Sunday, March 30, 2008

Real I.D. Act

We at the Objective Conservative and our contributors have agonized a bit in the past over the Real I.D. Act, which continues to be in the news. Lots of questions flow that certainly provide strange coalitions of libertarians, liberals, conservatives, etal. Is it a national i.d. card? Is it an unfunded mandate? Is it a violation of states rights? Is it a real form of protection to prevent terrorists from entering airplanes and courthouses?

This is an issue that seems to create lots of consternation for many. If you haven't paid attention to it you might check out today's latest on it and then try to figure out (or gosh make your opinions known here) where you stand on it. See:

Obama and the Washington Post Truth Squad

While Howard Dean and others try to convince Hillary to drop out of the race for president, the Washington Post debunks yet another Obama whopper relating his presence in America to the Kennedy family. At least Bill had a photo showing himself meeting with Kennedy. Check out another good tale if you haven't caught up on this one, at:

Saturday, March 29, 2008

GI Joe Sticks up for Hillary

"Actually Mrs. Clinton was too modest. I was there and saw it all. When Mrs. Clinton got off the plane the tarmac came under mortar and machine gun fire. I was blown off my tank and exposed to enemy fire. Mrs. Clinton without regard to her own safety dragged me to safety, jumped on the tank and opened fire, killing 50 of the enemy." Soon a suicide bomber appeared, but Mrs. Clinton stopped the guards from opening fire. "She talked to the man in his own language and got him [to] surrender. She found that he had suffered terribly as a result of policies of George Bush. She defused the bomb vest herself." Then she turned to his wounds. "She stopped my bleeding and saved my life. Chelsea donated the blood"

Thursday, March 27, 2008

More on Slavery (Victimhood)

Since Senator Pedersen has raised the issue of slavery, you might want to take time to read Ronald Kessler's News Max Column which deals with victim-hood, Obama and his preacher and Condi Rice. It points out the danger of Senator's Pedersen's guilt ridden apology for slavery and the promotion of victim-hood that ensues. See:

You've Got to be kidding!! -- The Cue

In response to contributor McPherson's editorial on slavery, we at the Objective Conservative have received several responses which are in the comment section below PJM's editorial below. However, contributor, The Cue, has also weighted in with his invective on Senator Pedersen's desire to see our state apologize for its grievous crimes. So, here, is the Cue's response:

"On the front page of the Midlands section in Saturday’s World Herald was the headline: “History buff urged slavery apology”. It seems that State Senator Dwite Pedersen has a friend who is a history buff and who feels badly about the former use of slaves in Nebraska. So Senator Pedersen introduces Legislative Resolution 284 and says: “My greatest ambition in this is to bring to awareness that slavery was here in Nebraska. I’m not expecting a whole lot of controversy.”

Slavery was covered in my eighth grade Nebraska history class, Dwite and I was unaware that it had been removed from our school’s curricula?

In order to apologize one needs to have done something wrong. So with that in mind, for those of you who have recently owned or currently own slaves, an apology is in order. For the rest of us, let’s stay out of it, because it’s just another divisive issue. We must ignore those who are on a perpetual search for victims and who have a clear desire to make others feel bad.

It is beyond my comprehension how our Legislature can justify wasting time on ridiculous issues like this, when there are real problems like the State budget, schools, and immigration that desperately need its attention. My recommendation to the legislature is to get back to work. And this time, let’s get some real work done.

For those of you who feel unworthy of the life you are leading or guilt over what your ancestors may have done, instead of taking part in this divisive action, I suggest you read a book, see your therapist, go to the gym or find some other method of assuaging your guilt. As for the rest of us, we are going to continue on with our lives. Oh, and I might add, without a hint of guilt either."

Republicans--More Giving?

There's an interesting column posted on Real Clear Politics by George Will today wherein he refers to a study on charitable giving. The Objective Consevative has believed for many years that conservatives are much more supportive of charities and civic organizations and Will's assessment of the study would seem to support it. A good and understandable read. Check it out:

Call to Prayer in England

From Real Clear Politics:

"From Across the PondPosted by BLAKE DVORAK E-Mail This Permalink Email Author
In his column today Tony Blankley offers this sobering story from England:
Two weeks ago, the story came from a town with a college that has been a leading force in the advancement of Christian civilization for 900 years: Oxford, England. Once again, something more than bluebirds threatens English skies. It seems that authorities at the Oxford Central Mosque have requested permission to use loadspeakers to blast the call to prayer five times a day from atop their minaret across the town that has heard for the past 900 summers, falls, winters and springs only the bells of the local churches.

Unsurprisingly, the Church of England's bishop for Oxford, the Right Rev. John Pritchard, has announced his support, calling on his congregation to "enjoy community diversity." He would be a likely successor to the current archbishop of Canterbury, who called for Shariah law for England recently.

It is not so much the attempt by European Muslims to alter their adopted homeland to fit their faith that's troubling as it is the willingness of Europeans to accommodate them. Sharia creep will continue as long as it meets no resistance."

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Hagel ????

It's not news to you that senator chuckie has not committed to Republican John McCain. He's not likely too either, but he'll make as much of his decision not to (or is it indecision as in "I called this press conference to announce that I have no announcement?") endorse while he uses it to promote his book. Watch for him on Fox tonight as he shares his views.

Suggestion: Take either a tranquilizer, a strong drink or a tums before viewing.

For more on his opinions, see

At last--A shot at a Democrat

Seems like the editorial staff hasn't been particularly supportive of Republicans today so in the interest of the "fairness doctrine" let's look at Democrat candidate for U.S. Senate, Scott Kleeb. Seems he has lost his license for too many speeding tickets. If you read his comments, the blame certainly doesn't seem to be on himself but rather the fact that he was running late for many events and had to get there. Now, as he campaigns for the U.S. Senate, he will have to have a "driver."

What is truly disturbing about this issue is not that he makes excuses for doing it, but the fact that by doing it he obviously thought he could "get away" with it. Now, don't we need more guys like him in the U.S. Senate. He'd be in good company with Senators Vitter, Kennedy and Craig in the Senate!

Suggestion: Scott, don't get a driver, get back on your horse and take your carpet bag with you to some other state!

Apology for Slavery -- PJM

When will it ever end? When is enough enough? Apparently, not yet. At the risk of being censored for criticizing a fellow Republican, I can no longer contain myself. What in the world has sent Senator Dwite Pedersen on his 'feel good' legislative folly calling for Nebraska to apologize for its role in slavery?

First of all, if you haven't read Resolution 284, it's attached for your review. Warning keep a box of tissues near and a waste basket for the potential emanations that will no doubt rapidly proceed from you body. As I read it, I felt like I had just gone through a major Act of Contrition. How could I possibly have been responsible for all these sins? God only knows what my penance will be. But what I can't figure out, is how am I responsible for these sins that date back to biblical ties? Will I need to burn my Bible since it certainly seems to have condoned slavery? As a Christian, as an American, as a Nebraskan, as a Republican is there any way I am not guilty for the crimes of somebody's ancestors (I not sure they are mine) mistreatment and enslavement of someone anywhere from thousands of years ago to a mere 140+ years ago in Nebraska?


Senator Pedersen is wasting his time and our money by introducing this resolution. It may make a bunch of liberal apologists happy--you know the ones that want to sit around with their lattes singing Kumbya who want to apologize about how we mistreat our dogs, shouldn't have dropped the bombs on Japan, should be ashamed about our country's wealth, our lack of sharing it with the rest of the world, etc, etc. They are the same folks that don't want to celebrate Columbus Day because of the disease and abuse he brought to the American Indians. By the way you might want to check out today's World-Herald editorial regarding the native Americans because they are certainly owed an apology. In fact, while my parents weren't living in Nebraska at the time of the 'slavery misdeeds or mis-thoughts' they were Irish and I'm sure that they were abused here when they first came to Nebraska. I suspect the Chinese who helped build the railroad weren't treated any better. I understand those of German ancestry weren't treated very well during WW I and WW II. How many other groups deserve an apology? In fact, can't we just all say one good ACT OF CONTRITION to expiate this guilt from our consciences once and for all?

It's interesting to note that the final part of Pedersen's resolution says, 'It is the intent of the legislature that this resolution shall not be used in, or be the basis of, any type of litigation.' DO I HEAR POTENTIAL REPARATIONS? Surely if you and I have sinned we must make atonement to the victims (even if many times removed) from the commission of our transgression.

I've rambled on enough, but let's make it clear. This is nothing more than 'feel good', liberal mentality legislation that fosters victim-hood and gives people another reason not to take responsibility for their life. It's true whether you pass legislation to apologize to blacks, reds (I apologize if I misuse the term--reparations later), yellows, Irish or whomever. With that said I'm going to ask Senator Pedersen to include a censure for J. Sterling Morton (who if you recall, last year was exposed as a slavery supporter), and make sure that ARBOR DAY is totally and completely rejected as a Nebraska State Holiday and wiped from the history as well. Maybe we could keep the holiday and just require an asterisk with a footnote that says 'Arbor Day was founded by a racist, but Nebraska has apologized for his thoughts.'

A Victory for States' Rights over Bush and The World Court

The Supreme Court got it right. It said that Texas did not have to give a convicted murder a new trial just because the World Court said it should, with President Bush taking the "world" view against his own home state. Given some of the Supreme Court's members penchants for looking to "world law" this is all a sweeter victory. By the way, if you're still uninclined to vote for John McCain, imagine how this battle would play out three years from now with two Hillary or Obama appointments. See the article:

Words of Wisdom from Hillary

"He would not have been my pastor. You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend." - Hillary Clinton

As Long as we are Criticising Republicans -- Editor

It should come of no surprise that this venue and its contributors are no fans of earmarks, but for those of you who haven't read today's Omaha World-Herald, you might want to take a look at who is out giving away your dollars---none other than Nebraska Representatives Terry, Fortenberry and Smith. How disappointing that these "conservatives" have now rationalized that earmarks are okay. For a good article about the problem with earmarks, see:

Hagel's new book -- Editor

Your editor received an e-mail solicitation today promoting Senator Hagel's new literary masterpiece, America: Our Next Chapter. The solicitation shows the endorsements of Colin Powell, Tom Brokaw and Kofi Annan. If that's the best conservatives the good senator can find to promote his book, he'd better hope that 3rd party he believes is so inevitable has lots of readers. It's for sure that Hagel won't be bowed over by conservatives looking for him at book signings.

Friday, March 21, 2008

Obama's Speech -- The Editor

Okay, we at the Objective Conservative have stayed fairly quiet regarding the Rev. Wright and his prodigy, Senator Obama, but unlike the liberal press we were not impressed with his speech earlier this week, and certainly don't think his stereotypical description of "typical whites" is anything less than prejudicial racist iteration. With that said, you might wish to read Charles Krauthhammer's review of the Obama speech. See:

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Graduation Rates and No Child Left Behind -- PJM

I've been quick to criticize the education establishment and No Child Left Behind so when I saw an article in my favorite conservative news paper, The New York Times, about how states obscure their high school graduation rates for N.C.L.B. reporting, I was certain I'd come upon more fodder to support my criticism of both No Child Left Behind and, of course, what Nebraska reports. Not surprisingly, the New York Times article certainly supports my belief that what is reported to the federal government is basically a sham--at least as far as graduation rates (see ). However, I decided to check out a few other sources that might be more enlightening on graduation rates both nationally and in Nebraska. Surprisingly to me, both seemed to reflect that Nebraska's high school graduation rates (See ) are not only accurately reported, but also among the highest in the nation. The national numbers ( ), however, do reflect that the states actual graduation rates overall are very different than those reported under No Child Left Behind. If you are interested, you might check out not only the story from the New York Times but also the two attachments above.No Child Left Behind has not been reauthorized and shouldn't be. It is an exercise in government waste, bureaucracy and misinformation.

The federal government would be well to not only not renew NCLB, but to dismantle the Department of Education entirely letting the states use their allotted portions of those funds to improve education at the local level. No where in the U.S. Constitution does it allocate involvement in education to the federal government.

Completing the Fence

You might want to check out Senator Jim Demint's latest effort to compel the government to do what it was supposed to, complete 700 miles of border fencing. You can check it out at: The link has also been added below. The Senator provides solid reasons why a real fence makes sense.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Obama and his minister

From Investor's Business Daily:

“Barack Obama’s story that he never once heard his preacher trash whites and America in hundreds of sermons sounds like Bill Clinton claiming he never inhaled while smoking dope. The mushrooming church scandal has taken the shine off the golden boy of politics, a two-decade regular at ‘unashamedly black’ Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. With his phony defense, the Democrat front-runner has exposed himself as both a typical Beltway spinmeister and a hypocrite. From the start of his presidential campaign, Obama has positioned himself as a straight shooter and a uniter—the very antidote to the sinister Clintonian politics of the past... ‘You know what I’m saying is true,’ he reassured voters. Yet his denial over Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s vitriol does not ring true. He’s suddenly shocked—shocked!—that his black nationalist church would spew anti-American venom. ‘I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally,’ he insisted, ‘either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew.’ Back in February 2007, however, Obama knew Wright might be a political liability. His chief campaign strategist, David Axelrod, was so worried about his provocative statements that he urged Obama to withdraw a request that Wright deliver an invocation at his presidential campaign kickoff. Reluctantly, Obama ‘uninvited’ his long-time friend and mentor, according to Wright’s own account at the time, telling him ‘it’s best for you not to be out there in public.’... Here’s another whopper Obama tells concerning Wright: ‘He hasn’t been my political adviser, he’s been my pastor.’ Yet it turns out Wright quietly had a formal role in Obama’s campaign, and was only pushed out last week as a member of his spiritual advisory committee when the tapes hit the airwaves. Spinning harder, Obama claimed Wright’s remarks are not ‘reflective of the church.’ Yet the videos clearly show fellow members whooping and thumping in their applause of Wright’s hateful rants. These weren’t just a smattering of amens and hallelujahs. They were standing ovations. Point is, these are the folks with whom the Obamas worship and socialize. Yet we’re expected to believe Obama never heard the same incendiary remarks from them, either? His plea of ignorance doesn’t wash.” —Investor’s Business Daily

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Obama Where is the New York Times?

An interesting column by Philip Brennan of News Max. Brennan discusses Bill O'Reilly's take on how the media is handling Obama'a Pastor Wright. One of the interesting comparisons is about how The New York Times handled its "expose" of John McCain's so-called relationship with a lobbyist as to how it is handling and will handle Obama's 20 year relationship with a far-left America hater. Don't hold your breath waiting for any condemnation of Obama and Wright from the Gray Lady....

Hagel at it Again -- Editor

If you haven't seen today's Omaha World Herald, check out the article on Chuck Hagel (Page 8B). Apparently (predictably), Hagel asserts that America needs a new direction and thinks proof of such lies in other countries' low esteem of our nation. At one point, at least, he says, "It isn't all our fault". Once again, his solution is for "America's leaders to be more like former Presidents Eisenhower and Harry Truman, who worked through international coalitions such as the United Nations, to make changes." Wow, Eisenhower the great conservative! Wow, the United a nations--an organization of thieves, liars, spies and lawbreakers! What a solution, Senator Hagel!!!

Hagel further asserts, "What you've got is a nation that's lost its faith." Of course in Hagel's eyes, this accounts for the rise of the percentage of independents who will be responsible for restructuring of existing parties or the creation of a third party. If Hagel truly believes this will be the case, maybe he ought to start reading different history books rather than promoting his own next book--soon to come out. The truth of the matter is Hagel is still part of the "Blame America First Crowd". His tenure and retreat into history can't come soon enough for those that don't blame America first.

One aside, this same Senator Hagel who extols the virtues of President Eisenhower also continues his assertion that the country "shouldn't focus on an unfeasible solution to to illegal immigration, like rounding everyone up and have them deported." Maybe the good senator should google "Operation Wetback", a program that President Eisenhower initiated to deport millions of illegal immigrants to Mexico.......Check that out Senator Hagel!

Monday, March 17, 2008

The News Media and Democrat Bias -- Say it ain't true

This from One News Now about Governor Spitzer's treatment by the Media.......

Political spokesman says media purposefully conceals Spitzer's party affiliation
Chad Groening - OneNewsNow - 3/17/2008 6:00:00 AM

"Rich Noyes, spokesman for the Media Research Center, says the major television networks have gone out of their way to avoid identifying former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer as a Democrat, much like they have done with numerous past Democratic sex scandals.

When news of Spitzer's involvement with a high-dollar prostitution ring broke, the Media Research Center found only one spoken reference to Spitzer being a Democrat during nine-and-a-half hours of coverage, which Noyes believes is yet another attempt by the media to hide the fact that the scandal involves a liberal Democrat.

Noyes points out that Spitzer was "the most influential Democratic governor, somebody who is talked about as ... running on a national ticket in years to come." Yet after he gets involved in "an incredibly embarrassing sex scandal, something that does a lot to erode his image as a law-and-order individual," the media portray him as a loner instead of a representative of the Democratic Party.

Spitzer's treatment, according to Noyes, is a far cry from the attention the networks paid to Senator Larry Craig's (R-Idaho) party affiliation during his much-publicized sex scandal last summer. When Craig's scandal first broke, "all three networks made it a point to call him a Republican" and said Craig's actions put a "black mark" on the Republican Party as a whole.

In fact, the MRC notes, NBC did not reveal Spitzer's Democratic Party affiliation until Thursday night. In taking this tact, Noyes believes the networks have successfully prevented the Spitzer scandal from having any kind of major political impact on the Democratic Party."

The Unicameral -- A relic and an Oddity

The Objective Conservative welcomes the article immediately below, authored by Matt Buttler in response to yesterday's (Sunday March 16)World Herald editorial page article (see ).

Contributor, Pat McPherson, comments further on Matt's response and on the Unicameral as follows:

"Once, again, it takes someone who has studied the topic to correct the misrepresentations and it's good Matt does so. The story of the unicameral is of concern to me because for years I have felt that a two house system would work much better. The current unicameral is a disaster for the party system and for the citizens who elect a governor and expect him to lead. For the governor, trying to get things accomplished is a task similar to herding 49 cats. Just as one example, with a partisan system which would be dominated by Republicans (at least so-called) the governor could have gotten his immigration legislation to the floor and passed. One could give many other reasons to abandon this relic and oddity, but time doesn't allow."

History Rewritten -- Matt Butler

History was re-written in this story.

"The fact is...according to Norris in his autobiography entitled, “Fighting Liberal”...that Norris’ objective was not a non-partisan legislature. It was a one-house legislature. And it wasn’t for “efficiency”. It was because Norris objected to “conference committees” and “conference reports” in the Congress, and the quasi-third house of Congress they comprised. Norris states in his book that he set out to get a one house legislature, and when he couldn't get enough signatures, he changed his course of action to get what he wanted by adding political parties to the chopping block. The result: a one house, non-partisan legislature.

Did I mention that he also had to resort to PAID petition circulators to get enough signatures?

Nebraska’s Unicameral is a tourist attraction. Since Norris hoodwinked everyone into thinking that his system was superior to that of the Founding Fathers of our country, many states have looked at it, and NOT ONE has embraced it. ZERO. The end result of our Unicameral system is 3 people: “Terrible Terry” Carpenter, John DeCamp, and Ernie Chambers. That’s what a one-house system produces.

Our state capitol was built with 2 legislative chambers. One sits empty. It’s time to re-balance this flawed system and stop worshipping the flawed legacy of George Norris."

Friday, March 14, 2008

Ted Kennedy -- Environmentalist

You won't believe this--fresh from Newsmax. Kennedy yacht is caught dumping diesel fuel into Nantucket Sound. Well, the rules are different (or simply don't apply) if you are a Kennedy. Remember this is the Kennedy that doesn't want any wind farms polluting his view of Nantucket Sound. See:

November Chances for Repulicans in the Senate

If you want what we regard as a fair assessment of the Republican senatorial chances in November, check out the article by Chris Cillizza in today's Washington Post. It's not particularly encouraging, but at least it would indicate that barring some unforeseen (but nonetheless possible) scandal the GOP will have more than the 40 votes to keep somewhat of a hold on the Democrats. See:

Good Polling Information

For some good polling summaries, you might want to look at the site of the American Enterprise Institute: They issue a monthly report and as you might see from it, it looks like a potentially close race to succeed George W. at this point.

Reformed Liberals and the failure of an earmark moratorium in the Senate

You might want to take a look at today's Patriot Post: It contains a great article about a reformed liberal followed by a brief diatribe about the failure of the Senate to pass an earmark moratorium. Republicans and conservatives should be outraged at the self serving Republican senators that prevented this from happening.

Thursday, March 13, 2008

The Courts (and the Legislature) taketh away

It seems that the courts in California have decided that maybe parents have no right to home school their children and may be punishable for doing so. Hopefully, the next level court will overturn the decision, but the prospect of courts doing such is scary.

In Nebraska, the legislature is looking at requiring that home schooled children be tested on a state exam.

The Nebraska Supreme Court just recently ruled that the death penalty, i.e., the electric chair was cruel and inhumane--apparently forgetting the utter depravity of the perpetrators whose cruel and unusual treatment and respect of human life got them in line for "old sparkey" in the first place.

The author of the article below discusses not only the California decision but also relates to the slippery slope of laws (such at the one recently passed in Nebraska to forbid smoking in public and work buildings) that restrict the rights of the citizen.

What should concern citizens is; 1) almost every law passed ultimately deprives one of certain rights; 2) once passed, those laws create a 'slippery slope' to pass additional laws that further infringe on ones rights, and; 3) there are enough liberal judges out their to continue legislating even more infringement on individual rights from the bench. It will only get worse if citizens don't say "enough" to knee-jerk legislation that infringes on their rights and creates unintended consequences and if citizens don't elect conservative judges or politicians responsible for appointing those judges.

See the article:

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Yea for Senators Clinton and Obama -- PJM

There appears to be an actual effort to put a moratorium on earmarks by the Senate, and maybe even in the House by none other than liberal Speaker Pelosi. Yes, seems the Democrats want to keep the "reformed Republicans" from taking credit for eliminating a problem that was a major factor in their loss of the House and Senate in 2006. So, although Hillary and Obama brought home millions in earmarks last year they've apparently seen the light--until perhaps one of them gets elected to the presidency. McCain has been a consistent opponent of earmarks, but minority leader McConnell seems to have difficulty figuring how he would vote on the issue, but then he, too, has taken home millions of dollars in earmarks (pork) over the years. See:

While on the subject of earmarks, perhaps you saw the article in the World-Herald last night dealing with transportation earmarks. You might want to read it as it shows just how important these earmarks are (really aren't) to Nebraska since even the State Roads Department doesn't want to come up with its 20% match so the projects can be built. Earmarks are not priorities--they are PORK!

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Porker of the Year Award Presentation

For a little fun, view the UTube video at It relates to the award Citizens Against Government Waste tried to give to Congressman Murtha who received their PORKER OF THE YEAR AWARD for bringing home $149 million in earmarks for 72 projects in Pennsylvania last year. What an accomplishment.

Monday, March 10, 2008

Am I seeing bears?

Fresh from the authoritative Washington Post today a discussion pitting Pork-Hating John McCain against scientists who spend $3-5 million studying bear DNA and numbers. Well, of course, it is important that the federal government fund this study because somewhere in the Constitution there must be a clause that entrusts the federal government with this obligation in addition to defending its boarders. What article is that now?

Without being overly cynical, perhaps McCain WILL do a better job than George W. on controlling these expenditures. On the other hand, if the Republicans in Congress don't get their act together, they'll continue to lose seats and presidential vetoes won't mean much....

McCain Sees Pork Where Scientists See SuccessCandidate Criticizes Ambitious Bear Study
"By Joel Achenbach Washington Post Staff WriterMonday, March 10, 2008; A01
WEST GLACIER, Mont. -- If you've heard Sen. John McCain's stump speech, you've surely heard him talk about grizzly bears. The federal government, he declares with horror and astonishment, has spent $3 million to study grizzly bear DNA. "I don't know if it was a paternity issue or criminal," he jokes, "but it was a waste of money."

A McCain campaign commercial also tweaks the bear research: "Three million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. Unbelievable."

Actually, it was a scientific and logistical triumph, argues Katherine Kendall, 56, mastermind of the Northern Divide Grizzly Bear Project.

Kendall is one tough field biologist: She's rafted wild rivers, forded swollen streams and hiked through remote backcountry for weeks at a time. She goes to places inhabited by all manner of large creatures with sharp teeth. She was once charged by an enraged grizzly. She stared the bear down.

So she can handle a growling politician -- even one now poised to become the Republican nominee for president.

"It's pretty cool that we pulled it off," Kendall said of her project while giving a tour of the rugged terrain near Glacier National Park. "Nobody got seriously hurt. We collected a ton of bear hair. We stayed on budget."

McCain, who has railed against government pork for two decades, cites three beneficiaries of what he calls wasteful spending in his TV ad "Outrageous." One is the infamous "bridge to nowhere," a project in Alaska, pushed by the Republican congressional delegation, that would link a sparsely populated island with the mainland. Another is a museum at the site of the 1969 Woodstock music festival, which would be supported with a million-dollar earmark co-sponsored by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).

And the third is the grizzly project. McCain has been jabbing rhetorically at Kendall's study since it began in 2003, including from the floor of the Senate:
"Approach a bear: 'That bear cub over there claims you are his father, and we need to take your DNA.' Approach another bear: 'Two hikers had their food stolen by a bear, and we think it is you. We have to get the DNA.' The DNA doesn't fit, you got to acquit, if I might."

Kendall, on orders from her superiors, will not directly respond to McCain ("I really can't wade into that"), but she clearly doesn't find his jibes amusing, much less accurate. The truth is, her project is focused not on the DNA of grizzly bears, but on counting them.

As a scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey, she set out to get the first head count of grizzlies in the Northern Continental Divide ecosystem. She and her co-workers at the USGS have used DNA primarily as a bear-identifying tool. Her project also employed barbed wire and homemade bear bait brewed up from rotten fish and cattle blood.

"There's never been any information about the status of this population. We didn't know what was going on -- until this study," Kendall said.

This was an astonishingly ambitious research project involving 207 paid workers, hundreds of volunteers, 7.8 million acres and 2,560 bear sampling sites. The project did not cost $3 million, as McCain's ad alleges, but more than $5 million, including nearly $4.8 million in congressional appropriations. It had a strong advocate in Congress in Montana's three-term senator, Conrad Burns, a Republican who was defeated in his reelection bid in 2006.

Burns is now chairman of McCain's campaign in Montana.

Grizzly bears in northwest Montana are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. But Kendall's project -- the results of which will be published soon in a scientific journal -- revealed that there are more grizzlies than anyone had realized. That suggests that three decades of conservation efforts, costing tens of millions of dollars, have paid off.
This could have long-term implications for the Northern Divide grizzlies, possibly including their removal someday from the threatened list. Delisting them would restore management of the bears to state control after decades of federal oversight.

"It was extremely well executed and well worth the money," said Sterling Miller, a bear researcher working for the National Wildlife Federation. "Someone like McCain should be delighted, in fact. The Endangered Species Act works."

San Francisco Mayor Newsom Continues Wacky Ways

Only San Francisco could have a Mayor Newsom. When he isn't personally trying to rewrite marriage laws by deciding to wed gays, he's working on solving the so-called global warming crisis with some twenty-five employees and at irrational costs. Let's just hope he doesn't seek Nancy Pelosi's job.

See the article:

No Matter How You Spin It

The loss of Denny Hastert's House seat in a special election this week bodes badly for Republicans come fall. Until they can come up with a message that is relevant and makes sense to the voter they will continue to lose seats in the House and the Senate. If they fail to elect McCain, they will have a nightmare on their hands.......

For even more reason to be depressed you might want to look at the article from the Politico below:

More on Earmarks or Why Republicans will continue to lose

The following article is a good short discussion of the angst facing "Republican leadership" over the elimination of earmarks. Leaders like Mitch McConnell want to continue "taking home the pork" while Senators Colburn, DeMint and, yes, McCain want a complete moratorium on earmarks. At least we can acknowledge that McCain will be better than "conservative Bush" on the issue should he be elected. On the other hand, if the Democrats take the leadership on this issue, then Republicans will continue to lose as they speak with two tongues . When will Republicans get their act together?

See Robert Novak's column:

A couple of good thoughts and quotes from the Patriot

Thought you might enjoy these two quotes gleaned from the Patriot today. Ronald Reagan had a unique way of discussing tax cuts and putting them into perspective. Walter Williams points out the slippery slope that eventually leads to diminished rights and socialism. Enjoy.

“How can limited government and fiscal restraint be equated with lack of compassion for the poor? How can a tax break that puts a little more money in the weekly paychecks of working people be seen as an attack on the needy? Since when do we in America believe that our society is made up of two diametrically opposed classes—one rich, one poor—both in a permanent state of conflict and neither able to get ahead except at the expense of the other? Since when do we in America accept this alien and discredited theory of social and class warfare? Since when do we in America endorse the politics of envy and division?” —Ronald Reagan

“The fact that an obese person becomes ill, or a cyclist has an accident, and becomes a burden on taxpayers who must bear the expense of taking care of him, is not a problem of liberty. It’s a problem of socialism where one person is forced to take care of another. There is no moral argument that justifies using the coercive powers of government to force one person to bear the expense of taking care of another... Forcing one person to bear the burden of health care costs for another is not only a moral question but a major threat to personal liberty. Think about all the behaviors and lifestyles that can lead to illness and increase the burden on taxpayers. A daily salt intake exceeding 6 grams can lead to hypertension. A high-fat diet and high alcohol intake can also lead to diabetes. A sedentary lifestyle can lead to several costly diseases such as hypertension, diabetes and heart failure. There are many other behaviors that lead to a greater health care burden, but my question is how much control over your life you are willing to give government in the name of reducing these costs? Would you want government to regulate how much salt you use? What about government deciding how much fat and alcohol you consume? There are immense beneficial health effects of a daily 30-minute aerobic exercise. Would you support government-mandated exercise? You might argue that it’s none of government’s business how much fat, salt or alcohol a person consumes, even if it has adverse health care cost implications. I’d ask: Wouldn’t the same reasoning apply to helmet laws and proposed obesity laws?” —Walter Williams

Friday, March 7, 2008

Brad Ashford -- A Republican Fraud -- Editorial Staff

The recent conduct of Brad Ashford and his liberally biased judiciary committee on Governor Heineman's illegal immigration proposals is just disgusting. Not to mention soon to be ex-senator Chamber's antics at pushups during the hearing. Nebraskans are sick and tired of illegal immigrants sapping their resources of benefits and education, taking jobs, not paying taxes and committing crimes. If the national government refuses to act, Nebraska's legislature should do as Arizona and other states have done and take the initiative. It is sad when elected officials like Ashford simply refuse to listen and sing their kumbaya songs of "can't we just all get along."

Brad Ashford is nothing more than a liberal in Republican clothing. He had several years in the legislature before leaving it and behaved much the same then. He ran for the U.S. Congress and was fortunately defeated. Then in 2006, voters in his district forgot his past performance and voted for the "new" Brad Ashford who was pro gun, pro-life and conservative. What they got was a guy that was pro-university embryo research, pro-choice, anti-gun and now pro illegal immigration. Republicans and other right-minded voters in Brad's district should not be fooled again. They shouldn't let him exhaust the term limits ban by running and being elected again in 2010 requiring them and the state to suffer his liberal antics through 2014. Let's hope we can find a good conservative to run against and beat Ashford in 2010. Until then, he will continue to tell you he is a conservative and do just the opposite. Unfortunately, the World Herald editorial page will continue to extol Ashford's "moderate' approach to issues, which is in fact its own.

Debunking Obama

It would appear that the Objective Conservative is doing a bit of a "Rush" job on Democrat aspirant Senator Obama today for which it offers no apologies. The article referenced below by Charles Krauthammer is interesting in that it not only suggests what Hillary (and possibly McCain) need to do to beat Obama, but also suggests that McCain is the courageous "uniter".
Check it out at:

Hillary and the nomination

The staff at the Objective Conservative has long felt that Hillary Clinton would end up the winner of the Democrat presidential nomination, albeit expecting an easier route than it's been. The staff still believes Hillary will win the nomination at any and all costs, short of and including the destruction of her (maybe we should say "their" - Bill and Hillary's) party. The article below from today's Patriot articulates many of the reasons we still believe Hillary will be the nominee.

Hillary’s silver bullets
By Mark Alexander
"In my last essay, “What dogs hear,” about Barack Obama’s surging political fortunes from meaningless rhetorical tripe, I noted, “Reports of Hillary Clinton’s defeat have been greatly exaggerated. NEVER underestimate the Clintons.”

Indeed, after a week of playing victim, the beleaguered damsel in distress mustered enough female voters to pull off wins in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island.

Including pledged so-called super delegates, Obama now has 1,567 delegates to Clinton’s 1,462. For Obama to claim the Demo nomination, he would need to win 458 of the remaining 611 delegates, while Clinton would need 563. Neither scenario is likely, which means that the nominee will instead be brokered by the remaining 346 uncommitted super delegates, most likely at the Demo convention in late August.

If all those numbers confuse you, just remember that Obama’s is the “yes we can” campaign and Clinton’s is the “yes we will” campaign—and that “we will” trumps “we can.”
Despite Obama’s lead, the Clintons are master dealmakers, which is to say, I still believe Hillary Clinton will be the Democrat nominee when the convention dust settles. In her mind, she has already spent eight years as Vice President (Gore was a mere straw man), and she simply won’t subject herself to the lesser half of an Obama-Clinton ticket.

The last time Democrats went to the convention looking for a nominee, it was Jimmy Carter v. Teddy Kennedy. However, that was somewhat amicable compared to the assault Clinton is now preparing against Obama.

Clinton, though, knows that the Democrats can’t afford another bloodbath like the 1968 convention, so she needs to take Obama out before then. She also knows that the campaign is going to get very ugly in the next three months, so putting Obama on the bottom of her ticket may not be an option. Clinton must therefore dispense with Obama, with prejudice, so she can choose her own veep, (say, former general, Wes Clark).

How will she do it?

For starters, she’ll claim to be the legitimate victor, but for being robbed of hundreds of delegates from her faux victories in Florida and Michigan. (Notably, Obama was not on the Michigan ballot).

The Democrat National Committee has stripped all 350 delegates from those two states as punishment for having moved their primaries ahead of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, which the DNC had decreed were the only four states that could hold their contests prior to 5 February, a.k.a. “Super Tuesday.”

Demos in Florida and Michigan are now asking for a do-over, to which DNC Chairman Screamin’ Howard Dean has responded, “The Democratic nominee will be determined in accordance with party rules, and out of respect for the presidential campaigns and the states that did not violate party rules, we are not going to change the rules in the middle of the game.”

Translation: Yes, Clinton won, but this is a “top-down” Party, and as duly instructed by Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, we are backing Obama.

Clinton fired back, “I’d like to see [the Florida delegates] counted because I think that’s in the best interests of the Democratic Party and our eventual victory in November.” That’s the Clintons—always putting the party first.

Second, after claiming to be the real victor, she will hang Antoin “Tony” Rezko around Obama’s neck, and throw them both overboard.

“Tony who?” you ask.

Rezko (a.k.a. “Tony the Obamanator”) is Obama’s Chicago fundraising patriarch, a “fixer” who was indicted in January on fraud, various extortion charges and money laundering for an Iraqi billionaire, Nadhmi Auchi, whom military analysts describe as one of Saddam’s bagmen. (No wonder Obama opposed Operation Iraqi Freedom.)

Rezko was jailed after being indicted, not because of a risk of flight, but for his own safety. Given the history of high-profile defendants in federal racketeering cases in Chicago, he would likely not survive outside of his solitary cell. (For the record, Rezko is not Italian, he is a Syrian immigrant.)

Chicago politics hasn’t changed much since the reign of one Alphonse Gabriel Capone, whose legacy of organized crime is thriving today under the safeguard of the current Demo boss, Mayor Richard M. Daley. He, and his father, the late Richard J. Daley, have ruled Chicago with an iron fist for more than 40 years.

While Obama has yet to be directly implicated in any of Rezko’s mischief, their relationship demands far greater scrutiny than a fawning mainstream media has so far given it.
After Rezko’s indictment, Obama returned $150,000 to Rezko associates, and donated $72,650 to charity, an amount equal to Rezko’s contributions to Obama’s campaign. This is a phony gesture usually reserved for anonymous campaign donors who show up on police blotters. But Obama and Rezko have been friends for 15 years, and Rezko “raised” a lot of graft for Obama’s first congressional campaign.

Obama says he did not end his relationship with Rezko until recently because “there was no evidence of wrongdoing.”

For the record, Obama went to Harvard Law School, was elected Harvard Law Review’s first black president in its 104-year history, and completed his J.D. degree magna cum laude. I am confident, therefore, that Obama has the perspicacity to realize that his friend was a gangster.
However, their relationship goes well beyond politics, and that is why Clinton has Obama by the, uh, has him cornered.

According to The Economist, “Mr. Rezko helped [Obama] buy his home in Chicago in 2005. The seller would close the deal on Mr. Obama’s house only if the adjacent empty lot was sold on the same day. In June 2005 Mr. Obama bought his home for $1.65 million, $300,000 less than the asking price, and Mr. Rezko’s wife bought the adjacent lot.”

Obama’s Georgian mansion on Chicago’s south side and the adjacent lot were originally one parcel, but the owner divided it into two. You guessed it—the adjacent lot was purchased by Rezko for the full $625,000 asking price, about $300,000 above market value. (I know, given Obama’s rhetoric, you thought he lived in a government housing project and commuted by mass transit.)

In other words, Rezko subsidized Obama’s discount with the purchase of the adjacent lot. Notably, Rezko’s lot purchase coincides with receipt of a “loan” from his Iraqi friend, Auchi.
Rezko’s trial began Monday, and his relationship with Obama will be a hot topic for as long as the trial lasts. Of course, Hillary will have to let the Leftmedia do her billing, and withhold any direct accusations, lest Obama will have time to resurrect the Clinton’s association with Jim and Susan McDougal and their Whitewater real estate “deal.” Of course, we previously published a photo of the Clintons with Rezko.

Clinton has a pocket full of additional silver bullets. The remainder of this campaign will be interesting."

California Marriage -- From the Patriot

Some things to think about when you appease groups by legislation and when you consider how your vote affects the make up of various courts:

"Judicial Benchmarks: CA marriage"
"Speaking of same-sex unions, on Tuesday the California State Supreme Court heard arguments regarding the constitutionality of the state’s ban on same-sex marriage. At least two, and possibly three, of the seven judges seemed likely to overturn the state’s voter-approved marriage laws. In 2000, California voters passed with over 60 percent of the vote Prop. 22, which read, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” The state legislature has since passed a series of domestic-partnership laws that undercut the sanctity of marriage. It was very difficult for the state to argue that homosexuals should be excluded from marriage when they already have all the rights of marriage under a different name. This should serve as a warning to those who are willing to compromise with homosexual activists. Contrary to the radical homosexual activists’ claims that they want marriage “equality,” their goal is to destroy the institution altogether. Rewarding homosexuals with domestic partnerships has created a slippery slope in the direction of legalizing same-sex marriage, and the court’s decision will likely have a heavy influence on the debate."

Monday, March 3, 2008

Hagel, McCain and Pelosi -- Recipients of Awards for Courage and Leadership -- Editor

It's noteworthy that Senator Hagel is receiving today an award from the University of Maryland called the Millared E Tydings Award for Courage and Leadership. The award was given to Senator McCain during his "contrarian days" back in 2001 and to Nancy Pelosi in 2003. A veritable cast of stars! It was noted that "Senator Hagel has been willing to put himself in harm's way throughout his pubic and military life, bucking his party if he felt a vital principle was involved." If he becomes Obama's Secretary of Defense, the good old U of M may have to give him the award again (see article blogged earlier today).

The "Old Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"

This bit of information from Sunday's New York Times. It should make Al Gore understand that the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" existed long before Hillary named it--even before Hillary was named after Sir Edmond (although Sir Emond climbed Mt. Everest some six years after Hillary's birth--nevermind, the truth complicates things).

"On March 2, 1877, Republican Rutherford B. Hayes was declared the winner of the 1876 presidential election over Democrat Samuel J. Tilden, even though Tilden had won the popular vote. "

McCain getting Conservative Advice

Maybe, McCain is getting good advise. At least that's what Newsmax says in the artilce below as it describes McCain's reliance on former Senator Phil Gramm of Texas. See below:

"Presidential hopeful John McCain’s chief economic adviser is former U.S. Senator Phil Gramm, a longtime advocate of free market fiscal policy.
And McCain is following the Texas Republican’s lead on such issues as healthcare, taxes and the federal budget.

Gramm, a former economics professor, retired from the Senate in 2002 and has been an investment banker at UBS. He joined old friend McCain’s then-floundering campaign in July and helped turn it around.

“If McCain follows Gramm’s counsel, and most of his current positions are vintage Gramm indeed, his policies as president would represent not just a sharp departure from the Bush years, but an assault on government growth that Republicans have boasted about, but failed to achieve, for decades,” Fortune magazine observes.

McCain and Gramm joined forces to help defeat Hillary Clinton’s healthcare plan in 1993. McCain and Gramm now support a plan that would allow Americans to shop for healthcare with their own money.

McCain advocates giving tax rebates of $2,500 per individual or $5,000 per family, and Americans could use that money to purchase healthcare policies on their own. The plan would also eliminate the tax exclusion for healthcare benefits offered by employers and replace it with the rebates.

Clinton and Barack Obama want to retain the employer-based system, and the Democrats would not allow insurers to charge lower healthcare insurance rates for young workers. McCain and Gramm favor allowing insurers to tailor their premiums, and their packages, to their customers, according to Fortune.

Regarding taxes, McCain now support extending the Bush tax cuts he twice voted against. But unlike Bush, he would seek to drastically cut spending.

“McCain’s main objection when Congress passed the tax cuts was that we didn’t have spending controls,” Gramm told Fortune.

McCain vows to balance the federal budget by 2012 by, among other things, vetoing all pork barrel spending and reining in spending for Social Security and Medicare.

Amid speculation that Gramm could be President McCain’s Treasury Secretary, Gramm said he’s reluctant to return to public life — but he won’t rule it out."

Hagel and Obama -- Heaven Protect Us -- Editor

The editor of the Objective Conservative doesn't read the comics, but after reading the following referenced article from Newsmax, thinks maybe he should. Newsmax tells us that Senator Hagel is a potential candidate for Secretary of Defense under President Obama, that Obama and Hagel are good friends. Now wouldn't that be a pair to draw to? In fact, the thought of Secretary of Defense Hagel should give conservative Republicans a real reason to vote for "liberal" John McCain come fall. See the article:

The State of the Republican Party -- Can McCain Save it?

Here's an interesting article from a guy that analyzes politics for a living. While no one that the editor knows is doing any jigs for McCain who, no doubt, tomorrow will become the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party, Stuart Rothenberg provides a pretty sad appraisal of the party verses its likely candidate and makes a case that McCain could win and possibly help revitalize the image of the party. Certainly, given Rothenbergs citings of polls relating to the party, it appears that it might take more than just a conservative candidate to resurrect its image and possibility to rediscover 1994. See the article:

The Gipper Speaks on Buckley -- From the "Patriot"

From today's Patriot Post, Reagan's words on Bill Buckley:
“I want to say just a word or two about... Bill Buckley. And unlike Bill, I’ll try to keep my words to single syllables, or at the worst, only two. You know, I’ve often thought when I’ve been faced with memorandums from deep in the bowels of the bureaucracy what I wouldn’t give to have Bill as an interpreter...I think you know that National Review is my favorite magazine... NR isn’t a favorite only because it’s fought the good fight so long and so well, although that would be reason enough. It’s my favorite because it’s splendidly written, brilliantly edited, and a pleasure to read. In fact, I honestly believe even if I were to suffer from mental illness or convert to liberalism for some other reason—NR would still be my favorite magazine because of its wit and its charm and intellectual quality of its contents... Let me just close by saying a heartfelt thank you to National Review for all you’ve done for the values we share.” —Ronald Reagan