I am working on my response to the Bush Speech, but a few things deserve mention.

First, Speaker Pelosi got caught in her first possible hypocrisy.  From Newsbusters:

Over at The Corner, Kathryn Jean Lopez reported GOP Reps. Eric Cantor and Patrick McHenry have found there's a loophole in the new minimum-wage increase: no hike for American Samoa. Why? Star-Kist Tuna is a major employer there, with its headquarters in Speaker Nancy Pelosi's district.

K-Lo passed along the Fox & Friends transcript that publicized the Star-Kist .

STEVE DOOCEY: We teased you with this a moment ago. On Wednesday the U.S. House passed a bill that says the minimum wage in this country will rise over time from $5.15 an hour to $7.25. Now, here's the thing. Included in the small print is the fact that the minimum wage will now include the islands of the northern marinas but it exempts American Samoa which is the only U.S. Territory not subject to minimum wage laws.

BRIAN KILMEADE: What's the big deal about that?

DOOCEY: It covers all islands except American Samoa. Why American Samoa?

GRETCHEN CARLSON: It just so happens Steve that Star Kist tuna employs 75% of the island's work force. They are making a lot of tuna there. Apparently then that is shipped off to San Francisco in a district where Nancy Pelosi is from. And now her people are saying that, you know, she has never been influenced by Star Kist at all but other people are saying, hey, this is a little bit of hypocrisy because how can this particular group of people benefit by not having to pay the new minimum wage which is almost $2 more an hour before.

KILMEADE: They have two major plants there and then all of a sudden they don't have to pay this money and this is a woman I'm going to fight corruption and things on the up and up and make things transparent. Reps. Eric Cantor and Patrick McHenry are beside themselves. Cantor says he is shocked. Now Patrick McHenry when he realizes this, hopped up on the Senate floor, says wait a second have you exempted the American Samoa you have included all these other regions and territories, everything else? When they started debating stem cell research, excuse me based on this is American Samoa going to be excluded from stem cell research? And Barney Frank went crazy said to him sit down essentially. Continue with your talk that had nothing to do with stem cell research in American Samoa.

DOOCEY: So in American Samoa they have a lot of tuna. It's processed by Star Kist, which is, their headquarters is actually in San Francisco because Star Kist is owned by the food conglomerate Del Monte which is in Nancy Pelosi's home district. Are you connecting the dots? Let's get this straight. Everybody has got to raise their minimum wage except American Samoa which, of course, has so many people who are pulling tuna out of the sea, shipping them off via Del Monte whose corporate headquarters in Nancy Pelosi's home district. I'm sure it's a coincidence. Don't you think?

It's obvious why the republicans would jump all over this, what with her stance against corruption.  The controversy really does not have any legs though, reports are that Pelosi is moving to remove the loophole.  But it is still fun.

Another hot item is the ruckus between Barbara Boxer and Condi Rice.  Video at Hot Air, story at Sister Toldjah:

In an earlier post today, I mentioned briefly the dustup over low blow comments Senator Barbara Boxer made to Sec. of State Condi Rice in a heated exchange about the Iraq war during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. Here’s the exchange:

Rice: “I can never do anything to replace any of the lost men and women in uniform, or the diplomats, some of whom . . . ”

An interrupting Boxer: “Madame Secretary, please, I know you feel terrible about it; that’s not the point. I was making the point about who pays the price for your decisions. Now the issue is who pays the price? Who pays the price? I’m not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young. You’re not going to pay a particular price, as I understand, with an immediate family.”

It was, of course, a cheap shot at the fact that Condi had no children, a shot that no woman should ever take at another (Condi wasn’t happy about the cheap shot, either). Gee, I wonder if the man-hating anti-family NOW gang will rush to Condi’s defense?

Boxer claims she was equating herself with Rice in that neither of them stands to pay the price of the decisions.  Whatever.  Radio Host Bryan suits however noted tonight that he prefers that with decisions that are so monumental, a person with a vested interest is not qualified.  He is right.  People who are more worried about loved ones do not seem likely to make the tough decisions necessary out of concern for their family.

Sister Toldjah however isolates another interesting issue:

But the bigger issue here, I think, is that her comments towards Rice represented a version of the old chickenhawk argument, and that is that if you haven’t served combat duty and/or don’t have family members who do/have, then you don’t have much credibility on matters of war and that you can’t really ‘feel’ for those who are serving and their family members because of it, which is kind of ironic, considering that Boxer herself admitted that her children were too old to serve and her grandchidren were too young to serve. So who the hell is she to lecture someone else about what military families feel and go through if she doesn’t have any ‘immediate’ family in harm’s way herself? Isn’t that how the “chickenhawk” argument works, Babs?

Has Senator Boxer visited with and met with more troops and their families than the Sec. of State, and therefore have some ‘inside knowledge’ about how military men and their families feel? No? Then why don’t you sit back and let those who have served or have family members grill Ms. Rice, Senator, because according to your own rules, you don’t have any credibility on matters of war and you can’t really feel’ for those who are serving either since no one in your ‘immediate’ family is serving.

If arrogance was a country, Senator Boxer would be the queen of it.

Good point indeed.

The Senate passed a bill that is a huge no brainner in my opinion.  Get convicted, lose your pension:

Bill would deny benefits to convicted lawmakers

With disgraced former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham eligible to collect a congressional pension from behind bars, the Senate on Friday voted to deny taxpayer-funded retirement benefits to lawmakers convicted in the future of serious ethics offenses.

Well finally.  We can hope they pass it before William "Ice Box" Jefferson is convicted.

There was this story about the Democrats and ethics reform, and the way this twisted about is almost bizarre. 

Reid, Durbin, Kennedy Kill Pelosi Earmark Reform in Senate

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's earmark reform proposal would require public identification of the sponsors of 95 percent of all earmarks. The earmark reform backed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid would allow the continued concealment of 95 percent of all earmarks.

So what happens when Sen. Jim DeMint, R-SC, offers the Pelosi earmark reform (which would when combined with the Reid measure cover 100 percent of all earmarks) to the Senate? Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin moves that the Pelosi reform be rejected, but the Senate votes 51-46 against his motion.

Then, as is customary in the Senate, DeMint moves that the Pelosi reform be adopted on a voice vote, since the 51-46 vote against the Durbin motion showed the majority favors the Pelosi earmark reform.

Can you guess who stood up next? It was Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-MA, who objected to the adoption of the Pelosi earmark reform and thus, under Senate rules, was able to block it.

In other words, on only its fifth official vote of the new Congress, the Senate, led by Reid, Durbin and Kennedy, killed a combined legislative proposal that would have required that all earmark sponsors be made public, in favor of a "reform" measure that lets virtually all earmark sponsors remain shrouded behind a legislative wall of secrecy.

Despite the stall tactic, this is a serious blow to Reid's authority, to the presentation of democratic unity and to the Senate's commitment to Ethics reform.

Another tip from Sister Toldjah, who notes that the Duke rapists DA has asked to be recused:

It’s about time. But assuming he’ll be allowed off the case, he’ll still be in the limelight as he’s in trouble with the NC Bar. I believe there will be a hearing on the complaints lodged against Nifong on Jan. 24th. Stay tuned.

Hat tip: ST reader sanity

I never thought there would be a criminal case that would make the OJ trial look sober, thoughtful and just, but I have to stand corrected.  The case against the players has been fraught with misconduct, an ever shifting series of stories by the victim and shocking blunders.

And I thought I would close with a warm theme, since we have a snowy cold spell going on here, so here is Pat Benatar's Painted Desert:

Leave a trackback of your best post for others to read.   Also, look at the trackbacks below to see what others are saying. 

And for my non-bloggin friends…feel free to look around and put your 2 cents in my comments…or if the mood strikes, cue up the band and give us a showtune.

For an explanation of a trackback, go here or here.

If your blog does not support Trackbacks (blogger is still in the dark ages in this regard), check out Haloscan, which I used to use on my old blogGER site, or you may ALSO JUST use The Wizbang Standalone Pinger to do so.

Just include this post’s permalink (right the post title and copy the short cut) in your post and use the Trackback URL at the end of the post for your trackback.

Trackbacks sent to Stop the ACLU, Samantha Burns,

Trackback URI | Comments RSS