Monday, June 30, 2008

More on Guns

A little more ad nauseum. From today's Washington Post editorial page, a clear statement of its bias (Why can't Barack Hussein Obama be as clear?).

"Even before the court issued its historic -- and misguided -- 5 to 4 ruling Thursday, law enforcement officials for Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) were working on a worst-case assumption.

The editorial goes on to tell congress to keep it's hands out of D.C.'s decision making process to cope with this horrific misguided opinion. Read it if you feel necessary at:

The Court

Sometimes we at the Objective Conservative seem to dwell ad nauseum on the same topic and we apologize if we offend, but the decisions and composition of the Supreme Court should probably be one of the most if not the most important consideration in electing a president because of the impact appointments have for decades to come.

From our friends at The Patriot Post, we are brought the opinion of columnist Chuck Muth:

"[T]he only logical argument which still might hold some sway with some... frustrated conservatives is the Supreme Court. It’s an old argument—[and] its power to persuade is less this election than in years past. The reality is that while there could well be two vacancies during the next president’s term, those vacancies are likely to be for two of the Court’s liberal members, Justices Stevens and Ginsberg. Should Obama win, he’d get to replace two liberals with two liberals. So the philosophical make-up of the court would be a wash... And many conservatives probably could have lived with that—as long as the Court didn’t hand down any outrageous new decisions this summer showing that the Court still had not moved far enough to the right... First the Court ruled, 5-4, that captured Islamic terrorists with absolutely no regard for American human life whatsoever are entitled to the same constitutional rights and privileges as a United States citizen. Then this week the Court ruled, again 5-4, that it is cruel and unusual punishment for men who rape little girls under the age of 12 to get the death penalty. Replacing even one of the five liberal justices on the wrong side of these rulings would indeed change the course of legal jurisprudence in this country for years to come. So simply maintaining the status quo isn’t looking like such an acceptable thing after all. And then there was [the] DC gun ban decision. The court got this one right—but only by a 5-4 decision. Citizens of the United States of America [darn] near lost a critical God-given legal right to self-defense by one stinking vote. ... Thanks to these three Supreme Court decisions, many conservatives may now feel compelled to return to the GOP flock, hold their noses REAL tight, and vote for John McCain in November.” —Chuck Muth

With his argument, we couldn't be in greater accord.

Leadership Means Making Difficult Decisions

Bob Novak has a good column today, 'Obama's Dodge on Handguns'. Novak questions the total lack of clarity that Barack Hussein Obama has displayed leading up the D.C. handgun/Supreme Court decision of last week. Basically, Barack Hussein Obama has refused to say where he was on this question. Now apparently, he agrees with the court decision, at least so he says.

Novak's column today seems to deal with an overriding issue of getting this fancy talker to really tell you specifically where he stands on anything. While his rhetoric sounds so enthralling, there is never any substance or yes or no answers. Novak notes in his closing that it will be interesting to see if this man, who wants to appoint judges similar to the ones that voted to continue the D.C. handgun ban, will do so with hopes that when a similar Chicago ban comes before the court they will affirm it and look back at the D.C. ban.

Whether you like John Sidney McCain or not you pretty well know where he stands on the issues. Republicans and conservatives find some of his views difficult to accept and the thought of voting for him less than palatable. However, the voter won't have to wake up some morning after January 20, 2009 wondering why President McCain did what he did that day. The same can't be said of President Obama who will have done little more than utter a bunch of inane platitudes as he mesmerizes the American populace into electing him.

For Novak's story, see:

New Oversight of Supreme Court Needed - Doug Patton

Contributor and nationally recognized columnist Doug Patton speaks on the Supreme Court.

June 30, 2008

"My old boss, U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, one of the few non-lawyers on the House Judiciary Committee, used to tell me about how Congress has the power to regulate the federal courts.

“Constitutionally, we could reduce the Supreme Court to the Chief Justice sitting in his chambers at a card table if we wanted to,” he would say.

I thought of that unused congressional authority as I pondered why it is that the Supreme Court tends to pull its members to the left.

In recent decades, from Abe Fortas and Thurgood Marshall, appointed by Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s, to Clinton appointees Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the 1990s, liberal Democrats are rarely disappointed in the left-wing positions of their appointees on virtually every issue. Not so with justices appointed by Republican presidents.

Certainly there are reliable minds on the court that can be trusted with the strict interpretation of the constitution. Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas have proven themselves worthy of our respect in that regard. Similarly, Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito are slowly building a reputation for eschewing judicial activism and for defending the concept of original intent.

But Republican nominees frequently fail to live up to the hopes of those who believe in strict adherence to the Founders’ constitutional intentions.

In modern times, perhaps the biggest disappointments began with former California Governor Earl Warren, a Republican appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower to serve as Chief Justice.

Richard Nixon’s appointments of Warren Burger and Harry Blackmun were a disaster. Both men voted in the majority on the most infamous Supreme Court ruling of the 20th Century, 1973’s Roe vs. Wade, with Blackmun writing the majority opinion. The result is forty million Americans aborted.

David Souter, appointed by President George H. W. Bush, has so abandoned any semblance of conservative jurisprudence that he is now counted consistently with Ginsburg, Breyer and John Paul Stevens on the left end of the court.

Two Reagan appointees, Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony Kennedy, turned into two of the biggest disappointments of the era. O’Connor’s left turn culminated two important recent cases, Carhart vs. Stenberg and Lawrence vs. Texas. The Carhart case struck down Nebraska’s ban on partial birth abortion. Lawrence created a constitutional right to sodomy, thereby throwing the door open wide for the movement to legalize same-sex marriage.

With O’Connor now retired, Kennedy is widely considered to be the court’s “swing vote.” But increasingly, Kennedy’s decisions are viewed as activist liberal votes. He wrote the majority opinion in the aforementioned Lawrence vs. Texas sodomy case. He voted with the liberal majority in the outrageous ruling of Kelo vs. City of New London, in which the Connecticut town was allowed to use eminent domain laws to seize property from one private owner and hand it over to another simply because the new owner could pay more in property taxes.

In two of his most recent votes, Kennedy sided with the leftists on the court in Boumediene vs. Bush and Kennedy vs. Louisiana. In Boumediene, the court granted habeas corpus rights to prisoners captured on foreign battlefields, thereby potentially extending the protections of the U.S. Constitution to every human being on earth.

In the Louisiana case, a defendant, Patrick O. Kennedy, was convicted of raping an eight-year-old girl. Louisiana law permits a sentence of death for such a crime, and the assailant was so sentenced. But in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that such a sentence constituted “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O’Connor are both extremely enamored with foreign law. This is a problem Congress should address. Kennedy spends his summers in Salzburg, Austria, teaching international law at the University of Salzburg. He attends a yearly international judges’ conference there.

Why should international law have any bearing on decisions supposedly based on the U.S. Constitution? Perhaps this type of activity should be curtailed or banned by Congress. Perhaps the size of the court should be reduced. Perhaps John Roberts reading briefs at a card table in his chambers isn’t such a bad idea."


© Copyright 2008 by Doug Patton

Sunday, June 29, 2008

Congressman Jefferson--July Hall of Shame Nominee

Congressman William Jefferson (D), LA, made the following announcement in mid June:

"My family and I have sworn a great oath to trust God and to fight on to vindicate ourselves and our good name. This we will do. And, in none of it, will I or they sacrifice our continued strong commitment and effective delivery of the things our people need to recover from the storm and from a bad economy."

If you don't remember this is the same William Jefferson in whose refrigerator some $90,000 in 'cold cash' was found in a bribery raid on his home. The Congressman is under indictment.

Surely, the good folks of Louisiana will have the good sense not to re-elect this guy. For his sheer audacity in seeking re-election we at the Objective Conservative will make him our July Hall of Shame Nominee.

Friday, June 27, 2008

Earmarks -- A Legislator's Best Friend

After all the talk over the past two years the insatiable appetite of legislators to reward their friends, lobbyists and supporters has not abated. In fact, they've introduced more earmark bills at a greater cost this year despite their inane promises to cut back and the threat of a veto by President Bush. Unfortunately, the spending bills with their Christmas gifts may never get to Bush, even if he should keep his word to veto. The Democrats may save them for President Barack Hussein Obama.

If Republicans had a brain in their heads they would simply vow once and for all neither to introduce or to support any bills with earmarks. THEY WON'T!

For more, see:

George Will on the Supreme Decisions

Yesterday, in 'Yet Another Supreme Victory' (see below) we noted the irony of Senator John Sidney McCain saying he would appoint Supreme Court Justices like Roberts and Alito. Columnist George Will picks up on that today in his discussion of how Barack Hussein Obama and John Sidney McCain fair under the courts rulings on guns and millionaires. Check it out at:

McCain and His Half Full Flip Flop

Charles Krauthammer has a good column today on John McCain's recent flip flop on drilling off coastal areas and his 'half-full' tank. See it at:

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Yet Another Supreme Victory

Contributor McPherson (see below) notes the D.C. gun rights victory. Yet, in a very important decision handed down today, the Supreme Court has overturned the millionaire's penalty in the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Act, viewing it as a violation of free speech rights.

Once again, we have an example of the importance of having judges that interpret the Constitution rather than legislate from the bench. Even more reason to agree with contributor McPherson on the importance of electing John McCain who as McPherson notes promises to appoint judges similar to Roberts and Alito.

We can't help, on the other hand, but note the irony of John McCain support of judges who overturned part of his campaign fiance act.

For more on this see:

Guns, The Supreme Court and John McCain - Patrick McPherson

For those of you who have not yet heard, the Supreme Court this morning issued a monumental decision in favor of gun ownership by striking down the Washington D. C. ban on handguns. The decision was a 5 to 4 one with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. voting to strike the D.C. ban.

According to the Washington Times:

"Scalia wrote that the Constitution leaves the District a number of options for combating the problem of handgun violence, "including some measures regulating handguns."

"But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table," he continued. "These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home."

The court also held unconstitutional the requirement that shotguns and rifles be kept disassembled or unloaded or outfitted with a trigger lock. The court called it a "prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense."

While this is in itself a monumental decision, I want to point out to you that had not George W. Bush been president and had he not appointed Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justice Alito to the court, the decision might have been very different.

With that in mind, I would also point out that you who have reservations about electing John McCain as your next president should consider what could happen to the Supreme Court should Barack Obama become the next president. Associate Justice Stevens, who voted against overturning the ban, will very likely retire in the next presidential term. If Barack Obama appoints his replacement we have at best a 5-4 conservative vs liberal 'legislate from the bench court' for possibly years to come. If one of the other liberals on the court retires, the stalemate will continue and likely for many years as even President Obama (think about that) will be smart enough to enshrine some 50 year old to the highest court. On the other hand, should an illness or unexpected retirement befall one of the five conservatives (and in the case of Justice Kennedy, I am being pretty liberal in including him in that definition), Barack Obama will certainly reshape the court on the liberal side for decades to come.

What does this mean? It means that no matter how you and I might differ with John McCain on issues like campaign finance reform, past support of liberal immigration policies or global warming, we had better get excited about evangelizing for John McCain to be our next president. McCain has committed to appointing judges in the mode of Roberts and Alito.

While other issues are important, the future of our rights and a constructionist interpretation of our Constitution demands we support and elect McCain.

You can read more about this at:

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

The Greening of Denver

The Denver Democrats, preparing for their national convention, may be carrying things a little far to prove their "Greenness", but their efforts make for an interesting read. If they were really as concerned they would just hold their convention on line. Check out the article from the Wall Street Journal at:

Mama McCain and the Law

If you wonder about John McCain's age, you might check out the column by the Sleuth, Mary Ann Akers, today. It concerns McCain's mother and her encounters with the law--namely speeding tickets, one for traveling up to 112 miles per hour. If her son does become president, she probably still won't be as interesting as Billy Carter (Billy Beer) and Roger Clinton.

Check it out at:

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

More on Countrywide-gate

From Congressional Quarterly we learn today:

"The Ethics Committee members crafted the proposal as an amendment to broader housing legislation pending in the Senate that aims to address the current mortgage crisis and housing price slump."

We find it absolutely fascinating that this amendment would be fastened to a bill that is going to help Bank of America, a large Dodd donor, buy Countrywide!!!! This bill should be defeated, and if not vetoed by President Bush if only for Senator Grassley's assault on your rights by requiring virtually all on-line transactions to be reported to the federal government.

For more of the story, see:

America's Day of Financial Reckoning

If you are not familiar with The Concorde Coalition you should be. It offers a less than optimistic appraisal, consistently, about America's financial future. While we at the Objective Conservative may not agree with it's generally held notion that tax cuts can only be paid for on a dollar-to- dollar basis against spending cuts, the organization offers some frightening forecasts of what we can expect if we don't address the financial challenges facing us.

They offer a great narrative in "Can Foreign Creditor's Avert America's Day of Reckoning?" They summarize the article thusly:

"Yet, there are no free lunches, even in a global economy. Sooner or later the United States, along with other aging developed economies, will need to bring consumption in line with savings. With boomers poised to begin retiring en masse over the next decade, the hour is already late. But if we face the difficult resource trade-offs now, there may still be time to change course. If we don’t, we will meet a day of reckoning. In the end, the future we bequeath to our children will be one of both diminished economic expectations and declining influence in world affairs."

For the full article, see:


For an interesting and informative discussion of the plight of poor Senators Dodd and Dorgan who received unknowingly favorable treatment (according to them) treatment for their loan requests, check out Rich Lowry's column:

Once again we have U.S. Senators benefiting from the positions they hold, taking campaign donations from the same folks who are and have provided them special treatment.

We wrote about this in our post of (see Archives - 'Countrywide and Senator Dorgan's Generosity' - for June 16 and 'Dodd, Dorgan, Countrywide and the Ethics Panel' - June 18 and 'Elected Officials and Favorable Treatment from their Donors' - June 14)

Obama for America

Senator Barack Hussein Obama's decision to create his own presidential seal seems to have quickly bombed as he received so much criticism that he has now withdrawn it from future use. Our friends at Real Clear Politics speculate that he has also withdrawn plans temporarily for his likeness to be placed on Mount Rushmore.

The Supreme Court and Our National Security

The Supreme Court made one good decision this week in not allowing environmentalists to interfere with the building of the wall along the U.S.-Mexican border. It is nice to know that the Supremes actually realize that the fundamental duty of our government is to defend our borders.

The Supremes also decided to hear a case about the Navy using sonar in training exercises off the coast of San Diego. Of course, environmentalists have sued alleging that the sonar might hurt a few whales. One would hope when the decision comes down from on high that the Supremes will once again realize that our nation's national security trumps the interests of environmentalists that would rather offer up our national security to potentially save a few whales.

See more at:

Monday, June 23, 2008

Words of Wisdom From John Kennedy

Courtesy of today's Patriot Post, this quote from John F. Kennedy speaks for itself and should speak to Barack Hussein Obama:

“It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now... Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.” —John F. Kennedy

Poor Chuck Hagel

Seems that the guy that couldn't make up his mind to announce and ended up announcing that he might announce later now would consider being the #2 guy on Barack Hussein Obama's ticket. Poor Senator Hagel just doesn't seem to understand what party he belongs to and the reality that no Republican or Democratic ticket topper would want an uncontrollable Chuck Hagel promoting his agenda over that of his boss.

But Hagel told the AP that he would consider being on Barack's ticket if asked. See:

While we at the Objective Conservative appreciate Hagel's generally conservative voting record (including his recent vote against the Lieberman-Warner Cap and Trade Bill, s.3036) we won't miss his maverick displays of political ambiguosness. One can only ask how a man with the so-called political principles Hagel professes to believe in could even contemplate thinking about a #2 slot with a guy whose principles are 180 degrees apart? Either Hagel is an opportunist, just doesn't know what he really believes, or perhaps is bi-polar.

A bit of Wisdom

The Objective Conservative has named local writer and poet H. Dean Cowles as its official Poet Laureate Here is a piece of his writing:


The stain of years revels its trail,
Allowing us to scrutinize
Behind the cling of aging's veil,
Mistakes whose aches regrets comprise.

But, laments should not now be retooled,
Their thrust deserves no further gain.
Recall instead, when fortune schooled,
Letting laughter lines and smiles remain.

H. Dean Cowles

Turn off the tube on Sunday mornings

While Tim Russert might not have been everyone's dream of a perfectly neutral host of Meet the Press, he was Heaven sent compared to his replacement for the rest of the year--Tom Brokaw. We think Tom should stay at his ranch in Montana. The only blessing being that we won't have any curiosity about the overt slant from the show or reason to watch it.....

The Real McCain?

There is an interesting, but somewhat lengthy column by Paul Harris in the British Observer that would appear to be the summary of the main Democratic talking points against John Sidney McCain, purporting to expose his 'dark side' and postulate his election as being that of "W's" third term. Worth looking at if only to give you a summary of the Democratic talking points against McCain:

Goodbye to New Democrats

In case you missed the June 20 Wall Street Journal editorial, Farewell New Democrats, you may find it instructive as to the real direction of the Democratic Party and it's current leadership. Worth the read at:

Friday, June 20, 2008

We'll be in Europe Soon

Driving our country toward more European socialism, the House has passed a bill providing for four weeks of paid parental leave for federal employees with the option of having another four granted to it. 50 Republicans voted for this shameful expenditure of taxpayer dollars. We can only hope the Senate has enough votes to block and in the event that it doesn't that President Bush has enough guts to veto. At this rate, we'll be working 30 hours a week and watching businesses produce ALL of their products elsewhere, like in France and Germany


Tell Barack it is working

From today's Washington Post we get the story about Iraq negotiating oil contracts with major companies. This is a sign that our efforts in Iraq are bringing enough stabilization to the country to make it worth investing in. Barack Hussein Obama would do will to check it out before deciding to run from American involvement there.


Taxpayers and Flooding

Taxpayers for Common Sense's Weekly Wastebasket has a good column about flooding and the money we taxpayers spend on paying for its affects. Probably one of the most telling facts mentioned is that if a community opts out of the federal flood insurance program, as did the resort community in Wisconsin thereby not affording its citizens the ability to get flood insurance, that same community can opt in within six months of a flood event allowing its citizens to benefit from the government program's generosity. Makes you wonder why anyone would want to be proactive?

See the piece at:

Obama and Sharpton

Although it appears that Barack Hussein Obama wanted Al Sharpton's endorsement, it appears that Shapton decided it was best to just be a tacit supporter.

In a Daily News Report in May, ( we learned that, "The Rev. Al Sharpton is backing Barack Obama, but he's made the strategic decision to keep his support quiet."

Probably good decision for both since we now learn from our friends at the Patriot Post that:

"The “Reverend” Al Sharpton, professional race hustler, is under investigation by the Internal Revenue Service for owing nearly $1 million in federal taxes and $365,000 in New York City taxes. On top of that, Sharpton’s National Action Network owes $1.9 million in payroll taxes and penalties. Several companies that have been subjected to the Sharpton shakedown, including Anheuser-Busch, have received subpoenas for records of charitable donations to his Network. The beer maker gave between $100,000 and $500,000 to his charity last year. Predictably, Sharpton played the victim, saying the subpoenas were part of a “fishing expedition.” That’s what he gets for being such a large mouth, er, bass."

Of course, why would anything the "Reverend" Sharpton does surprise anyone? The good news for Barack Hussein Obama is that Sharpton's videos won't be joining those of Rev. Wright and Father Pfleger as they are resurrected this fall.

The War in Iraq and John McCain

Charles Krauthammer has an excellent column, actually from last Friday, that John Sidney McCain might be well advised to read, as would Democrats who support Barack Hussein Obama's platform of precipitous withdrawal from Iraq. It is instructive. Check it out at:

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Nebraska -- We're #1! -- Bill Protexter

In a recently published analysis that was reported on by newspapers across the country – including our own Omaha World-Herald – Nebraska was named as the state with the highest taxes and fees on wireless services. Are you surprised? Probably not.

State tax rankings of various kinds come out every few months and Nebraska always seems to look bad. Whether it is state income taxes, taxes on businesses, gas taxes, automobile taxes, hotel taxes, or car rental taxes it seems we are always among the highest. Nowhere is this more true than the taxes and fees we are assessed by wireless companies who are doing the collecting for various federal, state and local governments and regulatory agencies. The average tax rate on wireless services in Omaha exceeds 22%! They are nearly as high in Lincoln and other larger Nebraska cities that also tack on a local option sales tax and an “occupation tax”. What other good or service is taxed at 22%?

I highlight our distinction as the highest tax state for wireless services for two main reasons (although there are many others.)

First, we as consumers must always be aware and vigilant about the taxes we pay on goods and services that add up over a year’s time. While we pay more through property and income taxes, be mindful of the amount of money we pay in taxes in our monthly cell phone bill, or with each tank of gas. To prove my point, multiply your monthly cell phone taxes by 12 for your annual total and see how much you are paying. You see, it does add up.

Secondly, if Nebraska is going to continue to make serious efforts in the areas of economic development, job growth and attracting young people, we must start moving down the list of high-tax states. There is no doubt that our high taxes on business - and high property taxes on the people who work at them - chase people away from Nebraska who would otherwise consider investing in our state. There is also no doubt that our other high taxes, like our first-in-the-nation wireless taxes, don’t help one bit.

Karl Rove for President!

Since we are talking about energy (still-see below), we call your attention to Karl Rove's Wall Street Journal column today wherein he takes both Barack Hussein Obama and John Sidney McCain to the woodshed for their shallow views on taxing energy companies and the gas tax holiday (McCain). Check it out at:

Given Obama and McCain's views on energy and global warming only Al Gore will be happy with the next four years while consumers will continue to pay more for their energy!

How to Provide Energy for 232 Homes for One Month

Talking about energy (see posts below) we get this today from Laura Ingraham in regard to Church of Global Warming leader and profiteer, Al Gore:

"AN INCONVENIENT ELECTRICITY BILL: Looks like Al Gore's found a good use for the millions he's made off "An Inconvenient Truth"! After remodeling his home last year to be "energy-efficient" and environmentally friendlier, his personal energy consumption this year has still managed to surge more than 10%. According to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, over the last year, his home ate through enough energy to fuel 232 normal American homes for an entire month. "

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

McCain and Energy

The same John McCain that opposes drilling in ANWR and supports the totally mindless idea of a "gas tax holiday" was apparently thinking with the better half of his brain yesterday when he flip flopped (and you know the Democrats will certainly and rightfully accuse him of same) by announcing that he now supports drilling off shore. With China drilling in Cuban waters barely 50 miles off our coasts, it seems that McCain has at last come to his senses. Sadly, the environmentally green, the world-will-be-destroyed-Al Gore members of the Church of Global Warming are still in their cocoons.

The good news for McCain, and also Bush with his timid and late endorsement of coastal drilling is that the public based more on its pocketbook rather than good sense has finally come around to support same, at least according to Rasmussen Reports which indicates:

"67% of voters believe that drilling should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other states. Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative and moderate voters strongly support this approach, while liberals are more evenly divided (46% of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose)."

We are also heartened to see McCain has actually suggested building 45 nuclear reactors in the U.S. by 2030. For more, see:

Maybe we at the Objective Conservative would be somewhat more heartened if McCain could just put his views into one comprehensive plan that recognized this is as much of national security issue as a pocketbook one (for consumers), define tighter time lines and explain how he will pay for it.

Congresswoman's Woes Continue

Mary Ann Akers, The Slueth, of the Washington Post has more information regarding California Congresswoman Laura Richardson and her financial woes. Akers, in her column, notes:

"Richardson, a freshman House member who is fast becoming Congress's poster child for the subprime mortgage crisis, didn't shed any more light on how she lost one home to foreclosure, defaulted repeatedly on loans for two other houses and failed to pay property taxes and car repairs."

Apparently, now Richardson is even in hot water for failure to disclose a loan she received from a strip club owner in whose favor she voted for while on the city council and on whose loan she has also defaulted.

Excuse our lack of sympathy for another deadbeat Congressman/woman.

See the Sleuth at:

Dodd, Dorgan, Countryswde and an Ethics Panel

We suggested on Saturday that Senators Dodd (D), CT, and Dorgan (D), N.D., would surely find themselves under investigation had they been Republicans. Well, maybe we were wrong as it now appears there will be a Senate Ethics Panel investigation of their preferred loans from Countrywide. We hope it doesn't turn into a Democratic whitewash. Time will tell. For more on this see the following:

Reflexions on Fahey's Faux Pas

The events of the past few days and Mayor Fahey's 'gotcha' politics and underestimation of the unintended consequences will live much longer than Fahey's statement:

" We've all agreed to move forward on it . That's in the best interest of the City of Omaha. We're fine with that."

No doubt Fahey does want to move forward and forget it happened and, no doubt, he will be abetted by his friends at the Omaha World-Herald who sat on this story for days before last Sunday's article (a source close to the Mayor's office who spoke to us off the record indicated that Dave Kotok and the Omaha World-Herald had this story at least five days before writing about it) and who in yesterday's editorial page took Fahey to the woodshed while at the same time warning his potential political foes that this incident of plain bad judgement and stupidity shouldn't be used in as political fodder. Yes, Fahey wants the public to forget about his moronic decision to get even with a political foe and yes the self serving interests of the Omaha World-Herald want to protect their good ol' boy should he decide to seek another term. Both Fahey and the Omaha World-Herald, by their actions, must think we are stupid!

Enough on this for the moment, but let's consider some of the other things that may have some consequences as a result of Fahey's Faux Pas.

First, regardless of whether Sokol disenfranchised himself by sending his notification to the Election Commissioner or not, the fact remains that the City Council's action yesterday approving Sokol's appointment to the MECA Board would seem to indicate that they agreed that Fahey had removed Sokol (by his letter on Friday) and that he had the right to based on Sokol's residency. It would also seem to vindicate the City Law Department's decision. What it also does is possibly expand the power of this or future mayors over the MECA Board if, in fact, it is the mayor and not MECA Board who is the final arbitrator of who may or may not remain eligible to serve on MECA. A precedence has been very possibly created.

Secondly, this bizarre incident has brought to our attention another political question. That is why did State Attorney General John Bruning allow himself to get into this argument? Could it be because not only was Sokol a close associate of Bruning's, but again as the Omaha World-Herald failed to acknowledge in its articles thus far, but also Brunings campaign chairman? By putting his two cents into the debate, did Bruning render an unofficial opinion from the Attorney General's Office? It would seem to us that whether Bruning may have had to recuse himself and his office from any decisions had the Sokol debate reached his office that Bruning would have been well advised to stay on the sidelines given his position.

We're still very curious as to how the information regarding Sokol's residency got from the Election Commissioner's Office to the Fahey Administration and we will continue to ask of the Fahey Administration and the Omaha World-Herald, "What did you know and when did you know it?"

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

We'd Still like to Know

We at the Objective Conservative still want to know when the folks at the Omaha World-Herald first learned of the 'Sokol' issue. We would also like to know how and when it came to the attention of the Fahey administration.

We are in full belief that the issue was manipulated by both the Omaha World-Herald and the Fahey administration to get past the contract signing. Whether the Sokol issue is resolved or not something is still smelly about this.

Mayor Relents on Disasterous Decision

When we reported last Saturday morning that Mayor Fahey was planning o replacing David Sokol on the MECA Board we couldn't have begun to speculate on the 'political dudu' that Mayors Fahey and Landau would create for themselves. One of our readers' comments compared this to the Frank Solich/Steve Pedersen example of a public relations mismanagement disaster. Our reader was right on.

Whether Sokol had rightfully created a vacancy by his action (as we believe), the response from the Mayor's office was no less than a 'Political Gotcha'. To only evaluate the fact that Sokol was a Daub supporter and a guy that had strong feelings about the location and the management of the new CWS stadium that differed with the administration was a total abidication of common sense when weighing Sokol's importance to the impending fund raising effort for the stadium. Not to mention Sokol's prominence in the community and his relationship to Berkshire Hathaway.

Mayor Fahey made a strategic blunder that will not be forgotten. Judging from Sokol's response to news of his reappointment the battle may have taken a 'Tet' holiday, but you can certain expect an uneasy truce and lots of firefights should Fahey decide to seek re-election.

Rumors Confirmed

About three weeks ago we reported in 'Rumors' on the Hagel connection family Linehan--that LouAnn had possibly taken a job with the State Department in the Green Zone of Iraq and that daughter Katie was supporting Jim Esch's candidacy against Lee Terry. It appears we were right on both counts, judging from a response received that day from Katie and from what we have learned from the Hill.

In fact, LouAnn is in the Green Zone. What is of particular interest is that she is classified as a Computer Specialist. Apparently, the State Department or those who hired her and placed her in that position weren't concerned that LouAnn has virtually no computer skills whatsoever. Perhaps LouAnn's stint at the State Department during a brief hiatus from Senator Hagel's office was sufficient to gain the political clout to get the job. Also, as you may recall hearing, the State Department seems to have and be having some difficulty recruiting career employees to go to the Green Zone.

We wish LouAnn a safe term in Iraq and a safe return but we find her classification of computer specialist a bit of a puzzlement. It would be interesting to know whether the classification is one of desperation by a State Department avid to recruit anyone to go to Iraq or whether it is the result of influence of Senator Hagel or some benefactor at State.

Monday, June 16, 2008

Mayor Fahey and David Sokol

When we first reported Saturday Morning that Mayor Fahey was planning on replacing David Sokol on the MECA Board we didn't have all the details. A lot of that has been cleared up since then although we still ask the question of both the Omaha World-Herald and the Mayor's office --What did you know and When did you know it? If anyone thinks that the Omaha World-Herald didn't know about this in advance of the College World Series Contract signing early last week, they simply still believe in the tooth fairy!

In any event, and regardless of whether Sokol's actions resulted in a legitimate reason to terminate his position on the MECA Board, Mayor Mike Fahey has created a firestorm by simply not allowing Sokol to continue to serve out his term by reappointing him--assuming he had vacated the position to begin with.

Fahey's lack of inclusion of the community in the entire CWS stadium process was bad enough. The fist fight between him and Sokol over the location and management of the stadium didn't help. And now, with the specter of the Mayor asking the Council to approve the appointment of Sokol's replacement as early as tomorrow and the likely battle at this week's MECA meeting as to seating that nominee in place of Sokol, Fahey has created for himself a problem that will surely engulf the business and political leadership of the community.


Countrywide and Senator Dorgan's Generosity

We see that Senator Dorgan, (D) N.D., who claims he received no special treatment from Countryside Lending has decided to give back to charity the $10,600 or so break that he might have received on his loan. He's going to give it to Habitat for Humanity-a worthy cause. But let's see. He already saved $10,600 on his mortgage payments. No doubt he'll get a 30+ percent deduction on his $10,600 contribution which means he'll save at least $3,200 on his taxes, so if we do the math correctly, he still comes out $3,200 ahead by taking Countryside's largess and being such a generous donor wanting to avoid any of the stench of favoritism.

If good ol' Senator Dorgan wanted to really erase all gains from his favorable treatment he would give Habitat for Humanity at least $15,000!

You can bet that if a Republican U.S. Senator had had this benefit Harry Reid and group would be calling for a senate investigation and would also be looking at the real numbers of reparation!

Saturday, June 14, 2008

Something Smells in Omaha

Earlier today(Rumors), some 12 hours before the evening edition of the Sunday Omaha World-Herald was published, we told you that Mayor Fahey planned to appoint a new MECA Board Member to replace David Sokol. With the evening addition, the OWH has rendered its own story for the reason why Sokol is to be replaced.

Why did Sokol find it so easy to change his residence weeks before he moved and yet not find it as easy and important to change it when he had a new address so that he could vote? Just how often does anyone file such a notice with the election commissioner when they move? Not very often unless they are trying to prove something, i.e., tax status? Our sources believe that the fact that Wyoming has no income tax was the major factor.

When did the Mayor's office really become aware of this? Did someone from the Election Commissioner's office squeal and when?

One would presume there is a trail of correspondence between the City Attorney, the Mayor's Office, Sokol, his attorney and MECA on this issue that goes well beyond the one referred to in the OWH. Shouldn't we the public see it all?

We also want to know just how long the Omaha World-Herald has sat on this story? Did they sit on it to protect their good old boy Mike Fahey and to avoid any embarrassment to the city over the document signing process? Nothing of this magnitude would have escaped the OWH until Friday of this week.

Where is the righteous indignation of the OWH for their supposedly not learning of this story until Friday when they learned a new appointment would be made and Sokol thrown off the board?

David Sokol is a good man whom the Mayor doesn't like. For what ever reason, he changed addresses and states of residence and that would seem to have terminated his tenure on the MECA Board. His attempt to reregister on May 23 would seem too little too late. However, the actions of the MECA Board, Mayor Fahey and the Omaha World-Herald beg the question of "who knew what and when?' and our citizens deserve the truth. They shouldn't accept the version they were fed in the Sunday paper.

Oh, and we understand that Mayor Fahey has already promised that Republican City Council members will be happy with Sokol's replacement.

McCain being McCain

Laura Ingraham has this to say about Senator McCain's recent townhall meeting and his comments on energy:

"On the oil industry itself: "I am very angry, frankly, at the oil companies not only because of the obscene profits they've made but at their failure to invest in alternate energy to help us eliminate our dependence on foreign oil ... They're making huge profits and that happens, but not to say, 'We're in this so we can over time eliminate America's dependence on foreign oil,' I think is an abrogation of their responsibilities as citizens."

For the record, Big Oil's profit margin has averaged 8.1% over the last five years. Meanwhile, beverage makers -- the industry to which he and his wife owe their fortune -- average 19% margins.

McCain spent what could have been hours -- I blacked out after the first fifteen minutes -- reeling off the names of Democrats he's had high-profile love affairs with over the years. Lieberman, Kennedy, Feingold, it just kept going and going and going. He talked about the good old days when Ronald Reagan held Tip O'Neill's hand and together they they raised Social Security taxes. He hopes to do something similar with Nancy Pelosi.

If I were advising Obama, after seeing last night I would agree to as many townhalls as McCain wants. "

Frankly, McCain is way off base on energy. He continues the mindless support of a gas tax holiday which will do nothing for the consumer but promote more driving and demand and consequently more price increases. He opposes drilling in ANWR. Where he could truly set forth a comprehensive energy initiative that would set him apart from Barack Hussein Obama, he continues to sound like his Democrat friends -- lots of rhetoric, no real solutions.

Rumors -- Gone but not gone

You can expect Nebraska Senator Ernie Chambers to become a candidate for his own creation, the Douglas County/Sarpy County abomination known as the Learning Community, within the next few weeks. If we didn't have enough of him from his 30 plus years in the legislature, wait till you have him on the Learning Community.

Hal Daub moves ahead with his summer listening and learning exploration campaign for next year's Omaha mayoral election by co-sponsoring a tent at the College World Series.

David Sokol is going to be dethroned as Chairman of the MECA Board.

Elected Officals and Favorable Treatment from their Donors

From today's Washington Post we learn:

"On Capitol Hill, Countrywide also spread support the old-fashioned way. Since 1990, Mozilo and his family have contributed at least $110,000 to federal political committees, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics. Mozilo donated $1,000 to Conrad in 1999, and Countrywide's political action committee gave Conrad $6,000 in 2005 and 2006. Countrywide's PAC has given Dodd donations totaling $21,000 since 1997.

But as the subprime crisis spreads, such largess has become a liability. The conservative advocacy group Freedom's Watch yesterday trumpeted the "sweetheart deal" extended to Dodd and Conrad. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a liberal-leaning group, asked the House and Senate ethics committees to investigate.

"Although there is no evidence that either Sen. Dodd or Sen. Conrad were aware they were receiving special treatment from Countrywide, their receipt of the unusually favorable loans creates exactly the sort of appearance of impropriety that the gift rule was designed to address," CREW wrote in a statement"

From the New York Times we here:

But, the Web site of the business magazine Portfolio, cited internal documents indicating that Countrywide had reduced the rate on the mortgage of Mr. Dodd’s Washington town house by three-eighths of a point, saving him $2,000 a year in interest payments, and reduced the rate on a Connecticut house by a quarter point, saving $17,000 over the life of the loan. "

This latest controversy stems from the v.p. vetting process of Barack Hussein Obama and the decision of James A. Johnson, one of Obama's three premier vetters, to step aside because of his activities at Fannie Mae and potential favorable treatment from Countryside Lending.

We can only hope that Senators Dodd and Conrad, both Democrats, receive the same degree of scrutiny and criticism that we're certain two Republican senators would.

See more at:

or at:

Friday, June 13, 2008

Fighting for the Polar Bear

Thank goodness, not every one is standing still for the listing of the Polar Bear as threatened. One of the premier hunting organizations in the United States, the International Safari Club, which is as species preservation oriented as any of those greenies has served notice it will fight the classification. GOOD FOR THE.

If this classification stands it will have far reaching impacts on virtually everything we do and build in this country all because of the elitist academic (not necessarily scientific) belief that by unilaterally disarming our nation can stop something that we are even sure can be stopped by anyone other than Mother Nature.

"SCI Notifies Interior Department it Will Sue over Polar Bear Listing
Safari Club International (SCI) today officially notified the U.S. Department of the Interior and Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) that it would file a lawsuit challenging the listing of the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The 60-day notice, required by the ESA, asks the FWS to reverse the listing within 60 days and sets forth nine claims against the FWS. This Notice Letter comes on the heels of a lawsuit filed last month by SCI challenging the FWS’s conclusion that the import of sport-hunted polar bears into the United States is no longer allowed because of the ESA listing.

"SCI has long opposed the listing of the polar bear under the ESA. In short, tremendous uncertainty exists regarding the nature and extent of climate change over the next 45 years and the impact of any climate change on polar bears. This uncertainty should have prevented the FWS from making the findings the ESA requires for listing. SCI has further pointed out that sustainable sport-hunting of polar bears and subsequent importation by U.S. citizens advances polar bear conservation and supports remote native communities in the Canadian arctic."

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Drilling and Zombies

The Wall Street Journal has an excellent editorial on the need to drill for oil. It's not particularly complimentary to the Democrat leadership or even John McCain, whom it calls a "clueless--don't drill Zombie". Read it and listen to the video at:

Another good, short video on drilling opportunities can be found at Townhall at:

Leave it Behind

We learn from today's New York times, that Secretary of Education Spellings is still promoting President Bush's No Child Left Behind and changes to it. The article notes that Barack Hussein Obama wants to overhaul it while Senator John Sidney McCain supports it. Both are wrong.

The federal government has no place in education under our constitution. Bush, many Republicans and most liberals think throwing money at a problem is the solution. It doesn't work. It surely didn't with Lyndon Johnson's war on poverty.

Sadly, whoever is elected the next President of the United States will perpetuate the bloated bureaucracy that is the Department of Education and its inane efforts to control our lives and the education of our children by its expensive intrusion into what should be a local and state responsibility.

If Republicans wanted to stand for something they should advocate eliminating the Department of Education and No Child Left Behind. It certainly wouldn't hurt their "me too" image that makes them indistinguishable from their Democratic colleagues.

Free Speech and Hate Crimes

We at the Objective Conservative happen to believe very strongly in the First Amendment. We also believe that the notion of 'hate crimes' is a ridiculous invention of a bunch of liberals who promote the notion of victim hood.

In our mind, a crime is a crime for whatever reason the perpetrator of it may have had. Whether you murder me because I am white, yellow, black, homo-sexual, bi-sexual, Muslim or Jew, or simply because you did so in the course of robbing the store in which I work, you still murdered me.

The notion of hate crimes changes how you look at these things. It also fosters the ridiculous things we see going on in Canada where free speech no longer exists as you will note by checking out the following articles. Worse yet, as you will see from one of those, there are folks that would like to alter our own First Amendment rights--not that liberal judges certainly won't try.

We'd suggest you check out these articles and think about free speech and how it truly makes the United States different. No doubt, if this blog were written in Canada, we too would be in court for our less than politically correct views.

Obama's Judgement

One can only wonder about the quality of folks Barack Hussein Obama will bring to Washington given his judgement of friends, associates, clergy and now V.P. vetters. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend? And, of course former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson who now has 'stepped aside' according to the presumptive Democratic nominee's latest press release:

"Jim did not want to distract in any way from the very important task of gathering information about my vice presidential nominee, so he has made a decision to step aside that I accept. We have a very good selection process underway, and I am confident that it will produce a number of highly qualified candidates for me to choose from in the weeks ahead. I remain grateful to Jim for his service and his efforts in this process."

There's an interesting editorial in the New York Times today that you might want to check out in this regard. See:

While we are at it, here's what Laura Ingram had to say today:

"OBAMA'S VEEP COMMITTEE ... AND THEN THERE WERE TWO: Now that former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson has resigned amid revelations that he secured sweetheart loan deals from Countrywide Financial, all eyes are on Eric Holder, the former Justice Dept. official who arranged Bill Clinton's pardon for fugitive Mark Rich and a handful of Weathermen terrorists.

Just yesterday Obama thought it was absurd he was even being bothered with questions about his veep vetters. He brushed off concerns about Johnson as merely the political "game" being played against him. Johnson, on the other hand, recognized he was scandal-tarred and quit. Now Obama looks like an idiot, as this embattled former CEO had sounder judgment than the potential next president.

Which brings us back to Holder. Obama's camp knows their guy already has PR issues with the Weathermen. So it'll be interesting to see if he handles veep vetter #2 any differently. "

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Nelson Want to Abolish Electoral College

Interestingly, after publishing contributor McPherson's column on Nebraska's method of awarding electoral votes, we find that Senator Nelson, (D), of Florida wants to see a constitutional amendment eliminating the Electoral College altogether by simply allowing presidents to be elected by popular national vote.

If you want to see reason for McPherson's idea and why this would be a terrible idea you might want to consider the demographic impact of such a change. As best we can determine, such a change would allow about 11 population centers in the United States to elect your president. You might consider that--especially if you are from Nebraska.

For more on Senator Nelson's thoughts, see:

Nebraska's Electoral Votes -- Patrick McPherson

When I started my last diatribe, which turned out to be one about the need to change the aberration we know as a non-partisan unicameral to a bipartisan two house system, I had actually started with the intent to take on another Nebraska aberration, its method of casting votes for the Electoral College. But I digressed.

Thanks to a populist-mentality change made to our state's constitution, Nebraska has awarded its electoral votes since 1996 not on a winner-take-all basis as does every state in the nation with the exception of Maine, but rather on a formula where one electoral vote is awarded for the highest winning presidential candidate in each congressional district (3 districts-3 votes) and the other two by overall winner of the presidential votes for the entire state. Under this system, a presidential candidate could win the First and Second Congressional Districts while losing the overall number of votes cast, and still win two electoral votes. Apparently, at the time that the voters passed this into law the thought was that it was fairer and that it would make presidential candidates from both parties pay more attention to Nebraska. Actually, until this year, Nebraska has religiously awarded all of its five electoral votes to Republicans under this method.

You may have read the significance of the last line of the last paragraph. It now seems that the Democrats believe that they actually have a chance of winning one or two electoral votes in Nebraska this year by winning the First and/or Second Congressional Districts. Hence we now find out that they, in fact, have two Obama activists working here in Omaha, residing in the Old Market. Obviously, their intent is to activate those 10,000 or so folks that flooded the Omaha Civic Auditorium when candidate Obama was in town and to propel not only candidate Obama but also candidates Kleeb and Esch to victory over candidates Johanns and Terry. It could work.

Nebraska has somewhere close to 400,000 registered Republicans as I recall. The total number of registered Democrats and independents approximately totals the same. Since Nebraska is a state dominated by Republicans it makes absolutely no sense to divide our electoral clout. Worse yet, because of this silliness, Nebraska, a state where Republicans outnumber Democrats nearly two to one could end up helping elect Barack Obama as its next president. Because of the extra emphasis placed on the Obama and his "change-mentality' candidates in the process, Congressmen Fortenberry and Terry could also end up losing their positions.

We shouldn't even be having this discussion and if we lived in 48 other states across the nation we wouldn't be. We'd understand the benefits of the winner-take-all method of awarding our electoral votes. We'd understand as do those in the other 48 states that electoral votes are best cast based upon the overall votes cast for the president in the state. We'd understand that just as the fact that each of our 57 states (excuse me, I was using Obama's numbers), I meant 50, have two U.S. Senators to give each state equal clout in the Senate, that casting our votes on a winner-takes-all basis gives us much greater clout--even if we don't see as much of the candidates.

So, I'm going to close this much the same way as I did the last diatribe.

With the fall elections coming up and with approximately twenty Republicans seeking re-election or asking for their first trip to Lincoln, I would propose that every interested Republican voter and activist extract from these folks a promise to support giving the voters of Nebraska an opportunity to amend their constitution by returning to a winner-takes-all method of calculating Electoral College votes.

And as I said in the last diatribe, hopefully, the leadership of the next legislature will provide the appropriate committee members to at least move these ideas (and others that I intend to discuss) forward to a full vote of the legislature and ultimately to a vote of the citizens. If not, then Republican voters should consider whether those committee members warrant their support at their next election.

Nebraska has and will continue to have more than 30 Republican State Senators. Despite the criticism we can expect from the elitist academics and the editorial boards of its major daily rags, it's time for these Republicans to start acting like they are proud to be Republicans or get out of the way so real Republicans can step up!

Monday, June 9, 2008

Let Them Eat Privately

You'll get a kick out of this. The Senate plans on privatizing its restaurants. Yes, seems the restaurants that serve these folks are losing money. Apparently, this is not being done without some angst to some senators who oppose privatization, lower wages and the stigma of doing something you generally recoil at. No doubt, this was a much tougher decision than voting on the name of a new federal building or post office, and much more important than dealing with issues such as Medicare and Social Security.

For more read:

Taxes on Bad Oil Companies

Since the Democrats have on heir agenda this week the issue of raising taxes on energy companies, we thought we might share a succinct communique we received from Senator John Cornyn, (R), TX.

We fully agree with him. Further, these bad oil companies are making less ROE (that's return on equity for you liberals) than many technology companies. Also, anyone that believes that companies pay taxes just doesn't get it. Any taxes companies pay are simply included in the price and markup you pay so you're probably paying more than you would if they weren't taxed at all.

Here's what Senator Cornyn has to say:

"Just recently, I joined my Republican colleagues in the Senate in pushing legislation to increase American energy production that would yield enough oil to fuel the country’s energy needs for five years. It would also bring prices down in the near-term by sending an important signal to the markets. Unfortunately, some in the Senate continue to block this legislation, as the price at the pump soars. We need to get government out of the way, let the free market work and increase domestic energy production.

Even more baffling, as families in Texas and across the country are paying an extra $1,400 a year in gas prices, the majority party in Congress has proposed $6.7 trillion climate tax package that could actually raise gas prices by 147 percent. It defies logic that after blocking the American energy production and oil independence, Congress is now pursuing bigger government, more taxes, and higher energy costs with no guarantee of actually improving the climate."

By the way, maybe Senator McCain should be looking at this guy for Vice President. He is a true conservative.

Democrats are Human too

We hate to seem gleeful at anyone's problems, but Democratic Congresswoman Richardson has come to our attention over the last several weeks and its nice to know that not all slime balls (our apologies to the same folks that Billybob Clinton offended) and deadbeats are Republicans. From today's Real Clear Politics we learn:

"According to the Long Beach Press-Telegram, more of Rep. Laura Richardson’s financial problems have been exposed. This time, they are car-related: A mechanic and a body shop told the newspaper that she stiffed them in 2005. And afterward, she “began using a city-owned vehicle — putting almost 31,000 miles on it in about a year — and continued driving the car five days after she had left the council to serve in the state Assembly,” the Press-Telegram reports, citing city records. “Last month, it was reported that Richardson’s Sacramento home, where she had lived during her brief Assembly stint before moving on to Congress, had fallen into foreclosure and been sold at auction,” according to the paper. “Further investigation revealed she had defaulted on that house and two others in Long Beach and San Pedro a total of eight times since 2004.” Richardson is unchallenged in her bid to retain her 37th District seat."

A Love Greater Than Life Itself -- Doug Patton

The following column written by fellow Nebraskan Doug Patton couldn't be more appropriate with the anniversary of D-Day just behind us and Flag Day to be celebrated this coming Saturday.

"June 9, 2008"

"The average age of the American servicemen who fought to liberate Europe from Fascism and the Pacific from Japanese Imperialism was nineteen.


Think about what you were doing at nineteen. For me, the year was 1967, and I was still enjoying the benefits of a college deferment. It would be two more years before I would begin my four years of military service, and as a member of the U.S. Air Force I was never in any of the real danger usually associated with service during the Vietnam War.

Most of us can only imagine the mature decisions forced upon those teenage members of that Greatest Generation, as we have come to call them. Yet somehow military servicemen of every generation provide us with examples of heroism that cannot be found in any other walk of life, and today’s generation of young Americans is no exception.

Ross Andrew McGinnis, of Knox, Pennsylvania, was born on June 14, 1987, to Tom and Romayne McGinnis. Recognizing that he was not interested in attending college, Ross enlisted in the U.S. Army’s Delayed Entry Program on his seventeenth birthday, June 14, 2004. He finished high school, graduating in 2005, and then entered basic training.

He was nineteen when he died a hero’s death in Iraq on December 4, 2006.

He and his Army buddies had often speculated what each of them might do if faced with a split-second, life-or-death decision. Ross said he didn’t know what he might do. Now the whole world knows.

When Ross McGinnis saw an enemy grenade land in his humvee, he could have jumped from the vehicle. He had enough time, and his Army training told him to do just that. Yet somehow the lives of the other four soldiers in that vehicle were more important to him, and Ross threw himself on top of the grenade, pressing his back against it and absorbing the impact of the blast. He was killed instantly, of course, but he had saved the lives of the others: Sergeant First Class Cedric Thomas, Staff Sergeant Ian Newland, Sergeant Lyle Buehler and Specialist Sean Lawson.

For the rest of their lives, these four men will remember their teenage buddy, mature beyond his years, who in a split second decided that he was willing to sacrifice his life in order to give them a chance to go home, marry, have children, raise families, have careers, see their grandchildren running in the yard and enjoy all the freedoms only America can provide. One of them has since said that he will always feel guilty for the life Ross gave him.

For his action, nineteen-year-old Private First Class Ross Andrew McGinnis was posthumously awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, the highest honor the United States of America can bestow upon a military member.

President Bush, in an emotional presentation of the Medal last week at the White House, spoke of McGinnis’ sacrifice:

“No one outside this man’s family can know the true weight of their loss. But in words spoken long ago, we are told how to measure the kind of devotion that Ross McGinnis showed on his last day: ‘Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

“The Gospel also gives this assurance,” Bush continued. “‘Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted.’ May the deep respect of our whole nation be a comfort to the family of this fallen soldier. May God always watch over the country he served, and keep us ever grateful for the life of Ross Andrew McGinnis.”

But perhaps the most poignant remarks came from Ross’s father, Tom:

“Our Bible tells us that God gave up His only son to die for us so that we may live. But Romayne and I are not gods. We can’t see the future, and we didn’t give our son to die, knowing that he will live again. We gave him to fight and win and come home to us and marry and grow old and have children and grandchildren. But die he did, and his mother, dad and sisters must face that fact and go on without him, believing that someday we will meet again. Heaven is beyond our imagination and so we must wait to see what it’s like.”

Indeed. Thank God for heroes like Ross McGinnis."

A little Monday morning humor

So this Department of Water Resources representative stops at a Montana ranchand talks with an old rancher. He tells the rancher, I need to inspect yourranch for your water allocation.The old rancher says, Okay, but don't go in that field over there.The Water representative says, Mister, I have the authority of the FederalGovernment with me. See this card? This card means I am allowed to go WHEREVERI WISH on any agricultural land. No questions asked or answered. Have I mademyself clear? Do you understand?The old rancher nods politely and goes about his chores.Later, the old rancher hears loud screams and spies the Water Rep running forhis life and close behind is the rancher's bull. The bull is gaining withevery step.The Rep is clearly terrified, so the old rancher immediately throws down histools, runs to the fence and yells at the top of his lungs.....Your card! Show him your card!

Saturday, June 7, 2008

New McCain Ad

The American public is in a change mode and many are enraptured by the latest so-called agent of change--you know, Barack Husssein Obama. With that, we get a new McCain ad on the war and peace that will probably fall on deaf ears until the next 9-11. Watch it and see whether it will move votes to a population that is fat, dumb and happy in its current perceived security. Then decide whether it will move any votes this fall. Sadly, it probably won't.

We might add that the darkness of this ad is strange to say the least.

Click here to view or see under Today's Videos:

Time for a Change in Linoln - Patrick McPherson

It's bad enough that George Norris gave Nebraska the Unicameral, the one aberration that exists among 50 states when it comes to the legislative branch of government. It's equally bad and perhaps worse that the late Senator Norris (who had some difficulty deciding which party he belonged to as his career ebbed) gave Nebraska the notion of a non-partisan legislature. Worse yet, the notion has maintained viability through the prairie populist notion that this unique entity of government is really good government. The notion has been furthered by academic elitists, Democrats who have over the last several decades fallen to represent only about one-third of the body, and, of course, the editorial staffs of the states major paper(s), including the Omaha World-Herald, which have apparently been drinking from Norris' fountain of inspiration.

There have been many articles that have appeared on the editorial pages of Nebraska's purveyors of ink in this regard with folks like me generally saying it's time for a bipartisan two-house legislature and with the elitist editorial boards suggesting that me and my ilk are simply a bunch of rubes.

Not too many years ago, a brave and true conservative member of the legislature (there are many that claim that 'R', but conveniently tuck into their pockets to avoid criticism from the elitist media--or perhaps fellow Republicans), unrepentant of his Republican credentials and conservatism, introduced a bill to amend the state constitution to return to a bipartisan two-house system. That individual was current Republican State Chairman and former State Senator Mark Quandahl. Of course, based on the tepid reception of his fellow Republicans, most of whom drink from the 'Norris Fountain of Inspiration', Quandahl's bill went nowhere.

Here is where I'm going with this. Right now there are more than 30 Republicans among our 49 state senators. Our Republican governor has to herd these folks to get anything done, not unlike herding 49 cats. It's just time we changed the system.

So, with the fall elections coming up and with approximately twenty Republicans seeking re-election or asking for their first trip to Lincoln, I would propose that every interested Republican voter and activist extract from these folks a promise to support the creation of a two-house bipartisan legislature or at least get them on record as 'Norris Fountain of Inspiration' drinkers.

Hopefully, the leadership of the next legislature will provide the appropriate committee members to at least move the idea forward to a full vote of the legislature and ultimately to a vote of the citizens. If not, then Republican voters should consider whether those committee members warrant their support at their next election.

Fear of Ron Paul Assult in Nebraska Subsides

While the Nevada Republican Party was finally dealing with attempt of the Ron Paul zealots which caused it to recess its state convention weeks ago, the Nebraska Republican Party's county organizations completed their mandatory holding of county conventions today. The conventions are the precursors to the party's state convention which occurs on July 12th in LaVista, NE and where delegates to the Republican National Convention will be selected.

Fortunately, the various Republican county parties appear to have survived the onslaught with only a relatively small number of crazed Paul delegates selected to tinker with the party's platform and delegate selection process in July.

In what should be no surprise to anyone, speakers at the various conventions, including Mike Johanns and Lee Terry were right on the Republican talking points about change--the right kind of change, as opposed to the Barack Huessein Obama change that their youthful opponents Scott Kleeb and Jim Esch are suggesting.

Obama Elected While We Slept

Given a press release by the Obama campaign, we must have been in some sort of a Rip Van Winkle state as the final words of his iteration on the great failure of the Senate to enact "Cap-n-Enslave' legislation say:

"As president, I am committed to ensuring that our children and our children’s children can point to this generation as the time when American found its way again."

Falling back on Al Gore's Church of Global Warming, Barack Hussein Obama says of the scientific indisputable fate of the world,

We can’t afford more of the same timid politics when the future of our planet is at stake. We are already breaking records with the intensity of our storms, the number of forest fires, and the periods of drought. By 2050, famine could force more than 250 million from their homes. And if we do nothing, sea levels will rise high enough to swallow large portions of every coastal city and town.

For more of what you can expect of newly elected President Barack Hussein Obama check out the full press release at:

Friday, June 6, 2008

Global Climate Change Debate dries up

Thank goodness. The Senate Climate Change debate won't resurface until next year. Maybe by then we'll either be destroyed by our inaction or a new ice age will have begun....

Thursday, June 5, 2008

The Nebraska Civil Rights Inititative -- Patrick McPherson

On a day that marks the death of one of the greatest political figures of the twentieth century, it seems only appropriate to talk about Ronald Reagan's vision of a color-blind society, and so I will.

Yesterday, we read in the Omaha World-Herald about a radio ad which advocates the end of affirmative action in Nebraska and is obviously directed at supporting the Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative. The initiative, should it secure enough signatures would be on the November ballot and would essessentially eliminate all racial preferenences in Nebraska government and education.

The radio ad is paid for by an out of state organization, the American Civil Rights Institute, which we are told is an organization sponsored by Ward Connerly, described by the Omaha World-Herald as 'a California businessman and affirmative action foe." Of course, the Omaha World-Herald reporter, Martha Stoddard, either in ignorance or by choice, fails to mention that Connerly is a former California Regent and a black man who successfully helped pass a similar initiative in California and in several other states. The article also mentions a good friend and conservative, David Kramer who has apparently become a spokesman for Nebraskans United which is apparently "the" group opposed to the initiative. Kramer rightfully objects to the ad which arouses the worst of racial sensitivities by using the names of Reverend Jeremiah Wright (you know, Senator Barack Obama's minister from Barack Obama's former church) and soon to be former Nebraska State Senator Ernie Chambers.

Clearly, the ad is in bad taste and poorly represents the thrust of the Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative. Chalk one up for Kramer and his group--the financial supporters of which I haven't checked out but can certainly speculate on, but won't.

But where Kramer is right on the ad, he and his group, along with the editorial page of the Omaha World-Herald, use equally bad taste and scare tactics in their tirades about the inappropriateness of dollars from outside the state funding the initiative and the destruction such an initiative will reap upon our fair state.

With some credit to the editorial exiguousness of the Omaha World-Herald, it published a very thoughtful and well written piece in its 'Midlands Voices' section yesterday, written by Dwayne Ball, an associate professor of marketing at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. That piece does an excellent job of pointing out exactly why the Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative should be passed in November should the petition secure enough votes. I'm not going to go into Ball's arguments. I think they are excellent and I hope you will read them. In fact, I hope you will read thoroughly the arguments from both sides.

Ronald Reagan and Martin Luther King both wanted color blind societies where a person was judge not by the color of his/her skin or by their gender or by anything other than then character and ability. Affirmative action and the notion of it tries to relieve one so-called victim and through unintended consequences, which government so easily seems to create, creates more victims. It fosters this crazy notion of victim-hood. Worse yet, it diminishes the accomplishments of those it promotes over others. If you don't believe that you might take the time to read Clarence Thomas's Book, 'My Grandfathers Son'. See what Clarence believes the notion of an affirmative action slot in an Ivy League university did for him after he got out of school.

Dave Kramer is a fine conservative, but he is wrong in opposing the Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative. The ads, as Kramer notes, however, are inappropriate. But affirmative action preferences need to end. Ward Connerly and Clarence Thomas understand why as does associate professor Ball. So did Martin Luther King and Ronald Reagan.

A whimsical and serious thought about Congress, Congressman Fortenberry, Arbor Day, Senator Dwight Pedersen and racism--but we digress

Yesterday's Omaha World Herald had an article titled, 'Congress a bit late on honor for Arbor Day.'

Seems that on Tuesday, June 3, Congress got around to approving a resolution recognizing Arbor Day 2008 and calling "for a presidential proclamation urging Americans to celebrate the tree planting holiday."

The resolution was introduced by Congressman Jeff Fortenberry in whose congressional district Arbor Lodge and the home of the great racist, promoter of slavery (yes, just as Christopher Columbus is now the bad guy, so has ol' J. Sterling Morton now been attacked posthumously for his apparent anti-abolitionist thoughts), founder of Arbor Day, J. Sterling Morton resided.

We're certain that had Congressman Fortenberry had a thoughtful discussion with outgoing State Senator Dwight Pedersen whose attempt to have Nebraska apologize for its nefarious role in the promotion of slavery, that the resolution would have never been introduced. But we digress....

In any event, Arbor Day 2008 happened on April 29th, 2008, some 35 days prior to the approval of the bill by the House of Representatives.

So we at the Objective Conservative ask the following questions:
  • Why even introduce such a resolution to begin with?
  • Doesn't the House of Representatives have better things to do (like deal with Social Security, our country's spending and taxes) than insignificant bills like this that take up time and government printing and accomplish virtually nothing other than giving some congressman the opportunity to say he introduced and got passed a bill?
  • Why if you are going to act on a bill would you even consider it after the date had passed? Isn't that kind of like approving food rations for someone that died a month ago?
  • Given the substance and the gravity of this onerous legislation is it any wonder why the American public gives the congress a worse favorable rating than it does George Bush?

We like Congressman Fortenberry, but really, Jeff, we hope you will concentrate on bills and issues that really do effect your constituents and our country.