Frisco Nan's Accusation

You'd think Frisco Nan couldn't have ensnared herself in the tar of the CIA interrogation methods mess, after reading this post from late last month.

You would be wrong.

Last week, the Speaker's weekly gabfest, at which she parades out in front of the press, resulted in a feeding frenzy. For once, inexplicably, the liberal press began to grill Nan on the 'enhanced interrogation methods' issue.

Nan buckled and blurted out that the CIA had lied to her. She was asked pointedly about this by a reporter, and affirmed that the agency's personnel had "lied" to her.

Even liberal CIA director Leon Panetta, the administration's stooge heading up the agency, fired back at Nan, protecting his agency and its personnel.

Nan continues to exhibit her less-then-average intelligence, if you pardon the pun, in this affair.

She's now on record with about four different explanations of what she thought she knew, and when. Now she's compounded it by accusing CIA personnel of simply lying to her.

Nan seems to believe that being Speaker makes her unassailable and infallible. Sort of like Jim Wright used to behave when he was Speaker.

This time, however, Nan has made a serious miscalculation. There were others at the briefings. Her own staff member attended at least one briefing at issue. And there were minutes of the briefings. As my prior post noted, some have pointed out that, if Nan didn't voice objections to the interrogation methods at the time, then she's in a very bad position now.

Since Nan threw down the gauntlet and accused the CIA of lying, it's a fairly simple matter to now investigate just who is lying. If it's not the CIA, then it has to be Frisco Nan. There's no other conclusion anymore.

Could the House Democratic blue dogs eventually call for her resignation as Speaker if Nan is shown to be the liar?

Glenn Beck's 912 Project Gains Momentum

I wrote this post about Glenn Beck's 912 Project back in March of this year. In that piece, I opined,

"While, as I noted above, I don't expect Glenn Beck to attempt to control the movement, I do expect him, at some point in the near future, to suggest that the local groups consider demanding that candidates for office in 2010 take a pledge to uphold the 912 Project's principles and values, or face opposition from one of the group's members in that locale or district."

I also offered a few sketchy scenarios concerning what could happen in Congress due to the influence or effects of this endeavor.

However, last Friday, when Beck had another live-audience program in the Fox ground floor studio on 6th Avenue, several new developments came to light. I have to say that I was right about the 912 Project spurring political change, but wrong about where and how. No surprise there.

As if taking their cue from Jeb Bush's interview in the Wall Street Journal back in February, and Beck's project, four state legislators from Utah, Texas, Montana and another state which I cannot recall, were in attendance, discussed laws they are introducing or have passed that limit federal actions in their state, as well as a new organization for state lawmakers across the country, the Patrick Henry Caucus.

Listening to various audience members, including Fox News lead Legal Contributor, retired NJ Judge Andrew Napolitano, and a Tenth Amendment expert, it became clear that what many people feel ails our nation is not a partisan issue, but a state's rights issue.

As the Tenth Amendment expert noted, the Constitution was written in such a way as to leave most governmental power to the states, where, it was felt, you'd be electing dozens of local citizens, from small districts, to your own legislator. Accountability would be, presumably, greater in the many, smaller districts.

For example, in my own state of residence, New Jersey, the most densely-populated state in the Union, many state representative districts share a single federal Congressional Representative. Although this state was long-ago captured by liberal attorneys, in theory, what ails my state is fairly easily fixed by many, smallish groups rising up and replacing our state representatives, thus shifting policy. Because running for a state representative seat is much less expensive than a Congressional seat, it should be easier to 'take back' the state, than the federal government.

This is something which, I confess, had not occurred to me quite so clearly prior to viewing Beck's Friday program.

But it became very clear that a lot of state legislators, without partisan labeling, are serious about competing with other states to offer a hospitable, low-tax, low-regulatory climate, with which to attract new business and residents.

Additionally, states are not allowed, legally, to run deficits at all, or for very long. Thus, they tend to have to actually "work." Well, they're supposed to, anyway.

One major debate topic was the unconstitutionality of Barney Frank's call to give federal loan guarantees to California bonds. Several people, including the state legislators, repudiated the right of the federal government to make 49 other states responsible for bailing out California's messed up government and budget.

This does, indeed, sound like a serious "line in the sand" issue. And, in fact, it would seem that California is in danger of legal bankruptcy about a decade ahead of when I predicted to my daughter just last March that this would happen. New Jersey and Illinois are close on its heels.

All of this is, I think, excellent. Rather than partisan bickering about whose party has screwed up Washington more, the issue is morphing into people, through their states, desiring to have such uninfluencable activity and spending reined in by stronger states' rights. Whether Democrat or Republican, people seem to feel aghast and helpless as both parties have, since Teddy Roosevelt, made the federal government more rapacious and unconstitutionally powerful.

Napolitano, I believe, reminded everyone that there are only 13 enumerated federal powers in the Constitution, with the Tenth Amendment reserving the remainder to the states.

I think Beck's 912 Project is already facilitating a structured, productive movement, or movements, to affect federal-level problems in our country. The solutions appear to be taking on a distinctive state-based, populist flavor which will be more answerable to voters in their smaller, more numerous state representative and senate districts.

This would seem to be a very good thing.

Dick Cheney On Colin Powell

Last week, I wrote my own opinion regarding Colin Powell's recent remarks regarding the GOP's current state.

Along with his comments on releasing CIA interrogation pictures, former VP Dick Cheney also weighed in on Powell's comments. His sentiments echoed my own.

Cheney said he didn't know Powell was even still a Republican, since he'd so explicitly backed Wonderboy in the last election.

I've always liked Cheney for his candor, and this time is no exception. 1991 was a long time ago, and Cheney doesn't let his work with Powell back then, during the fight for Kuwait, cloud his current response to Powell's actions and comments.

Is Dick Cheney Still VP?

Wow, that was quick!

Dick Cheney gives a couple of interviews, publicizing his views on the inappropriateness of releasing photographs from CIA files, and, presto, Wonderboy relents.

Is Joe Biden even in this administration?

Despite many people feeling he was out of line, as a former VP, Cheney's comments about the threat to national security evidently shoved the First Rookie back into line. Perhaps Cheney's drip feed of remarks finally percolated that thick liberal skull of the new president.

So, once again, Wonderboy changed direction and followed his predecessor's policies on anti-terrorism strategies.

If only he could somehow leave Guantanamo open. I'll be he wishes he'd kept his mouth shut about that now, don't you?

Promises, Promises.....Unaffordable Promises

I haven't located the video clip on YouTube yet, but bumbling VP Joe Biden made an unbelievable promise on camera to a group of school kids the other day. The clip aired on Bill O'Reilly's Fox News channel program last night. As soon as I locate it, I'll embed it or paste the link into a post.

Biden was captured live promising that Wonderboy and he will make sure that every child who wants to, goes to college. And if their family can't afford the expenses, the federal government will pay for it.

Not loan them money. Not offer grants.

No, the government will just pick up the tab. Period.

How in the world can US taxpayers afford this promise?

Those Wacky Kennedy Boys

I mentioned in this recent post on my companion business blog that I subscribe to the uber-liberally biased Outside Magazine.

In another recent issue of the periodical, I found a story about the current situation in the dictatorship of Venezuela. The picture painted by the article's author was truly horrendous; rampant thievery, kidnapping, drugging of tourists to rob them, advice to avoid any unknown taxi drivers.

In part of the story, the writer related how his taxi driver/guide bemoaned how Chavez parades on the world stage as an environmentalist, yet, at home, prices gasoline at the equivalent of US $.40/gallon. This subsidy has brought incredible congestion to the streets of Venezuela's major cities.

This got me thinking about those wacky Kennedy boys, Joe and Bobby.

Joe is that annoying do-gooder with the commercials showing him in a utility suit, heating oil hose nozzle in hand, dispensing free, Venezuelan-sourced fuel to American poor. Joe decries all things conservative, ignores how some of these people brought about their own evictions or financial problems, alleges that our government has failed them by failing to provide them with heating oil, then gets to work with his fuel truck.

Thus, Joe is supporting Hugo Chavez' wanton environmental destruction via artificially cheap gasoline prices.

But then we have Bobby. Well, Bobby, Jr., I guess. Except the original Bobby is dead, so Bobby, Jr. could be just plain old Bobby.

Anyway, I digress.

Bobby is often seen arguing for green energy grids, non-carbon energy sources, etc. The usually greenie heaven on earth, with no thought to cost or jobs and industrial electrical or locomotive power lost.

So, here's my question.

Shouldn't Joe and Bobby get their stories straight? Their combined acts together?

One of them, Joe, is ought dispensing free, carbon-based fuel, on behalf of a banana republic dictator who is polluting the world thought overly-subsidized fuel prices.

The other is railing against carbon economies.

Shouldn't they have just one family story line?

Or are they following their grandfather Joe's financial instincts, and providing a sort of "Kennedy energy hedge," by being on both sides of the same environmental issue at once?

Ah, those wacky Kennedy boys.

Maybe their Uncle Teddy should take them for a ride in his car out Edgartown way, to solve this Kennedy political split?

With his brain cancer, do you think he'll even know he's underwater when they go off the bridge this time?

Regarding Jack Kemp

Jack Kemp's recent death has unleashed a torrent of punditry about what he did, or did not, stand for. Many in the media knew him, both as a Congressman, VP candidate, and HUD Secretary.

Kemp's explicit and solid pro-growth economic credentials typically caused him to be labeled as a conservative. Of course, his stance on social issues was more mainstream.

However, with his passing, many, like ditzy Wall Street Journal weekend columnist Peggy Noonan, are plunging, yet again, into diatribes about how the GOP needs to be more centrist and mainstream. This time, they bemoan the party's reaction to Arlen Specter's job-protection-induced switch to the Democrats, and claim that Kemp's legacy should be a bigger tent for the Republican party.

As far as I know, Kemp was on a losing GOP ticket with Bob Dole, the latter no solid conservative, either. I'm sure Jack Kemp was a good Representative for his district in Buffalo. The tax cut legislation that bore his name certainly was good for the country.

But I never actually heard Kemp scold the GOP for being too doctrinaire. If anything, I'd say the story about his celebratory letters to his grandchildren on Wonderboy's election indicates he was fooled by the candidate's attempts to portray himself as centrist, rather than the extreme liberal he actually is, and governs as.

Jack Kemp was a valuable member of the GOP for many years. But I don't think that means we should automatically attribute things to him that he didn't necessarily say, nor give all of his opinions the same weight as those of successful GOP presidential candidates.