Poll: Americans say Reagan the best president, favor George W. Bush over Thomas Jefferson.

Verne Strickland Blogmaster   June 25, 2011

THIS ISN'T BREAKING NEWS, IT'S JUST SOMETHING I WANTED TO SHARE AFTER COMING ACROSS A NOTE ABOUT THE REMARKABLE AND BELOVED RONALD REAGAN, ABOUT SEVEN YEARS AFTER HIS PASSING ON JUNE 5, 2004.

DETRACTORS HAVE HAD PLENTY OF TIME TO TEAR DOWN HIS LEGACY -- BUT THEY HAVEN'T SUCCEEDED. THEY NEVER WILL.  

Ronald Reagan, in office from 1981-89, helped redefine the political framework as he led the country into a new conservative view of itself. The Republican Party still draws much of its ideological authority from this period.

The actor-turned-politician took two long-held tenets to the White House: The federal government was not the solution to the nation's problems, and the Communist Soviet Union was the "evil empire."

At the start of his presidency, Reagan favored the supply-side theory of growth, cutting taxes and social spending to jump-start a sluggish economy suffering with high inflation.

A deep recession forced some tax increases, but over the course of his tenure Wall Street responded appreciatively to "Reaganomics" and the economy boomed.

At the same time he fought to cut taxes, Reagan ordered a massive defense buildup to intimidate the Soviet Union, an expansion that required large-scale Pentagon spending. Critics called the effort corporate welfare for the defense industry.
In an attempt to stay ahead of the Soviets, Reagan supported the Strategic Defense Initiative, nicknamed "Star Wars," which promised to deflect incoming missiles.

The plan was mocked and derided, but has experienced a resurgence with some major new technology and components.It still concerns the Russians -- the best proof yet that the plan is feasible and potentially of value to U.S. defense.


Monday, February 21st, 2011 

Who is the greatest president in the history of the United States?


If you're asking a random sampling of Americans, as the Gallup polling firm recently did, it would be none other than Ronald Reagan.

A recent Gallup survey found that at 19 percent, Reagan topped the list for the third time in 12 years. 

President Abraham Lincoln came in second at 14 percent, followed by President Bill Clinton at 13 percent.

President John F. Kennedy rounded out fourth at 11 percent, and President Barack Obama came in seventh, at five percent.

Amazingly enough, President George W. Bush was chosen by just two percent, placing him in 10th: one spot ahead of President Thomas Jefferson, an influential member of the nation's founders.

In eight surveys over the last 12 years, Americans have always chosen Reagan, Lincoln or Kennedy to top the list. Reagan was the first choice in 2001, 2005 and 2001. Lincoln topped the list in 1993, and twice in 2003. President John F. Kennedy won out in 2000.

On President's Day Monday, Americans celebrated the birthday of President George W. Washington, but only 10 percent picked him as the greatest.

The poll, like many political questions, was seen through a partisan lens. At 38 percent, most Republicans were more likely to pick Reagan, while 22 percent of Democrats picked Clinton.

Reagan's return to the top may have been helped by his image being used in recent advertising campaigns.

In August, the Republican Study Committee (RSC) created an Internet advertisement called "Those Voices Don't Speak for the Rest of Us," juxtaposing video of a famous Reagan speech with context-free clips of Democrats such as Rep. Barney Frank, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Vice President Joe Biden and President Barack Obama.

Reagan has also been a media cause celebre in recent weeks, with his 100th birthday passing recently.
Reagan administration budget director David Stockman recently told Raw Story that military spending policies of Reagan era have all but doomed the US economy, even today.

"The Cold War is long over," he explained. "The wars of occupation are almost over and were complete failures -- Afghanistan and Iraq. The American empire is done. There are no real seriously armed enemies left in the world that can possibly justify an $800 billion national defense and security establishment, including Homeland Security."

Americans also seem willing to ignore a recent book by the president's son, Ron Reagan, that said the conservative icon may have been exhibiting signs of Alzheimer's disease while still in the White House.

His son, who's identified himself as a liberal and an atheist, wrote that in 1984, as his father went on to become the oldest president ever reelected at age 74, the younger Reagan began to "experience the nausea of a bad dream coming true" with regards to his father's mental condition.

He'd already suspected "something beyond mellowing" had begun to affect President Reagan and characterized his debate performance against Democratic nominee Walter Mondale as "fumbling," "lost," "tired and bewildered."

In fact, CBS reporter Leslie Stahl had recalled in her 2000 book, "Reporting Live," that Reagan had acted like a "doddering space cadet," in a 1986 meeting.

She even suggested that CBS News came extremely close to reporting that Reagan's condition had deteriorated so far that he was no longer fit to be president..
The results of Gallup's poll follow.

####

-- With earlier reports

---

Mexican military crosses border onto U.S. sovereign turf. Are they trying to take back Texas?

Verne Strickland Blogmaster  062511

Mexican troops cross into the United States at Bridge Two

By KGNS News Story / 062311

A convoy of three military trucks loaded with Mexican soldiers crosses the border at Bridge Number Two clearly violating international law.

It happens as Customs and Border Protection inspectors try to figure out what to do.

A CBP spokesperson says they got on the phone with Mexican authorities after being alerted that the military trucks were heading their direction loaded down with soldiers and weapons.

Mexican leaders say the soldiers, who had just been deployed to Nuevo Laredo, didn't know the area, got lost and then made their way through Bridge Two.

It's important to note that CBP did not tell us about the potentially serious situation. It came from another law enforcement agency.

Some callers to our newsroom were upset inspectors allowed the Mexican military to get so close to all those inspection booths over at Bridge Number Two.

Some noted had it been Mexican drug lords they could have taken inspectors by surprise and easily crossed the international border deeper into the United States.

GOP will go for override on Bev's veto -- Speaker Thom, you're doing noble work!

Verne Strickland Blogmaster  

CHALLENGES TO VOTER ID ARE FARCICAL. IT'S FREE, IT'S IMPERATIVE, IT'S A SAFEGUARD TO BALLOT BOX INTEGRITY. SYSTEM IN PLAY ON DRIVER LICENSES,  CREDIT CARDS, AIRLINE CHECK-IN. THIS IS BLATANT OBAMA VOTE PLOY!      

June 24, 2011

Raleigh -House Speaker Thom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg) announced today that the North Carolina House will attempt to override Gov. Bev Perdue's veto of the voter ID bill when the body reconvenes in July.

"Governor Perdue has chosen to veto a bill that over 75% of North Carolinians support and more than a dozen other states utilize," Tillis said.  "GovernorPerdue continues to play politics and she has once again turned her back on the voters of our state.  Republicans in the state House will not let this stand.  We will take the lead and we will work for an override vote on the voter ID bill when the House reconvenes in July."

Tillis said the House will notice the veto override once the House reconvenes in July for a brief session on redistricting.   The override vote will occur during the July session.

"This legislation is a no-brainer," Tillis said.  "Requiring a photo ID to vote is a measure that provides confidence in voting and protects the integrity of our electoral process.  Why this bill was vetoed is beyond me, but we will not stand idly by while the Governor and her liberal allies put politics before principle.  We simply want North Carolina to join the majority of states that have an ID requirement when someone shows up to vote."

The voter ID bill, known as the "Restore Confidence in Government Act," has consistently received substantial support of the voters across party lines.  If citizens do not possess photo identification, the bill stipulates that free photo identification can be provided at DMV locations or local Boards of Elections.

"This is not a partisan issue, nor is it defined by political controversy in other states," said Tillis.  "The Governor is out of touch with the people in her state, and we intend to make that very clear to the citizens of North Carolina in the days and months ahead."

www.cumberlandgop.com 

www.facebook.com/CumberlandGop 

GAY MARRIAGE BILL PASSES IN NEW YORK -- IF YOU CAN MAKE IT THERE, YOU'LL MAKE IT ANYWHERE!

 Verne Strickland Blogmaster / June 24, 2011

Gay couples and proponents of gay rights have a reason to celebrate tonight, as the New York State Senate has passed a bill that allows same sex marriage.

New York will be the sixth, and largest, state in the union to adopt gay marriage. The bill will take effect 30 days after governor Andrew Cuomo signs it into law.

The decision, which passed 33-29, was the culmination of weeks of contentious debate and negotiations between Governor Cuomo and the GOP-controlled Senate. After the bill passed in the Assembly, it was unclear if the bill had secured enough votes to pass in the Senate.

When a few notable undecideds joined the cause --including Republican Roy McDonald who famously defended his decision, saying "fxxk it, I don't care what you think. I'm trying to do the right thing" -- the scale in favor of gay marriage seemed to tip. 

Even when governor Cuomo had secured 31 votes (32 are needed to pass the bill), the next hurdle was whether Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos would allow the bill to come to a vote on the Senate floor. But on Friday, after days of crafting religious protections into the bill, and seven hours of GOP leaders' backroom conferencing, Skelos said the bill could come to a vote.

The turning point in the debate came early when Republican Senator Stephen Saland threw his support behind the measure, being the 32nd senator to do so, clinching the support needed to pass the bill. "I have to define doing the right thing as treating all persons with equality," Senator Saland said, "I certainly am at peace with my vote."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/24/gay-marriage-legalized-new-york_n_884434.html?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk3|73113

Delta adopts Saudi 'no-Jew' fly policy. Say WHAT?

---

---

THE UNFRIENDLY SKIES

Challenge to discrimination building as Congress, lawyers warned of plan

---

Verne Strickland Blogmaster /  June 24, 2011  12:20 AM
Article tip per Elizabeth Shikiar


Posted: June 22, 2011
8:34 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND




















Delta Air Lines' plan to add Saudi Arabian Airlines to its SkyTeam Alliance of partnering companies would require the American carrier to ban Jews and holders of Israeli passports from boarding flights from New York or Washington bound for Jeddah, prompting outraged accusations of illegal religious discrimination.

The issue, which has caught the attention of the American Center for Law and Justice already, was raised when Washington attorney Jeffrey Lovitky was perusing airline procedures for travel.

"As we learn more about the issue and facts, we are determined to ensure that American citizens do not face discrimination by airlines like Delta that are passenger code-sharing with Saudi Arabian Airlines," said Colby M. May, director and senior counsel of the ACLJ.

Read the insiders' plans for America under Shariah, in "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," autographed, from WND's Superstore.
"We will be communicating our position with members of Congress, the State Department and Delta Air Lines to ensure that the rights of American citizens are protected," he said.
(Story continues below)

The issue first was presented to Congress, the public and others by talk radio host and former U.S. Rep. Fred Grandy, whose own battle against discrimination was documented when his former radio station demanded he tone down criticism of Islam on his program. He then left the station.
 
Grandy and "Mrs. Fred," – Catherine – recently were interviewed by Talk 1200 show host Jeff Katz about the controversy, which was described as "outrageous."
Their conversation has been posted online as well as embedded:

"Creeping Shariah? Now [it is] jetspeed Shariah. Hat's off to Delta. It looks like Delta will be the first Shariah-compliant airline in the United States," Catherine Grandy said.

Katz noted, "As a Jewish man, I might not be able to fly on Delta Air Lines in the future."

Fred Grandy told Katz that he spent time already this week in Washington briefing members of Congress and other policy makers "on this kind of threat."

"This creeping Shariah, economic jihad, gets you everywhere you turn," Catherine Grandy said. "This is just not right. I'm sure this will be tested."

Fred Grandy said there were several questions raised by the controversy, including would passengers continue to fly on Delta, what should the government do and the advance of Shariah in the United States.
"If this isn't one landing strip at a time, I don't know what is," he said.

Delta officials did not respond to a WND phone call asking for comment, but their sentiment is clear in letters they wrote to Lovitky when he complained about their plans.

Lovitky told WND that he personally raised the issue with the Delta CEO Richard Anderson when he discovered the plan while making travel arrangements. He said Anderson didn't respond, but Kathy M. Johnston, a coordinator for the airline's "Customer Care" did write a letter. She blamed the plan to discriminate on Saudi Arabian requirements and said Lovitky should consult the State Department.

"Delta must also comply with all applicable laws in every country it serves and by the same token passengers are responsible to obtain the necessary travel documents required for entry into another country prior to their day of travel," she wrote. "If a passenger travels without proper documents, the passenger may be denied entry into that country and our airline may be fined. Delta assumes responsibility for ensuring that each passenger boarding our aircraft has the proper documents for travel to their ticketed destination."

Lovitky told WND that whatever discrimination the Saudis choose to enforce in their nation, it becomes a problem when Delta applies it to American citizens on American soil.

"Delta Air Lines acted in a purely voluntary manner in agreeing to this alliance with Saudi Airlines," he wrote in a letter asking the Delta board to act on the matter. "Accordingly, Delta has made itself responsible for ensuring that passengers on any flight jointly operated with Saudi Airlines will not be subject to discrimination on the basis of their gender, religion, or any other inappropriate grounds."

Fred Grandy

He told WND he has not yet heard back from the board members he contacted, nor have specific action plans been adopted by the ACLJ. But he noted the other restrictions that could be forced on Americans at Washington's Dulles airport and New York's JFK.

The restrictions could include clothing requirements for women and banning passengers from "carrying and reading religious literature of their choice."
"This includes, but is not limited to, both Christian and Jewish sacred texts, such as the Old Testament and the New Testament, as well as any objects that reflect their religion, such as a cross necklace," Lovitky said.

"You can imagine how foreign it is to our values as Americans," he told WND. "To adhere to restrictions of this nature is extremely burdensome.

"This needs to be addressed in a way which is consistent with our Western values," he said.

The plan apparently is proceeding through negotiations with a goal of having the Saudi airline aboard the Delta alliance in 2012. Delta's website lists Aeroflot, AeroMexico, AirEuropa, Air France, Alitalia, China Southern, CSA Czech Airlines, Kenya Airways, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, Korean Air, TAROM and Vietnam Airlines as "SkyTeam Partners" already.

But Lovitky pointed out to Delta that Congress recently considered a plan to address Saudi Arabia's discrimination, noting the government there confirms visas will not be issued for an Israeli passport holder or a passport that has an Israeli arrival/departure stamp, "those who don't abide by the Saudi traditions concerning appearance and behaviors" and "Jewish People."

"Delta is prohibited from engaging in religious discrimination by a variety of state and federal laws, as well as its own Code of Ethics," he wrote. "However, Delta would be directly involving itself in the most heinous form of religious discrimination if it were to enter into any code share or other reciprocal travel arrangements with any airline which refuses boarding to individuals of specific religious persuasions.

"I urge Delta to shun any reciprocal travel arrangements with Saudi Arabian Airlines until the government of Saudi Arabia provides assurances that persons who acknowledge being Jewish on their visa applications will be granted visas."
He also was upset that Delta's response to a followup letter was to say, "we respectfully consider this matter closed and we will not be responding to this matter again."


www.wnd.com

Jon Huntsman and family have forged close ties to Harry Reid over the years.

Verne Strickland Blogmaster / June 23, 2011

Back before Jimmy Carter, I gave a few bucks to some Democratic politicians. You know what they say: "After that, he never looked back." Well, I have looked back. A lot. And swore I'd never make that mistake again. I haven't.

I've been quite active in political affairs since then, but always on the right side of the aisle. Jesse Helms did that for me. I worked for him at WRAL-TV in Raleigh, beginning in 1966, stayed on at Capitol Broadcasting Company while he went to the U.S. Senate, then left broadcasting to help Jesse in his successful 1984 re-election campaign.

About that time, the National Congressional Club, Senator Helms' potent political organization, was the key to salvaging the candidacy of the beloved Ronald Reagan, propelling him ultimately into the White House.

Those experiences with the two iconic conservatives left an indelible impression on me. The die was cast. Promoting conservative causes and candidates became a passion that I have pursued in the forty or so years that followed.

All this rambling discourse leads me to my subject -- the proclivity of the Huntsman family, which gave us a new GOP candidate the U.S. presidency, to give money to none other than arch-liberal Harry Reid!

This "failing" in and of itself does not a liberal make, and does not tarnish the Huntsman the family's proud GOP credentials. But it does cut close to the bone, And it must arouse the curiosity of those of us who are looking about for a conservative Republican who has the right stuff to take down one Barak Obama.

The point is, when I scattered unmarked bills of small denomination to help Democrats I didn't even know, it was not a failure but a fumble, and not worth even a smudged footnote in anybody's political annals.

But the Huntsman clan apparently has had more than a fleeting fling in support of the poster child of today's way far left national Democratic Party.

And this might be of some consequence. It may take some strong political sanitizer to get the residue of that close contact with Reid off the hands of Jon Huntsman and his kin.  

Here's what triggered my mild and rambling but sincere rant:

Huntsman's Family Donated $25,000 to Reid

Wednesday, 22 Jun 2011 04:15 PM

By Henry J. Reske NEWSMAX

Newly announced GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman and his family have forged close ties to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., over the years. Although Huntsman never has donated to a Reid campaign himself, members of his family, including his parents and brothers, have sent $25,000 to the Senate’s top Democrat, the Las Vegas Sun reported.

While governor, Huntsman appointed Reid’s son, Josh, to Utah’s Board of Regents. Huntsman’s father even spread the goodwill to Democrats in general, sending $5,000 to the Nevada Democratic Party in 2008, according to the Sun.

Apparently the warm feelings are mutual. Reid said this week that he prefers Huntsman, who was President Barack Obama's ambassador to China until recently to front-runner Mitt Romney. “If I had a choice in that race, I’d choose Huntsman over Romney,” he said according to the Sun.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Huntsman-Reid-donations-Romney/2011/06/22/id/401029?s=al&promo_code=C7D1-1

No Wonder Harry Reid Likes Jon Huntsman

By Lonely Conservative June 22, 2011

 

The family of Jon Huntsman, GOP presidential wannabe, donated $25,000 to Harry Reid’s campaign in the last election cycle. No wonder Reid is so fond of Huntsman. Huntsman’s family helped to ensure that Reid remained Senate Majority Leader.

The Las Vegas Sun reported today:

Here’s a list of the donations from the GOP candidate’s family to Reid (with help from CQ MoneyLine):

Jon Huntsman, Sr., Karen Huntsman $9,600 (2/4/09)
Peter, Brynn Huntsman $9,600 (12/31/09)
James, Marianne Huntsman $4,600 (11/30/09)
Jon Huntsman, Sr. $2,000 (11/2/04)

http://lonelyconservative.com/2011/06/no-wonder-harry-reid-likes-jon-huntsman/

Huntsman to Obama: You’re a Remarkable Leader; Harry Reid: I Would Pick Jon Huntsman

 June 21, 2011 By Lonely Conservative

When President Obama appointed former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman to be his ambassador to China, Huntsman sent Obama a hand written note before he departed.

“You are a remarkable leader — and it has been a great honor getting to know you.”

Erick Erickson posted a photo of the note. Erickson’s no fan of Huntsman, he believes it was disloyal of Huntsman to quit his job to run against the man who appointed him. I get the point, but I have my own reasons for not caring for the guy. He seems to be running to the left of Obama. I would vote for any one of the GOP candidates over Huntsman.

But why take my word for what a terrible Republican candidate Huntsman would be, when you can take the word of Harry Reid.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid ventured into the 2012 presidential waiting game Tuesday, offering up his pick for the Republican presidential nomination.

“If I had a choice, I would favor Huntsman over Romney,” Reid told reporters after a meeting on Capitol Hill. “But I don’t have a choice in that race.”

 Thank God for that!

http://lonelyconservative.com/2011/06/huntsman-to-obama-youre-a-remarkable-leader-harry-reid-i-would-pick-jon-huntsman/


VS: Well, this stuff is nowhere close to the recent Weiner roast. It doesn't even qualify as a burnt marshmallow. But the story does warrant a second glance. Stay tuned.

NC redistricting: Democrat Brad Miller will pay the piper as GOP draws the map.

VERNE STRICKLAND BLOGMASTER

By Joshua Miller ROLL CALL  June 22, 2011

 

 Brad Miller: How far can you fall?

TO THE VICTOR GO THE SPOILS. IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING!

Rep. Brad Miller has no friends left in the North Carolina Legislature, where he drew his own district 10 years ago from a perch on the state Senate redistricting panel. Now, Republicans are making him their No. 1 target and looking for ways to dismantle his district.

Political payback comes in many forms.

It could be particularly biting this cycle for Rep. Brad Miller, who drew himself a Congressional district as a state legislator a decade ago.

Now, the North Carolina Democrat is on the receiving end of the redistricting process, with the GOP-controlled state Legislature due to deliver retribution in the form of dismantling his district and making him its No. 1 target for defeat.

“Congressman Miller, people tend to believe, will be targeted. And it’s purely personal. He chaired the redistricting committee in the [state] Senate 10 years ago, and this is payback, if you will,” state Democratic Party Executive Director Jay Parmley said.

Paul Shumaker, a longtime GOP strategist in the state, said Miller was “absolutely” the most vulnerable among the House Democrats being targeted — namely Reps. Mike McIntyre, Larry Kissell and Heath Shuler.
Miller “doesn’t have any friends left in the Legislature,” Shumaker said.

State Republicans are now haggling behind closed doors over the first draft lines of the new Congressional map, to be released around July 1. The state’s Democratic governor does not have the legal authority to veto new lines.

Republicans see the Tar Heel State as a gold mine for gaining seats in the 2012 cycle.

“It’s a place where the lines 10 years ago were gerrymandered in such a way that unlocking the gerrymander that’s there will give us [the] opportunity to pick up more seats there than any other state in the country,” said a Republican with substantial knowledge of the state’s redistricting process. The GOP sees the opportunity to have eight Republican districts, four Democratic districts and one tossup district in the state.

But Democrats think that is a bridge too far.

“There are laws of unintended consequences that come out of these things all the time. And the greedier these guys get, the more difficult it is going to be to hold these districts. They can make them competitive, but they can’t make ’em solid,” longtime North Carolina Democratic consultant Thomas Mills said.

Democrats admit that the state will be an uphill battle for them, but they note the demographic trends — increases in Latino and black voting age population that outpaced increases in white voting age population — and the higher voter turnout generated by having the president on the ballot will be to their advantage.

North Carolina will be a key battleground in the presidential election, a cause for optimism for Democrats.

The four safe Democratic districts are expected to be: the two majority-minority districts currently represented by Reps. Mel Watt and G.K. Butterfield; a third majority non-white district; and a white, affluent district anchored by the Raleigh-Durham area.

But as the details of a new Congressional map get hammered out in legislative committees, Republicans say final decisions on the new lines have not yet been made.

“Everything is still being finalized and everything is still being checked. Until that happens, we won’t know exactly what the maps will look like,” said a North Carolina Republican with knowledge of the redistricting.

Republicans see a number of ways to get rid of Miller’s district, including dismantling the 13th district entirely and placing it in a different part of the state.

Republicans also say Miller might be drawn into fellow Democratic Rep. David Price’s Chapel Hill-Durham-based 4th district, which sets up the potential of a Member-versus-Member primary. Miller’s office declined to comment, but it did say he was running for re-election.

One potential GOP challenger for Miller is Nathan Tabor, a tea-party-aligned businessman and chairman of the Forsyth County Republican Party.

Republicans say Kissell might well be the easiest target in redistricting because of the 8th district’s geography. By cutting Fayetteville out of the district’s eastern side and parts of the Charlotte region on its western side, the seat becomes more Republican. One potential GOP opponent for Kissell, depending on how the final lines are drawn, is businessman Pat Molamphy.

Geography might end up helping McIntyre. Bordered on one side by the Atlantic Ocean and on another by South Carolina, the 7th district will be more difficult for the GOP in North Carolina to tinker with than those of his other vulnerable colleagues.

Still, Republicans see a path to swinging his district, which has been represented by a Democrat since the 1800s, into their column. Regardless of the new lines, GOP insiders tell Roll Call that ex-Marine Ilario Pantano, who lost to McIntyre in 2010, is likely to take another run at the Congressman.

Republicans also see the prospect of McIntyre and Kissell being drawn into the same district.

Republicans say they need to shore up freshman Rep. Renee Ellmers’ (R) 2nd district but that other GOP incumbents are safe.

Democrats hope they will still be able to target the 2nd, which was held by Democrat Bob Etheridge for 14 years. And they note that the more Republicans who are moved into the 2nd, the harder it will be to dilute Democrats in the districts of McIntyre, Kissell and Miller.

The GOP also hopes to weaken Shuler’s 11th district in the western part of the state by adding population from the neighboring 10th district, which is very Republican. If the new lines were to place Democratic Buncombe County, where Asheville is located, outside the 11th, Shuler could face an even steeper challenge than he did in 2010.

But no matter the district lines, to beat him, Republicans will need a good candidate. Republicans in the Tar Heel State and in Washington, D.C., were bullish on their recruitment prospects this cycle, citing the substantial opportunity to add seats in North Carolina.

“There is a perception in North Carolina that this is a time to run for Congress if you’re a Republican living in one of those four Democratic districts,” said the Republican with substantial knowledge of the state’s redistricting process.

But regardless of what happens, there will almost certainly be a lawsuit over Congressional redistricting.

Parmley, the executive director of the state Democratic Party, did not seem optimistic that the courts could be avoided. “You always hold out a hope that they draw fair maps, but there’s no indication we’ve been given that makes us think that they will be fair for us. So I think it’s reasonable to expect in the long run, that this will not be settled by the Legislature,” he said.

Under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, either the Department of Justice or a federal court must also approve the final lines.

JoshuaMiller@rollcall.com | @jm_dc

Labels: 2012 Redistricting NC, Brad Miller Vulnerable, GOP

From an old man to a young man -- I've been there, but I couldn't stay!

Verne Strickland Blogmaster    June 20, 2011

I BELIEVE THIS EXCHANGE BEGAN WITH A POST I DID ON SOME VAST DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MORMONISM AND THE CHRISTIAN FAITH, INCLUDING DISTORTED REFERENCES TO JESUS CHRIST IN THE BOOK OF MORMON. I QUESTIONED HOW THIS MIGHT AFFECT A PRESIDENCY UNDER MITT ROMNEY. 

A YOUNG FRIEND OF MINE -- CAMERON SPENCER, WHOM I MET ON THE PANTANO CAMPAIGN TRAIL, TOOK ISSUE WITH MY COMMENTS. (HE'S NOT THE FIRST.) I THINK I HAVE PIECED TOGETHER MOST OF THE MAIN PIECES OF THE DIALOGUE. 

CAMERON IS SMART AND CAPABLE. HE IS JOINING THE U.S. ARMY AND WILL GO TO OCS. I CAME AWAY WITH A BLACK EYE AND A BLOODY NOSE, BUT WITH MY HONOR INTACT -- AND WITH RENEWED RESPECT FOR CAMERON. HE IS THE FUTURE OF AMERICA.

AN OLD DOG CAN LEARN NEW TRICKS. HE TAUGHT ME A FEW, AND I'M GRATEFUL.

HERE IS A LINK TO MY POST ON USA DOT COM:

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000069803763 

 ***********

Cameron writes: "I have no problem with the Mormon faith. What about the differences between Christianity and Judaism? I believe you're a big supporter of Israel. Do you not feel a contradiction or sorts since Jews don't believe exactly what you do as a Christian?" 
 

Verne writes: In a word -- no. As Christians, we are commanded by our Lord to always stand by Israel. Mormonism doesn't get the same divine attaboy -- for obvious reasons. Love you like a brother, Cameron, but you're struggling on this one. 
 
Verne writes: (Referencing photo of Cameron at a graduation.) Hey, there's my buddy at the halls of higher learning! Let's patch things up. Sorry things got a bit testy. I have a lot of respect for you, and surely you know that. Take care, and do a good job for the USA. I know you will. 

Cameron writes: Verne, absolutely no hard feelings. I think you've been dead wrong on a lot of the national issues lately, but that's the way it goes. The generational gap between you and I is becoming more apparent. I realize we're moving forward and as we do the world around us is growing increasingly comlicated and diverse. Like it or not, things ...have changed and there's no turning back the clock. I'm not sure you and the loyal readers of your blog realize this. I'm as conservative as they come, but I've noticed more and more of my fellow conservatives are not one bit logical or realistic in much of their thinking and it's troubling. No solutions, just complaining...day after day.

Verne writes: Very bold statement, sir. And quite disappointing. Youth, as they say, is wasted on the young. I think you're judging my generation harshly. I would disagree that we are out of touch, and we're certainly not lacking commitment or solutions. People my age have come through a lifetime of "complicated and diverse" times in history. Perhaps you're unaware of that. I could challenge many of your other assertions, which I would characterize as surprisingly naive. You're a good man. You'll live and learn also. And accomplish much. God bless you, buddy, and have a good life. Verne.

Cameron writes: "Verne, I think you're taking this conversation too personally. Don't. Fact is, I'm keenly aware of where your generation has been and I'm greatful for the handwork and incredible scrifices. I also see the current predicament we're in and realize some non-traditional solutions are likely the only way forward. Sometimes I feel like the Tea Party and the far right would rather stonewall than role up their sleeves and implement some practical solutions. Reality is: taxes are going to have to go up, Fox is biased...so is MSNBC, Obama is a citizen, a Tea Party candidate will never beat Obama, the debt limit is going to have to be raised, millions of illegal aliens will likely be granted some form of amnesty, both sides are to blame for the outrageous debt, Obama claims to be Christian...so we should take him at his word, Sarah Palin is not electable...she quit on the people of her state and can hardly put together a cohesive sentence while speaking on the air. I'd imagine you'd likely disagree with at least some of my points...if not, then I've misinterpreted your views. Let's continue the back in forth. Maybe we'll learn something from each other."

Verne writes: Cameron, you know, what truly hurts and surprises me is not your feeling that I am out of touch with reality in my writing. That I don't take as personal. And I've been told that many times before. But also I have plenty of company where the views I express are concerned. What I write is controversial, and is going to draw challenges and even derision. I have my mission, and I am going to continue with it. Jesse Helms, who mentored me at WRAL-TV and in later years as well, was called "Senator No" by many left-wing crusaders because of his votes against destructive liberal philosophies. But where there is a negative, there is also a positive. Therefore, when we are opposed to disrespect for deficit spending, we are FOR fiscal sanity; when we are opposed to UN homogenization of Western power and culture, we are FOR the concept of U.S. exceptionalism. Perhaps you get the idea. Opposition to the outrageous agendas of liberals, atheists, socialists, and misguided do-gooders of myriad descriptions is warranted. Our nation is being destroyed. Barry Goldwater, cruelly attacked for his conservative views, said, "Extremism in defense of liberty is a virtue" (or words to that effect.) I heartily subscribe to that.


I appreciate your frustration. But I appeal to you not to jettison the conservative tenets to which you have been exposed. You've learned from the best. It is that tendency I see -- frustration turned to anger -- to bail out on Ilario Pantano, Jesse Helms, Ronald Reagan, John Bolton, Allen West, Sean Hannity, the Tea Party, and the real defenders of freedom, that is my chief concern.


We need you, my brother. We need your faith in our cause. We need your youthful vigor and idealism. And, though you may not see this now, you need us and our beliefs, based on Christian and patriotic values. I sense that I have left myself open and vulnerable to some sharp criticism. Let it come. Just be as fair as you can. God bless you, my friend. Verne.

P.S. THESE TWO FIT IN THERE SOMEWHERE:

USA Dot Com: Mormons are not Christian -- a scholarly treatment that proves it!

usadotcom.blogspot.com

June 15 at 10:49pm  

Jb Pope, Linda Storey Gelbhaar and Kenneth Glenn Koons like this.

Verne Strickland -- Linda, Jb, and Kenneth: Thank you for being there kids. These people -- the Mormons -- are selling false "gods" and are coming to us fraudulently in Jesus' name. But they keep up the parody, although the deepest pit in Hell is reserved for those who practice such deceptions.

• • 
    

    June 16 at 3:02pm
  • 
    

    Cameron W. Spencer The Mormons I know are solid citizens, hardworking, extremely disciplined, and totally devoted to their families. They may not technically be Christians but they practice values that would put a lot of Christians to shame! So, I have no problem with Mormons and I'd vote for Romney or Huntsman tomorrow.

TO BE CONTINUED: 

Comments welcome on topic thread at http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000069803763

Don't call us 'occupiers' when we're dying for your country -- U.S. to Karzai.

VERNE STRICKLAND BLOGMASTER
 

Our diplomatic corps is rarely as candid as Ambassador Kirk Eikenberry in defense of the United States against unjust and unwarranted criticism of America. So the Ambassador's retort targeting Karzai comes as a breath of fresh air. We're investing heavily in Afghanistan -- willingly, generously. But there's a limit to how much ingratitude we can and should take. Thanks, Mr. Ambassador, for drawing a line in the sand. The same pushback should be exercised in any number of nations where we dole out blood, money and goodwill, which is acknowledged not with thanks but with arrogance. 
 

U.S. AMBASSADOR REBUKES KARZAI FOR 'HURTFUL, INAPPROPRIATE RHETORIC'.

By Patrick Goodenough     Monday, June 20, 2011
 

(CNSNews.com) – The outgoing U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan warned Sunday that the American people are growing weary of being viewed as “occupiers” by the leaders of a country where so much American blood has been spilled.

Karl Eikenberry’s candid and impassioned remarks came a day after President Hamid Karzai in a televised speech accused U.S.-led foreign troops of being in the country “for their own national interests.”

On Sunday, Karzai met with Iranian Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi – on the first ever official visit by Iran’s top defense official – and the two discussed problems arising from “the presence of foreign forces” in Afghanistan, according to reports in Iranian state media.

Last week Karzai held talks with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the sidelines of a Eurasian summit in Kazakhstan, and similar sentiments were expressed.

More than 1,500 U.S. troops have lost their lives in Afghanistan – some 177 this year alone – since U.S.-led forces invaded to topple the Taliban regime following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. More than 900 military personnel from other nations have been killed over that period.

There are around 100,000 American troops deployed in Afghanistan, and the first in a series of phased withdrawals is due to take place in the coming weeks.

Without mentioning Karzai by name, Eikenberry took aim Sunday at the increasingly harsh anti-coalition rhetoric emanating from the president, calling it “hurtful and inappropriate.”

The ambassador, who will leave his post over the summer, made the remarks at the end of a speech on the future of U.S.-Afghan relations, delivered to several hundred students at Herat University.

Karzai and President Obama in Washington
on May 12. (Below)

“When Americans, who are serving in your country at great cost in terms of lives and treasure, when they hear themselves compared with occupiers, told that they’re only here to advance their own interest, and likened to the brutal enemies of the Afghan people, my people in turn are filled with confusion and they grow weary of our effort here,” Eikenberry said.

“Mothers and fathers of fallen soldiers, spouses of soldiers who have lost arms and legs, children of those who’ve lost their lives in this country – they ask themselves about the meaning of their loved one’s sacrifice,” he continued. “I have to tell you, when I hear some of your leaders call us occupiers, I cannot look at these mourning parents, these mourning spouses, these mourning children, and give them any kind of comforting reply.”

Eikenberry conceded that that the “learning curve has been steep” in what is a “complex” situation. “But – in spite of our mistakes – we are a good people whose aim is to help improve our mutual security by strengthening your government, army and police, and economy.”

He went on to list some of the accomplishments, including the building of schools, clinics, roads, power stations, investment in educational training and in the agricultural field, promoting trade and reviving culture, music and sport.

“Yet, when we hear ourselves being called occupiers and worse, our pride is offended and we begin to lose our inspiration to carry on,” he told the Herat University students.

“At the point your leaders believe that we are doing more harm than good, when we reach a point that we feel our soldiers and civilians are being asked to sacrifice without a just cause, and our generous aid programs dismissed as totally ineffective and the source of all corruption … especially at a time our economy is suffering and our needs are not being met, the American people will ask for our forces to come home.”

http://cnsnews.cloud.clearpathhosting.com/news/article/us-ambassador-rebukes-karzai-hurtful-ina

Jon Stewart -- left-wing idealogue in clown's costume. Jon is scary, not funny.

     Fox News/YouTube

Verne Strickland Blogmaster /  June 20, 2011



You know, there are a lot of dynamics at play here.


Jon Stewart claims he is a comedian and entertainer -- not a devoted extreme cynic with a liberal agenda that is too blatant and obvious to ignore. The man is as he appears -- a media roughneck -- coarse, rude, opportunistic, aligned with the left, and often out of control.


And why not? Stewart is acting up not for payback -- but for PLAYBACK! The more outrageous the better, the more fawning attention he'll get from the (it pains me to say it) the "mainstream" media.


This is high stakes showbiz, and Stewart knows he's got nothing to lose, everything to win. That's the way the cards are stacked. He can't make a mistake -- just shoot the lights out of the little carny ducks that float by in this tacky  sideshow. 


Heap mockery, no matter how outrageous, on the prey of the day -- in this case consummate gentleman anchor Chris Wallace -- and you burnish your reputation as a destroyer of the despised "Fair and Balanced" Fox Network.

Ain't that the way? How many times have we seen the facade repeated -- a liberal shock jock lobs incendiery mortar rounds at a conservative moderator shouldering a water gun? Stewart, always looking to best Howard Stern, Bill Mahr or Rachel Maddow in the ultimate insult league, lets it all hang out? Bad taste be damned.


"You're insane," Stewart blurts. Really? Well, let's pick up the play-by-play of this uneven contest -- a jerk who doesn't give a damn grandstanding against a nice guy who does: 

***********

The Daily Show's Jon Stewart entered the proverbial lion's den, appearing live on Fox News Sunday to debate "media bias" with host Chris Wallace.

Early in the interview, Wallace flashed a previous quote of Stewart's calling Fox News a "relentless agenda-driven 24 hour news opinion propaganda delivery system," and asked Stewart, "Where do you come up with this stuff?"

Stewart responded, "Uh, it's actually quite easy."

Later, when Wallace argued that a clip about Sarah Palin from the Daily Show was political commentary, Stewart told Wallace, "You're insane... Here's the difference between you and I. I'm a comedian first. My comedy is informed by an ideological background, there's no question about that. But the thing that you will never understand...is that Hollywood, yeah, they're liberal, but that's not their primary motivating force. I'm not an activist. I am a comedian."

"Do I want my voice heard?" Stewart continued later. "Absolutely, that's why I got into comedy. Am I an activist, in your mind? A partisan ideological activist?" Wallace responded, "Yeah." "Okay, then I disagree with you," Stewart said.

"You can't understand, because of the world that you live in, that there is not a designed ideological agenda on my part to affect partisan change because that's the soup you swim in. And I appreciate that, I understand it. It reminds me of in ideological regimes, they can't understand that there is free media other places because they receive marching orders."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/19/jon-stewart-fox-news-sunday-video_n_879964.html  

VS: SAY WHAT? STEWART'S STATEMENT IS TOTALLY NONSENSICAL. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THE HOST IS WEARING BRASS KNUCKLES, HITS BELOW THE BELT, AND SWINGS AFTER THE BELL.

SICKENINGLY BAD DECORUM.

BUT THAT IS WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE IN THE ARENA TODAY, FOLKS. I JUST HOPE AND PRAY THAT ENOUGH OF US IN THE AUDIENCE KNOW THIS GUY AND HIS RAUNCHY ILK FOR WHAT THEY ARE. THEY'RE CHEATING, PEOPLE, FLYING UNDER A FALSE FLAG. AND THEY ARE GETTING BY WITH IT. SO FAR.

FOOTNOTE:
Jon Stewart (born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz; November 28, 1962) is an American political satirist, writer, television host, actor, media critic and stand-up 'comedian'. Here's incriminating description of 'The Daily Show' by the producers of this deceptive liberal stilleto of an 'entertainment' program:

SHOW DESCRIPTION: Accused of misinforming its core audience of young adults about international news, this series doesn't hide the fact that it's not a news program and only uses newsworthy stories as a jumping-off point to satire. In addition to celebrity and politician interviews, Stewart and his staff perform skits to get their points across.

---

Obama's 'no-show' miffs Hispanics. Got some ideas here on how to patch things up.

 THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES



Verne Strickland Blogmaster June 20, 2011

WELL, MR. OBAMA, LET ME GIVE YOU AN IDEA OR TWO. FIRST, WHILE YOU MAY LIKE BIGGIE SMALLS MORE THAN GEORGE JONES, I WILL SAY THAT THE POSSUM HAD A LOT OF HITS EVEN AFTER HE RECORDED 'NO-SHOW' JONES.

ALSO, YOU CAN WIN BACK THE LATINO VOTE BY SIMPLY SAYING: 'MR. GORBACHEV, TEAR DOWN THIS FENCE!' GIVE IT A TRY. AND LOOK, SIR -- DON'T SWEAT IT. WE'RE WATCHING YOUR BACK.

By JULIE MASON POLITICO.COM  | 6/19/11 11:14 PM EDT
 

Leaders of a national Hispanic organization are criticizing President Barack Obama for skipping their annual conference for the third consecutive year after he promised as a candidate in 2008 that he would return as president.

Some members of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials also are questioning Obama’s commitment to immigration reform, noting that deportations have increased under his watch — even as the administration intensifies its outreach for Hispanic votes. NALEO, which includes more than 6,000 Latino leaders who represent major blocs of voters in key electoral states, opens its annual conference Thursday in San Antonio.

“The president looks forward to continuing to work with Latino elected and appointed officials in the coming weeks and months on these issues as he and his administration have done over the past two years,” Miranda added.

After POLITICO raised questions about Obama’s attendance at NALEO, the White House informed the National Council of La Raza, another Hispanic organization, that Obama would attend its annual conference in July, according to La Raza spokesman Julian Teixeira.

When Obama addressed NALEO in 2008, the group’s executive director, Arturo Vargas, asked whether he would return in 2009, if elected.

Obama replied, “As president, I am looking forward to being back and addressing you.”

Three years later, NALEO is still waiting. Vargas said the invitation for this week’s conference was delivered to the White House a year ago.

“It’s more than a disappointment,” Vargas told POLITICO. “I don’t get it. I don’t think he’s given our membership the attention they deserve.”

Vargas said the White House told him Obama’s schedule is too tight to allow his attendance. The White House pressed NALEO to accept a video address by the president instead, according to the organization. NALEO declined.

“We’ve had numerous folks call and write, asking [that] he honor his commitment,” said NALEO President Sylvia Garcia, a Democrat from Texas. “They said no.”

Garcia and others asked for Attorney General Eric Holder or Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano as potential substitutes for Obama. The administration is sending Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

Salazar “will discuss the Obama administration’s priorities and the steps the administration has taken and will continue to take on behalf of Latinos and all Americans to put us back on the path to long-term prosperity and growth,” Interior Department spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff said.
 
She called the conference “a high priority for the White House as well as Secretary Salazar.”


But Juan C. Zapata, a Florida Republican and chairman of the NALEO Educational Fund, the organization’s nonprofit community outreach arm, called Obama “calculating” and “disingenuous.”

“He sent a very clear message to the Hispanic community that, ‘I want your support on the campaign, but I am not willing to do anything to earn it,’” Zapata said.

The rift is noteworthy — and even a little puzzling — because of the administration’s aggressive push for Hispanic support ahead of 2012. Obama’s campaign team is trying to raise historically low rates of Hispanic registration and voter turnout in at least a half-dozen swing states, and one Obama adviser involved in his reelection effort recently told POLITICO, “Hispanics could very well decide this election.”

In recent months, Obama has invited several Latino groups to the White House. He has stressed his support for overhauling immigration policy and for the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act, which would extend legal status to some young immigrants who go to college or into the military. He delivered a speech on immigration reform in El Paso, Texas, and last week, he made a quick trip to Puerto Rico.

“It is getting harder and harder for the president to go into a venue where he is confronted by Latinos because he is in a jam,” said Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), one of Obama’s earliest Hispanic supporters and a member of NALEO.

“In front of a group like NALEO, blaming Republicans for their intransigence on immigration reform and not addressing what the president’s own administration is doing to immigrants would not wash,” said Gutierrez, who traveled with Obama to the 2008 NALEO conference. “So it isn’t surprising to me that the president is not showing up.”

Luis Miranda, a White House spokesman, said the administration has shown “unprecedented” work and outreach on issues important to Hispanics.

“The scope of the president’s efforts on behalf of Latinos and all Americans is not defined by his participation at one event, but rather by the work carried out every day to put our economy back on track and spur job creation, improve access to health care, strengthen education and reform our immigration system so that it meets America’s 21st century needs,” Miranda said.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57313.html