Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick Under Pressure, Refuses to Apologize for his September 11th Comments
Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick has been under pressure from the Republican state party chief to apologize for remarks he made during his September 11th memorial speech. Yes, there still are some Republicans in Massachusetts, not many, but some. He refuses to apologize. Why? Because he was misunderstood. Isn’t that always the excuse from liberals, it seems like it.
“Let me be clear. I don’t think that America bears any fault for the attack on us on 9/11, and I don’t think that any of the family members with whom I spoke heard it or saw it that way,” Patrick said.
“I was there, I know what I said. I was as clear as possible in condemning the terrorist attacks, and I hope I’m clear right now,” he said.
But, there is at least one family member of a victim who did hear it that way.
The Democratic governor had been criticized by the state’s Republican party chief and the prominent brother of a Sept. 11 victim.
That brother of a September 11th victim is also a Republican running for a state office, he has made a speech at the memorial services for September 11th every year, except this year. He was not invited because he is running against a Democrat that Deval Patrick is endorsing. Pathetic.
So, let’s look at what Deval Patrick said one more time and see if we can figure out how he was mis-understood.
Because among many other things, 9/11 was a failure of human understanding. It was mean and nasty and bitter attack on the United States. But it was also about the failure of human beings to understand each other, and to learn to love each other. And it seems to me that that lesson and that warning is something that we must carry with us everyday.
Was he trying to say that terrorists need to learn to love us? I don’t think so. But maybe he was trying to say the terrorists don’t love us. Now that’s an understatement. The terrorists do love, they love their version of Allah, and they believe Allah condones killing us. Maybe, just maybe he was alluding to the terrorists in his speech.
In order to gain perspective lets delve into Patrick’s past to see if he may be talking about terrorists being unable to love us. When I look into his past I see a man who is very soft on crime. I see a man who is compassionate to violent criminals. He worked uder the Clinton administration, there are the Clintons again, it’s just a coincidence though, it always is with the Clintons, as assistant attorney general.
Patrick’s representation of Carl Ray Songer, who was convicted of the 1973 killing of a Florida highway patrolman. In the 1980s, while working for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Patrick successfully argued that Songer had been denied opportunity to present details about his background and upbringing before a jury awarded him a death sentence.
Patrick won a stay of execution for an admitted cop killer hours before he was to be executed because the jury wasn’t allowed to hear about his troubled childhood. Was this also a failure to understand and love a cop killer?
Then there is the case about Benjamin LaGuer. LaGuer tied up with telephone cords and beat and raped his 57 year old neighbor for over eight hours. He left her thinking she was dead. She wasn’t, she identified him as the attacker having known him as her neighbor. He has maintained his innocence and said a DNA test would prove it. What role does Patrick play in this?
Patrick had petitioned the parole board in 1998 and 2000 for LaGuer’s freedom and had contributed financially to the DNA testing. In his letters to the parole board Patrick characterized LaGuer as “thoughtful and eloquent.”
LaGuer is thoughtful and eloquent, wonderful. Ask his neighbor how thoughtful he is. Patrick helped pay for the DNA test, which proved LaGuer’s guilt.
Now I give you one last piece of his background and it goes back to the Clinton’s again. This time we are talking about the government attacking and killing a mother while she is holding her infant baby. That’s right, Ruby Ridge.
As the Justice Department’s chief civil rights prosecutor, Deval Patrick made the controversial decision not to criminally prosecute an FBI sniper who shot and killed an unarmed woman as she held her infant daughter in her arms during a 1992 standoff in Ruby Ridge, Idaho.
The incident, in which U.S. Marshall William F. Degan of Quincy and the wife and son of white separatist Randy Weaver were killed during an 11-day standoff, is cited by experts as the spark that started the anti-government militia movement that exploded after the standoff in Waco, Texas, less than a year later.
In 1994, Patrick, the Democratic candidate for governor who was then assistant attorney general, concluded there was insufficient basis to prosecute FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi for shooting and killing 43-year-old Vicki Weaver. Horiuchi had testified that he opened fire on the woman’s husband and his friend, Kevin Harris, when he thought they were about to fire on an FBI helicopter.
So now I ask you, was Patrick talking about the terrorists when he said that there was an inability to understand and love each other, or was he talking about us?
Video: Rudy Giuliani Campaign Ad Calling for Hillary to Apologize to General Petraeus
Below is a video I found at Conservatism With Heart. It is an ad run by Rudy Giuliani calling for an apology by Hillary Clinton for her character assassination of General Petraeus.
HAT TIP: Conservatism With Heart
Latest Fox News Poll (9/14) has President Bush’s Approval Rating Rising
Here is the results of the latest Fox News poll on president Bush’s approval rating:
The latest FOX News poll shows that while President Bush’s job rating remains low and a majority of Americans disapproves of his performance, his approval rating is up this week to its highest level in five months. Today 37 percent of Americans say they approve of the job Bush is doing, up from 33 percent last month, and 58 percent disapprove.
Rudy Giuliani Runs New York Times Ad Attacking Hillary, Moveon.org Responds
In a response by Rudy Giuliani to Hillary Clinton’s character assassination of General Petraeus Giuliani took out a full page ad in the New York Times in which he said the following:
You do not honor the troops by attacking their general at a time of war,”
In Giuliani’s print ad, his campaign quotes him as saying, “These times call for statesmanship, not politicians spewing political venom.”
The Giuliani print ad accuses Clinton, a New Yorksenator, of participating in a “character attack” against Petraeus, citing her comments during a congressional hearing that the general’s progress report on Iraq required a “willing suspension of disbelief.”
So what did Hillary say in response to Rudy? Nothing, she had her mouthpiece organization moveon.org do her talking for her.
In response, a liberal anti-war group is running a $50,000 ad campaign against Giuliani in Iowa, which begins the presidential nominating process. The television ad from MoveOn.org Political Action, which will start airing next week, accuses Giuliani of a “betrayal of trust” for abandoning the Iraq Study Group.
At least Rudy is out there on his own fighting for what he believes in. Hillary is letting a far left organization fight for her on this issue so that she doesn’t have to go on the record, she is still trying to play to the center. This provides her cover, she has moveon.org to cover her on the far left, meanwhile she is able to keep trying to move to the center and not seem like she is a far left zealot. Say what you will about Rudy, at least he has an opinion and he is willing to run on it, let the chips fall where they may. Hillary is trying to adopt multiple stances on the war using multiple groups to tell us where she stands in an attempt to pull votes from both sides of the war issue.
I may not be a big Rudy fan, but at least I know what he believes on this issue, I know because he tells us. If he doesn’t get elected because of his stance on the war at least we know he ran on his beliefs. Hillary may get elected, but she will do so because she promised everything to everybody and never took a stance on anything. That may get you elected, but it won’t get you respect. What is more important? Obviously each candidate has their own opinion.
Rudi Giuliani Blasts Hillary Clinton for her “Character Assassination” of General Petraeus
“The reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief,” Clinton said Tuesday.
That is what Hillary Clinton said to General Petraeus at his hearing in front of congress on the Iraq war. She has come right out and called him a liar. I suppose she DOES know something about being around men who are liars though.
She is really the one Democrat who came the closest to actually calling him a liar, the others also beat around the bush, but didn’t come as close. I find it funny that all the Democrats came out in their opening statements with some form of “I respect you General Petraeus” or “I respect your service to our country” statement before lambasting him and accusing him of lying and cooking the books for George Bush.BULLSHIT. The Democrats do not respect him or his service, they do not respect the military in general unless it is performing humanitarian efforts. Stop trying to soften your blows with that see-through bullshit that nobody believes, I would respect you more if you just admitted it. Okay, maybe not.
Rudy Giuliani has stepped to the forefront on this issue and has thrown his own jabs at Hillary Clinton.
Republican presidential contender Rudy Giuliani on Thursday accused Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton of participating in “character assassination” for questioning Gen. David Petraeus about his assessment of progress in Iraq.
“We believe unlike Hillary Clinton that General Petraeus is telling the truth,” Giuliani said.
Calling the ad (NYT Gen. Betray US ad) abominable, Giuliani said Clinton’s comments followed up on it “in a very, very coincidental way.”
He added, “What I don’t think should happen in political discourse is the kind of character assassination that MoveOn.org participated in in calling him General Betray Us, that The New York Times gave them a discount to do and that Hillary Clinton followed up on with an attack on his integrity.”
He also said, “It is time for Americans to really insist that American politicians move beyond character assassination and this is exactly what they attempted to do with General Petraeus.”
“Maybe you can disagree with his tactics,” Giuliani said of Petraeus. “I agree with them, but you have no right to disagree with his integrity.”
It’s good to see Rudy come to General Petraues’ side, what I heard from the Democrats at that hearing was painful to me. To hear the disparaging remarks they threw at Petraeus made me sick. Let us not forget, the enemy also saw this, and don’t think for a minute they weren’t smiling.
While Rudy isn’t my first choice for president, this is the one issue that I really agree with him on. It happens to be the most important issue to me, and when I hear him speak out on this it raises my opinion of him.
You can read the article here.
New York Times Gave Moveon.org a Huge Price Break for General Betray Us Ad
According to this article the New York Times may have given moveon.org a substantial price break to run it’s now famous and despicable General Betray Us ad.
NEW YORK (Reuters) – An ad criticizing the top U.S. general in Iraq raised charges on Thursday that The New York Times slashed its advertising rates for political reasons
Moveon.org only had to pay $65,000 for a full page ad that usually costs $181,692. The New York Times is denying the price break was because of the ad’s political content.
“We do not distinguish the advertising rates based on the political content of the ad,” Mathis told Reuters.
RIIIGHT. Just another coincidence. Rudy Giuliani has taken the opportunity here to fire back at the New York times for the discount and also at moveon.org for the ad itself.
Rudy Giuliani, a leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, criticized the Times over the ad which he called a “character assassination” of Petraeus.
“(I) call upon The New York Times to give us the same rate, the heavily discounted rate they gave moveon.org for that abominable ad,”
Giuliani said he plans to run an ad in the New York Times on Friday, lets see if he gets a break in price.
Update: It appears as though Rudy got the same price break as moveon.org. Of course, if this issue was not made public I doubt Rudy would have gotten the price break. The NYT had no choice once the word got out there, they still try to pretend they are non biased.
Norman Hsu Leaves Behind a Suicide Note That may Mention Barack Obama
According to this article before Norman Hsu disappeared he left behind a suicide note, Hsu was later found on a train curled up in the fetal position with pills by his side. Was it a possible suicide attemp? There was almost another Clinton associate who met an untimely demise, another coincidence, I suppose. Aren’t they all.
In this apparent suicide note, it has been reported that Hsu may have made a reference toward Obama as the person who leaked Hsu’s background to the Wall Street Journal.
Hsu’s undoing began two weeks ago with articles raising questions about his fundraising activities in the Wall Street Journal and about a criminal case in his past in The Times. In his letter, said a person familiar with its contents who asked to remain anonymous, Hsu contended that those articles were planted “by a politician who pledged ‘hope and change’ ” — an apparent reference to Sen. Barack Obama, Clinton’s main rival for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Of course Obama’s camp has denied these allegations.
“This is a sad and baseless allegation,” Obama spokesman Bill Burton said. “We had no knowledge of his past criminal behavior, fugitive status or a potential straw-donor scheme until reading it in the newspaper.”
The question that comes to my mind is, “would Obama have planted information on Hsu when he has also taken money from him?” I’m not sure. If Obama wants to go after Hillary’s past then surely there are enough skeletons in her closet that he can find something he was not also involved in. Or is the Clinton’s closet locked so secure that nobody has been able to get in. Did they deem it a worth gamble to leak this information about Hsu because of the relatively small amount of money that Obama accepted from Hsu?
Among the candidates to whom he donated was Obama — a total of $7,000 in 2004 and 2005. Obama recently gave that same amount to charity. Hsu’s associates have given Obama at least $12,600 more.
Compared to the $850,000 in donations from Hsu that Hillary recently vowed to return, Obama’s $19,600 seems like nothing. He very well could have seen this as a very acceptable risk.
The intrigue grows.
Indicted Oil Tycoon making Campaign Donations to Candidates
Oscar S. Wyatt Jr. is an oilt tycoon, he has also been indicted for providing kickbacks to Saddam Hussein.
Wyatt was indicted in 2005 on charges related to illegal payments for oil contracts from the Hussein-led Iraqi government under the United Nations’ oil-for-food program.
Wyatt is also a political contributor, here is a list of people he has donated to:
Bill Richardson, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Joe Biden, John McCain, Sam Brownback, John D. Rockefeller IV, John Cornyn, Kay Bailey Hutchison.
People from both sides of the aisle. I wonder what party he contributed the most to.
Overall, according to a Politico analysis of Federal Election Commission records, more than 70 percent of the Wyatts’ contributions have gone to Democrats — a pattern that has continued since Oscar Wyatt’s arrest.
It’s no suprise to see Hillary there now is it? Many of these politicians have said they will give the money to charity. What a scam that is, I mean charitable donations are tax dedutible. They will be giving nothing back.
These Democrats have no problem taking donations from BIG OIL now do they? I thought that they thought that oil was evil, that George W Bush was a greedy oil tycoon. But now we see who is the greediest. The Democrats have prostituted themselves to big oil by taking these donations.
Who else are they accepting donations from, HALIBURTON?
Read the article here
North Carolina School Bans the American Flag
Students at Hobbton High School in Newton Grove, N.C., aren’t allowed to wear clothing that features the American flag.
First off let me state that technically the American flag is not supposed to be depicted on shirts. It is also not supposed to be on items that will be thrown away such as napkins and pizza boxes. The American flag stamp is also not proper flag etiquette. That is not the argument I want to make today. I don’t have a problem with shirts that show the American flag, I think it is a great way to show your patriotism, as long as the shirt isn’t advertising something. So did a sixth grade student who wanted to show her patriotism on September 11th by wearing a shirt with the flag on it.
“Today she wanted to wear her shirt, and I had to tell her no. She didn’t like it at all because I knew it would get her in trouble. Of all days, 9/11, she could not wear her American flag shirt,” Gayle Langston tells WECT-TV.
I think this parent should have let her child wear the shirt to school and hoped for a confrontation. It will be a cold day in hell when my child is told he can’t wear an American flag shirt to school, I will be looking for that confrontation.
Here is their reasoning:
WNCN-TV says school officials wouldn’t comment on the controversial rule, other than to say that they didn’t want to be put in the position of choosing one flag over another.
They don’t want someone choosing one flag over the other? God forbid you actually are proud to be an American. I don’t understand where we are headed in this country when you are not allowed to be proud of your country. What is happening to us?
You can read the whole article here.
New Hampshire Tax Protesters in Stand-off with Federal Marshals Part 13
There is not much to write about on the convicted tax evaders, Ed and Elaine Brown, who have been in a stand-off with federal marshals since their conviction in January. However, several of their supporters were arrested last night in different states.
Four men were arrested yesterday in four different states on charges they each helped convicted tax evaders Ed and Elaine Brown of Plainfield remain fugitives from the law.
“These are very serious charges and carry severe penalties, should they be found guilty,” said U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier, who announced the arrests last night.
Charges against the four range from accessory after the fact to possession and use of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence.
This comes as some of the Brown’s supporters are already deserting him.
“Brown has ignored, on many occasions throughout the years, the good council (sic) of some valiant, focused, hard-working freedom fighters whom, unfortunately, exemplify a larger spiritual vision, and a more finely tuned sense of balance and reason than does Brown,” said a recent e-mail from Bill Miller, an ex-military exercise trainer who left the Browns’ fortress-like home in February.
Something has to happen in this case soon, this has already gone on far too long with nothing happening.
You can read the article here.
For the background on this story, you can start here.
