One Month In Office and Democrats Already Self-Destructing Over Ethics

AP Associated Press-
By Larry Margasak

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration and the new Congress are quickly handing over to Republicans the same "culture of corruption" issue that Democrats used so effectively against the GOP before coming to power.

Freshman Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., is only the latest embarrassment.

Senate Democrats accepted Burris because they believed what he told them: He was clean. Burris now admits he tried to raise money for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich D-Ill, who authorities say sought to sell President Barack Obama's D-Ill, former Senate seat.

"The story seems to be changing day by day," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Wednesday.

The political mess for the Democratic Party, however, isn't Burris' conduct alone; it's the pattern that has developed so quickly over the past few months.

_The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., is the subject of a House ethics investigation. It's partly focused on his fundraising practices for a college center in his name, his ownership financing of a resort property in the Dominican Republic and his financial disclosure reports.

_Federal agents raided two Pennsylvania defense contractors that were provided millions of dollars in federal funding by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.

_Blagojevich D-Ill was arrested Dec. 9 on federal charges, including allegations he schemed to sell the Senate seat to the highest bidder.

_Tom Daschle D-SD, the former Senate majority leader from South Dakota, abandoned his bid to become health and human services secretary and the administration's point man on reforming health care; and Nancy Killefer (D), stepped down from a newly created position charged with eliminating inefficient government programs.

Both Daschle and Killefer had tax problems, and Daschle also faced potential conflicts of interest related to working with health care interests.

_Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner (D)was confirmed after revealing he had tax troubles.

_Obama's initial choice for commerce secretary, Bill Richardson D-NM, stepped aside due to a grand jury investigation into a state contract awarded to his political donors.

_While the Senate voted overwhelmingly to confirm William Lynn as deputy defense secretary, Obama had to waive his ethics regulations to place the former defense lobbyist in charge of day-to-day operations at the Pentagon.

The No. 2 Senate Democrat, Richard Durbin D-Illinois, expressed his anger about the Burris case Wednesday while he was on an official visit to Greece.

"I do believe that the public statements made by Mr. Burris to this point have raised questions ... as to the nature of his relationship with the former governor and the circumstances surrounding his appointment," Durbin said.

Reid said in Nevada, "Now there's some question as to whether or not he told the truth."

Where to go next? Reid had no answer.

"What I think we have to do is just wait and see," the Senate leader said.

Senate Democrats now may be trapped in their own ethics system. Disciplinary action against a senator usually requires a long investigation by the Senate's ethics committee. While a preliminary inquiry on Burris is under way, that's only the first early step. And, with ongoing criminal investigations in Illinois, the committee probably would have to postpone any action — as it usually does — to avoid interference.

In 2006, Republicans lost control of the House after Democrats effectively used a "culture of corruption" theme against them.

The final scandal broke shortly before the election, when it was revealed that then-Rep. Mark Foley, a Florida Republican, sent sexually suggestive e-mails and explicit instant messages to teenage boys who had served as House pages.

Republicans were further harmed when it was disclosed that several of their members were aware of the problem and failed to take action.

Democrats, who've been in control of both Congress and the White House less than two months now, are lucky on one point. The next congressional election is nearly two years away.

EDITOR'S NOTE _ Larry Margasak has covered Congress, including major ethics investigations, since 1983.

Petraeus Report Confirmed, Surge Working, Media Not

Engram at BACKTALK has another great post.
He lays out clearly what the anti-war, antiAmerican, Leftwing News Media SHOULD be reporting today and tomorrow, but aren't because it doesn't fit their Bush hating anti American template.

"I had expected the news today to report the astonishingly low number of civilian and military casualties for the month of September. After all, there is an on-going debate about whether or not General Petraeus was betraying his nation by deliberately lying about the improving casualty situation in Iraq. Casualties from the month of September are directly relevant to that debate. In fact, they would appear to settle the issue. Things might get worse down the line, and al Qaeda will certainly manage to sneak in more mass-casualty attacks before this all over, but as of right now the trend in violence is very definitely in the downward direction (just as General Petraeus said was the case)."

But what do people read when they pick up the paper today? This:
Petreaus Admits to Rise in Violence
"Militants with the extremist group Al Qaeda in Iraq have launched a string of deadly bombings in recent weeks, including one this week that killed at least 24 people at a reconciliation meeting between Sunni and Shiite tribal, religious, political and security leaders in the Diyala provincial capital, Baqubah.

At least 11 Iraqis were killed in bomb blasts, mortar and gunfire today. The U.S. military also announced the deaths of two soldiers in small-arms fire, one during combat operations in a southern section of Baghdad and the other in Diyala."

What the media ISN'T telling us is that..."

"...the ICCC already includes those 24 deaths in the 75 deaths for the month that are attributable to al Qaeda's suicide bombers."

OR that...

"As of 8:00 P.M. September 30 (Baghdad time), documented deaths from suicide bombers in the month of September come to a mere 75.
Last month, it was over 600..."

And it's NOT just in Anbar either...


Despite Iraqi casualties being astonishingly LOW and despite the troop surge, US military casualties are way down (see graph below) and considering that this has happened despite the fact that Ramadan began on September 13, and despite the fact that al Qaeda threatened a major offensive during that time, the media hangs on to defeat and refuses to report the successes that are impossible to overlook "accidentally".


Engram concludes that the LA Times and media reporting is "pathetic"...

"That's just pathetic. Would anyone reading this (LA Times) story know that casualties are way down in Iraq? Or would they instead assume that violence continues apace and that our lying general was forced to admit it?
Well, as someone once said, "you go to war with the media you have, not the media you wish you had."

In his previous post at BACKTALK Engram details database numbers to demonstrate the effort to kill, disrupt and defeat America while starting a civil war by Al Qaeda and their failure to do so and concludes that hopefully...

"This may be al Qaeda's last gasp in Iraq. They have bet everything on defeating the troop surge, but it seems that the Democrats in Washington will not come to their rescue in time. Then again, I have mistakenly thought that al Qaeda was suppressed in the past, only to have my hopes dashed by yet another in a long string of spectacular mass-casualty attacks. Time will tell, but the trends seem favorable (finally)."

How long can the left hang on to the hope and dreams of defeat?
We are about to see, but one thing is for sure, it will be pathetic.
-red

UPDATE: 10/01/2007- Al Qaeda in "last throws"? Engram demonstrates today, again using liberal bodycount groups own numbers that not only did the surge "work" but how Shiites are taking on Al Qaeda suicide bombers and demonstrates irrefutably how the US military is absolutely WINNING the war against the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11/2001 and are now focused on Iraq.
Al Qaeda has failed to incite civil war, failed to defeat the surge and thus failed to turn enough Americans off to Bush and the war to win. They will no doubt try and form a "re-surge" to try and offset this HUGE VICTORY for America and Iraqis, but make no mistake, the left has been DEAD WRONG about the war and whether winning is achievable. A US/Iraqi victory is not only achievable, it is being achieved as we speak and is now moving into the "most likely to succeed" category.
-read all about it at BACKTALK if you dare know the truth!

Just heard a blip on KTOK as Engram reports that the Media is slowing, begrudgingly, minimally beginning to REPORT THE TRUTH in small bits, confirming the Petraeus Report. But don't look for them to apologize... much less understand the war, ... BABY STEPS before running with the libs.
-red s tater

Proving The Left Wrong (again)

This one goes out to all the lib's who like to claim I never criticize Republicans and only see the bad in Liberals.
I have posted on many of my disagreements with Bush and numerous Republicans in the past, but liberals still like to accuse me of wearing blinders and only seeing the good side of Republican politicians and only the bad in Democrats. (they don't actually read conservative opinions, they just assume)
They don't bother to notice the number of times I have posted the Will Rogers (D) OK quote that goes something like...
"you don't have to be around politics very long to realize that each party is worse than the other"

So lets get to it...
Bush is wrong on the borders and illegal immigration. That's right, Bush is wrong. Flat wrong, dead wrong, just plain wrong. Conservatives want the immigration laws enforced BEFORE they try to come up with a comprehensive plan for the 12-20 million illegal aliens.
Chuck Hagel needs to retire. Good riddance, buh-bye.
Airport sexpot Craig in Idaho needs to resign immediately if not sooner. (wide stance or not)
Arlen Specter should resign also. ASAP...buh-bye.
Bush and Republicans are wrong for not making English the official language.
Republicans in general were wrong for not building the fence and securing the borders as promised.
Republicans are wrong for not protecting marriage (1man+1woman), wrong for not rounding up illegals, wrong for not making the tax cuts permanent when they had the chance.
Bush was wrong to leave Clinton leftovers in positions of power (like the CIA)
Bush was wrong to not prosecute Sandy Berger for stuffing secret documents down his pants and stealing them to protect BJ Clinton.
Bush was wrong for not prosecuting the NY Times and whichever Democrat leaked the information about our being able to listen to Osama Bin Laden's cell phone... which of course was never used again.
Bush is wrong for spending like a drunken Democrat on crack.
Republicans were wrong for not fixing Social Security (privatization) when they had the chance.
McCain was wrong about the borders and too soft on "enemy combatants".
Gulianni is wrong about abortion and looks a little too much like Mr. Magoo.
Ron Paul possibly should be locked up and tested for insanity.
Condi Rice is too polite and nice.
Mitt Romney is too slick, tan, stiff and pre-programmed.
Laura Bush is short and too nice.
And finally, Cheney was wrong for not taking Kerry, Gore, Edwards, Kucinich, Clark and Clinton (either one) hunting instead of his best friend.

Now on the Democrat side...
Joe Liberman is a great American (even though I disagree with him on several issues)
John F Kennedy was a great American (even though I disagreed with him on several issues)
Zell Miller is a Democrat that I respect and could possibly supported and voted for under the right conditions.
John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Algore, Madeline Albright, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Wilson and General Wesley Clark had it right about Saddam (before they all got a bad case of Bush Derangement Disorder and changed their story 180 degrees)

There ya' go libs, now shut up about me not criticizing Repubs...

Now, having said all that, my (our) choice is still to select between politicians that...
A: Ignore the threat of Islamic Jihadi's, ignore the connection between Iraq and the Islamic Jihadi's, meet and side with enemies of the United States during a time of war, blame Bush for everything (including the attacks on 9/11: 49%) and offer solutions to nothing, while promoting abortion, advocating more gun restrictions, promising to raise taxes seeking to appoint liberal judges to impose new law(s) without congress actually writing law.

Or politicians that...
B: Understand and are actively engaged in the war with radical Islamic Jihadi's, understand what a loss to those Islamic Jihadi's in Iraq would mean for Americans and the world, support the unborn, support the 2nd ammendment, protect traditional marriage, lowering taxes, promoting business and appointing judges that don't write new laws from the bench.

Politicians from BOTH sides are guilty of being human however we cannot afford to have a man (or woman) in the white house who is willing to put the country at risk in the form of blackmail resulting from a mistress, airport bathroom hanky-panky or not having sex with that woman in the back of a limo somewhere. Politicians from BOTH sides are going to have some shady deal(s) somewhere in the closet or woodpile, no one is perfect.

So, my (our) choice is
A: The politician who doesn't recognize the connection between the war in Iraq and the war with radical Islam, is pro-abortion, anti-gun and wants to raise my taxes.
B: The politician who supports a victory in Iraq because it is a victory against radical Islam, is pro-life, pro 2nd ammendment, supports border enforcement and favors lower taxes...

A: Pacifists, Socialists & Communist wannabe's
B: Warmongers, Capitalists & holier than thou Christians

Since in my opinion the war against radical Islam is the single most important issue of our lifetime... you can guess which one I'm going with and it has NOTHING to do with (R) or (D)'s, just the issues.

Now, do you wish to debate the issues one by one?
No problem.
-red