Flap's Blog – FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog

Obama told reporters that the Republicans have no “standing to suggest that they’ve learned a lot of lessons from 9-11.”

He said they “helped to engineer the distraction of the war in Iraq at a time when we could have pinned down the people who actually committed 9-11.” He said Osama bin Laden is still at large in part because of their failed strategies.

Obama’s view of 9/11, terrorism is RADICAL LEFT, out of the mainstream of opinion and WRONG.

“Throughout this campaign, I have been very concerned that the Democrats want to take a step back to the failed policies that treated terrorism solely as a law enforcement matter rather than a clear and present danger,” Giuliani said. “Barack Obama appears to believe that terrorists should be treated like criminals — a belief that underscores his fundamental lack of judgment regarding our national security. In a post 9/11 world, we need to remain on offense against the terrorist threat which seeks to destroy our very way of life.”

Rudy is RIGHT. In the Clinton years terrorists like Osama Bin Laden and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were treated like common criminals and pursued as such. The Clinton administration “proceeded with 100 per cent law enforcement focus.” When 9/11 happened Bin Laden and KSM had already been indicted, and that helped how?

During Giuliani’s Presidential campaign Rudy called for a war on offense against terrorism, Obama would conduct exactly the opposite and put America at risk.

Iran on Tuesday insisted any demands it should suspend sensitive atomic activities would cross its “red line”, days after world powers submitted a new package aimed at ending the nuclear standoff.

“We have said several times that uranium enrichment is Iran’s red line and we must have this technology,” Deputy Foreign Minister Ali Reza Sheikh Attar said, quoted by the state IRNA news agency.

Suspending uranium enrichment — which the West fears could be used to make a nuclear weapon — is the key demand in the deal offered Saturday to Tehran by EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana on behalf of world powers.

The package offers Iran talks on a package of technological and economic incentives, so long as Tehran suspends uranium enrichment.

As Flap has been writing about for years now. Iran WILL NOT voluntarily suspend uranium enrichment. So, the choice is clear to the West:

1. Allow Iran to become a nuclear weapons possessing country

2. Militarily destroy Iran’s nuclear weapon producing capacity

3. Embargo Iran and sanction them so severely that they are “forced” to forego uranium enrichment.

Apparently the EU and United States are not serious – even yet!

Previous:

Iran Nuclear Watch: Britain to Increase Iran Sanctions

Iran Nuclear Watch: Ahmadinejad Taunts Bush

Of course, the entire remark has been taken and spun out of context, but what else is new for the LEFT?

The RNC’s response:

“MoveOn.org was wrong to smear General Petraeus, just like Barack Obama was wrong to not go to Iraq to meet with him. America cannot afford a Commander-in-Chief who listens to partisan groups like MoveOn.org instead of our commanders. Bringing peace and security to Iraq will require a Commander in Chief who won’t allow partisanship to cloud his judgment.”

The unions and left-wing organizations will continue to pound McCain on the unpopular war. But, will the Iraq War be the primary issue in the Fall with conditions on the ground there being dramatically better?

Flap thinks the economy and taxes will supercede the importance of the war.

A June 2 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the federal statute for money laundering is the latest in a string of delays – ranging from a late-arriving transcript of the trial, to the defense attorney’s computer crashing at the 11th hour – to push back the sentencing.

On Monday, Judge James P. Jones of the U.S. Western District of Virginia said the high court’s split decision in United States v. Santos “may be significant” in sentencing Shelburne.

Jones called the decision “complicated,” and “something I need to study further.”

It is unclear what if any bearing the high court’s decision will have on the sentencing.

Shelburne was convicted on March 6 of racketeering, health care fraud and money laundering, and faces up to 120 years in prison and a $1.25 million fine.

Dr. Roy Shelburne remains on bail pending sentencing and continues to practice dentistry but on a “dramtically reduced” level.

The judge in the case did not set a trial date for sentencing on Monday. The defense hopes to argue for a new trial at the sentencing hearing.

Stay tuned…..

Today, political activists who support the candidacy of Democrat Hannah-Beth Jackson will be protesting these tobacco contributions outside of the Hyatt Westlake Plaza Hotel in Westlake Village, California prior to a Strickland fundraising event featuring former Massachusetts Governor and Presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Flap understands that the GOP will have counter protesters.

But, what are the facts about the tobacco industry and the political contributions they make?

And, has Hannah-Beth Jackson received campaign contributions indirectly from politicians who have accepted money from the tobacco industry?

The answer to the question is yes.

Are Hannah-Beth Democrat Party supporters then hypocritical in protesting Tony Strickland’s acceptance of tobacco campaign cash when both their candidate and party have accepted like contributions?

The answer is yes.

Ok, back to the facts. This first graphic illustrates the influence of the tobacco products industry on state of California politics.

Graphic courtesy of Followthemoney.org

The above graphic represents donations to state legislative campaigns, state constitutional officers (e.g. Governor, Secretary of State, etc) and election measures. The California GOP has received more campaign money than the Democrats but in this election cycle by only 8 plus per cent.

Now, let’s look at the federal national contributions:

Graphic courtesy of Open Secrets.org

Again the GOP over the past decade or more have been the recipient of the majority of the federal candidate contributions. This includes members and candidates of/for the House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate, national political parties and President. Note that the GOP controlled the Congress for the majority of the last decade.

Here is a graphic from this year’s federal election cycle of tobacco industry money given to Congress:

Graphic courtesy of Open Secrets.org

There has been alot of tobacco money running through political campaigns, no?

Why?

Would heavy regulation and taxation have something to do with it?

You bet.

The industry is buying access to the legislative and executive leaders who regulate them – just like any other industry that deals with government.

What makes it EVEN MORE difficult to track the contributions is the propensity of California legislative campaigns to raise money in one district and then transfer it to another. Same goes with the political parties both Democrat and Republican.

After reviewing the campaign records of Hannah-Beth Jackson and Tony Strickland, it can be said that for now Strickland has accepted the most DIRECTLY reported contributions from the tobacco industry. A summary of Strickland’s receipts for his California State Senate run this year are here.

However, Hannah-Beth Jackson has also received two money transfers from a fellow California State Senator, Gloria Negrete McLeod, CA SD-32, who HAS received money from Altria Corporation, a tobacco products company. Hanna-Beth Jackson’s contribution receipts are here.

Of course, these records ONLY reflect what has taken place up to May 22, 2008. Tony Strickland has already issues a press release that he has raised over $1 million for his campaign. Undoubtedly, there will be more campaign transfers into Jackson’s account from the Democrat Party legislative leadership and other politicians.

So, where is the FLAP?

Both candidates and both political parties have received contributions from the tobacco industry. The GOP has received more than the Democrats but both have been the recipients of millions of dollars according to contribution limits and state and federal law.

Smoking and chewing tobacco may be unhealthful habits but the use of the products is NOT illegal.

Unless the protesters today can PROVE that these tobacco contributions have illegally influenced the campaigns of either candidate then Flap REALLY doesn’t see the point.

If Ventura County voters do not wish to vote for someone who has accepted campaign contributions from an American business interest selling a legal product that is heavily regulated and taxed, then so be it.

There has been full disclosure.