South Dakota Politics

Judges

I see Prof. Blanchard and I are in agreement...again.  We really have to coordinate these things. 

What Will Tim Johnson Do?

Why are the Democrats so impassioned on the issue of judges in the first place?  Each party has its constituencies.  It just so happens that the interest groups supporting the Democrats on this are extremist groups, such as the National Abortion Rights Action League who see abortion as a positive good, and those like People For the American Way who have an active antipathy towards religious people who are socially conservative. See No Left Turns for an example of the rhetorical gymnastics the Left must engage in order to explain that they just plain don't like religious people. It's just that Democrats like Chuck Schumer call it "strongly held beliefs."  See they're OK with religious people, as long as those religious people aren't too serious about it.  As political scientist Geoffrey Layman has pointed out in his book The Great Divide, most activists in the Democratic Party don't just disagree with religious conservatives, they actively hate religious conservatives 

If Tom Daschle were still in the Senate he would be cheerleading these efforts to torpedo nominees on the basis of their religious views or because they are insufficiently enthusiastic about abortion on demand.  Now that these nominees rated as qualifed. and in Priscilla Owen's case well qualified, by the ABA are going to come to a vote, one wonders how Sen. Johnson will vote. If he votes "no" he can't claim they weren't qualified because the ABA says differently.  What other reasons might he come up with? 

Everyone sees disaster in the Senate Compromise

Powerline:

What a hideous deal! The Democrats have agreed to cloture on only three nominees, and they have made no commitment not to filibuster in the future, if there are "extraordinary circumstances." Of course, the Dems think any nominee who is a Republican is "extraordinary." The Dems have just wriggled off the hook on some of the nominees that, politically, some of them did not want to be seen voting against.

Talkleft:

The worst, the compromise is in. Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor are in. Total capitulation by Democrats. Total victory for Frist. Let them spin it how they want, it's a loss for the Democrats. Henry Saad of Michigan is the fall guy. He won't get a vote. No one cared about him anyway. That's tossing the Dems a chicken bone.

I have to say I think Powerline is wrong.  This saves the filibuster but otherwise commits no one to anything, except for the first three judges mentioned above. The next time the Democrats are tempted to say that the circumstances are extraordinary, Republicans will say that's baloney, and were back where we started only with a few key appointments past he bar.   That's a clean win. 

Mixed Nuts

Conservatives seem to be apoplectic about the filibuster deal.  You can read NROs Bench Memos here, and John Hinderaker's effusive denunciation of Republicans here.  I see the point some of them are making.  If Republicans are in the majority, why not act like it?  If President Bush is nominating qualified people to the judiciary, and he is, then they should all be confirmed.  If it is wrong to filibuster qualified judicial nominees, then it is wrong to filibuster all of them, including Henry Saad and William Meyers.  Republicans gave up for dead two men who are qualified, and the principle that all nominees should get an up and down vote, while getting three wrongly assailed judges (Brown, Owen, and Pryor) that they likely would have gotten anyway.  So much for Republicans being able to ram their agenda through Congress. 

That said, Republicans gained the three judges they wanted most without having to resort to changing Senate rules.  The Democrats that were part of this deal agree not to filibuster except in "extraordinary circumstances."  I would not doubt that for most Democrats "extraordinary circumstances" means anyone to the right of William Kunstler, but if Democrats do filibuster a nominee, Republicans can simply say that the deal has been broken and they are free to change Senate rules.  The fact that Democrats agreed to this at all tells me that they thought they had a losing hand agreed to allow the judges that their left-wing constituency disliked most.  Let's call this a victory with costs for the Republicans. 

I realize I am a broken record on this, but I continue to maintain that Republicans are mistaken in attempting to change the filibuster rules and should simply make the Democrats hold up the entire work of the U.S. Senate while they filibuster highly qualified judicial nominees.  Also, barring serious ethical questions, I think presidents of either party should be given the benefit of the doubt on all judicial nominees. 

Senate Compromise

Sounds like a compromise on the Senate filibuster issue. 

UPDATE:  Associated Press:

Under the terms, Democrats agreed to allow final confirmation votes for Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor, named to appeals court seats. There is "no commitment to vote for or against" the filibuster against two other conservatives named to the appeals court, Henry Saad and William Myers.

The agreement said future nominees to the appeals court and Supreme Court should "only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances," with each Democrat senator holding the discretion to decide when those conditions had been met.

Filibuster

San Francisco Chronicle:

The Senate careened toward a historic showdown Monday on President Bush's stalled judicial nominees and its own filibuster rules, the outcome in doubt as centrists from both parties struggled for a compromise.

"The moment draws closer when all 100 United States senators must decide a basic question of principle," Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said as the rap of the Senate's gavel opened a scheduled day-and-night session, prelude to Tuesday's climactic votes. "Whether to restore the precedent of an up-or-down vote ... or to enshrine a new tyranny of the minority." ...

At the Capitol, cots were brought in, available for senators to nap on as the late debate wore on.

Supreme Court

The United States Supreme Court ruled today on the constitutionality of the federal beef checkoff program.  Some South Dakotans were plaintiffs.

UPDATE:  Here's more from The New York Times:

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that the government was within its rights to force beef producers to pay for a multimillion-dollar ''Beef: It's what's for dinner'' marketing program, even when individual cattle producers disagreed with the campaign.

The 6-3 decision is a defeat for farmers in several agricultural sectors who oppose paying mandatory fees for advertising they may later oppose. Currently, there are dozens of similar federal and state ad campaigns for products including milk, pork and cotton, many of which are being challenged on free speech grounds.

The beef campaign is a form of ''government speech'' immune to First Amendment challenge, the court said.

''The message set out in the beef promotions is from beginning to end the message established by the federal government,'' Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in an opinion joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist as well as Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Clarence Thomas and Stephen G. Breyer.

At issue was a 1985 law requiring producers to pay a $1-per-head fee on cattle sold in the United States. That fee, which generates more than $80 million per year, goes to an industry group appointed by the Agriculture Department to support advertising and research programs.

Anti-Americanism Fails in Germany

Gerhard Schroeder managed to become the poster child of Anti-Americanism in 2002 when he saved his Social Democratic party by running not against the Christian Democrats so much as against George Bush and the war in Iraq.  As it was Schroeder's extremely cynical campaign produced a very narrow victory. 

ELECTION RESULTS 2002
PARTIES	VOTE
Social Democrats	38.5%
CDU-CSU	38.5%
Greens	8.6%
Free Democrats	7.4%
PDS	4.0%
Others	2.6%
Source: Federal Electoral Commission

With the SDP and the CDU (the major left and centrist parties), the outcome was determined by their coalition partners.  The Greens gave Schroeder the edge in 2002 by coming in a little ahead of the Free Democrats.

But yesterday Schroeder's SDP suffered a calamitous defeat in local elections after having tried the same trick again.  This by John Fund in the Wall Street Journal.

Yesterday, facing a likely loss in elections in Germany's largest state, North Rhine-Westphalia, his Social Democratic Party's union backers played another anti-American card, this time depicting U.S. investors as blood-sucking parasites. Social Democratic chairman Franz Muntefering compared hedge funds to "swarms of locusts." This time, the tactic failed. Mr. Schoeder's party went down to a stunning defeat, losing the largely working-class state, home to one out of five Germans, for the first time in nearly 40 years. Last night Mr. Schroeder announced he would hold national elections this fall, a year ahead of schedule. [my emphasis].

As an example of the campaign, consider the following cartoons from David's Medienkritik:

The caption above translates: U.S. Firms in Germany: Bloodsuckers.

Perhaps this kind of thing finally irritated the German electorate, or maybe Anti-Americanism is just loosing its venom. 

 

Explaining Democracy to Howard Dean

I don't know how it appeared on television, but the transcript of Howard Dean's appearance on Meet the Press yesterday reads like a man Hell bent on destroying his party.  There are many things one could comment on, but I will just chose one.  The Chair of the Democratic Party says:

Without extended debate, [Bush] can march marshal his party and just ram it right through.  They already ram things through the House.  We need more than one party in charge.  And the vote on Tuesday is going to be critical to decide whether American democracy still allows those of us who didn't vote for the president to have any say in running the country whatsoever.

"We need more than one party in charge"?  Well, we have a way to secure that reality, Mr. Dean.  They're called elections, and your party keeps losing them.  If the American public wanted "more than one party in power" then they'd vote that way, and often have.  Say what you will about the 2000 election, but Bush's success in 2004 is unqualified for all except the loony left.  Further, the Democrats have not won either of the chambers of Congress since 1992.  Let's not forget that the brief Democratic control of the Senate in 2001-2002 did not come as the result of an election, but of party switching.  At the first opportunity, the American people put the Republicans back in charge of the Senate.  One of the Democratic arguments in favor of their unprecedented efforts in filibustering judicial nominees is that due to the nature of the Senate (with equal representation of states) Senators representing a minority of the country could actually make up a majority of Senate votes and "ram through" a judicial nominee.  See, the Democrats can't decide if they like minority rights or hate them.  So they defend minority rights by making up phony constitutional arguments about the filibuster (which, of course, is not in the Constitution) and then whining about the very Constitutional nature of the Senate.  And if the Republicans have the ability to "ram through" their programs, I must say they are doing a pretty poor job of it so far.  My advice to Chairman Dean is, if you want the Democrats to have more of a say in what goes on in Washington you might want to consider winning an election sometime.  Less left-wing drivel, more vote getting. 

Why Did We Elect Sen. Thune?

In the squabbles over who is to blame for the Ellsworth situation, let us remind ourselves of one of the reasons many South Dakotans voted for John Thune over Tom Daschle.  I refer you to the latest piece by Robert Novak:

Indeed, the question of who shall sit on the Supreme Court is the reason for this crisis. It is the reason key Senate Democrats held an unprecedented meeting in Minority Leader Tom Daschle's office on Jan. 30, 2003. Thanks to Republican discovery of Democratic e-mails, an unprecedented documentary record reveals a pure political power play.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Senate's 73-year-old  liberal lion, has orchestrated a solid Democratic front that has succeeded beyond all expectations. It has kept 16 Bush nominees off the appellate bench, some permanently. But Kennedy went too  far. Had he blocked two or three judges, the reaction would have been modest. Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, hardly a fire-eating Republican, told the Senate Friday that the nominees are being "held hostage as pawns in a convoluted chess game that is spinning out of control."

Daschle tried to sell himself as just good old moderate Tom Daschle who is one of us and shares "South Dakota values."  Remember, he was an alter boy here in Aberdeen, voters were reminded.  On the other hand, back in Washington, Daschle was at the core of an "unprecedented" effort by the leader of the far Left of the Democratic party to radically alter the course of the Senate in the name of destroying any potential Supreme Court nominee who might dissent from the Democratic orthodoxy that the US must have abortion on demand through nine months of pregnancy and that abortion on demand must be judicially imposed by the Supreme Court by perverting the language of the Constitution.  If Tom Daschle were still in the Senate he would be at the front of the Democratic effort to abuse the meaning of "advise and consent" and would be giving aid and comfort to those digging up dirt to destroy the reputation of any potential Supreme Court nominee who does not bow before the goddess of Roe v. Wade. 

More Decline of the West

Prof. Blanchard comments on the sickening of Europe.  Then today there is this piece in US News and World Report about Europe's "aggressive secularism."  The article references George Weigel's The Cube and the Cathedral which I read last week.    I recommend this slender volume to those interested in the confluence of religious thought and political thought and also for those interested in the subject of Europe's impending death.  As US News points out:

One consequence of this is the changing demographic character of the Continent. With Europe's native-born labor force declining since World War II, the need for more workers helped boost the Muslim population from about 1 million in 1945 to about 18 million today. By now, it is clear that many of the guest workers have come to stay--and the addition of Turkey to the EU would bring about 62 million more Muslims into the European fold. Islam scholar Bernard Lewis is not alone in saying that Europe will be Islamic by the end of the 21st century "at the very latest." To many who think that Europe is more a cultural than a geographic entity, this would alter the very core of European identity.

Weigel provides the following stunning facts: Eighteen European nations report "negative natural increase" (more deaths than live births); no western European Country has a replacement level birthrate; Europe's retired population will increase by 55% in the next twenty-five years while its working population will decline by 8%; Germany is on pace to lose the equivalent of the population of the former East Germany by 2050; and perhaps most stunning, by 2050 42% of Italians will be over 60, at which point almost 60% of Italians will have no brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, or uncles. 

I have noted before the economic disaster that awaits Europe.  They have a rapidly aging population with an enormous welfare state that promises to take care of them but they do not have the workforce or the productivity to support such a welfare state economically.  The consequences the future of civilization and for stability in the world are dire. 

Fun State Law of the Day

In 1883, the territorial legislature of Dakota passed a law stating that students and non-students who disrupted the "proper order" of public schools through "acts of violence, boisterous conduct or threatening language" could be fined $20 and put in the county jail for 10 days.

NASCAR Politics

In case you missed it, The New York Times Book Review looked at two new books about the rise of NASCAR and noted some political implications (there is, naturally, lots of coastie Times' sneering about "run-away Republicanism; anti-intellectualism: the corn-pone memes of God and guns and guts; crass corporatization; Toby Keith anthems...").

The Daschle Staffer Blogs' Trouble with the Facts

One of the several lefty/anti-Thune blogs run by former Daschle staffers is now bashing Thune for being in New York City last week.  Trouble is, Thune was NOT in NYC last week.  The lefty blog just made that up.  Of course, this comes from the blog run by the former Daschle staffer who writes about "ripping Thune's n--s off" and promotes "F-- John Thune" t-shirts and was detained by police in 2002 for stalking Thune.  Some real gems, those embittered former Daschle staffers.  To be completely accurate, of course, we could say they are still Daschle staffers.  Daschle's former campaign manager, Steve Hildebrand, has been paid since the election by Daschle's campaign fund and by his political action committee and the fellow who just made up the fact that Thune was in NYC works for Hildebrand.  So Daschle is paying for all these attacks.  It's worth noting that this month is the one-year anniversary of Daschle's major address at Kansas State University opposing the "startling meanness" in American politics.  Yeah right.  Maybe the press should ask Senator Daschle, who many believe wants to run against Thune in 2010, if he's bought any of the "F--- John Thune" t-shirts that his staffers are promoting.

Newsweek

Newsweek has a new policy:

Newsweek Chairman Richard M. Smith, responding to a week of criticism over a retracted story about the desecration of the Koran, said yesterday that the magazine is restricting its use of anonymous sources.

"The cryptic phrase 'sources said' will never again be the sole attribution for a story in Newsweek," Smith wrote in a letter to readers.

The retracted item, which sparked violent protests in Afghanistan and elsewhere that killed 16 people, relied on one unnamed government official in saying that military investigators had confirmed that U.S. guards at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility had flushed a copy of the Koran down the toilet. The item was attributed to "sources," although there was only a single source, who Newsweek said later backed off his account.

Judges

Washington Post:

Barring a last-minute compromise, Democrats tomorrow will again try to block the confirmation of Priscilla R. Owen, one of the 10 appellate court nominees they thwarted in Bush's first term. If they succeed, Frist says he will seek a change in Senate precedents to bar the filibustering of judicial nominees. Vice President Cheney is ready to occupy the presiding officer's chair in case he is needed to break a 50-50 tie in Frist's favor.

King Abdullah of Jordan on Iraq and Bush

Jordan has long been a voice of reason in the Middle East.  This brief interview Lally Weymouth conducted with King Abdullah  is striking reading.  From the Washington Post:

How do you see the situation in Iraq?

I think at the end of the day Iraq will succeed and stand on its own two feet and be independent and completely capable. . . . The Iraqis have matured over the past several months and they believe that they have to make Iraq for Iraqis. I think that the turning point was the elections on January 30. They were successful beyond my expectations if I can be that honest, and I was very pleased to see that 8 million people went to the polls under the threat of the insurgents and terrorist attacks. It meant Iraqis wanted to take the risk for their future, and I think it can only get better from now on.

I am excited that all the different sectors of Iraqi society are beginning to reach out to each other. The level of success will be determined in the elections in December [after a new constitution is written] and what we are looking to achieve is an outreach between Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite factions.

This comment is especially poignant in light of the news that a large block of Sunnis have dropped their boycott of Iraqi elections and are now seeking to enter the government.  Again from the WaPo:

BAGHDAD, May 21 -- More than 1,000 Sunni Arab clerics, political leaders and tribal heads ended their two-year boycott of politics in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq on Saturday, uniting in a Sunni bloc that they said would help draft the country's new constitution and compete in elections.

Sunnis have remained on the sidelines of the Iraqi government since then. Most Sunnis boycotted national elections in January that put the long-suppressed Shiite majority in charge. Meanwhile, a Sunni-led insurgency appears to have become increasingly unpopular among ordinary Iraqis as the death toll from bombings and other attacks climbs.

"The country needs Sunnis to join politics," Adnand Dulaimi, a government-appointed overseer of Sunni religious sites and a leader of the drive to draw Sunnis into the rebuilding of Iraq, declared at the conference Saturday where the bloc was assembled. "The Sunnis are now ready to participate."

How important were Bush's policies to the movement toward democracy in the Middle East?  King Abdullah is candid about this.

How do you feel about the Bush administration's push to spread democracy in the Middle East and your own moves toward reform? Is the American effort helpful?

I think it is helpful. President Bush actually triggered reform in that it became a subject for debate, which it wasn't as of two years ago. If you look at the Palestinian and Iraqi elections in January, both of which I think were largely successful, I think that set the tone. Whenever you have successful elections and signs of democracy moving in the right way in the Middle East, it creates a positive energy that makes countries move faster. So what is happening around [us] is a good signal for Jordan that we need to continue the pace of reform if not accelerate it.

And there you have it.  President Bush actually triggered reform in that it became a subject for debate, which it wasn't as of two years ago.  If Jordan thinks so, its reasonable to think so. 

The Decline of the West

Western Civilization, that is.  One of the things that characterizes the left/right divide in American politics is this: the left would like to be more like Europe (generous welfare states, more controls over the market), whereas the right would like to be less like Europe.  But what is Europe like?  A couple of articles zero on the increasing decrepitude of the Camp of the Saints.

The European economy is no longer growing at a rate sufficient to buoy up its celebrated social model.  This by Robert Robb at the Arizona Republic:

Right now, the Eurozone economies have growth rates that are a third to a half that of the United States. In the 1990s, the U.S. economy experienced a quantum increase in productivity. European investment in information technology as a percentage of gross domestic product is considerably less than in the United States and is declining. The European Commission estimates that, as of this year, labor productivity per hour in the European Union will have declined from 97 percent of the U.S. level in the mid-1990s to only about 88 percent.

The EU produces only about 70 percent of the U.S. GDP per capita. It has a smaller portion of its population in the workforce and much higher unemployment among those wanting to work.

Europeans work fewer hours per year and retire earlier. Over the course of a lifetime, American workers put in 40 percent more hours than their European counterparts.

The Europeans are not clueless about this, but their politics make it almost impossible to do anything about it.

In Europe, it's harder to eliminate jobs, which makes employers more reluctant to create them to begin with. Much more of the workforce is covered by collective bargaining, making pay-for-performance wage structures difficult. Unemployment benefits tend to be more generous and last considerably longer.  Higher taxes and less flexible labor markets lead to less investment and slower growth.

European leaders have a very difficult political path to tread. There appears to be great reluctance by their publics to give up any of the security, protections and benefits of the social model. Yet without higher economic growth, the model is unsustainable. But higher economic growth requires reforming the model.

The new president of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, has made reform and economic growth his priority. His vice president, Gunter Verheugen, has improved competitiveness as his primary portfolio.  But their first initiative - opening up the service sector to greater cross-country competition within the European Union - has come a cropper. France and Germany buried it, fearing the effect of competition from newly admitted members from Eastern Europe.

It is this that threatens to torpedo the new European Constitution, which right now seems to be loosing in France.  That's the country that more or less gave birth to the European Union. 

The demographic problem is even worse.  This from the Investor's Business Daily:

Europe is changing. The birthrate, now at 1.5 live births per female, is well below the 2.1 required just to replace its population. Birthrates of immigrant Muslim populations there are three times the average. Upshot: By 2020 or so, the European population will fall by more than 4% while the Muslim population will double.

By 2050, just to keep the current worker-to-retiree ratio intact, Europe will have to bring in an estimated 13.5 million immigrants each year. That's 608 million immigrants — the equivalent of 10 Germanys — over 45 years. Anything less will consign the Continent to unavoidable economic decline.

And where will all these newcomers come from? The same places they've come from in the past — Turkey, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Pakistan — all Muslim. Europe's new nursery.

This has ramifications for America as well. We assume that the Europe we'll be dealing with tomorrow will be much the same as Europe today — one that understands and shares our cultural values. The fact is, as Europe slowly becomes more Muslim and less European, it is at risk of dying — not as a place, but as a culture.

Whatever we want the United States to be, it can't be more like Europe.

 

Essay of the Day

The essay of the day appears in the San Francisco Chronicle and is entitled "Leaving the left; I can no longer abide the simpering voices of self-styled progressives -- people who once championed solidarity."  The author's credentials as a man of the left are exceptional.  Excerpt:

My estrangement hasn't happened overnight. Out of the corner of my eye I watched what was coming for more than three decades, yet refused to truly see. Now it's all too obvious. Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually cheering against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.

Like many others who came of age politically in the 1960s, I became adept at not taking the measure of the left's mounting incoherence. To face it directly posed the danger that I would have to describe it accurately, first to myself and then to others. That could only give aid and comfort to Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and all the other Usual Suspects the left so regularly employs to keep from seeing its own reflection in the mirror.

Now, I find myself in a swirling metamorphosis. Think Kafka, without the bug. Think Kuhnian paradigm shift, without the buzz. Every anomaly that didn't fit my perceptual set is suddenly back, all the more glaring for so long ignored. The insistent inner voice I learned to suppress now has my rapt attention. "Something strange -- something approaching pathological -- something entirely of its own making -- has the left in its grip," the voice whispers. "How did this happen?" The Iraqi election is my tipping point. The time has come to walk in a different direction -- just as I did many years before. ...

I began my activist career championing the 1968 presidential candidacies of Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy, because both promised to end America's misadventure in Vietnam. I marched for peace and farm worker justice, lobbied for women's right to choose and environmental protections, signed up with George McGovern in 1972 and got elected as the youngest delegate ever to a Democratic convention.

Eventually I joined the staff of U.S. Sen. Howard Metzenbaum, D-Ohio. In short, I became a card-carrying liberal, although I never actually got a card. (Bookkeeping has never been the left's strong suit.) All my commitments centered on belief in equal opportunity, due process, respect for the dignity of the individual and solidarity with people in trouble. To my mind, Americans who had joined the resistance to Franco's fascist dystopia captured the progressive spirit at its finest.

A turning point came at a dinner party on the day Ronald Reagan famously described the Soviet Union as the pre-eminent source of evil in the modern world. The general tenor of the evening was that Reagan's use of the word "evil" had moved the world closer to annihilation. There was a palpable sense that we might not make it to dessert.

When I casually offered that the surviving relatives of the more than 20 million people murdered on orders of Joseph Stalin might not find "evil'" too strong a word, the room took on a collective bemused smile of the sort you might expect if someone had casually mentioned taking up child molestation for sport.

My progressive companions had a point. It was rude to bring a word like "gulag" to the dinner table.

I look back on that experience as the beginning of my departure from a left already well on its way to losing its bearings.

I hope I don't say this very often, but the above essay is a must-read.  Follow the link and read the whole thing.  It tells us much about our politics at the moment.

Media Bias on Stem Cell Story

President Bush has long been subject to extreme media bias on his stem cell research policy.  His position is certainly debatable: he proposed federal funding for stem cell research on existing cell lines, and this for the first time, but opposed any funding for projects that would involve creating new embryos in order to harvest them for cells.  This is almost by definition a moderate policy, taking a mean between two extremes.  But the media routinely described his position as extreme, and mischaracterized the policy as a ban on stem cell research.  In fact it was a ban on nothing.  Private research was un affected.  Moreover it would be the first time a President authorized Federal support for such projects  The Federal Government merely made choices between which types of research it would fund.

Now another Republican has been subject to the same yellowed journalism.  This from William Saletan at Slate:

Last week, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney proposed four amendments to a bill supporting stem cell research. The Boston Globe headlined the story, "Romney urges changes to stem cell bill—Adds amendment to prohibit cloning." The Globe's fourth paragraph explained, "The governor has echoed the hopes of many that stem cell research may one day find treatments for diseases, and he shares the conviction that the research is important to the state … But the governor has split with a large majority in the Legislature over cloning human cells." If you read the Globe, you get the impression Romney supports stem cell research but opposes cloning.

That isn't the impression you get if you read the New York Times. The Times' report on the same proposal never mentioned cloning. "New Limits Are Proposed for Research on Stem Cells," said the headline. The lede paragraph explained only that Romney proposed "excluding a type of embryonic stem cell research" (ESCR). The story never mentioned that Romney supported ESCR apart from cloning.

In short, Governor Romney is strongly in favor of the research, a fact that the NYTs buried.  He is opposed only to human cloning. 

The difference is enormous. In a poll taken two months ago by advocates of therapeutic cloning (also known as somatic cell nuclear transfer, or SCNT), 70 percent of likely Massachusetts voters supported ESCR, but 84 percent opposed cloning to produce a human birth. The word "cloning" was so radioactive that the pollsters omitted it from their questions about SCNT. They called the product of SCNT an "altered egg" and emphasized that "no sperm is used." When they asked voters to choose between pro-SCNT and anti-SCNT arguments, they left out the bottom line of the anti-SCNT argument: that cloned embryos would be destroyed. Instead, they said the argument's bottom line was that SCNT would "lead to cloning babies"—an empirical claim most voters rejected. Politically, "stem cells" is a winner. "Cloning" is a loser.

This is science politicized.  Without alternative media like Slate and this blog, where would you here the full story?

Thune's BRAC legislation

The Daschle holdouts can't seem to accept the fact that the war is over and are scorning Senator Thune's efforts to save Ellsworth Air Force Base at a time when every South Dakotan who cares about saving Ellsworth should be pulling together.  Amazingly, people who are directly under Daschle's imprimatur promote "F--k off, John Thune" t-shirts, openly admit they are bitter about the last election, publicly muse about "ripping Thune's n--s off," and yet for some reason are taken seriously by the local press when they issue releases attacking Thune.  The vicious nature of the Daschle campaign that hid behind humbug about "startling meanness" in politics has finally been unmasked.   

By the way, isn't it remarkable how the Daschle holdouts are implicitly stating that someone who has been in the Senate for five months has more capability to lead on the BRAC issue than Senator Johnson, who has been in the Senate for eight years?  In the Daschle holdouts' rush to descend on Thune at a moment of perceived vulnerability, Daschle's contempt for Johnson has also been unmasked. 

Anyway, earlier this week, Senator Thune attended a hearing held in Washington by the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission at which Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. John Jumper testified.  The AP recorded the Thune-Jumper confrontation in a couple of photos, as seen below.

On Thursday, Senator Thune introduced legislation to postpone the 2005 round of defense base closure and realignment.  You can read the contents of his bill (S. 1075) at this link.   

Here's a photo of Senator Thune's press conference on Thursday promoting his BRAC postponement bill, at which several co-sponsors of his bill also appeared.

The Washington Post reported on this press conference yesterday, noting particularly that several of these senators praised Thune's leadership on the BRAC issue. Excerpt:

Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) said in front of the seven television cameras in the gallery: "Senator Thune has done us a great service by offering this legislation." Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said: "Let me start by thanking you, Senator Thune, for your leadership." And so it went as each senator spoke.

Clearly, any reasonable observer can see that Senator Thune is working very hard at all levels to save Ellsworth.

Dean's 100 Days

The Dems are frustrated with Chairman Dean's first 100 days.  USA Today:

National party chairmen Howard Dean and Ken Mehlman have the same job titles but different jobs. One is on a mission to rebuild, the other to expand. ...

Mehlman, chairman of the Republican National Committee, is courting black and Hispanic voters on a regular basis. ...[He] has visited Latino neighborhoods and historically black campuses[,] attended black-oriented receptions and ceremonies, spoken to minority chambers of commerce and raised money for Otto Banks of Harrisburg, Pa., a black city council candidate new to the GOP.

Dean, who reaches Day 100 as Democratic National Committee chairman Monday, is for the most part speaking to diehard Democrats who are the backbone of their party. He's addressed Democrats in nine states dominated by Republicans, such as Kansas and Mississippi, and in party strongholds such as California and Massachusetts. He's spoken to labor unions, gay-rights groups and state party chairs — all pillars of the party.

Some Democrats are frustrated by the contrast between the two approaches, even as they praise Dean's efforts to revitalize flagging state parties. "Democrats should be stirring things up, roiling the waters on (the GOP) side the way Mehlman is on ours. He's playing in our sandbox," says Steve Rosenthal, CEO of America Coming Together, a group formed to energize and turn out Democratic voters. ...

Rosenthal, Marshall and others say Democrats — led by Dean — should be reaching out to groups and areas where Republicans have done well: military families, Catholics, evangelical Christians, business leaders, people who live in the "exurbs" beyond even outer suburbs, and people who live in small, "micropolitan" cities. They also say Democrats should focus on black and Latino voters, even though majorities of both voted for Democrat John Kerry for president last year. ...

Dean is offering Democrats his trademark red-meat rhetoric along with guidance on outreach. In speeches covered locally, he has called Republicans "corrupt," "brain-dead" and "mean." "They are not nice people," he said last month in a radio interview on Air America Minnesota, according to the political newsletter Hotline. Last weekend he said House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, whose associates are under investigation but who has not been charged with anything, should go home to Houston to "serve his jail sentence" at Texas expense.

At the same time, Dean tells Democrats they need to "respect people in all 50 states" and try to win them over. "We need to talk to people from our hearts," he told California Democrats. He said Democrats should "say what our values are" and "inform Americans about what we believe instead of letting the other party do it."

Lies from the Religious Left

I remember hearing about this several times.  James Watt sets the record straight.

Last December Moyers received an environmental award from Harvard University. About three paragraphs into the speech, after attacking the Bush administration, Moyers said: "James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony he said, 'After the last tree is felled, Christ will come back.' Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out across the country. They are the people who believe the Bible is literally true -- one-third of the American electorate if a recent Gallup poll is accurate."

I never said it. Never believed it. Never even thought it. I know no Christian who believes or preaches such error. The Bible commands conservation -- that we as Christians be careful stewards of the land and resources entrusted to us by the Creator.

Perhaps Moyers can produce evidence to back up his account, but I wouldn't hold my breath.  Moyers has been dishonest from the beginning, and I rather suspect this is just another blantant lie.

The Permanent Campaign

There must be a special place in Hell for those who create FEC reports.  Or perhaps that is the Hell.  Anyhow, this is what your intrepid blogger found by perusing the April Quarterly report for the Daschle campaign war chest.  This is actual campaign money (you know, A Lot Of People Supporting Tom Daschle), not DASHPAC.  You too can access this information by going here and clicking on the PDF file for the April report at the top. WARNING:  It's a big flippin' file.  For poor suckers like me who are still on dial up, it's a loooong download. 

Since the beginning of 2005 former Daschle campaign manager Steve Hildebrand has personally been paid $2696.63 by the Daschle campaign that supposedly isn't campaigning anymore.  Part of this is $809.56 on Valentine's Day.  Couple this with the $1518.08 he received the same day from DASHPAC, and there was a lot of Daschle love going out to Steve Hildebrand this past Valentine's Day.  You can find these payments on pages 20 and 46 of the PDF document.   Hildebrand's consulting company was paid by the Daschle campaign chest a total of $3000 in March 2005 (three separate payments of $1000).  You can find these expenditures on pages 31-32 of the report.  Add all this up with the DASHPAC money that I noted below, and Mr. Hildebrand and his consulting interests have been paid a total of $13,214.81 by Tom Daschle from January to the end of March 2005. 

As I also noted below, there is nothing necessarily unethical about this.  Perhaps these are payments for services rendered during the campaign.  But it certainly raises questions when those who run "independent" political groups that do nothing other than attack John Thune are actually on the payroll of Tom Daschle.  Daschle has left a possible political future open for himself.  Perhaps he is just never going to stop running for office, and he is still paying people to run his permanent campaign. 

Job Stats

Both Dakotas doing well jobwise.  I found the summary at NRO here (scroll down a bit) and you can see some of the stats from the Joint Economic Committee here and here (pdf warning). 

·        Non-farm payroll employment increased in 46 states and the District of Columbia in April and decreased in 4 states.

Job gains of 10,000 or more occurred in Florida (+21,000), California (+20,400), Illinois (+17,700), Nevada (+13,500), North Carolina (+13,400), Texas (+12,100), and Michigan (+10,000). Job losses were reported in Colorado (-3,600), Delaware (-1,800), Louisiana (-500), and West Virginia (-200).

Ø The largest over-the-month percentage increases in employment were in Nevada, the District of Columbia, North Dakota, Idaho, South Dakota, Iowa, and Wyoming. The largest over-the-month percentage losses in employment were in Delaware and Colorado.

· Over the year ending in April, non-farm payroll employment increased in 48 states and the District of Columbia and fell in 2 states (Michigan and South Carolina). The largest percentage gains were in Nevada (+6.4%), Arizona (+3.9%), Utah (+3.5%), Oregon (+3.3%), and Florida (+3.0%).

· Three states recorded over-the-month unemployment rate decreases that were statistically significant in April (Iowa, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota). Virginia and Washington were the only two states with statistically significant unemployment rate increases in April (+0.3 percentage point each).

Who's on the Daschle Payroll?

Federal election law is a funny thing.  While I tend to dislike many of the limits on how candidates, parties, and PACs raise and spend their money, I really like the disclosure requirements.  You can find interesting things with just a little digging (and it takes some digging because, hey, it's the federal government we're talking about here). 

For example, with just a bit of effort you can find who is getting money from Tom Daschle's political action committee, DASHPAC.  But, you say, isn't Tom Daschle out of office?  Aren't you guys at SDP obsessed with Daschle even after he's been beaten?  Well, Tom Daschle's Senate career may be over (or on hiatus?), but DASHPAC keeps spending.  For example, it might be interesting to note that the South Dakota organizer of Americans United to Protect Social Security is Steve Hildebrand, former campaign manager for Tom Daschle. And it just so happens he is still on the Daschle payroll.  For example on February 14, 2005 (happy Valentine's Day!) Hildebrand received $1518.08 in moneys identified as "salary."  Salary for what?  In March of this year the consulting firm of Hildebrand Tewes in Sioux Falls received a total of $6,000 from DASCHPAC.   So even after his defeat, Daschle is paying people to do political work for him in the state. 

Like Fox News, I report, you decide.  It certainly brings into question the independence of Americans United to Protect Social Security.  This group has been unremitting in its attacks on Senator Thune. Some of the people associated with this group have made crude and vile attacks upon Thune.  Now, is this a non-partisan public interest group, or is it simply another arm of the Daschle camp intent on undermining Senator Thune?  The ties between the Daschle camp are obvious in personnel, and now a financial tie can be shown.  And people wonder why we still pay attention to Daschle.  So far this information comes via the DACHPAC.  It will be interesting to see what the Senator does with the over $700,000 he has remaining in his campaign account. 

Interested readers can read the FEC reports for themselves here.  For each monthly report, click on the PDF file indicated on the right.  I note that there is nothing unethical going on here, but this is information that the public may be interested to know. 

They Love Castro: Part II

Yesterday I noted that twenty-two members of the House opposed a resolution supporting the meeting of democrats in Cuba.  Twenty-one of those in opposition were Democrats.  The lone Republican was cranky libertarian Ron Paul.  One of those Democrats opposing democracy in Cuba is the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Ways and Means, Charles Rangle.  Now we get this via Instapundit:

Citizens from 365 groups across the island are gathering this weekend to hammer out a compact for the creation of a free post-Castro Cuba. This Assembly to Promote Civil Society in Cuba is meeting for the first time under the most incredible of conditions — inside communist Cuba. It could make history. . . .

The new assembly could create a Cuban Charter 77, the document that served as a road map for the post-communist Czechoslovakia under Vaclav Havel. And the group's reasonings about how to design the new society it believes will happen resemble the deliberations of America's Founding Fathers.

But risks are high. On Monday night, government henchmen pounded on the door to arrest one Society delegate, and several others were roughed up by Castro's goons. As fear grows, there will be more thuggery before the week is done. But Society members vow not to quit, no matter what Castro tries.

The link to the whole story at Instapundit is broken, but just google some key words and you can find a cached copy.  What is happening here?  Very important members of the Democratic Party are supporting the Communist goons who beat up pro-democracy organizers while opposing the brave men and women planning for a democratic post-Castro Cuba.  Of course, Castro is proof that only the good die young, because that s.o.b. seems to live forever.  The moral blindness of these Democrats is astounding.  It's no wonder Americans do not trust the Democratic Party on foreign policy.  So much for all the talk about human rights and fighting for social justice. 

How the Mighty Have Fallen

From dominating the Middle East and presiding over a police state which killed a million people to this:

Dems Shutting Down Senate

The New York Times:

As the filibuster fight roiled the Senate for the second day, Republicans lashed out at Democrats on Thursday for disrupting the Senate's legislative business in what both sides acknowledged was a preview of the hostile Senate atmosphere that could follow the looming showdown on judicial nominees.

"Our friends on the other side of the aisle are shutting down the business of the Senate by making it impossible for committees to do the work of the American people on everything from intelligence matters to passing an energy bill when gas prices are at record highs," said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the No. 2 Republican.

Democrats argued that the magnitude of the filibuster debate merited the full attention of lawmakers. They refused to agree to what is usually a routine request to extend committee work beyond the two hours allotted daily under the rules, contending that work would still get done.

"Because of the importance of the debate that is to take place on the Senate floor today, the Senate's attention ought to be turned to this and not committee meetings," Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, said.

There is significant legislation at stake. Besides energy and asbestos measures whose legislative reviews were cut short on Thursday, Congress is trying to pass a major transportation bill and an air quality bill, as well as all of its spending measures. Democrats have said they will not block spending bills, to avoid a full-blown government shutdown.

Newsweek

LGF:

Arab Press Doesn't Believe Newsweek Retraction

Arabist shill Linda S. Heard has a piece in Gulf News, in which she refuses to believe Newsweek’s retraction and threatens the West with more violence unless someone is turned over to the Islamic world and punished. For something that didn’t happen. Did Newsweek really err?

A war on terror cannot be fought with terror. [Putting a Koran in a toilet is now defined as “terror?” —ed.] If America wants respect and cooperation from the Muslim world then it must extend the same courtesies. [This courtesy and respect, of course, only goes one way. —ed.]

Insulting Islam and defacing the Quran will merely serve to inflame the fires of Islamic fundamentalism and anti-Americanism on streets from Casablanca to Kabul.

And rather than deny such incidents have occurred, the Bush administration would do well to investigate, severely punish the offenders and offer its sincere apologies to the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims.

There was recently a televised debate in Qatar as to whether the “war on terror” was a euphemism for a war on Islam. An audience vote showed an almost down the middle split with the no’s having the slight edge.

I don’t think it is but if the bigoted and irreligious within the United States army’s ranks are allowed to get away with using the Quran as a tool for psychological torture, then the day will inevitably come when there will be a seismic shift in the perceptions of moderate Muslims.

It is up to the Bush administration to ensure that day never comes. For if it does, the prediction of Arab League chief Amr Mousa that the gates of hell will open may loom ever larger.

Politically, the Muslim world is currently divided but those who attack Islam and its holy book will inadvertently create a united force with which to be reckoned.

Deadwood Finale

Todd Epp, editor of the Democratic Blog S.D.Watch, has posted on this Sunday's season finale of Deadwood.  I unhesitatingly endorse his tastes, at least when it comes to TV.  Deadwood is my favorite TV show currently in production, running far ahead of second favorite, House. 

It features the finest dialogue I have ever seen in a televised series.  And it of obvious interest to South Dakota, being the best unpaid advertisment for one of our attractions that we could hope for.  If you haven't caught the bug yet, go out and buy the first season on DVD.  I warn you, the language is as raw as it gets, but the number of stories squeezed into the adverage episode is a wonder, and every one of them is finely crafted. 

Thune and Johnson Working Together

As our honorable opposition in the regional blogosphere has noticed, we here at SDP are all for bipartisanship just now.  They are right to subject our motives to some scrutiny, but even if our motives are not altogether pure, as theirs no doubt are, that doesn't mean we aren't right.  Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. 

So I submit this, from the Argus Leader:

As their parties bicker about Senate judicial nominations, South Dakota Sens. Tim Johnson and John Thune are working together to delay the Pentagon process that has targeted Ellsworth Air Force Base for closure.

Thune introduced legislation Wednesday that would delay the base-closing process until most troops return from the Iraq War and the Pentagon issues its Quadrennial Defense Review, which will evaluate the Pentagon's future strategy.  It also would nullify the list of base closings issued May 13.

Thune, a Republican who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, is considering an attempt to add the bill to legislation that authorizes funding for the Department of Defense.  "We need to slow down the process and fully understand the military's long-term needs," Thune said Wednesday.

Johnson, D-S.D., is a co-sponsor of the bill but acknowledged Wednesday that the legislation will be an "uphill political climb" because the Bush administration is certain to oppose it.  "I would put this in the category of doing everything we can," he said.

If there is any hope for Ellsworth, both Senators who ran promising to save it should concentrate on this.  There will be plenty of time to slander each other later. 

They Love Castro

This is from Jay Nordlinger's Impromptus.  Not all Democrats love Castro, of course, but why is it that all who love Castro are Democrats?  I thought they stood for human rights?  They hate the so called bigoted right-wing, but they love Castro who jails people just because they are black, homosexual, or have "subversive" books. 

Tomorrow, an astonishing event is scheduled to take place in Cuba: the General Meeting of the Assembly to Promote Civil Society in Cuba. This is a great democratic gathering, and those participating have put themselves at great risk: For days, Castro has been arresting democratic activists, and otherwise flexing the muscles of his police state.

Various groups and institutions around the world have expressed their solidarity with the Cuban democrats, including the U.S. Congress. The House passed a resolution — and 22 congressmen voted against. Oh, yes.

Who were they? Oh, you know — the usuals: Charles Rangel, Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Barbara Lee, Jim McDermott, Cynthia McKinney, Pete Stark . . .

You’ve heard me say a thousand times before that Rangel is about Castro’s best friend in the United States — at least in the political class. This is doubly a shame, because Rangel is so beloved of the American media. “Good ol’ ‘Chollie,’” they say (because Rangel is a New Yawker, and he talks like that — irresistibly charming guy, most people find).

Guess what he told Meghan Clyne of the New York Sun? He said that he voted against the Cuba-democracy resolution because American politicians “refuse to give the government the respect that it deserves.” He was referring to his friend Fidel’s regime, of course: a regime that imprisons, tortures, and executes at will. That denies its subjects all rights. That is listed by the State Department as terrorist.

Hewitt and Kondracke on Ellsworth

From the Grand Forks Herald: On Friday, Fred Barnes, executive editor of The Weekly Standard magazine, and Morton Kondracke, executive editor of Roll Call, appeared on conservative talk-show host Hugh Hewitt's show. Hewitt said the Bush administration and Congress should support Thune by getting Ellsworth off the closure list.

As Hewitt put it, "they cannot close the one base after the state throws Tom Daschle out."

Kondracke disagreed, saying such a "nakedly political" move would hurt the president. But Barnes agreed with Hewitt: "Some of these bases are going to be saved, and it would be very harmful to John Thune if Ellsworth is not one of them."

Dean

Bob Novak:

After Howard Dean last weekend declared Tom DeLay ought to be in jail, a longtime Democratic operative told me the party's national chairman had momentarily ripped off his muzzle but that it soon would be restored. My source erred, however, in believing that Dean ever had been muzzled. It's just that nobody has paid much attention to his rants.

Since his election as chairman of the Democratic National Committee on Feb. 12, Dean has studiously avoided most national television exposure. But he has been talking to party gatherings across the country, and his intemperate language at these outings contradicts the notion that he has been kept under control. That he will leap onto the national stage Sunday on NBC's ''Meet the Press'' with Tim Russert raises concern among the Democratic political players whether he will contain himself.

Dean's election by the DNC membership was a case of the inmates seizing control of the asylum. After the 2004 election, party leaders spent more than three months in a fruitless effort to find an alternative to Dean. Their fears of money drying up under Dean have largely been realized, but they have deluded themselves into thinking the former Vermont governor who screamed his way out of any hope for the 2004 presidential nomination was under firm restraint.

The party's congressional leaders, Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, sat down with Dean for a heart-to-heart talk. They politely urged him to restrain his rhetoric, to organize rather than inflame. Dean thereupon buried himself in the ''red'' states of Republican America to seek Democratic converts, giving the impression that he was heeding the pleas of the congressional leadership.

He was not. He has described the Republican leadership, in various venues, as ''evil,'' ''corrupt'' and ''brain-dead.'' He has called Sen. Rick Santorum, chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, a ''liar.''

What he said last weekend differed from this invective only in that it was presented to an urban forum and so became public knowledge. Addressing the Massachusetts Democratic convention in Lowell, Dean declared: ''I think DeLay ought to go back to Houston where he can serve his jail sentence down there courtesy of the Texas taxpayers.'' Dean would jail DeLay without trial, without indictment and without accusation of any crime.

National chairmen are supposed to fire up the troops, but Dean's rhetoric crosses a line. What he said was too much even for so tough a partisan Democrat as Rep. Barney Frank, who attended his state's convention in Lowell and was appalled by Dean's language.

Dean's deficiencies as face and voice of the Democratic Party were supposed to be overcome by his legendary prowess, evident by his run for president, raising funds in small packages. That so far has proved a grievous disappointment. First-quarter figures show the DNC received only $13 million from individuals, compared with $32 million raised by the Republican National Committee. Overall figures were $34.2 million by the RNC, $16.7 million by the DNC.

Sense and Sensibility in SDP Posts

A few readers objected to some of the language in my recent post The Next AIDS Crisis II.  We appreciate everyone who takes time out for our blog, so I wish to respectfully defend the posting. 

AIDS is a very serious public health issue, but one that is heavily distorted by political pressures from both sides.  The role of promiscuous sex in the epidemic has always been underplayed, if not altogether ignored, by the media.  The article from the New Yorker, on which I posted, was a conspicuous exception, in large part because the author is trying valiantly to raise the alarm. 

I posted several passages that included very blunt language and vivid descriptions of what is currently going on in the gay community in San Francisco.  I think that such language is largely necessary to get the point across. 

I did however remove one offensive sentence that, after considering a reader's sensible objection, I judged unnecessary.

I do note that other readers said they learned a lot from this post.

Senate Debate

The debate over the blocking of votes on judges has started in the Senate.  From The New York Times:

In his opening remarks, Dr. Frist said Democrats had "radically" altered the traditions of the Senate by blocking votes on 10 of 45 appeals court candidates put forward by Mr. Bush. Even as a bipartisan group of senators sought to head off a climactic vote, Dr. Frist said the filibuster must be brought to a halt either by allowing the Senate to decide the nominations or changing the rules to ban such tactics. "We must restore the 214-year-old principle that every judicial nominee with majority support deserves an up-or-down vote," Dr. Frist said.

Washington Times on yesterday's Senate debate on judges:

At 9:47 a.m., the presiding officer ordered a close to the quarreling and called up Justice Owen -- thus beginning the debate that appears increasingly likely to end in the deployment of the so-called nuclear option.
    In addition to Justice Owen, senators also discussed the nomination of California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown, although her nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was not officially called to the floor.
    Republicans portrayed the nominees as highly accomplished, well-qualified jurists who were retained on their respective courts with higher vote margins than any other justices running in those elections.
    "Janice Rogers Brown can get 76 percent of the vote in California, and Priscilla Owen can get 84 percent of the vote in Texas, but neither can get a vote to be confirmed in the Senate," said Mr. Frist, answering Democratic arguments that the nominees are "out of the mainstream."
    "Are 76 percent of Californians and 84 percent of Texans out of the mainstream?" he wondered. "Denying Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen a vote is what's out of the mainstream."

Dakota Voice

Check out the newest newspaper in South Dakota, the "Dakota Voice."

New Bill

Press release from Senator Thune:

Senator Thune introduces bipartisan bill to delay BRAC

WASHINGTON – Legislation introduced today by Sen. John Thune, R-SD, would delay the current Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round. The legislation would delay the process until most troops return from Iraq, a complete analysis is conducted on overseas facility requirements and several pending reports are released and their impact on BRAC is determined, including two Homeland Security related reports and the Pentagon’s long-term planning document, the Quadrennial Defense Review. The bipartisan bill would, in effect, nullify the base closings recommended by the Pentagon on May 13.

“It doesn’t make sense to close bases now,” Thune said. “Given the permanence of base closings, the Pentagon should take the time to review the recommendations of the QDR and other reports first. We need to slow down the process and fully understand the military’s long-term needs. Furthermore, we should not be undertaking massive BRAC realignments and closures while we are engaged in a war.  This bill will correct what I believe to be a grave error by the Pentagon.”

A bipartisan group of senators is co-sponsoring the legislation, including Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Susan Collins (R-ME), Pete Domenici (R-NM), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Trent Lott (R-MS), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Ted Stevens (R-AK) and John Sununu (R-NH).

“Senators from Maine to Alaska are standing united against the Pentagon’s premature plans to close military bases,” Thune said. “The Pentagon’s recommendations got a very cold reception in Congress. It’s common sense to wait for the Overseas BRAC and QDR before we move forward.”

The Quadrennial Defense Review Report is due to be released early next year.  The QDR is a comprehensive examination of America’s future defense needs, including potential threats, force structure, strategy, defense infrastructure, and other elements of the defense program. The Commission on Review of Overseas Military Facility Structure of the United States (“Overseas BRAC” or “Overseas Basing Commission”) was established in 2003 to provide Congress and the President with a thorough study and review of U.S. military structure and facilities overseas. The Commission publicly released its report earlier last week, but no action has been taken.

The legislation would also stop the BRAC from moving forward until the implementation and development by the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security of the National Maritime Security Strategy and the completion and implementation of the Secretary of Defense’s Homeland Defense and Civil Support Directive – only now being drafted. These two planning strategies should be key considerations before beginning any BRAC process.

The Next AIDS Crisis II

According to the New Yorker, a decade of good news about AIDS in the Gay Community seems to have come to an end.  There are four basic reasons.  Three of them were cooked up by America's Pharmaceutical industry. 

One was the development of an effective treatment, by means of a cocktail of drugs.

Twenty million people have died of aids, most of them in Africa, where the epidemic grows more devastating every year, as it does in places like China, Russia, and India. Ten thousand people die each day—seven every minute—and seventeen thousand more become infected. In America, however, the sense of crisis has passed. After increasing rapidly throughout the nineteen-eighties, the number of new cases peaked in 1993, and within two years so did the number of deaths. In 1996, when effective H.I.V. therapy became widely adopted, the incidence of aids began to fall dramatically. Few diseases without a cure have evolved as rapidly.

With bars in places like Chelsea and the Castro filling with healthy men, and the continual migration of new people in search of a more open life, some men began to wonder, What’s so bad about H.I.V.? It’s a treatable disease. Pharmaceutical companies ran ads depicting H.I.V.-positive men as rugged and virile.

Another was Tina. 

Tina is crystal methamphetamine, a chemical stimulant that affects the central nervous system. It is hardly a new drug, and it has many other names: biker’s coffee, crank, speed. It has also been called redneck cocaine, because it is available on the street, in bars, and on the Internet for less than the price of a good bottle of wine. Methamphetamine is a mood elevator, and is known to induce bursts of euphoria, increase alertness, and reduce fatigue.   . . . Crystal first gained popularity in the gay community of San Francisco in the nineteen-nineties, where it became the preferred fuel for all-night parties and a necessity for sexual marathons. Its reputation quickly spread. Crystal methamphetamine is highly addictive, but its allure is not hard to understand; the drug removes inhibitions, bolsters confidence, supercharges the libido, and heightens the intensity of sex.   . . . The first thing people on methamphetamine lose is their common sense; suddenly, anything goes, including unprotected anal sex with many different partners in a single night—which is among the most efficient ways to spread H.I.V. and other sexually transmitted diseases. In recent surveys, more than ten per cent of gay men in San Francisco and Los Angeles report having used the drug in the past six months; in New York, the figure is even higher.

The last magic potion is Bob Dole's little blue friend.

Crystal methamphetamine constricts the blood vessels, which makes sustained erections difficult. Viagra reverses that effect. “So now you can go from Thursday to Sunday and have outrageous amounts of sex."

The last factor is the Internet. 

“I was seeing a patient at one of the S.T.D. clinics one day,” Jeffrey Klausner, who is the director of the Sexually Transmitted Diseases Prevention and Control Services of the San Francisco Department of Public Health, told me. “It was in the spring of ’99, and we were starting to see a small increase in the number of syphilis cases in gay men . . .  . I asked this one guy how many sexual partners he had had in the past two months, which is something we always ask. And he said fourteen. And then I asked him how many he had had in the past year. And he said fourteen.     

“That was a little odd,” Klausner continued. “I said, ‘Well, what happened two months ago?’ The man replied, ‘I got online.’

“I didn’t have a clue what he meant,” he said. “Nothing. So he explained it. ‘Well, I am a fifty-year-old, overweight, H.I.V.-positive man. I am balding; I’m not that attractive. But I can go online any time of the day and I can get a sexual hookup. I can go to this site on AOL and I can say I want to meet somebody now for sex. And that’s all there is to it.’ ”

Recounting this story six years later, Klausner still looked mystified. “I asked him to explain. And he told me, ‘I go online and put out my stats—if I am a top or a bottom, what I like to do. I am a top, I am H.I.V.-positive. So I will say, “Does anyone want to be topped by an H.I.V.-positive guy?” ’ ”     

Klausner continued to recall the conversation: “ ‘I’ll get five responses in half an hour. And then I will speak to them on the phone. If I like their voice, I will invite them over and look through my window. If I like what I see, then I will be home, and if not I can pretend I am gone. It’s been great. I don’t have to talk to anybody to do it. I don’t have to go out of the house. I can get it like this,’ he said, and snapped his fingers.”

What has been the effect of these four horsemen of the next public health Apocalypse? 

After years of living in constant fear of aids, many gay men have chosen to resume sexual practices that are almost guaranteed to make them sick. In New York City, the rate of syphilis has increased by more than four hundred per cent in the past five years. Gay men account for virtually the entire rise. Between 1998 and 2000, fifteen per cent of the syphilis cases in Chicago could be attributed to gay men. Since 2001, that number has grown to sixty per cent. Look at the statistics closely and you will almost certainly find the drug. In one recent study, twenty-five per cent of those men who reported methamphetamine use in the previous month were infected with H.I.V. The drug appears to double the risk of infection (because it erases inhibitions but also, it seems, because of physiological changes that make the virus easier to transmit), and the risk climbs the more one uses it. Over the past several years, nearly every indicator of risky sexual activity has risen in the gay community. Perhaps for the first time since the beginning of the aids epidemic, the number of men who say they use condoms regularly is below fifty per cent; after many years of decline, the number of new H.I.V. diagnoses among gay men increased every year between 2000 and 2003, while remaining stable in the rest of the population.

That is terrifying.  Given the nature of infectious diseases there is good reason to believe that such a sexual culture will again be a breeding ground for drug resistant strains of the HIV virus, and perhaps for forms of it that will be much more contagious.

I've seen enough.

So you think we are having a cool season.  This from 75 Degrees South, a blog from the British Antarctic Survey.  The blogger posts from Halley, where it is currently a balmy 29 below.

Sun down is an important date at Halley. Today the Sun set for the last time in 105 days, marking the beginning of the true Halley winter. Now I can understand that over 3 months of complete darkness might sound a bit grim to most people but strangely these winter months are my favourite time down here. To really experience Antarctica you have to see it during the winter.

Grand Forks AFB v. Ellsworth

Looks like I stirred the pot a bit with my post following the BRAC announcement.  This from todays Grand Forks Herald:

OUR OPINION : Will politics pit GFAFB against Ellsworth?

Our view:: Let's hope not, although the Senate's GOP leadership is sure to work hard to save the S.D. base.

"Fasten your seat belts," Bette Davis memorably said in the movie All About Eve. "It's going to be a bumpy night."

Here are three items of interest to anyone who cares about Grand Forks Air Force Base's fate in the current BRAC round.

Item 1 is a story in a Rapid City (S.D.) Journal issue of about a year ago - May 24, 2004:

"Ellsworth Air Force Base would be a good home for research, development and training for the nation's growing fleet of unmanned military aircraft, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said Saturday ....

"The base could become a national 'center of excellence' for all phases of development of more than a half a dozen emerging UAVs that will build on the tradition of the well-known Predator drone, Frist said."

Frist was in South Dakota at the time campaigning for Republican Senate candidate John Thune. "Assuming President Bush is re-elected, Frist said having a Republican South Dakota senator consulting with Republican Senate leaders would be better for Ellsworth than keeping (incombent Democratic Sen. Tom) Daschle in power," the newspaper reported.

And Thune won - but the Pentagon put Ellsworth on the closure list anyway. Which brings us to Item 2.

On Friday, Fred Barnes, executive editor of The Weekly Standard magazine, and Morton Kondracke, executive editor of Roll Call, appeared on conservative talk-show host Hugh Hewitt's show. Hewitt said the Bush administration and Congress should support Thune by getting Ellsworth off the closure list.

As Hewitt put it, "they cannot close the one base after the state throws Tom Daschle out."

Kondracke disagreed, saying such a "nakedly political" move would hurt the president. But Barnes agreed with Hewitt: "Some of these bases are going to be saved, and it would be very harmful to John Thune if Ellsworth is not one of them."

Which brings us to Item 3, a post Friday on the influential South Dakota Politics Web log (www.southdakotapolitics.blogs.com):

"With the end of the Cold War, the 'jewels' (of the Strategic Air Command), Grand Forks and Ellsworth, no longer are necessary," the blog reads, under the headline, "Grand Forks AFB v. Ellsworth".

"So what makes Grand Forks preferable to Ellsworth when it comes to the unmanned program or realignment in general? Why Grand Forks AFB but not Ellsworth for this program?

"One hates to leech off of our neighbors or undermine their own well being, but our delegation needs to find a way, if not to keep Ellsworth's current mission, at least to mitigate the loss by snagging a mission such as the unmanned aerial program from Grand Forks AFB."

There's not enough room left for comment in this space. But for now, just read the Bette Davis quote again. That pretty much sums it up.

The Air Force has said that a mission at Grand Forks AFB that involves UAV's would be in part a Homeland Security mission and border patrol, which is understandable.  In addition, the  Fargo Air Guard wing, which will be denuded of its planes, likely will gain some sort of UAV mission as well.  Given these facts, basing the UAV's at GFAFB makes sense.  However, BRAC commissioners are already questioning the logic of keeping the Grand Forks base open with such a reduced mission (loss of 2,200 service personel and 1,000 civilian contractors).  Whether that bodes well for maintaining its KC-135 tanker fleet in addition to an added mission or bodes ill for closing the base entirely (why not station the UAV's a couple hours farther west at Minot AFB?) remains to be seen.  But considering it takes 7 of 9 commissioners to add a base to the closure list, its a good bet Grand Forks will survive.  That and the likelihood that the new mission at GFAFB will be supplemented by the nearby Fargo Air Guard unit as well as their proximity to our northern border, and its a safe bet we won't be stealing their mission.  Ellsworth's best bet lies with convincing the BRAC commission that either Ellsworth is the more appropriate facility for our B-1 fleet or that it is unwise to base the entire fleet at one facility.

Norman Mailer and the Paranoid Style

Norman Mailer, author of great novels that people used to say they read, and source of the occasional paranoid outburst, has a theory about Newsweek's now retracted story.  His entry into the blog world (Huffington Post) gives us some hint of the foundations of his literary reputation.

At present, I have a few thoughts I can certainly not prove, but the gaffe over the Michael Isikoff story in Newsweek concerning the Koran and the toilet is redolent with bad odor.

Get it?  Bad odor.  Toilet.  No mixed metaphors here. 

Who, indeed, was Isikoff's supposedly reliable Pentagon source?  One's counter-espionage hackles rise.  If you want to discredit a Dan Rather or a Newsweek crew, just feed them false information from a hitherto reliable source.  You learn that in Intelligence 101A.

Counter-espionage often depends on building "reliable sources." You construct such reliability item by secret item, all accurate. That is seen by the intelligence artists as a necessary expenditure. It gains the source his credibility. Then, you spring the trap.

As for the riots at the other end, on this occasion, they, too, could have been orchestrated. We do have agents in Pakistan, after all, not to mention Afghanistan.

Ah . .  now we have it.  Its not that the MSM has been doing bad journalism, its that the evil Bush administration is pulling their puppet strings.  Dan Rather was fed a bad story by some CIA spook.  The whole Koran story, including the riots in Pakistan, were "orchestrated" by our agents.  What a subtle and diabolical plan!  Bush gets to laugh at Newsweek and all it costs us is increased enmity across the Muslim world.  What is the evidence for all this?

Obviously, I can offer no proof of any of the above. [But the] outcome was too neat. It came out too effectively for one side. At the age of eighty-two I do not wish to revive old paranoia, but Lenin did leave us one valuable notion, one, at any rate. It was "Whom?" When you cannot understand a curious matter, ask yourself, "Whom? Whom does this benefit?" Dare I suggest that our Right has just gained a good deal by way of this matter?  [I found the novelist required some editing, but go to the source if you suspect foul play]. 

In other words, we don't need no stinking evidence. A story that hurts Bush is manifestly true until it is discredited, whereupon it automatically switches to a example of the Bush administrations covert manipulation of the news. 

I have my own theory.  I think no such person as Norman Mailer exists.  He is a creation of the CIA, engineered to make the left look like a bunch of raving lunatics.  Big brother creates not only his own army but the armies of his enemies, so he can stage faux battles to keep the masses occupied.  I admit its paranoid, but now that the NVB has shut down, someone has to keep up the good work.

 

Good Grief

I get Peanuts in my email box every morning.  It's good for my soul.  I can't resist sharing today's.  I really enjoy the strips about poor old Charlie Brown.  And dear United Features Syndicate, I swear I will never do this again.

Funny Moments in Norwegian Lutheran History

This incident comes to us from Doris Stensland, Robert Lundgren, and Donald J. Sneen, “Life in the New Land, 1859-1880: The Scandinavian Experience,” in Donald J. Sneen (ed), Prairie Faith, Pioneering People: A History of the Lutheran Church in South Dakota (Garretson, American Lutheran Church, 1981), 27:

The transition from rough rugged pioneer life to frame churches and more civilized ways sometimes necessitated changes in people's habits.  Once the women of a congregation became brave and put up two signs in the church -- "Do not spit on the floor."  The first Sunday it was especially difficult for one man who chewed tobacco all the time.  He swallowed some, spit his mittens full, used his wife's hankerchief, and finally decided to spit out the window.  He opened it and stuck his head out, and crash!  it came down on his neck.  The preacher stopped in the middle of the sermon and there was snickering throughout the church.  Even an old Ellingianer who was never known to laugh, smiled that time.

The Judge Fight and the Memos

The question of whether the President's judicial nominations will get a vote in the Senate may be answered this week.  The Washington Times provides some background on how we got here:

The "nuclear" showdown that is expected to begin unfolding in the Senate today has its origins in closed-door discussions more than three years ago between key Senate Democrats and outside interest groups as they huddled to plot strategies for blocking President Bush's judicial nominees.
    In a Nov. 7, 2001, internal memo to Sen. Richard J. Durbin, who is now the minority whip, an aide described a meeting that the Illinois Democrat had missed between groups opposed to Mr. Bush's nominees and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat and member of the Judiciary Committee.
    "Based on input from the groups, I would place the appellate nominees in the categories below," the staffer wrote, listing 19 nominees as "good," "bad" or "ugly."
    Four of the 10 nominees who Democrats have since filibustered were deemed either "bad" or "ugly." None of those deemed "good" by the outside groups was filibustered.
    Among those listed as "ugly" was Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen, whose nomination will be brought to the floor today by Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican.
    The internal Democratic memos, downloaded from Democratic computer servers in the Judiciary Committee by Republican staffers, offer a unique look into the early stages of the filibuster campaign, when Democrats were clearly doubtful that they could succeed in blocking any of the nominees.
    In the 14 memos obtained in November 2003 by the Wall Street Journal and The Washington Times, Democratic staffers outlined the concerns held by outside groups about Justice Owen's "hostile" position toward abortion and her "pro-business" attitude.
    In a June 4, 2002, memo to Mr. Kennedy, staffers advised him that Justice Owen would be "our next big fight."
    "We agree that she is the right choice -- she has a bad record on labor, personal injury and choice issues, and a broad range of national and local Texas groups are ready to oppose her," the aides wrote.
    Another nominee discussed often in the memos is Miguel Estrada, a Washington lawyer who became the first filibustered nominee and who withdrew his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit after waiting two years for a final vote.
    In the 2001 memo to Mr. Durbin, the staffer explained the concerns that the outside groups had about Mr. Estrada.
    "They also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous because he had a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment," the aide wrote.
    The memos also reveal the close relationship between Democrats and the outside groups.
    In a June 21, 2002, memo to Democrats Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Durbin, Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York and Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington, a staffer urged delaying a hearing for Mr. Estrada to "give the groups time to complete their research and the committee time to collect additional information."

Religious Establishment on the Left

Hadley Arkes is one of the most intelligent and funniest lecturers I have ever had the pleasure of listening to.  He is the Groucho Marx of political thought.  He has this excellent piece in the Daily Standard on a Clinton appointed judge blocking the implementation of a religiously biased program on homosexuality in Montgomery County Maryland.  But the religious bias belongs, surprise, to the left.

A FEDERAL DISTRICT JUDGE IN Maryland has jolted the local liberal establishment in Montgomery County by blocking a pilot program in sex education. The program was designed to sweep away the "myths"--the lingering moral inhibitions and retrograde theological teachings--that apparently feed reservations, still widely held, about homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Judge Alexander Williams Jr. put the kibosh on this plan, and the jolt has had a deeper resonance, not least because Williams happens to be a Clinton appointee.

The program aims, in large part, to prevent discrimination against homosexuals.  That is an aim  which I endorse.  But in doing so as part of a government sponsored program, the authors commit obvious violations of the establishment clause. 

As for biblical teaching, the committee noted that the Bible contains numerous passages condemning the practices of heterosexuals. Among the things condemned have been "adultery, incest, wearing clothing made from more than one kind of fiber, and eating shellfish, like shrimp and lobster." The implication, of course, is that the Jewish rules on kashrut in eating and clothing are just so many conventions that most thoughtful people would regard as quaint, without moral force. "Fortunately," said the committee, "many within organized religions are beginning to address the homophobia of the church," by which they mean, of course, the Catholic church. By way of contrast they laud, among others, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, the Unitarian Universalist Association, and the Society of Friends (Quakers), for supporting "full civil rights for gay men and lesbians." Catholics, Evangelicals, Mormons, Orthodox Jews--these are apparently the retrograde religions, for in holding to their traditional teaching, even as they minister to gays and lesbians, they deny the civil rights of these Americans.

A state government may certainly promote tolerance. It may not promote the view that some religions are advanced and others retrograde.

As Williams noted, the curriculum "juxtaposes this portrait of an intolerant and Biblically misguided Baptist Church against other, preferred Churches, which are more friendly towards the homosexual lifestyle." In particular, the curriculum "plainly portrays Baptist churches as wrongly expressing the same intolerant attitude towards homosexuals today as they did towards African Americans during segregation." Williams observed that Baptists were presented here as "unenlightened" and "misguided" and wanting in the "tolerance" that marked the enlightened religions. In the name of secularism, or detachment from religion, the board was doing nothing less than establishing one segment of the religious in the country as less legitimate, less in accord with the liberality of the laws, and yes, less to be tolerated. So much for the Establishment Clause.

Hildebrand's Attack Group Struggling

Roll Call:

The largest independent organization opposing President Bush’s plan to add private accounts to Social Security is struggling to raise dollars from individual contributors, sources say.

Americans United to Protect Social Security has not received a single large-dollar donation from an individual since it was formed in February. Instead, the group is subsisting largely on contributions from organized labor, which has exceeded its expected level of giving, and other liberal interest groups. ...

Regardless of future financial developments, however, dollars for the Social Security campaign have been scarce from the small group of major donors who financed America Coming Together and the Media Fund — two soft-money organizations that raised better than $200 million for the 2004 election.

Most of those givers — including billionaire financier George Soros and insurance company executive Peter Lewis — appear to be proceeding cautiously so far this cycle as they strategize about where best to spend their money.

How About Some Good News

How's this for clout:

The highway bill set to pass the U.S. Senate today includes significantly more funding than the House-passed version and maintains South Dakota’s historical transportation funding level, Senator John Thune said today.

The transportation bill set to pass the Senate includes roughly $1.307 billion for South Dakota’s road needs over the next 5 years, at least $134 million more than in the same five year period of the bill that passed the House of Representatives in March. Most importantly, the Senate bill maintains South Dakota’s funding percentage of overall federal highway apportionments to states. The State will receive in formula funds over these 5 years amounts averaging 30.74 per cent more than under the average year in the previous transportation bill.

As a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, Thune worked to promote South Dakota’s transportation needs and helped craft a multi-year reauthorization bill concerning the nation’s surface transportation program.

Daschle Funding Anti-Thune Attack Machine

As previously noted, former Senator Tom Daschle continues to pay his former campaign manager, Steve Hildebrand, from his political action committee, DASHPAC.  A reader informs us that Daschle is also paying Hildebrand out of the coffers of his campaign account.  Does Daschle know the next election isn't for nearly six years?  As many remember, Daschle started running television ads 18 months before last fall's election, but this is ridiculous.