Emergency Info for State of Emergency in Virginia

Dear Friends:

WTOP -- A GREAT RESOURCE THAT KEEPS YOU POSTED ON MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS! 

Remember WTOP 103.5 FM is a great resource for the most up to date information about the situation from all sources -- local and state.  www.wtop.com 

UPDATE FROM GOVERNOR'S OFFICE: (And Note:  The Governor is in Fairfax to survey the situation)

Today the Governor declared a state of emergency in response to severe weather that affected the Commonwealth last night. This action authorizes state agencies to assist local governments in responding to the storm's impact and forecasted extreme temperatures.

The widespread power outage caused by last night's storms, combined with forecasted triple-digit high temperatures for the next several days, have created a dangerous situation for many Virginians. Older Virginians, infants and those who have medical conditions are especially at risk for heat related injuries.

It will take several days to restore all power so we need to help all Virginians plan accordingly. This is not a one day situation; it is a multi-day challenge.

The Governor has called on members of the media to help broadcast information regarding the location of all cooling shelters in the state. Cooling shelters are run by localities, so as that information continues to be released the Governor asks that our local radio, television, print and online media outlets get those locations out as quickly and broadly as possible. All Virginians can check: http://virginiaderecho.tumblr.com/ throughout the days ahead for a list of all known cooling shelters.

Last night's thunderstorms caused the broadest non-hurricane related power outage in Virginia history. In addition, today's forecast calls for the possibility of additional thunderstorms this evening and tonight, with the potential for the storms to become severe. As temperatures continue to reach the triple-digits in the days ahead the Governor is calling for all Virginians to help one another as power outages could last for a number of days.

Specifically the Governor asks:
· Neighbors to check in on one another and offer assistance to those without power
· Media to work with local governments to broadcast as widely as possible the locations of all local cooling stations. Cooling stations are run by localities and therefore announcements regarding their locations are done on a city by city, county by county basis. Media are asked to stay in close contact with local officials and utilize all communication platforms to help Virginians find assistance
· Virginians with power, or on a mobile device, should checkhttp://virginiaderecho.tumblr.com/  periodically for a rolling list of all known local cooling stations and share that information with friends, family and neighbors

Under state law, the Governor declared a state of emergency so that state resources can be made available. This emergency declaration ensures a fully coordinated state response to support local response and recovery efforts. A declaration also expedites timely deployment of personnel, equipment and supplies to impacted areas.

· The Virginia Emergency Operations Center is coordinating the state's response with increased staffing.
· Virginia Department of Transportation crews are working to clear debris and ensure roads are safe for travel.
· Virginia State Police are assisting with traffic control and security.
· Authorized up to 300 National Guard members to assist with recovery
 

Please feel free to contact either me or the Virginia Department of Emergency Management at www.vaemergency.com or 800-468-8892.

Obamacare Upheld as a Tax

Believe me I am not happy about the mental gymnastics that Chief Justice Roberts did to reach this choice.  But as Ian's Wife below has pointed out, there is some silver lining to our misery.

I do agree with him that it isn't their job to deem something good or bad strictly on a policy basis.  I also agree that it is not their job to save us when we vote idiots into office.  Their only job is to deem something within the parameters of constitutional or not constitutional.

One of the most interesting things I have come across since the ruling is this:

Today’s conservatives frequently complain about the dangers of judicial activism. Perhaps now they’ll be more alert to the dangers of judicial restraint.

The argument being that Justice Roberts is a constructionist.  He believes in the written constitution and abides by stare decisis.  Therefore, he had no choice but to uphold the law.  The case-law is clear, in a tie the government wins.  The constitution was set up to give latitude to the legislators as they were voted in by the will of the people.  They also to go onto to explain that it is very possible that Bork would have voted exactly the same way, or at least would have felt compelled to by his own standards.

Does this mean that I accept the ruling?  Well no, but I also realize that this is the last word on the matter, at least in the manner that Obamacare was being fought out in the courts.  The litagation on this law is far from over.  We have a long way to go, especially when it comes to rights of Church and State.

One of the things that I have found most interesting in all of this is:

In those 5 percent of hard cases, the constitutional text will not be directly on point. The language of the statute will not be perfectly clear. Legal process alone will not lead you to a rule of decision. In those circumstances, your decisions about whether affirmative action is an appropriate response to the history of discrimination in this country or whether a general right of privacy encompasses a more specific right of women to control their reproductive decisions or whether the commerce clause empowers Congress to speak on those issues of broad national concern that may be only tangentially related to what is easily defined as interstate commerce,

Senator Barack Obama on why he vote against the confirmation of Chief Justice John Roberts.  In a small way, Chief Justice Roberts flipped the president the bird.  He very clearly crafted his opinion to limit the use the commerce clause.  An issue that always appeared to be part of who he is.  Roberts was a member of The Federalist Society.  Much of his career was spent trying to limit the over-reach of the federal government and protect the rights of the states.  Which in many ways makes this decision even that much harder to take.

I, for the most part, expected to the law to be upheld.  I had hoped that the mandate would go, and the law would stay.  I too felt that they would leave it up to the legislature to deal with the aftermath of the mandate being gone.  I also must admit that I called it tax many times.

The strangest thing in all of this is that they can't mandate us to purchase a product and impose a fee.  But, they can tax us for not buying something that they want us to.  That is an oxymoron is it not?

I had read an article by some left leaning person that made a very compelling argument that it would be Scalia of all people that would uphold the law.  Sadly, I can't find the link to it.  But in this article it went through some case law that had Scalia normally siding to increase the use of the commerce clause.  Something that I had no idea about.  This same article also said that they had hopes that Roberts would vote on their side.  1 out of 2 is not so shabby.

Our job now is to educate the people in this country to what their choices mean.  When we go to the ballot box we are not voting for prom king/queen.  We are voting for people who will be handling very serious issues that do effect our everyday lives.  Obamacare may seem good to some on the surface.  After all they are getting all kinds of "free stuff".  But all these free things have a cost.  These costs will be seen in higher premiums, and entire new class of the uninsured.

CBO and JCT’s projections of health insurance coverage have also changed since last March. Fewer people are now expected to obtain health insurance coverage from their employer or in insurance exchanges; more are now expected to obtain coverage from Medicaid or CHIP or from nongroup or other sources. More are expected to be uninsured. The extent of the changes varies from year to year, but in 2016, for example, the ACA is now estimated to reduce the number of people receiving health insurance coverage through an employer by an additional 4 million enrollees relative to the March 2011 projections. In that year, CBO and JCT now estimate that there will be 2 million fewer enrollees in insurance exchanges. In the other direction, CBO and JCT now estimate that, in 2016, the ACA will increase enrollment in Medicaid and CHIP slightly more than previously estimated (but considerably more in 2014 and 2015), and it will reduce the number of people with nongroup or other coverage by 3 million less and the number of uninsured people by 2 million less than previously estimated.
To recap, the CBO now predicts that Obamacare: 1) will force millions more Americans out of their current employer coverage than originally advertised; 2) will force millions more Americans onto Medicaid than originally advertised; 3) will force millions more Americans to pay fines for not obtaining health care; 4) will force businesses to pay billions more in mandate fines; and 5) will leave millions more Americans without insurance than originally advertised.

So the goal of getting everyone insurance is a fantasy.  It is not going to happen.  It is going to be much more expensive than we were orginally told, and many people (myself included) who did have a policy that they really liked, will not be able to keep it.

Another clear irony of all this, Nanny Pelosi told us we had to pass it to find out what was in it.  Guess what?  It was a tax.  You own it.  It is a tax.  No spin will allow you to get past that.  No spin will allow you to say that you didn't raise taxes on people who made less than $250K, you did.  No spin is going to change the fact that your assurances that the mandate was constitutional were wrong.  No spin is going to change the fact that this is much more expensive than orginally packaged.

The law is still unpopular.  The supreme court decision is not all that much better.  This has become one of the most clear and concise issues of the presidential campaign.  When you vote in November do you vote Obama and keep Obamacare, or do you vote Romney and for any other republican running for a federal seat and to try and get a repeal?  That is the choice.  It is clear and it will decide which direction this country chooses to go.

Some Midday Humor

About Those Taxes Obama Didn't Raise on the Middle Class

yeah, not so much.  He lied, Nanny Pelosi lied, they all lied.  This is now even bigger than taxmaggedon.  Well, yeeha.  

Romney's Response to Obamacare Ruling

You know, we had to expect that this could happen.  I really thought that the mandate would go and the balance would stay, therefore forcing congress to either fix or repeal.  It seemed to me to be the best way for a judge to handle it.  They are not elected and shouldn't be making law.  The left had said they thought they could either Scalia and/or Roberts.  What I had read about Scalia was quite compelling.  He has consistently voted for stretching the commerce clause.  Something that I didn't know.  


I was down at the court today.  It was crazy.  I ended up mainly surrounded by supporters of the law, I couldn't get over to the tea party section because of the crowds.  


I have more to say, but I need to gather my thoughts more.  There are a few things in this ruling that I am happy about.  Or, at least in the wording that he used.  


Romney gave this reaction:

Quote of the Day - Judge Hinkle Edition

“leaving an ineligible voter on the list is not a solution.  People need to know we are running an honest election."

Judge Hinkle, A Clinton appointee, on the lawsuit filed by DOJ to stop the state of Florida from purging illegals off its voter rolls.

DOJ and Holder are having a bad week.  The judge will allow the purge to continue.  As he should.  There should be no chance that an illegal is voting in our elections, or at least to close to no chance as possible.  Voting is right in this country, but that doesn't mean that you can do so illegally.

Immigration - My View

There is a great deal of back and forth about the Supreme Court ruling that was released Monday.  Arizona passed a law that was viewed by the right as help to the federal government to deal with the problem.  The left viewed it as, what else is new, racist.  A key provision in the law was upheld by the court.  States can ask about legal status of any person that has made contact with the police for any lawful stop.  That was 8-0.  Even the "wise Latina" realizes there is nothing wrong with the police asking about legal status to a person who is being questioned by the police.  The court struck down three other provisions.  One involving the warrantless arrest of someone with "probable cause" if law enforcement believes they have committed an offense that is punishable with deportation.  I can't even begin to say how glad I am that was struck down.  Under no circumstances do I want police officers to have that kind of power.  I am unwilling to give up my civil liberties for a terrorist or an illegal alien.

What the court really did was force the hand of congress.  We need immigration reform in this country.  We needed it yesterday.  The congress has been dragging their feet on these issues for decades.  For a variety of reasons.  Someone of which lay squarely on the soldiers of the far right.  Even the mention of limited work visa's is called amnesty by some.

We cannot continue on the path that we are on.  Something must be done.  Here is my view of what we should do.

Anyone that is currently in the country illegally must register at their most local immigration office.

Back taxes must be estimated and paid.  If you are unable to pay in full, a payment plan must be put in place.  If you do not pay on time every month you are deported.

You must have gainful employment

You must pass a written and oral test to prove you are proficient in the English language.

You must return to country of origin to start process of getting a visa.  We can make exceptions in cases of civil war and other levels of unrest in your country.  They will be handled on a case by case basis.  If you cannot afford to return to your country, you can find a charity that will help you with that.

You will not be given citizenship.  You will go to the back of the line.  You will wait seven years for citizenship from the date of your legal status goes into effect.  No credit will be given regardless of how long you have in the United States.

If you have been convicted of a violent felony, you will be returned to country of origin.

You will pay a fine not less than $5,000 to cover your costs of the visa.

You will not collect any entitlement for a period of five years with the exception of unemployment that is paid for by the insurance of your former employer.

You will sign an agreement that you will not seek any social security payments for money that was earned before legal status was given even if you paid into the system with fraudulent numbers.

The borders will be secured

Anyone caught crossing the border after this time will be detained and face a deportation hearing

We will overhaul the visa system.  We will give two-year work permits for low-skilled workers who want to work as a migrant farm worker.  (The majority of these people don't want to stay in the States, they come and work and return home)

High-skilled workers will be given higher consideration for visas.

The quotas for Mexico and South American countries will be higher.  We will offset these numbers by reducing the numbers of other countries.  TBD

Let's face the facts.  We will not deport all the illegals that are in the country.  It will not happen.  Maybe it should, but it won't.  So let's get a comprehensive reform plan into place that actually takes into account the workforce that we have, and the workforce that we need.

I have a friend who is from Columbia.  He came here many years ago.  He didn't have much of a problem getting a visa.  He is happily married, a father of three, a small business owner, a homeowner, and a former candidate for state senate.  Today, he would never get into this country.  No visa for him exists.  He has family that can't get a visitor visa to come see him.  One of his family members that would like to come is a small business owner back in Columbia.  He has a good life there, he has no desire to live here.  But he can't even come for a two-week vacation.  That makes no sense.

The time has long since passed that we admit our problems with the illegals is something that we have done to ourselves.  We have porous borders and a broken visa system.  It is next to impossible for a low skilled worker from Mexico to get a visa into this country.  It is very easy to say when you are on this side of the border that you wouldn't break the law and come here.  If you have to feed your children when there are no jobs, you may just make the same decision that they make.  It is the system that is broken and causing the problems.  We have built incentives for people to come here illegally.  Until we get rid of those, the problem will not be solved.  The problem will not be solved until we fortify the border.

The time has come that we stop arguing and get the job done.  Fortify the border, fix the visa system, and make a common sense approach to the people who are otherwise law-abiding citizens.  Immigration makes us better and stronger.  This problem is easily solved.  It is pure politics that is stopping this.  The time has come for congress to act.

RIP Nora Ephron

I loved this movie and this is my favorite scene.

She will be sleepless no more.

Bush Administration and Obama Administration on Fast & Furious

Live Blogging From Inside the Supreme Court

You can access the feed here:  Many "experts" I heard today are expecting Arizona immigration to be released today (widely believed to be upheld) and no Obamacare until Thursday.  The justices have gathered and the decisions released today should be read from the bench starting at 10am

http://scotusblog.wpengine.com/

It's Such a Mystery to why the EU is Broke

The EU's Court of Justice ruled earlier this week that if you happen to become ill during your 'vacation" days, your employer must simply give you more vacation time.  Insert deep breath here.  This is not a typo, you will be given additional vacation time to make up for the fact that you were ill during your vacation.

“The purpose of entitlement to paid annual leave is to enable the worker to rest and enjoy a period of relaxation and leisure,” the Court of Justice of the European Union, based in Luxembourg, ruled in a case involving department store workers in Spain.  “The purpose of entitlement to sick leave is different, since it enables a worker to recover from an illness that has caused him to be unfit for work.”

So, the logical question becomes, what constitutes illness?  Say for instance you cut your foot on a rock while at the beach and spend part of your vacation time getting a doctor to take a look at it, you then can't go to the beach the next day because it hurts a little.  Do you get the entire week again, or maybe just that day or two?  I used to travel a great deal in my younger days.  Several of those trips were to Mexico.  Every time I was there I met people from the UK.  So, if they drink the water and get an upset tummy they will get another vacation.  

This policy is ripe for abuse and goes a long way in explaining why they have stagnant economies, higher unemployment, and just all around broke.  But hey, they get another vacation day if they get sniffles.   So all's good.

This is so backwards that even The New York Times is questioning the wisdom of this policy:

With much of Europe mired in recession, governments struggling to reduce budget deficits and officials trying to combat high unemployment, the ruling is a reminder of just how hard it is to shake up long-established and legally protected labor practices that make it hard to put more people to work and revive sinking economies.

Everyone once in a while NYT says something that makes sense.  The more the government interferes with the private sector the more the people suffer in the long run.  The Europeans are not interested in fixing their problems.  This case makes that painfully obvious.  While this policy seems good on the surface, what it has done is make employers less likely to hire.  The more the employee costs, the fewer the private sector will employ.  It is simple math people.

Quote of the Day - Washington Post Commenter Edition

If Sandusky had murdered all the victims, he would be facing basically the same punishment. Why did none of the victims complain, or anyone else for that matter, for 30 years? Because nobody thought it was very serious. Now the fanatics have their say. Unfortunatelly this area of law is dominated by fanatics, religious fundamentalists to whom anything vaguely or remotely connected to sex shoud be banned and severly punished, anti abortion, anti pornography, anti Playboy, go back to Puritanism mind set.

Commentary under the story about Jerry Sandusky being found guilty of 45 out 48 charges of child molestation.  

There is no way to know if this is a male or female, but seriously?  Does this idiot think that young kids are to blame for not coming forward?  Sandusky was a well-respected man in the community.  This is exactly what child predators do; they pick very vulnerable children who have troubled backgrounds and sometimes troubled families.  It makes far less likely they will be believed.  People who do these things to children are very cunning.  Which is exactly what makes them so dangerous.  

A man saw another grown man having sex with a child in a locker room shower.  Does he think that the a young man wants to have sex in a public shower with a man who was close to three times his age?  

This is how sick our society has become.  Bash religion at every single turn.  I would like to think that virtually everyone in this country could at least say hey grown men having sex with children is wrong.  Rape is wrong.  But alas, that isn't true.  The degradation of our society continues and it seems like it is picking up steam with every passing day.  

For the Couple Who Has it All - Obama Campaign Gift Registry

Yep, the Obama campaign has sunk to a new low.  After all what does a newly married couple need more than Obama needs re-election funds?  Apparently, nothing.

H/T to Weasle Zippers

Romney's First 100 Days - Virginia Edition - Video

Nike Celebrates LeBron's First Ring - Video

I have taken "heat" for sticking up for LeBron's decision to go to Miami.  It paid off last night.  He would still be waiting for a championship (one that would never have come) had he stayed in Cleveland.  Cleveland was not willing to do what it takes to build a championship team.  They were nothing without Lebron, their record for the past two years proves that.  Basketball is a team sport. You can't win on your own.  Don't believe me, ask Jordan.  He himself will say he never would have accomplished what he did without the cast around him.  


Congrats to LeBron.  MVP, Finals MVP, and Champion.  


Yes, I am huge basketball fan, and no I am not a Heat fan.  I am a long-suffering Knicks fan.  

Sandusky, Pedophilia, and Sympathy

I came across this OP/ED piece on CNN today.  The article is presented in a way that is somewhat misleading.  There is a picture of Jerry Sandusky and the headline reads Do Pedophiles Deserve Sympathy?  I clicked on it mainly because I wanted to see how someone may try to justify the behavior of that monster.  In a court of law he gets the benefit of the doubt, but in my book he is guilty as sin and deserves to rot.

The article makes a clear distinction between someone who has abused a child and someone who has sexual urges towards young children.  Although, technically Sandusky is not a pedophile as his victims reached puberty.  But I am getting off point here.  The author is trying to say that pedophilia is something that cannot be chosen.  He is an associate professor of psychology in Canada.  His point is to ask and suggest that we, as a society, put mechanisms into place that will allow a non offending pedophile to get help without the fear of mandatory report laws.

He talks about some programs that are already in place around the world and how that they seem to be effective.

The best example of this effort is the Prevention Project Dunkelfeld in Germany, supported financially by private donation. It began with a media campaign aimed at people struggling to resist their sexual interests to children. By offering counseling and other services, it is expected that they can remain offense-free. Hundreds of people contacted the Dunkelfeld project after it was established. People from all over the world, including Austria, Switzerland and England, turned to the assistance.
Another example is the Circles of Support and Accountability, which was developed in Canada. The programs are staffed by volunteers who have received training from professionals. They provide support to people who are under no mandate to attend but are nonetheless seeking help to not commit sexual offenses

There is not enough data to look at long-term results, but short-term results seem to be promising.

I have always admitted that I sometimes leave the reservation on "traditional" conservative thought.  Sexuality is one of these road trips.   I do believe that you are born with your sexual preference.  It is somehow hard-wired into you.  Now, having sex is a choice, at least in most cases.  But feelings of attraction are what they are.  I am 100% against gay marriage as well as civil unions.  I base that on my religious beliefs.  But I do think that you are either gay or you are not.  You are either attracted to children or you are not.   I don't totally dismiss other factors, but I do think there is a biological function in there somewhere.  If it were simply lust as some say, it would happen more often.  Homosexuality only happens in about 10% of the population.  Pedophilia is even less common.

Therefore, I don't believe that things like pedophilia can be "cured".  It can be controlled possibly, but not cured.  So does making help available to men (and rarely women) a bad thing?  Probably not, as long as they have not abused.

But for me the real money quote in this article is this:

Pedophilic men have significantly less white matter, which is the connective tissue that is responsible for communication between different regions in the brain. Pedophiles perform more poorly on various tests of brain function, tend to be shorter in height and are three times more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous (characteristics that are observable before birth). Although nonbiological features may yet turn up to be relevant, it is difficult, if not impossible, to explain the research findings without there being a strong role of biology

Is it just me or did this man just make another reason to abort babies that could "possibly" show signs of being a pedophile?  This is the continued slippery slope that is part and parcel on the left.  They "normalize" something, such as abortion, homosexuality, and the push to start normalizing pedophilia has already begun.  So is really that far of leap to think that this man is suggesting that aborting babies that show the "characteristics" of pedophilia should be aborted?  I don't think it is.  

Cavuto Destroys MSNBC - Video

Apparently, Mr. Cavuto is also a suffer of MS.  He didn't take to kindly to MSNBC's admitted socialist Lawrence O'Donnell's unwarranted and dishonest attack on Ann Romney using horse riding as a way to help deal with her MS.  

New Republican Artur Davis Speaks to FCRC

Thanks to the wonder Smitty over at The Other McCain for capturing the video, even with the world's youngest blogger on his arm.

The crowd loved him.

Agent Terry's Family Releases Statement on Executive Privilege and Contempt Charges

“Attorney General Eric Holder’s refusal to fully disclose the documents associated with Operation Fast and Furious and President Obama’s assertion of executive privilege serves to compound this tragedy. It denies the Terry family and the American people the truth.”

The Terrys said that their son “was killed by members of a Mexican drug cartel armed with weapons from this failed Justice Department gun trafficking investigation. For more than 18 months we have been asking our federal government for justice and accountability. The documents sought by the House Oversight Committee and associated with Operation Fast and Furious should be produced and turned over to the committee. Our son lost his life protecting this nation, and it is very disappointing that we are now faced with an administration that seems more concerned with protecting themselves rather than revealing the truth behind Operation Fast and Furious.”

These people buried their child.  They deserve to know why.  

Eric Holder Releases Statement After Committee Votes to Push for Contempt of Congress Charge

“In recent months, the Justice Department has made unprecedented accommodations to respond to information requests by Chairman Issa about misguided law enforcement tactics that began in the previous administration and allowed illegal guns to be taken into Mexico.  Department professionals have spent countless hours compiling and providing thousands of documents -- nearly 8,000 -- to Chairman Issa and his committee.   My staff has had numerous meetings with congressional staff to try and accommodate these requests and yesterday, I met with Chairman Issa to offer additional internal Department documents and information that would satisfy what he identified as the Committee’s single outstanding question.

Unfortunately, Chairman Issa has rejected all of these efforts to reach a reasonable accommodation.  Instead, he has chosen to use his authority to take an extraordinary, unprecedented and entirely unnecessary action, intended to provoke an avoidable conflict between Congress and the Executive Branch.  This divisive action does not help us fix the problems that led to this operation or previous ones and it does nothing to make any of our law enforcement agents safer.  It's an election-year tactic intended to distract attention -- and, as a result -- has deflected critical resources from fulfilling what remains my top priority at the Department of Justice:  Protecting the American people.  

Simply put, any claims that the Justice Department has been unresponsive to requests for information are untrue.  From the beginning, Chairman Issa and certain members of the Committee have made unsubstantiated allegations first, then scrambled for facts to try to justify them later. That might make for good political theater, but it does little to uncover the truth or address the problems associated with this operation and prior ones dating back to the previous Administration.  

I have spent most of my career in law enforcement and worked closely with brave agents who put their lives on the line every day.  I know the sacrifices they make, so as soon as allegations of gunwalking came to my attention – and well before Chairman Issa expressed any interest in this issue -- I ordered the practice stopped.  I made necessary personnel changes in the Department's leadership and instituted policy changes to ensure better oversight of significant investigations.  And, I directed the Department's Inspector General to open a comprehensive investigation.  That investigation is ongoing, and the American people and Congress can count on it to produce a tough, independent review of the facts.

When Chairman Issa later began his own investigation, I made it clear that the Department would cooperate with all appropriate oversight requests, while still adhering to our legal obligations to protect information involving ongoing law enforcement investigations, legally-protected grand jury material and other sensitive information whose disclosure would endanger the American people or our agents investigating open cases.   

The American people deserve better.  That is why, I will remain focused on, and committed to, the Justice Department’s mission to protect the rights, safety, and best interests of my fellow citizens and to stand by my brave colleagues in law enforcement.

Liberal Logic - Laura Bush Gets Award Edition

Sewall-Belmont House, a museum dedicated to the advances of women, is giving former first lady, Laura Bush the Alice award.  The award is named after Alice Paul, a pioneer in assuring women obtained the right to vote.  


Sonia Pressman Fuentes, the co-founder of The National Organization of (liberal) Women is especially upset by this:

“When I read that the award was going to be given to Laura Bush, I felt as if I’d had a sudden onset of Alzheimer’s, I couldn’t believe my eyes.”

It’s not partisan I’m not complaining that she’s a Republican. I’m complaining that she’s never done anything for women to get this award.”

Really?  Laura Bush has never done anything for women.  Hmm, let's see what is listed on Wikipedia (Well known for their conservative bias/sarc): 

 Another of her signature issues were those relating to the health and well being of women. She established the Women's Health and Wellness Initiative and became involved with two major campaigns.Bush first became involved with The Heart Truth awareness campaign in 2003.^[34] It is an organization established by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to raise awareness about heart disease in women, and how to prevent the condition.^[35] She serves in the honorary position of ambassador for the program^[34] leading the federal government's effort to give women a "wake up call" about the risk of heart disease.^[34] She commented on the disease: "Like many women, I assumed heart disease was a man's disease and cancer was what we would fear the most. Yet heart disease kills more women in our country than all forms of cancer combined. When it comes to heart disease, education, prevention, and even a little red dress can save lives."^[34] She has undertaken a signature personal element of traveling around the country and talking to women at hospital and community events featuring the experiences of women who live, or had lived, with the condition.^[34] This outreach was credited with saving the life of one woman who went to the hospital after experiencing symptoms of a heart attack.^[34]Bush meets with women in the Pink Majilis in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates to discuss cures for breast cancer in the Middle East, October 22, 2007
With her predecessor, former First Lady Nancy Reagan, Bush dedicated the First Ladies Red Dress Collection at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in May 2005. It is an exhibit containing red suits worn by former First Ladies Lady Bird Johnson, Betty Ford, Rosalynn Carter, Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, Hillary Clinton, and Laura Bush meant to raise awareness by highlighting America's first ladies.^[36] She has participated in fashion shows displaying red dresses worn on celebrities as well.^[37]Bush's mother, Jenna Welch, was diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 78. She endured surgery and currently has no further signs of cancer. Laura Bush has become a breast cancer activist on her mother's behalf^[38] through her involvement in the Susan G. Komen for the Cure. She applauded the foundation's efforts in eliminating cancer and said, "A few short years ago, a diagnosis of breast cancer left little hope of recovery. But thanks to the work of the Komen Foundation... more women and men are beating breast cancer and beating the odds."^[38] She used her position to gain international support for the foundation through the Partnership for Breast Cancer Awareness and Research of the Americas, an initiative that unites experts from the United States, Brazil, Costa Rica and Mexico.^[39]In November 2001, she became the first person other than a president to deliver the weekly presidential radio address. She used the opportunity to discuss the plight of women in Afghanistan during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, saying, "The brutal oppression of women is a central goal of the terrorists."^[40] In May 2002, she made a speech to the people of Afghanistan through Radio Liberty, a radio station in Prague, Czech Republic.

And:

In August 2007, the Laura W. Bush Institute for Women's Health (LWBIWH) was founded at the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center. This institute aims to integrate research, education and community outreach in a multidisciplinary approach to women’s health and has begun efforts to establish a multi-campus women's health institute in Amarillo, El Paso, Lubbock and the Permian Basin.^[41]A subsidiary of the center, the Jenna Welch Women’s Center, opened in Midland, Texas, on August 10, 2010, to deliver expert medical care to women and their families. Operating in partnership with the Laura Bush Institute, the Jenna Welch Center, named for Bush's mother, strives for excellence in research, education and community outreach.^[42]

That darn sexist that has never done anything for women.  

Quote of the Day - Gerry Connolly Edition

It’s not really up to the Supreme Court to second-guess the legitimate decision made by the elected representatives of the people, and if people want to change that law, they can do so by changing the legislators.

Congressman Gerry Connolly on the Supreme Court deciding Obamacare.  


One must wonder if he understands the constitution even a little.  Sadly, the chances of him being defeated in November are not good, the redistricting made the district lean even more left.  

MSNBC & @MitchellReports Just Can't Help Themselves

Yesterday, Gov. Romney made a stop at a WaWa.  For those that are not aware, a WaWa is like a 7-11 that sells gas.  They seem to be regional.  To be honest I had never been to one until about a year or two ago.  There are none close where I live.  


Andrea Mitchell selectively edited Romney's statement's to make it sound like he didn't know what a Wawa is and their touch sandwich ordering system.  Like I said they are regional, so there are many people who have no idea what they are, what they sell, and how they set up their stores.  Here is her report:

What Romney was really doing was comparing the the efficiency of the private sector to the public sector.  Here is a video of the same exchange without the selective editing:

Andrea Mitchell you should be ashamed of yourself.  How exactly do you call yourself a journalist?    You are nothing more than a leftist hack that will do whatever it takes to help Obama get re-elected.  


MSNBC will more than likely never correct this.  


So, Juan Williams do you know understand the importance of just being a blogger.  That is how the truth about his statements are getting out there.  The left has the nerve to talk about Fox?  Please. 


Rest in peace journalism, rest in peace.  


Hat tip to Sooper Mexican for breaking this story.  

Juan Williams Jumps the Shark....Again

The relevant point is that the court may do irreparable harm to is reputation with anotehr highly political split between justices appointed by Democrats and justices appointed by Republicans.  A 5-4 defeat of the healthcare law will erode trust in the justice system.  

So says Juan Williams.  I guess he has forgotten this:

The poll also asked respondents if they think the individual mandate is constitutional or unconstitutional. Seventy-two percent said it is unconstitutional. Though there were some partisan differences, a clear majority of even Democrats, 56 percent, think it is unconstitutional. Ninety-four percent of Republicans and 70 percent of independents said the individual mandate is unconstitutional.

And this has been constant throughout the debate on healthcare.  The difference is that democrats, for the most part, don't seem to care that it is unconstitutional.  They want Obamacare and it matters none if it violates my rights or hurts the healthcare industry in this country.  


The real question that Juan Williams should be asking is why possibly 4 justices that were appointed by dems would so blatantly disregard the constitution and say that the federal government has the right to force us to by a product simply because we are alive?  When you are willing to answer that question Mr. Williams, then we can talk.  

Artur Davis Speaks of Why He Has Joined the GOP - Jindal and Christie Big Factors

He lives in my neck of the woods.  There are things that I don't like about Christie, but if he wants to run for elected office in my progressive area and vote like that, I will take it.  Remember, he was one of the first people to publicly come  out for President Obama.  This is big.  He sees for himself, the democratic party has left him.  

A Tribute to Father's. Allan Houston on the Importance of Fathers in the lives of children.

Men have been left out of the equation when it comes to fatherhood.  We live in a society where we are told that biology doesn't make a family, and women are perfectly capable of being wonderful single parents.  Both of those statements are true, to an extent.  But that doesn't change the need that children have for a father figure.  Study after study has shown that children do better in a happy two parent home.

The Cleavers don't exist.  It would be nice if they did, but they don't.  I don't think it is healthy for a child to watch day in and day out a unhappy marriage and two parents that fight constantly.  But we need to get to the point again that we discuss that fathers do matter.  They matter a great deal.

On this father's day I thought there is no better tribute than to talk about a man who is putting his money where his mouth is.  He is the father of seven so he knows of what he speaks.  He knows that his father was a good part of the reason for the success he has had in his life.  He wants other children and fathers to experience that.  This is so needed in the black community especially.  7 out 10 kids are born to single mothers.  The black father has been made irrelevant in our society.  That needs to change.

It doesn't hurt that I am long-suffering Knicks fan.  Read about his foundation here.

Weekend Funnies

I will be busy for a good part of the weekend.  Enjoy the laughs.

Yep, Obamacare Will Do Wonders for Medical Care in the U.S.

A new survey has come out and it is downright terrifying.  If Obamacare would actually stand a chance of improving medical care in this country conservatives would not be so against it.  The truth is this.  If you are poor and have a hard time getting what you perceive to be good medical care, Obamacare is going to make that worse.  If you were happy with your medical care, chances are you won't be once Obamacare is fully implemented.  


The dems spent the better part of two years demeaning the insurance industry and big pharma, but Obamacare is boon to them.  Who it doesn't help is the average American.  

KEY FINDINGS

• 90% say the medical system is on the WRONG TRACK
• 83% say they are thinking about QUITTING
• 61% say the system challenges their ETHICS
• 85% say the patient-physician relationship is in a TAILSPIN
• 65% say GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT is most to blame for current problems
• 72% say individual insurance mandate will NOT result in improved access care
• 49% say they will STOP accepting Medicaid patients
• 74% say they will STOP ACCEPTING Medicare patients, or leave Medicare completely
• 52% say they would rather treat some Medicaid/Medicare patient for FREE
• 57% give the AMA a FAILING GRADE representing them
• 1 out of 3 doctors is HESITANT to voice their opinion
• 2 out of 3 say they are JUST SQUEAKING BY OR IN THE RED financially
• 95% say private practice is losing out to CORPORATE MEDICINE
• 80% say DOCTORS/MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS are most likely to help solve things
• 70% say REDUCING GOVERNMENT would be single best fix.

New RNC Ad - From Reboot to Replay - Video

Apparently the president is using and reusing the same old lines from one speech to the next.  I suppose it isn't surprising once the campaign is in full gear.  But, yesterday's speech was supposed to be the big one on the economic direction of our country under his "leadership".  


This speech has been widely panned as one of his worse.  


The RNC wasted no time.  I am repeating myself, but they are getting better at this.  Many conservatives were worried that they were not trying hard to get win back the white house.  I think those fears can be put aside.  They are working very hard.  They are being responsive to daily events and getting quality ads out there within hours.  


Here is the latest:

Quote of the Day - Dana Milbank Edition

I had high hopes for President Obama’s speech on the economy. But instead of going to Ohio on Thursday with a compelling plan for the future, the president gave Americans a falsehood wrapped in a fallacy.

Ouch.  From WashPo no less.  Oh my, has President Obama lost his mojo?  


H/T to Jill at Pundit and Pundette   

Romney's Response to President Obama's "Doing Fine" Comment - Video

See, I don't think what President Obama said was a "gaffe".  He believes with every fiber of his being that the government is suppose to provide jobs for people.  We know better.