BluegrassBulletin.com

Rand Rocks The House: Over 800 Brave Snow Storm To Attend His "Rally For Republicans"

I wanted to get a first hand look at the Rand Paul campaign after all the press releases I get and the attention focused on this race, so I drove to Louisville this morning to bring you a first hand report.

I arrived just as Rand and about 20 volunteers had finished going door to door in the snowstorm asking for votes in Louisville in January.  Now for anyone ever involved in a political campaign this is notable for several reasons.  January door to door work is rare.  Doing it in a snowstorm is dedication and getting 20 volunteers to do almost anything this early in a campaign is remarkable.

I then covered the event at the Kentucky Fair and Exposition Center billed as the "Rally for Republicans".  I didn't know what to expect.  I was surprised.  For a first time candidate this had the look and feel of the best run republican events I've ever witnessed.  Plenty of signage, plenty of volunteers, plenty of registration tables, sign in sheets, name badges, campaign gear (bumper stickers, signs, sweatshirts etc.) to rival anything I've seen, and in 40 plus years, three national conventions and countless campaign events, I've a lot of things to compare it to.  The only thing I wondered about was would there be a crowd. 

At the early event where WHAS Joe Arnold was conducting an interview with Rand and his father Ron Paul, the place was packed.  By the time the news crew wrapped up and the supporters filed in, about 150 people crowded the room and more were outside waiting for some to leave so they could get through the door.

A little bit surprisingly to me, (with all the rumors about Grayson having the "party vote" locked up) I spotted and talked with many long time, reliable republican stalwarts, big donors and those I knew to have been elected party officials who were in attendance.  They were more enthusiastic than I have seen them in years.  Quite frankly what I observed  I can only describe as a rejuvenation of that spirit many Kentucky republicans seemed to have lost over the last three years.

And then I went down the hall and took a peek inside the big event, the main rally.  I wondered if the weather would keep a lot of people home.  As it was in spite of bad weather on a cold January day Rand Paul drew a crowd of over 800 cheering and energetic fans who drove to Louisville, paid to park, walked through the icy wind and gathered to show their support.*

I had a brief chance to talk with Paul who seemed to be taking it all in with a friendly smile.  As one supporter who observed my interview said to me, "Don't make it sound too good, we're fine if they keep underestimating us, but look around.  Does this guy look un-electable to you?"

This time I'll let you be the judge.  Without embellishment, these are the facts.  But with eight hundred people in the room jamming to the sounds of singer Aimee Allen (I left before she performed) I think it's at least fair to say that today Rand Rocked the house. 

*Crowd estimate provided by others who remained for entire event

Prosecutor's Disappointment: Where Did It Come From?

After a federal jury handed lead prosecutor, assistant US attorney Ken Taylor, a rejection of his allegations against Bill Nighbert, Ernie Fletcher's former Transportation Secretary, Taylor commented to the press that he was "disappointed".  This comment raises a few questions. Out of what was Taylor's disappointment born and should Taylor's decisions in this "political prosecution" themselves be subject to a close examination now that ordinary citizens have rejected his call for conviction?

Nighbert's lawyer, Howard Mann, says that the prosecution's case was full of holes, particularly the testimony of their main witness, James Rumage, upon whom Ken Taylor built this costly prosecution.  But Taylor chose to push ahead anyway, dragging Nighbert through the gauntlet of negative press where so many reputations have been destroyed by a thousand cuts.

Should Taylor's political affiliations raise any concerns?  Taylor attended Fancy Farm in 2005, the year of the governor's tribulations.  Though he was the chief elections fraud prosecutor in the Eastern District of Kentucky, he was observed to be keeping company with the very democrats who were trying to bring down the Fletcher administration.

It should be remembered that democrat Greg Stumbo, a candidate for governor himself earlier that year, had targeted Governor Fletcher primarily focusing on people in Nighbert's transportation cabinet.  The phrase "The damage is in the indictment" has become known as "The Stumbo Way."

In 2008 Taylor began the prosecution of former Transportation Secretary Nighbert primarily on the now discredited testimony of James Rummage.  Isn't it fair to ask, "Was there an element of partisanship in his decision"? 

Taylor took an oath as an assistant United States Attorney.  Yet to date there has been no indictment of Stumbo despite the very disturbing allegation that Greg Stumbo attempted to thwart a federal criminal investigation into former Democratic Lieutenant Governor Steve Henry.  "Stumbo and his cronies" were directly accused of pressuring a Kentucky blogger to "destroy evidence" and "shred documents".  And if memory serves correctly, more than one person has at least raised the specter that Greg Stumbo was implicated in significant wrongdoing, while in office, without any word of an indictment by Taylor. 

In the past Stumbo has been accused of ignoring a woman's claims that her civil rights were violated by a county prosecutor for purely political reasons, and some even recall a former Stumbo assistant bringing allegations of drug trafficking to Taylor's attention which might have implicated Stumbo himself, without an indictment.

Was Taylor hanging with the democrats hoping for an appointment to become the US Attorney under a democratic administration?  Was his weak prosecution of Nighbert done with proper motives?  Was his reliance upon Rummage any different than the reliance he might have placed upon others who complained about alleged criminal conduct by democratic officials, but whom Taylor might have ignored?

And while prosecutors deserve the same benefit of the doubt given to their accused, when political prosecutions are rejected by ordinary citizens serving as impartial jurors, the motives of the government prosecutors themselves require close scrutiny. 

As in the recent case involving the now infamous prosecutor Mike Nifong and the Duke LaCrosse players, history teaches us that unless and until the public is satisfied that the tremendous power possessed the government is managed with fairness to all, an uneasy feeling will continue to grow in this nation until it reaches critical mass, resulting in civil unrest.

The mainstream media has the resources to fully explore these things.  Will they?

Just asking.

Lawson Nighbert: Not Guilty On All Counts

Acquitted, vindicated and in tears, Bill Nighbert and Leonard Lawson listened as the clerk read the verdicts: Not Guilty on all counts.

Might the public accept this decision as just?  If so, perhaps the Governor will issue an apology for his early comments and Kentucky's press will stop trying to crucify people, destroy their reputations and convict them in the court of public opinion until jurors have done their jobs.

But don't hold your breath.  An acquittal in court is one thing, justice in the press quite another.

Congratulations to their counsel.

OUCH!! This Will Leave A Mark: James O'Keefe Responds To MSM Accusations

James O'Keefe is the young guy who filmed various ACORN employees advising a phony hooker how to avoid the law and get free stuff.  He has recently been arrested after attempting a similar undercover story about Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu's avoidance of constituent complaints over her "healthcare" vote.

Various MainStreamMedia outlets have jumped at the chance to convict him in the press.  O'Keefe has responded with a sharp blow to their heads.

The government has now confirmed what has always been clear:  No one tried to wiretap or bug Senator Landrieu’s office.  Nor did we try to cut or shut down her phone lines.  Reports to this effect over the past 48 hours are inaccurate and false.

As an investigative journalist, my goal is to expose corruption and lack of concern for citizens by government and other institutions, as I did last year when our investigations revealed the massive corruption and fraud perpetrated by ACORN.  For decades, investigative journalists have used a variety of tactics to try to dig out and reveal the truth.

I learned from a number of sources that many of Senator Landrieu’s constituents were having trouble getting through to her office to tell her that they didn’t want her taking millions of federal dollars in exchange for her vote on the healthcare bill.  When asked about this, Senator Landrieu’s explanation was that, “Our lines have been jammed for weeks.”  I decided to investigate why a representative of the people would be out of touch with her constituents for “weeks” because her phones were broken.  In investigating this matter, we decided to visit Senator Landrieu’s district office – the people’s office – to ask the staff if their phones were working.

On reflection, I could have used a different approach to this investigation, particularly given the sensitivities that people understandably have about security in a federal building.  The sole intent of our investigation was to determine whether or not Senator Landrieu was purposely trying to avoid constituents who were calling to register their views to her as their Senator.  We video taped the entire visit, the government has those tapes, and I’m eager for them to be released because they refute the false claims being repeated by much of the mainstream media.

It has been amazing to witness the journalistic malpractice committed by many of the organizations covering this story.  MSNBC falsely claimed that I violated a non-existent “gag order.”  The Associated Press incorrectly reported that I “broke in” to an office which is open to the public.  The Washington Post has now had to print corrections in two stories on me.  And these are just a few examples of inaccurate and false reporting.  The public will judge whether reporters who can’t get their facts straight have the credibility to question my integrity as a journalist. [Big Government]

Obama Gets Body Slammed For Misplaced Criticism Of Campaign Finance Ruling

Obama reads a teleprompter well, but who ever is writing that stuff for him should be fired.  He is getting the tar kicked out of him over his inappropriate, low class, condescending, ignorant, factually incorrect criticism of the Citizens United campaign finance decision announced last week by the US Supreme Court.

During the oral argument in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Seth Waxman, the former Solicitor General of the United States who was representing John McCain and other campaign finance law sponsors, asserted that the plaintiffs' position was contrary to the thrust of more than 50 years of Supreme Court precedent. Justice Alito said that this argument -- or "sound bite," as he characterized it -- is "perplexing." He noted that the issue before the Court was merely the validity of two precedents that don't date back that far.

Justice Alito's concern turned out to be prescient when, in his State of the Union address, President Obama (Mr. Sound Bite, himself) claimed that the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United "reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections." Even Waxman had not made this claim at oral argument, although Solicitor General Kagan and Justice Sotomayor threw the number 100 around in this connection.

Last night, Justice Alito reportedly responded to Obama's sound bite by quietly saying something like "that's not true." Alito was right at least two levels. First, as noted above and as Linda Greenhouse acknowledges, Citizens United did not disturb any principles that date back 100 years.

Second, as Shannen Coffin points out, the decision in Citizens United is quite clear that it does not address whether the government can regulate improper foreign influence over our electoral process. Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy stated: "We need not reach the question whether the Government has a compelling interest in preventing foreign individuals or associations from influencing our Nation's political process." [note: Bradley Smith has more on this issue].

Presidents should feel free to criticize important Supreme Court decisions with which they disagree. It's bad form, however, to do so at an event where Justices are in attendance by invitation. And it is unconscionable to do so by blatantly misrepresenting what the Court has said.[Power Line]

I Thought I Was The Only One Who Caught This Ignorant Obama-ism

During his 2010 State Of The Union address Barack Obama, a former senior lecturer on Constitutional law said this:

"We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal…."

I immediately blurted out "that's from the Declaration of Independence not the Constitution.  What a dumba$$."

Apparently I wasn't the only one to catch it. Gateway Pundit blogged it today.

Does Michelle Malkin Read This Blog?

Today Michelle Malkin had this headline on her blog:

Reverse Midas: Obama to campaign for beleaguered Sen. Bennet in Colorado

Which made me wonder, do you think she reads this blog?

Nah, probably not.

***THE ARMED CITIZEN*** An Every Friday Feature

Police say 91-year-old Robert Thompson and his Rottweiler mix, Rett, were alarmed when they saw a prowler on the back porch trying to get into their home. "I started to let [Rett] out the door, and he was so anxious he got caught in the door," said Thompson, a Purple Heart World War II veteran. Rett pounced on the suspect and held him down. Thompson ran inside to call 9-1-1 and get his gun. Upon his return, Rett released the suspect, who tried to get up and charge Thompson. The suspect changed his tune when the veteran fired a shot, narrowly missing him. "I think the guy was scared to death. He was screaming," said Thompson, who held the suspect for police. "If anyone violates my home they better be careful, that's all I got to say," he said. (News-Herald, Panama City, FL, 11/19/09)

Reprinted with the encouragement of the NRA

Morning Funnies

The Marcus Carey Perspective 1-28-2010 "An Insidious Plot"

The Federal Government has enacted a law which invades your privacy, confiscates your property, raises taxes and grows the government.  Exposed and excoriated.  Listen.

Subscribe To "The Marcus Carey Perspective":