Saturday night with Luscious Jackson
Oh, please let it snow in time for Christmas.
FYI: In case your wondering what happened to the lead singer...
Oh, please let it snow in time for Christmas.
Lets begin with the comment from Virginia's native son and xenophobe Congressman-elect Virgil H. Goode, Jr. that started the firesotrm
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515-4605
December 7, 2006
Thank you for your recent communication. When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens dont wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.
The Ten Commandments and "In God We Trust" are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, "As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office." Thank you again for your email and thoughts.
Virgil H. Goode, Jr.
70 East Court Street
Rocky Mount, Virginia 24151
First, it is an act of hubris that perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist activism -- my culture trumps America's culture. What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book.Hmm, strange, I though this was a country of free religion. When did Christianity become the religion of the land?
Forgive me, but America should not give a hoot what Keith Ellison's favorite book is. Insofar as a member of Congress taking an oath to serve America and uphold its values is concerned, America is interested in only one book, the Bible. If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don't serve in Congress.
ALEX WITT (MSNBC host): But I'm curious -- overall, Cheri, why would Congressman Goode be so concerned about having a Muslim being sworn in using the Quran? I mean, how is it any different from a Christian using the Bible?Strange that people are lashing out against a bigot? The United States of American is a Christian nation? Are these wingnuts serious?
JACOBUS: Well, first of all, I'm a pretty big fan of free speech, so even if Congressman Goode's remarks were somewhat inelegant, if you read the blogs today there are a lot of people who sort of get his larger point -- first on immigration -- but also, you do have a newly elected Democrat [sic] Muslim member of Congress who seems to be proactive in making a stink about this, saying, "I will not be sworn in with my hand on the Bible like every other elected member to Congress before me."
WITT: But --
JACOBUS: And he could have -- look, if he wasn't trying to make a stink about it, if he wasn't trying to cause controversy, what he should have done, and the mature thing to do and the diplomatic thing to do, would be to say, "You know, I think I would like both." But instead, you have a newly elected member of Congress trying to cause controversy, and yet we're focusing on Virgil Goode? I think that's a little bit strange.
White House officials said they were aware that some Democrats and Muslims were urging President Bush to admonish Representative Virgil H. Goode Jr., Republican of Virginia, and Dennis Prager, the conservative commentator, for suggesting that the first Muslim elected to the House had no place in Congress. "We're aware of the situation," said Dana Perino, a spokeswoman for Mr. Bush, "but no judgments have been made."
The last honest reporter in Connecticut. A comment from Ted Mann from thw New London Day on the so-called Lieberman hack story.
Meanwhile, back in the past, there was the great sabotage that wasn't.Still no word from Mark Davis or the countless other writers who ran on this bogus story...
A review by U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor and Attorney General Richard Blumenthal has determined that whatever caused Sen. Joe Lieberman's web site to crash on the eve of his primary defeat to Ned Lamont in August, it wasn't Lamont's fault.
Just for fun, let's review what Lieberman's then-campaign manager (unlike Lieberman, he didn't survive the unsuccessful primary) Sean Smith had to say at the time. Here's the text of the email the campaign sent out to reporters that day:"For the past 24 hours the Friends for Joe Lieberman’s website and email has been totally disrupted and disabled, we believe that this is the result of a coordinated attack by our political opponents. The campaign has notified the US Attorney and the Connecticut Chief State's Attorney and the campaign will be filing a formal complaint reflecting our concerns. The campaign has also notified the State Attorney General Dick Blumenthal for his review."
"We call on Ned Lamont to make an unqualified statement denouncing this kind of dirty campaign trick and to demand whoever is responsible to cease and desist immediately. Any attempt to suppress voter participation and undermine the voting process on Election Day is deplorable and has no place in our democracy."
Apparently neither does a web site lacking for bandwidth...
you can learn something from this guy.
What is it about the Internet that makes some political pundits, columnists and reporters so goofy? It seems like almost every time I read a mainstream media story about political Web sites and bloggers, the pieces are full of ill-informed junk.Mark Davis was the king of misinformation throughout the entire primary with his over-the-top reporting and infamous outrageous softball questions he threw at Joe Lieberman. For all the horrible writing and reporting from the local news media (for the exception of FOX-61), the shoddy reporting from a person who claims to be a chief political reporter was not only ridiculous, but an insult (as well as a disservice) to the public at large.
Remember back in August when Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman's campaign Web site crashed the night before primary day? Lieberman claimed that his site had been hacked by his Democratic primary opponent, Ned Lamont, and his outrageous charge was bought wholeheartedly by just about every political reporter and commentator in the country.
Just a little bit of checking would have revealed that Lieberman had failed to buy enough Internet bandwidth to handle the election traffic. But the almost nonstop cable news coverage focused solely on Lieberman's call for a federal investigation of the Lamont campaign. The newspaper coverage wasn't much better.
Well, the feds and the state attorney general just concluded their investigations. Lieberman's site wasn't hacked. Intense national interest in the antiwar Lamont challenge had simply overwhelmed Lieberman's pathetic Web site. Once again, the media got it badly wrong, and, for the most part, reporters haven't yet bothered to correct the record. A search of Google News yesterday found around 10 stories about Lamont's exoneration, and almost all of those were from Connecticut media sources.
Hey Jen Medina, you were LIED to again.
Today, the senator's press office passed us to Dan Gerstein, formerly the communications director for the campaign, who gave us this statement:Docunemted? Hey Dan, show us the documents...if there is any lawyer familiar with Freedom of Information Act, please email me, I'd be more than happy to go to court and file an FOI to get these "documents" if possible.
["]When the Lieberman campaign Web site went down at the end of the primary, we had very good reason to believe at the time that there had been a deliberate effort to disable it. Earlier in the campaign there had been a documented attack on the site by an outsider, and in this instance our Web site consultant assured us in the strongest terms possible that we had been attacked again. That is why we brought the incident to the attention of the U.S. Attorney and the Attorney General. We appreciate their thorough investigation into the matter, and accept their findings.["]
Does the Lieberman camp have any reason to apologize to Lamont supporters, as some have suggested?Hey Dannyboy, this is far from over.
"I'm not going to get into that," Mr. Gerstein said, declining any further comment.
UPDATE (8:00 PM): I decided to up the ante and make a little video using file footage from the docunemtary Blog Wars and the news broadcast from WTNH.
The U.S. attorney's office and state attorney general have cleared former U.S. Senate candidate Ned Lamont and his supporters of any role in the crash of U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman's campaign Web site hours before last summer's Democratic primary.And after all the accusations of sabotage, what's Lieberman's response today?
"The investigation has revealed no evidence the problems the Web site experienced were the result of criminal conduct," said Tom Carson, spokesman for U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor.
State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal confirmed the joint investigation "found no evidence of tampering or sabotage warranting civil action by my office." Both men declined to provide additional information, such as what might have happened to the site.
Calls to Lieberman went unanswered yesterday.After all of Joe's whining and accusations, nowhe has no comment?
The Courant has the details.
Why, oh why, did people re-elect this person? I can only hope her slight of hand catches up with her one day.
here's a classic Olbermann "Special Comment" on our now former Secretary of Defense.
FOX 61 filed this report on Senator Chris Dodd's trip to Lebanon that I posted about on Monday.
Good grief...you're kidding me right?
The military isn't drinking the Kool-Aid either.
The Bush administration is split over the idea of a surge in troops to Iraq, with White House officials aggressively promoting the concept over the unanimous disagreement of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to U.S. officials familiar with the intense debate.When can the Democrats start the hearings?
Sending 15,000 to 30,000 more troops for a mission of possibly six to eight months is one of the central proposals on the table of the White House policy review to reverse the steady deterioration in Iraq. The option is being discussed as an element in a range of bigger packages, the officials said.
But the Joint Chiefs think the White House, after a month of talks, still does not have a defined mission and is latching on to the surge idea in part because of limited alternatives, despite warnings about the potential disadvantages for the military, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the White House review is not public.
Do the right thing. You know she lied, just get rid of her and get it over with. Why start another term with a cloud over your head?
People shouldn't forget about tensions in Lebanon.
This morning on Face the Nation, former Secretary of State and Bush Kool-Aid addict Colin Powell clearly outlines why the John McCain/Joe Lieberman's call for more troops in Iraq is not only unrealistic, but unwise (if not outright idiotic).