Rasmussen Reports;

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has to share his spot atop the field of Republican Presidential hopefuls this week. The newest face in the race, former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson, is now tied with Giuliani. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds each man earning support from 24% of likely Republican Primary voters. A week ago, Giuliani had a six percentage point lead over Thompson, 23% to 17%.

Via No-Pasaran;

TF1 is announcing the following results for the French parliamentary election:
UMP & Presidential majority (Right) : 405-455 seats
Mouvement pour la Démocratie (Eunuch Centrist) : 1-4 seats
Socialist Party and other Left : 120-160
Run-off elections continue next Sunday.

More;

The outcome is likely to leave Sarkozy with substantial political control, much like the sweeping powers Charles de Gaulle enjoyed with his hallmark strong presidency.
“I’m depressed – I voted for the Socialists purely because the right is going to win,” said Geraldine Gourbe, a 30-year-old philosophy professor, on her way out of a polling station in northern Paris.
“I voted for them to be effective, but I’d rather have voted for the Greens or the Communist Revolutionary League,” she said, concerned that those parties’ candidates stood less of a chance of gaining seats.
The composition of Sarkozy’s Cabinet and its ability to push through legislation is tied to the number of seats the mainstream right holds.
Labor unions and student groups are ready to mount strikes and protests if they deem that Sarkozy wants to go too far in trying to trim France’s welfare state protections.

As I’m in Texas at the moment, I guess this could be considered local content.
John Hawkins emails;

I’ve got a scoop from a Senate aide on the behind-the-scenes maneuvering in the Senate that killed the immigration bill yesterday. You may want to check it out to see why every conservative who opposed the bill owes a big debt of gratitude to Jim DeMint.

John Fund on Fred Thompson;

To that end, Mr. Thompson said the next president should have the courage to talk straight with the American people and bluntly say that Americans will have to confront both the soaring cost of entitlements and the need to remain committed in the war on terror, even when Iraq is “in the rear-view mirror.”
“This is a battle between the forces of civilization and of evil,” he said, noting that reports over the weekend of a foiled plot against John F. Kennedy Airport in New York was proof positive that terrorism remains a real threat. “I listen to the Democratic congressional leaders and I hear them talking about how many [House and Senate] seats they’re going to pick up because of this war,” he said. “I listened to one of their presidential candidates talk about that this is a phony war, the war on terror. This is what passes for policy today in the Democratic Party.”
Mr. Thompson also zinged Democrats for proposing a budget that boosts spending dramatically while remaining silent on the extension of investment-focused tax cuts that expire in 2010. “The Democrats are hot after repealing all of that, the engine that’s driving this economy.”
On judicial nominations, Mr. Thompson recalled his role in helping guide John Roberts through the confirmation process. He said nominees like Chief Justice Roberts are necessary because too many judges were “waking up in the morning and deciding what social policy should be.” He warned federal judges: “If they continue to act like politicians, the American people are going to start treating them like politicians, and that’s not good news for them.”
But Mr. Thompson’s biggest response came when he addressed immigration. “We are a nation of compassion, a nation of immigrants,” he told the crowd. “But this is our home, and whether you’re a first-generation American, a third-generation American or a brand newly minted American, this is our home and we get to decide who comes into our home.” At that, much of the crowd rose and applauded midspeech.

Yuval Levin;

Leading up to tomorrow’s ill timed vote on a stem cell funding measure, the House Democratic leadership wanted to offer its members some cover from charges they were friendly to human cloning. So they scheduled a vote tonight on a so-called cloning ban that actually failed to ban cloning. Using a tried and true semantic trick, the bill defined human cloning as the transfer of a cloned embryo to a woman’s womb, rather than the creation of that embryo, thereby protecting the practice of cloning (and destroying) human embryos for research while pretending to ban it.
The fact that Speaker Pelosi thought it was necessary to do this already signaled a peculiar desperation on this issue, and left a lot of us scratching our heads. But the results of the vote are just downright amazing. The Speaker brought the bill up under suspension, which means it would have needed a two-thirds vote to pass. Not only did it not get two-thirds of the members, it didn’t even get a simple majority. The bill failed, with 204 votes in favor and 213 against—a full 74 votes short of the margin needed to pass.
[…]
None of this makes stem cell politics a huge winner for Republicans, of course, but somehow Speaker Pelosi just might have found a way to lose the Democrats’ edge on the issue. She’s that good.

*

12% *
*Includes the 5% who prefer Céline.

In his 1994 campaign for state senator, which current declared presidential candidate had all four of his Democratic Party primary opponents, including the encumbent, thrown from the ballot?

On those rare occasions that political types ask my advice on how to blend party messaging with the internet and blogging, I recommend they spend time in the archives of Patrick Ruffini, eCampaign Director at the RNC and webmaster for the Bush-Cheney ‘04 campaign. (bio).
No kinsellan pretender, Ruffini’s one of the rare birds who combines exceptional political instincts with an exceptional understanding of how the digital organism functions, and where to press one’s ear.
From an exchange with Ross Douthat of The Atlantic and Reihan Salam, American Scene;

Douthat and Salam are believers in Big Government Conservatism, but argue that it’s been botched in its execution. Their vision of “Sam’s Club Republicanism” is that of a lower-middle class majority held in place by government largesse with a conservative face.
I’m here to break the news to them that it won’t work. Republican voters are not motivated by a sense of entitlement. (That might be why they’re Republicans.) Whenever we’ve tried to give away the goodies (Medicare Part D, NCLB, etc.), we have not succeeded in creating loyal new Republican constituencies. The activist base that listens to Rush and dials Congress is up in arms about a bridge in Alaska and the 2% of the budget that is education spending. They won’t take kindly to a beefed-up version of Big Government Conservatism.
People vote their values (writ large) not a narrow Thomas Frankian sense of economic interest. And it cuts both ways. That’s why the church attendance gap does more to explain voting patterns than income. It’s why the toniest, most cosmopolitan parts of big cities vote 80% Democratic, while their French counterparts earlier this month voted 80% for Sarkozy. We aren’t Europe, where our politics revolves around class, and we shouldn’t try to be.
What the welfare state Republicanism that Douthat and Salam advocate (in the name of the “base” no less) most resembles are the economic policies of Richard Nixon and the One Nation Conservatism of Ted Heath in the U.K. Which is precisely what the New Right in America and Thatcherism in Britain rose in opposition to. The revolt against Country Club Republicanism and its accommodation with government is one of the few reasons why we can speak of a “movement” and a “base” today.
That’s why I write that when the movement is strong, the GOP becomes more conservative and government gets smaller. When we govern without reference to what our voters want, the brand is diluted, government gets bigger, and voters are confused about what we really stand for.

Emphasis mine.

POW!

Is leaving Law & Order, thereby removing one of the last remaining reasons I continued to watch a show that has become increasingly political in tone.
More here;

Fred Dalton Thompson is planning to enter the presidential race over the Fourth of July holiday, announcing this week that he has already raised several million dollars and is being backed by insiders from the past three Republican administrations, Thompson advisers told The Politico.
Thompson, the “Law & Order” star and former U.S. senator from Tennessee, has been publicly coy, even as people close to him have been furiously preparing for a late entry into the wide-open contest. But the advisers said Thompson dropped all pretenses on Tuesday afternoon during a conference call with more than 100 potential donors, each of whom was urged to raise about $50,000.
Thompson’s formal announcement is planned for Nashville. Organizers say the red pickup truck that was a hallmark of Thompson’s first Senate race will begin showing up in Iowa and New Hampshire as an emblem of what they consider his folksy, populist appeal.
[…]
A member of Thompson’s inner circle, who insisted on anonymity, said the former senator will offer himself as a consistent conservative who can unite all elements of the Republican Party. “The public is increasingly cynical and disenchanted with government,” this adviser said. “Competence is at the heart of what people want from government, and they need to have a sense that government can do the things they care the most about. They want a reason to continue Republican governance. Thompson can be seen as the adult with a firm hand on the tiller.”

Valerie Plame is on the hot seat;

Former CIA officer Valerie Plame should explain “differences” in her various accounts of how her husband was sent to the African nation of Niger in 2002 to investigate reports Iraq was trying to buy uranium there, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said.
Plame’s differing versions have furthered “misinformation” about the origins of the case that roiled Washington beginning in July 2003, said Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo. Plame gave those accounts to the CIA’s inspector general, Senate investigators and a House committee in March.
A February 2002 CIA memo released last week as part of a study of pre-Iraq-war intelligence shows that Plame suggested her husband, former State Department official Joseph Wilson, for the Niger trip, Bond said. That “doesn’t square” with Plame’s March testimony in which she said an unnamed CIA colleague raised her husband’s name, Bond told USA TODAY.

As an aside, witness this blatant attempt at misdirection by USA Today;

Plame’s identity as an undercover CIA operative was revealed after Wilson accused the Bush administration of ignoring his Africa findings. The disclosure of Plame’s status led to a federal investigation that culminated in former White House aide Lewis “Scooter” Libby’s conviction on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice.

“Scooter” Libby wasn’t accused of disclosing Plame’s status, nor was he tried for that.
The leak was the work of Richard Armitage. Unsurprisingly, his name seldom appears in these news items (including this one), since it undermines the mythology that the leaked info about Plame was a deliberate plot by a vindictive White House. Armitage was part of the Colin Powell camp.
Despite the fact that Patrick Fitzgerald was aware that Armitage was the source early in his investigation, he was never charged.
More here.

at least we understand your motives now and who you probably are
came in when the filters were down i guess
reread this time and get over your self and your illusion of some importance
many have more of an open mind re 9/11 than you obviously
wheres the plane that hit the pentagram ,, i mean pentagone,,
i mean pentagon?
what about the Saudi plane being the only thing allowed to fly out,,, on 9/11
millions more inquiry points ,, but what for ,,
lots like this happens all the time
history is written by the victors
3000 Americans have died in Iraq trying to free up the price of oil on the NASDAQ
how many have died looking for the ghost osama bin laden (that bush/chaney employee) (he is an Aries fire rooster so i guess he could be involved)
100’s of thousands of Iraqi’s have also died and unless the bombing has some new twist like Siamese twin suicide bombers,,,news at 11 ,,,no one gives a shit,,,he is right no one gives a shit especially about your kind of prehistoric DNA
guys like you are why guys like me exist marty,,I’m coming to get some
a million hacked to death in Rwanda and not even a second of media
so i get his point
and you are free to not vote for us and just pray your union job is safe,,it isn’t
everyone knows you know i am trying to win the green nomination here in my riding and you like the ndp are scared to death of that happening
good attempt at your brand of hate though marty
i could teach you some tricks
yeah I’m a paranoid pot smoker,,,
crazy tooo
like a fox
and repetitive,,hahhahha
__________________
juror.ca
endprohibition@telus.net
johnshavluk@gmail.com

John Shavluk is the Green Party nominee for Newton-North Delta.
More here.
Related.

Right in Manitoba;

The part of the quote that caught my attention though is the fact that Gary Doer feels that polls are undemocratic. This has not however stopped the NDP from spending their money on polls an it has also not stopped the NDP from spending taxpayers money to conduct polls. Of course the NDP has refused to release any stats from the polls conducted on the taxpayers dime. Criticism of this has caused the NDP to introduce legislation that will add government polls to the documents which can be obtained through freedom of information.
So it appears that polls according to Doer are only undemocratic when they are not commissioned by the NDP. While this attitude by the NDP should come as no surprise to anyone.
Here is the real kicker though. Gary Doer and gang have no problem hiring Viewpoints Research Ltd.* to do polls on behalf of the NDP and Manitoba government. A company that is owned by Ginny Devine who just happens to be Gary Doer’s wife!

Forget polls. Check the horoscope!
Manitobans vote tomorrow. For what, nobody seems quite sure.

Reader Ian Bailey writes;

As you know in Canada the number of seats is based on the Census
population. But what if the Census is wrong?
A quick look at the attached spreadsheet shows that Nova Scotia had more electors and voters than Saskatchewan in 2006. Which should be impossible given the relative Census populations.
Reference: Results of the 2006 Election (http://www.elections.ca/scripts/OVR2006/default.html- table 3 & 4).
If Nova Scotia has more people than Saskatchewan the new electoral law should cause some consternation for the regular Canadian’s, the equal rights types and legal beagles considering Saskatchewan has 3 more seats than Nova Scotia.
How could the census be wrong? The return rate on mail in censuses is less than 80% in the U.S.. God knows what Canada’s return rate is. It is widely known that the 18-30 group shows in general is vastly under counted. In Nova Scotia, population 907,008 (2001), the MSI database (Health Cards) showed 954,000 people not counting the military (10,000) and RCMP (1,000). In Halifax there are whole new subdivisions of big apartment buildings and condos and the new census showed almost no change in population. There is a problem, how big is anybody’s guess.
The MSM should have picked up on it when the 2006 election results came out. Sorry, what was I thinking.
Anyway it is a little different take on the inequalities of our electoral system without dumping on PEI with 4 seats.

Right now, Charles Adler is on my radio interviewing a lawyer about what strippers “do” and don’t “do”.
A lawyer.
Figures.
Here’s someone a little more credible;

Well over a decade ago, I spent a year and a half in this less-than-savory profession. The club where I worked was an up-scale, fairly classy place (at least as far as strip clubs go), and the treatment afforded the women who worked there was better than most places I had been. This particular club also had one other defining characteristic — an overwhelming reliance on “imported talent”. Every Canadian girl was out numbered by Romanians, 10 to 1.
Knowing what I now know about Romania (I briefly visited), and the living conditions suffered by most under the Communist regime and after, I understand fully why many women would opt for any opportunity to leave a country that was crumbling into a bottomless pit of poverty. By comparison, I’m sure a Canadian strip club looked like a much more prosperous option. A clever ruse that many clubs and their agents were happy to perpetrate on their unsuspecting charges. I witnessed it many times, firsthand.
A young lady interested in moving to Canada and becoming a stripper, would get fast-tracked through an agent who would find her a club willing to sponsor her trip. She was not expected to cover any upfront costs. The club would then find her a hotel to stay in (at her cost) and a driver to ferry her back and forth from hotel to club (at her cost). In return, she was expected to “work off” the cost of her sponsorship to the tune of (on average) $9,000-$12,000 — some were even charged interest. This usually required working 7 days a week, 10-13 hours a day, and taking home a measly fraction of the money she earned. In the meantime, the club would hold her passport, in order to prevent her from going anywhere else (or back home).

Read the rest.

How are you likin’ him so far?
More….Anonymous said…

The first thing I noticed was where the email came from. Looking at that, “I believe” Garth is spending his time at work reading and responding to blogs.

heh…

*

TSN

“I was frustrated a couple weeks back when Randy Moss was traded to New England,” Favre said on the Packers’ website. “I never wanted to be traded and I don’t want to be traded. I want to be in Green Bay. I want to finish my career as a Packer.”

Globe & Mail;

“I am happy to find the Leader of the Bloc Québécois back among us today. It’s as if he never left,” Mr. Cannon said.

(h/t to sharp eyed reader Larry)

Good advice for the CPC;

‘The report from Save the Children, based in London, has Canada dropping over the past year to 25th place from fifth on the Children’s Index.’ This story was not picked up by many (Dippers?), because, the data covered 2004-2005, when the Liberals in charge…
Why did Canada drop so dramatically? I don’t ask this as a Liberal bashing cue.
What can Canada’s government do to reverse the downward trend?
Are (we) Conservatives not taking the Save the Childrens report seriously? If not, why not?
If Conservatives don’t get a handle on this, and get front and center, next year we could have another ‘Afghan detainee’ type explosion, when the data isn’t from Liberal times, and will be used as proof that Cons have killed social programs.

No question.
And more unsolicited advice from me.
Never assume the base will remain loyal as you move to the fiscal left because there’s “nowhere else to go”. There is always somewhere else to go, and someone waiting to take them there – even if the “there” turns out to be wilderness.