before you look at the evidence. When you decide to stop abusing the scientific process for political gain, then perhaps we can talk.

In saying: "Your conclusions have been decided before you look at the evidence" Schmidt is in fact of course describing the Greenie procedure. Good ol' Green/Left "projection" again. And getting papers published in journals where the editors and referees agree with you is both a doddle and no proof of anything. It is exposure to people who DISAGREE with you that is the real test and the Greenie scientists will not be in that. James Taylor further emailed Marc Morano as follows:

I would really prefer to keep the conversation with them constructive and professional, but the nasty, unprovoked, ad hominem attack they posted on their website against scientists who disagree with them was simply uncalled for.

By the way, I attempted to post a follow-up comment on their blog, but they have cut me off and refuse to post my comments. How typical of their tactics! If they are going to have a "closed" blog that does not allow dissent, they should at least be intellectually honest enough to identify it as such. Seeing as Gavin and company refuse to post comments from people who disagree with them, I will share my attempted post with you:

Gavin, I am disappointed, though not surprised, that you and your Real Climate fellow activists have refused our invitation to speak at the climate change conference (see 47, above). I can make a pretty good guess as to why. Less than a year ago, on March 14, 2007, Real Climate's Gavin Schmidt and two other global warming alarmists debated global warming against three skeptical scientists in front of the prestigious Intelligence Squared debating society in New York City. A poll of audience members prior to the debate found that the audience believed by a 2-to-1 margin (57 percent to 29 percent) that global warming is a crisis. After a lengthy debate in which all panelists had a chance to present their evidence and answer follow-up questions, the audience voted by a 46 to 42 percent margin that global warming is NOT a crisis.

Better for Real Climate activists to remain in your self-contained blogosphere and classlessly sling mud than to run the risk of another public embarrassment in a fair and honest scientific debate, right Gavin?

Another correspondent writes:

In my opinion, intelligence is a necessary part of a scientist's innate equipment, but intelligence alone is insufficient. Insight and character count too, for without them a scientist lacks judgment, the absence of which will eventuate in self-deception. Bad character leads to worse, until it undermines and defeats intelligence. I offer Gavin Schmidt as evidence for the validity of my opinion.

I might finally note that the Leftist "Think Progress" site has also weighed in with typical intellectual depth. They seem to feel that they have uttered a damning indictment by trotting out their usual boilerplate that the conference is funded by "Big oil". Getting the Green/Left to rise above ad hominem smears and actually debate the issues really is a Herculean task!

See here for theoretical physicist Lubos Motl's scathing comment on the same matter.

Posted by John Ray

WHY I'M VOTING FOR MITT ROMNEY ON SUPER TUESDAY

Let’s face it, none of the candidates are perfect. They never are. But McCain is the least perfect of the viable candidates. The only one left standing who can honestly be said to share most of our conservative principles is Mitt Romney.

I say this as someone who has not been an active Romney supporter. If conservatives don’t unite behind Romney at this stage, and become vocal in their support for him, then they will get McCain as their Republican nominee and probably a Democrat president. And in either case, we will have a deeply flawed president.--Mark Levin

I will be honest and admit (as most of you are aware) that Romney was not my first choice. Yet, as I look at what is at stake in this November's election I think it is crucial that we pick the most conservative candidate for our nominee. I am a pretty loyal Republican and I like, probably 80% of our guys. Why we are somehow stuck with several candidates that are a part of the 20% is very frustrating, to say the least.

Anyone who has read my blog for any length of time knows that I have had HUGE issues with McCain for many years. The fact that he is now the possible nominee for our party is just beyond dis-heartening. It is like driving a stake through the heart of Reagan Conservatism. I cannot sit by silently while what so many of us have worked for is dismantled by someone as liberal as McCain. Therefore, it is expedient to support the one conservative left in this race, Mitt Romney.

Here are some articles to take a look at that make the case:
--5 Good Reasons to Vote for Mitt Romney
--Rally for Romney by Mark Levin
--Governor Romney on the issues
--A Call to Conservative Action
--A very comprehensive post on Mitt Romney

Solid, Stellar Conservatives who are endorsing and/or are supporting Mitt Romney:
--Senator Rick Santorum
--Sean Hannity
--Talk Show Host Mark Levin
--Michael Reagan
--Reliapundit's post comparing Team Romney with Team McCain

Other sites on Romney worth checking out:
--Evangelicals for Mitt
--Denny's pro-Romney Blog
--Hugh Hewitt's blog

Also, it is worth noting that Mike Huckabee is no longer a viable candidate and the only purpose he serves is to take votes away from Romney. One wonders if he hasn't made some kind of deal with McCain because he refuses to bash McCain but goes after Romney with a vengeance. This post makes the case for Huckabee being a spoiler and I think its blatantly obvious that at this stage of the game a vote for Huckabee is really a vote for McCain.

THE SLAUGHTER IN KENYA IS AN ORGANIZED INTIFADA

JUST A REMINDER - BECAUSE THIS ANGLE IS NOT GETTING ANY PLAY IN THE MSM:

Kenya police fire teargas at Muslim protesters
Fri 18 Jan 2008, 11:06 GMT

MOMBASA, Kenya (Reuters) - Kenyan police fired teargas on Friday at several hundred primarily Muslim demonstrators protesting in the port of Mombasa against President Mwai Kibaki's disputed re-election.

The protest followed Friday prayers in the main mosque, on the last of three days of rallies called by the opposition but banned by police. Police also fired teargas at Muslim protesters near the main mosque in the capital Nairobi.

IT'S THE JIHAD, STUPID!

• OBAMA'S COUSIN IS LEADING THE INTIFADA IN KENYA.
• "THE KENYA INTIFADA."
• OBAMA'S COUSIN WANTS SHARIA.
• OBAMA WANTS HIS COUSIN TO WIN.
• THAT SAYS A LOT ABOUT OBAMA.

SOCIALIST POLICIES IN VENEZUELA RAISE INFLATION TO 36% ANNUALIZED RATE

SOSD/AP:

Monthly inflation reached 3 percent in January in Venezuela, despite efforts by President Hugo Chavez to tame consumer prices soaring amid an oil-fueled spending boom.

Inflation in January – usually one of the year's slowest months as consumers recover from holiday spending – swelled from the 2 percent rate reported for the same month of 2007, the Central Bank said Friday in a statement.

High oil prices are flooding the country with cash and boosting public spending, driving 8.4 percent growth in 2007. Venezuela is one of the world's top oil producers and the fourth-largest supplier to the United States.

Its annual inflation rate is 22.5 percent, the highest in Latin America.

LA CALLE DE SERFDOM.

• CHAVEZ IS CATCHING UP TO MUGABE.
• THESE ARE THE FRUTIS OF SOCIALISM.
• THIS IS WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT OBAMA/HILLARY/MCCAIN TO DO TO OUR ECONOMY.
• THE MISERY INDEX WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY LIB JIMMY CARTER.
• THE SAME LIB DEMS WILL BRING IT BACK.

A VOTE FOR OBAMA/HILLARY/MCCAIN IS A VOTE FOR MORE MISERY - FOR THE COMMON GOOD OF COURSE.

Bird flu strikes Karachi

KARACHI:

Laboratory tests on Friday confirmed the existence of H5N1 strain of bird flu in one poultry farm in Karachi’s Gadap Town, prompting the health authorities to conduct medical examination of poultry workers. However, the virus was not found in humans, health officials said.

NOT YET.

MITT ROMNEY VIDEOS - WATCH THEM ALL AND VOTE FOR MITT

WILL 70 YEAR OLD MCCAIN GET A MALIGNANT CANCER FOR THE THIRD TIME?

• MCCAIN HAS BEEN OPERATED ON TWICE FOR MALIGNANT CANCER.

2000:

According to Associated Press releases (August 2000), U.S. Senator and war hero John McCain has been found to have a dangerous form of skin cancer, melanoma, for the second time. ... Melanoma is the most dangerous form of skin cancer and is frequently associated with prolonged exposure of the skin to sunlight.

NYTIMES:

Senator John McCain of Arizona sailed through five and a half hours of surgery for two malignant melanomas today without complications and with no immediate indication that the cancer had spread, his doctors said.

The operation involved removal of two malignant melanomas from his left temple and left upper arm along with lymph nodes from his neck and a portion of his salivary gland.

THE SURGERY IN 2003 WAS A RECURRENCE; HE ALREADY HAD SURGERY FOR MALIGNANT MELANOMA A FEW YEARS BEFORE.

• HE COULD GET IT AGAIN - AND IT COULD COME BACK WORSE.
• IT HAS ALREADY SPREAD TO HIS GLANDS ONCE.
• AND HE'S NOW 70 YEARS OLD. THE AGE HIS FATHER WAS WHEN HE DIED.
• YOU CAN SEE THE AGE AND ILLNESS ON HIS SCARRED FACE.
• IS THIS THE KIND OF MAN WE WANT TO BE PRESIDENT?

• LOOK AT HIS LEFT JAW LINE AND THE CHEEKBONE.
• ON THE LEFT, THE LINES TO HIS FACE ARE CLEAN AND FINE AND SYMMETRICAL.
• ON THE RIGHT - TAKEN A FEW YEARS AGO - HIS FACE IS SCARRED AND MISSHAPEN.
• HE HAS A BIG SCAR AND IT LOOKS LIKE AN IMPLANT.
• HE LOOKS LIKE A SICK, CANCEROUS MEAN OLD LIBERAL OLD MAN.

I SUSPECT MCCAIN IS NOT FIT FOR THE OFFICE BASED ON HIS CANCEROUS HISTORY.

I DEMAND HE RELEASE HIS MEDICAL RECORDS AT ONCE.

TEAM ROMNEY VERSUS TEAM MCCAIN

HERE'S "TEAM MCCAIN "- THESE ARE ALL PEOPLE MCCAIN'S MADE MAJOR DEALS WITH, AND THEY'RE ALL LIBS:



HERE'S TEAM ROMNEY:











WHERE DO YOU STAND?

DO YOU STAND WITH MCCAIN AND KENNEDY AND FEINGOLD AND LIBERMAN AND KERRY?

OR DO YOU STAND WITH ROMNEY AND LEVIN, INGRAHAM, HANNITY AND COULTER?

MCCAIN-FEINGOLD, MCCAIN-KENNEDY, MCCAIN-LIEBERMAN, AND MCCAIN EDWARDS: ARE THEY BILLS OR TICKETS?

The above are the names of major LIBERAL legislation in which the agenda of the Dem LIBERALS was proposed by a MAJOR Dem LIBERALS an MCCAIN.

But they might as well be the GOP ticket if McCain gets the nomination.

If you couldn't support McCain-Feingold or McCain-Kennedy or McCain-Lieberman of McCain-Edwards, then you shouldn't support McCain.

MCCAIN IS AS LOYAL AND AS CONSERVATIVE A REPUBLICAN AS LINC CHAFEE

... and Linc Chafee is now a lib Democrat!

The only difference is that forty years ago McCain got his jet shot out from under him (for the FIFTH TIME!) and landed in a commie POW camp - where he was tortured.

THANKS FOR YOUR VIETNAM SERVICE JOHN.

NOW GET LOST!

IF YOU PREFER "DIVIDED GOVERNMENT" THEN THERE'S ONLY ONE CHOICE: MITT ROMNEY

Clinton was elected with a Democrat Congress and lost it.

We ended up with divided government and it was good: the GOP Congress has a salutary effect.

Bush was elected with a GOP Congress and and lost it.

We ended up with divided government, and it was NOT so good - but....

Things like this happen all the time - at all levels of government. Americans do know how to split their ballot and vote for one party in the executive and another for the legislative.

If McCain is on the ballot in November, and if he runs against Obama or Hillary - (which is what's likely), then there won;t be divided government NO MATTER WHO WINS!

WHY!?

Simple: McCain is - for all intents and purposes a Democrat/Liberal.

My brilliant co-blogger Doug Ross proves in this short/visual MUST SEE POST that McCain has more in common with Obama and Hillary than he does with the GOP and Romney in this post.

Therefore, ANY VOTE FOR MCCAIN IS A VOTE FOR THE LIBERAL AGENDA.

There is only one way top guarantee the liberal agenda will at l;east be held in check; BY VOTING MITT.

Mitt is the only conservative left. And when he was governor of Massachusetts he proved that he knows how to use the veto.

So even if you don't love him, you MUST VOTE MITT MERELY TO HOLD THE LIBERALS IN CHECK.

A vote for McCain is a vote for carbon taxes, for tax increases on the wealthy, for more gun control, for less domestic oil exploration, for treating the terrorists in Gitmo like common criminals, AND TO SUPPORT GIVING AMNESTY TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

McCain will drive us down the road to serfdom and over the cliff.

DON'T VOTE MCCAIN!

"INDIAN AMERICANS" AT THE DNC

Not Native Americans. Indian Americans.

Among those Indian Americans chosen for a prominent role at the DNC is Iman Malik Mujahid, who according to India West, will sit on the DNC's selection committee and play a role in selecting delegates and alternates. Mujahid, which means "warrior" and derives from the same Arabic root as "jihad," is the founder and director of the Sound Vision Foundation. According to Sound Vision's web site, Iman Malik Mujahid

is the President and Director of Sound Vision Foundation Inc. He is an Imam in the Chicago area. A graduate of Darul Uloom Shah Waliullah in Islamic Studies and the University of Chicago in Political Science, he has learned television production as director and producer at the Chicago Access Corporation. He is the producer of Sound Vision's programs....

The above sounds innocuous enough, and one might assume that Mujahid is a public-relations specialist for the media. He probably is such a specialist.

But is he also something else?

According to this article ("Sound Vision = Fun with Fundamentalism for Kids : 'To acheive the best of this world and of the world to come'") at Militant Islam Monitor, Sound Vision specializes in certain kinds of materials with a special agenda:

The videos and vacation tips below are a few examples of how the Islamist 'parallel universe' is being marketed today and begs the question as to how a generation of children raised on the concept of 'life in the world to come' , who are being taught that "Animals are Muslims too " will react as adults when they come face to face with the infidel manifestations of humanity who refuse to "revert" to Islam.

The poster above which shows the September 11th attacks on New York, with the caption "America and American Muslims Under Attack" answers this question and reveals that for Islamists, only Muslims,( or potential converts), fall under the category of 'humanity'....

Read the MIM article on Sound Vision HERE.

Some choice for the DNC, huh?

[Hat-tip to the blog site Miss Kelly and Little Green Footballs for some of the above information]

Crossposted to Always On Watch

Homosexuality Trumps Confidentiality

There is an appalling case at the University of Georgia (also excerpted on today's "Education Watch") where a student was punished for something he wrote on a supposedly "confidential" survey. The university's guarantee of confidentiality to him was rendered a fraud.

How come? Because he wrote a scathing evaluation of a professor who himself admitted that he was "difficult". You still don't get it? The professor was a homosexual. Protecting homosexuals from criticism trumped all the integrity of the university's promises, apparently.

I was appalled enough about it to write as follows to University President Adams:

"Dear Prof Adams

As a survey researcher with over 200 papers in the academic journals, I was shocked and appalled to hear that your administration has failed to protect a guarantee of anonymity that you have given.

I find it hard to believe that you have allowed an emotional homosexual to undermine your integrity in the matter. I refer of course to the affair of Assoc. Prof Joseph Disponzio and student Beck.

You should have refused all co-operation with anything arising from a breach of the guarantee you have given.

You have completely undermined all such guarantees given not only by you but by all of us survey researchers -- guarantees that are essential to social research.

Please backpedal immediately and completely. You are an irresponsible and shortsighted fool if you do not.

I intend to post this letter on the net in order to discourage you from ignoring it. Your actions in the matter so far do not inspire much confidence in you

Yours faithfully

(Dr) John Ray

I was probably not as nicey-nicey as I should have been so I encourage others to add their voices to mine. The email address for Adams is: presuga@uga.edu


Posted by John Ray

Gottfried on Goldberg

Paul Gottfried is a very grumpy conservative who spends most of his time attacking other conservatives. His own stance seems to be somewhere between paleoconservatism and libertarianism but no doubt he would be grumpy about that characterization too.

So it is no surprise that his short review of Jonah Goldberg's book is grumpy too -- apparently accentuated in this case by the fact that Gottfried has himself written to similar effect but has has not got nearly as much publicity as Goldberg. So amid the gloom, one reads a few quite good comments:

"Italian Fascism, until Mussolini unwisely threw in his lot with Hitler in 1936, enjoyed immense support among socialists in the U.S. and Western Europe. For many foreign partisans of Mussolini's corporatist experiment, fascism looked very much like socialism. And since fascists talked about "national revolutions" and condemned market capitalism, they seemed to the editors of The New Republic, and many others, much like those standing on the left side of History.

Well into FDR's first term, he and his Brain Trusters looked to the Italian model as a usable blue print for "mobilizing" the American people in the face of the Depression. Massive subsidies to reactivate the work force and to carry out public works programs of all kinds were aspects of the New Deal that had already been tried out by the Italian Fascist state. And unlike the Nazi regime, which came to power in 1933 just before FDR's inauguration, Mussolini did not oppress Jews or impose anything resembling Nazi race laws until after his shift into Hitler's orbit. As late as 1935, he was the most outspoken and vigorous enemy of Hitler on the European continent."

Gottfried probably has picked up a few minor errors in Jonah's book -- such as just where Carl Schmitt fitted into the Nazi regime -- but there are also major points on which he is plain wrong. He says:

"Fascism was a movement of the anti-libertarian Right. What made it a force of the Right, to repeat my point one last time, was its emphatic rejection of the principle of equality and its search for social models in antiquity-as opposed to the Left's vision of an ideal future that might be extended to the entire human race

The claim there -- that the Left differ from Fascists in that the Fascists to a degree looked backwards for inspiration -- entirely ignores the love-affair between the Greens and the Left that we see today. The current Left generally do their best to facilitate the Greenie push to return us to a romanticized and idealized past. Think of Al Gore! Modern-day Leftists are just as reactionary as Hitler and Musso were -- maybe even more so. Hitler and Mussolini were in fact clear precursors of the Greenies. See here and here.

Secondly, Gottfried's claim about "rejection of the principle of equality" also ignores Hitler's central slogan: Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuehrer. Hitler wanted all Germans to be one. The slogan means "One people, one government, one leader". Hitler DID want all Germans to be equal -- though of course he wanted himself and his henchmen to be the wise leaders who would guide the masses (The Fuehrerprinzip). But how is THAT different from the Leftist spokesmen of today? In Orwell's memorable phrase, both the Fascists of yesteryear and the Left of today believe that "all pigs are equal but some are more equal than others". That the modern-day Left are more circumspect about saying as much is the only difference. Both believe in their own superior wisdom and try to impose their tyrannies however they can

Gottfried also seems to be quite out of touch when he says this as evidence of the difference between Fascism and Leftism:

"Fascist government did nothing of significance to change productive forces or to redistribute wealth. It made owners, managers, and workers into contributors to an overarching Fascist order; and it required industrial leaders to consult with Fascist mediators before "releasing workers from their duties." Workers were then given unemployment compensation"

Sorry but that seems like a pretty good description of (say) the British Labour Party government of today -- with its unfair dismissal laws and its abject failure to close Britain's notorious social class gaps. And the red-tape with which British industry has been burdened does seem to me to have "made owners, managers, and workers into contributors to an overarching Fascist order". Their degree of autonomy shrinks year by year.

Gottfried thinks he is so much wiser than Jonah but he shows precious little evidence of it.

Posted by John Ray

NETANYAHU: OLMERT IS UNFIT TO LEAD

Benjamin Netanyahu has given his own press conference about Ehud Olmert (via J6D Newsblog):

Labor chairman Ehud Barak must insist on Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's departure following the publication of the Winograd Report on the Second Lebanon War, Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu said Thursday at the party's Tel Aviv headquarters.

Netanyahu said the failures the committee noted in its report and the fact that most of the nation believes that Olmert must resign obligated him to do so.

"Olmert refuses to take responsibility, to demonstrate personal honesty and leadership and to do what most of the public expect him to do," Netanyahu said. "The prime minister is emptying of content the concept of responsibility. The people of Israel know today that they are led by a prime minister who is not qualified or fit to lead them.

Barak knows this and he knows that the public expects him to ensure that this failed leadership does not continue."

Netanyahu accused Olmert of "running from responsibility" after losing a war in which his government had unprecedented national and international support and an unprecedented advantage over its enemy in Israel's longest battle since the War of Independence. He rejected attempts to blame the IDF for the war's failures.

"The IDF warriors fought heroically," Netanyahu said. "An amateur government is responsible for the failure."

That's right, it's the government that let down the army and the public.

WHAT MAKES THE WORLD SAFER AND MORE PEACEFUL: MAKING CLOONEY A UN PEACE MESSENGER, OR KILLING AL QAEDA BIGGIES?

TWO FROM THE BBC: Clooney made UN peace messenger

Oscar-winning actor George Clooney has officially been appointed a United Nations peace envoy in New York.

The film star, who will promote the UN's peacekeeping missions around the world, arrived in the city from a trip to the Darfur region of Sudan.

Mr Clooney told the BBC he hoped to be able to help the people he met there who had suffered in the conflict.

Among the eight other peace messengers are actor Michael Douglas and Israeli classical musician Daniel Barenboim.

AND THEN THIS ONE: Senior al-Qaeda commander killed

A senior al-Qaeda leader in Afghanistan, Abu Laith al-Libi, has been killed, Western counter-terrorism officials have told the BBC.

News of his death emerged on a website used by Islamist groups. Ekhlaas.org said he had "fallen as a martyr".

There is speculation that he was killed by a US missile strike in the North Waziristan area of Pakistan this week.

He is believed to have behind an attack at an Afghan air base a year ago, while the US vice-president was visiting.

A Pakistani daily paper, the News, reported that the suspected US strike was aimed at Libi and another senior figure, Obaidah al-Masri.

• WHICH MAKES THE WORLD SAFER, NAMING CLOONEY A PEACE MESSENGER OR KILLING BAD GUYS!?

• KILLING BAD GUYS DOES. EVERY TIME

• IOW: THE US MILITARY ARE THE REAL PEACE MESSENGERS.

• CLOONEY AND THE SCUM-SUCKING WHORES OF THE UN ARE A BUNCH OF EVIL-APPEASING PUSSIES.

• WHAT IDIOTARIAN LIBS - LIKE THE UN WHORES AND CLOONEY DO - HAS NO EFFECT, EXCEPT TO AGGRANDIZE THE EGOS OF ASSHOLE ACTORS AND SCUMBAG DIPLOMATS.
  

JUST SAYING...

BIRD FLU GETTING MUCH WORSE IN ASIA

MIDDAY (BOMBAY, INDIA): Bird flu kills three in Indonesia

Jakarta: Bird flu killed three victims in as many days in Indonesia and has ravaged poultry stocks in Tibet and India, as the virus picks up steam across Asia.

Indonesia's announcement yesterday of the death of a 32-year-old man raised its human toll to 101, accounting for nearly half the worldwide total.

• ER UM... THAT'S TOTAL SO FAR...
• BELIEVE IT OR NOT, A BIRD FLU PANDEMIC MIGHT JUST BECOME THE BIGGEST ISSUE OF THE ELECTION - AND OUR LIVES.
• I'D RATHER HAVE MITT AS CAPTAIN OF MY SHIP THAN MCCAIN OR HILLARY OR OBAMA.

MCCAIN NEARLY LEFT GOP: THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS SCOOPED DRUDGE!

DRUDGE TONIGHT:

PAPER: Dem say McCain nearly abandoned GOP...

WELL, THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS INDEPENDENTLY FOUND AND LINKED TO THIS NEARLY FORGOTTEN YEAR-OLD PIECE OVER A WEEK AGO!

HERE:

REMINDER: MCCAIN NEARLY SWITCHED PARTIES IN 2000

THE HILL:

Democrats say McCain nearly abandoned GOP

By Bob Cusack

Posted: 03/28/07 07:39 PM [ET]

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was close to leaving the Republican Party in 2001, weeks before then-Sen. Jim Jeffords (Vt.) famously announced his decision to become an Independent, according to former Democratic lawmakers who say they were involved in the discussions.

In interviews with The Hill this month, former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) and ex-Rep. Tom Downey (D-N.Y.) said there were nearly two months of talks with the maverick lawmaker following an approach by John Weaver, McCain’s chief political strategist.

Democrats had contacted Jeffords and then-Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) in the early months of 2001 about switching parties, but in McCain’s case, they said, it was McCain’s top strategist who came to them.

• MCCAIN IS NOT A CONSERVATIVE.
• MCCAIN IS NOT A LOYAL REPUBLICAN.
• MCCAIN IS A GOOD HAWK, AND THAT'S ABOUT IT.

BOTTOM-LINE: MCCAIN DOESN'T DESERVE TO BE THE STANDARD-BEARER FOR THE GOP.

NOT ANYMORE THAN CHAFFEE - WHO IS NOW A DEM, AND JEFFORDS, WHO LEFT THE GOP AND CAUCUSED WITH THE DEMS.

(ASIDE: AND EVEN MCCAIN'S HAWKISHNESS IS FLAWED:

• HE SAID WE'D LOSE TO SERBIA WITHOUT GROUND TROOPS - AND HE WAS WRONG; WE WON WITHOUT THEM;
  
• HE SAID WE NEEDED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS MORE TROOPS IN IRAQ - BUT WE DEFEATED AL QAEDA WITH A SURGE OF 30,000 AND A TOTAL OF 160,000 - SO HE WAS WRONG AGAIN.)

Permalink - Posted by Reliapundit

• AT THE TIME, WE GOT A LINK ON IT FROM ALLAHPUNDIT AT HOT AIR.

• NOW - A WEEK LATER LATER - THE GREAT MATT DRUDGE REMEMBERS.

• I'M GLAD DRUDGE HAS LINKED TO IT - EVERY GOP VOTER SHOULD REALIZE THAT MCCAIN IS LYING LIBERAL SCUM, AND VOTE FOR MITT.

MCCAIN NEARLY LEFT THE PARTY IN 2000 - AND NEARLY RAN WITH KERRY IN 2004!

MCCAIN IS UNFIT TO LEAD THE GOP!

EVERY BLOGOSPHERIC READER SHOULD REMEMBER THAT - AND THIS:

THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS SCOOPED DRUDGE! THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS SCOOPED DRUDGE! THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS SCOOPED DRUDGE! THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS SCOOPED DRUDGE!

BLOGROLL US!

READ US TWICE A DAY!

I JUST DONATED TO MITT - NOW IT'S YOUR TURN

I looked at my W2 and said I can't afford to do this.

Then, I looked in my soul and said I can't afford NOT to.

NOW IT'S YOUR TURN!

Use the handy-dandy button atop the sidebar.

AND USE IT NOW!

Donate whatever you can.

The money you give will send a very powerful message: conservatism is not dead; we've only just begun to fight!

IS OBAMA THE MUSLIM'S MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE?

• OBAMA - WHO IS 1/2 KENYAN-MUSLIM - WAS FOR DECADES BANKROLLED BY REZKO -A CROOKED SYRIAN, WHO - NOW WE LEARN - WAS BANKROLLED BY A CROOKED IRAQ.

• I THINK THESE LAYERS OF CORRUPTION OVERLAPPING ISLAM SHOULD WORRY EVERYONE.

IS OBAMA THE MUSLIM'S MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE?

• I DUNNO... HE'S A DANGEROUS LEFTIST AS IS - AND TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE ON THESE GROUNDS ALONE, BUT THESE SLIMY MUSLIM CONNECTIONS CREEP ME OUT.

• I MEAN, HE ALSO SUPPORTS THE MUSLIM THUG (HIS CUZ) WHO IS BEHIND "THE KENYA INTIFADA".

• AND THEN THERE'S ROBERT MALLEY - ONE OF OBAMA'S KEY THE SYRIAN FOREIGN POLICY ADVISORS...

• IT'S ALL TOO STINKING CORRUPT AND ANTI-AMERICAN FOR ME - AND IN A VERY MUSLIM WAY.

JUST SAYING

YUP: LIBERALS LOVE MCCAIN

I had dinner with one of the most liberal people I know. He goes way back with the left-wing movement. He was a buddy of Paul Newman, McGovern, Eldridge Cleaver, Ramsey Clark, Jane Fonda, Prince Sihanouk, Eugene McCarthy, Bela Abzug, The Nation folks, the CCR, the ACLU, was in two commie cells in the 1950's - and marched against every war since Vietnam, including Iraq.

He thinks it would be great if McCain won the GOP nomination because he could happily vote for McCain. Likes him a lot.

Libs know he's one of them.

AMIR PERETZ BLAMES PREDECESSORS FOR WAR'S FAILURE

Because he was cited as being part of the problem in the Winograd report, Amir Peretz has now given a press conference in which he says that his predecessors in the defense ministry are responsible for the failure of the 2nd Lebanon war:

Peretz stated that his predecessors should have been held accountable for much of the failings revealed in the war, pointing the finger particularly at former Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and former Defense Minister and current Labor Chairman Ehud Barak.

"There are tough questions regarding the six years prior to the war. This needs to be investigated further. Mofaz remained silent and did not alert about the failings (during his term in office). I have paid a heavy political price for years of failed policy.

"These questions should be presented to those who stated that the IDF needs to be a small and clever army, and thus jumpstarted the dynamics that led us to this catastrophe; and to those who decided that Israel could withdraw from Lebanon without an agreement, while abandoning our Christian allies and creating a vacuum that drew Hizbullah in."

Well, I'm glad he's pointing out that his two predecessors also have blame to shoulder. Because even Mofaz and Barak cannot be allowed to escape blame for their own negligence.

IN ISRAEL, EVEN POLITICIANS HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY

Shortly before the Winograd report was published, Michael Oren in the Wall Street Journal has something to say in relation:

The war began on July 12, 2006, when Hezbollah gunmen ambushed an Israeli border patrol, killing eight and kidnapping two. Mr. Olmert's response, a large-scale campaign intended to crush Hezbollah and secure the soldiers' release, was supported by most Israelis until serious mismanagement of the war surfaced. While receiving inadequate or faulty equipment -- my rifle literally fell apart in my hands -- Israeli forces were denied permission to invade Southern Lebanon and neutralize the katyusha rockets that were pummeling Israeli cities. Instead, Israeli jets bombed the Lebanese routes through which Syria resupplied Hezbollah and destroyed the organization's Beirut headquarters.

These attacks obliterated much of Hezbollah's infrastructure and killed a fourth of its fighters, but they also laid waste to a large part of Lebanon, killing civilians and squandering Israel's initial international backing. Hundreds of rockets, meanwhile, continued to smash into northern Israel, displacing a half-million civilians. Only on Aug. 13, after a month of fighting and with a U.N. ceasefire already approved, did the government authorize a ground offensive into Lebanon. The operation achieved nothing, either militarily or diplomatically, and cost the lives of 33 Israeli troops.

In another country, perhaps, such blunders might result in the resignation of senior officers but not necessarily elected officials. In Israel, though, no one is above blame. Accountability for decision making is a tenet of the Zionist ethos on which the Jewish state is based and, unlike most nations, Israel has a citizens' army in which the great majority -- politicians included -- serve. Most uniquely, Israel confronts daily security dangers and long-term threats to its existence. Israelis can neither condone nor afford a prime minister who passes the buck to their army or shirks the onus of defense. The person who sends us into battle cannot escape responsibility for our fate.

And that person is mainly Ehud Olmert.

Voting

On November 4, American voters — nowhere near all of those eligble — will go to the polls and cast their ballots for the President of their choice. Many voters believe that they are educated voters who understand the issues and that they reach a measured decision. As is often the case, voters want change. The following video clip (about two minutes in length) shows various Presidential aspirants repeating the message of change, an oft-cited reason for casting one's ballot:






According to this "The Science of Presidential Complexity," an article from the January 28, 2008 edition of the Washington Post, however, most votes are cast without much consideration as to agreement with a potential leader's views and, instead, are based on voting for simplistic solutions, even though those proposed solutions are much the same as campaign promises unkept over and over again (emphases mine):

The question is not whether we agree with these views: Politicians stake out such positions precisely because they strike a chord with many voters. The question is why we like our bromides so simple -- especially when the same promises have been offered to us time and again in previous elections.

[...]

"Low complexity wins elections," said psychologist Lucian Gideon Conway III of the University of Montana at Missoula, who published his analysis of the presidential speeches in the journal Political Psychology. "People like simple answers, and someone saying, 'I don't have all the answers and here are five possibilities' is a hard sell compared to someone who says, 'I have a plan and it is going to work and my opponent is completely wrong.' "

The result is a paradox. Politicians offer simplistic solutions in order to win elections. But to govern, they must quickly ratchet up their complexity because they confront costs, consequences and compromises. But when up for reelection, it's time to dumb things down again.

[...]

So the next time you hear presidential candidates say simplistic things that people want to hear, remember that they are merely responding rationally to the incentives that voters give them. The disturbing question is not why politicians pander, but why pandering works -- and for that we need to look in the mirror.

According to the article, past leaders have campaigned on simplicity, but once in office, have gone on to offer solutions which were more complex:

Those who changed history -- a group that included leaders from George Washington to Fidel Castro -- invariably had simple ideas as they went about winning power but quickly increased the complexity of their thinking after they obtained power. Revolutionaries who offered complex ideas to begin with or those whose complexity did not quickly increase after wining power usually were failures.

Over and over again, voters, those who don't become cynics and disenfranchise themselves, desire that the promises made to win elections and how elected leaders govern be consistent and related — an assumed connection on the part of voters for as long as I can remember. But maybe hoping for that consistency is as elusive as chasing a rainbow. Perhaps once in power, leaders suffer a reality check and are forced to govern in a manner quite different from their original promises and ideas. Then again, that explanation as to why leaders once in office so often disappoint the citizeny, including those who once staunchly supported a given candidate during a campaign, may be a simplistic rationale, too.

In my view, citizens often do not get the government they voted for. Nevertheless, in the next election, the desire for change sends the diehard voters, hopeful once again or detemined to vote against a particular candidate, to the polls. This cycle, dating back to the earliest days of self-government is self-perpetuating. So far, however, mankind has not come up with a better idea than the imperfect system of electing leaders who almost inevitably disappoint the governed.

(Crossposted to Always On Watch)