Al Gore, in his ever-present pompousness, has defied the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works by refusing to submit his testimony until right before the committee hearing.  This is after the GOP agreed to waive the 48-hour rule and allow him special treatment to submit his testimony 24 hours beforehand.

From Sen. Inhofe’s (Ranking Member on committee) blog:

Gore first demanded to be granted an unprecedented 30 minute opening statement to the Senate EPW Committee for Wednesday’s (March 21) global warming hearing scheduled for 2:30 pm ET.

The GOP minority on the EPW committee agreed to the 30 minute opening statement.

But then Gore demanded a waiver of the EPW committee’s 48 hour rule that requires all witnesses before EPW to submit their testimony in advance. The GOP minority on the EPW committee then agreed to waive the 48 hour rule in favor of allowing Gore to submit his testimony 24 hours before the hearing.

But in a breaking news development on Capitol Hill — the former Vice President has violated the new 24 hour deadline extension by failing to submit his testimony – even with the new time extension granted to Gore.

As of 8pm ET Tuesday evening, the testimony still has not been received by EPW, a clear violation of committee rules.

The word on Capitol Hill says not to expect Gore’s testimony to the Senate EPW committee until Wednesday (March 21) — the day of the hearing.

It appears that Gore does not believe the same rules apply to him that apply to every other Senate EPW witness.

The question looms on Capitol Hill: Is Gore delaying the submission of his testimony until the very last moment because he fears it will give members of the EPW committee time to scrutinize it for accuracy?

What is Gore so afraid of?  If human-made, catastrophic, Armageddon-wreaking global warming is so factually sound and the “debate is over” about the issue, then why does he feel like he has to delay submitting his testimony?  All I gotta say is I hope Inhofe gives him hell.

From The Exercise of Vital Powers

So here is a worst case scenario for 2008:

Lets say there is a clear Democratic frontrunner, probably Hillary or Obama. By Feb 5th they have the votes locked up for the nomination and then they start campaigning.

Lets also say there isn’t a clean GOP frontrunner. No candidate has a lock on the nomination, and they are all campaigning to win the votes of delegates on the 3rd ballot.

The Dem candidate can go into full fundraising mode, he/she has the lock and that party can unite behind their candidate in Feburary.

The GOP won’t unite till September once the convention is over. There will surely be sore-loser supporters who won’t support the eventual nominee.

Furthermore, the nominee will have had to promise all sorts of things to GOP special interest groups. That will make him that much harder to sell to independents in the General election.

Of course, by the end of the year, there could be a clear GOP frontrunner and no Democratic frontrunner and this all works in our favor. And I still think a national primary day is the only thing that is going to get rid of the stupidity of Ag Subsidies, so it could be worth it in the long run.

Listen in.

FDT talks about immigration

* No Amnesty
* Border security first
* 1986 amnesty scheme was “buying a pig in a poke” and things got worse (Did I mention I love the Southern sayings)

How anti-war protesters “support the troops” in Portland, Oregon.

H/T: Little Green Footballs