Expertise's Politics and Sports Blog

Monday, July 26, 2004
Wife of Iowa Gov. comments on speech of blacks and Southerners

Well the Boston Herald found a little goodie.

Christine Vilsack, the wife of Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack and Tuesday's primetime speaker at this week's DNC Convention, wrote a 1994 column that commented on the speech of blacks, Southerners, and Easterners, particularly in New Jersey and West Virginia.

I say "commented", although the Herald said "derided", because some of the comments are kind of blurry on whether it's an insult or not.  I'm trying to find the whole column online, and when I do I'll post it on this site.

But here are some of the excerpts:

``I am fascinated at the way some African-Americans speak to each other in an English I struggle to understand, then switch to standard English when the situation requires,'' Vilsack wrote in a 1994 column in the Mount Pleasant News, while her husband, Tom, was a state senator.

Vilsack wrote that southerners seem to have ``slurred speech,'' wrote that she'd rather learn Polish than try to speak like people from New Jersey, and wrote that a West Virginian waitress once offered her friend a ``side saddle'' instead of a ``side salad.''

The future Iowa first lady seemed to be promoting English as the nation's official language, an issue that tripped up her husband, Gov. Tom Vilsack, with many Democrats.

Now the comments about Southerners, West Virginians and Jersey people (Jerseyans?) can be seen as insults.  I don't know if you can actually say the black comment can really be taken as an insult without seeing more of the column.  So far, I can't find it online.  I'm sure someone in the blogosphere can get their hands on it.

I'm sure John Kerry is breathing a sigh of relief, happy that he dodged that bullet, albeit partially.  As you SHOULD know, Tom Vilsack was one of the leading candidates to be Kerry's running mate.  Most pundits say it was the "English as the offical language" issue that dropped Vilsack off of that list.

Did Kerry know beforehand?  I doubt it.  Remember; this is the same man who didn't know about Berger's investigation.  I'm sure if he's that in the dark about that investigation, and she is still on the speaker's list, then he didn't have a clue about this either.

Posted at 01:24 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  


Sunday, July 25, 2004
Palestinian businessmen take wall money on the side.

As you probably know, Israel has taken alot of heat for the wall they are building in the West Bank to keep out suicide bombers and the like from attacking the mostly Jewish communities.  Israel is going to do it anyway, and has even stated that UN Resolution encourages Palestinian terrorism.  They told the same thing to the European Union.

But what alot of people don't know, and has been highlighted, once again, by Drudge, is that Palestinian businessmen sold the concrete for the wall to Israel, and made millions

And check this out:

Palestinian businessmen have made millions of pounds supplying cement for Israel's "security barrier" in the full knowledge of Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader and one of the wall's most vocal critics.

A damning report by Palestinian legislators, which has been seen by the Telegraph, concludes that Mr Arafat did nothing to stop the deals although he publicly condemned the structure as a "crime against humanity".

The report claims that the cement was sold with the knowledge of senior officials at the Palestinian ministry of national economy, and close advisers to Mr Arafat. It concludes that officials were bribed to issue import licences for the cement to importers and businessmen working for Israelis.
So.....Palestinian businessmen wanted a piece of the action.   They went to the officials, who knew what they were up to, bribed them to get licenses to work with Israeli importers and businessmen to sell their concrete.

And - get this - Arafat knew all along.

You think any Palestinians are calling for Arafat to resign?  Yeah right.  Only the lackies:

One of the report's three authors, Hassan Khreishe - an independent legislator and long-term critic of Mr Arafat - last night called for the Palestinian cabinet to resign.

"Wealthy Palestinians with connections at the highest levels have been making millions helping Israel build this wall while Arafat and the Palestinian Authority have been urging people to fight against it," said Mr Khreishe, a council member from the West Bank city of Tulkarm.

"Why Arafat did nothing about it, we just don't know. These people are traitors who have brought shame on us, and they should be punished."
While the officials should be fired immediately, why aren't they going after Arafat too? 

The answer:  because they know he's untouchable.  And anyone that calls for his resignation will be committing political suicide....if not physical suicide as well.

Posted at 02:48 pm by Expertise
Comments (1)  


Saturday, July 24, 2004
Teacher gets H.S. students to taste flavored condoms.

When I found out about this, I found it to be absolutely deplorable.

Who in the world could actually think this was a good idea?  You have to actually taste condoms in order to learn protective sex?  This is a perfect example on how public schools have gotten out of control.  If I'm fortunate to have kids one day they will NEVER be allowed to take a sexual education class, and definitely not in a public school.

Sure; teenagers should be taught about condoms and other forms of contraception.  But tasting condoms goes over the line.  In fact, it probably makes the child look forward to using them, which will encourage more sexual activity than before. 

I'm not a abstinence-until-marriage advocate, but I do think that kids at that age should not have sex.  Of course, these "enlighteners" will say "that's unrealistic".  Is it unrealistic to expect every teenager to abstain from sex?  Yes.  But it's not unrealistic to encourage whomever you can.  Believe it or not, some just might listen.

But what this guy did?  Absolutely over the line:

According to a report in the Santa Fe New Mexican, parent Lisa Gallegos said that when her 15-year-old daughter balked at putting a condom in her mouth, instructor Tony Escudero told her, "Come on, sweetie, have a little fun."

Also, Gallegos quotes her daughter as saying when a male student expressed his disgust with homosexual activity, Escudero said, "Never say never, because you never know. Someday you might like it that way."
This is not a teacher that should be in charge of high school teenagers, or any children for that matter.  There are too many naive teenagers out there that will swallow (no pun intended) the indoctrination that this guy is serving up.  Even to joke with kids like that while pressuring to participate, as he did to Gallegos's daughter, is very irresponsible.

This is why I cringe at the thought of being a parent; there is no telling what is being told to your child by whom.  And with parents and children spending less and less time with each other nowadays,  it gives an opening to influences outside the family that could result in behaviors that you never thought your child would have.  All you can do is prepare them for that world and just hope they don't get caught up in it.

Posted at 05:04 am by Expertise
Comments (1)  


Sperm donor forced to pay child support.

If you think the courts aren't out of control, read this:

A state appeals court ruled that a verbal agreement between a woman and her sperm donor was invalid, and ordered the man to pay child support for the woman's twins.

The three-judge panel ruled Thursday that the deal between Joel McKiernan and Ivonne Ferguson - in which McKiernan donated his sperm and would not be obligated to pay any support - was unenforceable because of "legal, equitable and moral principles."

Despite an agreement that appeared to be a binding contract, the father is obligated to provide financial support, the court decided.

"It is the interest of the children we hold most dear,'" wrote Senior Judge Patrick Tamalia.

Tamalia needs to be impeached immediately.  This was a binding legal contract that was entirely enforceable.  If Ferguson could not provide for that child then she should NOT have had it in the first place!

Once I had heard about this, I was immediately reminded of Thomas Jefferson's warnings about the judiciary.  Probably out of almost everything he has ever stated about how government works, these were probably the most visible:

"The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working under ground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric. They are construing our constitution from a coordination of a general and special government to a general and supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet . . . We shall see if they are bold enough to take the daring stride their five lawyers have lately taken. If they do, then . . . I will say, that "against this every man should raise his voice," and more, should uplift his arm . . .

Having found, from experience that impeachment is an impracticable thing, a mere scarecrow, they consider themselves secure for life; they sculk from responsibility to public opinion . . . An opinion is huddled up in conclave, perhaps by a majority of one, delivered as if unanimous„and with the silent acquiescence of lazy or timid associates, by a crafty chief judge, who sophisticates the law to his mind, by the turn of his own reasoning . . .

A judiciary independent of a king or executive alone, is a good thing; but independence of the will of the nation is a solecism, at least in a republican government."
Keep that in mind everytime you see something like this, folks...

Posted at 02:46 am by Expertise
Comments (2)  


Maybe Berger was trying to hide this?

I'll admit; I haven't read a page of the 9/11 Report.

I'm slack.  I know.  First, I didn't even know that it was online until a blogger posted a link to a page of it.  It seems kind of stupid to me that they would sell a book, although it's only $10 bucks, and post it free for everyone online.  But then that brings us to the sad reality that there are plenty of Americans that are not internet savy and would have to buy the book, if they are even interested in the book in the first place.

But there was something that the New York Sun found out about FOUR possible chance to attack and kill Osama bin Laden:

Well, look now to what the 9/11 report has to say about the man to whom President Clinton, under attack by an independent counsel,delegated so much in respect of national security, Samuel “Sandy” Berger. The report cites a 1998 meeting between Mr. Berger and the director of central intelligence, George Tenet, at which Mr. Tenet presented a plan to capture Osama bin Laden.

In his meeting with Tenet, Berger focused most, however, on the question of what was to be done with Bin Ladin if he were actually captured. He worried that the hard evidence against Bin Ladin was still skimpy and that there was a danger of snatching him and bringing him to the United States only to see him acquitted,” the report says, citing a May 1, 1998, Central Intelligence Agency memo summarizing the weekly meeting between Messrs. Berger and Tenet.

    In June of 1999, another plan for action against Mr. bin Laden was on the table. The potential target was a Qaeda terrorist camp in Afghanistan known as Tarnak Farms. The commission report released yesterday cites Mr. Berger’s “handwritten notes on the meeting paper” referring to “the presence of 7 to 11 families in the Tarnak Farms facility, which could mean 60-65 casualties.”According to the Berger notes, “if he responds, we’re blamed.”

    On December 4, 1999, the National Security Council’s counterterrorism coordinator, Richard Clarke, sent Mr. Berger a memo suggesting a strike in the last week of 1999 against Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. Reports the commission: “In the margin next to Clarke’s suggestion to attack Al Qaeda facilities in the week before January 1, 2000, Berger wrote, ‘no.’ ”

    In August of 2000, Mr. Berger was presented with another possible plan for attacking Mr. bin Laden.This time, the plan would be based on aerial surveillance from a “Predator” drone. Reports the commission: “In the memo’s margin,Berger wrote that before considering action, ‘I will want more than verified location: we will need, at least, data on pattern of movements to provide some assurance he will remain in place.’ ”

    In other words, according to the commission report, Mr. Berger was presented with plans to take action against the threat of Al Qaeda four separate times — Spring 1998, June 1999, December 1999, and August 2000. Each time, Mr. Berger was an obstacle to action. Had he been a little less reluctant to act, a little more open to taking pre-emptive action, maybe the 2,973 killed in the September 11, 2001, attacks would be alive today.

FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES, people.  And in each of those four, our National Security Advisor was given the option to attack Osama bin Laden and either said flat out said no or gave some half-assed excuse.

But the Democrats keep implying that the Clinton Administration did EVERYTHING they could to catch Osama bin Laden.

The August 2000 incident is really particular because it was only last March that we found out about CIA surveillance tapes that found Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan.  Now we find out how the Clinton Administration reacted after they found those tapes.

Posted at 12:30 am by Expertise
Leave a message  


Friday, July 23, 2004
Universal Press releases statement on Rall cartoon.

I'm going to test myself.  I'm going to try to get through this post without cursing.

Wish me luck.

Well there's been some follow-up on the infamous Ted Rall cartoonMichael King has been a guest on a number of black talk radio stations taking heat for this, particularly on black talk radio stations by a number of dimwits (I didn't cuss, yall.) that would rather excoriate him for being a black conservative rather than criticize that slime Rall.

Well it got the attention of Richard "Dick" (Hey....he got it in his URL, so it's fair game, shawdy.  That doesn't count either.) Prince, who contacted UPS for a response to a press release by Project 21, a black conservative group that King is a prominent member of, to stop syndicating Rall's cartoons.

Here's their response:

In response to a query from Journal-isms, Lee Salem, editor and vice president, Universal Press Syndicate, issued this statement:

"When we distribute opinionists -- writers or cartoonists -- to op/ed pages, it is with the knowledge that editors of those pages edit by selection. Most newspapers print only a few releases of any one cartoonist’s or writer’s work because of space constraints, subject matter, viewpoint expressed, or other editorial considerations. We know that every client will not like every cartoon or column we distribute, but we do not prejudge the editorial diversity for subscribers that range from strongly conservative to strongly liberal. We assume the editors who buy the features we distribute know what works in their market and what [doesn't].

"The criticism of Ted Rall's depiction of Ms. Rice obscures the fact that it is part of a larger, hyperbolic context. In the cartoon, Rall is clearly imagining unlikely scenarios that might befall a number of key people in President Bush's administration. That he exaggerates both the language and the events is a time-honored tool of satirists. Anyone who takes it literally is missing the point."
Does Lee Salem think we're fools?  Does he honestly think that if it was the NAACP or any other leftist organizations like La Raza or some civil rights pimp he would use this line on them?  NO.  He'd be on his knees begging them not to boycott or target Universal Press.

What makes it worse is that he tries to EXPLAIN this bigotry....using the piss-poor (again, not cursing) excuse of satire.  I want him to explain to me when on what day did using racial slurs in satire OR IN ANY OTHER FORM OF CORRESPONDENCE became acceptable???!?!?!?!? 
To HELL with Ted Rall's and your point!!!!!

Every conservative should be insulted by the treatment by Salem to Project 21 and black conservatives all over the country.  For him to actually respond with this garbage is absolutely disgusting and serves as a perfect example of the lack of respect for black conservatives around the country.  And I feel sorry for Universal Press Syndicate if this lowlife is their vice president.

Posted at 04:24 am by Expertise
Leave a message  


Thursday, July 22, 2004
Richard Vinroot deserves respect.

He did has%20a%20new%20home. %20Something%20told%20me%20not%20to%20go%20to%20Blogspot;%20mainly%20because%20I%20just%20wanted%20to%20be%20different. %20I%20just%20found Blogdrive%20by%20doing%20some%20searches%20on%20the%20net%20and%20decided%20I'll%20just%20try%20it. %20Besides,%20Blogdrive%20has%20never%20been%20a%20problem%20for%20me, I%20LOVE%20this%20template,%20and%20for%20the%20most%20part%20it's%20been%20pretty%20easy%20to%20use.
">the right thing.  He could have easily stayed in the runoff and still had a chance to defeat Ballentine, but he did what was best for the party, something that few politicians would have done.  This was a big shock for everyone, and considering some of the statements he made about Ballentine yesterday, no one expected it.

With this show of integrity by Vinroot, I expect Ballentine to get a slight push in the polls that he otherwise wouldn't have gotten had a runoff would have went down.  The White House will enthusiasticly support Ballentine, since Ballentine is more of a moderate conservative after Bush's own heart, so I'm sure Bush will campaign in North Carolina a few more times before the November elections.

Easley will still have a considerable lead in the polls, but Ballentine still has a considerable chance to beat him.  Good luck to him, and he has by support and my vote so far.

Posted at 05:38 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  


Casual Notes:

- Lashawn Barber has a new home.  Something told me not to go to Blogspot; mainly because I just wanted to be different.  I just found Blogdrive by doing some searches on the net and decided I'll just try it.  Besides, Blogdrive has never been a problem for me, I LOVE this template, and for the most part it's been pretty easy to use.

- Am I crazy simply because I fell in love with this picture?  I've always loved watching storms come off the horizon, particularly off the coast.  They are so dark and the breeze that accompanies them feels so good.  I guess it's because I lived just off the Pamlico Sound in Hyde County, North Carolina when I was a child, where it was normal for a thunderstorm to roll in during the late afternoon every summer day, and hurricanes would always be something to talk - or worry - about.

Oh well.  Maybe you guys wouldn't understand.

- Here are some "separated from birth" reunions:

Linda Ronstadt and Ms. Swan from Mad TV


Mel Watt and Michael "Flash" Turner from The Five Heartbeats (sorry guys, I couldn't find an exact pic from the movie, but I did get a pic of him from "She's Gotta Have it".  Bottom left.)

- People are so full of hate.  If Kanye West was yelling about fucking hoes and shooting niggas he would be heralded as a "poet", but because he makes a hot track called "Jesus Walks", the Christian haters have to come out of the earth. 

It reminded me of the hate shown by these people when Passion of the Christ came out.  I'm not a religious person by any means, but that doesn't mean I hate it.  Considering that I was raised to go to church when I was a kid (in fact, both parents still bug me about finding one here from time to time), to deny my Christian heritage would be to deny who I am and where I came from. 

And umm....I kinda sorta like ME right now, so let's not go there. :-D

Posted at 04:21 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  


The Washington Post's crippling story on Berger.

There's no other way to put this.  If the Washington Post is dead on the money in this article, set to be in their paper this morning, Sandy Berger is done.

Here are some exerpts:

"After Berger's previous visit, in September, Archives officials believed documents were missing. This time, they specially coded the papers to more easily tell whether some went missing, said government officials and legal sources familiar with the case. 

If this is true, and they indeed coded the documents in anticipation to Berger entering the archives, then that kills the idea that it was an "accident" and was "unintentional", as Berger has been claiming from the start.

Here's more:

"Several days later, after he had retained Breuer as counsel, Berger volunteered that he had also taken 40 to 50 pages of notes during three visits to the Archives beginning in July, the lawyer said. Berger turned the notes over to the Archives. He has acknowledged through attorneys that he knowingly did not show these papers to Archives officials for review before leaving -- a violation of Archives rules, but not one that he perceived as a serious security lapse."


Now, I got the impression that these were a few handwritten notes.  40 to 50 pages?  That sounds like a pretty large portfolio. 

Considering the high security measures taken by National Archives staffers with HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, that "perception" is full of bunk too.  Either the former National Security Advisor - who at the very least is supposed to understand the importance of securing highly classified documents -  is completely ignorant, or he thinks everyone just fell off the turnip truck yesterday.

Also, the Washington Post's use of the word "volunteered" needs to be defined:

"As his attorneys tell it, Berger had no idea in October that documents were missing from the Archives, or that archivists suspected him in the disappearance. It was not until two days later, on Saturday, Oct. 4, that he was contacted by Archives employees who said that they were concerned about missing files, from his September and October visits. This call -- in Berger's version of the chronology, which is disputed in essential respects by a government official with knowledge of the investigation -- was made with a tone of concern, but not accusation. 

Berger, his attorney Lanny Breuer said, checked his office and realized for the first time that he had walked out -- unintentionally, he says -- with important papers relating to the Clinton administration's efforts to combat terrorism.

Berger alerted Archives employees that evening to what he had found. The classified documents were sensitive enough that employees arrived on a Sunday morning to pick them up."
The way the rest of the press has reported on this story, they made it seem as if Berger handed over the documents on his own, as if he went BACK to the Archives and gave them the documents on his own without any type of notification that he took them.


"Berger has known for months that he was in potential jeopardy. Breuer was hired in October, and in January former White House press secretary Joe Lockhart was enlisted to remain on standby if a public controversy blossomed. But Berger allies said he did not inform Kerry because he had resolved to work privately with Justice Department officials, and received assurances that these officials would treat the matter confidentially."
Oh yeah.  He knew from the start that he was wrong in taking that material.  That's why he called up Breuer and Lockhart.  And I'm sure he wasn't the only one that was informed as well, as Slick Willie was the one who told him to go to the National Archives in the first place.

In light of this story by the Washington Post, I don't see how criminal charges could not, and should not, be filed against Sandy Berger.

Even if their allegation of the coding system turns out not to be true, the simple fact remains that Berger admitted to taking unclassified documents that had not been cleared by the National Archives THREE TIMES starting in July. and did not return any of them until he was notified by the National Archives that they were missing after his visit.

One time could be deemed unintentional.  THREE TIMES is deemed intentional.  Regardless of if he did it in the auspices of a cover-up or not, the fact remains that he took them when he shouldn't have, and that's illegal.  Ashcroft needs to get to work.

Posted at 02:25 am by Expertise
Leave a message  


Wednesday, July 21, 2004
The wrong guys won last night.

I kind of had hopes for the primaries last night, but they were quite disappointing.

Let's start in Georgia first.  "Jihad" Cynthia McKinney won her primary last night, getting 51% of the vote.  And now it looks as if she will go on to return to Washington, as Georgia's 4th Congressional District, a district that I used to live in and was embarrassed to have her as a representative, is heavily socialist and full of Bush-haters.  I wish her Republican opponent, Catherine Davis, well, but she has about as much of a chance to win as a mouse has to survive in a box full of pythons.

Herman Cain also lost in his bid for the U.S. Senate.  This is a crying shame too, because I've heard alot of good things about him and there were a number of conservatives, black and white, that were excited about his candidacy.  Johnny Isakson won the primary outright yesterday and will more than likely win Zell Miller's seat.  Far as I know, Isakson's a decent guy, but it's definitely disappointing when a black conservative with the credentials of Cain falls short.

In North Carolina, it wasn't much better.  For the Republican Gubernatorial primary, there will be a runoff between Richard Vinroot and Patrick Ballentine.  I was hoping Fern Shubert would have pulled an upset, but she got 5th place.  She was probably the most qualified for the nomination, and never pulled any punches in regards to laxing driver's license standards to allow illegal aliens to vote.  She also is a CPA, and had extensive knowledge about problems and waste within the state budget.  I'll support Ballentine, since he is a fresh face that the Republican Party desperately needs.  Richard Vinroot lost to Governor Mike Easley in 2000, and made false statements in regard to fellow primary candidate Bill Cobey's record on tax hikes.  Not only do I think Ballentine should win, but people have started to rally around him last night.

In the Republican primary for Lieutenant Governor, Thomas Stith, another black conservative that was a member of the Durham City Council, lost outright as well.  It was a good try.  Besides, I doubt if he would have defeated Beverly Perdue, who is very popular and is obviously being groomed to be our next governor in 2008.

But one black conservative that was somewhat successful, but I wish wasn't, was Vernon Robinson.  He will face Virginia Foxx in a runoff for Republican Senate Candidate Richard Burr's congressional seat. 

I'm hoping Foxx wins.  This guy will hinder, not help the conservative cause within the black community.  If he ever makes it to Congress he will become an instant target for those who wish to disparage black conservatives.  He would be the leftist's response to anything Cyntha McKinney has said or done.  And it's already started, as NPR/Tavis Smiley has done a segment on him.

I checked out his radio and TV ads from his website, and they are absolutely HIDEOUS.  He's got to be the worst gay bashing politican I've ever seen, and his disparaging remarks on his Cosby ad and his statements about illegal aliens is sickening.  I cannot support someone that crass and bigoted.

Hopefully this 2004 election will get better for people in North Carolina.  But I doubt it.      

Posted at 09:25 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  


Next Page


Contact Me

If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:

rss feed


Weblog Commenting and Trackback by