Does John McCain have ethics troubles?

The New York Times recently ran a story regarding John McCain's lobbyist ties, specifically those involving Vicki Iseman. The story mentioned some McCain aides who feared that the relationship, which McCain said was never sexual, would draw attention (negative, of course) to their boss, possibly hurting McCain's career.

The NYT story was not an editorial, however, in true form, the Republican presidential candidate's campaign issued this statement:

"It is a shame that The New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit-and-run smear campaign."

Instead of blaming the Senator for being a little too cozy with lobbyists, which involved flights on corporate jets, etc, they blame the media for reporting it. Classic.

Change in Alabama

Last night, Joseph Patton and I represented the Capital City Free Press doing election coverage for WAUD 1230 am and WQSI 93.9 fm in Auburn. It was funny, entertaining and informative, just like the last time when host Lane Powell called it "The Daily Show meets Animal House."

If you missed the news, Alabama's Democratic primary voters (total turnout for the primary broke a record at 40%; previous record was 29%) voted for Senator Barack Obama.

My new article is about this historic win in a state with a sordid history of race and justice. It's called "Change in Alabama" and is online at the Capital City Free Press.

Senator Bishop removed from committees...good for him

Well, since no assault charges were filed and the ethics committee let him go without so much as a punch to the face, Senator Charles Bishop, Republican hot-head from Arley (or the [back]woods of Arkansas) will not be on legislative committees, including the General Fund budget committee.

Good for him. He assaulted a colleague in the freakin' senate chamber and made Alabama look worse than we normally do, not only nationally, but internationally.

Ps - Thanks for that...I think the backwoods of Arkansas miss you.

More info in the Birmingham News and here.

Free The Hops calls for a boycott of all things Budweiser

The Alabama non-profit organization dedicated to changing Alabama's archaic laws hindering beer lovers from enjoying beers that contain more than 6% alcohol has called for a boycott of Budweiser.

Free the Hops (www.freethehops.org) called for the boycott because Budweiser has opposed a local Birmingham bill that would allow various "craft beers" and other imports into the city of Birmingham.

Of course, Free the Hops wants a state law allowing this (as do I), but I guess you have to start somewhere.

Budweiser says they want the state law changed and that the local law would be "confusing" as a distributor.

Stuart Carter, president of Free the Hops, says that under current state law, Alabama cannot get 96 of the top 100 beers of the world as rated by www.BeerAdvocate.com because the beers exceed the legal limit.

The irony, or ignorance, of this situation is that you can buy wine in Alabama that can be as much as 14.9% alcohol by volume, and the Alabama Beverage Control (state-owned, mind you) can sell you liquor like Everclear, which is 95% alcohol by volume.

Support Free the Hops!

So, does this mean assault is OK in Alabama?

The headline reads: "Alabama Senate Ethics Committee takes no public action over punch"

This was the punch that you probably saw on CNN or some other national news broadcast.

Did Alabama make the news because of new techonological developments? Nope.
A great humanitarian saved someone's life? Nope.
How about a truck that runs on a saliva/chewing "tobaccy" mixture? Nope.

A punch between two legislators.

Anyway, read these two posts for some background on this story: "Have you punched your state senator today?" and "Quick note about Charles Bishop being raised in the woods...."

So the ethics panel takes no public action over a punch, which in legal terms might be referred to as "assault." Try getting away with punching your co-worker and see what happens to you.

This leads me to this question: If a state senator can assault a co-worker and not get into trouble, what would happen if a voter punched a state senator?

Here's hoping someone finds out. Cheers.

Kucinich calls it quits

Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich has officially withdrawn from the race to the White House. He will now focus on keeping his seat in the US Congress.

He follows in the footsteps of Republican Fred Thompson, who recently gave up his presidential ambitions. Remember how he was expected to jump in the Republican race, steal a bunch of thunder to become the next Ronald Reagan? Well...maybe he can go back to Law and Order...or something.

The field is getting more and more narrow.........

Do you feel safe NOW? (The FBI didn't pay their phone bill...oops)

Look at this Associated Press headline: FBI wiretaps dropped due to unpaid bills.

Some telephone companies have cut off FBI wiretaps because the FBI can't seem to pay their phone bill on time.

This includes some wiretaps under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA...you've probably heard that acronym when discussing wiretaps before...you know, like "illegal wiretaps" that didn't go through "FISA"....that kind of stuff).

The FISA wiretaps are used for suspected spies and terrorists.

Let this be a lesson to our government: You can't have wiretaps, legal or otherwise, if you don't pay your phone bill.

Also.... the FBI went all Enron-style, blaming "faulty bookkeeping" for some of the mistakes, including one involving a former agent who managed to steal $25,000 for her own, personal use. That agent pleaded guilty in June 2006 - which kind of means the problem was known, at minimum, a year and a half ago.

This has been another episode of "Our Tax Dollars at Work."

Is 2008 the Year of Change?

My new column is now online at the Capital City Free Press. It asks, "Is 2008 the Year of Change?"

It's about one particular congressman by the name of Robert Wexler (D-FL) who started a web site called WexlerWantsHearings.com. The web site involved Vice President Dick Cheney and the word "impeachment."

Read it here.

Happy New Year! Let's make it count.

The War on Christmas: The Battle of Montgomery Reaches Third Intense Year

Once again, it's time for that special season when we get to fight a war involving a "religious" holiday with purely pagan roots.

Yes, the "War on Christmas," that fictitious war being fought by right-wingers who seem content on blaming "secular progressives" and the ACLU (cue the scary organ music) for taking Christ out of that pagan holiday we've come to know as Christmas. (Read the history of the "Saturnalia" if this pagan thing is news to you.)

It's very telling that the only people who seem to be making money off the "War on Christmas" are the same ones getting upset about it - see Bill O'Reilly and World Net Daily for examples.

Well, in honor of this ridiculous, fictitious war, my third annual fictitious news article on this fictitious war, and more locally the fictitious 'Battle of Montgomery', is now online at the very real Capital City Free Press.

Here is an excerpt:

"Just days after fighting in World Net Daily's newest fabrication of the War on Thanksgiving–which cost the lives of thousands upon thousands of turkeys according to well-respected columnist Chuck Norris–three-star general Bill O’Reilly is once again leading the third year of the Battle of Montgomery, part of the larger War on Christmas."

Read the entire article here.

Million Dolla' Bill, Ya'll

A guy goes into a bank and tries to open an account with a $1 million bill.

If you're waiting on me to finish the joke and get to the punchline, I apologize. I'm not joking.

Here's the story at MSNBC: Anyone have change for a $1 million bill?

I feel sorry for his relatives, and I hope the stupidity gene doesn't run in the family.

Join the Sex Toys for Troy King drive!

You might already know about Alabama Attorney General Troy King's insatiable hunger for shutting down "adult" novelty stores. Of course! Why focus on crimes like rape or murder when there might be women (or men) out there...um...having "fun" in the privacy of their own homes!

Well not in Alabama! We just won't stand for that!

Loretta Nall, former gubernatorial candidate for the Libertarian Party, has started a "Sex Toys for Troy" drive, encouraging Alabamians to mail sex toys to the AG....at this address:

Alabama Attorney General
c/o Troy King
11 South Union St., 3rd floor
Montgomery, AL 36130

She began talking about this on her blog, but the story has been picked up by the Mobile Press-Register.

Preview of the Republican Presidential Candidates

Last month, the Capital City Free Press ran a preview of the Democratic presidential candidates, so this month, it's the Republicans' turn.

If you're wondering what they stand for....or even who's running....check out the story here.

A true life case of dumb and dumber...

Look at this Associated Press headline: "Klan group opposes Cullman KKK rally"

A local klan group is opposing a national klan group's rally because, as KKK member Ken Meir says, "We are opposed to the ignorance and stupidity as displayed by the individuals that thumbed their nose at the area churches by continuing to use racial slurs, threats and avoided Christian deportment."

Um.....if Mr. Meir was truly "opposed to ignorance and stupidity," he wouldn't be a klan member.

Oh, but Cullman, Alabama makes national news for ignorance. Any surprises there?

Congrats to Al Gore

The winner of the popular vote in 2000 is not only an Academy Award winner, but is also now the recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

The prize is shared with the UN's climate change panel for spreading awareness of man-made climate change.

If only the person with the most votes had actually become president in 2000.....

'08 Democratic presidential preview

If you're wondering about the candidates on the Democratic presidential candidates and what they stand for, I've got a brief preview of the main ones (at least the ones who have participated in debates.)

It's at the Capital City Free Press. Click here to read it.

An oil deal, in Iraq, with no national oil law, during a war....surely you jest!

Iraq + War + Oil + Texas oil company + "W" fundraiser = "war for oil" / (Greenspan comments + JC Watts comments)

Well there's a quaint little equation. Uh oh, it must be one of those conspiracy theories, huh?

Here's a headline from CBS News: "Texas Co. Signs Iraq Oil Deal With Kurds" and directly underneath it: "With No National Iraq Oil Law Passed, Kurdistan Region Makes Its Own Rules."

Hunt Oil Company, from Texas, is hunting for Oil in Iraq's Kurdish region, despite the fact that most "major international companies have sat on the sidelines, not only for security reasons but because of the absence of legislation governing the industry and offering protection for investments."

Oh, and look at this paragraph:

"Hunt, who is also on the board of Halliburton, has been a key fundraiser
for President George W. Bush, who named him to the President's Foreign
Intelligence Advisory Board."

But what's been going on with the national oil law in Iraq? Oh, this paragraph explains it:

"A draft oil law for all of Iraq has been bogged down for months, in part
because of disputes over who will control the proceeds."

So what does the central government in Baghdad think of this oil exploration? Let's see:

"In August, however, the Kurdish self-governing region in northern Iraq
enacted its own law governing foreign oil investments. The move angered the
central government in Baghdad, but the Kurds are determined to push ahead with
oil exploration."

Angry? Iraq's central government? Say it ain't so.

Of course, they could all just take another month off work, I suppose.

Look who just jumped in the race for president...

He's back.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
If you've been wanting to return to the theocracy that we never had, you now have a candidate to vote for:

Alan Keyes is running for president.

What? I thought the whole "War for Oil" thing was supposed to be a left-wing talking point?

So you still think that the whole "War for Oil" is some left-wing slogan or just some anti-war rhetoric? You think it's a talking point of moveon.org or alternet?

Well let's see what conservative Republican J.C. Watts thinks. He often appears as the conservative voice on various news shows, and he just happened to be on CNN's "The Situation Room" yesterday, September 17, 2007.

They were discussing former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's new book, in which Greenspan says, "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil."

And what did J.C. Watts have to say about that statement? This:

"Well, and I read today where the chairman was trying to explain himself,
and he said that he said to the White House that this would affect the global
economy because the price of oil obviously would go up, and people at home would
be paying $5, $6 a gallon for fuel, and, Wolf, I think we're kidding ourselves
and naive to think that oil didn't have, didn't play a role in it. I don't think
the President made a decision to say we're going to go fight for oil, but I
think, you know, that was kind of a subtext or kind of something that you had to
factor into it because of what it would do to the world economy."

So can other conservatives finally join with Mr. Watts and admit what Greenspan says "everyone knows"? Please?
----------------------------------

Also, I found the link at NewsBusters.org (click here), a site that claims to be "exposing and combating liberal media bias." What's ironic about them talking about this is that instead of being shocked that these conservatives were basically saying that the Iraq war has been about oil, the headline is "CNN's Begala: Michael Moore & MoveOn 'In the Center,' Bush 'Betrayal'."

They seem more concerned that someone would actually say that Micheal Moore and Moveon.org were in the center, rather than far-left, on this issue, than the fact that conservatives were basically backing up what the "far left" (or "center") has been saying.

If you don't like the facts, just change them. Isn't that right, Mr. President?

FactCheck.org has a new article on Bush's recent speech to the nation, in which he tried to convince us all that the surge was working, and that Iraq was more stable.

Of course, cherry-picking intelligence seems to be the M.O. of the Bush Administration, so the fact that Mr. Bush "played loose with the facts" should come as no surprise.

Click here to read the FactCheck.org article, "Operation Iraqi Gloss-Over."

If you haven't seen this, you should.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Be0uIjz68KA