Friday, May 26, 2006

the news leader is at it again

For any title in the News-Leader to include the word FACT is just truly unbelievable. This is after all the same paper that has misrepresented a petition drive to have the city audited, a misrepresentation of a pro american rally as being anti-immigrant.

Lets be focused News Leader and when you call the pot black make sure you also look in a mirror and call the kettle the same.

I don't know whether I'm for or against another coal buring, I'm more a nuclear power plant type since I believe it to be more ecologically sound. Does anyone know what they do once they remove all the coal out of the ground?

Keep SW2 debate focused on facts


Opponents' group tries to play dirty-tricks game.

Certain opponents of the proposed new Southwest 2 coal-fired power plant are up to their same old political games.

Yesterday, the Ratepayers for Affordable Utilities held a City Utilities-bashing session in an attempt to convince voters to turn down the June 6 ballot issue that would fund a 300-megawatt coal plant.

We have no problem with folks who disagree that Southwest 2 is the best, most reasonable solution to Springfield's future power needs.

We have no problem with Ratepayers spokesman Lee Gannaway taking potshots at CU's management. That's his prerogative.

But we do have a problem with Gannaway and his band of naysayers trying to present inaccurate information to voters at the last minute. That's what they did with a misleading flier that was mailed out days before the election two years ago. That's what they tried yesterday by taking facts about energy costs out of context.

Voters should listen to the Ratepayers' call to check the facts.

When they do, they'll find that group's arguments on the salient facts related to Southwest 2 miss the mark.

Amid all the rhetoric spilled by the opponent group at its news conference Wednesday, one point stood out. The Ratepayers believe that the better option for voters is to turn down the Southwest 2 plant and force City Utilities to enter into an agreement to be partial owners of a proposed huge plant in Oklahoma known as the Tenaska/GRDA project. To back its claim, the Ratepayers group points to the consultant's study paid for by CU to compare a variety of possible alternatives to Southwest 2.

The cheapest of those was the Tenaska project.

Gannaway said Wednesday that consultants Black & Veatch endorsed that move over building Southwest 2. He pointed to the letter from the consultants as proof.

He's just plain wrong.

The consultants did say the Tenaska project is the lowest-cost of the other alternatives considered by CU, but it says clearly, in a sentence Gannaway conveniently ignored, that "B&V concludes that SW2 is the most economic baseload alternative for the CU system."

It doesn't get much clearer than that. CU General Manager John Twitty made that point in a later news conference. The Tenaska/GRDA proposal would cost 5.04 cents per kilowatt hour — and that's assuming the project gets an air permit, which it lacks. Southwest 2's cost is lower, 4.5 cents per kilowatt hour.

What bothers us most about Ratepayers attempt to mislead voters is that it waited so long to make its point. Other opponent groups have been publicly engaged in this city's debate over power alternatives for more than two years.

They, too, disagree with CU over its decision to seek approval for SW2. They think there are better, cleaner alternatives, and they've argued for them and given voters a chance to make a decision. They haven't made the debate personal, as Gannaway did Wednesday. They simply disagree.

Voters should keep that in mind as the debate over future energy needs reaches its fevered pitch in coming days. Look for facts, not rhetoric.

We believe you'll see, as we do, that Southwest 2 is good for our city's future.

The House smells like bacon again.

Can someone please explain to me why the federal government has decided that the
Agricultural Dept. has a budget of this size??
What type of crops does the government grow to have this type of budget?

I wonder how much of this budget is required to pay ranchers and farmers not to raise cattle and the like or to grow crops?

The House smells like bacon after having passed the $18.4-billion 2007 Agriculture Department appropriations bill, 378-46. The bill may be $96 million less than its FY 2007 predecessor, but it's still $564 million more than the President requested. Meanwhile, several billion dollars of extra spending was approved for FY2007; again, above President Bush's request. An alternate lower budget was indeed proposed by Reps. Mike Pence and Jeb Hensarling; all too tellingly, though, it garnered only 94 Republican votes.


House Majority Leader John Boehner revealed his legislative agenda for the coming year, but with congressional Republicans focused on November and no record worth speaking of, no one seems to care. If Boehner really wants to capture the attention of those who brought him and the rest of the Republican bench to the dance, he will focus on the legislative agenda as outlined by Mr. Pence and the Republican Study Committee. Here in our humble editorial shop, let's just say we're not holding our breath.

In ethics news, video surveillance of Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson shows him accepting $100,000 in cash from an FBI informant. $90,000 of that money was later found in the congressman's freezer during a search of his home (talk about frozen assets!). Jefferson will likely be charged with taking bribes from indicted businessman Vernon Jackson in exchange for helping Jackson to secure deals for his telecommunications holdings in Africa.

A Saturday night raid (with warrant) on Jefferson's congressional offices in Washington has caused a scramble on Capitol Hill to circle the wagons. Citing concerns over "constitutionality," Speaker Hastert and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi issued a joint statement condemning the search of Jefferson's office and demanding that the papers taken be returned.

Since when, exactly, is Congress concerned about something so arcane as constitutionality? This spectacle of representatives claiming super-constitutional rights won't play well with voters already turned off by this arrogant Congress. It is precisely this imperious attitude that has obstructed Petition to Investigate and Indict John F. Kerry for acts of treason. President Bush has now ordered the seized documents sealed while the House and Justice Department seek a resolution to this so-called infringement upon the Legislative Branch.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

royality chooses no sides

Since when does the average american have this type of power, or vocalise the thought they they can bring law enforcement to its knees. Get over it Dennis the "crook" was caught with his fingers in the cookie jar(so to speak) now let the JUSTICE system run its course.
Kudo's to AG Gonzales for letting the pompous elected representative they AREN"T above the law and aren't above reproach.

district 139

Hastert demands FBI return documents

By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer 21 minutes ago

House Speaker Dennis Hastert demanded Wednesday that the FBI surrender
documents it seized and remove agents involved in the weekend raid of
Rep. William Jefferson (news, bio, voting record)'s office, under what
lawmakers of both parties said were unconstitutional circumstances.

"We think those materials ought to be returned," Hastert said, adding
that the FBI agents involved "ought to be frozen out of that (case) just
for the sake of the constitutional aspects of it."

The Saturday night search of Jefferson's office on Capitol Hill brought
Democrats and Republicans together in rare election-year accord, with
both parties protesting agency conduct they said violated the
Constitution's separation of powers doctrine.

"Not anyone here is above the law," Pelosi told reporters Tuesday, as
she prepared to meet with the House speaker. But, she added, "I think
you've seen abuse of power of the executive branch over this weekend."

A day earlier, Hastert, R-Ill., complained personally to President Bush
about raid. Other House officials have predicted that the case would
bring all three branches together at the Supreme Court for a
constitutional showdown.

But while most leaders of both parties stand together in opposition to
an executive branch raid of a legislative branch office, party leaders
are acting on different political agendas.

Democrats, hoping to exploit Republican scandals on Capitol Hill and
regain control of Congress, are making it known that Jefferson, of
Louisiana, is no longer welcome on the House's most prestigious panel,
the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee.

For his part, Jefferson, who has denied wrongdoing, remains defiant.

"I will not give up a committee assignment that is so vital to New
Orleans at this crucial time for any uncertain, long-term political
strategy," Jefferson said Tuesday. "If asked, I would respectfully decline."

His spokeswoman, Melanie Roussell, added that Jefferson will not resign
from Congress.

Republicans are being careful to avoid defending Jefferson while
standing up for the separation of powers in an increasingly tense
relationship with the White House over its use of executive power.

In April, Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., personally
told Bush that "the president doesn't have a blank check" during a
discussion of Bush's domestic wiretapping program.

Hastert kept up the drumbeat after the FBI's raid of Jefferson's office.

"My opinion is that they took the wrong path," Hastert said after
meeting with Bush in the White House. "They need to back up, and we need
to go from there."

The developments are the beginning of what lawmakers predict will be a
long dispute over the FBI's search of Jefferson's office last weekend.
Historians say it was the first raid of a representative's quarters in
Congress' 219 years.

FBI agents searched Jefferson's office in pursuit of evidence in a
bribery investigation. The search warrant, signed by U.S. District Court
Judge Thomas Hogan, was based on an affidavit that said agents found
$90,000 in cash wrapped and stashed in the freezer of Jefferson's home.

White House officials said they did not learn of the search until after
it happened. They pledged to work with the Justice Department to soothe

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales tried to strike a conciliatory tone,
saying, "We have a great deal of respect for the Congress as a coequal
branch of government." But he also defended the search: "We have an
obligation to the American people to pursue the evidence where it exists."

Officials said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had
discussed Jefferson's situation with several fellow senior lawmakers and
there was a consensus that he should step aside, preferably voluntarily,
at least until his legal situation was clarified. It was not clear
whether she or an emissary approached Jefferson. The officials who
described the developments did so on condition of anonymity, citing the
delicacy of the situation.

Justice Department officials said the decision to search Jefferson's
office was made in part because he refused to comply with a subpoena for
documents last summer. Jefferson reported the subpoena to the House on
Sept. 15, 2005.

Monday, May 22, 2006

FBI Raid Angers Some on Hill

There are two different sources on this story which is why both are linked. If this doesn't give you enough courage to cast your ballot for someone other then a democrat or a republican(let's not forget Jack Abramoff or Mr. "Duke" Cunningham)nothing will.
The total corruption of members of both parties flies in the face of those of us that work hard play by the rules and achieve success even tho' BIG BROTHER is trying his damnest to hold us back.

I hold NO allegiances to anyone or any group. My campaign is self funded. Neither of my businesses have benefited in any manner from government regulation.
I can be trusted to bring FISCAL responsibility back to Jeff City, and bring back constitutional compliance.

state house district # 139


Mon May 22 2006 10:00:41 ET

Saturday nightÂ’s FBI raid on the office of Rep. William Jefferson
(D-La.) surprised and angered House officials, who were not told that
the Rayburn House Office Building search was to take place until one
hour beforehand, offering the latest sign that federal prosecutors are
using increasingly aggressive tactics in their pursuit of allegedly
corrupt lawmakers.

This is believed to be the first-ever FBI raid on a Congressional
office, ROLL CALL reports.

Documents filed in support of the search show that the Justice
Department is assembling a wide-ranging case against the veteran
Democratic lawmaker.

At this time, Jefferson is being investigated for bribery, wire fraud,
bribery of a foreign official and conspiracy to bribe foreign officials,
according to an affidavit filed by an FBI agent in support of the search

But the Justice Department and FBI agents are also looking at “least
seven other schemes in which Congressman Jefferson sought things of
value” in return for official acts, the affidavit states.

That suggests that additional avenues for prosecuting Jefferson could be
revealed soon. The FBI has two confidential witnesses who are offering
testimony against Jefferson, as well as undercover audio and video tapes
of him allegedly asking for and receiving bribes worth potentially
millions of dollars in exchange for his help in putting together African
telecommunications deals for U.S. firms, according to the affidavit.

On one videotape, the FBI filmed Jefferson allegedly receiving $100,000
in cash from one of their cooperating witnesses. Most of the money was
later recovered in a raid of Jefferson¹s home, reports ROLL CALL's John

Jefferson and his family members allegedly received payments from both
sides of the telecom deals, with money coming from the American and
Nigerian firms through companies controlled by the Jeffersons, his two
brothers and son-in-law, according to the FBI affidavit.