<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Wednesday, February 25, 2004

Hillary’s battle against Internet journalists
A new WorldNetDaily book by Richad Poe exposes secrets about Hillary Clinton:

A new book by New York Times best-selling author Richard Poe profiles, for the first time, the true story of how a group of "renegade journalists" – including, prominently, WND's Joseph Farah – fought to expose America’s darkest scandals through the Internet, and how the most powerful woman in the world tried to stop them.

Titled "Hillary's Secret War," this sizzling documentary shows how, from her own "war room" in the White House, Hillary Clinton commanded a secret police operation dedicated to silencing dissent, muzzling media critics, intimidating political foes, whitewashing Clinton scandals, and obstructing justice.

The book is published by WorldNetDaily's own publishing division, WND Books.

Hillary's operatives infiltrated every level of the news media, federal law enforcement, intelligence agencies, and the federal court system, the book chronicles.

Showing that Hillary Clinton and her operatives regarded the "unregulated" datastream of cyberspace as a threat to their power, potentially devastating in its ability to bypass the controlled, corporate media, "Hillary's Secret War" reveals why journalistic "dissidents" on the Internet were persecuted with special ferocity.

Daschle…a Democrat or a South Dakotan
I just received an email from the Million Mom March group urging Daschle to be a good Democrat, turn his back on South Dakota gun owners, and oppose pro-gun legislation:

Tell Senator Daschle: No Immunity for the D.C. Snipers' Gun Dealer

The purpose of this letter is to urge you to contact Senator Tom Daschle. (The best way to do this is to call him - here is his number: (202) 224-2321. The second best way is to e-mail him - click here. http://www.stopthenra.com/site/R?i=cThgM73k9Lf-_v2Mejv72Q.. ) Although Senator Daschle is the leader of Senate Democrats, he is currently supporting legislation to give Bull's Eye, the gun dealer whose negligence armed the D.C. Snipers, immunity. I know it's hard to believe, and totally inconsistent with who Senator Daschle is ... but it's true.

Why is he doing this? Because he comes from South Dakota and is up for re-election, and the National Rifle Association has a lot of influence there? Maybe. We don't know. But that's a bad excuse, isn't it? Senator Daschle says it's not his intention to give immunity to Bull's Eye. The problem is that this bill does give immunity to Bull's Eye.

In fact, the NRA has alerted its members to send Senator Daschle an e-mail thanking him for his support. Tell Senator Daschle he cannot vote to grant immunity to Bull's Eye and other reckless gun dealers. Tell Senator Daschle to be a good Democrat and fix this bill. Tell Senator Daschle that he needs to side with police in this country who oppose this dreadful bill and not with the NRA. Tell Senator Daschle to come to his senses.

What this email doesn't tell its readers is that Bull's Eye would be charged if they illegally sold the gun to the DC Snipers. If fact there is not record of the gun being sold, so it may have been stolen. Criminals don't care about laws, even gun control laws.

Tuesday, February 24, 2004

Tony Dean called inflammatory
Here is content from Tony Dean’s web site:

I have been told that some lobbyists for ag groups have been telling elected officials that this website is "inflammatory."

Maybe, Maybe not.

I am reminded of former President Harry Truman's words.

The "give'em hell" President said he only told the truth about them and they thought they were in hell.

What we did this past legislative session is report on and comment on some of the most blatant anti-conservation and anti-Game, Fish & Parks legislation introduced in decades.

And we told the truth about it, which some groups and individuals did not like. Therefore, they have labeled it inflammatory.

The fact that none of this nonsense passed the legislature suggests that these efforts were far from the mainstream of South Dakota thinking, and that our positions were, in fact, correct ones.

This prompted me to send Tony this email:

Your web site is biased...you proved Sunday that you can't handle the
truth.

Here is Tony’s response:
You trample on the truth so often, you cannot recognize it.
It was a pleasure not shaking your hand, a gesture I reserve for those I am
pleased to meet and those I respect. You're neither.

Trample the truth...where are the specifics behind your false accusations Tony! Sunday, I offered the specifics that countered your false accusations you made in 2002, and you refused them. How are you going to recognize the truth if you refuse to even look? You will never learn…you know what they say about old dogs.

You won’t debate the issues, so you resort to smear tactics. Typical liberal.
Daschle playing both sides of a gun fight
The New York Times is reporting (subscription required) on the Democrats adding anti-gun legislation to the lawsuit immunity bill for gun dealers and manufacturers:

"Things are very fluid," said Tony Orza, chief lobbyist for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, an advocacy group. "We're looking to a fierce fight."

The two other gun measures also have bipartisan backing, and President Bush favors both. But their fate in the Senate is unclear. The first, sponsored by Senators Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia, would renew the assault weapons ban, a 1994 law that bans 19 types of semiautomatic weapons, for another 10 years.

The second, backed by Senator Reed and Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, would close the so-called gun-show loophole by requiring unlicensed gun dealers to conduct instant background checks on customers at gun shows.

Attaching those measures to the immunity bill would create a kind of legislative Catch-22: Will backers of the weapons ban and gun-show checks vote for immunity to get the other two measures passed? Will immunity backers vote for the bill if it includes the other two measures?

"It's a tricky situation," Senator Feinstein said. Of the immunity bill, she said, "I'd really like to just oppose it."

Among those in an especially tricky spot is Senator Tom Daschle, the Democratic leader. He is facing a tough re-election campaign in South Dakota, a rural state where his constituents strongly favor gun owners' rights. He has come out strongly in favor of immunity.

But some of Mr. Daschle's fellow Democrats, including Mrs. Feinstein, have been pressing him to support extending the assault weapons ban and closing the gun-show loophole. On Monday, after days of insisting through a spokesman that he was undecided, Mr. Daschle issued a statement saying that he would support both the ban and the background checks at gun shows.

Both of the anti-gun proposals have Bill Clinton history. There is a web site dedicated to the Clinton gun ban:

Like all firearms, except for fully-automatic machine guns, semi-automatics—including those defined as “assault weapons” by the Clinton ban—fire only once each time the trigger is pulled. They also use the same ammunition as other types of guns.

“Gun control” advocates claim that various military-style attachments—attachments that in their minds re-define semi-automatic firearms as “assault weapons”—provide advantages to criminals. But even the rabidly anti-gun Washington Post admits, “Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of crime.” Data from police experts must be deliberately avoided by those pushing "assault weapons" bills. A clear case in point is the internal memorandum to California Assistant Attorney General Patrick Kenady that warned: “Information on assault weapons would not be sought from forensics laboratories as it was unlikely to support the theses on which the “Assault Weapons” ban legislation would be based.”

The so-called gun show loophole was fabricated by Bill Clinton (who was known to be fast with the truth) in response to the Columbine school shooting. The two shooters illegally obtained a couple of their guns from a gun show. The same anti-gun tactic is in Daschle’s S.22.

Let’s not foreget that the South Dakota Legislature passed SCR 3 (Senate 33-1, House 64-0) which included these findings in regard to gun shows:

A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION, Recognizing the substantial public contribution of gun shows and discouraging inappropriate attempts to regulate or restrict them.
WHEREAS, the right of South Dakotans to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by both the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution and by the twenty-fourth section of the Bill of Rights of the South Dakota Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the revolutionary freedom of our country was secured and protected by the responsible use of firearms by law-abiding American citizens; and
WHEREAS, innumerable Americans, in and out of uniform, have given their lives to preserve our constitutional freedoms; and
WHEREAS, the lawful use of firearms is a daily occurrence, not only for sporting and hunting purposes, but to protect our loved ones, our property, and the public safety; and
WHEREAS, gun shows provide an invaluable community-based opportunity for those law- abiding citizens who choose to exercise this facet of their constitutional rights; and
WHEREAS, gun shows aspire to be wholesome family events that generate substantial positive economic and commercial impact for our cities, counties, and state:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Senate of the Seventy-ninth Legislature of the State of South Dakota, the House of Representatives concurring therein, that community gun shows be recognized for their many positive contributions to South Dakota and all of its citizens; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all future attempts to inappropriately regulate, restrict, encumber, or eliminate gun shows should be judiciously resisted.

South Dakotans should contact Senator Daschle and Senator Johnson and tell them to get on one side of the gun fight…South Dakota’s side!
HB 1191 brought back to life
KELO is reporting the passage of HB 1191 with the ban on most abortions amended back in:

The state Senate has just revived a bill banning abortions in South Dakota.

The bill passed 18-to-15, which is the minimum number of votes needed for passage.

The bill is almost the same as one that passed the House earlier. But it must go back to the House now, because the Senate did make some changes.

Monday, February 23, 2004

Now is the right time for HB 1191
HB 1191 was Hoghoused by the Senate State Affairs Committee due to supposedly pro-live concerns that the time is wrong. They argue the time is wrong because of the current makeup of the Supreme Court. That’s a good point, but not one to stop us from standing tall for the equal protection of unborn life.

First, the makeup of our courts will not change unless South Dakota changes the actions of the Senate Minority Leader, Tom Daschle. Here is an excerpt from a Jeff Gannon report regarding the second filibuster recess appointment by President Bush, Alabama Attorney General William H. Pryor Jr.:

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) said that Pryor "is a man of integrity committed to the rule of law, not making law from the bench."

"I am confident he will impartially interpret the law and uphold justice," Frist added.

His counterpart, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD), architect of the Democratic filibusters, did not respond to a request from Talon News for comment. Daschle faces a tough reelection campaign where obstruction of the president's agenda is a key issue.

Daschle's Democratic colleagues expressed their opposition to the appointment.
Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) said, "Regularly circumventing the advise and consent process is not the way to change the tone in Washington."

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), another member of the Judiciary Committee, complained that Bush's action was "a flagrant abuse of presidential power."

"This is an outrageous appointment of a nominee who has questionable commitment to the authority of the Supreme Court and the rule of law," Kennedy said, referring to Pryor's criticism of the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision, which in effect created a constitutional right to abortion.

Democratic presidential front-runner Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) has indicated that as president he would only appoint judges to the U.S. Supreme Court who support Roe v. Wade.

By passing HB 1191 in its House form, we should expect Senator Daschle to use his clout to stop the filibuster of pro-life judges…who are like minded with the constitutional belief held by most South Dakotans that the unborn deserve equal protection. Its time for Daschle to show his worth for reasons more important than money. For those that want to argue that the proponents only want to make a political point don’t understand that our rights are being held hostage at the Federal level, and we should look at our Federal representatives for support.

Second, Daschle can help make room in the Supreme Court by supporting the impeachment of Justices. This was done once in American history as reported in a Joseph Farah column:

Impeachment of a Supreme Court justice is not without precedent. In 1805, Samuel Chase was impeached. Back in the 1960s, Lyndon Johnson's friend Abe Fortas was threatened with impeachment and resigned. It can happen again. It must happen again.

Some have written to me to tell me it is a hopeless crusade.

I tell you even if it fails, it is absolutely necessary to change the dynamic with regard to future court nominations. It's time to put the judicial activists on the defensive. It's time to get the country mobilized against a "living Constitution." It's time to awaken the nation to the absolute essential task of taking our court system back – from the top down.

Don't expect the politicians to lead this movement. It's up to you. Politicians don't lead, they follow. And they will follow you, America, if you rise up in righteous anger against this coup by the "Sodomy 6.”

As Farah argued, it is up to us to get things going. The time is right to pass HB 1191. Then put the Supreme Court on notice that we are truly serious.

Third, Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade is currently challenging that case. Here is an excerpt from a FoxNews report:
A federal appeals court has agreed to hear a request from the woman formerly known as "Jane Roe" to reconsider the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion.

Norma McCorvey, who joined with anti-abortion activists nearly 10 years ago, is seeking to have the decision overturned, citing what she says is more than 30 years of evidence that abortions are psychologically harmful to women.

I believe that these three points make it absolutely imperative that HB 1191 is amended back to its original form and becomes law. Our founding fathers received pressure from some not to challenge the tyranny of the British government. Likewise, we should not listen to those who are afraid to challenge the tyranny of the Federal courts. We will give up a lot less than what our founding fathers did.

South Dakota has the best opportunity to lead the nation in a fight for the constitutional right to life for those who cannot fight. Further, we should welcome those who come from other States to join in the fight. In the spirit of Abe Lincoln…I say charge on!!!!

Sunday, February 22, 2004

South Dakota Politics is really hot
Jason at South Dakota Politics has some great posts on Tom Daschle. Check out:

BOMBSHELL
Ross' column "contagious"
Daschle's schizoid politics

Sibby confronts Tony Dean
With the op-ed about Tony Dean running in today’s Argus Leader (see previous post) and with him in my hometown of Mitchell, I thought it was destiny that I provide him with the thick backup materials to that op-ed in person.

I strolled into Cabela’s with my deer hunting partner with camera in hand. We saw Tony at the front register, then he turned and walked toward the back of the store. He entered the bargain room in the very back, where I showed him the op-ed. He acknowledged reading it, so I offered him the backup material. He immediately refused the document and then realized who he was talking to. I offered him my hand, but he refused to shake it. Suddenly anger took over him and he stated that he did not appreciate a thing that I have done. So I said he is entitled to his opinion and I left him.

Later I remember a post from his web site that made this statement:

There was the undertone of anger I heard in the voices of Rep. Jim Lintz of Hermosa and others who had signed on as sponsors of this legislation. Seething anger, simmering beneath the surface. I’ve heard it before in similar situations but I have never understood it.

Today, Tony Dean may still not understand anger, even though he lived it. My deer hunting partner did get a photo of that moment.

Sibby Online in today’s Argus Leader
Today’s Argus Leader printed an op-ed I hand delivered to Randell Beck. It is not on line, so here it is:

The Argus Leader Editorial Board ran a editorial on 1/8/2004 titled, “Keep Senate Race clean”. This was in reference to the upcoming Thune verse Daschle race. The Argus Leader put the responsibility solely on the “candidates and their supporters”. Specifically the Argus Leader signaled out the Club for Growth as supporters who - they claim - run “anti-Daschle commercials”.

The piece continued to point its finger at conservatives by saying, “For Republicans, this is just as much about voting Daschle out as it is voting Thune in”. Then the editorial stated “voting records were fair game”, but “using innuendo – instead of facts” was wrong.

Those who live in a house of mirrors should not be throwing stones. Instead the Argus Leader should look into the mirror and see that they were as much responsible for the negative tone of the 2002 Senate Race as anybody. I will use the gun issue to demonstrate this.

As a member of NRA, I was invited to attend the NRA’s 9/23/2002 endorsement of John Thune. To my surprise, David Kranz’s 9/22/2003 column was titled, “Sportsman split in support of Senate candidates”. This began the negative attack of Tony Dean against the NRA. Kranz stated, “Dean says Thune and Johnson both support the Second Amendment, which guarantees the right to bear arms.”

The day following the 9/23/2002 NRA endorsement of Thune, Kranz wrote a Argus Leader report titled, “Thune, Johnson backers dispute records on guns”. In that negative report Kranz included false accusations from Tony Dean and Democrat partisan Clark Butler against the members of the NRA whose endorsement was based on the candidates voting record.

In a 9/25/2003 email to Kranz I brought up Johnson’s voting records which included support for the anti-gun Million Mom March, that was lead my Rosie O’Donnell. He never responded, so I mailed him copies of the Congressional Record which he also never responded to. Tony Dean was allowed his negative anti-NRA innuendo while Johnson’s voting record was never covered.

Therefore, the 1/8/2004 Argus Leader editorial is simply an attempt to hypocritically shift blame. More disturbing than that was a 6/15/2003 Randell Beck column regarding Linda Daschle’s role in lobbying for Boeing’s controversial 767 tanker deal with the Air Force. He said, “when she does go to bat for the airplane manufacturer, she handles commercial, not military, issues”. I sent him the 2001 lobbying report that tied her directly to the scandal.

After sending the lobbying report, follow up emails, and addressing the issue with him on a Sioux Falls talk radio program, he refuses to admit his mistake.

I do hope that the 2004 Senate race is different than the 2002 race. For a change, the Argus Leader coverage has to be unbiased, truthful, and probes into the actual voting records of the candidates. In order to have a chance at a clean Senate Race, the Argus Leader has to come clean with the truth about the life-long personal love for Democrats by its political reporter David Kranz and the Argus Leader also needs to add an objective ombudsman.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?