Daily Archives: November 1, 2010

Obama’s Peeps Give Out Your Name and Phone Number to Strangers

There’s just something odd about the savior of the free world, the man under whose command the seas will recede and the climate will cool, who gives your name and phone number to complete strangers.
Victoria —
Tomorrow, you can help determine not just the outcome of this election, but our country’s future.
You made the difference in 2008. Now, once again, you can defy the conventional wisdom that says you can’t overcome the cynicism of our politics; you can’t overcome the special interests and the big money; you can’t tackle our biggest challenges.

This movement has never backed down from a tough fight — and we’re not about to start.

Victoria, we’ve got to keep moving America forward — but I need allies in the House, the Senate, and governing states to make it happen. The ballot you cast in 2008 was a crucial first step. Thank you for that.

In addition to returning your ballot, I need you to make sure you get at least three of your friends to do the same. It is simply the most important thing you can do to make sure we can keep bringing about change.

Find more information about voting in Oregon here.

According to OFA’s records, you live in Oregon’s 1st Congressional District. Please vote for:

John Kitzhaber for Governor
Ron Wyden for Senate
David Wu for Congress
If you have already voted, please click here to help in these final hours of our Vote 2010 campaign.

When we arrived in Washington, we knew the road ahead would be difficult.

Kitzhaber Holds Lead With People Who Don’t Remember Him. Gather Round, Chillens, and Victoria Will Tell You a Story

The Portland Tribune has done the last theoretical poll until the REAL one tomorrow. Two interesting findings: One, Democrats will vote for anyone with a D after their name–even KitzWhopper:

In the most recent survey, the percent of Democrats who say they are voting for Kitzhaber increased from 73 percent to 81 percent.

 Two, Here’s the most telling statistic:

The race is virtually a dead heat among voters older than 35, while Kitzhaber holds an 11-point edge among younger voters.

So “younger voters,” allow me (via the folks at Third Century Solutions, who compiled this list) to tell you what you don’t remember (previously posted here). When you look at this list you’ll see two things: Kitzhaber always took care of himself but never accorded the same to the people of Oregon, and, when it mattered the most, he ran away:

1) Faked heart attack when state was flooded in 1996 and Vera was filling sandbags
2) Said health care should have been reformed on state level rather than federal after being feted regularly by “The Economist” for medical rationing
3) Vetoed Secondary Lands bill in Washington Park in 1995.  Governor threw tantrum in front of WW II veterans and stormed off – later told press he doesn’t “do public” well
4) Rip-rapped his own Neskowin beach house when others couldn’t protect their homes
5) Built on his 10 acres on Umpqua River when land was zoned Exclusive Forest use
6) Vetoed a record 100 bills in 1997 Oregon legislature
7) Refused to do interviews with media other than liberal media – even though he said he changed for this latest campaign — really?
8) Fleeing scene of Biscuit Fire five minutes before President Bush arrives, and leaving Sen. Wyden alone and furious
9) Unable to get along with legislative leaders – including Secretary of State of his own party, Phil Keisling
10) Refused to attend National Governors Association meetings, which at the time included innovative governors such as Jeb Bush, Tommy Thompson, John Engler, Bill Weld. Why? Because Kitzhaber already had the answers
11) Went fishing after 9/11 for a week when country was in crisis
12) Wanted to tear down dams on Snake River and freaked out then-Washington Gov. Gary Locke
Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com

Kitzhaber Holds Lead With People Who Don’t Remember Him. Gather Round, Chillens, and Victoria Will Tell You a Story

The Portland Tribune has done the last theoretical poll until the REAL one tomorrow. Two interesting findings: One, Democrats will vote for anyone with a D after their name–even KitzWhopper:

In the most recent survey, the percent of Democrats who say they are voting for Kitzhaber increased from 73 percent to 81 percent.

 Two, Here’s the most telling statistic:

The race is virtually a dead heat among voters older than 35, while Kitzhaber holds an 11-point edge among younger voters.

So “younger voters,” allow me (via the folks at Third Century Solutions, who compiled this list) to tell you what you don’t remember (previously posted here). When you look at this list you’ll see two things: Kitzhaber always took care of himself but never accorded the same to the people of Oregon, and, when it mattered the most, he ran away:

1) Faked heart attack when state was flooded in 1996 and Vera was filling sandbags
2) Said health care should have been reformed on state level rather than federal after being feted regularly by “The Economist” for medical rationing
3) Vetoed Secondary Lands bill in Washington Park in 1995.  Governor threw tantrum in front of WW II veterans and stormed off – later told press he doesn’t “do public” well
4) Rip-rapped his own Neskowin beach house when others couldn’t protect their homes
5) Built on his 10 acres on Umpqua River when land was zoned Exclusive Forest use
6) Vetoed a record 100 bills in 1997 Oregon legislature
7) Refused to do interviews with media other than liberal media – even though he said he changed for this latest campaign — really?
8) Fleeing scene of Biscuit Fire five minutes before President Bush arrives, and leaving Sen. Wyden alone and furious
9) Unable to get along with legislative leaders – including Secretary of State of his own party, Phil Keisling
10) Refused to attend National Governors Association meetings, which at the time included innovative governors such as Jeb Bush, Tommy Thompson, John Engler, Bill Weld. Why? Because Kitzhaber already had the answers
11) Went fishing after 9/11 for a week when country was in crisis
12) Wanted to tear down dams on Snake River and freaked out then-Washington Gov. Gary Locke
Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com

The Lawsuit Over Destruction of America’s Borders Will Be Televised

By REES LLOYD
            Due to the extraordinary level of public interest in the case of USA vs. State of Arizona, Case No. 10-16645, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal has consented to live broadcast of Oral Argument on Monday, Nov. 1, 2010, at 9a.m. (PST). It will be broadcast  nationwide on C-Span 1, and streamed to remote viewing locations at courthouses, including in Portland.
            Opposing attorneys for the U.S. and the State of Arizona will argue before a three-judge panel the constitutionality of  Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070, which authorizes local police to inquire into a person’s legal right to be present in Arizona, but only under certain strict conditions  imposed on officers which are greater than the conditions placed on federal officers for such questioning.
            The proceeding will be broadcast from the  U.S. Courthouse in San Francisco by C-Span 1. It will be video streamed to federal courts at the U.S. Pioneer Courthouse in Portland, OR; at the 9th Circuit Courthouse in Pasadena, CA; in Seattle, WA; Phoenix and Tucson in Arizona; New York;  and Boston.  It will also be streamed to certain law schools, but none in Oregon.
            The Obama administration first publicly attacked Arizona for adopting SB 1070, and then, through Attorney General Eric Holder, filed suit against Arizona to enjoin enforcment of it. A U.S. District Court granted an injunction against certain portions of SB 1070, and allowed other provisions to be enforced. Arizona and Gov. Janice Brewer appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal.

 

            In addition to the legal briefs filed by the Obama administration attacking SB 1070 as preempted by federal law which gives exclusive authority over immigration law enforcement to the federal government, and opposing briefs filed by Arizona and Governor Brewer defending SB 1070 as not only constitutional but absolutely necessary to protect Arizona citizens from illegal alien violence and crime due to the federal government’s failure to enforce immigration laws, the 9th Circuit has received more than two dozen amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs. 
            The amicus briefs  have been filed on behalf of several States, many members of Congress, other office holders, many organizations, and even foreign governments.  The Court has denied the requests of various amici to make oral argument, but has granted the U.S. and Arizona thirty minutes each to argue their positions, from which they may grant time to amicus parties for oral presentations.
            Among the amicus curiae is the United Mexican States, which did not seek to intervene as a party  to the lawsuit, but did apply for and receive consent to file a legal brief attacking Arizona.  In it, Mexico argues that Arizona SB 1070 is an “intrusion in international affairs,” “impedes international relations and bilateral collaboration in cross-border issues;” and “will severely hinder Mexico-Arizona trade and tourism;” “derails efforts towards comprehensive immigration reform and collaborative border management;”  [and] “obstructs international and border collaboration to combat drug issues.”
            Mexico further argues that SB1070 “poses a risk of harassment by law enforcement to Mexican citizens;” and “dangerously leads to a patchwork of laws that impede effective and consistent diplomatic relations.”
            Appearing in support of Mexico and joining its brief as amicus curiae are: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Paraguay and Peru. It has been noted that all, or almost all of  them receive foreign aid or foreign loans granted by the Obama administration, and paid by the taxpayers of the United States, including the taxpayers of Arizona.  Those Latin countires now file briefs in support of the Obama administration in attacking Arizona.
            This has caused questions to be raised as to the propriety of a United States Court making constitutional determinations in whole or in part on the interests, wants, and views of a non-party to the litigation, Mexico, a corrupt and failed state whose greatest export is its own citizens who illegally enter the U.S. in violation of law, and the Latin American countries which seek and receive aid or loans from the Obama administration and have joined Mexico in attacking the State of Arizona.
            It has been noted that Mexico, which attacks and complains against the right of an American state to defend its citizens against violent and criminal acts by illegal aliens from Mexico, is itself building a wall on its southern border to keep out illegal aliens from those other Latin American countries which now join Mexico in attacking an American State.
            It has been further noted that  72 citizens of some of those Latin American countries joining Mexico were recently raped and  then murdered in the Mexican State of Chiapas, , after illegally entering Mexico from their countries.
            In addition, it has been noted that Mexico, while attacking Arizona, is the major source of illegal narcotics as well as illegal aliens entering the U.S., and is near collapse as a state due to out-of-control drug crime which has resulted in approximately 30,000 killings of Mexicans by Mexican drug gangsters in the last four years. Most recently, Mexican drug thugs brazenly attacked a small city’s police station with over a thousand rounds of gun fire,  and hand grenades, resulting in the entire police force resigning. Civil authority in the city has collapsed. This is manifestly evidence of a failing if not failed state.
            Thus, aside from the question of Mexico having any legal standing to complain against Arizona’s laws and policies protecting its citizens from illegal aliens from Mexico, including the Mexican drug thugs terrorizing Mexico, and thereby to have Mexico’s views, wants, and interests  shape American constitutional jurisprudence, there is the question of Mexico’s moral standing to attack Arizona and thus American citizens in light of Mexico’s own inability to control crime within its own borders,  the export of its own citizens to the U.S. illegally by which Mexico profits by remittances from illegal aliens, and Mexico’s own morally repugnant and brutal immigration policies and actions pertaining  to aliens who illegally enter Mexico.
            The briefs of the USA and the State of Arizona, and of amicus curiae, including Mexico, are available on the website of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal.
            It is unknown at this time whether the Obama administration and Attorney General Holder have decided to give some of its oral argument time to Mexico to attack Arizona on oral argument in the 9th Circuit.
[Rees Lloyd is a longtime civil rights attorney who writes for the Victoria Taft blog and  is a frequent commentator on the Victoria Taft Show.]

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com

Requiem for Pelosi and the Democrats

Brian Baird, Democrat Representative for Washington State 3rd Congressional District and retiring after 6 terms in office, is following in the footsteps of many who went before him. He wrote a book about his time in office, , “Character, Politics and Responsibility: Restarting the Heart of the American Republic.”

Baird, well known for “official” congressional trips to exotic locales takes some pretty controversial stands in his book.

Of the Pelosi led Congress Baird says, “It’s been an authoritarian, closed leadership.”

On “cleaning out the swamp” as many Democrats campaigned on throughout 2006, Baird states, “We abandoned all that work after the election, and leaders told us we should trust them to clean things up. I don’t know a single member of the Democratic caucus who saw the final rules package before they voted on it.”

On energy reform Baird claims, “With cap and trade we wound up with a bill that didn’t accomplish much, was enormously complicated and expensive.”

Towards Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac he says, “When I was first elected I was puzzled why they were holding events in my honor as a mere freshman. I asked myself, why is a federal entity so involved in political activity?”

On health care reform he said, “What the hell were we doing voting on this? I had labor groups come to me and insist the bill was so important we couldn’t wait to know what was in it,” even though he still stands by his voting for the bill.

With the claims made in his book, all I can ask is why now? Why did he not speak out earlier or stand up against this mess? Where were you when you should have been representing us, Mr. Baird, not those special interests you rail against today.

Read more at Wall Street Journal

Baird says what he would say to incoming freshmen Republicans, if they win as big as expected, “Governing isn’t as easy as you think.”

To the Reflector’s Marvin Case he claims, “elected leaders do not always tell the truth and refuse to take responsibility for solving problems. They focus more on party or personal power than common good. As a result, people lose faith in and respect for government. Honesty means making decisions through reason, not blind obedience, wishful thinking, fear, anger, intimidation or raw power.”

Maybe if he had avoided some of those exotic trips or stood by constituents, it might not be as hard as it has been made.

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com