Web Osi Speaks!

Friday, October 31, 2008

Two Of Kentucky's Finest (LOL), Or Just A Testimony To My Saying That "IDIOTS Abound EVERYWHERE"!

Read the story here, and decide for yourself.

Labels: , ,

Louisville Courier Journal Accused Of "Biased Reporting". Surprise! Surprise!! Read The Letter Below.

CJ's biased reporting

As an American citizen that holds a BA in English with a minor in Communications, I am absolutely apalled by this newspapers biased coverage of the election. I have been keeping track, since August of this year, of how many articles printed in the Sunday Forum are pro-Democrat or pro-Reupublican. I am astonished (though I suppose I shouldn't be) that your coverage is so one-sided. While attending Journalism classes at the University of Louisville, I was taught that the one main constant in media/news coverage was to balance a publication with BOTH sides of a story. The key word is balance! Not to throw in an opposing viewpoint to your own agenda every three publications. I am including an article, written by YOUR side a.k.a. a Democrat, that expands on this and perhaps will enlighten you and the readers of your newspaper. Perhaps, just perhaps the hand of justice will touch the media!"Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights? -- An open letter to the local daily paper -- almost every local daily paper in America: I remember reading All the President's Men and thinking: That's journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know. This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration. It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans. What is a risky loan? It's a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay. "The goal of this rule change was to help the poor -- which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can't repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can't make the payments, they lose the house -- along with their credit rating. They end up worse off than before!

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them. Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans. (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me. It's as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of Congressmen who support increasing their budget.) Isn't there a story here? Doesn't journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout? Aren't you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending? I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal. 'Housing-gate,' no doubt. Or 'Fannie-gate. Instead, it was Sen. Christopher Dodd and Rep. Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting sub-prime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed. As Thomas Sowell points out in a essay, Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury. These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was the Democratic Party. "The party that tried to prevent it was the Republican Party. Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie. Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout. What? It's not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame? Now let's follow the money right to the presidential candidate who is the number-two recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae. And after Freddie Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who made $90 million while running it into the ground, was fired for his incompetence, one presidential candidate's campaign actually consulted him for advice on housing. If that presidential candidate had been John McCain, you would have called it a major scandal and we would be getting stories in your paper every day about how incompetent and corrupt he was. But instead that candidate was Barack Obama, and so you have buried this story, and when the McCain campaign dared to call Raines an adviser to the Obama campaign -- because that campaign had sought his advice -- you actually let Obama's people get away with accusing McCain of lying, merely because Raines wasn't listed as an official adviser to the Obama campaign. You would never tolerate such weasely nit-picking from a Republican. If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish, and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis. There are precedents. Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension -- so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link. Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection. If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression. Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That's what you claim you do, when you accept people's money to buy or subscribe to your paper. But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie -- that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain, and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad -- even bad weather -- on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to. If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth -- even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate. Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means. That's how trust is earned. Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time -- and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing. Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter -- while you ignored the story of John Edwards's own adultery for many months. So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all, in journalism, left? Do you even know what honesty means? Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for? You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles. That's where you are right now. It's not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there. If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices. Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation's prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama's door. You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a Senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis. You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way. This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion. If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe -- and vote as if -- President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie. You're just the public relations machine of the Democratic Party, and it's time you were all fired and real journalists brought in, so that we can actually have a news paper in our city." That's Orson Scott Card, a card-carrying Democrat writing in the Rhinoceros Times in Greensboro, North Carolina.

Editor's comment:


while your letter makes some very valid points, it reads more like a manifesto for the Republican Party since it tended to ABSOLVE the party of any responsibility for our nation's crisis.

For the record, both the Democratic Party AND the Republican Party deserve to share whatever blame lies out there!


Mitch McConnell Retaliates, Releases Hound Dogs On Bruce Lunsford. Watch And Laugh, And Then Stick With Mitch.

Below is Mitch's ad:

Below is Bruce Lunsford's earlier ad before Mitch ZINGED him with the above ad:


David S. Broder: What We've Learned About McCain.

What we've learned about McCain
BY David S. Broder

As we near the end of another presidential campaign, it is useful to ask ourselves what we have learned about the candidates that we did not know before. When you reflect back on all the rallies, the speeches, the ads and the debates, what insights have we gained about their goals, their methods, their characters? I will turn to Barack Obama next, but today's subject is John McCain.

We knew a great deal about him from the past. We knew that he was a product of the military elite, the son and grandson of admirals, imbued with the patriotic impulses and the sense of duty to country that is his family tradition. We also knew that he had the capacity and willpower to endure and resist the terrible abuse he suffered in a North Vietnamese prison camp.

We knew that he had the backbone to set his own course -- a rebel defying authority -- and that he carried that trait into politics, often challenging the leaders of his own party and the wishes of his fellow Republicans. We also knew that he had a temper, redeemed by a self-mocking sense of humor, and we knew that he had a capacity for building genuine friendships across party lines.

We suspected, and soon confirmed, that he had limited interest in, and capacity for, organization and management of large enterprises. His first effort at building a structure for the 2008 presidential race collapsed in near-bankruptcy, costing him the service of many longtime aides. From beginning to end, the campaign that followed has been plagued by internal feuds and by McCain's inability to resolve them.

The shortcoming was intellectual as well as bureaucratic. Like Jimmy Carter, the only Naval Academy graduate to reach the Oval Office, McCain had an engineer's approach to policymaking. He had no large principles that he could apply to specific problems; each fresh question set off a search for a "practical" solution. He instinctively looked back to Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive era, with its high-mindedness and disdain for the politics of doling out favors to interest groups. But those instincts coexisted uneasily with his adherence to traditional, Reagan-era conservatism -- a muscular foreign policy, a penchant for tax-cutting and a fondness for business.

McCain was handed a terrible political environment by the outgoing Bush administration -- a legacy of war, debt and scandal that would have defeated any of the other aspirants for the nomination. But because McCain could not create a coherent philosophy or vision of his own, he allowed Obama and the Democrats to convince voters of a falsehood: that electing McCain would in effect reward Bush with a third term.

A similar ambivalence clouded his relationship with the Republican Party. Neither rebel nor defender of the party's doctrines, he won its nomination by smart tactics and lucky circumstances in three primaries -- New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida -- without ever establishing himself as its legitimate spokesman.

His vice presidential choice, his best opportunity to put his stamp on the future, was made, typically, more on instinct than careful appraisal. McCain saw Sarah Palin as reinforcing his own reformer credentials. The convention embraced her, not as a reformer but as the embodiment of beliefs precious to the religious right. And the mass of voters questioned her credentials for national leadership.

The campaign has been costly in terms of McCain's reputation. He has been condemned for small-minded partisanship, not praised for his generous and important suggestion that the major party candidates stump the country together, conducting weekly joint town hall meetings -- an innovation Obama turned down.

The frustration for McCain and his closest associates is their belief that he is ready to practice the kind of post-partisan politics the country wants -- which they believe Obama only talks about.

Should McCain still win the election, it will demonstrate even more vividly than the earlier episodes in his life the survival instincts and capacity for overcoming the odds of this remarkably engaging man. If he becomes president, the country would have to hope this campaign has honed his leadership skills.

David S. Broder is a columnist with The Washington Post. His e-mail address is

Editor's comment: Mr. Broder: You are so right about John McCain, but you forgot one thing:

John McCain's pick of SILLY Sarah Palin was a way for him to prove he is a Maverick -- at least the way he figured.

By being "HIS OWN MAN" on this issue, he intended to send a message to the enthrenched Republican establishment that he wasn't going to put up with their SH*T.

This was an admirable trait, but it backfired; and it did so, because John McCain FAILED to adequately "vet" SILLY Sarah.

Now the rest is history, as the saying goes!


Person For The Week: Barack Obama ("He Takes A Licking, But Keeps On Ticking") .

Our Person for the week is a man who has taken quite a beating, but though licked, he keeps on ticking.

How does President Barack Obama grab ya?


George F. Will: 'Faux Conservatism' Implodes.

'Faux conservatism' implodes
By George F. Will

From the invasion of Iraq to the selection of Sarah Palin, carelessness has characterized recent episodes of faux conservatism. Tuesday's probable repudiation of the Republican Party will punish characteristics displayed in the campaign's closing days.

Some polls show that Palin has become an even heavier weight in John McCain's saddle than is his association with George W. Bush. Did McCain, who seems to think that Palin's never having attended a "Georgetown cocktail party" is sufficient qualification for the vice presidency, lift an eyebrow when she said that vice presidents "are in charge of the United States Senate"?

She may have been tailoring her narrative to her audience of third-graders, who do not know that vice presidents have no constitutional function in the Senate other than to cast tie-breaking votes. But does she know that when Lyndon Johnson, transformed by the 1960 election from Senate majority leader into vice president, ventured to the Capitol to attend the Democratic senators' weekly policy luncheon, the new majority leader, Montana's Mike Mansfield, supported by his caucus, barred him because his presence would be a derogation of the Senate's autonomy?

Perhaps Palin's confusion about the office for which she is auditioning comes from listening to its current occupant. Dick Cheney, the foremost practitioner of this administration's constitutional carelessness in aggrandizing executive power, regularly attends the Senate Republicans' Tuesday luncheons. He has said jocularly that he is "a product" of the Senate, which pays his salary, and that he has no "official duties" in the executive branch. His situational constitutionalism has, however, led him to assert, when claiming exemption from a particular executive order, that he is a member of the legislative branch, and, when seeking to shield certain of his deliberations from legislative inquiry, to say that he is a member of the executive branch.

Palin may be an inveterate simplifier; McCain has a history of reducing controversies to cartoons. A Republican financial expert recalls attending a dinner with McCain for the purpose of discussing with him domestic and international financial complexities that clearly did not fascinate the senator. As the dinner ended, McCain's question for his briefer was: "So, who is the villain?"

McCain revived a familiar villain -- "huge amounts" of political money -- when Barack Obama announced that he had received contributions of $150 million in September. "The dam is broken," said McCain, whose constitutional carelessness involves wanting to multiply impediments to people who want to participate in politics by contributing to candidates -- people such as the 632,000 first-time givers to Obama in September.

Why is it virtuous to erect a dam of laws to impede the flow of contributions by which citizens exercise their First Amendment right to political expression? "We're now going to see," McCain warned, "huge amounts of money coming into political campaigns, and we know history tells us that always leads to scandal." The supposedly inevitable scandal, which supposedly justifies pre-emptive government restrictions on Americans' freedom to fund the dissemination of political ideas they favor, presumably is that Obama will be pressured to give favors to his September givers. The contributions by the new givers that month averaged $86.

One excellent result of this election cycle is that public financing of presidential campaigns now seems sillier than ever. The public has always disliked it: Voluntary and cost-free participation, using the check-off on the income tax form, peaked at 28.7 percent in 1980 and has sagged to 9.2 percent. The Washington Post, which is melancholy about the system's parlous condition, says there were three reasons for creating public financing: to free candidates from the demands of fund-raising, to level the playing field and "to limit the amount of money pouring into presidential campaigns." The first reason is decreasingly persuasive because fund-raising is increasingly easy because of new technologies such as the Internet. The second reason is, the Supreme Court says, constitutionally impermissible. Government may not mandate equality of resources among political competitors who earn different levels of voluntary support. As for the third reason -- "huge amounts" (McCain) of money "pouring into" (the Post) presidential politics -- well:

The Center for Responsive Politics calculates that by Election Day $2.4 billion will have been spent on presidential campaigns in the two-year election cycle that began January 2007, and another $2.9 billion will have been spent on 435 House and 35 Senate contests. This $5.3 billion is a billion less than Americans will spend this year on potato chips.

George F. Will is a syndicated columnist with The Washington Post. His e-mail address is

Editor's comment: "'Faux conservatism' implodes".

YEP, and deservedly so.

The Republican Party needs to return to its roots and guiding principles enunciated by its Founder (and my hero) Abraham Lincoln, RID itself of BIGOTS, RACISTS, AND, DIXIECRATS!

Now, that will be a START -- a very GOOD start, that is!


Senate Endorsement: Is There ANY Doubt That Senator Mitch McConnell Needs To Be Sent Back To Washington, D. C.? I Did NOT Think So.

Instead of writing a piece here, I'll just let you know that 9 of Kentucky's 11 newspapers largest newspapers enthusiastically endorsed his candidacy.

The two that did NOT?

Louisville Courier Journal and Lexington Herald Leader.

And I'll post these comments below for your consideration. Democrats have had their fun "ribbing" Mitch McConnell, but it is NOW time to get serious since the election is in a few days.

Read below in Mitch's own words and stick with Mitch:

... this election is about which candidate can do the most for the people of Kentucky over the next six years. It is about whether it makes sense to throw away the experience of a senator who built the clout to consistently deliver for Kentuckians.

Most Kentuckians understand we aren't guaranteed a seat at the table. Californians have 55 elected officials in Congress fighting to ban offshore drilling for American oil and promoting their San Francisco values. In Kentucky, we only have eight advocates to speak on our behalf in Washington. Therefore, it is essential that the people we send to Washington have the clout and influence necessary to put Kentucky's priorities at the top of the Senate's agenda.

Beyond the clear lack of influence my opponent would have in the Senate, delivering for Kentucky means taking tough stands on the most important issues of our time without regard to your own political pursuits. It means putting Kentuckians' interests ahead of your own.

Labels: ,

Halloween Brings Us Spooks. Laugh Away.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

HuffingtonPost.Com In The News.

Read more here.

Labels: , ,

I Received mY FIRST ROBO Call Of The General Election Today. It Was From The U. S. Chamber Of Commerce.

I also received a flyer from them. Check it out below (click on ad to view larger image. I hope it works):


VISTA Is Dead. Thank God.

Read more here.

Labels: ,

Sarah Hepola: Halloween, Now More Than Ever.

Sarah Hepola
Halloween, now more than ever
By Sarah Hepola • Special to The Washington Post • October 30, 2008

In the run-up to the 2004 election, couples wanting a hot Halloween costume dressed like Britney Spears and her then-hubby Kevin Federline; rarely have Kangol hats and fishnets sold so well in October. This election year's pair is the pregnant Bristol Palin and her fiancé, Levi Johnston, the proud self-described redneck. The pop culture parade that has long marked Halloween -- the movie superheroes, the Hollywood icons, the pirates and the sexy nurses -- has been supplanted by a raft of characters ripped from CNN headlines. It's not just Sarah Palin and Barack Obama but such figures as the polygamist wives of Texas, the fallen New York governor Eliot Spitzer and the bankrupt playboys of Wall Street.

In a sense, this stems from the entertainment industry's failure to introduce stirring characters. (Yet another Batman? Yet another Paris Hilton reality show? That's what we have to choose from?) But it would be near-impossible for anyone to compete with the most fascinating election cycle of our lifetimes. (Or, at least, the most fascinating election cycle of the lifetime of anyone contemplating a Bristol Palin get-up.) Who really cares whether Lindsay Lohan is a lesbian when the future of our country is at stake? This Halloween season, politics has replaced television and sports and (thank you) fallen starlets as water-cooler conversation. Not bad for a country that traditionally has had one of the lowest voter turnouts in the industrialized world.

It's not as though we won't see Madonna and Alex Rodriguez out there this Friday, or Iron Men or deranged Jokers with makeup smeared into their hairline. But the creative types who angle to win costume contests will be trying to translate the absurdities, metaphors and talking points of the 24-hour news shows into an outfit that is not just understandable but singular. (A hockey mom is not going to cut it, folks.)

Four years ago, such high-achievers hit the Washington party circuit outfitted as swing states. But no one needs to carry around a red-and-blue shaded map of Ohio when the possibilities for metaphor lie before us like a slop trough for, perhaps ... a pig wearing lipstick? It's a tribute to the rich rhetoric of this campaign that you can cherry-pick from all the catchphrases floating in the ether -- "spread the wealth around," "That One," "The fundamentals of our economy are strong," "I can see Russia" -- for costume inspiration. And we haven't even mentioned the supporting cast yet: Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Tina Fey, Joe Lieberman, Katie Couric and the wildlife of Alaska, among many others. How many Joe the Plumber outfits are we going to see? It's not just the most important election in decades; it's also the greatest dramatis personae since Shakespeare.

Of course, with the opportunity for brilliance comes an equal opportunity for offensiveness. It's depressing to think of the nastiness that could be on parade -- the dead animals, the racial and socioeconomic slurs from both political camps meant to be funny. (Let's hope that anyone in blackface is paying tribute to Robert Downey Jr. in "Tropic Thunder.")

But Halloween is, after all, a gloomy holiday in a country that rarely acknowledges such shadows -- not in any official way, at least. In its original pagan incarnation, after all, Halloween was a festival intended to ward off evil spirits. If it does still have that power, I can't imagine a time when we'd need it more. That's something that "real America" and ironic-costume-wearing America -- and all the candy-laden doorways where the two overlap -- can agree on.

Sarah Hepola is an editor at Salon.


Leonard Pitts: Paradigm Of Paranoia And Guilt.

Paradigm of paranoia and guilt
Leonard Pitts

It smelled worse than rotting garbage in triple-digit heat, but I'm not surprised some folks swallowed it anyway.

Meaning the story that was a mini-sensation for about 15 minutes last week: the McCain campaign worker supposedly mugged by a black man in Pittsburgh. For those who missed it, the details are as follows. Ashley Todd, 20, claimed she was accosted by a 6-foot-4-inch black man who demanded money. When said black man saw a John McCain bumper sticker on her car, he became enraged and, in an apparent effort to make her support Barack Obama, carved a "B" on her cheek.

It was enough to send some conservative bloggers -- Michelle Malkin was a notable exception -- into fits of apoplexy. One, Dan Riehl of, reportedly unburdened himself of the opinion that, "Obama's run his campaign just like a street thug out of Chicago. Now we get to see what some of his worst supporters are like." Another spoke of "black savages" roaming the street. Then there's the reader who said I should be "embarrassed" at what this other black man had done.

Well, that slimy yellow goo you see dripping down those people's faces today would be egg. See, there's a reason this story smelled like garbage. It was. Pittsburgh police say Todd eventually confessed to making the whole thing up.

As I told the aforementioned reader in an admittedly uncharitable moment, anyone with half a brain should have figured as much from the get-go. Some folks became suspicious when they saw a picture of the "B" -- too neat a job, they said. Others say it was the fact that the "B" was backward, as if it had been carved using a mirror.

Me, I found Ashley Todd's story fishy before I ever saw the "B." Her mugger sounded like no mugger I've heard of before. Your typical street thug does any violence he feels compelled to do, scoops up whatever valuables he can and vacates the scene ASAP. He does not hang around to discuss politics.

That's reality. Todd's tall tale, however, fits a fantasy white people occasionally espouse when the discussion turns to black-on-white crime. Some of them -- emphasize some -- believe black muggers mug them as a political statement, a way of exacting righteous black revenge for slavery, Jim Crow and, oh, I don't know, Kenny G.

Indeed, years ago, a guy assured me with perfect equanimity that I, as a black man, could walk unafraid through the worst slums in Detroit whereas he, as a white man, would have real reason to fear. I tried to explain to him that there is no such thing as a "brother pass," that dark skin is not a Get-Out-Of-Mugging-Free card. I tried to explain that violent crime is actually a highly segregated affair -- blacks victimize blacks, whites victimize whites. I tried to explain that if we walked together through his hypothetical slum, the one in danger would be the one who looked like he had the most money and the least clue.

He didn't buy it, of course. Indeed, over the years, I've heard other people repeat his reasoning. I've come to regard it as a manifestation of latent white guilt, this conviction some white folks have, that black crime is a statement of protest; i.e., that black guy mugged me because I represent to him decades of oppression and discrimination. It never seems to occur to such folks that maybe the mugger mugged them because -- all together now -- he's a mugger. Mugging people is what he does.

Ashley Todd's bizarre story fits into that paradigm of paranoia and white guilt as snugly as a jigsaw puzzle piece. Some of us wonder what motivated her, but I think we should be saving our curiosity for the people with the egg on their faces.

I don't care why she told that lie. I am curious why they were so ready to believe it.

Leonard Pitts is a columnist for the Miami Herald. His e-mail address is

Editor's comment: For racist KNUCKLE DRAGGERS, it's always a "Black Man did it."

You see, no matter how IDIOTIC they are, these KNUCKLE DRAGGERS know one thing; they know that a cry of a Black Man "doing whatever (fill in the blank)" to a White woman ALWAYS gets the Calvery riding to the rescue.

Unfortunately, for Black Men, the GENERIC discription the "victim" gives police, is enough to put EVERY Black Man at risk of FALSE arrest and imprisonment.

Thank God that GOOD people did NOT immediately believe Ashley Todd's HOAX, otherwise ANOTHER Black Man will be getting prepared to rot in prison.


Gas Prices Fall To Record Lows; No Wonder Silly Sarah Palin Is NO Longer Shrieking "DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW"! *SIGH*

Yes, in case you haven't observed, gas prices are at a record low now. It is at $2.25 per gallon in Bowling Green. If you use your Kroger gas card, it is $2.15 per gallon.
Next week, I expect t0 pay below $2.00 per gallon. By the time Christmas rolls around and I roll out of the state for the holidays, I expect to pay around $1.79.

No wonder I do NOT hear economic opportunistic political folks, like SILLY Sarah Palin, SHRIEKING: "DRILL HERE, AND DRILL NOW".

It is funny, isn't it?

The SILENCE from politicians is DEAFENING!


Results Of The Mock Elections Across Kentucky Schools. Read Below.



RE: Over 100,000 Students Participate in Kentucky Student Mock Election
DATE: October 30, 2008
CONTACT: Les Fugate, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
Office of the Secretary of State
Office: (502) 564-3490
Cell: (502) 229-3803

(Frankfort, KY) Students across the Commonwealth are choosing both Democrats and Republicans to send to Washington. Over 100,000 students in elementary, middle, and high schools across the Commonwealth went to the polls this week to vote for their favorite candidates for President, Congress, and to voice their opinion on the most important issue facing our country. Most notably, students selected John McCain for President of the United States and Mitch McConnell for Kentucky’s next U.S. Senator. Over 300 schools participated in the National Student Parent Mock Election, coordinated by Secretary of State Trey Grayson.

“It is essential that students become acclimated to the democratic process, and there is no better way than for them to participate in the process themselves,” stated Secretary Grayson. “We hope that this will begin a lifelong commitment to voting among these young people.”

This project is an exceptional tool for confronting, and in many cases, reversing the disturbing voting trends in the 18-24 year old demographic. Engaging students with the core principles of democracy fosters an important behavior that many will carry far beyond the classroom.

The following are the statewide results of the mock election:

United States President:
John McCain/Sarah Palin (Republican) – 48.6%
Barack Obama/Joe Biden (Democrat) – 47.0%
Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzalez (Independent) – 3.1%
Chuck Baldwin/Robert Thornsberry (Constitution) – 0.6%
Bob Barr/Wayne Root (Libertarian) – 0.8%

United States Senator
Mitch McConnell (R) – 52.8%
Bruce Lunsford (D) – 47.2%

United States Representative, 1st Congressional District:
Edward Whitfield (R) – 56.5%
Heather A. Ryan (D) – 43.5%

United States Representative, 2nd Congressional District:
S. Brett Guthrie (R) – 48.0%
David Boswell (D) – 52.0%

United States Representative, 3rd Congressional District:
Anne M. Northup (R) – 38.1%
John Yarmuth (D) – 57.1%

United States Representative, 4th Congressional District:
Geoff Davis (R) – 57.0%
Michael Kelley (D) – 43.0%

United States Representative, 5th Congressional District:
Harold “Hal” Rogers (R) – 68.1%
Jim Holbert (I) – 31.9%

United States Representative, 6th Congressional District:
Jon Larson (R) – 39.3%
Ben Chandler (D) – 60.7%

Of the issues listed below, which issue do you feel is the most important one our country is facing today:
Economy – 48.1%
Energy Crisis – 9.0%
Healthcare Quality and Costs – 13.6%
Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – 20.7%
Other Issues – 8.5%

For results from individuals schools, please visit:

This is third and final mock election for the Office of the Secretary of State. The first, held with Kentucky Governor’s Scholars, saw John McCain win the race for President by 2.5%. The second election, held with college students across the Commonwealth, saw Barack Obama win by 11.1% and Mitch McConnell win by 1.4% of the vote. During these mock elections, the Office of the Secretary of State registered nearly a thousand students to vote.

The results of this mock election will represent Kentucky’s votes in the National Student/Parent Mock Election. The National Student/Parent Mock Election seeks to turn the sense of powerlessness that keeps young Americans and their parents from going to the polls into a sense of the power of participation in our democracy. The National Student/Parent Mock Election receives support from numerous organizations, including the National Parent Teachers Association, the National School Boards Association, the National Council for the Social Studies, the American Association of School Administrators, the National Association of Elementary School Principals, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, and the Council of the Great City Schools. The Election Assistance Commission and the Kaplan Foundation provide ongoing funding for the Mock Election.

Kentucky’s mock election was selected as one of three mock elections in the country to receive funding from the Election Assistance Commission. The grant allowed the office to expand its efforts to reach more students across the Commonwealth. Without the grant, the deep state budget cuts threatened to cancel this year’s mock election. Kentucky has hosted a mock election for every general election since Secretary Grayson assumed office in 2004.

Grayson directs the Civic Literacy Initiative of Kentucky (CLIK), a multi-year effort that will determine a strategy for enhancing long-term civic engagement and civic literacy within the Commonwealth. As part of that effort, he released a report, Rediscovering Democracy: An Agenda for Action, that calls upon the state to take tangible steps to increase civic literacy. The report, which details four principle recommendations and scores of additional recommendations, was developed from the work of the Kentucky Workgroup on Civic Literacy and the CLIK.

A focus of the report is increased technology in order to further engage students in the political process. Grayson’s office has an international, award-winning website with increased online election services so that information is readily available for Kentucky citizens 24 hours-a-day/7 days-a-week. Grayson is also a pioneer in using popular mediums such as Facebook to make the political system more approachable to young people.

“By involving students in the democratic process, we wish to not only energize young people to vote, but to also remind their family and friends about the importance of voting on November 4, 2008,” said Secretary Grayson.


More (SURVEYUSA Poll) Breaking News: "In Fight For Open House Seat In KY2, Guthrie May Hold The Line For GOP." Guthrie Leads Boswell 53% To 43%.

Read more of the poll results here (the poll results are worth while as there are many other polls of interest, or the poll's analysis below:

In Fight for Open House Seat in KY2, Guthrie May Hold The Line for GOP: In an election for the open US House seat in Kentucky's 2nd Congressional District, Republican Brett Gurhtrie may have the votes to defeat Democrat David Boswell, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted for Roll Call, the newspaper of Capitol Hill, and WHAS-TV in Louisville. Guthrie gets 53% today, Boswell 43%. 31% of Democrats cross-over and vote Republican in the House race. Boswell and Guthrie tie among seniors, but SurveyUSA polling has Guthrie ahead in all other age groups.

McCain carries the district by 27 points. Republican Guthrie runs 9 points weaker than McCain. Democrat Boswell runs 8 points stronger than Barack Obama. In the district, McCain has Plus 25 Favorability; Obama has Minus 22 Favorability; Guthrie has Plus 14 Favorability; Boswell has Plus 4 Favorability. Republican Ron Lewis, the 7-term incumbent who is not seeking re-election, has Plus 40 Favorability. 800 adults were interviewed by SurveyUSA. Of them, 673 were registered to vote. Of them 587 were determined by SurveyUSA to be likely to vote on or before election day.

Editor's comment: Is it NOT O-V-E-R for David Boswell?

I suspect it is.


BREAKING NEWS: First Lady, Laura Bush, Will Visit Kentucky On Monday. Read Email Below.


Today, the Republican Party of Kentucky announced that First Lady Laura Bush will visit the Commonwealth on Monday, November 3, 2008 for a 2008 Victory Rally.

Mrs. Bush will be joined by several Republican candidates including Brett Guthrie, Kentucky’s 2nd District Congressional Candidate, State Representative Dwight Butler (R-18), State Representative David Floyd (R-50) and Trina Summers, candidate for State Representative, District 49.

“We are excited to welcome Mrs. Bush to Kentucky as we head into the final stretch of this election to bring home a victory,” said Guthrie.

“We’re honored that Mrs. Bush has chosen to join us in the final hours of the campaign season. Nothing is more important than energizing voters in the last 72 hours and with her help, we’ll send experienced conservative leaders to Washington, D.C. and Frankfort,” said Summers.

The rally will take place at the Paroquet Springs Convention Centre, 395 Paroquet Springs Drive in Shepherdsville, Kentucky.

Tickets are required to attend the event. Free tickets are available at any of the following Victory 2008 Volunteer Centers between 9:00am and 8:00pm from October 30-November 2.

1815 North Dixie Avenue, Suite 4
(270) 234-1233

10001 Linn Station Road, Suite 105
(502) 498-5191

Bowling Green
410 East 10th Avenue
(270) 842-7627

1707 Cedar Grove Road
(502) 468-9482

Doors will open at 11:00am. Attendees are asked to arrive no later than 12:00pm.

Members of the press interested in attending the event must fax his or her name (as it appears on his or her driver’s license), Social Security number and date of birth on company letterhead to the attention of Erin Brady at (502) 569-4884 no later than 12:00pm on Saturday, November 1, 2008. For additional credentialing or logistical questions, please contact Erin Brady at (303) 667-4725. For all other questions, please contact Mrs. Bush’s press office at (202) 456-6313.


SILLY SARAH Palin Is John McCain's "WHACK JOB". Who Called Her That, You Ask? A John McCain Adviser, And I AGREE. Read More From Politico.Com.

Here's the link from Politico, and below's an excerpt:
John McCain's campaign is looking for a scapegoat. It is looking for someone to blame if McCain loses on Tuesday.

And it has decided on Sarah Palin.

In recent days, a McCain “adviser” told Dana Bash of CNN: “She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone.”

Imagine not taking advice from the geniuses at the McCain campaign. What could Palin be thinking?

Also, a “top McCain adviser” told Mike Allen of Politico that Palin is “a whack job.”

Maybe she is. But who chose to put this “whack job” on the ticket? Wasn’t it John McCain? And wasn’t it his first presidential-level decision?

And if you are a 72-year-old presidential candidate, wouldn’t you expect that your running mate’s fitness for high office would come under a little extra scrutiny? And, therefore, wouldn’t you make your selection with care? (To say nothing about caring about the future of the nation?)

McCain didn’t seem to care that much. McCain admitted recently on national TV that he “didn’t know her well at all” before he chose Palin.

But why not? Why didn’t he get to know her better before he made his choice?

It’s not like he was rushed. McCain wrapped up the Republican nomination in early March. He didn’t announce his choice for a running mate until late August.

Wasn’t that enough time for McCain to get to know Palin? Wasn’t that enough time for his crackerjack “vetters” to investigate Palin’s strengths and weaknesses, check through records and published accounts, talk to a few people, and learn that she was not only a diva but a whack job diva?

But McCain picked her anyway. He wanted to close the “enthusiasm gap” between himself and Barack Obama. He wanted to inject a little adrenaline into the Republican National Convention. He wanted to goose up the Republican base.

And so he chose Palin. Is she really a diva and a whack job? Could be. There are quite a few in politics. (And a few in journalism, too, though in journalism they are called “columnists.”)

As proof that she is, McCain aides now say Palin is “going rogue” and straying from their script. Wow. What a condemnation. McCain sticks to the script. How well is he doing?

In truth, Palin’s real problem is not her personality or whether she takes orders well. Her real problem is that neither she nor McCain can make a credible case that Palin is ready to assume the presidency should she need to.

And that undercuts McCain’s entire campaign.

This was the deal McCain made with the devil. In exchange for energizing his base by picking Palin, he surrendered his chief selling point: that he was better prepared to run the nation in time of crisis, whether it be economic, an attack by terrorists or, as he has been talking about in recent days, fending off a nuclear war.

“The next president won’t have time to get used to the office,” McCain told a crowd in Miami on Wednesday. “I’ve been tested, my friends, I’ve been tested.”

But has Sarah Palin?

I don’t believe running mates win or lose elections, though some believe they can be a drag on the ticket. Lee Atwater, who was George H.W. Bush’s campaign manager in 1988, told me that Dan Quayle cost the ticket 2 to 3 percentage points. But Bush won the election by 7.8 percentage points.

So, in Atwater’s opinion, Bush survived his bad choice by winning the election on his own.

McCain could do the same thing. But his campaign’s bad decisions have not stopped with Sarah Palin. It has made a series of questionable calls, including making Joe the Plumber the embodiment of the campaign.

Are voters really expected to warmly embrace an (unlicensed) plumber who owes back taxes and complains about the possibility of making a quarter million dollars a year?

And did McCain’s aides really believe so little in John McCain’s own likability that they thought Joe the Plumber would be more likable?

Apparently so. Which is sad.

We in the press make too much of running mates and staff and talking points and all the rest of the hubbub that accompanies a campaign.

In the end, it comes down to two candidates slugging it out.

Either McCain pulls off a victory in the last round or he doesn’t.

And if he doesn’t, he has nobody to blame but himself.

Editor's comment: WHACK JOB, indeed.

Labels: ,

What An Embarrassment. At Rally, John McCain Calls For "FAKE" Plumber Joe And Joe Did NOT Show. Even "Joe The Plumber" Is Abandoning John McCain.

OK, Here Are The Congressional Endorsements As Promised.

In the FIRST District, the blog's endorsement is for the incumbent Ed Whitfield.

The endorsement is made though this Writer is very disappointed that the Congressman kissed the bailout Pig because the Pig had on lipstick.

We expect him to do BETTER next time, but we are certain his opponent can't, so we endorse him for re-election.

In the SECOND District, we have Brett Guthrie, who is very well known in Warren County, and David Boswell, who is known state-wide.

Both men are Conservatives, and who ever is elected, will serve this district well.
But we prefer Brett Guthrie's brand of Conservatism.

In the THIRD District, we have Anne Northup trying to dislodge John Yarmuth from his perch.

The Writer likes Anne's brand of Conservatism, but he also likes John's political CHUTZPAH, such as he displayed when he was the FIRST elected official in Kentucky to endorse Barack Obama.

I was, however, DISAPPOINTED when he joined Ed Whitfield and others in kissing the bailout Pig, simply because the Pig wore lipstick.

This Writer expects BETTER from him in the future, should he win his seat back.

In the FOURTH District, The Writer can see NO reason to replace Ben Chandler, and so he is endorsed.

Likewise, for Hal Rogers, in the FIFTH District.

And in the SIXTH District, there can be NO doubt but that GEOFF Davis is the one we endorse.

Tomorrow, the choice for Senator will be announced.

Will you be surprised by my pick?

Who knows, so come back and check it out.


Betty Winston Baye': The Elephants Leave Town; Their You-Know-What Remains.

Betty Winston Baye'
The elephants leave town; their you-know-what remains

Yes, my little chickadees, the circus is about to leave town. The ringmasters, the clowns, the elephants, the trapeze artists and the tattooed lady (that would be the John McCain supporter who apparently carved a "B" into her own cheek and then blamed it on a big, black Barack Obama supporter) are almost packed.

But the smoldering heaps of dung this menagerie will leave is going to stink for a while, and maybe longer than usual if Barack Obama wins the presidency.

This election season is an example of what W.C. Fields must have had in mind when he said, "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, dazzle them with bull."

The bull has certainly been flying. And though some will argue that I should insert the parenthetical that both sides are equally guilty, I don't believe that's true. Nobody accuses McCain of being an "other" or a terrorist.

But how about that bull from Gov. Sarah Palin that it was the plan all along that the clothes on which the Republican National Committee spent $150,000 to outfit her, a supposed consignment store-shopping hockey mom, her "First Dude" and their kids, would be donated to charity?

Yeah, and pigs can fly.

Alaska, size-wise, is the nation's biggest state. That may explain why two of Alaska's leading politicians -- Palin and senior U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens -- have been caught telling some big lies.

Stevens was found guilty this week of accepting gifts from a certain oil industry executive, who apparently has benefited from the connection. Stevens, an Indianapolis native, is seeking re-election. He has represented Alaska in Congress since 1964. He's been a senator since 1968 and holds the Republican record for continuous service in that body.

Stevens' wife, a partner in a major law firm, actually testified that she had no idea where her own family's furniture disappeared to, or that the furnishings that replaced it had come from Bill Allen, the oil exec.

In fact, Catherine Stevens said that she never liked the replacement furniture. Yet, she kept it for seven years.

See what I mean about pigs flying?

More seriously, though, the hysteria whipped up during this campaign may resonate for years.

Hysteria such as what prompted an anonymous caller to the newspaper to refer to Obama as "a baby-killing Muslim." Hysteria that prompted a caller, who disagreed with The Courier-Journal's endorsement of Obama, to leave a message for a colleague that said, "F -- your liberal ways, you nigger-lovin' bitch." The hysteria that even at this late date has people insisting that Obama isn't eligible for the presidency because he was born in Hawaii, which, like Alaska, became a state 1959, two years before Obama was born.

Yet more serious, however, is the hysteria that provoked someone to hang Obama in effigy from a tree on the University of Kentucky campus. Obama probably won't swing Kentucky, but this is ridiculous. Then there's the case of the two young white supremacists, who authorities say threatened to assassinate Obama while wearing white tuxes and top hats.

People get these ugly ideas from somewhere. Sadly, it's very often from political candidates.

Kentucky's senior Sen. Mitch McConnell, the most powerful Republican in Congress, seemed to be trying to covertly make some point by including in his response to The C-J's decision to endorse his opponent a line about California's elected officials in Congress who are "fighting to ban off-shore drilling for American oil and promoting their San Francisco values."

Say what?

This may not be the ugliest election in the history of the Republic, but it is undoubtedly one of the stupidest. The argument, for example, that it was a liberal media trick for CBS' Katie Couric to ask Palin which newspapers and magazines she read "to stay informed and to understand the world." And how priceless was the expression on Joe Biden's face when he seemed to believe that a Florida news anchor was just joshing with him when she quoted Karl Marx and then asked, "How is Sen. Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around?"

But as I said, this circus is almost over. Presumably life will return to normal, though honestly, it's harder than ever to figure out what normal is in America these days.

Americans have always had strong political disagreements, and the beauty of the system, Americans love to boast, is that Americans have the right to publicly disagree. But in this election season, a lot of folks just seem to have gone completely bonkers.

I wrote weeks ago that when this election is over, there may be value in all of us retreating to some psychiatrist's couch to help us figure out what in the hell just happened to us.

But now we're in the 11th hour before Election Day, and we still have people saying that they don't know enough yet about McCain and Obama to choose between the two. If I were a judge, I'd sentence these people to repeated listenings of soul singer Teddy Pendergrass' golden oldie with the lines that say, "If you don't know me by now, you will never, never, never know me. All the things that we've been through. You should understand me like I understand you."

But for those who really don't know by now, something else said that W.C. Fields said might help -- "I never vote for anyone. I always vote against."

Betty Winston Bayé is a Courier-Journal columnist and editorial writer. Her column appears Thursdays on the editorial page. Read her online at Her e-mail address is


"RECORDGATE" Update: Lunsford Says He'll Tell Marshall County Grand Jury He was "Illegally Bugged".

Lunsford: He'll tell grand jury he was 'illegally bugged'
By Joseph Gerth

Democrat Bruce Lunsford's campaign says he will tell a Marshall County grand jury that a Republican operative "illegally bugged" his speaking platform during a debate in Western Kentucky.

The grand jury will consider a complaint by Richard St. Onge III, an employee of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, who claimed that Lunsford took his digital recorder after the debate and that Lunsford's staff erased it.

Jason Darnall, an assistant Marshall County attorney, said the grand jury will decide if any crimes were committed, and that he will not make a recommendation. The jury is set to meet Nov. 7.

Surreptitiously recording someone is a class D felony.

St. Onge put the recorder on Lunsford's rostrum. Ed Hart, Lunsford's campaign chairman, said St. Onge never asked permission to do so, and the campaign has said it was hidden under a notebook.

Rebecca Fisher, a spokeswoman for the Republican committee, said St. Onge didn't hide the recorder and was simply trying to obtain a good recording.

In a statement by Lunsford spokeswoman Lindsey Berman, the campaign suggested Sen. Mitch McConnell is using the incident to deflect attention from issues such as the economy, the Bush presidency and the conviction of Republican Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska on corruption charges:

"We'll be happy to tell the story of how McConnell's people illegally bugged Bruce's podium. In the meantime, we'll keep talking about how Mitch McConnell, George Bush and Ted Stevens have nearly destroyed our economy and the trust of the American people."

After the debate last Thursday at Kentucky Dam Village State Resort Park, Lunsford picked up the recorder and handed it to an aide. It was returned after St. Onge complained to the Marshall County sheriff. St. Onge said more than 65 recordings were erased.

Reporter Joseph Gerth can be reached at (502) 582-4702.

Editor's comment: This could get U-G-L-Y!


Bill Clinton Campaigns With Barack Obama. Watch The Video.

Did You Watch Barack Obama's "Infomercials"? Well, Watch Below. Awesome Stuff.

Laugh At Ted, Will Ya?

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Democrats Take Issue With Mitch McConnell's Senate CLOUT. I Beg To Differ, Don't You? Watch The Video Ad.

Now, The Videos From Youtube. Sorry For The Late Posting.

Part #1:

Part #2:


More Pictures.

I Just Returned A While Ago From Mitch McConnell's Rally In Bowling Green. Watch Pictures.

Click on pictures to enlarge them.


Recording Device Flap Between Mitch McConnell And Bruce Lunsford Could Backfire And Land McConnell Staffer In Felony Trouble.

Read more here, or the excerpts below from Law Reader:

A Marshall County Grand Jury will hear evidence on Nov. 7th. about a controversy over a digital recording device that erupted after last week’s debate between candidates in the Kentucky U.S. Senate race. This investigation launched at the request of the McConnell campaign may boomerang and could result in prosecution of a McConnell campaign worker.

The investigation concerns various claims reported in the press. Lunsford is quoted as saying he was at his podium in the public debate with Mitch McConnell, and found a digital recording device hidden under a notebook on his podium. Lunsford turned the recording device over to a campaign aide and it was later delivered to the Marshall County Sheriff Kevin Byars.

A McConnell campaign worker Richard St. Onge filed a complaint with the Marshall County attorney’s office asking that charges be filed against Lunsford and Achim Bergmann a Lunsford campaign consultant. St. Onge claims that the Lunsford campaign deleted the recordings on the recording device before delivering it to Sheriff Byars.

A press report yesterday stated that the McConnell campaign had taken the recording device to an expert and they had restored the audio recording.

The complaint by St. Onge seems to make the claim that he is the owner of the digital recorder. Therefore, the Grand Jury can be expected to inquire about how the device got to the Lunsford podium. It is suggested that the device had recorded private comments of Lunsford with his campaign workers.

Throughout this election the McConnell campaign has assigned a worker identified as “Richard” to follow Lunsford throughout the state and videotape every Lunsford appearance. “Richard” repeatedly followed Lunsford and videotaped him as he walked through crowds and shook hands with voters and spoke to them. Is this “Richard” the same person as the Richard St. Onge who filed the complaint with the Marshall County prosecutor?

So far the media has run this story as a charge against the Lunsford campaign. However Kentucky law appears to cover the activities as a potential felony offense committed by the person who placed the recording device on Lunsford’s podium and hid it.

Kentucky law (KRS 526.010) defines “eavesdrop” as meaning “to …record…any part of (a) oral communication of others without the consent of at least one (1) party thereto by means of any electronic, mechanical or other device.”

Lunsford said that he believed the device was placed on his podium and hidden in an attempt to record pre-debate comments he made to his campaign workers and to record any public comments he made under his breath during the debate.
It is one thing to record a public statement of a candidate. It may well be a felony however if any part of a private conversation is recorded without permission of at least one of the participants to the conversation. It would not be a violation of law to record or videotape a public statement of a candidate, but conversations made in private appear to be protected by Kentucky law.
If a person is guilty of eavesdropping under Kentucky law they have committed a Class D Felony punishable by a sentence of up to five years in prison. (KRS 526.020).

Even the act of installing a recording device with the intent to eavesdrop is defined as a Felony under KRS 526.030.

Mere possession of an eavesdropping device is itself a misdemeanor. (KRS 526.040).

If a device is determined to be an eavesdropping device, it must be forfeited. (KRS 526.080).

The procedure where the Lunsford campaign turned the device over to the local Sheriff seems to be the correct thing to do. If you find evidence of a crime you should turn it over to the law enforcement officials.

The act of the Sheriff in not holding on to the device, and instead delivering it back to the McConnell campaign seems to be a strange thing for a law enforcement official to do with material evidence of a crime.

The Marshall County Grand Jury will not meet to consider the McConnell campaign complaint against Lunsford until Nov. 7th., but due to the eavesdropping laws, the Grand Jury may well be more interested in examining the conduct of Richard St. Onge, than of the Lunsford campaign.

The claim that the Lunsford campaign deleted the recorded information on the recording device, if true, could complicate the issue. However KRS 526. 030 makes it a Felony offense just to install such a device, and does not require proof that a private conversation was actually recorded.

Read the applicable Kentucky Law for yourself:

KRS 526.010 Definition.
The following definition applies in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
“Eavesdrop” means to overhear, record, amplify or transmit any part of a wire or
oral communication of others without the consent of at least one (1) party thereto by
means of any electronic, mechanical or other device.
Effective: January 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 226, effective January 1, 1975.

KRS 526.020 Eavesdropping.
(1) A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he intentionally uses any device to
eavesdrop, whether or not he is present at the time.
(2) Eavesdropping is a Class D felony.
Effective: January 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 227, effective January 1, 1975.

KRS 526.030 Installing eavesdropping device.
(1) A person is guilty of installing an eavesdropping device when he intentionally
installs or places such a device in any place with the knowledge that it is to be used
for eavesdropping.
(2) Installing an eavesdropping device is a Class D felony.
Effective: January 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 228, effective January 1, 1975.

KRS 526.040 Possession of eavesdropping device.
(1) A person is guilty of possession of an eavesdropping device when he possesses any
electronic, mechanical or other device designed or commonly used for
eavesdropping with intent to use that device to eavesdrop or knowing that another
intends to use that device to eavesdrop.
(2) Possession of an eavesdropping device is a Class A misdemeanor.
Effective: January 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 229, effective January 1, 1975.

KRS 526.080 Forfeiture.
Any electronic, mechanical or other device designed or commonly used for
eavesdropping which is possessed or used in violation of this chapter, is forfeited to the
state and shall be disposed of in accordance with KRS 500.090.
Effective: January 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 233, effective January 1, 1975.


Those Of You In Louisville, Get To Know Doug Kemper.


Kentuckians who reject educated ideas pay the cost
By Tom Eblen

Some Kentuckians will believe anything, unless they hear it from a person well educated on the subject.

Historians have long noted Kentucky's anti-intellectual streak, which has helped keep the state near the bottom of national rankings in education, income and other measures of progress.

Some Kentuckians fear change and scorn "elites," who are generally defined as anyone better-educated or more broad-minded than they are.

I happened upon an interesting example last week while driving back from an interview in London. I was flipping through the radio channels and heard WVLK talk-show host Sue Wylie introducing Charles Haywood as her guest that hour.

Haywood is a Ph.D. economist and retired dean of the University of Kentucky's Gatton College of Business and Economics. He was Kentucky's first economic development secretary and is a former research director for Bank of America. He has appeared on Wylie's show several times recently to discuss the economic crisis.

Wylie framed that morning's show around this question: Are Barack Obama's tax proposals socialism?

Haywood politely explained that returning tax rates for people earning more than $250,000 a year to pre-Bush administration levels was hardly socialism. Using that measure, he joked, you would have to call the tax policies that prevailed during Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower's administration in the 1950s communism.

But Wylie and her audience were having none of it. She justified the assertion by repeatedly saying "a lot of people are talking about this." Of course, she didn't explain that those people are McCain and his surrogates.

Many people who called in to the show argued with Haywood and dismissed his expertise. At least one called him a liberal — talk radio's favorite insult.

"I was surprised that so many people just didn't really understand what's going on, and certainly are misinformed about some things," Haywood said when I called later to ask him about the show.

"I was trying to explain it to my wife, Judy, too," Haywood said. "I said, well, there is just a lot of anti-intellectual sentiment out there. ... It's awfully hard to explain irrationality. It is a curious reaction from people who are obviously in a fairly low- to middle-income group and would benefit from a tax change."

Haywood favors Obama's economic proposals over McCain's, although he didn't say so on the air. He's not alone.

An informal survey of academic economists by The Economist magazine found that "a majority — at times by overwhelming margins — believe Mr. Obama has the superior economic plan, a firmer grasp on economics and will appoint better economic advisers."

Haywood went on: "The thing that's so shocking to me is really the extent to which McCain has played fast and loose with the proposals of Obama." Actually, it is in complete character with McCain's increasingly shrill and desperate campaign.

For me, this election was an easy call. George W. Bush's presidency has been a disaster. His tax breaks for the wealthy, giveaways to big business and aversion to government regulation have wrecked the economy and racked up a staggering public debt. The cake was iced with a huge bailout for the financial-services industry, which seems more interested in using public money to buy up weak rivals than in easing the credit crunch.

Rather than finish the job in Afghanistan, Bush led the nation into a senseless war in Iraq. Now we're bogged down in both places, and Osama bin Laden still runs free. Bush has ignored the Constitution, embraced torture and government secrecy and seriously damaged America's image among our allies. His administration has favored ideology over science, and it has consistently played to fear rather than reason.

The last thing America needs is another four years of the Republican policies that got us into this mess. And McCain's decision to put Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin a 72-year-old heartbeat away from leadership of the free world says all I need to know about his judgment.

I find it interesting that people such as Warren Buffett, one of America's most successful capitalists, and Gen. Colin Powell, Bush's former secretary of state, have endorsed Obama's ideas and leadership over McCain's.

Many intelligent Kentuckians I know and like are supporting John McCain. Many are more comfortable with Republican ideology, or they prefer McCain's résumé and leadership to Obama's. I respect that.

What I can't respect, though, is the gullibility and willful ignorance of Kentuckians who buy into and perpetuate right-wing fear-mongering.

How else to explain recent poll results that show 14 percent of Kentuckians — and 28 percent of Kentucky Republicans — think Obama is Muslim, even though it's a well-publicized fact that he's Christian. Like Obama's race, it shouldn't even matter. But we all know that it does to some people.

We must replace fear with hope, ideology with logic and ignorance with education. The stakes are simply too high.

Editor's comment: As admirable as Tom's piece is, I suspect his task is akin to walking backwards into a gale force wind.


BREAKING News: "Mitch McConnell Says Ted Stevens Must Go, As SENATE WOULD HAVE 'ZERO TOLERANCE' FOR FELON". Now That's BETTER, Senator.

McConnell says Stevens must go

By Ryan Alessi

ELIZABETHTOWN — Republican U.S. Senate Leader Mitch McConnell said Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens should quit now or risk a swift expulsion since being convicted Monday on corruption charges.

"I think he should resign immediately," McConnell, Kentucky's senior senator, told the Herald-Leader Tuesday night after a Hardin County GOP rally. "If he did not do that ... there is a 100 percent certainty that he would be expelled from the Senate."

A jury found Stevens, 84, and the longest serving Republican in Senate history, guilty on seven charges of lying on his official financial disclosure forms to hide gifts and more than $250,000 in home improvements paid for by an oil executive.

Several other key Republicans, including presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota, called for Stevens to step down now, even before Stevens faces the verdict of Alaska voters on Election Day. Stevens has been locked in a tight campaign with Democrat Mark Begich, the mayor of Anchorage, since he was first charged in July.

If Stevens wins, then steps down, a special election would replace him.

"If a resignation is going to happen, the nation gains nothing by having it happen before the election," said Mead Treadwell, an Alaska Republican and longtime Stevens supporter who is among the state's largest McCain donors, according to The Associated Press.

Oregon Republican Sen. Gordon Smith, who like Stevens is in a tight race for re-election, and Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., echoed that call, the AP reported.

"Service in the Senate demands the highest ethical standards," Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said Tuesday. "Unfortunately, his conviction proved that he has failed to meet those standards and he should resign immediately."

They were joined by Maine Republican Sen. Olympia J. Snowe, who said that "stepping down would be the right thing to do."

Stevens has given no indication he's even considering resignation. His spokesman did not return AP's messages seeking comment Tuesday. Instead, Stevens released news that the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission and a retired Air Force officer had endorsed him.

Democrats, who now hold a 51-49 majority in the Senate, have targeted Stevens' seat as part of their bid to build a filibuster-proof, 60-vote majority.

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama also said Tuesday that Stevens should vacate his Senate seat.

Stevens, who was first elected to the Senate in 1968, has vowed to appeal the conviction and "fight this unjust verdict."

But McConnell, who is in his own tough re-election fight, said that regardless of the outcome of the election, Stevens won't be serving in the Senate much longer.

"The Senate would have zero tolerance for the continued service of a convicted felon," McConnell said.

Earlier Tuesday, McConnell's Senate office dispatched a statement saying Stevens, after being found guilty, "must face the consequences of those actions" and "will be held accountable so the public trust can be restored," although it didn't outline specific consequences.

It wasn't until answering questions after his last stop Tuesday on his re-election bus tour through western and west-central Kentucky did McConnell call for Stevens to resign before the Senate took its action.

McConnell pointed to the Senate ethics committee process that would automatically review the case and could recommend expulsion. McConnell led that process in 1995 when Oregon Republican Sen. Bob Packwood faced allegations of personal and official misconduct.

"If someone were convicted of a felony, they would be expelled from the Senate," McConnell said. "I am the guy who chaired the ethics committee when we expelled Packwood from the Senate. I'm the one who made the motion to expel Packwood from the Senate."

Packwood resigned after the ethics committee voted unanimously to expel him for, as McConnell called at the time, "a habitual pattern of aggressive, blatantly sexual advances" toward women on his staff.

McConnell added that Packwood was forced out "for less offense than" what Stevens now faces.

After Stevens was first charged this summer, McConnell said he would reserve judgment until after the trial. He described the issue as one for Alaska voters and not one that might become radioactive for other Republicans.

Tuesday, McConnell dismissed any suggestion that Stevens' problems would be a big issue in his own re-election race. "It is (an issue) in Alaska," he said to end the brief interview.

During an afternoon campaign stop in Greensburg, McConnell's Democratic challenger Bruce Lunsford called for McConnell to lead the charge to oust Stevens.

"I think as the leader he should be the one instigating that," Lunsford told the Herald-Leader.

Lunsford said Stevens' conviction was "another example of business as usual" for a Congress that has experienced a recent spate of lawmakers with ethical problems, ranging from Republican U.S. Rep. Duke Cunningham of California, who is serving an eight-year prison sentence for a host of corruption charges, to Democratic U.S. Rep. William Jefferson of Louisiana, was indicted last year on charges of accepting bribes.

Lunsford said he didn't have a sense of what effect, if any, the Stevens case might have in the Kentucky U.S. Senate race.

"I do believe this: I believe it's a clear indication that the system Mitch McConnell is protecting doesn't work," Lunsford said.

Lunsford has built his campaign around the concept of change from the status quo and has attempted to link McConnell with President Bush, particularly on economic policies.

Tuesday, in Greensburg, Lunsford pledged to be an independent voice in the Senate, a counter message to McConnell, who has said frequently in recent days that any freshman Democratic senator would have to fall in line behind Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

"I'm not going up there to be anybody's guaranteed vote," a defiant Lunsford told the two dozen Democrats who showed up for Lunsford's stop at the historic Old Green County Courthouse. "I'm going up there to be your vote."

McConnell has been contrasting his seniority and leadership position with what would be Lunsford's "rookie" status.

In Elizabethtown, McConnell told 100 GOP activists who braved the crisp late fall air to attend the rally that Senate leaders even assign the desks in the chamber based on seniority.

"So he'll be way back in the back of the room," McConnell said of Lunsford. "His only responsibility every day will be to march down the middle of the aisle and salute Harry Reid and ask how to vote."

Editor's comment: I am glad the Senator FINALLY called for Convicted Felon, Ted "Bridge to nowhere" Stevens, to resign.

If you have not read the Ted Stevens' indictment, upon which he was convicted of ALL counts, you can read it here.

Senator, I'm also happy you did NOT wait too long to make the call.



Laugh All You Want. I Know I Will!


Tuesday, October 28, 2008

A QUICK Note On Our Endorsements.

I shall be making endorsements, but ONLY for Federal offices.

So if you want consideration, and there are facts or issues you want to bring to my attention before you are considered for endorsement, please feel free to email them to me PRONTO.

On Thursday, I shall endorse for Congress (the House version).

On Friday, it will be the Senate's turn.

On Monday, the Presidential election.

Stay tuned.


"Ragin' Cajun", James Carville, Weighs In On Mitch McConnell/Bruce Lunsford Kentucky Senate Race. Read His Email Below.

Dear Osi,

I've said it before and I'll say it again: it isn’t enough to get rid of George W. Bush. We've gotta get rid of the people who helped him wreck this country. And number one on that list has gotta be Mitch McConnell.

Mitch McConnell backed George Bush every step of the way down this dark path. And he's blocked every bill that's come within sight of fixing the mess he created.

Folks, we gotta drop this guy.

That's why I'm asking you to get working to send Bruce Lunsford to the Senate, and help Kentucky Ditch Mitch.

Election Day is coming up fast, and if we're not ready to fight for a better Senate then we might as well sit it out, because we can't fix a thing without the right people in Washington working to make it happen.

Mitch McConnell isn't the right people. He led fights against body armor and time at home for our troops, health care for our kids, ethics reform, and raising the minimum wage.

This guy would fight against letting orphans hug puppies on Christmas morning if he could. He calls himself the “Proud Guardian of Gridlock” in Washington, and if he goes back there we're gonna stay stuck in the mud for another six years.

Kentucky's gotta make a change, and we gotta help them do it.

Bruce is a good guy, with deep Bluegrass roots and a love of Kentucky that runs even deeper. He believes in a strong America, where everyone has a chance to succeed like he has, and where nobody has to worry about whether they can afford to see a doctor, put food on the table, or send their kids to school.

Put Bruce side-by-side with Mitch McConnell, and the choice is clear. And according to the polls, they're side-by-side already. Bruce has all the momentum right now, and he just needs a little extra push to bring this race home.

The race is so tight; McConnell doesn't have the guts to defend himself anymore. He's so scared of being called on his record; he's ducking debates now.

I don't know about you, but the only chicken from Kentucky I want to see has 11 herbs and spices on it.

If he had any other job, every boss in America would want to fire his butt. Well, he works for us. We're his boss. It's time to point him to the door and give him a hard kick in the pants.

Mitch McConnell's going to fling every scoop of mud he can grab out of the gutter in the next week. It's all he's got left. If he ran on his record, he'd get tarred and feathered. So he's running on the same fuel he uses in the Senate: lies, fears and smears. It's disgusting.

We need good people like Bruce Lunsford in the Senate to fight for regular folks, and to help enact an agenda that takes care of all Americans not just a few. And we need people like Mitch McConnell out of Washington, and out of the way.

Let's send Bruce to the Senate, and let's send Mitch packing.

This is our year: let's make it big.


James Carville

Contributions or gifts to Friends of Bruce Lunsford are not tax deductible.
By submitting your contribution, you agree $2,300 is designated for the general election. Federal law prohibits contributions to the campaign from corporations, labor organizations and national banks; from any person contributing another person's funds; from foreign nationals who lack permanent resident status; and from federal government contractors. By donating, you affirm that your contribution is from personal funds and not from funds otherwise prohibited under law. If this contribution is from more than one individual, such as from a wife and husband, please provide the requested information and signature for each. If two signatures are provided, you both affirm that your contribution is made from a joint account. To comply with federal law, we must use best efforts to obtain, maintain and submit the name, mailing address, occupation and name of employer for individuals whose contributions exceed $200 per election cycle.


McConnell Responds to Endorsement. "Great", I Say.

McConnell responds to endorsement

The Courier-Journal should excuse its readers at their lack of surprise over the endorsement in this year's Senate race. After reading over 140 attacks in this publication since I became Republican leader of the U.S. Senate, I suspect even my most partisan critics are similarly unmoved.

Setting aside the formality of this newspaper's opposition, this election is about which candidate can do the most for the people of Kentucky over the next six years. It is about whether it makes sense to throw away the experience of a senator who built the clout to consistently deliver for Kentuckians.

Most Kentuckians understand we aren't guaranteed a seat at the table. Californians have 55 elected officials in Congress fighting to ban offshore drilling for American oil and promoting their San Francisco values. In Kentucky, we only have eight advocates to speak on our behalf in Washington. Therefore, it is essential that the people we send to Washington have the clout and influence necessary to put Kentucky's priorities at the top of the Senate's agenda.

Beyond the clear lack of influence my opponent would have in the Senate, delivering for Kentucky means taking tough stands on the most important issues of our time without regard to your own political pursuits. It means putting Kentuckians' interests ahead of your own.

My opponent has absolutely no record of ever delivering for anyone other than himself, and as we have come to find out, even that has come at the expense of others.

I've been honored to serve as your senator and will continue to use all the clout you've helped me build to represent our values and help me deliver for Kentucky.



U.S. Senate

Louisville 40205

Editor's comment: I have always figured that defeating Mitch is akin to Kentuckians putting a slug between their eyes, politically speaking.

So stick with Mitch.