NixGuy and Matt at Weapons of Mass Discussion commented earlier today on the latest development relating to the Malariotherapy Misadventures of 2nd District Democratic Congressional candidate Victoria Wells Wulsin Whatever (affectionately known around here as “VW3″).

Joseph Rhee’s ABC report on the topic has has more meat in it than the local Cincinnati Enquirer has supplied in the two or three years Wulsin’s Malariotherapy Misadventures have been relevant.

But, as an Old Media report, Rhee takes the seemingly obligatory “GOP candidate on the attack” approach, and in the process makes VW3 a much more sympathetic character than the facts and circumstances warrant.

Additionally, Rhee let Wulsin get away with a contention that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny (bold is mine):

Dr. Wulsin told ABC News that she never directly participated in malariotherapy experiments and was only hired by Dr. Heimlich to review existing malariotherapy studies. “He commissioned a literature review and I demonstrated through that, that it was nowhere near scientific or ethically relevant or justifiable,” said Wulsin.

In December of 2004, Wulsin submitted a draft report to Heimlich that concluded that “the preponderance of evidence indicates that neither malaria or Immunotherapy will cure HIV/AIDS.”

Oh, she’s good. With some voice and choreography lessons, and she could join these guys.

But alas, a full vetting and demonstration will have to wait until early next week, as this issue deserves a lot more attention than it will get on the night before Independence Day.

Victoria Wells Wulsin Whatever, affectionately referred to around here as VW3, has a full, complete, all-angles-considered, and simply fabulous plan for Iraq at her OH-02 congressional campaign web site.

I really can’t understand why no one in the Bush Administration, the military, or in Iraq has thought of this (saved here in case Team VW3 changes it, for fair use and discussion purposes):

• Iraq:

We need to set benchmarks and goals for the war in Iraq, and we need to have a plan to bring our troops home safely and quickly. We should also establish clear goals and benchmarks for the Iraqi government, and bring the troops home if they’re not met.

Brilliant!

Upon learning of Wulsin’s plan, President George W. Bush was heard to say, “I should have figured that out with my huuuuuge brain. ….. Wait a minute — We did, and I was in charge. How ’bout that!”

General David Petraeus said, “I should have felt that in my biiiiiig heart. ….. Hold on — The Iraqis have met or are working towards meeting those benchmarks.”

Barack Obama said, “I should have had the cour- …. uh, never mind.”

“Hey — Stop talking about my gun flip-flop ….. and my wife ….. and my race ….. and my former old pastor ….. and my former new pastor ….. and Father Pfleger ….. and my smoking ….. and my campaign finance “flip-flop of epic proportions” ….. and my FISA flip-flop ….. and my twenty-plus other flip-flops.”

“And I’m putting you on notice — You’d better not say another word about my ears!”

“Anybody got a light?”

Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki muttered, “You Americans need to keep this Wulsin woman out of your Congress …. and her little dog too (scroll to “6/17/2006″ at the link; backup file here). Oh, and remind Obama that he hasn’t been to Iraq in over 900 days. So he’d best go to an airport, notify air traffic control, start flapping those ears (snicker, snicker), and get over here.”

++++++++++++++++++++

The above policy statement by Ms. Wells Wulsin Whatever should not surprise anyone who has read the full, complete, all-angles-considered, and simply fabulous text of her energy statement at the same web page (backup file here), as it comes straight from the Land of Oz:

Gas prices are too high. We should reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce our dependence on the foreign powers that provide it. Southern Ohio is well positioned to develop alternative energy sources for the nation - let’s invest in cleaner, renewable power produced here at home.

VW3 will just click those ruby slippers together a few times (”there’s no energy like clean energy, there’s no energy like clean energy …..”). Just like that, we’ll have all the “cleaner, renewable power” we’ll eeeeever need, right now, without having to do any messy drilling for that nasty black stuff.

Brill- Whatever, Vic.

Nice try, Jeff, no sale — The validity, or lack thereof, of the complaint to the Ohio’s State Medical Board doesn’t change the validity of conclusions reached in 2006.

First, an important assertion made by the Dean of Cincinnati remains unrefuted, unless someone proves otherwise. Thus, his conclusion still stands:

She told one reporter that she did not find “Malariotherapy” effective, yet in her report to the Heimlich Institute she laid out plans to rename it, promote it, and do further research on it.

….. Dr. Wulsin now seeks the office of congresswoman, representing the citizens of Ohio. While we all can make small errors of judgment and may disagree from time to time, Wulsin’s activities at the Heimlich Institute go beyond simple mistakes. She knew exactly what she was doing, worked for a period of months, had access to records and resources, and was paid for it. How she was paid should be the subject of further investigation. In my opinion, her failure to stop the “Malariotherapy” by exposing it is reprehensible. If she claims she didn’t know then she is inept.

My pre-election take in 2006 also still stands:

Folks, the CDC and others rightly believe that this kind of human experimentation needs to be relegated to the House of Horrors — not given at least tacit sanction, as it was, by an MD who at some point may have been on the take.

As a congressperson in a technically advanced age, Vic Wulsin will be in a position to not only vote on legislation authorizing “advances” in medical science that are questionably ethical, but she will be able to throw the persuasive weight of her medical credentials behind any effort to do so.

(Now, pay attention closely here, because deciding that Vic Wulsin’s ethical breaches constitute a Dealbreaker has NOTHING to do with whether you, dear reader, are prolife, but they have EVERYTHING to do with whether Vic Wulsin is prolife.)

All of this aside, Vic Wulsin could have a failsafe position in all of this if she were unequivocally prolife. Her past dalliance with Dr. Heimlich could be excused as a big, but not fatal, mistake, as she had no hands-on involvement in experiments. She could in theory, say she’s sorry and promise to sin no more. But Vic Wulsin is anything but prolife, and is in fact pro-abort, pro-embryonic stem cell research, and perhaps even pro-cloning (she refused to answer a Cincinnati Right to Life questionnaire which could have cleared up these matters). This means that there is no reason — none — to believe that she would be willing to put the moral brakes on allowing taxpayer dollars to be used for “promising” but unethical medical studies and protocols that might be stampeded though Congress in the name of “the greater good,” or to make such studies a law-enforcement matter if they were attempted in the private sector.

Based on all of the above, Vic Wulsin has earned BizzyBlog Dealbreaker 1: Serious Lapses in Medical Ethics.

(Recall that a BizzyBlog Dealbreaker is “something that completely justifies a person not voting for you, regardless of your party or your stands on the issues.”)

What the state Ethics Board did or didn’t do changes none of this.

If 2nd District voters knew of Vic’s Malariotherapy Adventures, the vast majority would immediately see her as totally out of touch with their values. Wulsin’s only hope is that, with the silent assistance of the Cincinnati Enquirer, they never find out.

__________________________________

Source Material:

• Oct. 20 — (Cincinnati Beacon, guest column by Dr. Robert Baratz) Black Box Warning: Wulsin’s Claims of Innocence
• Various Dates — (Cincinnati Beacon) Wiki entry for Victoria Wulsin
• A PDF of Wulsin’s report with Executive Summary is no longer available at the link where it was present in November 2006.

The Real Clear Politics delegate count has BOOHOO (Barack O-bomba Overseas Hussein “Obambi” Obama) up on HR4C (Hillary Rodham Cackling Crying Complaining Clinton) 1542-1447. There are nine Ohio and 45 Texas delegates not yet determined.

While I don’t think you can overstate how much weaker Obama is today than he was 24 hours ago, Mrs. Clinton still has a very tough climb. Getting her tainted “wins” in Michigan and Florida to count, and getting “already-committed” Obama superdelegates back into her camp, both appear crucial to her winning the nomination. Each has the danger of seriously alienating those who didn’t vote for her.

_________________________________________________

From the “Told Ya” Department:

• Last night (11:17 p.m. item at post) I wrote, “Questions for those of you who crossed over from GOPLand to vote for Hillary tonight, and the alleged geniuses who encouraged it: What if Obama is so weakened that he loses big in Pennsylvania, and accepts the idea of becoming her Veep? How will you feel about your contribution to that near-juggernaut scenario?”
• Story this morning: “Clinton Hints At Sharing Ticket With Obama” — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton hinted at the possibility of a democratic “dream ticket” with Sen. Barack Obama.

Even if that nightmare doesn’t come to pass, I question GOP crossovers who today are happy that the Dem fight will drag on until probably mid-May. That’s 75 more days where Clinton v. Obama will use up the available oxygen and keep John McCain’s name out of the public eye. If it’s “John who?” by Memorial Day, whose fault will that be?

Radio talkers and others who advocated and carried out the “Save Hillary” strategy yesterday may have a lot to answer for in eight months.

_____________________________________________

I know there’s more bad blood between these two than the Hatfields and McCoys, but Jean Schmidt had no business calling Tom Brinkman a “fringe candidate” — and it’s a big tactical mistake.

Fringe, schminge, Jean. He got almost 40% of the vote. These are 28,000 people whose votes you will need in November.

_____________________________________________

How sweet it is — Runner-up John “Check ‘n GONE” Rabenold spent about $230,000 in his attempt to buy the OH-35 State Rep race. That’s about $37 for each of the 6,196 votes he received. I wouldn’t be surprised if winner Ron Maag spent less than $3.70 for each of his 6,727 votes.

I give this result a 5-Snoopy rating (graphic blatantly stolen from Weapons of Mass Discussion — of course, originally from the late Charles Schulz):

Well, at least Rabenold can take comfort in the fact that his loss isn’t as embarrassing as Pat DeWine’s $183 per vote debacle in 2005’s OH-02 Special GOP primary. DeWine spent $1 million and got 5,467 votes, finishing a distant fourth in a field of 11.

Special Note: I will begin covering tonight’s results at about 10:00 9:40 p.m.

Ohio’s Secretary of State (link is to a “current election” page) will have an accessible results page beginning at 5 p.m. Polls close in Ohio at 7:30 p.m.

I would not be surprised based on the overnight flooding in some parts of the state if vote counts aren’t delayed a bit.

______________________________________________

I was voter number 35 in my precinct at 8:20 this morning.

By contrast, looking at this 2005 post, there were 81 votes in my precinct as of 40 minutes before the polls closed in that August’s nationally-watched Jean Schmidt-Paul Hackett race (*), and “in the low 40s” at about the same time on OH-02 Primary day in June of that year (&).

UPDATE: As of about 1:45 p.m., the precinct’s vote count was up to 100. That’s with 5-plus hours and the evening rush remaining.

It seems (emphasis “seems”) that a lot of Rs are voting as Ds for HR4C (Hillary Rodham Cackling Crying Complaining Clinton). If she wins Ohio tonight, will Mrs. Clinton thank her Republican supporters for her victory margin?

UPDATE 2: Although I didn’t have a precinct vote count on Primary day in May 2006, the post I put up that day clearly indicates that today’s precinct turnout will far exceed that one.

____________________________________________

& - Shameless Blogospheric Plug/History Lesson 1: Current congresswoman Jean Schmidt’s June 2005 special GOP primary victory over a field of ten others was partially (and somewhat inadvertently) brought to you by various members of the then-nascent center-right blogosphere (founding members Weapons of Mass Discussion, BizzyBlog, NixGuy, Porkopolis, Viking Spirit, and Project LOGIC) in Southern Ohio, who formed the founding core of what is now the State of Ohio Blog Alliance.

* - Shameless Blogospheric Plug/History Lesson 2: Current congresswoman Jean Schmidt’s August 2005 special election victory over “The Ohio Insurgency” of Paul Hackett was partially (and quite intentionally) brought to you by by Ohio’s center-right blogosphere in cooperation with Hackett pretend-Republican video poster Trey Jackson, with an “assist” (heh) from Rush Limbaugh.

Memo to Victoria Wells Wulsin Whatever: Assuming you win the OH-02 Democratic Primary today, this isn’t going away (HT The Bellwether Daily via NixGuy), even if your buds at the Cincinnati Enquirer continue to protect you. You’ve had two years to fix this; I’m assuming that you would have, if you could have.

_____________________________________________

What this Washington Post article is trying to say, but won’t, is that Victoria’s Secret stores crossed the line from sexy into sleazy several years ago. Now they’re trying to crawl back.

_____________________________________________

YouTube is going live.

That’s great, but I hope some alternative outlets do the same. YouTube management has acquired a serious case of political correctness (examples here and here) that in the long run could make bias from the likes of Dan Rather et al seem like the good old days.

_____________________________________________

Recent Old Media outrages spotted at NewsBusters:

• From Scott Whitlock, “ABC’s Chris Cuomo: Prince Harry ‘Expendable’” — “‘Good Morning America’ co-host Chris Cuomo joked on Monday’s show that Britain’s Prince Harry ‘has been over in Afghanistan fighting because he’s expendable. ….. The reason that Harry is allowed to be in Afghanistan is because he’s not the heir to the throne. William’s not allowed to be there.’” Cuomo’s remarks were not only tasteless, they are untrue, as William is scheduled “to be depoloyed on the frontline.”
• Martin Finkelstein, “NYT Term for Eco-Terrorists: ‘Anti-Sprawl Activists’” — incomprehensible near-sympathy at the New York Times (”House Fires With a Message in the Northwest”) for the eco-terrorists (term used by the AP) who did millions in damage to four model homes north of Seattle. The homes appear to have been targeted because they were built using so-called “green” techniques; in essence, the eco-terrorists wanted us to know that the mere act of attempting to build something violates their sick view of an ideal world. I wonder if the Times would be so sympathetic to “message deliverers” if any targeted Times Company property?
• Lynn Davidson, “Expert: IDF Didn’t Shoot Intifada Icon Mohammad al-Dura; Media Yawn” — Before the term “fauxtography” was coined, there was the incident that gave rise. It involved the claim that “(Israeli soldiers) killed the boy who was crouching behind his father during a gunfight between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian shooters.” It has been shown beyond doubt to have been staged.

Start here:

See this previous post for an explanation of how the chart was compiled, and for references to earlier scorecard posts.

The accumulated evidence from these outside watchdog groups shows that in 2006, Jean Schmidt was the second-most conservative congressperson in Ohio.

Any GOP challenger to Jean Schmidt has to decide to campaign on one of two things:
- They will be a more conservative voter as a congressperson than Schmidt has been, because that’s what Ohio’s Second District voters want.
- They will be a less conservative voter than Schmidt, because that’s what District voters want.

To make a compelling case for either, I believe that the challenger has to actually slog through the votes analyzed in detail by the rating groups referred to in the table (National Journal, National Taxpayers Union, Americans for Tax Reform, Club for Growth, American Conservative Union, and the US Chamber of Commerce), and come up with how he or she would have scored. I am certain, based on experience, that those organizations would be glad to provide any detailed information necessary to complete this kind of work.

As a challenger, if you believe you’re more conservative, and can show that you would have scored better than Schmidt, you would obviously tell the voters that, and post the results to prove it. You would then highlight the key votes on which you would have gone in the more conservative direction, and explain why those votes are so important that true conservatives should vote for you, and not for her.

Obviously, if you come out less conservative and believe that’s a more appropriate direction, you would do similar things, and argue in that other direction.

To my knowledge, neither of Jean Schmidt’s current challengers (listed here at this Enquirer link) have done that, including the now ex-challenger. They should have done so by now.

There are probably other ways to get to the same place, and I don’t want to pretend that completely new ideas don’t count, because they can count for a lot. But I don’t understand why Second District GOP Primary voters should consider pulling the lever for any challenger who isn’t going to make a comprehensive case for replacing Mrs. Schmidt that goes beyond soundbites and generalities. And, as I see it, no one has.

_______________________________________________

UPDATE, Feb. 13: Remember how Club for Growth gave Schmidt so much grief (third item at link) in the 2005 GOP Special Primary? The CFG’s August 2007 RePORK Card shows that their harsh 2005 judgment of Schmidt was mostly premature.

Here’s how they evaluated Ohio’s GOP congressional delegation and selected others on 50 earmark-related votes in the first half of 2007:
- Pence (IN) - 100%
- Jordan - 98%
- Chabot - 96%
- Schmidt - 74%
- Boehner - 60%
- Tiberi - 38%
- Davis (KY) - 12%
- Gillmor - 8%
- Hobson - 6%
- LaTourette - 6%
- Pryce - 4%
- Turner - 2%
- Regala - 0%

And the blogosphere (Matt at Weapons of Mass Discussion, 5:21 p.m.; NixGuy, 6:33 p.m.) skunks the Enquirer (“last updated” 9:01 p.m., unless updated earlier - doubtful; meanwhile, the Enky’s Politics Extra blog has nothing).

Reax: I guess I won’t be able to get away with not paying attention to the 2nd District until September, as I had sort of hoped.

And speaking of hopes, I hope for a constructive campaign, and believe that it is legitimately possible.

• Ruffini Notes the Importance of OH-02 in 2005, and Therefore 2008
• Michigan’s on the Brink, But Indiana’s in the Pink (a bit of a distillation of this previous BizzyBlog post)

Gee, I saw it in Republican State Central Committeeman John Becker’s report on Tuesday, and didn’t think it was a big deal.

Bill Sloat was the first blogger on the news, followed by Matt at Weapons of Mass Discussion and Dave at Wide Open.

First, to dispel the inevitable: I haven’t endorsed any Republican in the Second Congressional District. At this point I don’t intend to, but I reserve the right to change my mind. I will only say that anyone who wants to take the seat away from incumbent Jean Schmidt should have to tell us why their performance will be better than hers, not just that he or she happens not to be her. None of this should surprise anyone.

Now to the Anthony Muñoz situation. Matt, Dave, and, in his follow-up post, Bill Sloat, are all calling the Pro Football Hall of Famer’s October 16 appearance as a guest speaker at “the fundraiser at the home of Bob and Marilyn Rhein” (from Becker’s post) an “endorsement.”

It is not. Obviously, it’s a show of support. Muñoz may endorse Heimlich, but he hasn’t yet, and based on past history, there’s at least some reason to believe he won’t.

“Showing support” vs. “endorsing” is more than a distinction without a difference. In January and February of 2006, during Bob McEwen’s second attempt to defeat Schmidt, Muñoz’s endorsement of McEwen from the Spring 2005 Special Election primary stayed on McEwen’s campaign web site for several weeks after he announced his candidacy. Muñoz’s name was at some point taken down, along with the names of several others who had endorsed McEwen in 2005, but were not doing so in 2006. One of those other names was that of right-to-life legend John Willkie, who endorsed Schmidt.

In March, during preparation for an unsuccessful election law complaint against McEwen relating to endorsements and other matters, I spoke with Muñoz’s personal secretary, who, apparently after speaking with Muñoz, specifically told me that he would not be endorsing anyone in the primary. Muñoz did indeed “show support” for McEwen by appearing at a campaign fundraiser that also featured jack Kemp. But he never formally endorsed McEwen, and his name never reappeared on McEwen’s Endorsements page, which still exists, during the 2006 campaign.

Given what came out about Mr. McEwen during the final few weeks of the 2006 primary campaign, I suspect that Mr. Muñoz is more than a little relieved that he did not formally endorse him. That lack of a formal endorsement saved Muñoz, who is heavily involved in the community with character-building and other noble programs, quite a bit of embarrassment and backtracking.

Now, to Heimlich. His web site does not have an endorsements page. It does have an announcement of the October 16 event, which begins as follows:

NFL Hall-of-Famer Anthony Munoz will be the featured speaker at a fundraiser to support Phil Heimlich’s campaign for Congress on October 16.

The fundraiser is to support Heimlich; the speaker, as of this moment, hasn’t endorsed him.

That said, there are solid reasons, including Heimlich’s involvement in some of the same character-related programs as Muñoz, and Heimlich’s probable lack of McEwenesque overstuffed baggage, to believe that a formal endorsement by Muñoz is coming. If it does, it will shake up the race. Until then, I remain true to my patron saint’s nickname.

To fully understand why Ahmadinejad’s visit to New York was so wrong, and so dangerous, you must read Patrick Poole’s Friday post, and his underlying FrontPage column from a year ago.

________________________________________

“Logically,” Ahmadinejad’s visit to Columbia should make academia safe for a wide variety of speakers and scholars expressing opinions across the entire political spectrum. That’s not going to happen until the hypocrisy chronicled by Liberally Conservative goes away.

________________________________________

Boring Made Dull rips into Mattel (my link is different; the point is the same) about the ultimate meaning of their inexplicable apology — to “the Chinese people”(!) — for the lead-containing recalled toys:

The seemingly obvious conclusion – that they’ll feed lead paint to your kids to appease the Chinese and maintain their profits – seems almost inescapable.

________________________________________

First it was Justin at Right on the Right getting photoed with Michelle Malkin.

Now it’s Brain Shavings posing with Laura Ingraham.

Cut it out already.

________________________________________

Pain Dealer read a post at Lead Us Forward, who blogged about about the American Spectator’s Prowler reporting that James Dobson dissed Fred Thompson in hopes that it would help clear the GOP field for Newt Gingrich to enter the fray. Got that? The answer to Pain Dealer’s question is, “Yes, Dobson has lost his political mind. He lost it over two years ago.”

________________________________________

Put down the coffee, and remove all sharp objects from the vicinity.

Then read on, and link over.

OK, here we go — Conservative Culture notes a party’s upcoming political convention in Los Angeles.

________________________________________

Last Thursday, Large Bill noted why Ted Stevens, who yours truly said should resign quite a while ago, needs to go — NOW. Monday, John Fund extended the immediate resignation invitation to Don Young, the state’s sole congressman. The GOP needs to clean the stables, so that people on the other side like Murtha, Williams Jefferson, and Mollohan, et al have no equivalent company.

________________________________________

FYI from FYI News: “Kaleigh Lynn Pituch was born to Andy and Charissa early Monday evening, weighing 8 pounds 4 oz, and was 21 inches long.” Congrats to all.

I am told from time to time that MoveOn is not really a radical organization.

Wrong. MoveOn is run by people whose first, and second, and third instincts, if given any opening, are to silence opponents. They are petty tyrants in training.

You doubt? Consider how many people had to be involved in the decisions leading to this:

MoveOn.org’s thin skin

(MoveOn) has been sending out cease-and-desist letters to CafePress, a website that lets people offer custom-designed t-shirts, coffee mugs and the like for sale. Last week it demanded that the site remove eight (parody) items, arguing that they violated MoveOn’s merchandising trademarks.

Trademark law doesn’t confer monopoly rights over all uses of a registered phrase or symbol, however, and it wasn’t created simply to protect the trademark owner’s interests. Instead, it’s designed to protect consumers against being misled or confused about brands.

….. To its credit, CafePress refused to take down five bumper stickers ….. “While we understand that negative commentary is unsavory, our shopkeepers’ parodies of the MoveOn.org trademark are permissible here, especially when one considers the First Amendment implications raised by the social and political importance of your organization, the policies it advocates, and the countervailing messages conveyed by the parodies,” wrote Daniel Pontes of CafePress to Carrie Olson, MoveOn’s chief operating officer. Olson had been the one requesting the takedown.

MoveOn is not run by a bunch of legal newbies. They know what fair use is, but went after the CafePress vendor anyway in the name of intimidation, pure and simple. And they got their way, sort of; the vendor involved is “retooling,” and says, “….. lest ‘the group that shall not be named’ think this is a right-wing conspiracy, it isn’t. I’m a Democrat. Or, I will be until tomorrow.”

Closer to the truth: MoveOn is International ANSWER with a very thin veneer of civility that washes away at the slightest provocation.

Glenn Reynolds: “They told me that if George W. Bush were reelected simple Internet parodies would be ruthlessly suppressed by a political commissariat. And they were right!”

______________________________________

When Iraq vet Paul Hackett seemed about to upset Jean Schmidt in August 2005 in Ohio’s heavily GOP Second Congressional District, and almost did, it was somehow seen as a referendum indicating flagging support for the Iraq War — even though Hackett got as close as he did by pretending to be a Bush-supporting war hawk in his local TV ads, while cursing the president and calling him a chickenhawk for the benefit of Old Media.

So if Republican Jim Ogonowski (HT Patrick Ruffini), a 28-year military vet whose brother John was the pilot of American Airlines Flight 11 on 9/11, gets close to, or even upsets, Niki Tsongas on October 16th in Massachusetts’ 5th District, it will be seen as a referendum of support for General Petraeus and continuing on his recommended course ….. Right?

Someone’s definitely nervous ….. and unspeakably petty.

______________________________________

Noonan on Greenspan. What she said.

_____________________________________

Follow this:

• Hillary now says that Hillarycare II won’t cover illegal aliens.
• But she has previously said that she wants universal health care that covers all 47 million of those who are uninsured.
• That 47 million figure includes a very large number of non-citizens (9.6 million in 2005, according to this post at Not Taking Sides that looked at the Census Bureau report; others believe the correct figure is between 12-20 million).
• The first two items above cannot co-exist.

Over 15 months after the initial wave of publicity, Joey Vento of Geno’s Steaks was going before the Thought Police, er, the Philadelphia Human Relations Commission. The hearing, Illegal Protest originally reported, was to be on Thursday, September 27th at 9am at the Philadelphia Free Library. But now it has been postponed. Illegal Protest thinks it’s because PHRC doesn’t think it has a case, and is dragging its feet. I hope IP is right.

__________________________________________

Nicholas Sarkozy is taking on the French welfare state. Update: That didn’t take long — the public-sector unions are calling for a national strike of rail and power workers.

__________________________________________

Mike Adams is keeping the heat on jihadist Kent State prof Julio Pino and the school’s Provost. As he should.

__________________________________________

Make Rooma for Ooma:

Ooma turns the traditional phone model on its ear. You shell out $399 ($599 starting in 2008) for a slick gray-and-white box that is smaller than a typical answering machine. This Ooma Hub connects to your high-speed broadband Internet service and whatever telephone handset you have lying around. From then on, all local and long-distance calls in the USA made through that phone are free. You can plug in additional handsets by buying optional $39.95 devices called Ooma Scouts. Scouts aren’t required for additional cordless handsets

This bears watching. It could be the death of the local phone company. My tear ducts are dry.

__________________________________________

Bill Kristol made a great point at the Weekly Standard yesterday (HT Taranto at Best of the Web) about Columbia University and its invitation to Mahmoud “Champion of the Dispossed” Ahmadinejad to speak while he is visiting the United States:

As Columbia welcomes Ahmadinejad to campus, Columbia students who want to serve their country cannot enroll in the Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) at Columbia. Columbia students who want to enroll in ROTC must travel to other universities to fulfill their obligations. ROTC has been banned from the Columbia campus since 1969. In 2003, a majority of polled Columbia students supported reinstating ROTC on campus. But in 2005, when the Columbia faculty senate debated the issue, President Bollinger joined the opponents in defeating the effort to invite ROTC back on campus.

Taranto’s follow-on is even better, noting that Columbia doesn’t want ROTC on campus because of the school’s “objection to the law, signed by President Clinton, that prohibits open homosexuals from serving in the military.” Meanwhile, the dictator in charge of a country that brazenly executes homosexuals is welcomed at Columbia with open arms.

__________________________________________

James Dobson won’t support Fred Thompson.

Mr. Dobson supported the carpetbagging, illegal-voting, Eritrea-lobbying, Amway/Quixtar-flogging, House Bank-overdrawing, still-in-office pretending, Elections Commission-reprimanded, resume-inflating (second item at link) Bob “H-S” McEwen for Congress in the Ohio’s Second District Special election in the Spring of 2005. Dobson even narrated a personal endorsement of McEwen in a radio ad. All of the items I have noted were not known at the time, but enough were that Mr. Dobson really should have known better.

Jim Dobson is by all reasonable accounts a fine man, but he has zero political instinct. Given Dobson’s recent track record, his non-endorsement is the last thing Fred Thompson needs to worry about.

Maybe someday I’ll be able to explain that “H-S” thing I just threw in.

Uh oh.

Some people who seem to nearing the land of obsessive-compulsiveness will consider the title of this post “plagiarized.” You see, I didn’t attribute the title of this post to a specific person at the The Technology Front or put “Look Both Ways Before You Cross the Street” in quotes.

The actual author of the post must be really mad, as I haven’t specifically named him. I guess I’d better link to his post or I’ll be in trouble with the Plagiarism Police outposts at the Daily Bellwether and the Cincinnati Enquirer.

And why didn’t the TLF poster tell us where HE got “Look Both Ways Before You Cross the Street” from? Was it from here, here, or elsewhere?

Zheesh.

NixGuy has reached a boil over the long history of this and similar accumulated nonsense, and I don’t blame him. Go there, and I’ll stifle an oh-so-tempting rant over the chronic failure by Old Media (to be fair, excluding the targets of this post’s criticism), going back at least as far as Drudge-Isikoff-Lewinsky, to attribute so many of “their” stories to the blogs and other online sources where news has so often appeared first.

As noted here yesterday, Kansas Congresswoman Nancy Boyda walked out of a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Friday after hearing General Jack Keane testify about the potential impact of a bill meant to micromanage troop deployment. Keane also testified about progress being made in the counteroffensive that has come to be known as “the surge.”

Boyda walked out because the objections to that bill, and the descriptions of an improving situation in Iraq, were apparently too much to bear. She said as much when she returned. Boyda and the fly in her pocket (based on her several references to “we”) went into full-rant mode (painfully long and slow-loading audio is here; scroll down to July 27’s entry and click on “Audio Transcript”; Boyda’s tantrum is about 60% of the way through it; also note that at least a half-dozen hecklers and demonstrators had to be removed during the hearing):

“….. As many of us, there was only so much that you could take until we, in fact, had to leave the room for a while, and so I think I am back and maybe can articulate some things that after so much of the frustration of having to listen to what we listened to.”

“But let me just first say that the description of Iraq as if some way or another that it’s a place that I might take the family for a vacation, things are going so well, those kinds of comments will in fact show up in the media and further divide this country instead of saying here’s the reality of the problem and people, we have to come together and deal with the reality of this issue.”

Nothing in the General’s testimony was even remotely suggestive of the family-vacation idea Boyda falsely attributed to him.

As to Boyda’s fear that the general’s testimony might show up in the media (also in essence a plea not to cover it) — not to worry, as this Google News search shows:

In case you’re wondering (by this time, you shouldn’t be), the New York Times and the Washington Post have nothing relating to Boyda’s walkout or subsequent statement.

A few of the Google news links above are to the Associated Press story on the situation, which appears to have been carried almost nowhere. Even that story is about her defending herself and not the impropriety of her snit fit. The Washington Times link is to the end of an editorial, which wraps rather nicely:

We are at a moment when freshman Rep. Nancy Boyda, Kansas Democrat, feels justified walking out on retired Army Gen. Jack Keane at a hearing because she cannot stomach the general’s positive assessment of developments in Iraq. Let us hope we will soon arrive at a moment when Mrs. Boyda can be regarded as histrionic and no more.

Perhaps the voters of Boyda’s district will have a role in making those histrionics history.

Almost two years ago, all manner of hellfire, brimstone, and ridicule rained down on Ohio Republican Congresswoman Jean Schmidt when she was accused of calling John Murtha a coward (sorry, she didn’t; she said, “Cowards cut and run, Marines never do.” She never called Murtha a coward; Murtha voted with Schmidt and 401 other members of Congress against immediate withdrawal [i.e., the non-cowardly choice.).

If you’re a member of the other party, the consequences of, in essence, calling a general testifying under oath a liar are apparently less severe.

Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.

____________________________________

UPDATE: Allah at Hot Air has more on the Left’s “On no, we’re doing well” hysterics here and here.

UPDATE 2: Taranto at Best of the Web — “Boyda, it seems, wants to suppress information about success in Iraq, because such information would “divide the country.” Better that the country be united in defeatism.”

This blog, RAB’s Matt Naugle, and former Lincoln Logs blogger Matt Dole were interviewed by Ryan Kelley of Campaigns & Elections. The result is here, and is well-done by Mr. Kelley.

I do want to elaborate on this quote of yours truly:

“I think both parties are really not in touch with what’s on the mind of the rank-and-file voters and rank-and-file non-voters.”

I specifically cited illegal immigration; it wasn’t directly germane to what Mr. Kelley was covering, so I don’t mind that he didn’t use my example. The average Democrat voter and left-leaning non-voter is NOT for open borders, which for all practical purposes is the position of the Congressional Democratic leadership. The average GOP voter and right-leaning non-voter wants the border secured first, and the guest-worker and other problems solved second; the president and too many squishy Republicans in Washington insist on a “comprehensive solution.” How about a “comprehensive” fence first?

I also take issue with Matt Dole’s contention — “I don’t think blogs are a persuasive tool.” A logical reaction would be, “OK, then why bother?” I think a few people were persuaded for the first time that CBS reporters are not heroic investigators, and that the network’s “60 Minutes” is an agenda-driven operation, when the phony Bush-National Guard documents were exposed. I also believe that at least a few people overcame a knee-jerk (and, it turns out, largely indefensible) dislike for incumbent Jean Schmidt, and were persuaded not to vote for her challenger in Ohio’s Second District GOP Congressional Primary last year, when that challenger’s residency, illegal voting, questionable lobbying, and the nature of those backing him were exposed.

______________________________________________

Someone should ask the ACLU why they didn’t help this aggrieved student:

Emily Brooker, a student in Missouri State’s (MSU) School of Social Work, had religious objections to an assignment made by professor Frank Kaufman. Little did she know how much trouble her objections would cause.

According to the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), which wound up helping Brooker, Kaufman told all his students to write a letter to the Missouri legislature expressing support for homosexual adoption, and for each individual student to sign his or her name to it. As an evangelical Christian, Brooker refused to do so, and the full weight of the school’s power fell on her. She was charged with violating three of the school’s “Standards of Essential Functioning” — diversity, interpersonal skills and professional behavior.

Furthermore, ADF said, Brooker was forced to undergo a two-and-a-half hour grilling from an “ethics” committee, which asked her questions pertaining to personally-held religious beliefs such as “Do you think gays and lesbians are sinners?”

Brooker’s treatment shows that this is not just a case of one out-of-control professor. From all appearances, this is an out-of-control university where academic freedom is a one-way street. There’s no need for radical private universities like going-defunct Antioch when taxpayer-subsidized schools like MSU imitate Antioch, at about half the price.

______________________________________________

Speaking of the AWOL ACLU, it should also have been front-and-center on this one:

Public school district reverses decision, guarantees student’s right to read Bible

Ann Arbor, Jul 24, 2007 / 10:30 am (CNA).- A public school district has given written assurance that a third-grade student is permitted to read his Bible in his classroom.

Elementary School District 159, located outside of Chicago, sent the written assurance after receiving a letter from the Thomas More Law Center. School officials had previously denied the third-grade student, Rhajheem Haymon, this right.

The law center, which is a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, wrote the letter on behalf of the Haymon family.

Rhajheem’s father, Leslie Haymon, contacted the law center after being informed that school officials had denied his son the right to read his Bible during “reading time,” a time during the day when students may read a book of their choosing.

What possible defense was there for the school’s position?

______________________________________________

TVOH is R-I-G-H-T about this (underlying story is here):

U.S. District Judge James Munley, believes he can over ride the will of the people. He struck down as “unconstitutional” a local law (in Hazelton, PA — Ed.) designed to crack down on illegal immigration, dealing a blow to similar laws passed by dozens of towns and cities across the United States.

He wrote a 206 page opinion trying to prove his illegitimate point. I believe that this is ground (sic) for impeachment. Under the tenth amendment, any power not given to the Federal government by the states is reserved to the states and the people. The people passed a law that is not listed in the constitution, and a federal judge thinks he can override it. No he can not.

Being a judge doesn’t give you an unlimited right to make stuff up. When you do, you deserve impeachment.

Meanwhile, Clueless Chuckie Schumer saying that “We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” reinvents advise and consent (HT Instapundit). Note that media commentary on “threats to judicial independence,” which would surely accompany any attempt to impeach Judge Munley for his objectively indefensible ruling, is notably lacking in regards to Schumer’s statement, which is as grave a threat to judicial independence as I’ve ever seen.

Eric Scheibeler has requested that I make a clarification at the following June 2005 post:

2nd District (OH) Race: The McEwen Connections, Part 6–The McEwens and Amway Quixtar (AQ)

Two sentences of text in the first paragraph of what was published at that post from his e-mail to me have had “strikethrough” applied to them, with reference to a just-added “Update 3″ at the end of the post.

The text of Update 3 at that post follows.

+++++++++++++++++

(Beginning of Update 3 text)

UPDATE 3, May 18, 2007: Mr. Scheibeler contacted me and asked me to add the clarification that follows to replace the text that has had “strikethrough” applied to it in the first paragraph of his e-mail above –

“A posting on an article about Amway and Quixtar contained statements that should be clarified.

Quixtar has filed a lawsuit against me
(see http://merchantsofdeception.com/news.html)

I discovered deception in the Amway Quixtar distributor force and reported it to Dick DeVos. Long after that, my wife and son received an anonymous death threat on the telephone. I had been threatened in a meeting by a person known to me who is not an Amway employee nor acting upon their direction. The threats have never been attributed to either Mr. DeVos nor Amway, Quixtar nor any of their employees. I am issuing this statement in order to clarify publicly that I did not receive a death threat either from Amway or from Mr. DeVos. As I indicated in my book, Merchants of Deception, I do not know who threatened my wife and son on the telephone.”

(End of Update 3 text)

++++++++++++++++

Comments at this post have been turned off.

______________________________

Previous Post:
- Feb. 26 — Eric Scheibeler Wins Major Victory in Amway-Quixtar Fight

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently came out with its congressional rankings for 2006. Every congressperson’s score can be found here; Senators are here.

I’m not convinced that the Chamber’s choices of 15 bills in the House and 12 in the Senate that served as the bases for the ratings were broad enough. Also, given the pork-driven tendencies of so many Members, it seems a little hard to handle that about 110 House members and 18 Senators could get perfect 100% scores, incredibly including “Waste Ted” Stevens.

Nevertheless, here are the Chamber’s rankings for locals and selected others:

Senate (OH-KY-IN) –
- DeWine (R-OH) — 100%
- McConnell (R-KY) — 100%
- Lugar (R-IN) — 100%
- Bunning (R-KY) — 91%
- Voinovich (R-OH) — 75%
- Bayh (D-IN) — 45%

Senate (selected others) –
- Hagel (R-NE) — 100%
- Specter (R-PA) — 100%
- Clinton (D-NY) — 67%
- Obama (D-IL) — 55%
- Reid (D-NV) — 50%
- Biden (D-DE) — 45%
- Lieberman (D at the time, CT) — 44%
- Dodd (D-CT) — 42%

House (local OH-KY-IN) –
- Boehner (R-OH) — 100%
- Gillmor (R-OH) — 100%
- Ney — (R-OH) — 100%
- Oxley (R-OH) — 100%
- Pence (R-IN) — 100%
- Pryce (R-OH) — 100%
- Schmidt (R-OH) — 100%

- Tiberi (R-OH) — 100%
- Chabot (R-OH) — 93%
- Davis (R-KY) — 93%
- Hobson (R-OH) — 93%
- LaTourette (R-OH) — 93%
- Sodrel (R-IN) — 93%
- Turner (R-OH) — 93%

- Regula (R-OH) — 80%
- Ryan (D-OH) — 47%
- Brown (D-OH) — 40%
- Jones (D-OH) — 40%
- Strickland (D-OH) — 40%
- Kaptur (D-OH) — 33%
- Kucinich (D-OH) — 20%

House (selected others):
- Hastert (R-IL) — 100%
- Jindal (R-LA) — 100%
- Tancredo (R-CO) — 100%
- Hunter (R-CA) — 93%
- Jefferson (D-LA) — 86%

- Paul (R-TX) — 60%
- Emanuel (D-IL) — 47%
- Conyers (D-MI) — 20%
- McKinney (D-GA) — 9%

Here are updated consolidated rankings for the locals:

See this previous post for the prior chart, how it was compiled, and references to the other scorecards.

In the Senate, the Chamber rankings caused McConnell and Bunning to reverse 1-2 positions. Meanwhile, in the House, Boehner and Schmidt to inch ahead of Chabot. When missing one item on a scorecard moves you from 1st to 3rd, as it did to Chabot, you know that the differences between the three in last year’s voting were pretty narrow.

That was last year. This year, on the three most visible votes thus far (minimum wage increase, student loan subsidy expansion, and pork for the Banks), some differences have emerged. Boehner is 3-for-3 — against min-wage, against further student loan subsidies, and against the Banks pork). Chabot is 2-for-3, having whiffed on the student loan subsidies. Schmidt is 1-for-3, missing on min-wage and, painful to report, the Banks pork (HT NixGuy and Weapons of Mass Discussion). One hopes that this is not the start of a longer-term trend for the congresswoman.