When is a Politician Truly Non-Partisan?

When does a career politician lose their affiliation to a political party? That's right, when it is a Democrat being charged with a crime. Here is a link to an article about a councilman accused of stealing $300,000 intended to support youth baseball.

D.C. Attorney General Irvin Nathan has sued Ward 5 Councilman Harry Thomas alleging Thomas directed to his personal use more than $300,000 in city funds meant to support youth baseball in the District.

The lawsuit filed Monday in D.C. Superior Court asks Thomas to pay the cash back and requests damages totalling more than $1 million. It alleges that Thomas spent the cash on an Audi and trips to Las Vegas and Pebble Beach, among other items.

Read the entire article and let me know if you see either "Democrat" or "Republican" anywhere in the article. Since it is a negative story and party affiliation isn't listed you can be certain the crooked politician is a Democrat. I will admit that since this particular crook is a DC politician they may not be aware that there is more than one political party.

Impeachable Conduct? You Decide

Impeachment proceedings should not be undertaken lightly. Whenever we down the path of presidential misconduct it is the cover up which really undermines an administration more than the initial misbehavior. That is true again in a matter involving President Obama and his crooked friend Kevin Johnson. Here are the basic alleged facts:
* Former NBA player and current Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson was investigated by the AmeriCorps inspector general, Gerald Walpin after people reported misuse of funds by Johnson when he was head of a private school funded by Americorps.
* Johnson is a friend and ally of Obama.
* Obama fired Walpin in June amid allegations of senility.
* Walpin filed suit in federal court in Washington in July alleging that he was fired improperly while investigating whether Johnson had misused federal grant funds.
* U.S. attorney ruled in favor of Walpin that he was removed improperly.
* Johnson's fiance, Michelle Rhee, who is now DC schools chief, handled the "damage control" after the sexual misconduct charges arose against Johnson.
* Walpin has not been reinstated.

This scandal and the administration cover up have received scant reporting in the lamestream media. Does anyone doubt it would lead the evening news every night if a Republican president fired an inspector general who was investigating his buddy?

Does impeding an investigation of misuse (fancy word for theft) of government funds rise to the level of impeachable behavior? When you get down to it Nixon was hounded out of office for impeding an investigation into misbehavior by his underlings. Funny thing is based on his naive foreign policy mentality, we have considered Obama to be serving Jimmy Carter's second term and it turns out he is looking more and more like Nixon without the competence (or press scrutiny).

Liberal Media Bias? What Liberal Media Bias?

In the wake of the Obama administrations attacks on FOX news for failing to be as liberal as the other networks, it is funny to see real examples of media bias. Here are a couple. And bear in mind, the false story sinks in to the memory while the correction if one is even printed is buried in small print on page 6.

Earlier this week, it was reported that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia during a speech mentioned that he would have dissented in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education ruling that the notion of separate but equal was unconstitutional. However, what he actually said was he would have dissented on Plessy v. Ferguson which originated the idea of separate but equal This "mistake" advanced the dishonest but often repeated assertion that conservatives are racist.

Today, Politico.com ran an article with this headline: "Iowa Republicans wince at Sarah Palin's $100K speaking fee." Wow, that greedy so-n-so I can't believe she . . . . . . Oh, hey wait a second. If you read the whole article and get through all the nonsense about their fund raising efforts you find this paragraph:

There is no indication that the former governor has requested a fee or that her decision whether to attend is being influenced by whether she’ll be paid.

That nugget is listed on the second page more than 20 paragraphs into the article. Now, stop and consider that most people just read the headline and maybe a couple paragraphs. Does anyone think crap like that isn't intentional? The media negative characterization of Gov. Palin has led to a misimpression of her among those who get the news from the mainstream media and believe the stuff they're shoveling.