Place an Ad | Subscribe | Advertise With Us

Listen to me!! (But don’t tell anyone)

By Jennifer J. Foster

Posted 11/06 at 01:47 PM (0) Comments

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is set to deliver remarks at a Wisconsin Right to Life event Friday evening, one of the few speeches the former Republican presidential nominee will have given since she resigned the governorship last summer.

But Palin appears to be doing her best to keep a low profile on this trip: no press will be allowed into the Milwaukee auditorium where she will speak and those who have paid the $30 admittance fee are unable to carry in cell phones, cameras, laptops, or recording devices of any kind.

You know, circumstance (and some sketchy decision-making) made Sarah Palin a national figure when she was chosen as John McCain’s out-of-nowhere VP pick.

She insists that whatever poor or unfavorable impressions people have of her are the result of attacks on her by the national media (only the “liberal” members of the national media, though).

But here’s the thing: If you believe that the media parses your words and edits your tapes to make you look like an idiot, why wouldn’t you want as many legitimate, complete representations of your speeches as possible to counter your “attackers”?

I was hopeful that Palin was right—that McCain’s campaign staff had mishandled her and that the incompetency she appeared to show during her national roll-out was not her fault.

But a year later, I still don’t get Sarah Palin.

And it appears that I’m not alone: According to a Gallup poll noted by CNN, only about one in three Americans would seriously consider casting their vote for her.

I’m one of the other two.

Still not settled

By Jennifer J. Foster

Posted 11/04 at 07:46 PM (1) Comments

Here’s your latest update on the status of the ongoing controversy over whether abortion will be covered in the pending public option.

From The New York Times:

House Democratic leaders struggled Wednesday to strike a deal that would restrict the use of federal money to pay for abortions under sweeping health care legislation headed for debate on the House floor this week ...

The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, a supporter of abortion rights, has little choice but to heed the concerns of members of her caucus who oppose abortion. As many as 40 House Democrats, a potentially decisive bloc, have threatened to oppose the bill without tighter restrictions on abortion.

As the Times reports, the current House bill neither requires nor forbids health plans from covering abortions; Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of health and human services, would decide whether the public option would cover them.

Sebelius has a long record of support from and cooperation with Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of abortions in the world. So while the House bill doesn’t stipulate that the public option would cover abortion, everyone knows that if Sebelius is making the decision, it will.

I’ve told you here previously about the effort by U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak to ensure that tax dollars are not used to fund abortions. Stupak’s amendment, though it is being assailed as an infringement on women’s rights, would simply continue the policy the federal government has had to abortion funding for 30 years.

U.S. Rep. Brad Ellsworth now has a compromise proposal. As the Times reports, “if the public plan decides to cover abortion, it would have to hire private contractors to handle money that might be used for that purpose.

Predictably, neither side is happy.

Supporters of abortion rights, like the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said the proposed restrictions went too far.

Laurie Rubiner, vice president of Planned Parenthood, said Mr. Ellsworth’s proposal would “tip the balance away from women’s access to reproductive health care.”

“Abortion should not be treated any differently from any other medical benefit or procedure,” Ms. Rubiner said. “It is our hope and expectation that the secretary would decide to include coverage of abortion in the public option.“

... The bill stipulates that in every part of the country, there must be at least one insurance plan that provides coverage of abortions and at least one that does not.

Douglas D. Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, said Mr. Ellsworth’s proposal was “a phony compromise.”

“It serves no purpose except to assist Speaker Pelosi in peeling votes away from an amendment that would flatly prohibit the public plan from paying for elective abortions,” Mr. Johnson said. That amendment was offered by Representative Bart Stupak, Democrat of Michigan.

It’s been said that a sign of a good compromise is that neither side likes it. That may be true. But Ellsworth’s proposal does come off as a cop-out of sorts—not specifically precluding the public option from covering abortion, but simply providing a middleman to handle the money.

I hope the pro-life members of the Democratic Caucus see this for what it is: Worthless window dressing.

Hurrah for Hillary

By Jennifer J. Foster

Posted 11/04 at 12:08 PM (0) Comments

Hurrah for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who’s finally speaking bluntly to Pakistani leaders and their people.

From the Associated Press:

In a lively give-and-take with students at the Government College of Lahore, Clinton said inaction by the government would have amounted to ceding ground to terrorists.

“If you want to see your territory shrink, that’s your choice,“ she said, adding that she believed it would be a bad choice.

Clinton likened Pakistan’s situation—with Taliban forces taking over substantial swaths of land in the Swat valley and in areas along the Afghan border—to a theoretical advance of terrorists into the United States from across the Canadian border. It would be unthinkable, she said, for the U.S. government to decide, “Let them have Washington (state)“ first, then Montana, then the sparsely populated Dakotas, because those states are far from the major centers of population and power on the East Coast.

Clinton was responding to a student who suggested that Washington was forcing Pakistan to use military force on its own territory. It was one of several questions from the students that raised doubts about the relationship between the United States and Pakistan.

I like that comparison Clinton made regarding the land concessions. The Pakistani approach takes on a new feel when you look at it from that perspective, doesn’t it?

The bottom line for Pakistanis is that, for better or worse, their country is a nuclear power. They wanted to achieve that status, and now they have to live with the responsibility of being one. If they are not going to do the things necessary to ensure the viability of their democratically elected government—and, therefore, the security of those nukes—then someone has to.

And all of us—Americans, Europeans, Talibanis, al Qaeda and everyone else alike—know that it’s not going to be the U.N.

Pakistan has a choice. They can do what’s necessary to stop the advance of the Taliban, or they can watch while someone else does.

Tuesday: Political junkies’ delight

By Jennifer J. Foster

Posted 11/03 at 06:13 AM (2) Comments

Today is a big day for political junkies—especially in Alabama.

All sorts of intrigue awaits later today as several contentious races will be settled:

In the New Jersey governor’s race, incumbent Jon “Don’t vote for the fat guy” Corzine finally faces off with Republican challenger Chris Christie. You might remember a recent post I wrote about the whole “fat” thing. This race seems to be in a dead heat, so the results will be eagerly awaited.

Virginia looks poised to elect a Republican governor to succeed super-popular Democratic Gov. Tim “should-have-been-VP” Kaine despite President Obama’s support for the Democratic candidate, R. Creigh Deeds. Polls show that some dissatisfaction with the Obama/Pelosi/Democratic legislative platform has been a component in GOP candidate Bob McDonnell’s healthy preview numbers, and pundits will chatter tomorrow night about what this race means, if anything, for congressional Democrats in 2010.

The congressional race in New York’s 23rd District, one of the most bizarre contests ever, will be settled between a candidate on the Conservative Party platform and a Democrat (who was endorsed by the Republican nominee, who dropped out this weekend). Yes, I said it was strange. Read more here. But the takeaway in this contest won’t be the winner; it will be how grassroots Republicans and conservative (small c) independents break with mainline Republicans. When the pundits get sick of talking about New Jersey, they’ll talk this one up (or, if you watch MSNBC, they’ll focus on it completely to play up the splits in the GOP).

And then there are the ballot measures, always fun. Issues this year include medical marijuana expansion (Maine), the repeal of benefits extention to gay couples (Washington), the repeal of a statute allowing gay marriage (Maine) and whether to allow casino gambling for economic benefit (Ohio). Fun, huh?

OH!! And I almost forgot. If all those elections and ballot initiatives weren’t enough fun, CNN is going to have JESSE VENTURA on as a guest on Larry King Live! Yes, the former-wrestler-turned-governor-of-Minnesota-turned-party-unaffiliate will be sounding off about the evils of organized politics tomorrow night. CNN! What? Joy Behar wasn’t available? Oh, that’s right—you guys gave her her own show. And how’s that working out, exactly?

Closer to home, there’s plenty going on, too:

The Alabama Republican Party will host a news conference in Montgomery at 10 a.m. to talk ethics reform. Word has it that there are some questions about some personnel spending in the Senate, among a bunch of other related things.

GOP gubernatorial candidate Bradley Byrne will roll out his ethics plan at 2 p.m. in Birmingham. “Byrne will outline the specifics of his Ethics Reform package and his plans for achieving legislative passage,“ according to a campaign news release. Note the capital E and the capital R. It must be important if random, inexplicable capitalization is involved!

Unless he’s planning a first-hand report about rush-hour traffic on 280, Byrne had better make it quick in Birmingham, or rent a helicopter, because he’s due to appear with the other six announced gubernatorial candidates in a forum at Auburn University at 7 p.m. This is one of the first times all seven candidates—two Democrats, five Republicans—will appear together. Yes, I’m planning to be there, if for no other reason than to report to you how many times the candidates dodge state issues, like why most of them don’t trust you to reform Alabama’s antiquated constitution, to share with you their unsolicited thoughts on congressional issues, like how much they oppose the dreaded OBAMACARE (insert blood-curdling screams from your Halloween garden noise machine here).

I’m really counting on the League of Women Voters and our local chambers of commerce to keep the candidates’ feet to the fire and keep their attention focused where it should be—on the people, potential and problems in Alabama, not on cheap shots at national figures in Washington.