uvAggravator2.0

Could there be some sort of statewide ambition planned, especially with an opening at the LG position?

She raked in $128,229 in the first six months of this year, second only to Dick Saslaw.  Damn. 

I wouldn’t have expected Judge Andrew Napolitano to be a huge standout at last week’s RightOnline conference, be he absolutely knocked it out of the park with this speech. This has got to be one of the most powerful defenses of our Constitution and Constitutionally-guaranteed liberties I’ve ever heard presented. 

Videos of all the speeches can be found here. I highly recommend watching Mike Pence, Michelle Bachman and Herman Cain also.

The only argument the left can apparently bring to bear against the Tea Party movement is that it’s a bunch of uneducated, incompetent white racists who want to return America to the days of segregation and slavery. To highlight the utter ridiculousness of such drivel, which is quite evidently a tacit admission that the left simply can’t debate the issues, I bring you this supposed racist by the name of Herman Cain who spoke at Americans For Prosperity’s RightOnline conference last weekend.

Let’s just see the left try to throw the unenlightened racist smear at this guy.

Out of ammo, lefties?  That racism tar-brush not working?  How about you bother to address the issues for a change then, rather than try to shut down the debate by calling everyone who doesn’t agree with you a bigot.

Prince William County Chairman Corey Stewart released his draft of the Rule of Law Act today, and immediately members of the House of Delegates pledged to introduce it during next year’s session of the General Assembly.  Despite the ongoing and inevitable (given the current Administration in Washington) legal wranglings that are tying up SB 1070 in Arizona, there’s hope that Virginia will move ahead to protect taxpayers, legal workers, honest businesses and our community, all of which suffer from the impacts of illegal immigration and those who profit by perpetuating the state of rampant lawlessness it creates. (more…)

The Washington Post looks at Ken Cuccinelli and manages to not make him into the snarling knuckle-dragger that their editorial board wants to portray him.  And interesting look at a guy who a lot of people try and define on the extreme, but is actually much deeper than most realize.  

He's going places.

We have often heard mention of Ronald Reagan’s speech about “bold colors” and not “pale pastels” in which he encouraged Conservatives to draw clear distinctions between themselves and the Liberal movement. There are some in the Republican Party who long derided this philosophy as “divisive” and claimed that this style of conservatism “could not win”.

However, according to a The New Republic article, this tactic is not only working, but working brilliantly.

The Pew Research Study cited by The New Republic indicates that voters are, by and large, identifying their philosophy as conservative. In other words, by being bold in our beliefs, via the TEA Party movement and other recent activism, we have seen a public shift in our direction.

It would seem that Ken Cuccinelli-style conservatism is more “mainstream” than many would like to admit.

It’s been nearly two months since the Gaza “freedom flotilla” captivated and divided the world.  Now, for the first time, we have an idea of what the Turkish electorate thinks – and for the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP), the answer is not good.

Amidst the discussion of Turkey becoming the newest jihadist haven (and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan becoming the next jihadist leader), yours truly noticed that Erdogan’s AKP was in political trouble.  What was not known was the effect of the flotilla fallout.

Well, now we know.  Sonar Aristrima conducts monthly polls on Turkey.  Angus Reid and Bloomberg reported on its July figures.  Compared to May (before the flotilla raid), the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) has gained a point, while the AKP is flat.  Among other things, this put’s CHP’s lead outside the margin of error.

Meanwhile, the third place Nationalist Movement Party/Nationalist Action Party (MHP) easily clears the 10% threshold needed to remain in Parilament – meaning the CHP and MHP can still block the AKP from returning to power.

Bloomberg has some other details which are none too promising for the AKP:

Erdogan received the lowest rating for trust of any Turkish leader or government branch listed in the poll, at 33 percent. The most trustworthy was the armed forces, with 78 percent. The poll also shows 46 percent of respondents had a negative outlook on the economy.

According to the poll, 77 percent said unemployment was the country’s most important problem.

I reiterate two things I said last time: the election is a year away, and the CHP, while secular, is a left-wing party that will give Washington some headaches.  Still, two months after Erdogan was basking in the glow of an international spin campaign par excellence, the people who actually determine if he’ll keep his job are as unhappy with him now as they were then.

The rest of us need to keep that in mind.

Cross-posted to BD

It’s been nearly two months since the Gaza “freedom flotilla” captivated and divided the world. Now, for the first time, we have an idea of what the Turkish electorate thinks – and for the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP), the answer is not good.

Amidst the discussion of Turkey becoming the newest jihadist haven (and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan becoming the next jihadist leader), yours truly noticed that Erdogan’s AKP was in political trouble. What was not known was the effect of the flotilla fallout.

Well, now we know. Sonar Aristrima conducts monthly polls on Turkey. Angus Reid and Bloomberg reported on its July figures. Compared to May (before the flotilla raid), the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) has gained a point, while the AKP is flat. Among other things, this put’s CHP’s lead outside the margin of error.

Meanwhile, the third place Nationalist Movement Party/Nationalist Action Party (MHP) easily clears the 10% threshold needed to remain in Parilament – meaning the CHP and MHP can still block the AKP from returning to power.

Bloomberg has some other details which are none too promising for the AKP:

Erdogan received the lowest rating for trust of any Turkish leader or government branch listed in the poll, at 33 percent. The most trustworthy was the armed forces, with 78 percent. The poll also shows 46 percent of respondents had a negative outlook on the economy.

According to the poll, 77 percent said unemployment was the country’s most important problem.

I reiterate two things I said last time: the election is a year away, and the CHP, while secular, is a left-wing party that will give Washington some headaches. Still, two months after Erdogan was basking in the glow of an international spin campaign par excellence, the people who actually determine if he’ll keep his job are as unhappy with him now as they were then.

The rest of us need to keep that in mind.

Cross-posted to RWL

Governor Bob McDonnell today announced a town hall tour around Virginia. Coming on the heels of a stellar report on his approval ratings, the Governor will continue his outreach to Virginians across the state. This should be pretty interesting considering unemployment is still extremely high in some parts of the state. Can’t wait to see what kind of stories and soundbites come from this tour.

From the press release:

Governor Bob McDonnell will hit the road in August to hold eight town hall meetings around the Commonwealth. The tour will kick off in Roanoke on Wednesday, August 4th. The “Virginia Speaks: A Conversation about Jobs, Government Reform and Our Future” events will allow Virginians to speak directly with Virginia’s governor about the issues facing the Commonwealth. The governor will also spend a portion of each town hall discussing his efforts to make government smaller and simpler, privatize Virginia’s state run ABC stores, and create good jobs statewide. In addition to Roanoke, “Virginia Speaks” town halls will be held in Norfolk, Chester, Fredericksburg, Fairfax, Harrisonburg and Danville before concluding in Bristol on August 31st.

Discussing the “Virginia Speaks” statewide tour, Governor McDonnell noted, “I’ve served in elected office for 18 years. During that time I have consistently found that the best ideas don’t come from Richmond, they come from Virginians in communities statewide. We are focused on reforming state government to make it simpler, smaller and more efficient. To best accomplish this goal we must hear from the citizens who own that government, and who deal with it on a daily basis. That’s why we are launching the ‘Virginia Speaks’ statewide town hall tour. It’s your government, and we want to know how we can make it work better for you.”

McDonnell continued, “One of our ideas to make government smaller and simpler, while providing an immediate infusion of new revenue for transportation, is to privatize Virginia’s state-run ABC stores. Our state government must be focused on core priorities instead of services that should rightly be provided by the private sector, offering Virginians more choice and convenience. In a tough economy, why should we miss out on hundreds of millions of dollars for roads just so the state government can retain a monopoly on the sale of bourbon and vodka? We need to get roads built, and we need to refocus government on its core responsibilities. Privatizing ABC will accomplish both goals, and I’m going to talk about this proposal at each one of our town halls. I know Virginians will be able to help us privatize ABC the right way by sharing their experiences and good ideas.”

The Governor concluded, “I’m also going to discuss other ways by which we can reform Virginia’s state government, and how we are working to help the private sector create the good jobs we need in every community. More importantly however, I’m going to spend my time listening. I want Virginians to tell us how government can work better, what would make it easier to access and use, what doesn’t work, and what we can do to ensure a better return on their investment. I’m looking forward to starting this tour and traveling all across the Commonwealth in August.”

The governor will be joined at each town hall by a number of cabinet secretaries and Administration officials. In addition to the sites of the official “Virginia Speaks” events, the governor will be traveling to a number of other Virginia cities and counties during this same time period. Details of the governor’s public events for each week will continue to be released through the Friday weekly public schedule.

Additionally, in order to accommodate the “Virginia Speaks” tour, and ensure the maximum amount of public input for the Governor’s Commission on Government Reform and Restructuring, the previously scheduled final full meeting of the Commission has been moved from August 26th to September 13th. The meeting will still be held in Richmond. The interim report of the Commission will now be issued by September 15th.

Townhall Dates:

August 4, 2010 — 7:00pm-8:30pm

Roanoke
Roanoke County Administration Center
Board of Supervisors Board Room
5204 Bernard Drive
Roanoke

August 9, 2010 —7:00pm-8:30pm

Norfolk
Old Dominion University
Webb University Center – Hampton/Newport News Room
4201 Hampton Blvd.
Norfolk

August 19, 2010 — 7:00pm-8:30pm

Chester
Cultural Center of India
6641 Ironbridge Parkway
Chester

August 24, 2010 — 7:00pm-8:30pm

Fredericksburg
University of Mary Washington
Lee Hall – Room 412
1301 College Avenue
Fredericksburg

August 25, 2010 —7:00pm-8:30pm

Fairfax
Northern Virginia Technology Council Auditorium
2214 Rock Hill Road, Suite 300
Herndon

August 26, 2010 —7:00pm-8:30pm

Harrisonburg
James Madison University
East Campus Dining Hall – Montpelier Room
800 S. Main Street
Harrisonburg

August 30, 2010 — 7:00pm-8:30pm

Danville
Institute for Advanced Learning and Research
Great Hall
150 Slayton Ave.
Danville
***Partnering with the Sorensen Southside Public Leadership Series***

August 31, 2010 — 7:00pm-8:30pm

Bristol
Bristol Public Library
J. Henry Kegley Meeting Room
701 Goode Street
Bristol

So I say I’m taking some time off from blogging, but a couple days in the office and a couple interesting developments suck me right back in (hopefully temporarily, then back to summer vacation!).

Lloyd makes an interesting observation about Dick Black and his FaceBook page and something on that page just jumped up and slapped me across the face.  Dick Black likes Mel Gibson!  As stated in the title, this really doesn’t surprise me.  Here’s some of Mel’s latest thoughts on women and blacks (don’t listen if you’re sensitive to foul language – I’m looking at you Willie!).  If only these damn women would stay at home and wear burkas we wouldn’t have these kinds of problems in our society!

Tweet This Post 

With unemployment numbers at an all-time high, there is a great need for job creation. However, Congress and the White House seems to be pre-occupied with passing anti-business legislation which continues to drive jobs out of the United States.

Recently, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.) has introduced legislation in Congress to bring jobs back to the United States from overseas. The Bring Jobs Back to America Act would align existing federal funding (with no additional cost) to support job repatriation and manufacturing growth. This act would also bolster intellectual property protection. This legislation would require the Secretary of Commerce to develop a national manufacturing and job repatriation strategy and set targets for job creation in the manufacturing sectors. Additionally, the legislation would also call for a study of new tax incentives to help lure businesses back to America.

Wolf said, “These companies want to bring their manufacturing jobs back home but they won’t do it simply because we ask them to. We need to consider tax incentives to aggressively ‘onshore’ these jobs.”

Additionally, this bill would also bring back President Reagan’s “Project Socrates” as an independent “American Economic Security Commission” to identify and monitor emerging technologies and global economic threats. Project Socrates was initiated during the Reagan administration to address America’s competitiveness challenge and determine the source of the nation’s declining competitiveness and develop programs to address the source of the problem.

Wolf has worked hard to address the rising unemployment levels and has hosted three job fairs within the 10^th District. Below are Wolf’s remarks from his press conference on the legislation:

Today I am introducing today the Bring Jobs Back to America Act, which would start the process of bringing real jobs back to America that have gone overseas during the last two decades.

My legislation will build on language I included earlier this year in the fiscal year 2011 Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill directing the Commerce Department to launch a job repatriation initiative to bring those jobs back home.

I believe that a strong manufacturing and technology development base is critical to job creation and the economic competitiveness of the United States.

Something has happened in our country. We’re making fewer and fewer things. Today, everything seems to be labeled: “Made in China.”

If you have ever taken the train from Washington, D.C., to New York and looked out the window, you can see our empty factories. You pass through my old neighborhood in Philadelphia. GE’s switchgear factory used to be one block from my home. Now there’s nothing there but an empty, littered field.

You pass through Trenton, New Jersey, and can see the famous bridge sign that reads: “Trenton Makes, the World Takes.” Trenton doesn’t make anything anymore.

Last year, General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt noted that in recent years in the United States, “Real engineering was traded for financial engineering.” Immelt called on the U.S. to grow manufacturing jobs to comprise at least 20 percent of American jobs – nearly double the current level.

In this era of intense global competition, we must work aggressively to bring jobs that have gone overseas back home to the U.S. to immediately start growing the percentage of these jobs, as Immelt called for.

It’s not enough to talk about creating jobs. We have to take immediate steps to create jobs.

I have been, and remain, a staunch supporter of free trade. Free trade has yielded benefits to the American people and our economy.

However, we have been far too slow in responding to our international economic competitors in this era of global markets and competition.

The irony is that as much as American firms have offshored manufacturing and development jobs, they remain reliant on America for support. And with American unemployment hovering around 10 percent, it’s time for some of these American firms to come home.

When an American plant manager in Mexico is kidnapped, the firm doesn’t call the Mexican Federal Police, they call the FBI.

When the Chinese steal an American firm’s intellectual property, the firm calls the U.S. Commerce Department.

It’s time to bring some of these jobs home because America can be competitive in this global economy and it’s the right thing to do. My legislation will start this process.

Overall, I believe that my bill helps to re-focus the United States to be more proactive and a smarter competitor in the global economy – both in the short-term and long-term.

Specifically, this bill requires the secretary of Commerce to set targets for job repatriation and creates multi-agency “Repatriation Task Forces” to identify American companies manufacturing abroad and work with states to bring jobs back to the U.S.

The goal is to bring back real jobs from overseas to the United States – jobs that are already created and an American could immediately fill.

This bill would require the Commerce Department to survey all American firms with significant manufacturing facilities in foreign countries, allowing the Repatriation Task Forces to proactively identify all firms interested in working with state and local governments to facilitate a mutually beneficial repatriation of jobs.

The bill would also comprehensively align federal resources in support of repatriation efforts. It allows state and local governments to use a variety of federal funding – at no new cost – to support job repatriation initiatives by state and local governments.

For example, my bill aligns Economic Development Agency (EDA) and National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) grants to allow state and local governments to use this funding for repatriation.

It also would direct the secretary of Commerce and the IRS to quickly study and report on the merits of a new federal tax incentive to encourage repatriation.

In addition to repatriating jobs today, we must redouble our efforts to foster emerging technologies to create our manufacturing base of tomorrow.

For too long, the U.S. has failed to strategically monitor emerging opportunities and threats in our competitive global economy. We are starting to see the ramifications of this failure in the rise of China as an economic power.

My bill would reconstitute President Reagan’s “Project Socrates” as an independent “American Economic Security Commission” to identify and monitor emerging technologies and global economic threats.

Project Socrates was initiated during the Reagan Administration to address America’s competitiveness challenge and determine the source of the nation’s declining competitiveness and develop programs to address the source of the problem.

Our Commission – composed of 12 business leaders and economists appointed by the majority and minority leaders – will similarly take a comprehensive and unbiased look at all of our global economic competitors – both strengths and weaknesses – and help inform the Congress on how to bolster American economic security.

This will ensure that we have an independent mechanism to monitor new opportunities and threats to ensure that America can capitalize on revolutionary technologies and create new jobs in the U.S.

The bill also provides stronger protections for American intellectual property and helps to expedite the patent process for cutting-edge new technologies developed by universities.

The faster we can secure our innovations and move them to market, the more jobs we can create in this country.

We can no longer afford to ride the coattails of yesterday’s innovations; we have to identify and support the emerging technologies of tomorrow that will create American jobs.

The Chinese, Indians and other international competitors are actively monitoring new technologies and trends to support their firms. To date, we have not.

Are Americans willing to continue to sit idly by and allow the Chinese to dominate new industries at our expense?

Norm Augustine, the former chairman and CEO of Lockheed Martin, best captured the situation we now find ourselves in when he said:

“In the technology-driven economy in which we live, Americans have come to accept leadership as the natural and enduring state of affairs. But leadership is highly perishable. It must be constantly re-earned.

“In the 16th century the citizens of Spain no doubt thought they would remain the world leader. In the 17th century it was France. In the 19th century, Great Britain. And in the 20th century it was the United States.

“Unless we do things dramatically different, including strengthening our investments in research and education, the 21st century will belong to China and India.”

Author Richard McGregor wrote in his new book, The Party, that the Chinese government, “still runs on Soviet hardware.” It uses the full resources of the state to advance the interests of Chinese firms.

The Chinese are spying on us. They are launching millions of cyber attacks against American companies and the federal government every day. The Chinese are funding the genocide in Darfur. They have Catholic bishops in jail, Protestant pastors in jail, and they have plundered Tibet.

If the U.S. is to be truly competitive in the global economy, we must be vigilant and proactive – in a manner that is consistent with our national interest and international treaties.

I urge swift passage of this legislation to help bring jobs back to the United States today and to lay the groundwork for tomorrow’s manufacturing and technology base. We cannot afford to wait. Our international competitors aren’t.

I better watch out. Bloggers are lawsuit-bait for thin-skinned liberals who don’t like it when bloggers show videos of speeches.

Shirley Sherrod, whose videotaped comments about sending a white farmer to “one of them that his own kind would take care of him” since she “didn’t give him the full force of what I could do,” has decided to sue the blogger who played the video excerpt that led her to being fired and subsequently coddled.

At the National Association of Black Journalists convention in San Diego, Ms. Sherrod said she would “definitely” file a lawsuit. The type of suit is unclear.

“He had to know that he was targeting me,” she said in a speech at the convention.

Quite the speaking gig she’s got going on, eh?

Let’s see. If “targeting” a public figure by playing a clip of a speech is something to sue over, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and a host of other news networks and programs better open the checkbook.

Wonder what the statute of limitations are about media sources “targeting” public figures by playing a few sentences of a speech.

Dan Quayle can be the richest man in America. Someone tell Sarah Palin she can sue the media. Newt. Bush. WOW! This could be a lawyer’s field day. The Washington Post better watch out for George Allen’s attorney.

Hey, Sherrod. Here’s a hint. When you give a speech, especially a distinctly long and boring one to audiences as diverse and multi-cultural as the NAACP and the National Association of Black Journalists, some media will probably report parts of your speech without playing the entire insomnia-curing thing.

And let’s get another thing straight. If, a few years ago, a white Bush Administration official gave a speech to a Whites organization and talked about how he was supposed to help this black farmer, and he didn’t do everything he could’ve and just sent him to “one of his kind,” what do you think the Left would be saying?

And if he whined that he was taken out of context, would the Left suddenly say “OK, we understand. Everybody gets too worked up.”

And if that Bush Administration official decided to sue the blogger who reported what he said, the nutroots would explode.

So let’s cut the hypocrisy. Sherrod is becoming a huge embarrassment. Her 15 minutes are up.

Yet is there a single reason in the world why George Allen should not respond to this?

“We vehemently disagree with your analysis and wonder if serving in the elite, rich, United States Senate has skewed your vision of the world in which we live,” wrote executive director King Salim Khalfani.

“Your opponent then and coming, George Allen, would not have had the gall to write about the ‘myth of white privilege’ even though I am sure he feels that way.”

Huge opportunity to find out what’s really on George Allen’s heart, and maybe have an honest conversation on affirmative action and race in Virginia.

One would think that after the numerous findings and reports of data fudging and other shenanigans (since this past November, I have been posting on the slew of errors, data manipulation, and other shenanigans that have been plagued cliamte change alarmism; including today’s post, we are now up to thirty-one of them), the fplks at East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit would know better than this (Steve Goddard at WUWT):

HadCrut released their January 1850 through June 2010 temperature data yesterday, and something “interesting” happened. Their temperature anomalies from January-April jumped up from their published values on June 3.

 . . .

HadCrut still shows 1998 hotter than 2010 so far, but they seem to be working on “correcting” that problem.

Why is it that post facto adjustments always seem to be upwards in later years, and downwards in earlier years? This whole global temperature business looks like a complete joke to me.

Did they really think we wouldn’t notice?

Cross-posted to VV

One would think that after the numerous findings and reports of data fudging and other shenanigans the folks at East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit would know better than this (Steve Goddard at WUWT):

Why is it that post facto adjustments always seem to be upwards in later years, and downwards in earlier years? This whole global temperature business looks like a complete joke to me.

Did they really think we wouldn’t notice? See the whole post here or here

Julea Ward

If the shoe were are the other foot, imagine the publicity. The story is out there, but it is not getting much coverage.  Here are some of the headlines.

• Court Upholds Expulsion of Counseling Student Who Opposes Homosexuality
• Court rules student counselors must ‘affirm’ gay clients
• Lawsuit claims school bias on Christian views
• A Disappointing Ruling in Michigan

What is involved? The Alliance Defense Fund is defending two Christian ladies who want to uphold their Christian beliefs at public universities.

• Julea Ward
• Jennifer Keeton

Amazingly, there are not just one, but two cases. Both feature attractive ladies and a controversial topic.  Yet that does not seem to be sufficient to attract much attention from the lamestream media.  Nope. We got to protect the “good guys” from their own bad publicity.

What crime have these ladies committed? They are unwilling to endorse homosexuality. Both ladies are in graduate programs in school counseling, and neither is willing to accept homosexuality as normal, ethical behavior.  So the universities these ladies attend want to throw them out.

Believe it or not, a judge has already upheld Julea Ward’s expulsion. Get this quote.

In his 48-page opinion, Judge Steeh said the university had a rational basis for adopting the ACA Code of Ethics.

“Furthermore, the university had a rational basis for requiring students to counsel clients without imposing their personal values,” he wrote in a portion of his ruling posted by The Detroit News. “In the case of Ms. Ward, the university determined that she would never change her behavior and would consistently refuse to counsel clients on matters with which she was personally opposed due to her religious beliefs – including homosexual relationships.” (from here)

We actually want people to pretend believe something — when they don’t? Is that not the alternative?

What is absurd is that these universities actually claim not to discriminate. Nope. They just insist you think their way because that is the only correct way to think.  Because Keeton has expressed view contrary to her faculty, here is what Augusta State University insists she do.

The lawsuit says Augusta State faculty members developed a remediation plan specifically for Ms. Keeton and told her she would be expelled from the College of Education’s counselor-education program if she did not fulfill its requirements. The plan calls on Ms. Keeton to attend workshops on serving diverse populations, read articles on counseling gay, lesbian, and bisexual and transgendered people, and write reports to an adviser summarizing what she has learned. It also instructs her to work to increase her exposure to, and interaction with, gay populations, and suggests that she attend the local gay-pride parade. Ms. Keeton has refused to comply. (from here)

The above quote is from the Chronicle of Higher Education. Here is how another source puts it.

Jennifer Keeton, 24, who is pursuing a master’s degree in counseling, said she was ordered to undergo a re-education plan that requires her to attend “diversity sensitivity training,” complete additional remedial reading and write papers to describe their effects on her beliefs, according to the lawsuit filed Wednesday.

The ultimatum: Complete this re-education plan or be expelled from ASU’s Counselor Education Program. (from here)

It is not a matter of just completing remediation training.  Keeton has to change her opinion. Even if she completes the program, she has no guarantee she will not be expelled.  

Note that the expulsion from Augusta State University specifically targets Christians.

Two faculty members, according to court documents, said that Miss Keeton is prejudiced because of her ethical beliefs on GLBTQ issues. In reply, she asked them how her Christian convictions are any less acceptable than those of a Buddhist or Muslim student, to which one faculty member replied, “Christians see this population as sinners,” court papers show. (from here)

These ladies are being thrown out of public universities paid for by tax dollars. These are universities responsible for educating the people who educate our children. And what does their faculty believe? Unless you believe there is nothing wrong homosexuality, you are not qualified to be a school counselor. That is, if you believe what the Bible says about homosexuality, you are not qualified to be a school counselor.

Jennifer Keeton

Clinton appointee US District Judge Susan Bolton issued a temporary injunction stopping five parts of Arizona’s legal attempts to do what the Federal Government won’t do – stop illegal immigration.

According to news sources, those five parts are the following:

1. Requiring police officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws.

Bolton says that’s troublesome because “burdens lawfully present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked.”

By that logic, handgun waiting periods are unconstitutional because law-abiding handgun buyers will be restricted while their status is checked, right?

Do we think police don’t check for outstanding warrants when they stop someone for speeding?

The judge will cause lots of left-loving restrictions to fall if her logic is the final say.

2. Requiring state officials to check the immigration status of anyone in custody in Arizona before they were released from jail.

This was blocked because the judge felt the Federal Government would never be able to handle the number of status requests. So, basically, Arizona can’t enforce laws because the Federal Government is too inefficient.

3. Making it a state crime for legal immigrants to be without immigration documents.

Here’s the funny thing. It’s already federal law that immigration documents be carried at all times. Feds just don’t enforce it.

So, the judge says its wrong for Arizona to have a law that mirrors federal law, because Arizona might actually enforce it?

4. Banning illegal immigrants from soliciting employment.

See, the Obama administration wants to crack down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants, but they have no problem with illegal immigrants applying for work. Liberals…..if it’s wrong for companies to hire illegals, shouldn’t it be wrong for illegals to apply?

5. Arresting suspected illegal immigrants without a warrant.

This is the famous “racial profiling” fear that prompts 90 year old Jewish grandmothers to be searched in airports while not offending Khalid sheikh Mohammed in line ahead of her.

Want to really read something funny? The judge had no problem with the part of the law allowing Arizona residents to sue any state office or agency for failing to fully enforce immigration laws.

What a hoot! One the one hand, the judge says Arizona can’t enforce federal immigration laws. Then she gives every Arizona resident the right to sue Arizona for following her ruling.

I can’t wait to read Scalia’s opinion on this one. Hopefully, it will be for the majority.

Well if the feds' policies and objectives are to NOT enforce our country's laws and borders (which unfortunately we know is true), then YES Arizona's enforcement of the laws the feds are ignoring DOES interfere! BUT THAT'S A GREAT THING!

"The federal government's ability to enforce its policies and achieve its objectives will be undermined by the state's enforcement of statutes that interfere with federal law," she wrote.Read more at www.latimes.com

From this quote to the DCPost, I get the feeling the answer is "Yes . . . until the election is over."

Connolly's Fairfax-based 11th district is the most affluent congressional seat in the country, based on median household income, and he warned his fellow Democrats that the issue might not be the slam-dunk some think it is.

"I honestly think it's a danger," Connolly said of the tax debate. "I part ways, I think, with the dominant view of my caucus on this subject. I do not favor a permanent extension of the Bush tax cuts. I do favor extending the current rate for some period of time until the economy is on a sustained and a robust track."

Connolly argued that the top 5 percent of earners represented a disproportionately large share of consumer spending, so increasing their taxes could blunt the economic recovery. "Democrats need to abandon their ideology on the Bush tax cuts and look at the economic reality on the ground," Connolly said.

At the end of the article, he says that the base needs to be fired up for him and its Obama who can do that.  Perhaps, but its gonna be hard Connolly to explain to Democrats why he wants to keep the hated Bush Tax Cuts . . . which if allowed to lapse will lead to essentially the largest tax increase in American history. 

[Blogger's note: I didn't know that TNR couldn't embed Javascript; I will embed the video once Reason makes it available on their YouTube channel - sorry for making you click away in the meantime; at least it will pop open in a new window, and you won't lose your place.]

I have been blogging pretty exhaustively about a fissure in a traditional center-right coalition comprised of libertarians and conservatives (see here and here). The folks over at Reason have finally made video available of the three-way debate between the Cato Institute's Brink Lindsey, AEI's Jonah Goldberg (also of the National Review), and FreedomWorks' Matt Kibbe:

I've been blogging as often as possible about this ideological spat because a) as a political scientist, it's a generally interesting phenomenon to observe, particularly when set against the backdrop of the rise of the Tea Party movement, and b) the extent to which this (hopefully temporary) rift gets smoothed over will have, I believe, a significant effect on the 2012 presidential election, if not this year's midterm elections. Of course, I don't have a wealth of empirical data on hand at this point to evidence my thesis - so we'll just have to call it a hunch.

Marc Ambinder at the Atlantic is smellin' what I've been cookin' for awhile:

Economic libertarianism is the message du jour, and Pawlenty's budget cutting in Minnesota may get some attention. But really, and he and none of the sober wing candidates have figured out exactly what the non-Palin wing of the party wants. There's no way to get social conservatives on board with Palin or Mike Huckabee in the race. So who's left to help you win primaries and caucuses?

Libertarians.

They are -- they could be -- to the Republican Party what the anti-war left was to Democrats in 2003 -- the out-of-the-establishment power center that can drive the narrative of the race. How do you get the attention of libertarians without losing conservatives? You could shift positions on the war in Afghanistan, or try to fashion a more realist foreign policy. That seems to be a non-starter; the consultants for these candidates are fairly covnentional and are risk-averse. Endorse medical marijuana? Legalized gambling? Something else?

Ken Cuccinelli gets a huge weight off his neck by deciding to donate the tainted $55,000 Bobby Tompson/US Navy Vets Association donation to real veterans charities (press release below the fold).  I still think the timeline of those donations and various regulatory changes stinks, but this is a good move, even if delayed.

Cuccinelli to donate $55,500 from campaign to Virginia veterans charities
- Money was originally a contribution from Bobby Thompson -

RICHMOND – Today, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli announced his intentions to donate $55,500 to veterans’ charities around the Commonwealth.  The funds were originally donated to the Ken Cuccinelli for Attorney General Campaign in the summer and fall of 2009 by Bobby Thompson.
 In recent months, Thompson and a charity he directs, the United States Navy Veterans Association, both have come under scrutiny.  In June the campaign set aside the funds donated by Thompson into a segregated account after Cuccinelli’s political staff worked to locate certain members of the group and came up empty handed.  Most recently, Thompson’s lawyers have declared that they have been unable to locate Thompson despite their best efforts. 
“We were practicing the principle of presumed innocence with Bobby Thompson, awaiting proof from law enforcement that the money he had given the campaign was either a legitimate donation or was not his to give.  With Mr. Thompson’s recent disappearance and apparent unwillingness to maintain contact with his own attorneys, it seems that he does not wish to defend himself or the U.S. Navy Veterans Association.  Because of this, I chose to divest my campaign of any funds associated with Mr. Thompson,” Cuccinelli said.
Over the past week the Attorney General and his political staff have been contacting veterans around the Commonwealth attempting to determine how to most effectively help veterans and their families. Cuccinelli stated “Our goal here is identify veterans’ charities that have an impact around the Commonwealth – and then direct those funds where they can be of most help to our nation’s heroes.”
Ken Cuccinelli’s campaign will announce when a decision has been reached on which charities to allocate the funds to.

Tweet This Post 

“My office is currently reviewing Judge Bolton’s 36-page order regarding the United States’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction against Arizona’s immigration law. Much like the ruling itself, my initial reaction to the ruling is mixed. I am pleased that she rejected the federal government’s argument that the entire statute should be enjoined and I am also pleased she found that it was unlikely that the federal government’s arguments would prevail with respect to certain provisions of the law. However, I am disappointed that Judge Bolton found it was likely that the federal government’s arguments would ultimately prevail regarding other provisions of the Arizona law,” said Cuccinelli.

Cuccinelli also noted that today’s ruling was preliminary in nature, stating, “Judge Bolton’s ruling was limited to the motion for a preliminary injunction and was not a final decision on the merits of the case. The ruling is only the first step in the process. I continue to hope that, ultimately, the courts will find Arizona’s effort to protect its citizens to be constitutional.”

“It didn’t do a lot to address cost factors in health care. So we’ve got a lot of work to do,” said Erskine Bowles, former White House chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, speaking about the new health law, which was signed into law by Obama this past spring after a nearly year-long fight in Congress.
-- (Daily Caller, July 15, 2010)

The American Petroleum Institute, advocates and standard-setters for the oil and natural gas industry, slammed the Senate over their recent approach to Offshore Energy Production proposed late yesterday.

The bill would raise taxes on refiners from 8 cents per barrel to 45 cents per barrel in order to increase funds to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund.

API’s President and CEO Jack Gerard called the provision on oil spill liability a “jobs killer.”

Gerard said that “Requiring an unattainable level of insurance coverage for domestic energy producers on the Outer Continental Shelf will force the vast majority of American companies out of U.S. waters….”

The institute issued an economic study indicating the United States would lose an estimated 175,000 jobs per year between now and 2035 and U.S. oil production would decline by 27 percent if deepwater drilling proposals under consideration were adopted and the moratorium lasted indefinitely.

“Legislation that raises the cost of production to uneconomic levels; that renders deepwater oil and natural gas areas off limits to production; drives small- and mid-sized firms out of business; shuts down access to domestic energy resources; or singles out our industry for punitive tax increases—all of which have been part of various bills in the House and Senate—will have significant impacts on jobs and economic growth,” said Gerard.

Democrats, such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada say the tax hikes are necessary to hold oil companies “responsible” and that the legislation would increase jobs in the “green” economy.

Augusta County supervisor Tracy Pyles seeks clearance from fellow supervisors tonight to use the services of County Attorney Patrick Morgan in reviewing his staggered terms petitions.

Pyles wants to use petitions to get the necessary voters signed to bring his idea for staggered supervisor terms to a referendum. But he has been advised to seek a legal opinion on whether the petition complies with the Virginia Code.

The summer of the discontented voter steams onward and, unfortunately for President Obama, polls show voters are no longer blaming the bad times on the George W. Bush administration.

Add Hispanics to the growing list of Obama supporters disgruntled by aspects of the presidents performance, in what has become for the White House and Democrats a seemingly daily beat of gloomy polls.

Rasmussen Reports just released a poll about Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and his overall approval in Virginia.

According to the poll, McDonnell receives high marks overall, from independents, and those who favor a repeal of the healthcare bill.

Some key data points:

• Nearly two-thirds (64%) of Virginia voters continue to approve of the job new Governor Bob McDonnell is doing, according to a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state. That includes 29% who Strongly Approve.
• Eighty percent (80%) of GOP voters and 68% of voters not affiliated with either major party approve of McDonnell’s performance. Fifty-four percent (54%) of Democrats disapprove.
• Seventy-one percent (71%) of those who Strongly Favor [repealing the healthcare bill] approve of McDonnell’s handling of the governor’s job, compared to just 31% of those who are Strongly Opposed to repeal.

Of note, 41% of African Americans also approve of McDonnell’s handling of the job – this, in spite of African-Americans only voting for McDonnell at less than 30%.

The Daily Caller has published still more excerpts from the left-wing journalism chat room JournoList. This time the theme is “Heroes of JournoList.” The phrase refers to lefty journalists who on at least one occasion overcame their ideology to defy the conventional wisdom of JournoList’s 400 participants.

And what qualifies as heroism on JournoList?

Today we take a look at some local political history here in Spotsylvania.

One of the things I discovered in my campaign for the Board of Supervisors last year was the rather dubious record the county regarding taxes.  In fact, the county has experienced sixteen property tax increases in twenty-two years (1988-2010).  Now, truth be told, the county has so many recent residents (escaping even higher-tax jurisdictions), that this history hasn’t been highlighted much.  Moreover, a number of the tax increases have come during reassessment years, where the tax rate was reduced, but not nearly enough to counteract assessment increases – and even when assessments fell (as they did this year), the tax rate rose by more than what would have equalized taxes.

This latter reason has, as one would expect, sparked quite the debate here.  Many (including some Supervisors) have convinced themselves that the equalization concept (i.e., if the tax rate leads to a higher average tax payment, it’s a tax increase no matter what the rate is) is some recent creation of right-wing, anti-tax crazies trying to hamstring local government.  So, I thought it best to take a walk down memory lane to see . . .

• How the tax rate was treated during reassessment years?
• What was done with taxes prior to 1988?
• When was the last time property taxes were actually reduced in Spotsylvania?

The first question led me to the 1982 reassessment, in which property values rose 30% in the county.  Keep in mind, this is 1982, long before the Republican Party elected any Supervisors in Spotsylvania (although Buford Carr was rumored to be one back in the day), let alone allegedly hijacked the tax rate discussion.

Yet what do we find as the headline for the budget story in the Free Lance-Star (emphasis added) . . .

Spotsylvania sets hold-the-line tax rate of 65 cents

Cutting the budget to avoid raising the average tax bill, the Spotsylvania Board of Supervisors last night approved a $28.7 million operating budget for 1982-83 that drops the real estate tax rate to 65 cents . . .

Hold-the-what?

As an added irony, none other than Emmitt Marshall (who in recent years has tried to wave off the equalization idea) made the initial motion for the 65 cent rate (county staff had proposed 68 cents).  So clearly, the idea that assessments can make a rate “cut” an actual increase has a long tradition in Spotsylvania.

Meanwhile, I found that, somewhat surprisingly given the nature of the spending debate, that even though the 1970s and 1980s had faster growth in population than the later decades (from 1970 to 1990, population grew over 350%, compared to 212% for 1990-2010), they also saw fewer tax hikes (seven versus fourteen).  Lest we forget, this is also despite the 1970s having two double-digit inflation spikes.

But what about a tax cut?  Well, after looking at Board meeting minutes and a slew of FLS stories (the archives going back 80+ years are on-line now), we find that the last genuine act of tax relief for Spotsylvania homeowners came in June of 1975.  Since then, we’ve had nineteen property tax hikes (and six presidents, nine governors, four sheriffs . . .)

Oh, and the overall budget has grown over 3600% in nominal terms since then (890% in real terms).

Cross-posted to VV