If Michael McGee Would Disappear

The more details that come out about Ald. Michael McGee's activities, the worse it gets.

I had so little respect for McGee to begin with, but this is just amazing. It's incredible that a community leader would be such a thug.

McGee wasn't just talk either. In addition to ugly words, physical violence was one of his tactics to intimidate and get what he wanted.

The story in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is jaw-dropping.

Milwaukee Ald. Michael McGee and two other men plotted to kill a man whom they suspected of burglarizing a home before deciding that he instead should be beaten, District Attorney John Chisholm said Wednesday.

In the original murder plot, $3,000 was to change hands for killing the intended victim, Chisholm said. McGee and the others later agreed on a "beat down" of the intended victim for $1,000, the district attorney said, adding that the trio referred to "peeling back" the intended target's "wig" and "sewing his cap together."

"An argument could be made that this was a conspiracy to commit homicide," Chisholm said in court.

McGee's attorney, Glenn Givens, said Milwaukee police and prosecutors are confused about street language and, at worst, McGee was part of a plan to commit misdemeanor battery.

"You have to look at who is using language and what community they come from before you make any determinations," Givens said.

Unbelievable!

No wonder McGee was a believer in the "stop snitchin' " philosophy.

He obviously had reason to promote the idea of people keeping their mouths shut.

If asked, don't tell.

McGee's attorney's explanation for the "beat down" plot is loony.

Not surprisingly, Givens is already employing the race card. People don't understand the urban language. Poor McGee is being accused of something all because the meaning of his words are lost in translation.

Supposedly, police and prosecutors don't understand the language of the street.

That's so lame!

The street is the workplace of the police. I'm sure they're familiar with the vernacular. And prosecutors certainly have been exposed to street language in their dealings with people.

Furthermore, Givens attempts to argue that ALDERMAN McGee was only planning misdemeanor battery, nothing major.

That sounds awful.

How could McGee's supporters possibly give him a pass on that?

The murder plot downgraded to a "beat down" plan is so horrible that it makes his call for people to throw bricks at speeders seem rather quaint.

The loyalty of McGee's supporters borders on pathological.

That brings us to Eugene Kane and his column, also in today's Journal Sentinel.

To sum it up, it's a load.

Yes, Kane says that McGee's supporters deserved better for their loyalty.

But most of what Kane writes lashes out at McGee's opponents.

Like McGee's lawyer, Kane whips out that oh so convenient race card.

The accusation that McGee was shaking down constituents who wanted to do business in his district is troubling, particularly in light of his frequent pronouncements about fighting for people who are traditionally shut out of opportunity in city politics.

Also troubling is how many folks are willing to throw "innocent until proven guilty" out the window simply because McGee is a public figure they never liked and always wanted to see meet a bad end.

(Granted, "innocent until proven guilty" has never resonated as much with regular folks as "where there's smoke, there's fire.")

There's a legion of people willing to call McGee a criminal now that the federal government has supplied the ammunition. To be fair, most of these people called McGee the same thing before any charges were filed in this matter.

The details of a pretty damning case against McGee are incomplete but clearly suggest the federal government thinks it has more than enough evidence to prosecute him for the kind of corruption that sends politicians away for years.

That prospect is sure to get a rise out of McGee's constituents, many of whom have given him unequivocal support since he joined the Common Council in 2004.

It's fair to say no local politician in recent years has engendered so much diverse reaction, particularly across racial lines. I get the sense some people are convinced the majority of racial problems in Milwaukee would disappear if more black people rejected Mike McGee as a leader.

That's not true, but it's what some people believe.

"A pretty damning case against McGee"?

That's putting it mildly, very mildly. The case is damn damning.

What McGee is accused of doing has nothing to do with his race AT ALL.

If he's found guilty of the charges, he's a criminal. His skin color isn't a factor.

Kane's comment that people think many of Milwaukee's racial problems would disappear if more blacks rejected McGee as a leader is interesting.

I don't think the problems would disappear if more blacks rejected thug McGee, but they certainly would be lessened.

McGee is a horrible role model -- the worst. That thug should not be in a leadership role, unless the objective is to have an area of city, the 6th District, be a breeding ground for crime and violence.

A positive first step in getting Milwaukee's racial problems to disappear would be to get the "gatekeeper" McGee to disappear.

He's not a part of the solution; he IS the problem.

Kane goes on:

It's a safe bet that many 6th District residents will continue to support McGee; the word entrapment already has been bandied about on black talk radio.

Kane italicizes "entrapment."

Why?

Does he give it emphasis because he thinks it's a possibility.

How can one be entrapped when it comes to approaching business owners and shaking them down?

I don't see how that would work.

The people gloating over McGee's predicament should remember how quickly events can change and how slowly legal matters can move toward resolution. There's a chance McGee will remain in office for months to come.

What is that?

A threat?

"Nah, nah! McGee is still in power."

Who's doing the gloating?

As for the voters in the 6th District who were called dupes and worse for their decision to keep McGee in office, this latest development represents either an extreme betrayal of trust by the alderman or yet another unwanted episode in his calamitous career that must be endured. In any case, they deserved better in return for their loyalty to McGee and will likely learn from the experience.

Huh?

Bribery and extortion and threats of physical violence don't qualify as part of just another "unwanted episode," not by any respectable standards.

When it comes to putting faith in politicians, some of us have had our hearts broken before.

McGee's misdeeds (crimes) shouldn't be heartbreaking for his supporters. I don't have too much sympathy for them.

It's not like they didn't know what sort of person McGee is.

They just don't care.

I think it's heartbreaking that people have stood by this thug.

He's a bad guy, a really bad guy.

I know this is harsh, but they were fools to put their faith in him.

Fred Thompson and Great Expectations

Officials in Fred Thompson's inner circle decided the time was right to take the tease up a notch.

Thus, the leak, the speaking on condition of anonymity, the 4th of July tease.

WASHINGTON -- Fred Thompson, a former Tennessee senator and "Law & Order" actor, will take a step toward a formal presidential candidacy next week, several officials with knowledge of the plans said Wednesday.

Thompson will form a "testing the waters" committee, which will allow him to begin raising money and hiring staff without officially committing to a White House bid. The creation of the committee, to be called "Friends of Fred Thompson," will be paired with the start of his first major fundraising push.

The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plans were not public, said Thompson is discussing plans for a campaign swing through various early primary states in late June, and is considering several options for a formal announcement should he ultimately decide to enter the race. They said that one scenario under discussion, among others, would have him officially announce his candidacy over the July 4 holiday.

But these officials also cautioned that he's made no final decision about whether to run or where and when to get in the race should he decide to go forward.

This isn't as bad as the media-hyped, goofy Chuck Hagel announcement that he was going to make an announcement about announcing his plans regarding the 2008 presidential race. Of course, that announcement turned out to be nothing more than an announcement that he was putting off a decision on running for the presidency.

Today's leak from the Thompson camp is a more subtle approach. There's no Hagel-style major press conference slated, when the media trekked out to Nebraska for a non-announcement.

It's also different in that many Republicans are actually encouraging Thompson to quit dangling his hat above the ring and finally toss it into the ring. Hagel didn't have the support that Thompson has. He didn't have the grassroots groundswell that Thompson does.
The Politico, the same online outlet that broke the news that John Edwards was withdrawing from the race, goes further than the Associated Press.

It states unequivocally that Thompson will enter the presidential race over the 4th of July holiday.

Fred Dalton Thompson is planning to enter the presidential race over the Fourth of July holiday, announcing that week that he has already raised several million dollars and is being backed by insiders from the past three Republican administrations, Thompson advisers told The Politico.

Thompson, the "Law and Order" star and former U.S. senator from Tennessee, has been publicly coy, even as people close to him have been furiously preparing for a late entry into the wide-open contest. But the advisers said Thompson dropped all pretenses on Tuesday afternoon during a conference call with more than 100 potential donors, each of whom was urged to raise about $50,000.

Thompson's formal announcement is planned for Nashville. Organizers say the red pickup truck that was a hallmark of Thompson's first Senate race will begin showing up in Iowa and New Hampshire as an emblem of what they consider his folksy, populist appeal.

A testing-the-waters committee is to be formed June 4 so Thompson can start raising money, and staffers will go on the payroll in early June, the organizers said. A policy team has been formed, but remains under wraps.

The supporters on Tuesday's call make up a group the campaign is calling "First Day Founders." When launched, the campaign will have offices in Nashville and Northern Virginia, the advisers say.

Campaign officials said they have every indication Thompson will declare his candidacy, but cautioned that he could still decide not to run or to postpone the announcement. Mark Corallo, the campaign spokesman, said: "He is seriously considering getting in and doing everything he has to do to come to a final decision."

I think this buzz is legitimate.

It appears that the months long Fred Thompson tease is going to end with a commitment to run for the presidency.

There is a problem with Thompson putting a lid on all the speculation about his presidential intentions.

He'll no longer be able to hide on the sidelines and issue statements or write columns when he feels like it. Thompson will have to deliver on a regular basis.

Thompson's tease routine that he's been milking since March has had the effect of setting the bar very high. Expectations are great.

Has the hype crowning Thompson as the great Republican savior set him up to be a disappointment?

I don't know.

I think there's a strong possibility that could happen.

Will the Republican Party be reborn on the 4th of July?

Anything short of that will be a letdown.

Cindy Sheehan Bids America Good-Bye

I was writing about Cindy Sheehan before she became Cindy Sheehan.

It seems fitting that I should at least acknowledge her attention-grabbing swan song of sorts that appeared on Daily Kos, the blog that Russ Feingold calls home.

In her long-winded post entitled "Good Riddance Attention Whore," Sheehan whines about how she was chewed up and spit out by the libs.

This is my resignation letter as the "face" of the American anti-war movement. This is not my "Checkers" moment, because I will never give up trying to help people in the world who are harmed by the empire of the good old US of A, but I am finished working in, or outside of this system. This system forcefully resists being helped and eats up the people who try to help it. I am getting out before it totally consumes me or anymore people that I love and the rest of my resources.

Good-bye America ...you are not the country that I love and I finally realized no matter how much I sacrifice, I can’t make you be that country unless you want it.

It’s up to you now.

If only this were true.

She'll be back. I know she will.

But at least for now, Sheehan intends to fade from view, at least a bit.

Gold Star Families greeted Sheehan's exit with relief.

A group of Gold Star Family members, who have lost a son or daughter in the war on terrorism, today issued the following statement in response to Cindy Sheehan’s announcement that she is halting her public anti-war protests. For more information log on to: www.MoveAmericaForward.org

“We are very pleased to hear that Cindy Sheehan is ending her disgraceful campaign to discredit the United States military and the heroic men and women in harms way in Iraq and Afghanistan. We sympathize with the shared pain from losing a child in the war effort, however, we cannot excuse the fact that Cindy has taken the wrong turn at every corner in assigning blame for the loss of her heroic son, Casey.

“Casey Sheehan was a proud member of the United States Armed Forces. He believed in serving his country faithfully and volunteered for the duty assignment that led to his death at the hands of Islamic extremists. He should have been the example followed by Cindy Sheehan. Instead, she chose to associate with the most virulent anti-American elements in the United States and abroad.

“Throughout her public demonstrations, Cindy Sheehan has repeatedly been dismissive of the majority of Gold Star Parents who disagree with her stance on the war. Cindy Sheehan does not speak for us, nor thankfully does she speak for most Americans. It’s time for Cindy to go home and put her life back together and realize just how fortunate she is to live in the greatest nation on earth.

“We are saddened that Cindy’s withdrawal from political activities is because she was disappointed that more Americans did not accept her distorted worldview that America is the blame for all of the ills of the world. Perhaps off the world stage, she will be able to regain her bearings and see that her son and America were serving the cause of freedom in the world and security at home. God Bless the United States of America, and may God help Cindy Sheehan to heal from the pain and bitterness that have consumed her.”

DEBRA ARGEL

TODD BASTIAN

JOSEPH WILLIAMS

DEBBIE LEE

JOSEPH JOHNSON

MIKE ANDERSON

MERILEE CARLSON

JAN JOHNSON

God bless them.

The contrast between the Gold Star Families and Cindy Sheehan couldn't be more dramatic.

They share the tragic loss of a son or daughter in war, but the similarities stop there.

In her farewell to America, Sheehan said that she was resigning as "the 'face' of the American anti-war movement."

I think she was fired quite a while back. Her face stopped being important to the lib media long, long ago.

Plenty of elected officials, such as every Democrat presidential candidate, have stepped into the anti-war spotlight, leaving her in their shadows.

Yes, Sheehan's good-bye was long overdue, but meaningless now.

Her current irrelevance makes her resignation seem sort of pathetic.

Nonetheless, as I said two years ago, I pray she finds peace.

Resign, "Gatekeeper" McGee

In "Time to Resign," The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Editorial Board, in all its wisdom, has called for Ald. Michael McGee to resign immediately.

I agree that McGee must go, but hearing it from the JS Editorial Board is too little too late.

After McGee's victory in the recall election in April, the JS Editorial Board gave a pep talk to McGee.

Cynics will say the voters got what they deserve. That's not only a cheap shot but probably inaccurate. The majority of the people who voted for McGee probably did so because they honestly felt that, despite his many personal foibles and outrageous behavior, he was not only listening to them but had their interests at heart. Especially when they felt he was challenging the establishment.

Shaking down business owners can hardly be seen as having the interests of the people at heart.

Was it right for the JS Editorial Board to look the other way and gloss over McGee's "personal foibles and outrageous behavior"?

Don't standards of decency and integrity matter?

Was it acceptable for a leader to call police officers "faggots"? Was it OK for him to call the former Milwaukee D.A. a "dumb ass"? Was calling for the lynching of community leader Leon Todd just business as usual?

Apparently, none of that mattered because the people had spoken and the Board didn't want to second guess the people.

Now, it is second guessing itself in today's editorial.

Although details are still emerging, what is known about the case should be highly disturbing to all Milwaukee residents and in particular the 64% of voters in the 6th Aldermanic District who gave a resounding vote of confidence to McGee in an eight-way recall election April 3.

McGee is accused of using his position to solicit bribes from businesses in his district with the promise of using his influence in city licensing matters.

McGee must be presumed innocent until proved guilty, but this latest development does not occur in isolation. There has been a steady accumulation of embarrassments. The current charges are so grave that the alderman cannot continue to effectively serve his constituents. He should resign immediately.

...We supported the recall against McGee because we believed it was time for the district to move beyond the myriad problems of McGee's own making that kept him from being the alderman he should be.

...Last month, we agreed with one of the candidates McGee defeated that despite his personal foibles and outrageous behavior, McGee appeared to have the interests of his constituents at heart.

Perhaps we were wrong, but if McGee truly does care about his constituents, he should step down.

"PERHAPS we were wrong?"

No, no, no.

The Editorial Board WAS DEFINITELY WRONG.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

There's no question about it.

Good public servants don't practice extortion.

Engaging in bribery and extortion aren't personal foibles. That's criminal.

It's good that the Board wants McGee to resign.

I just wish it would have taken responbility for being among McGee's enablers and admitted that, for its part, it failed the community by giving a thug the benefit of the doubt.

Details are still sketchy with the state case being sealed, but the criminal complaint in the federal case gives an idea of the extent of McGee's alleged abuses.

Milwaukee Ald. Michael McGee solicited bribes from business owners in exchange for help in getting or keeping liquor licenses and other matters, according to federal charges filed Tuesday.

The complaint says that for at least the past year, McGee has traded his power for cash, extorting from $500 to $2,500 from each of several business owners.

Calling himself the "gatekeeper" for new businesses in his district, he told one owner his help would cost "a pretty penny" as he demanded a bigger bribe, the nine-page criminal complaint says.

The complaint also says McGee extorted business owners to donate to his recently successful campaign to beat back a recall. A liquor store owner said McGee pressured her to donate to his gun buy-back program.

In addition to federal charges, McGee faces state counts related to a suspected threat. And prosecutors said there could be more charges.

If convicted of the federal charges, McGee, 37, would face up to 30 years in prison and a $500,000 fine, said U.S. Attorney Steven M. Biskupic.

"According to the evidence in the complaint, Mr. McGee corruptly solicited cash from business owners in exchange for favorable treatment on city licensing matters," Biskupic said.

...Mayor Tom Barrett called the charges "very serious."

"They go to the core of our democratic system. There is no place in city government for corruption," he said.

The charges are beyond "very serious." I would call them explosive.

McGee, the "gatekeeper," has imploded.

For the sake of the 6th District and the city of Milwaukee as a whole, I hope McGee's reign is over.
_______________________

Here is an oldie but goodie from Eugene Kane (May 2006):

Despite the overheated rhetoric from media pundits who view McGee as some dangerous virus that needs to be excised from the body politic, I prefer to consider him a young, hot-headed black politician still finding his way.

Clearly, he needs to understand that living a public life can be embarrassing when you constantly put yourself in the spotlight.

McGee was rightfully criticized for using anti-gay rhetoric that demeans the homosexual community. But his frequent homophobia doesn't erase his standing as often the lone maverick vote at City Hall standing for or against policies that impact young black and Latino males. He voted against a discriminatory anti-loitering ordinance that would have put too much pressure on cops to pick and choose who they thought was a gang-banger and who was not.

He's also been in the forefront of community protests against the beating of Frank Jude Jr.

The reason McGee - with all his flaws - is necessary in this city is that he is the embodiment of representative government. He stands for a group of angry young black people everybody else ignores. These are young African-Americans who have chosen to participate in the system partly because of his presence.

Much of the front-page news about McGee in the past few weeks would be minor league stuff if he weren't an alderman named Mike McGee or Michael Imanu Jackson.

The more some voices denounce him, the more his support grows. In fact, I know some blacks who love McGee simply for the way he gets white folks so riled up.

The people who hold his future are voters in his district, and no one else.

No doubt, there will be more chances to write about McGee - his Wauwatosa municipal court trial for resisting arrest during an incident at Blockbuster is coming up - but hopefully it will be about his advocacy for his constituents instead of his personal conduct.

My sincere wish is that McGee's recent attempt to face up to his personal troubles allows him to follow the path of another angry young black politician I admired.

During my college days in Philadelphia, this former city councilman was known for his militant protest marches, fiery speeches and even a fistfight in City Council chambers. The firebrand black politician eventually learned from his mistakes to become a respected veteran in political circles.

Today, John Street is the mayor of Philadelphia. I'm not saying that's where McGee will end up, but at least one of the Mike McGees I know has some of the same stuff.

Amusing, isn't it?

Kane is an apologist for McGee -- "a young, hot-headed black politician still finding his way."

He's found his way right into an orange jumpsuit.

I think it's a safe bet to assume that McGee isn't going to be mayor.

When he's sitting in prison, McGee won't have an opportunity to be the sort of "firebrand black politician" that Kane admires so much.

McGee: Press Conference

No tape.

Yes, it's taped.

McGee: Bribery

According to The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, a leaker said Ald. Michael McGee will be charged with soliciting a bribe.

Ald. Michael McGee is expected to be charged by federal prosecutors with soliciting a bribe, according to a source familiar with the investigation.

The source, who asked not be named because the case remains under seal, said McGee could face additional federal charges as well as state charges of threatening violence. Whether the soliciting charge would come today, or would follow other charges, is unclear, given he's being held on a state charge.

Police arrested him on Monday, much earlier than planned, after a threat of violence arose, sources said.

State and federal officials have set a press conference for 1 p.m. at the federal courthouse.

Some questions:

--Is McGee allowed to hang a Hugo Chavez poster in his jail cell?

--Has anyone spotted a "Free McGee" t-shirt yet?

--Will there be a shield in place to protect state and federal officials from "brickin' " at the press conference?

10 Memorial Day Deaths in Iraq... and Counting?

The Associated Press has an anti-war, anti-Bush administration agenda.

I expect the usual slant in its reporting of hard news. The AP manipulates it all the time. Nothing new about that.

However, I find this headline to be particularly offensive, even considering the source, the liberal hacks at AP.



From the Associated Press:

Eight American soldiers were killed in roadside bombings and a helicopter crash in a restive province north of Baghdad, the U.S. military reported Tuesday, making May the deadliest month of the year for U.S. troops in Iraq.

...The Americans — all from Task Force Lightning — were killed Monday in Diyala as the United States commemorated Memorial Day, bringing the number of American forces killed this month to at least 110, according to an Associated Press count assembled from U.S. military statements.

In statements issued Tuesday by the public affairs office of the Multi-National Corps-Iraq office at Camp Victory at Baghdad Airport, the military said six of the soldiers died in explosions near their vehicles and two others were killed in the helicopter crash. The statements did not say if the helicopter was shot down or suffered mechanical problems.

Eight American soldiers lost their lives yesterday.

They join over 3,400 others.

The fact that the eight were killed on Memorial Day shouldn't be exploited.

These men, these precious lives, aren't political props.

They deserve far more respect than that.

Stop the presses!

As I was writing this, the headline has changed.

BAGHDAD -- Ten American soldiers were killed in roadside bombings and a helicopter crash on Memorial Day, the military reported Tuesday, making May the deadliest month of the year for U.S. troops in Iraq.

...The American deaths raised the number of U.S. forces killed this month to at least 112, according to an Associated Press count assembled from U.S. military statements.

The Americans — all from Task Force Lightning — were killed Monday in Diyala as the United States commemorated Memorial Day, bringing the number of American forces killed this month to at least 110, according to an Associated Press count assembled from U.S. military statements.

In statements issued Tuesday by the public affairs office of the Multi-National Corps-Iraq office at Camp Victory at Baghdad Airport, the military said six of the soldiers died in explosions near their vehicles and two others were killed in the helicopter crash. The statements did not say if the helicopter was shot down or suffered mechanical problems.

...On Monday, 36 people were killed across Baghdad in a wave of attacks, according to an AP tabulation of reports from police officials who said they could lose their jobs if they provided the information. Another 33 bullet-riddled bodies were found dead, tortured and abandoned in different parts of the capital, the apparent victims of ongoing sectarian violence, said an official in an Iraqi ministry who has access to daily reports. The official said he would be dismissed if his superiors knew he was releasing the information to Western media outlets.

Not only does the AP drool over the Memorial Day deaths of Americans, it ends the agenda-article by stating that death tolls of violence in Iraq are being withheld from the Western media.

I suppose it's all part of the "Bush lied" Iraq policy, right?

I can't help but wonder if AP keep a tabulation of deaths during World War II.

How were the deaths reported then, military and civilian?

How many WWII Memorial Day deaths were there in 1942 or 1943 or 1944 or 1945?

Are Memorial Day deaths worse than other deaths?

I don't think so.

The AP does.

It's pure exploitation and disgraceful.

McGee: Public Corruption, Potential for Violence

Ald. Michael McGee: "I don't have a birth certificate."

I wonder.

Who snitched on Michael McGee?

An investigation by federal and state authorities resulted in his arrest.

Someone must have cooperated with officials. That's against the McGee Stop Snitchin' Creed.

From The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

McGee is under investigation on potential public corruption charges, according to sources familiar with the probe, which has been placed under seal. Further details are expected to be announced today during a joint news conference by U.S. Attorney Steven Biskupic and Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm.

It was unclear late Monday where and under what circumstances McGee was arrested, but sources said the arrest was made earlier than planned because investigators suspected the potential for violence.

That's weird.

True, "McGee" and "potential for violence" are synonymous; but it's still weird.

What was McGee doing that his arrest was necessary to ward off violence?

What did authorities think might happen?

...At the request of the Milwaukee County district attorney's office, a secret John Doe investigation was launched in December to look into matters related to the [McGee] recall effort. Assistant District Attorney Bruce Landgraf, assigned to the district attorney's white-collar crime unit, was placed in charge of the investigation. The Journal Sentinel has independently confirmed the existence of the John Doe but not the target of it.

At the time, McGee attorney Mike Maistelman alleged fraud on the part of recall organizers. Another possible focus may be on why Joan Hollingsworth, who initially was paid to assist recall organizers, later said she misled recall signers about the purpose of the petition.

The recall also prompted a Milwaukee County court commissioner to issue a restraining order against McGee after former Milwaukee School Board member Leon Todd, who was running Jordan's campaign, told the commissioner he feared for his life. McGee said during a radio broadcast that Todd should be "hung" for his "betrayal of the community," resulting in a flurry of calls cursing and threatening Todd.

At the time, another McGee attorney, Bill Baldon, said McGee was not urging violence but was simply engaging in political discourse.

McGee also caught authorities' attention in May 2006 when he petitioned to legally change his name to McGee, saying that his name at birth was really Michael I. Jackson. He later withdrew the petition, but by then the state Department of Transportation's fraud unit had launched an investigation. The department determined that the alderman had held driver's licenses in both names. His license with the Jackson name had been revoked in March 2000. When the state determined that McGee and Jackson were the same person in June 2006, the McGee license was revoked, as well.

Read about McGee's adventures here and here.

"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

Things get messy when we threaten to hang someone from a tree, too.

Monday marked the third time McGee has been arrested in the past year and a half.

Three arrests in eighteen months.

THREE ARRESTS!

The man is an alderman!

A recall election gave the people of his district the chance to get a decent representative on the Milwaukee Common Council, but they overwhelmingly voted to keep McGee.

It's really hard to grasp that the voters have so little respect for the law and such low standards in terms of leadership that they're willing to accept McGee's antics and elect him.

TMJ4 reports:

We have also learned that police used search warrants to search McGee's Trostel Square apartment near Commerce St. on Monday night.

I wonder if police came across any smoking guns.

I can just imagine how this is playing out with McGee's supporters.

I'm sure they're rallying behind him, with the elder McGee leading the charge. The bigot will encourage violence in response to his son's arrest. Same old, same old.

There also will probably be protests and vigils, accompanying the accusations that McGee is being harassed.

That's all likely to come.

And why was Junior McGee arrested?

Even though more information won't come until later today, we don't need details.

It's a vast racial conspiracy. First and foremost, McGee's supporters will frame his arrest as racially motivated.

They'll paint him as a victim and a hero, a martyr.

No matter what the charges, no matter what the evidence, his diehard followers will still follow.

That's the pathetic part.

McGee is a thug. Lots of people in Milwaukee are thugs, so that in itself is not unusual. What's revealing is that a majority of voters in McGee's district either don't see it that way or they do but don't mind.

The thing that really disturbs me is that so many people are willing to stand behind him. You'd think by now that the people of his district would have had enough.

Instead, they can't seem to get enough McGee.

It's really a sad commentary on the state of the city.

Mamas don't let your babies grow up to be Michael McGee.

Michael McGee, Jr. Arrested

There's another chapter in the Michael McGee family saga.

From The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Ald. Michael McGee was arrested Monday by Milwaukee police on a case that is being jointly investigated by federal and state authorities, officials said tonight.

McGee is under investigation for potential public corruption charges, according to sources familiar with the probe, which has been placed under seal. Further details are expected tomorrow when U.S. Attorney Steven Biskupic and Milwaukee District Attorney John Chisholm are expected to hold a joint news conference.

It was unclear where and under what circumstances McGee was arrested, but the sources said the arrest was made earlier than planned because investigators suspected the potential for violence.

Police spokeswoman Anne E. Schwartz confirmed the arrest late today.

"We arrested Alderman McGee and are referring all calls on the matter to the U.S. Attorney's Office," Schwartz said.

At this point, the U.S. Attorney's Office isn't talking.

There should be details tomorrow.

Chisholm said he couldn't talk because the case is under seal.

So many questions to be answered...

Now that Junior McGee is behind bars, who will take over WNOV's "Word Warriors"?

Memorial Day: Remembrance and Gratitude

Sparks from the Anvil


"The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart. . .should swell into a mighty chorus of remembrance, gratitude and rededication on this solemn occasion."

---Abraham Lincoln

Nancy Pelosi and the Taliban

On June 21, 2005, Nancy Pelosi declared the war in Afghanistan over.

She was very clear at the time.

Pelosi said, "The war in Afghanistan is over."

Note to Pelosi: It's not over, not then and not now.

Since her positively idiotic statement, this clueless woman has become the Speaker of the House.

That's scary. Someone so utterly clueless is in a position of such power.

No wonder Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Osama bin Laden, and other figures hostile to the Bush administration celebrated the Democrats' victory in November 2006.

Someone should notify Pelosi about the situation in Afghanistan.

What's going on is sort of warlike.

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan -- The Taliban has launched a new operation targeting government and foreign forces in Afghanistan, a spokesman said Sunday, as two policemen died in an ambush in the volatile south.

Purported Taliban spokesman Qari Yousef Ahmadi said the group's leaders announced the beginning of operation "Kamin," or "Ambush."

"In this operation, we will target our enemies and use our tactics — suicide bombs, remote-controlled (roadside bombs) and ambushes — against occupying forces and the government," Ahmadi said by satellite phone from an undisclosed location. "We start this operation today in all of Afghanistan."

After a winter lull in violence, militant attacks and military operations have surged. NATO and the U.S.-led coalition stepped up operations in the early spring, hoping to pre-empt a spring offensive by militants that threatened the already-shaky grip of President Hamid Karzai's government.

And this should bother motherly Pelosi:

In Kandahar, the Taliban ambushed a police convoy on Saturday, and the ensuing one-hour gun battle killed two policemen and wounded three others, said Shah Wali Kot district chief Obaidullah Khan. He said the Taliban also suffered casualties, but he had no details.

In neighboring Zabul province, a roadside bomb exploded Saturday as an Afghan army vehicle passed, wounding two soldiers, said Gen. Rahmatullah Raufi, the regional army corps commander.

Meanwhile, five children were killed in eastern Ghazni province Saturday when a bomb they were playing with exploded, said provincial police chief Gen. Ali Shah Ahmadzia. He said they were 5 to 12 years old, and two other children were wounded.

The explosive was "planted by the enemy at the side of the road in Andar district," Ahmadzia said.

Five CHILDREN were killed.

Is she going to blame President Bush for that?
I suppose she'll find a way.

Is Pelosi going to retract her statement of June 21, 2005?

No way.

This is just another indication of how disastrous the Democrats are.

They don't understand the War on Terror.

They aren't up to the task of protecting the American people.

It's as simple as that.

U.S. Troops to the Rescue in Iraq

Opponents of President Bush and the war in Iraq are constantly chanting the mantra that Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terror.

Russ Feingold likes to say that.

Of course, there are others that don't believe there is a global War on Terror at all. It's a bumper sticker, a slogan.

These include four Democrat presidential candidates -- John Edwards, Joe Biden, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel.

One might consider these people uninformed or deceptive or stupid or liars.

Whatever one thinks of these Democrats, whatever their motives may be, they are WRONG when it comes to the War on Terror.

WRONG. WRONG. WRONG.

BAGHDAD -- U.S. forces raided an al-Qaida hide-out northeast of Baghdad on Sunday and freed 42 Iraqis imprisoned inside, including some who had been tortured and suffered broken bones, a senior U.S. military official said Sunday.

The raid was part of a 3-month-old security crackdown that included the deployment of 3,000 more U.S. troops to Diyala, a violent province north of the capital that has seen heavy fighting in recent weeks, said Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, the top U.S. military spokesman in Iraq.

Caldwell said Iraqis told U.S. forces about the hide-out: "The people in Diyala are speaking up against al-Qaida."

He said the 42 freed Iraqis marked the largest number of captives ever found in a single al-Qaida prison. Some of those freed were held for as long as four months and some had injuries from torture and were taken to medical facilities for treatment, he said.

Wow.

U.S. troops freed Iraqis being held in an al Qaeda prison IN IRAQ.

The captives had been tortured.

Does Amnesty International know about this?

The organization should take a break from harassing the United States and condemn al Qaeda.

Remember al Qaeda?

Members of that terrorist group hijacked four U.S. civilian airliners and crashed three of them into both World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon. The fourth plane never made it to its destination, believed to be the U.S. Capitol, thanks to the bravery of passengers that tried to regain control of the plane.

Remember that?

It happened on September 11, 2001.

It was a big deal at the time.

For a few months, Democrats and Republicans alike stood shoulder to shoulder against our enemies.

Now, some Dems have forgotten.

It seems to me that they are putting their own short term political futures ahead of the long term security of the United States.

They want to deny that al Qaeda is in Iraq.

They want to minimize the global terrorist threat.

These Dems are dangerous.

Will they praise our troops for their successful rescue mission?

I don't see how they can.

According to some of them, al Qaeda isn't a factor in Iraq or a force worth waging war against on a global level.

FOX News and the Democrats' Debate

I think it's so amusing that the liberal media berate FOX News for being biased while they are just as biased or worse. (I say they're significantly worse.)

From The New York Times:

Four years ago, the leaders of the Congressional Black Caucus began looking for a television outlet to co-sponsor and broadcast a presidential debate to address the concerns of minority voters.

Only one news channel made an acceptable proposal, and an unlikely channel at that: Fox News, in what some Democrats viewed as an effort to associate itself with a group that could help it make good on its claim of presenting “fair and balanced” news coverage.

But now that relationship is being shaken by the decision of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina to shun the debate, a move that has exposed fault lines among two major constituencies of the Democratic Party. While the withdrawal by the candidates frustrated members of the black caucus, it mollified liberals who had objected to the involvement of Fox News, whose programming includes some of the most conservative and pro-Republican commentary on the air.

That sounds positively ridiculous.

Ooooh! FOX News programming has some conservative and pro-Republican commentary!

GASP!

When MSNBC, whose programming includes some of the most liberal and pro-Democrat commentary on the air, hosted a Republican debate, The Times didn't point out the lib network's extreme, unabashed bias.

It's just goofy for outlets like The Times to report as if the lib operations are fair and balanced while FOX is pure propaganda.

Can they really be that out of touch with reality? Are they really in such a dramatic state of denial?

The sensitivities surrounding the issue were evident this week when a spokeswoman for Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, said Mr. Richardson would not participate in the debate, which is scheduled for September. But only a few hours later, the spokeswoman phoned the reporter to say that she had misspoken, and that Mr. Richardson had yet to decide. In the interim the reporter had sought a response from the caucus on Mr. Richardson’s apparent withdrawal.

Meanwhile, members of the caucus have been pushing back, with press secretaries for caucus members getting “talking points on how to cast the debate in a positive light,” as one staff member explained it.

The caucus is bent on salvaging what remains of the debate, and of a relationship that has produced other benefits. Not only has Fox given over precious air time for the debate, but an examination shows that its parent company, News Corporation, has also taken other steps to reach out to the group’s constituency, including making campaign donations to the caucus and its members and creating internship programs at predominantly black colleges.

It sounds like News Corporation has done a lot more than other companies to prove itself to be a fair and balanced operation.

The Democrat candidates, like John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama look like fools for refusing to participate in a debate hosted by FOX.

As Jay Leno joked, if the Dems can't handle FOX, how can we trust them to handle the terrorists?

Sure, they're just pandering to the fringe wacko Lefties that pull their strings; but what does that reveal?

It reveals that they're puppets.

By shunning the FOX debate, the Dems look terribly weak.

...[M]r. Edwards, Mr. Obama, and Mrs. Clinton announced that they would not participate in the latest debate co-sponsored by Fox and the caucus.

Mr. Edwards, at least, cited what many Democrats had long said privately but had been unwilling to say aloud, given Fox’s large megaphone: that the network is neither fair nor balanced, but tilts right. Neither Mr. Obama nor Mrs. Clinton chose to characterize Fox in withdrawing.

HAHAHAHA

"Mr. Edwards, at least, cited what many Democrats had long said privately but had been unwilling to say aloud, given Fox’s large megaphone: that the network is neither fair nor balanced, but tilts right."

That is so lame!

And is The New York Times fair and balanced?

Where does it tilt?

Edwards, Clinton, and Obama are cowards and panderers.

They act on personal political expediency, not principle.

...While Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware said this week through a spokesman that he would be there, he may not have much company; representatives for two other Democratic candidates, Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut and Representative Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio, did not respond to messages asking whether they were in or out.

It would be insane for Biden to refuse to participate in a debate aired on FOX.

Biden appears on FOX so often that I think he must have his own dressing room with his name permanently posted on the door.

He couldn't suddenly claim that appearing on a debate on FOX was the wrong thing to do, when he's on the network every week.

...Among the reasons Democrats have been willing to take on Fox News more stridently than before is the galvanizing of the left around its opposition to the Bush White House, especially its handling of the Iraq war. Meanwhile, Fox’s viewership declined last year, perhaps emboldening Democrats who may no longer see it as having quite the reach it once did, especially with Congress now in the control of the Democrats.

If The Times wants to play with ratings numbers, it should note that FOX is the highest rated cable news network.

FOX most certainly has a reach that is far superior to any other cable news outlet.

That's a really silly suggestion to say that Dems may realize that FOX doesn't have "quite the reach it once did."

If a candidate wants to be seen, FOX is the place to go. No doubt about it.

Even Biden is smart enough to recognize that.

And what about The Times and its reach? It's readership has plummeted. I guess it doesn't have "quite the reach it once did." Actually, it's not even close.

Katrina Memorial

Is this the best way to spend $3.5 million in New Orleans?

The simple answer is NO.

NEW ORLEANS -- Tucked inside a $14.4 billion blueprint for the rebuilding of New Orleans is a proposal for a Hurricane Katrina monument on a grand, "Homeric" scale, like the Arc de Triomphe in Paris.

The idea is to honor Katrina's victims and the spirit of New Orleans, and create a tourist attraction.

But with many sections of the city still in shambles and only about half the population back 21 months after the hurricane, some question the need for a $3.5 million memorial, even if it is paid for mostly with private money, as proposed.

...The rebuilding plan is making its way through city approval processes. While the memorial is a far lower priority than upgrading drainage and reconstructing neighborhoods over the next decade, it is still listed among the top projects.

Troy Henry, project manager for the Unified New Orleans Plan, said planners believe — and the local arts community seems to agree — that a memorial would create a place where people could reflect on Katrina.

"It's something that's with us everyday, the remnants of it anyway, and I think it's affected so many people, not only the city and its fiber — its architectural and structural fiber — but also the fabric of the people living here," said Mary Len Costa, director of public art for the Arts Council of New Orleans.

A memorial to commemorate the victims of Katrina and honor the strength and determination of the survivors would be appropriate.

There's no question about it.

However, it's nuts for millions of dollars to be spent on a memorial when so much rebuilding still needs to be done in New Orleans.

There's plenty of time (forever) to create a memorial. The more pressing need at the moment is rebuilding homes, schools, hospitals, and other facilities destroyed by Katrina.

It took nearly 60 YEARS after World War II ended for a memorial to be constructed in Washington, D.C., recognizing the service and sacrifice of the millions of Americans who fought and the hundreds of thousands who died.

If it took that incredibly long to honor the World War II generation, surely a Katrina memorial can wait.

Building a monument in New Orleans has to be considered low on the priority list.

And whether or not funds for a Katrina memorial would come from private donations isn't the point.

Any funds rasied at this time, with storm victims still living in trailers and without permanent housing, would be better spent on rebuilding.

Ask those still homeless by the hurricane if they think that money should go toward a memorial at this stage.

Now isn't the time for $3.5 million to be directed toward a "tourist attraction," not when so many people have yet to put their lives back together.

Our Long National Nightmare is Over

Rosie O'Donnell's stormy days at The View are history.

NEW YORK -- Rosie O'Donnell has fought her last fight at `The View.' ABC said Friday she won't be back on the show following her angry confrontation with co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck on Wednesday.

O'Donnell asked for, and received, an early exit from her contract. She was due to leave "The View" in mid-June.

Thank you, ABC!

"Rosie contributed to one of our most exciting and successful years at `The View,'" show creator Barbara Walters said. "I am most appreciative. Our close and affectionate relationship will not change."

I don't understand why Barbara Walters has debased herself by carrying water for O'Donnell.

Walters' credibility is in tatters.
Anwar Sadat


In a statement, O'Donnell said she was grateful. "It's been an amazing year and I love all three women."

Presumably, that includes Hasselbeck. The two exchanged bitter words on Wednesday over O'Donnell's opposition to the war in Iraq. They've frequently had snippy political exchanges during O'Donnell's year on the daytime chatfest, but never as long and loud as that one.

John Edwards Flip-Flops on Memorial Day

Rosie O'Donnell, U.S. Troops, and 655,000 Iraqis

UPDATE: Rosie O'Donnell is out at The View. She won't be back.
___________________

The question:

Did Rosie O'Donnell call our troops in Iraq terrorists?

O'Donnell is horrified at the suggestion. It caused her to go off on Elisabeth Hasselbeck for not being willing to assist in her CYA effort.

We all know about their feud and the implosion of The View.

But did O'Donnell call our troops terrorists?

Here's a portion of the transcript from the May 17 show:

O’DONNELL: …… I just want to say something. 655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?

HASSELBECK: Who are the terrorists?

O’DONNELL: 655,000 Iraqis — I’m saying you have to look, we invaded –

HASSELBECK: Wait, who are you calling terrorists now? Americans?

O’DONNELL: I’m saying if you were in Iraq, and the other country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?

HASSELBECK: Are we killing their citizens or are their people also killing their citizens?

O’DONNELL: We’re invading a sovereign nation, occupying a country against the U.N.

On O'Donnell's blog, "Shelly" writes a post arguing that O'Donnell most definitely did not call the troops terrorists.

I don't know who Shelly is. I'm guessing it might be Bill Clinton using "Shelly" as his nom de plume.

Shelly's parsing of O'Donnell's words rises to the level of Bill's "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

Shelly writes:

Rosie does not mention the troops at all in that segment of the show. She poses a rhetorical question. “Who are the terrorists?” “I’m saying if you were in Iraq, and the other country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?”In both of her rhetorical questions she refers to the “United States” and “us.” The policy of the United States or “our” policy in Iraq is not the responsibility of the soldiers who are ordered to execute the policy. It is obvious that state supported terrorism can only be implemented by those who have the responsibility of doing the fighting and dying. But, it is not the soldiers who are the terrorists in that hypothetical. And she was not calling the soldiers terrorists.

In other words, O'Donnell wouldn't spit on our troops, the baby killers, because they are merely fulfilling their duty by acting as terrorists in the name of the United States.

O'Donnell would jump at the chance of spitting on the U.S. policymakers, because they are the real terrorists.

Shelly argues that O'Donnell was saying that America engages in "state supported terrorism." She didn't actually accuse the troops of being terrorists.

O'Donnell agrees with Shelly's analysis, writing, "THANK GOD 4 SHELLY" at the end of the post.

In my opinion, Shelly's argument is very weak. It's semantics.

Look at the spirit of O'Donnell's comments. She clearly is equating U.S. policy with terrorism, terrorism of the sort we saw on September 11, 2001.

Are we to believe that O'Donnell considers our troops, the ones carrying out the supposed terrorist policies of the U.S., to be guiltless?

To believe that, we must accept that our troops are mindless beings, capable of behaving like terrorists without being burdened by any pangs of conscience.

Even if you're willing to swallow O'Donnell's defense, you have to admit that at the very least, she is insulting the troops.

Let's pose this question:

Does O'Donnell charge the U.S. government with using the U.S. military to carry out its policies of state-sponsored terrorism to kill 655,000 Iraqis?

Absolutely, unequivocally YES.

The Nays

Fourteen U.S. Senators voted AGAINST the Iraq war funding bill, including presidential wannabes Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

WASHINGTON -- Courting the anti-war constituency, Democratic presidential rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama both voted against legislation that pays for the Iraq war but lacks a timeline for troop withdrawal.

"I fully support our troops" but the measure "fails to compel the president to give our troops a new strategy in Iraq," said Clinton, a New York senator.

"Enough is enough," Obama, an Illinois senator, declared, adding that President Bush should not get "a blank check to continue down this same, disastrous path."

Their votes Thursday night continued a shift in position for the two presidential hopefuls, both of whom began the year shunning a deadline for a troop withdrawal.

Clinton and Obama are stumbling over themselves trying to appeal to the fringe Left base that rules the Democrat Party. I think John Edwards' current lead in Iowa has pushed Clinton and Obama to wander further from the center.

That's a gamble in the long term.

True, a candidate has to make it through the primaries first; but moving so far to the Left is dangerous as far as the general election goes.

Now that there are alternatives to the Old Media, Clinton and Obama aren't going to be able to manipulate the masses as easily as they could have years ago.

There are other sources of information now. The candidates' swing to the Left won't be forgotten even if they attempt to move back toward the center after securing the Democrat nomination.

Every move they make will be documented and discussed on radio. It will all be easily accessible on the Internet. Every faux pas and fake Southern drawl lives on You Tube.

The game is different now. The rules have changed.

Voting against funding for the troops may play well among the fringe radicals, but that's not the case when it comes to most Americans.

It's hard to believe the extent to which the Democrat candidates are willing to go to appease the hardcore Bush haters.

It's stunning.

The Democrats have really gone over the Left edge. Like their colleagues, Clinton and Obama aren't edging down a slippery slope into lib-ville, they are jumping off a cliff.

Roll Call

NAYs ---14
Boxer (D-CA)
Burr (R-NC)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Dodd (D-CT)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Obama (D-IL)
Sanders (I-VT)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

____________________________

Read " 'A Big Mistake' Vote Gives Bush His Iraq Money," from The Nation.

Boing-Boing Becomes Simon

This bush baby is a star.

The bush baby formally known as Boing-Boing will now be called Simon, in honor of the American Idol judge.

From The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Wednesday night, "Idol" host Ryan Seacrest announced on the air that the show was donating $1,500 to sponsor a wide-eyed, cuddly, real-life bush baby in Milwaukee in commemoration of the bush baby brouhaha that hit early in the TV show's season.

"Idol" fans will recall that decidedly uncuddly judge Simon Cowell told "Idol" hopeful Kenneth Briggs that he looked like a bush baby. The rip caused a national outcry.

So the zoo's eight-year-old resident "bushkin," Boing-Boing, whose ancestors hail not from Britain but from Central Africa, is getting a new handle: Simon. Like Cowell, bush babies are known for their rasping nocturnal hoot calls.

Unlike him, "they're so cute," says Jenny Diliberti, a zoo spokesman.

The sponsorship came about through the Association of Zoos & Aquariums. The show's producers tried tracking down an American bush baby to sponsor, but it turns out examples of Galago moholi are harder to find than "Idol" finalists in Oshkosh.

According to Diliberti, the Milwaukee County Zoo got the "Idol" call two days ago because Milwaukee has one of the few bush babies registered with the national zoo group.

County Executive Scott Walker has gone ape over the "Idol"/Milwaukee hookup.

"For us, this is a major coup," says Walker. "It's a great thing that we have such a vibrant zoo with such rare animals. When I watched the show last night, I was worried that Seacrest was going to step on it, talk over the name of the zoo or something, but he did pretty well."

Walker hopes the Simon-"Simon" connection will only get bigger.

"We plan to invite Briggs to the zoo and give him a permanent pass," Walker says.

The zoo should capitalize on the American Idol attention and put out a line of bush baby Simon souvenirs -- T-shirts, caps, key chains, mugs, etc.

I imagine online sales of the stuff would be profitable.

I'm sure there are Idol fans around the country, even around the world, that can't make it to the Milwaukee County Zoo but would like to purchase a little piece of Simon bush baby memorabilia.

If handled properly, the bush baby could be a real windfall for the county.

Scott Walker -- idol maker.

Democrats Cave on Iraq War Funding Bill

After the Iraq war funding bill was approved overwhelmingly, sans a troop withdrawal timetable, some Dems tried to construct an alternate reality.

I guess what happened was too painful for them to handle, so they went into denial.

They caved and then some insisted that they would never cave.

How stupid do they think their supporters are?

The Dems continue to lie to their fringe Leftist base. They make promises but they don't have the courage of their convictions to keep them.

The Senate's 80-14 vote to send the legislation to the president came less than two hours after the House gave its approval on a margin of 280-142. In both cases, Republicans supplied the bulk of the support, an oddity in an era of Democratic control.

Democrats in both houses coupled their concession with pledges to challenge Bush's his policies anew — and force Republicans to choose over and over between the president and public sentiment on the unpopular war. "This debate will go on," vowed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada was even more emphatic. "Senate Democrats will not stop our efforts to change the course of this war until either enough Republicans join with us to reject President Bush's failed policy or we get a new president," he said.

But Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky cautioned against more of the same. "I want to make it clear ... that if all funding bills are going to be this partisan and contentious, it will be a very long year," he said.

This is a major defeat for the Dems.

That, of course, is good news for America and the Free World.

How is this playing in the Arab World?

From Press TV Iran:

The US Congress has sent President Bush a multi-billion dollar Iraq war budget, after bowing to his demands to rip out troop withdrawal timelines.

After a day of anguished, emotional debate reflecting sharp divisions over the unpopular war, the House of Representatives voted 280-142 to fund the war through September, and the Senate concurred by 80 votes to 14.

The votes left many anti-war Democrats with a sour taste but acknowledging they lack the power to thwart Bush's war strategy, despite controlling Congress, and Republicans crowing they had beaten Democratic 'surrender dates'.

The passage of the budget ended, temporarily at least, a bitter constitutional tug-of-war between Congress and the White House, though Democrats vowed they would renew their efforts to handcuff Bush over a war which has dragged on four years.

"The days of blank checks and green lights for his failed policy are over," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who reluctantly backed the bill.

"Senate Democrats will never give in, never, never, never, never," Reid said, paraphrasing former wartime British Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

I suppose Iran's Press TV is cheering on the Dems, but what Reid said can't be viewed as anything but truly embarrassing.

How can Reid pretend to be Churchill after Dems clearly did give in?

True to form Dave Obey is ready to explode.

"I hate this agreement," said Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, who played a key role in talks with the White House that yielded the measure.

And John Murtha has suddenly shifted gears.

Reflecting unhappiness among conservatives in his own party, Bush said he would have preferred less domestic spending than the bill contained. "But, still, by voting for this bill members of both parties can show our troops and the Iraqis and the enemy that our country will support our servicemen and women in harm's way," he said at a Rose Garden news conference.

One of the most vocal war critics in Congress readily agreed. "This is not a game. They run out of money next week," said Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, whose speech opposing Bush's Iraq policy more than a year ago was a turning point in the debate.

The Dems are really in disarray. Murtha agreeing with Bush???

Hell must be freezing over.

Russ Feingold, of course, is ticked off.

He complained that his fellow Dems were going wobbly.

Transcript of Feingold's long-winded remarks.

Egomaniacal Feingold is so proud of his performance from the Senate floor that he has posted it on his Senate website.

Any way you look at it, the Dems buckled. The all anti-war, all anti-Bush, all the time crowd can't be happy with the party.

And another thing, I haven't noticed the lib media report that Dems are demoralized by their stunning defeat.

Notice how they overlook that? Why don't they report that the Dems are hopelessly divided?

As usual, the lib media's bias is showing.

I think Dem supporters should feel betrayed. Are they disgusted enough to sit out the 2008 election?

Harvey Pollack Gas Protest

It seems like I've been hearing about this story for days.

There were the reports leading up to the event and now today -- the big protest.

Whoop-de-doo.

MEQUON, Wis. -- Motorists pulled in to Harvey Pollack's gas station Thursday, honked and gave him a thumbs-up — because he wasn't selling any fuel.

The owner of Towne Market Mobil in this suburb north of Milwaukee shut down his pumps for 24 hours, hoping to start a movement aimed at convincing oil companies to lower their prices.

"Somebody out there is making money at these prices, but not me," said Pollack, 57. "So I just thought: What can I do to help the consumer?"

How does not selling gas help the consumer?

If you're on "E" and you need to buy gas, it would be a pain, not a pleasure.

Yellow caution tape surrounded Pollack's six idle pumps for his protest, which drew dozens of drivers. One in a green minivan rolled down her window and shouted "Thank you!"

Maria McClory, 38, drove 10 miles out of her way to buy a diet soda from Pollack's station after seeing local television coverage of the protest.

"I just wanted to support them and thank them for making a statement," said McClory, who drives about 100 miles a day for work in her sport utility vehicle.

Huh?

Gas is so expensive that consumers are barely getting by, yet McClory drove 10 MILES out of her way to get a diet soda from Pollack's station.

What a waste! What would Al Gore say?

It doesn't seem like McClory is strapped when it comes to the price of gas. She doesn't feel a need to conserve.

It sounds to me like she was hoping to get on TV or be interviewed. She succeeded.

...Pollack and station general manager John Schwartz agreed to experiment with a pump shutdown after an Internet-based push for a one-day gas boycott went largely unheeded last week.

"Somebody's got to be the first to try this," Schwartz said.

I think Pollack did this as a publicity stunt because IT DOESN'T ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING, other than get his mug on TV.

A one station shutdown certainly doesn't impact the oil companies at all.

Maybe Gov. Jim Doyle was upset about losing the taxes from Pollack's gas sales, but I'm sure he was calmed by aides that very slowly explained to him that drivers would just go to another station down the road to purchase gas.

A one-day gas boycott by one station is pointless.

If they didn't already take their business elsewhere, People that didn't buy gas at Pollack's station today will do it tomorrow. No impact.

If the population en masse got rid of cars and stopped purchasing gas altogether, that would be a different story. If purchasing habits really changed, that would make a difference.

Pollack's protest is a joke.

Actually, the joke is on the media eagerly lapping up the story.

I wonder how much gas was wasted with members of the media driving to Mequon to interview Pollack and snap photos of the yellow tape and signs.

I don't like high gas prices, but this is lame.

Eugene Kane's Rude Awakening

Eugene Kane is still looking for someone to blame for 4-year-old Jasmine Owens' murder, someone other than the thug that fired the killer bullet and other than every person with knowledge of the crime choosing to stay mum.

He writes:

I asked Hines what some residents of the inner city should think about a much-touted plan to commit additional police resources to the city's most violent and crime-plagued areas that started last weekend. Specifically, I wondered if some residents should be annoyed by the city's decision to launch a comprehensive crime prevention campaign only after a child's tragic death placed a glaring spotlight on the need for more police in certain neighborhoods.

Although Ald. Willie Hines accurately says that the crime prevention program had been in the works for months, Kane plants doubts. That's irresponsible.

The press conference to announce the new program was scheduled BEFORE Jasmine Owens was murdered.

That's not up for debate.

That's a fact.

Kane can't be that stupid. He has to be deliberately trying to rile people up by writing things that are patently false.

This sentence is idiotic:

As alderman, Hines said, he wants to provide support to the Police Department so it could keep residents safer but also wanted to hold cops accountable for their actions within the community, which seems like a pretty mixed message these days.

That's not a mixed message at all.

Cops should always be held accountable for their actions; and the community should support the Police Department.

How is that message mixed?

The police need the assistance of responsible citizens. They're on the same team. They're not the bad guys. The police didn't kill Jasmine Owens. They're working to bring the killer/ killers to justice.

Kane ends his column with a positively goofy conclusion:

In the end, I get the sense powerful people in this city don't have any more answers to the problem than the rest of us.

Maybe it's time to stop waiting for them.

What does Kane think?

Does he think that powerful people, elected officials, are saviors? Super heroes?

I guess he does.

Why has it taken so long for Kane to arrive at the notion that people need to save themselves?

I know it's tough for hardcore liberals to think outside the Lefty mindset, where the almighty government is always the solution.

Personal responsibility is foreign to them.

In effect, Kane is saying people shouldn't have faith in leaders to deliver them from evil.

I don't think it's necessary to abandon leaders, but it is necessary to drop the victim routine and engage in a little self-determination.

Kane needs to grow up. He needs to start being part of the solution and stop contributing the problem.

The American Idol Finale: Jordin Sparks Wins

The American Idol finale had something for everyone, all generations.

The show relied more heavily on past Idol talent then in other years.

That could be a function of the fact that the show has a larger pool of previous winners from which to draw.

Kelly Clarkson, Ruben Stoddard, Carrie Underwood, and Taylor Hicks all performed, separately and together in a Beatles medley.

Of course, Sanjaya was there to sing his famous rendition of "You Really Got Me," Aerosmith's Joe Perry accompanying him. Ashley, the crying girl, was in the audience crying again.

Other performers included Gwen Stefani, Smokey Robinson, Doug E. Fresh, Green Day, and Bette Midler.

The audience had that unusual mix of stars and has-beens -- Jerry Springer, Jeff Foxworthy, Brad Garrett, Teri Hatcher, David Hasselhoff. If Bill Maher was there, I didn't see him.



74 million votes were cast.

American Idol and the Milwaukee County Zoo Bush Baby

I never know what to expect from an American Idol finale.

As usual, standouts from the auditions portion of the competition were invited back.

The "impressive ones," short on singing talent but long on memorability, were given Golden Idol Awards.

In a mock awards show style, Ryan Seacrest handed out the statues to people in different categories, like "Best Presentation," "Most Original Vocal," and "Best Buddies."

The "Best Buddies" honor went to Kenneth Briggs and Jonathan Jayne.

Kenneth is the contestant that Simon Cowell said looked like a bush baby.

Simon told Kenneth: "You look a little odd... you look like one of those creatures that live in the jungle, with those massive eyes. What are they called? A bush baby."

While Kenneth and Jonathan were on the stage to accept their awards, Seacrest directed the audience to the screen. A giant image of a bush baby dwarfed the stage.

It was then that Seacrest announced that American Idol is sponsoring a bush baby at the MILWAUKEE COUNTY ZOO.

Will Idol fans flock to Milwaukee to visit the famous bush baby?

Blind John Edwards

"War on Terror? What War on Terror? I don't see any terror."


I don't think there's much to say about John Edwards' disgusting comments today.

His words speak for themselves.

Quite simply, Edwards is a disgrace.

He has shown himself to be utterly blind, incompetent, and politically opportunistic in the worst way; yet polls show that he's leading in Iowa.

Will the people of Iowa have a change of heart after today?

NEW YORK -- Democratic White House hopeful John Edwards, in a major foreign policy speech Wednesday, minimized the Bush administration's War on Terror as nothing more than a "bumper sticker slogan" used to justify the war in Iraq and "bludgeon political opponents."

"It is now clear that George Bush's misnamed 'War on Terror' has backfired — and is now part of the problem," Edwards told the Council of Foreign Relations in New York. "The War on Terror is a slogan designed only for politics, not a strategy to make America safe. It's a bumper sticker, not a plan."
Edwards proposed foreign policy changes from the direction taken by the Bush administration, calling on Congress not to back down to White House pressure for a bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan without requiring a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces. Congressional leaders said Tuesday that they are close to a deal that would fund the wars without a timetable for withdrawal.

"Every member of Congress should stand their ground on this issue and do everything in their power to block this bill," Edwards said. "Congress should send President Bush another bill funding the troops, supporting the troops, with a timetable for withdrawal. If the president vetoes that bill, send him another one."

...Edwards, who lost his bid in 2004 to become vice president, said Bush's strategy has backfired.

"He’s used this doctrine like a sledgehammer to justify the biggest abuses of his administration," Edwards said.

Edwards proposed his own strategy — withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq in less than a year, closing Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and working to rebuild the U.S. military.

In the first presidential debate last month in South Carolina, Edwards was one of four Democrats — including Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel — who said they did not believe there was a global War on Terror. Front-runners Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama indicated that they did.

Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, voted in 2002 to authorize the invasion of Iraq but has since become a harsh critic of the conflict. In his speech, he reiterated his call to remove American combat troops from Iraq within a year and vowed to "restore the contract we have with those who proudly wear the uniform to defend our country and make the world a safe and better place."

What Edwards said today should be a wake up call to Americans.

It should be a warning to us that Edwards and like-minded Dems are not fit to manage the national security of our country.

If the nation buys the leftist lies that Edwards is pushing, then America's future is very, very dark.
Truly, Edwards is the Jimmy Carter of the Dem 2008 presidential field.

Absolutely disgraceful.

Americans shouldn't walk away from Edwards and the Dems. They should run away as fast as they can.

Rosie O'Donnell and Elisabeth Hasselbeck

Rosie O'Donnell is making the most of her final days on The View's soapbox.

Her ugliness is getting even uglier.

NEW YORK --Watching Rosie O'Donnell and Elisabeth Hasselbeck squabble on ABC's "The View" is nothing new, but Wednesday's dustup seemed particularly nasty with the co-hosts trading accusations and personal digs.

A political discussion over the war in Iraq became heated when an angry O'Donnell decried Hasselbeck for not standing up for her when media outlets suggested that she'd called U.S. troops "terrorists" during a previous debate.

"What you did was not defend me. ... I asked you if you believed what the Republican pundits were saying — you said nothing, and that's cowardly," O'Donnell said.

Responded a stern Hasselbeck: "Do not call me a coward, because No. 1, I sit here every single day, open my heart and tell people what I believe."

O'Donnell and Hasselbeck were shown on a split screen as the argument progressed without commercial interruption.

"Do you believe that I think our troops are terrorists? And you would not even look me in the face, Elisabeth, and say, `No, Rosie,'" O'Donnell said.

Responded Hasselbeck: "Because you are an adult, and I am certainly not going to be the person for you to explain your thoughts. They're your thoughts! Defend your own insinuations!"

O'Donnell, who is leaving the ABC daytime talk show next month, said she wasn't going to fight anymore. "So for three weeks, you can say all the Republican crap you want."

Elisabeth Hasselbeck must be counting the days until she can go to work and not have to face O'Donnell and put up with her rants.

O'Donnell referenced the "squabble" on her blog.

a split screen
new heights
or lows
depending on who u ask

is this kelli
no rosie
well hello it is betsy
i saw the view today
and wanted to call u
and just say hi and i hope u r ok

betsy and i chatted
i thanked her
fed the geese
put on amy winehouse

loud
always loud
the soul shakes
the heart awake

like it or not

tomorrow kelli turns 40
i will not be at work

peace out

Poor, poor Rosie.

"i hope u r ok"

Good grief.

Talk about crap!

American Idol Final Prediction

Will Jordin or Blake take the American Idol title for season 6?

My opinion: It should be Jordin.

I make no predictions on the results; it's too close to call.

However, I will make a prediction.

Bill Maher was at the show last night. I saw him pumping his fist in the air after Jordin sang.

Of course, a few weeks ago, Maher was in the Idol audience cheering Barry Gibb.

This guy is a real Idol fanatic.

That just seems strange to me. I'd expect Maher to think that he was too cool for Idol. At the very least, I'd think that Maher would keep his Idol love in the closet.

He doesn't. He's loud and he's proud.

I predict that Maher will be there tonight. He'll be this year's David Hasselhoff, wiping tears from his eyes as the winner is crowned.

My Good Name

Remember this?

People online looking for the White House website would plug in whitehouse.com instead of whitehouse.gov.

Many an unsuspecting grade schooler was treated to a splash of porn from the .com site when looking up information on the White House at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

whitehouse.com was an adult and political entertainment website that first came online in 1997. According to a statement on the web, it was originally created by Dan Parisi as a place where uncensored discussion of government policies could occur before adult content was added to make it more profitable. It was created by Willie Cox from Victorville.

Part of the controversy about whitehouse.com was that users wishing to visit the website of the White House (www.whitehouse.gov) could easily go to the adult website instead. Although .gov as a top-level domain is available only to official government sites in the United States, .com is a much more common ending on the web, and is frequently entered by mistake. In addition, many web browsers add ".com" to the end of an address if no suffix is entered, so simply typing "whitehouse" into the address bar would lead one to whitehouse.com. Because of the explicit and commercial content of the site, it was frequently cited as one of the most egregious examples of domain name misuse, up until the domain was sold.

The website whitehouse.org, a humor site that satirizes the U.S. president, remains controversial for similar reasons, although less so because its content is usually much less obscene.

...In 2004 Parisi decided to sell the domain, mainly because of his son who would be in kindergarten the next year. At this point he was making US$1 million annually from the site alone. Parisi had said he did not want to sell the domain name to anyone in the adult entertainment industry, and even claimed to have turned down what was essentially a blank check from a buyer hiding his identity behind his broker.

In November 2005, the domain appeared to be used for a real estate site. In December 2005 it contained only Google ads, with a notice that a site for investigating people by checking their public records would be coming.

In March 2006, whitehouse.com called itself "America's Free Speech Forum". It advertised a cartoon contest and presented links to Associated Press political news stories.

In July 2006, the site was a real estate site again, and forwarded to www.house.com.

As of November 2006, it is a search engine for people, which searches over 90 million White Pages listings and 14 million Yellow Pages listings.

This all leads to the name of my blog.

I discovered this.

FREEDOM EDEN Online Dating???



That image is from a cached page.

Thankfully, the website is no longer active.

freedomeden.com
What you need, when you need it

Hmmm.

I did a search on the site and learned this and this and this.


I am creeped out.

I feel like the whitehouse.com of the blogosphere.