Hank Hill's 'The View From Arlen' Blog.  

Saturday, December 31, 2005


SPITZER PROBE URGED AFTER "THREATS"

ALBANY—Top New York Republicans have called for a formal investigation into allegations that Attorney General Eliot Spitzer threatened a man who wrote an editorial critical of Spitzer’s conduct.

According to the New York Post, both Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno (R-Rensselaer) and state Republican Chairman Stephen Minarik have urged that a formal investigation be launched into claims by John Whitehead, “one of the most respected figures on Wall St,” that Spitzer telephoned Whitehead and threatened him after Whitehead wrote an editorial about Spitzer in the Wall St. Journal.

a furious Spitzer tracked him down in Texas last spring after he authored an earlier piece in defense of former American International Group CEO Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, who was being investigated by Spitzer for corporate fraud.
Citing notes he said he took during the telephone conversation, Whitehead quoted Spitzer as saying, "Mr. Whitehead, it's now a war between us and you've fired the first shot . . . I will be coming after you. You will pay the price."


In addition to Bruno and Minarik, the Post notes, Governor George Pataki has said he had "no reason not to believe" Whitehead was telling the truth.

Assemblyman Tom Kirwan (R-Newburgh) has called for Spitzer's impeachment “if Whitehead's charges are proven to be true.”


Spitzer has denied Whitehead’s claims. However, on Friday, the Post reported, Spitzer admitted to having a “a passionate conversation” with Whitehead.

Spitzer, considered the front-runner for New York's Governor in 2006, has come under criticism from some circles for what some view as "politically motivated" prosecutions of New York business leaders.

In November, the New York Daily News reported that Spitzer was using fines and settlements obtained from these prosecutions to hand out "millions of dollars to politically connected organizations that could boost his campaign for governor in 2006."

Spitzer denies that politics play a role in his office's activities.


Wednesday, December 28, 2005


SCHUMER PREDICTS IRAQ FAILURE
(WANTS NATION SPLIT ALONG ETHNIC LINES)


AUBURN, NY--US Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) thinks that Iraqi democracy will fail, and that nation should be split along ethnic lines.

According to the Auburn Citizen, Schumer made that statement at a meeting with constituents on Tuesday (December 24) in Auburn.

Schumer does not expect an American-style democracy to flourish in Iraq, and if such democratic efforts do not succeed, he wants to offer semi-autonomous regions within one country to Iraq's three main ethnic groups, the Kurds, the Shiites and the Sunnis.

According to the paper Schumer, while stating he "stands by his vote in support of the war in Iraq," does not believe the Bush administration was "thinking through the potential consequences of some its decisions in Iraq."

Schumer was ostensibly in Auburn to speak on what the Citizen called "the impact of fuel price increase for farmers." However, he also spoke on other issues during a brief question and answer session.

Schumer's comments on Iraq came in response to a question from an Auburn City Council member, the paper noted.


Monday, December 26, 2005


ITHACA OFFICIAL: IMPEACH BUSH



ITHACA--The outgoing Ithaca City Attorney has publicly called for the impeachment of President Bush, over reports that he authorized wiretapping for foreign intelligence purposes without judicial warrant following September 11.

Writing in the Ithaca Journal, Marty Luster, a democrat, argues that the President and Vice President Cheney should be impeached, over what Luster characterizes as the administration's history of "lies," "secrecy" and "torture."

As if the lies that took us to Iraq were not enough. As if the knowing use of bad intelligence wasn't enough. As if the ever- shifting justifications for this war were not enough. As if the use of torture by and at the behest of the United States was not enough. As if the disclosure of classified information to retaliate against a critic of the war policy was not enough. As if the shroud of secrecy that binds this administration was not enough. As if the squandering of hundreds of billions of dollars in support of this war at a time when we can't find the money to rebuild one of our great cities, when millions of us go without health care and when the federal government has reneged on its commitment to public education was not enough....Now, after all that, now we have the disclosure that the president personally ordered and continues to order the interception of telephone and e-mail communications of thousands of U.S. citizens and residents on U.S. soil without search warrants, without court authorization of any sort and without any basis in the constitution or laws of this land.

According to Luster, Bush "has violated his oath of office by failing to “preserve, protect and defend” our Constitution and has violated the law of this land by ignoring the strictures and limits of (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act)."

However, not all democrats agree with Luster. For example, John Schmidt, who served as an assistant attorney general during the Clinton administration, has stated his belief that Bush's actions were "consistent with court decisions and with the positions of the Justice Department under prior presidents."

In the Supreme Court's 1972 Keith decision holding that the president does not have inherent authority to order wiretapping without warrants to combat domestic threats, the court said explicitly that it was not questioning the president's authority to take such action in response to threats from abroad.

Four federal courts of appeal subsequently faced the issue squarely and held that the president has inherent authority to authorize wiretapping for foreign intelligence purposes without judicial warrant.

In the most recent judicial statement on the issue, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, composed of three federal appellate court judges, said in 2002 that "All the . . . courts to have decided the issue held that the president did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence . . . We take for granted that the president does have that authority."

Luster did not include any of the decisions cited by Schimdt in his analysis.

As Ithaca City Attorney, Luster has used his office for a number of controversial political actions. For example, in 2004, he sued the State of New York, using taxpayer funds, in an effort to force the state to allow gay marriage.

It is unknown whether Luster composed his column attacking Bush during his taxpayer-funded office hours. Under New York State law, the use of public property for partisan purposes may be illegal.

Luster is retiring at the end of this year. His replacement, Dan Hoffman, is also a well-known local Democrat.


Saturday, December 24, 2005


"AND THE BELLS WERE RINGING OUT ON CHRISTMAS DAY"


Over the past two days, as the holiday season approaches, I find myself playing the same Christmas song over and over: the Pogues' "Fairytale of New York":

It was Christmas Eve, babe
In the drunk tank
An old man said to me,
"Won't see another one"
And then he sang a song,
"The Rare Ole' Mountain Dew"
I turned my face away
And dreamed about you

Got on the lucky one
Came in at 18-to-1
I've got a feeling
This year's for me and you
So Happy Christmas
I love you, baby
I can see a better time
When all our dreams come true

When you first took my hand
On that cold Christmas Eve
You promised me Broadway was waiting for me

You were handsome
You were pretty
Queen of New York City
When the band finished playing
The crowd howled for more

Sinatra was swinging
All the drunks they were singing
We kissed on the corner
Then danced through the night

You're a bum
You're a punk
You're an old slut on junk
Lying there almost dead on a drip in that bed
You scumbag, you maggot
You cheap lousy faggot
Happy Christmas? Your arse
I pray God it's our last

I could have been someone
Well so could anyone
You took my dreams from me
When I first found you
I kept them with me babe
I put them with my own
Can't make it all alone
I've built my dreams around you

And the boys from the NYPD Choir
Were singing "Galway Bay"
As the bells were ringing out
For Christmas Day



Patrick Hynes, of the American Spectator has written a column eloquently describing why this is the best Christmas song of the past twenty-five years.

Read the column then download the song.

And Merry Christmas.

Tuesday, December 20, 2005


UCLA: Media Bias Real

A UCLA-led study confirms what most Americans have long thought: that the mainstream media is liberal.

"There is a quantifiable and significant bias in that nearly all of them lean to the left," said co?author Jeffrey Milyo.

The study, which appears in the latest issue of the Quarterly Journal of Economics, both confirms some long held beliefs and offers a few suprises.

CBS News, the New York Times and the L.A. Times were the second, third and fourth most liberal news organizations. However, the most liberal was the news pages of the Wall St. Journal.

While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times.

As far as conservative or moderate news:

Five news outlets — "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer," ABC's "Good Morning America," CNN's "NewsNight With Aaron Brown," Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and the Drudge Report — were in a statistical dead heat in the race for the most centrist news outlet. Of the print media, USA Today was the most centrist.

A UCLA press release notes that the researchers "took numerous steps to safeguard against bias — or the appearance of same — in the work, which took close to three years to complete. They went to great lengths to ensure that as many research assistants supported Democratic candidate Al Gore in the 2000 election as supported President George Bush. They also sought no outside funding, a rarity in scholarly research."


Thursday, December 15, 2005


BLOOD-THROWING CRIMINALS PROTEST AT GITMO


Guantanamo, Cuba—A group of anti-war protesters awaiting sentencing on charges of throwing blood on a soldier, a recruiting station and the U.S. flag are now in Cuba, protesting the alleged treatment of terror detainees at Guantanamo Bay.

According to a Ithaca Journal, the three Ithaca residents, “Daniel Burns, Clare Grady and Teresa Grady, have joined about 25 other protesters fasting since Monday at a Cuban military checkpoint outside the U.S. Naval base at Guantanamo Bay.”

The group is demanding access to the hundreds of detainees being held at the naval base, some since just after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. About 32 of the detainees are conducting a hunger strike to protest their treatment.

The three, along with fellow Ithacite Peter DeMott, were convicted of charges of trespassing and damaging government property after a jury trial in Binghamton in September 2005.

The group was accused of going to a Army recruiting center near Ithaca on March 17, 2003, and throwing their own blood on the walls, the floor, the United States flag and Staff Sgt. Rachon Montgomery, who was working as an army recruiter that day.

The protesters, while admitting to their actions, claim they have done nothing wrong. The four, who are representing themselves, claimed that their actions were legally justified because they did it to stop the United States from invading Iraq.


During the trial, it was revealed that two of the four protesters, DeMott and Clare Grady, had histories of committing violent acts against federal property.

Sentencing for the four is scheduled for January 2006.

The group is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Miroslav Lovric at the United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of New York, Binghamton branch office. It is unknown whether prosecutors are aware of the four’s trip to Cuba.

According to the Journal, the three protestors “have had no travel restrictions placed on them…until their sentencing in January in federal court. But one of the conditions of their freedom is to not break any laws.”

”Americans face restrictions when traveling to Cuba and face both civil and criminal penalties if they don't get approval from the U.S. Treasury Department, a spokeswoman said [but] could not confirm whether the three protesters had obtained the required permission, saying that information was confidential.”

Tuesday, December 13, 2005


TOOKIE WILLIAMS


Wednesday, December 07, 2005


THE CONTINUING DEMOCRATIC CRACK-UP



John Marciano, a professor emeritus at Cortland State College, is a vocal opponent of the war in Iraq.

Unlike many in the anti-war movement, however, Marciano is at least consistent.

Rather than attack only the Bush administration, Marciano takes the leaders of the Democratic party to task for their own “opportunism” regarding the war:

Democrats accuse Bush of misleading the public in the invasion of Iraq, [but] we need to recall [Bill] Clinton's assertions about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction…Clinton has been joined in his support of war by leading Democratic senators, e.g., Hillary Clinton, Charles Schumer, John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, and Diane Feinstein, all of whom voted for the “War on Terrorism”…


If the United States had not faced sustained Iraqi resistance…we would not have heard a peep from Bill and Hillary Clinton and leading Democrats. They have no moral ground upon which to condemn Bush's conduct of this war because they are accomplices

Marciano, who also accuses the U.S. of “war crimes” in Iraq and “the slaughter of yellow, brown and black people across the world [and] at home,” is obviously a member of the more radical fringe of the left in America. However, for at least the past several years, this is the “base” of the Democratic party.

Most leaders of the party have tried to appease this base by blaming the war on “Bush LIED,” while trying to convince the “moderate middle” that they “support the troops.”

However, it seems as if more and more members of the Democrat base are catching on to this. For example, peace activists have begun regularly protesting Hillary Clinton over her past support of the war.

In response, the Democrat’s leader, Howard Dean, is now saying that the U.S. can’t win and effectively calling for surrender.

Democrats continue to hope that President Bush’s troubles at home will translate to big wins for their party in 2006 and beyond. However, the general disarray of their own party, with even their radical base starting to see through their cynical ploys, would seem to indicate that the Democrats should not be popping any champagne corks just yet.


Thursday, December 01, 2005


BLOOD-THROWING CRIMINALS FETED BY CAMPUS


GENEVA, NY—A group of anti-war protesters who threw blood on a soldier, a recruiting station and the U.S. flag will deliver a lecture at Hobart and William Smith campuses today.

According to a campus press release, the four Ithaca residents-- Daniel Burns, Peter DeMott, Clare Grady and Teresa Grady--are expected to address students on “the use of unconventional politics as a means for political organizing and resistance in a time of war and in a time of the Patriot Act.”

In addition, the group’s sponsor, Professor Craig Rimmerman of the HWS political science department, hopes to ask the group "what they were thinking about at the time that they made their decision, and how they have dealt with the legal ramifications of their actions."

The four were convicted of charges of trespassing and damaging government property after a jury trial in Binghamton in September 2005.

The group was accused of going to a Army recruiting center near Ithaca on March 17, 2003, and throwing their own blood on the walls, the floor, the United States flag and Staff Sgt. Rachon Montgomery, who was working as an army recruiter that day.

The protesters, while admitting to their actions, claim they have done nothing wrong. The four, who are representing themselves, claimed that their actions were legally justified because they did it to stop the United States from invading Iraq.


During the trial, it was revealed that two of the four protesters, Peter DeMott and Clare Grady, had histories of committing violent acts against federal property.

Sentencing for the four is scheduled for January 2006.

The group is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Miroslav Lovric at the United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of New York, Binghamton branch office. It is unknown whether prosecutors are aware of the four’s lecture.

According to the campus website, “interview opportunities and additional background information may be requested through the Office of Communications, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, Geneva, New York. Phone: (315) 781-3540. After business hours, Communications staff members are accessible through contact information on their answering machine at that number.”