-Lurid Crime Tales- | |
Jack Palladino, detective hired by Bill Clinton to discredit women in 1992, on life support after robbery | |
2021-01-30 | |
Palladino, whose celebrity clients have also included Harvey Weinstein, Don Johnson, Kevin Costner, Robin Williams, Huey Newton and Snoop Dogg, fell onto the pavement outside his home when the robber grabbed his new camera from around his neck, the San Francisco Police Department said,
"Fell 37 times" He suffered a traumatic brain injury in the fall and wasn’t expected to survive, his stepson told the newspaper. | |
Link |
Home Front: Politix | |
GOP Wants Secret Ballot ( Bushies Seek Amnesty Proponent) | |
2007-01-19 | |
I'm a Republican, but this kind of chicanery is exactly one of the reasons why the GOP lost in the last election. Amnesty for illegals is a no-fly idea and it needs to be stopped. Republican National Committee members think they will get a secret ballot on today's election of a new general chairman, which would protect members opposed to the White House's push to fill the new slot with an advocate of an amnesty for illegal aliens. "If we get the secret ballot as promised, then every member will feel free to express his or her view without the fear of coercion or intimidation," said RNC member Curly Haugland of North Dakota. What? Secret ballots? Why, why, that would be like democratic or something and we can't be associated with that now can we? The move to create a new top office on the committee and fill it with Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida is scheduled to take place today, on the third day of the annual RNC winter meeting here. Mr. Martinez supports President Bush's plans for what conservative critics call amnesty for illegal aliens. Former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele, a former state party chairman and RNC member who attended the meeting yesterday as an observer, was talked up by some members as an alternative to Mr. Martinez. Mr. Steele, praised by name in a farewell speech by outgoing Republican National Chairman Ken Mehlman, lost a Senate run in November but remains popular with RNC members. Steele would be a good candidate for the position IMO. "The Republican Party is against amnesty for illegals, but if the president wants Mr. Martinez as general chairman, that should be the president's prerogative," Mr. Steele told The Washington Times. Then again...kowtowing to the President on this issue is just stupid. Being Republican doesn't mean blind obedience to stupid ideas. The RNC leadership's desires historically almost always carry the day, especially when a Republican is in the White House, but some members yesterday said they saw hope that things might turn out differently this time. "If it is a secret ballot, it will make a huge difference," said RNC member Denise McNamara of Texas, who said she intends to vote against the creation of the general-chairman position and, if that move fails, to vote against Mr. Martinez to fill the office, regardless of whether the vote is secret or public. So far, a minority of members share her willingness to publicly express opposition. "I will vote against the creation of an office of general chairman, even if it is a voice vote," said RNC member Steve Cloud of Kansas. "But a lot of others on this committee who also oppose the creation of that office -- whether because it violates the rules or because they oppose amnesty for illegal aliens -- they will be afraid to say what they think unless there is a secret ballot." At issue is whether the RNC's rules permit the creation the "general chairman" position. The rules governing the RNC, adopted at the 2004 Republican National Convention, call only for an elected chairman and co-chairman. RNC member Robert M. "Mike" Duncan, a Kentucky resident and the current treasurer, is running unopposed for chairman. RNC member Tim Morgan of California is exacted to become the new treasurer. Great! Just what the GOP needs - another layer of bureacracy. I swear the parties get more and more alike every day. | |
Link |
Home Front: Politix |
Michael Steele to become RNC Chair |
2006-11-10 |
Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman, whose party just lost both chambers of Congress, will leave his position in January, and the post as party chief has been offered to Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele. "It is true," Mr. Mehlman told The Washington Times when asked about reports last night that he would resign. "It's something I decided over the summer. No one told me I needed to. In fact, folks wanted me to stay." Other Republican Party officials said some Republican National Committee (RNC) members, including state party chairmen, have mounted a move to have Mr. Steele succeed Mr. Mehlman. But they said that President Bush's political adviser Karl Rove, who is Mr. Mehlman's mentor, would rather see Mr. Steele serve in the president's Cabinet, perhaps as secretary of Housing and Urban Development. These officials said no one has actually offered Mr. Steele either the RNC post or a Cabinet post. Steele spokesman Doug Heye said last night that "I don't know of any conversations that Lt. Gov. Steele has had on this topic, but I can tell you that there are many people who have said he would be an ideal candidate, based on the race he ran this year." "I talked to him very briefly about it today. He has not made any decisions yet about what he will do next. He is still focused on his role as lieutenant governor," Mr. Heye said. . . . |
Link |
Home Front: Politix | |
Michael Steele for Republican National Chairman? | |
2006-11-09 | |
Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele (R), who came up just short yesterday in his Senate race against Rep. Ben Cardin (D), is mulling a bid for the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee, according to an informed GOP source. Steele would not challenge current RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman, but chatter among Republican insiders is that Mehlman has made clear for months that he might not return to his current post. "Chairman Mehlman will be making an announcement regarding his future at the RNC in the coming weeks," said RNC communication director Brian Jones. Mehlman has made outreach to the African American community a priority during his time as head of the party, and Steele would be seen as a logical successor to that effort.
| |
Link |
Home Front: Politix |
Jim Geraghty: more from "Obi-Wan" |
2006-11-07 |
Obi Wan Kenobi and I haven't heard much. Obi Wan was intrigued that in the RNC conference call, Ken Mehlman mentioned Montana, Michigan, and House seats in Georgia and Hawaii (!). The first two were in response to a question from Hugh Hewitt, but if any early data looked bad, Mehlman could have been more equivocal or tried to downplay those races. As it was, he seemed a bit enthused. (And if once-left-for-dead Michigan and Montana are looking good, how do places like Tennessee, Missouri, Rhode Island, Maryland or New Jersey look?) At noon, it's not clear what the party folks know, but they will know how the morning turnout, GOTV operations, etc. are going compared to the morning two years ago, or four years ago. I have yet to encounter any signal of low turnout in red-leaning areas. In fact, as the Hilton Head, S.C. downpour report from Dad indicated, Republicans seem to be turning out a lot, even if there's nothing particularly close or exciting on the ballot. A Kerry effect, maybe? Another report from Burke - turnout is comparable to last year's governor's race (at a polling place that seemed to have a lot of federal employees supporting Jim Webb, judging from bumper stickers in the parking lot). George Allen had better be getting good turnout in southern Virginia. By now, Obi notes, the folks in the "quarantine room" where the exit poll data is being collected have some idea of how the night is going. Something will slip out, sooner or later. Of course, both sides know this, and it's almost certain that there are those who will try to spread rumors, to affect the moods, and potential turnout, of those of us attached to the Internet and hungry for any data we can get. UPDATE: One last point - there's been nothing to indicate the Republican wave crested or slowed within the past day or two. Wish we had comprehensive data for one more day, but the big, deep, broad shift to the GOP may have hit at just the right time for this election. |
Link |
Home Front: Politix |
Crocodile Tears for Joe |
2006-08-14 |
By Robert Novak WASHINGTON -- Mary Matalin, longtime Republican political operative and Vice President Dick Cheney's adviser, seemed near tears on the Fox News Channel Tuesday night as adverse voting returns for Sen. Joseph Lieberman came in from Connecticut. With Matalin a reliable indicator of her party's line, she began an outpouring of GOP grief over Lieberman's Democratic primary defeat. That was a remarkable reaction to a liberal senator who has given George W. Bush scant help on any issue other than Iraq, from which he now also has retreated. In Lieberman's and my school days, this would be called shedding crocodile tears (defined by Webster's as "a hypocritical show of sorrow"). Cheney himself deplored Connecticut's results, and presidential adviser Karl Rove placed a publicized telephone call to the senator. Republicans cast anti-war primary winner Ned Lamont as a cross between Joe McCarthy and George McGovern. Contradicting his 18-year Senate voting record, Lieberman is identified as a Democratic centrist (supposedly one of the last of that breed). With Republican morale sliding three months before midterm elections, Connecticut provided welcome news for GOP strategists. Republican National Chairman Ken Mehlman on the day after the primary was in Cleveland facing a Republican meltdown in Ohio and warned of a McGovernite takeover of the Democratic Party by elitists. Mehlman described Rep. Sherrod Brown, a left-wing congressman who leads Republican Sen. Mike DeWine for re-election, as a Midwestern Lamont. But how different from Lieberman would Lamont vote in the Senate? Not much. President Bush, always seeking Texas-style centrists, famously hugged and kissed Lieberman on the House floor after delivering the 2005 State of the Union Address. Aside from Iraq, it has been unrequited love with Lieberman consistently denying Bush needed votes. Lieberman was in Connecticut campaigning Aug. 3 when the Senate again failed to break a filibuster against estate tax relief, but he would have voted no had he been there. In key votes of the last Congress selected by the Almanac of American Politics, Lieberman followed the straight liberal line in opposing oil drilling in ANWR, Bush tax cuts, overtime pay reform, the energy bill, and bans on partial birth abortion and same-sex marriage. Similarly, he voted in support of Roe v. Wade, and for banning assault weapons and bunker buster bombs. His only two pro-Bush votes were to fund the Iraq war and support missile defense (duplicating Sen. Hillary Clinton's course on both). Lieberman's most recent ratings by the American Conservative Union were 7 percent in 2003, zero in 2004 and 8 percent in 2005. "Well deserved!" ACU Chairman David Keene told me. "I don't see why any conservative should be overly concerned about Joe Lieberman's plight." Lieberman has opposed Bush as the environmentalists' Senate leader on global warming. He rebuffed attempts to compromise Social Security reform. He had a perfect record, seven for seven, backing filibusters that blocked Bush judicial nominees. He voted for cloture on three judicial nominations only after a compromise by the bipartisan Gang of 14 (which included Lieberman). He voted against confirming Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. This record of party regularity has won Lieberman's independent candidacy little backing from party stalwarts. Only four (out of 44) Democratic senators announced post-primary support for him. I could not find backing for Lieberman's independent candidacy from any of my longtime Democratic sources, who never have been associated with the MoveOn.org, neo-McGovernite wing of the party. Primarily because of Iraq, the clock has run out on Lieberman in his party since he was its 2000 nominee for vice president. In his disastrous 2004 campaign for the presidential nomination, he lost badly in eight consecutive state contests (doing no better than 11 percent in Delaware). For Lieberman to have any chance in November, Connecticut Republican voters will have to reject the party's lackluster nominee (former State Rep. Alan Schlesinger). The only conceivable motivation would be Lieberman's position on Iraq, but even that faded last week. In a desperate Sunday night effort to separate himself from the president, he said "many of the Bush administration's decisions regarding the conduct of the war" were not "right." That did not fit the post-primary profile of courage that subsequently was sketched for him by the Republican high command. |
Link |
Home Front: Politix |
Republicans predict victory |
2006-08-05 |
![]() He made the prediction after unveiling a strategy that he hoped would frame the fall election as a choice between Republicans and Democrats, rather than a referendum on President Bush and Republican control of the government. Party leaders hope that fear of Democrats will trump anger or disappointment with Republicans. As the Republicans huddled, their public optimism was offset by two new detailed looks at the House and Senate races and the national mood by Larry Sabato, a noted political analyst, and the Cook Political Report. Both concluded that Republicans are in big trouble. Independent political analyst Charles Cook warned this week that Republicans face the threat of "an electoral rout." "First, the political climate will be extremely hostile to Republican candidates. Second, while Republicans benefited from turnout in 2002 and 2004, this time voter turnout will benefit Democratic candidates. And third, the advantages that the GOP usually has in national party spending will be significantly less than normal." Vilsack encouraged by Democrat prospects in November Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack stood at the end of a wharf Friday and said he thinks the Democrats' ship is going to come in during the November elections. Vilsack, who is considering a 2008 bid for president, was in Charleston for this weekend's National Governors Association meeting. "I guarantee you Democratic governors will have a majority of the governerships of the country by the time the fall elections are said and done," Vilsack said. The former chairman of the Democratic Governors Association is doing what he can to get one of his own into the governor's office in South Carolina, campaigning with fellow Democrat and state Sen. Tommy Moore who is running against Republican Gov. Mark Sanford in the November election. |
Link |
Home Front: Politix | ||
Key Democrats unite for troop pullout | ||
2006-08-01 | ||
![]() Bush has consistently said there will be no such pullout until the fledgling Iraqi government can secure its position and Iraq's security forces can defend the country. Republicans said the letter amounted to Democratic leadership surrendering to terrorists. "The Democratic leadership continues to demand that American soldiers end their mission and wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists that we are fighting in Iraq," Ron Bonjean, a spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., said in a statement. Ken Mehlman, chairman of the Republican National Committee, issued a similar statement. "Waving a white flag in Iraq may appeal to the Democrats had previously advocated reducing reduce troops levels in Iraq, but were split on the precise approach. During a recent floor debate in the Senate, Democratic Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin proposed legislation that would require troops to be out of Iraq by July 2007. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and other Democrats backed a measure that called for a phased redeployment to begin by Dec. 31, but did not set a deadline for all troops to be home. The recent letter, dated July 30, is significant because - signed by every top Democrat on committees with oversight of military, intelligence and international affairs - it solidifies the Democrats' position and presents a unified front as members head into election season. The letter also was signed by Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, his House counterpart.
| ||
Link |
Home Front: Politix |
Smell The Desperation: Donks To Push Cut 'N Run In Senate, Now |
2006-06-21 |
The DhimmiDonk Mantra: Defeat = Victory... in November. No graphics for Sedition, Traitor or Coward, so I had to settle for these.![]() Actually, I'd say it's a reminder of why we want to do the fighting there, in the asshat's back yard, rather than here. Republican leaders called the proposal for withdrawal a "cut and run" that would embolden terrorists. Obvious, if you aren't a partisan asshole, total idiot, or utterly lacking a sense of shame. The Senate is expected to spend at least five hours today debating two competing Democratic proposals to start pulling U.S. combat troops out of Iraq. Productive. The killings are "a grim reminder of the price we're paying for a failed policy in Iraq," said Sen. Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the Democratic whip. "It's time for Iraqis to stand up. When will this end?" Yo, Turban Durbin, when will you stand up? Have you no shame? When will this end? I'd say not until you're sent packing to find productive employment. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said withdrawing troops would be a "dishonor of historic proportions. The Iraqi people want us and need us to help them. If we break our promise and cut and run, as some would have us do, the implications could be catastrophic," the Tennessee Republican said. "Surrendering is not a solution. We cannot go wobbly. The price is too high." Though not a favorite of mine, Fristy's nailed this issue cold. Last night, in a speech at the Hyatt Regency Washington to Republican volunteers, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman said, "Republicans unite on the need to stay on the offense to confront terrorists; Democrats are having a debate in their party." He characterized the Democratic debate as some "say we need to cut and run; some people say we need to walk ... and other people say we need to jog." The comments come as lawmakers embark on a second week of debating Iraq policy, this time in the form of the Senate's defense authorization bill. Some (heh) say the Donks should drop dead, too. I would like to help them, but that's just me. Sen. Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat and ranking member on the Armed Services Committee, and Sen. Jack Reed, Rhode Island Democrat, have sponsored an amendment that calls for "phased redeployment" to begin by Dec. 31. The nonbinding amendment would require the Bush administration to submit a schedule for continued troop withdrawal. Typical poseurs trying to look important and in charge - and this bit of sabotage is the only thing they can come up with. ![]() But this time it'll be different. Really. We're not wanking for press releases and MSM orgasms. We've, uh, played with the numbers and dates and stuff, so this time will be special. This is what the Senate is for, y'know. Mr. Kerry and Mr. Feingold -- potential presidential candidates in 2008 -- sent a joint e-mail to Mr. Kerry's 2004 campaign supporters saying that withdrawal will lead to a more effective war on terror. "Our troops have served valiantly in Iraq," the senators said. "Now, it's time to put the future of Iraq where it belongs: in the hands of the Iraqi people and their leaders." Potential. Heh. Um, more effective how, exactly? Actually, your wet dream is more dead soldiers. It's the only thing that will serve your political ends. BTW, release your records, yet? Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said Democrats agree that there "should be a redeployment starting sooner rather than later," and downplayed the difference between the Levin and Kerry amendments. "Even though we have at least two positions, I think if you look at them closely, they are both basically the same: that there should be redeployment of troops. It's a question of when," the Nevada Democrat said. Yes, indeed, all of you are finally on message: Defeat. Mr. Levin and Mr. Reed insisted yesterday that their amendment is not "cutting and running," and that it sets no pace or speed for combat troops to leave Iraq. Then it is utterly unnecessary - and taking the decision out of the hands of the commanders on the ground, putting it in the hands of political hacks, is cutting and running. Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, disagreed. "I don't support it. I strongly believe it's not when we leave, it's how we leave," he said. Victorious. No more Dhimmidonk military adventures cut short because they didn't have the stomach for it. The "when" is easy - when victory is achieved and Iraq is secure. The lessons learned the hard way in Germany, Japan, Korea, etc. - y'know, those places where we've had troops for 50+ years. Either amendment would need 51 votes to become attached to the defense authorization bill. It is unlikely that enough Republicans will join the about 40 Democrats expected to vote for the Levin amendment. Fewer Democrats are expected to back the Kerry amendment because it fixes a date for complete withdrawal from Iraq. This is pure kryptonite - America does NOT back either of these idiot ideas - the RINOs had better keep that in mind - to cover for lacking any innate sense or courage. National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley told reporters on Air Force One yesterday that Iraqis are eager to assume responsibility for their nation's security. "Their concern is that we will move, draw down our forces too quickly, before they're ready," he said. Why, that's rational! The Senate last year passed a resolution declaring that 2006 would be a year of "significant transition" in Iraq. Yep. That's what the Senate is for. Pointless uninformed posturing. Last week, House lawmakers voted 256-153 to reject a timetable for troop withdrawal and approved a nonbinding resolution that affirms the Bush administration's Iraq policy. The 10 hours of House debate and expected five hours of Senate debate are the most significant discussion of Iraq policy since the war began in March 2003. More than 2,500 troops have been killed in the war. Um, this has been shot down in the House, already, General Levin. Been there and done that. Just last week. Makes you wonder doesn't it? About the motives, I mean. This couldn't be another purely political Dhimmidonk stunt, could it? These Dhimmidonk "statesmen" are above that, right? I love Levin's pretentious little image thing, with the glasses down on his nose and his comb-over. I presume it's meant to convey serious scholarship and wisdom. Something like that. Funny, though, he doesn't seem to recall last week very clearly. I guess it's either Alzheimer's or politics. Probably both. The Senate yesterday voted 79-19 to pass a nonbinding amendment saying Iraq should not grant amnesty to terrorists who attack, kill or wound U.S. troops, responding to a newspaper report that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was considering limited pardons for militants who lay down arms. Senators also voted 64-34 to approve a measure saying Congress recognizes Iraq as a sovereign nation. Yep. That's what the Senate is for, alrighty. Nonbinding? Of course. Pointless? You said it. Irrelevant? Hey, it's the Senate, dood! I've decided that losing your sense of shame leads directly to insanity and then to the Dhimmidonk Party, though some might suggest they are the same thing. You don't pass "Go", but you'll collect alot more than $200 - if you're reliably partisan. |
Link |
Home Front: Politix |
Talk of Pelosi as Speaker Delights Both Parties |
2006-05-30 |
(NYT) WASHINGTON, May 29 Hoping to win a Congressional majority in November, some optimistic Democratic lawmakers have taken to referring to Representative Nancy Pelosi as "speaker," as in speaker of the House. So have some optimistic Republicans. "She ought to be a big component of the fall campaign," said Ed Rogers, a Republican strategist and lobbyist. "There are some Democrats who make really good bad guys." Ms. Pelosi, the California Democrat and House minority leader, lends herself to easy caricature by Republicans. She is an unapologetic liberal, with a voting record to match (the Republican National Committee chairman, Ken Mehlman, said she was neither a "New Democrat" nor an "Old Democrat" but a "prehistoric Democrat"). She is wealthy (married to an investment banker, she has assets listed at more than $16 million). She represents San Francisco, which Republicans love to invoke as a hotbed of counterculture decadence and extremism. "Is America ready for Nancy Pelosi's Contract With San Francisco?" asked Representative Ric Keller, Republican of Florida, posing a question that, one imagines, could form the basis of many Republican advertisements this fall. |
Link |
Home Front: Politix | ||
The Politics of 'And' | ||
2006-05-06 | ||
So lets accept the and premise: We are a nation of immigrants. And we are a nation of laws. And together, we must practice the politics of and, forging a new way, a solution that recognizes these two essential concepts. Because if we give up on either one If we close ourselves off to the very lifeblood that gives our nation strength and vitality Or if we say anything goes, to heck with our laws and system of justice Then we have given up on America.
| ||
Link |
Home Front: Politix | ||||||||||||||
Fake, but Accurate: How MSM Helped Elect Bush | ||||||||||||||
2006-03-01 | ||||||||||||||
President Bush, for the first time, is hailing the rise of the alternative media and the decline of the mainstream media, which he now says conspired to harm him with forged documents. I find it interesting that the old way of gathering the news is slowly but surely losing market share, Bush said in an exclusive interview for the new book Strategery. Its interesting to watch these media conglomerates try to deal with the realities of a new kind of world.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]() in newsmaking that tends to be pretty consistent.
![]()
cmon,are they just afraid to say it? | ||||||||||||||
Link |