I know this is probably another post that will create another blog civil war but this is, in my estimation, not only ineffective and ridiculous but a huge violation of civil rights.

Miami police announced Monday they will stage random shows of force at hotels, banks and other public places to keep terrorists guessing and remind people to be vigilant.

Deputy Police Chief Frank Fernandez said officers might, for example, surround a bank building, check the IDs of everyone going in and out and hand out leaflets about terror threats.

“This is an in-your-face type of strategy. It’s letting the terrorists know we are out there,” Fernandez said.

Yeah lets get out there and harass people for IDs that you don’t legally have to carry. I am all for strong enforcement but this is just a easte of police power and the only reason they use it is that it is “flashy.” I shouldn’t have to show my ID to anyone just walking down the street. I am willing to concede obviously for airlines, banks, etc. But the sidewalk shouldn’t require an ID, if I go in a park I don’t need to prove who I am to anyone.

If anyone remembers from Hunt from Red October, the one Russian commander is amazed you don’t need papers to go from state to state. Well one would think you wouldn’t need to carry an ID to walk on the sidewalk.

The Editors at NRO have provided the conservatives with “blind vendettas” against our president with some more ammunition to carry on the fight. I am somewhat shocked that NRO would turn against Bush during this critical time during the war on terror, but then again they aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed.

A sampling of their brilliant work:

The current issue of Time magazine has a revealing quote from “a Republican official close to the White House” about the president’s approach to supporters of immigration enforcement: “Bush decided to give these guys their rhetorical pound of flesh. In return, he wants a comprehensive bill, which is what he has always wanted. He’s just going to lead with a lot of noise about border security.”

So once again President Bush will use conservatives to get his bill passed, but he has no real intentions of changing the tune when it comes to “border politics”.

The President’s own words damn him:

We will not be able to effectively enforce our immigration laws until we create a temporary-worker program.

Wrong, wrong and wrong again. [this space has been intentionally left blank]

A pull quote from the Human Events article in the previous blog entry that I found highly amusing in light of recent events:

Smith refused to name names; but other sources confirmed a report by columnist Bob Novak that Rep. Duke Cunningham (R.-Calif.) had taunted Smith after the vote–waving his checkbook and promising to donate to Brad Smith’s primary opponents. (See Curmingham’s statement in “Capital Briefs,” page 2.)

[Warning this article reposted from Human Events is guaranteed to boil your blood, but as I am doing a paper on the passage of the Prescrition Drug Bill I just had to repost it. Mourning, wailing, and gnashing of teeth welcomed and encouraged on the comments thread. As well as monuments to fmr Reps Toomey and Smith. Oh and Pence '08!]

The House Republican leadership kept the late-night vote open almost three hours–toward the break of dawn–but the prescription drug entitlement still seemed on its way to a 216-to-218 defeat. Then just before 6 a.m., Representatives Trent Franks (R.-Ariz.) and Butch Otter (R.-Idaho) switched their votes from “no” to “yes.”

After a few vote-changes by Democrats, the bill passed by a final tally of 220-215. (See roll call, page 26.)

This is the story of how a small band of committed conservatives stood up to enormous political pressure and almost defeated a massive new entitlement program proposed by their own party.

Around 5:30 a.m. on Saturday, November 22, Republican Representatives John Shadegg (Ariz.), Jeff Flake (Ariz.), Mike Pence (Ind.), Trent Franks (Ariz.), and Butch Otter (Idaho), all opponents of the bill, were huddled outside the House chamber. The GOP leadership told them that if the bill were defeated, Majority Leader Tom DeLay (Tex.) would bring up either the same bill again or, amazingly, a Democratic package twice as costly. That proposal, they were told, already had the 218 votes needed to pass.
Arm-Twisting

Worse, they were also told, President Bush was behind the plan, and would sign the Democratic bill if it reached his desk.

President Bush has never vetoed a bill.

The conservatives were shocked by this threat, which endangered the solidarity and resolve they had maintained all night. “Both Jeff [Flake] and I made it clear to Trent [Franks] and Butch [Otter] that if they chose to change their votes, we would not fault them,” said Shadegg, in retrospect not the clearest way of keeping them in opposition.

This touched off a brief but heated exchange between Shadegg and Pence, sources said. The two men calmed down and made up after raising their voices at each other.

The five opponents of the bill then met in an office in the Capitol with Speaker Dennis Hastert (R.-Ill.), DeLay, Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas (Calif.), and Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson, who had been working the House all night.

Franks, who had earlier rejected pleas by Hastert and DeLay to change his vote, agreed to call President Bush. Franks finally told Bush that he and Otter would provide the switches necessary for the package to pass. They were apparently so taken with the argument that a worse bill actually might be enacted by their leaders and signed by their President that they changed their votes. Pence said that he disagreed with their rationale for switching.

Other conservatives held firm under enormous pressure, most notably retiring Rep. Nick Smith (R.-Mich.), whose son Brad hopes to win his safe 7th District seat in a crowded Republican primary (see Politics, page 12).

Smith said he was told his son would get “almost unlimited financial support, plus some nationally recognized names to endorse him,” if Smith voted for the drug bill.

“This comes after [Brad] had sold part of his property to put his own $100,000 into his campaign” said Smith.

But his son told him, said Smith, “‘Hey, Dad, you stick to your guns and do the right thing. I don’t want to go to Congress that way.’” Smith didn’t waver.

“The only sad part is that I may have hurt Brad’s chances of getting in, because some of the members were pretty adamant that they were going to work to make sure he didn’t,” said Smith. “I thought that after 20 years in elected office, I knew what arm-twisting was. This was pretty aggressive arm-twisting.”

Smith refused to name names; but other sources confirmed a report by columnist Bob Novak that Rep. Duke Cunningham (R.-Calif.) had taunted Smith after the vote–waving his checkbook and promising to donate to Brad Smith’s primary opponents. (See Curmingham’s statement in “Capital Briefs,” page 2.)

Rep. Walter Jones (R.-N.C.) told HUMAN EVENTS he would rather resign from Congress than support the costly new federal entitlement program.

“[Chief GOP Deputy Whip] Eric Cantor [R.-Va.] did approach me on the floor and asked me if I would vote for the Medicare package,” said Jones. “And I said, ‘If the Good Lord came down and asked me, I’d say no.’”

“My hope was that they would make this a better bill,” said Rep. Jim DeMint (R.-S.C.), who also voted “no.” “But this never happened.”
‘Successful Failure’

DeMint, who is running for the Senate in a crowded primary, said several doctors in his state called to tell him they would not support him if he voted no. “I said I was doing something that went beyond the next election, and supporters were being bought with short-term candy in a stocking” he said.

Freshmen Scott Garrett (N.J.), Gresham Barrett (S.C.), and Tom Feeney (Fla.), among others (see related story on page 7) were also hammered. Feeney personally told President Bush over the phone that he had “not come to Washington to ratify and expand Great Society programs.” Some House members, sources say, threatened to delay Feeney’s anticipated ascent into the House leadership. But he was overheard telling his tempters on the House floor, “This isn’t about my career–this is about my country.”

The conservative effort was a “successful failure,” Pence told HUMAN EVENTS, because a net of six more Republicans opposed the bill this time than when it first came up in June. “When 25 principled conservatives held on for almost three hours in the longest vote in history, I was pretty proud to be a participant.”

The administration made up for the six additional GOP “nos” by winning a net of seven new Democratic “yes” votes.

Meanwhile, Republican Representatives Richard Burr (N.C.)–a 2004 Senate candidate–Steve Buyer (Ind.), and James Sensenbrenner (Wis.) who voted against the bill in June, voted for it this time. And Rep. Ernest Istook (R.Okla.) switched in the middle of the voting period from “no” to “yes.” All four Republicans gave the same explanation as Franks and Otter: They had been persuaded to believe that their President would actually sign an even worse bill.

Congressmen John Culberson (R.-Tex.) and Jeff Miller (R.-Fla.), on the other hand, changed their votes the opposite way–from “yes” to “no”–at the last minute, once the bill’s passage had been ensured.

PHOTO (COLOR): In 1996, conservative Rep. Nick Smith (R.-Mich.) chaired the House Task Force on the Debt Limit and the Misuse of the Trust Funds. He’s shown here at a Feb. 12,1996 press conference calling for then-Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin to resign. This year, Smith stayed true to his limited-government principles, standing up against the leadership of his own party to vote against the most expensive new entitlement in 40 years.

~~~~~~~~

By John Gizzi and David Freddoso

“We will not be able to effectively enforce our immigration laws until we create a temporary-worker program.”

That was all I needed to hear last night to know that we were being given another song and dance. Actually, Mr. President, there is a way to stop it. It’s called a wall. China built one a thousand years ago; we can do it now. Admitting that may even seem crude by today’s standards, the technology exists today to monitor the border effectively and stop the flow of illegal immigrants even without the Great Wall of Arizona. Perhaps a combination of both would be in order? There is no reason why four years after 9-11 our borders along Mexico remain as porous as they are. The Minute Men have proven that it can be done. Put the guards on the borders or build the wall or put up the military technology. Don’t blow smoke up our butt, Mr. President. We are all smart enough to know that this simply is about garnering the vote of the illegal Mexicans for the Republicans.

And what of the 11 million illegals that are already here? The ones that are forcing hospitals to close in California because they don’t pay. The ones whose kids get free education on the taxpayers’ dimes. The ones who give birth to their kids on US soil so they can collect welfare. Bush did not address these 11 million in his speech. Will they be allowed to sign up for this guest worker program after they have already shown that they have no respect for the laws of our country? Bush says he does not believe in amnesty, but if these 11 million can apply for this program then is this guest worker program not a euphemism for amnesty?

Earth to George! Drop the guest worker program. We have five percent of Americans currently unemployed. Take away their food stamps and their Section 8 housing and trust me. They’ll pick the lettuce. We should be concentrating on the job market and standard of living for our own people, not Vincente’s folks. Bush is leading the Republicans down a bottomless pit on this one. Some Democrats are already beginning to realize what a hot button issue this is and that they can make big gains by running to the right of the Right on this one.

If Bush were serious about putting a stop to illegal immigration he would have done something about it on September 12, 2001.

This issue is going to be on the front burner for some time so thought it would be an interesting topic of conversation.

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - The Vatican newspaper said on Tuesday that homosexuality risked “destabilizing people and society”, had no social or moral value and could never match the importance of the relationship between a man and a woman.

The remarks were contained in a long commentary published to accompany the official release of a long-awaited document that restricted the access of homosexual men to the Roman Catholic priesthood.

The article by Monsignor Tony Anatrella, a French Jesuit and psychologist, said homosexuality could not be considered an acceptable moral alternative to heterosexuality.

“During these past years, homosexuality has become a phenomenon that is always increasingly worrying and in many countries is considered a quality that is normal,” the article in L’Osservatore Romano said.

The article was specifically approved by the Vatican’s secretariat of state.

“It (homosexuality) does not represent a social value and even less so a moral virtue that could add to the civilization of sexuality,” Anatrella said. “It could even be seen as a destabilizing reality for people and for society.”

The Catholic Church, the article said, had a duty to reaffirm its position that homosexuality is “against conjugal life, the life of the family, and priestly life”.

“In no case is this form of sexuality a sexual alternative, or even less, a reality that is equivalent to that which is shared by a man and a woman engaged in matrimonial life,” the Italian-language article said.

“It (homosexuality) cannot be encouraged or even less so, supported with pastoral initiatives,” it said in an apparent reference to Catholic priests who administer to homosexuals without reminding them of the Church’s position against gay sex.

It said homosexuality was “a sexual tendency and not an identity” and repeated the Church’s stand against allowing gays to marry or to adopt children. It also called homosexuality “an incomplete and immature part of human sexuality”.

It repeated some themes in the Vatican document, and added a list of ways seminary directors could determine if a candidate for the priesthood had overcome homosexual tendencies or risked not being able to respect the Church rule of priestly celibacy.

Howard Kaloogian, former US Senate candidate, has announced his bid for the Congressional seat formerly held by Duke Cunningham, who resigned in disgrace today for accepting millions in bribes. Kaloogian appears to be the genuine article of real conservative we need in Washington. What say you SaveTheGOP readers? This is a safe GOP seat so the primary is key, we need to get another real conservative in.

…amongst the mainstream press, such as the Ap and Fox News, is clearly shown in the coverage of California Rep. Cunningham’s (R- Cal.) resignation from the House upon admitting that he accepted bribes from defense contractors to allocate them federal contracts. The Ap story is here, and the Fox version is here. The Fox version goes into much greater detail about what the reader cares about: the facts of the transactions. Meanwhile, at the end of the Ap story is this:

” Cunningham’s pleas came amid a series of GOP scandals. Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas had to step down as majority leader after he was indicted in a campaign finance case; a stock sale by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is being looked at by regulators; and Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff was indicted in the CIA leak case.”

It has been thoroughly shown that the DeLay indictment is a joke; Bill Frist has said exactly what he did, which is in no way questionable; and last but not least, I love how they’re still associating the words “Dick Cheney” with “CIA leak case” despite the fact that nobody was indicted for leaking anything and the indictments that were handed down have lost a great deal of credibility following Woodward’s actions. Media bias at its finest.

If I was a homeless person I would not want to live in France and here is why. I would take living in America over France any day, where private organizations and citizens donate their time, money and hearts to those in need. I encourage everyone to volunteer at a local soup kitchen or shelter this year, it is a very rewarding experience. Having been to France, I was surprised at the number of homeless people in the city. ( I also noticed the hard way that they like using the bathroom in public phone booths, yuck)

This horrifying article points out that in the UK many babies are being born alive during abortions and then killed. Chilling indeed.

A motion is on the floor of the Canadian parliament to dissolve the Liberal Party party government and hold new elections. Very amusing.

We can all agree that Sen. John McCain is a great American hero. He is a model of courage and patriotism for a new generation of American warriors.

However, I still believe his recent amendment, which categorically bans coercive interrogation techniques, torture and inhumane treatment, is deeply flawed. There is no question that torture is immoral and attended with many evils. But this does not negate the fact that sometimes torture and coercion are absolutely necessary to prevent another catastrophic, 9-11 style terrorist attack . In the war on terror, it is the duty of the American government to defend its citizens. In extreme cases, where a terrorist prisoner witholds information that could potentially save millions of American lives, we have no choice but to utilize coercion - and torture if necessary - to obtain such critical information. Again, these are extreme circumstances, but given the nature of the enemy we face, they are not so hypothetical. Torture is a moral imperative in cases where prisoner information could prevent mass death. By banning coercion and torture in every situation - even extreme instances where terrorist information will save lives - the McCain Amendment gravely endangers our entire nation.

McCain’s support for the “no torture ever” policy should remind us that he is unfit to lead America as President of the United States. President Bush and Vice-President Cheney, in their staunch opposition to this resolution, have demonstrated that they are willing to endure the moral scruples and political fallout associated with coercive interrogation and torture policies. They accept the harsh consequences of these measures so that the American people can live in peace , freedom and security. This is sacrificial, principled leadership at its finest. If Sen. McCain is really serious about winning the White House in 2008, he will also have to exhibit such fortitude and courage, just as he did in the Hanoi Hilton some 40 years ago.

Charles Krauthammer has a tremendous article on this very topic in the recent issue of the Weekly Standard. I suspect his piece will re-ignite this necessary debate in our country. I encourage all Savethegop.com readers to peruse it here.

Joe Schwarz (RINO-MI) is going to be facing a challenge from Tim Walberg, who the Club for Growth has now endorsed, which will hopefully keep other solid conservatives out of race. I liked Brad Smith for this seat in ‘04, but at this point we need to get the best guy to knock Schwarz out and it looks like that guy might be Walberg. Definitely a race to keep an eye on. Also note the comment of the MI state chair:

But Michigan Republican Party Chairman Saul Anuzis said he won’t discourage anyone from running.

“I believe primaries are healthy,” he said. “They’re good for the party, they draw people who believe in issues and generate a lot of early activity.”

Man, can I get Anuzis to come to PA and be our state chair. We need more folks who think like him.

I can’t say it enough times, but thank God for Tom Coburn. From today’s Wall Street Journal

Amid the carnage, however, there was one small triumph last week: Senate Appropriations powerhouse Ted Stevens decided to pull funding for the infamous $320 million “Bridge to Nowhere” in his home state of Alaska. For those joining this story in progress, the proposed project would have connected Ketchikan, Alaska with remote Gravina Island (population 50)…………

The one hero of this episode is Senator Tom Coburn (R., Okla.), who sponsored an amendment to block funding for the bridge and use the money to repair vital bridges on the Gulf Coast destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. Mr. Stevens erupted on the Senate floor and threatened to quit if the measure passed. The vote failed. However, Mr. Stevens threw in the towel last Tuesday, announcing that he was taking this “drastic action” because his state had been “so unfairly maligned in the national press” in recent weeks.

I particularly remember this night. I was in DC and I was supposed to meet a friend of mine for dinner who works for Senator Coburn. He called me on my cell while I was at the restaurant bar and told me he would not be able to make it because he was on the Senate floor waiting for Senator Coburn to introduce a spending amendment that would give Senator Stevens a heart attack. I wished him well, hung up the phone, looked up at the bar TV, and there was Stevens, whining and wimpering. It was sweet bliss.

While Coburn definitely put Stevens in his place, this part kind of bothers me.

In any case, Mr. Stevens isn’t redirecting the bridge’s $320 million to New Orleans. The deal is that the money stays in Alaska but will be spent on other road projects.

Destroying the waste going towards such an absurd cause was part of the fight, but the other part was to have that money go towards New Orleans so we don’t incur any more debt in the rebuilding. Pressure should be put on Stevens to return that money back to the Federal budget. Alaska is one of the smallest states population wise; how much money can they possibly need up there?

This is just another reminder of the work that still needs to be done within the GOP. Alaska is a solidly red state and very conservative. There is no reason why it should be represented by the Murkowskis and Stevens. They can do so much better.

YellowJacket was born in Tampa, Florida in 1986. Due to his father’s job he lived all around the county during his illustrious childhood. Only a few months after being born, YellowJacket’s family moved to Minneapolis for two years, followed by Dallas, Texas for a year and a half, followed by Tampa (again) for five years, followed by Minneapolis (yet again) for two more years, until finally settling down in Atlanta amidst the 1996 Olympics. YellowJacket’s family has lived in Sandy Springs, Georgia ever since, and one of YellowJacket’s first voting experiences was voting in the recent referendum to incorporate Sandy Springs as a city to keep more local tax dollars in the region.

YellowJacket is currently in his second year attending the Georgia Institute of Technology, where he is majoring in Mechanical Engineering and trying to get out alive. He is a brother of Chi Psi Fraternity, along with Mike, and is also involved in several other campus organizations.

Though an engineering major, YellowJacket also has a passion for politics and current affairs. He applies his political knowledge (what little there may be) and opinions through journalism, which he developed a talent for while writing for the North Springs Oracle; as Editor in Chief he lead the high school paper to win many statewide awards. Due to this journalism background, he isn’t a typical number-crunching engineering student and in the political arena, has a particular interest in journalism and bias in the media.

Though a young college student with idealistic ideas and a keen interest in beer, not to mention very little direct political experience, YellowJacket has a firm belief in the Constitutional ideals of our Republic as intended by our Founding Fathers. His favorite historical figures are George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Robert E. Lee. His favorite beer is Corona, and he enjoys long walks on the beach.

UPDATE: [Feb. 4, 2008] I’m now in my 4th year at Georgia Tech, and am getting my degree in Economics and International Affairs. Go Jackets.

“Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less.” – Robert E. Lee

So Save The GOP readers, I have been trying to do research on this Senate primary in Michigan between Keith Butler, Mike Bouchard, and Jerry Zandstra. I know Bouchard is supposedly the uber-RINO and that Butler was the first Republican elected to Detroit City Council in ages, but what’s up with Zandstra?

From GrassrootsPA

Indeed, nearly every robbery report has been followed by calls for petition drives, protests - and more.

Penn undergraduate Cory Bray, who heads the school’s College Republicans chapter and knows one of the robbery victims, has loudly condemned the administration and urged students to apply for concealed-weapons permits.

“If Penn can’t protect us,” he said, “we should be able to protect ourselves.”

We went through this here in Pennsylvania with Specter and Toomey. The RNC, the President, and Senator Santorum came out to stump for a man who constantly stood in the way of a conservative agenda. This year it’s Rhode Island and it’s Chafee and Laffey. The RNC is putting all of their backing into trying to keep a man who votes more times against them than with them. It’s really bad, though, when even the Left wing wack jobs notice it. From the DailyKos

The DSCC has $20.3 million cash on hand, the NRSC is at $9.3 million (and wasting a lot of money trying to kill off fellow Republican Laffey in Rhode Island).

Senator Dole, can’t you see how embarrassing it is when even a crazy nutcase like Kos can see how illogical your efforts are? We have chances to pick up Maryland, Michigan, and even Washington next year, and your wasting your time and energy on Chafee and even the fringe nut left is mocking and laughing at you. This is exactly the reason why the Republicans have raised half the amount of cash as the Democrats. I refuse to give any money to the RNC when I know it will go to help RINOs who don’t stand for my party or my beliefs.

If the GOP gets slaughtered next year we won’t have to look far to see why.

This is still waiting to be confirmed, but the Jerusalem Post is reporting that Zarqawi and fellow terrorists blew themselves up after US troop cornered them in a building. If this is true, it is extremely big news. Zarqawi is the leader of Al-qaida in Iraq and responsible for countless civilian deaths across Iraq and most recently in Jordan. This is the guy who video taped himself cutting the heads of innocent civilians, including several Americans. It is well past time that this guy got what was coming to him.

This is a tremendous article from Human Events that dispels the conventional myths surrounding Jerry Kilgore’s recent loss to governor-elect Tim Kaine. The media, the Democrats and moderate Republicans are touting Kilgore’s defeat as a political failure for conservatism and the Bush agenda. On the contrary: Far from running as an avowed conservative, Kilgore consistently shunned conservative principles throughout his campaign. The other two state candidates in VA, Bill Bolling and Bob McDonnell, won large victories on traditional conservative platforms. Kilgore, however, took unbelievably weak and ambiguous stances on abortion, guns and taxes (You can see this on full display in the first debate with Tim Kaine and moderator Tim Russert). The Kilgore campaign should be a harsh reminder that the Republican Party must embrace, not scorn, its conservativve ideals. Conservative leaders, like McDonnell and Bolling, will always be more successful than spineless, visionless politicians like Jerry Kilgore.

These parts of the article were particularly insightful:

“In striking contrast to his two Republican running mates—and to Bush himself in his winning campaign against John Kerry last year—Kilgore not only failed to deploy the tested conservative issues of taxes, abortion, and guns but actually seemed to run away from them. As one Republican Party leader from the nominee’s own Southwest Virginia home area told me: “Jerry attacked Kaine, all right, but never spelled out what he was in favor of. This was the worst campaign [for governor] that was ever run!”

While Kilgore repeatedly said he opposed any new taxes, he refused to sign the pledge of Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform that puts in writing a vow never to raise present taxes or support new ones. According to ATR spokesman Chris Butler, “Grover and the rest of us repeatedly urged Mr. Kilgore to sign the pledge, but he wouldn’t do it. The conservative Bolling, by contrast, proudly signed the ATR pledge. Noting that Bolling won 40,000 more votes than Kilgore, Butler said: ‘Had Mr. Kilgore signed the pledge, he would have won.’”

Alas. Conservatives should adopt the following rallying cry for the 2006 elections: “No More Jerry Kilgore’s!”