What party was he? I have no idea whatsoever. I've read three short pieces on the Philadelphia Inquirer and still don't know. I guess it's a stone cold mystery and will be forever.

Unless you have Wikipedia. Hint: He's a city machine pol who brings home the bacon.

Here's the statement from the US Attorney who prosecuted him:

Vincent Fumo, a once powerful politician, will now face the consequences of spending other peopleÂ’s money, taxpayersÂ’ money, our money, to provide himself with the extraordinarily lavish lifestyle that he felt he was entitled to.

...

Public officials must remember that public service is a privilege and an honor, not an opportunity for personal bias and gain.

Public officials must remember the arrogant rationalizations that juries in this case and others have emphatically rejected.

“I am worth it” is not a defense, is not an excuse, is not a basis, for spending at least ninety thousand dollars of charity money on tools and appliances, including almost seven thousand dollars just on high-end vacuum cleaners for your four homes.

“Everyone is doing this” is not a defense, is not an excuse, is not a basis, for taking the Seaport Museum’s luxury yacht for a cruise without paying for it, or giving no-work contracts worth hundreds of thousands of dollars to your friends.

...

“But I have worked so hard,” even if it were true, is not a defense, is not an excuse, is not a basis for spending, to borrow the Senator’s term, OPM - “other people’s money,” to pay for people to oversee the renovation of your 33-room mansion, to clean that mansion, to paint your home - and your girlfriend’s home - with hundred dollar a gallon paint, to follow your ex-girlfriend, spy on her, and try to get her arrested.

Hard work never, never, balances the scales against such abuse.

Vincent Fumo used his vast power to build an empire of senate employees, government paid contractors, and non-profit charity workers, to serve as personal servants and political operatives, to satisfy his many and utterly extravagant wants and needs, personal and political.

His actions claimed real victims – the State Senate, a chaity, a museum, the government, and most important, the taxpayers of Pennsylvania.

Vince Fumo did not just cross the line that divides proper and improper conduct.

He completely ignored the line, as if it could not be seen, as if it had been painted over.

And when Vince Fumo found himself so far on the wrong side of those lines that he felt there was no turning back, he did everything possible to erase the trail that led us to him.

...

There should never be another Fumo World, a world in which millions of dollars of taxpayer and charity money went to enrich and feed one manÂ’s gluttony.

The public is weary of officials playing by their own rules and ignoring lines.

We hope that our investigation and prosecution, and the juryÂ’s verdict of guilty, has served to restore some of the publicÂ’s confidence in the integrity of our system of government.

DavidR., who tips, informs me Ed Rendell was a character witness (think about that -- the governor serving as a character witness for this scumbag) during the trial. After the verdict, he had no comment.

Posted by: Ace at 11:41 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 571 words, total size 4 kb.

It's amazing but Jim Tedisco, Republican candidate for the House in NY's 20th Congressional District, has finally said he would have voted against Obama's so-called "stimulus" bill after weeks of playing coy about his position.

No, no, no, 1,000 times no. ThatÂ’s pretty much the answer that Assembly Republican Minority Leader and Congressional candidate Jim Tedisco finally gave, after weeks of being beaten up for his refusal to answer, as to how heÂ’d vote on the $780 billion federal stimulus bill.

“No. That’s the answer,” said Tedisco, who is running for the 20th Congressional district seat formerly held by Kirsten Gillibrand.

“I’m going on the record now to say I would have voted no.”

...Tedisco added that he’s taking his “no” stance after hearing from constituents in the district. We’re not sure of this yet, but there could be some poll numbers to indicate that people are having doubts about the stimulus, given the ongoing slump in the stock market and what seems to be ever-rising unemployment.

Gee, a heavily Republican district against the 'stimulus'? Who would have thought? And yet this guy had to wait to be told it was a bad idea. No wonder his lead is down to 4 points from 12 two weeks earlier.

Tedisco also said he supports the efforts of NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to get information about the AIG bonuses. If you've been reading the comments on the earlier AIG thread, you'll see I think this is mostly cheap political theater but given the status of Republicans these days, it's probably best to be on the right side of the audience (and at least be willing to look into what, if anything can be done about the bonuses)*.

*I added the last part in the parenthesis to be clear I'm not saying Republicans should support doing "something" but there's nothing wrong with seeing if there are any legal means currently available.

Posted by: DrewM at 10:19 AM | Comments (5)
Post contains 343 words, total size 2 kb.

Bloggers are the enemy.

....she warned city residents that itÂ’s not crime, or the stagnant economy that is a great danger to the cityÂ…but malicious bloggers.

The Daily Record reported that Tilghman in her speech said that the presence of a small group of suspicious, mean-spirited people over the last five years focused on the negative has grown, endangering the cityÂ’s vitality. She added that some people are avoiding serving their city because itÂ’s not worth chancing the scorn of bloggers.

------------------------
In addition to that, she has gone through great lengths to control the media, forbidding anyone in city government from speaking to WICO Radio host Bill Reddish, after Reddish gave the good old fashion grilling to City Council President Louise Smith. The station had to give her a show in order to have city coverage.

Believe me, it is not the scorn of bloggers that city workers are afraid of. It was the scorn of Barrie if they violated her gag order and let the truth out.

Gosh, a politician who is trying to shut down criticism from independent citizens AND the press. Huh. Imagine that.

I searched various articles and blog entries for her party affiliation. It was curiously omitted, time and time again.

Know where I found it?

Newsbusters.

Guess.

Posted by: LauraW at 10:05 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 2 kb.

I wouldn't. Not again, at least.

Posted by: Ace at 08:37 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.

Eh. He's a comic. And despite the attempt to claim otherwise, "schvartze" is not on par with the n-word. It's Yiddish for "black." I don't know. As it's used, I always got the feeling it was more a term of silly-fake-racism rather than real racism. I don't remember Mel Brooks catching much flack for it.

Video of Jackie Mason angrily rejecting charges of racism.

Posted by: Ace at 08:30 AM | Comments (8)
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

(Photoshop from TiffVegas) I don't think we would get much argument for stating the Republican party is in disarray and largely failing as a loyal opposition to the unprecedented power grab underway by Obama and the Democrats. If there was ever a time for a powerful voice to raise up and stand athwart history shouting WTF? it is now. The only unifying theme on the right seems to be Tea Parties and the possibility of Going John Galt. Those are populist symptoms caused by the complete lack of a coherent message in response to the crisis-mongering of Obama's team of over-matched incompetents. The Republican leaders in Congress have made some efforts such as denying any votes for the Generational Theft Act in the House, but RINOs in the Senate made sure our children start off with a crushing debt load.

The purported voice of the Republican party Michael Steele has shown himself to be tin-eared and even worse completely self-contradictory. He bad mouths Rush one day, and then kisses his ass the next. He comes out pro-choice until the next day he is reminded that the culture of death party is the Democrats. He shows no anchoring beliefs or any ability to articulate a platform that can bring the disillusioned right together. Well I know someone who can.

Draft Ace for Chair of the Republican National Committee! (or at least Comms Dir./New Media Guru)

He has shown a tremendous ability to electrify the right and get rousing discussion of tough issues underway.
He has built an online community that encompasses all facets of the right from Libertarian to Conservative.
He was named Blogger of the Year at last year's CPAC for contributions to our political discourse.
He has the strength of his convictions, but tolerates and welcomes disparate opinions.
He believes in the marketplace of ideas and provides a platform for them to fight for their legitimacy.
He understands the power of new media and can take the fight to the left on their own turf.

Draft Ace!

There is no reason that a right of center party has to be led by the same crop of boring, idea-less, wankers who helped W waste their time in the majority spending money like Democrats. Well at least until the latest pack of rapacious looters entered the halls of Congress and the White House and completely re-set the bar for waste and progressive abuse. We need new blood and someone willing to put some blood in the water.

Draft Ace!

The right needs to have an argument amongst itself and that is something Ace can definitely bring about. We need to figger out what we stand for and what we will not stand for. Then we need to get that message out. You want a vast, right-wing, noise machine? I'll give you a vast, right-wing, noise machine.

Draft Ace!

Spread the word morons, let them all know that we want Ace.

Motivate the Malkin Message Machine. Instigate the Instapundit. Love the Lizardoid Nation. Stoke the Hot Air. Corner the Corner. Holler at Hugh Hewitt. Obviously BLACKFIVE will cover his military flanks with 360 security.

Draft Ace!

Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our Moron dead.

Draft Ace!

Brought to you by the Draft Ace cabal. (Tony & Diane leading the way)

Posted by: Uncle Jimbo at 08:12 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 568 words, total size 4 kb.

This may be smart politics, as Obama realizes he has a "bailout backlash" problem brewing. In no small part thanks to his relentlessly crude populist demagoguery on the issue. Even Bill Kristol is urging the GOP to make hay with AIG.

And isnÂ’t this a moment for the GOP to separate itself from the Bush administration as well as the Obama administration, who together have been responsible for an incompetent and improvident bailout? Figuring out the right policy going forward with respect to toxic assets and the rest is, of course, a major intellectual task. But being on the side of a healthy populist reaction to the AIG situation is at least a good political start.

But isn't the issuance of government fiats to ostensibly private concerns actually, um, nationalization? Shouldn't the Confused One figure out if he's nationalizing the banks and AIG in the first place?

It seems nationalization in everything but name:

The Obama administration is looking for ways to recoup at least some of the $165 million American International Group, Inc. paid out in bonuses over the weekend, despite accepting billions in government aid to stay afloat, reports CBS News correspondent Peter Maer.

The White House continues to negotiate with AIG to bring any payments in line with the government's priorities, an administration official told CBS News.

President Barack Obama is scheduled to speak Monday morning on AIG while rolling out his plan to help small businesses. He's expected to voice anger over the bonuses and could elaborate on administration efforts to recover some of the money, reports Maer.

The administration official said that the bonuses "long been known about inside and outside AIG. But we didn’t want to accept them.”

The White House is seeking what are described as "mechanisms" to recover money spent on bonuses, but the company insists some of the bonuses are part of legally binding contracts signed before the government's bailout.

The "any legal means" quote was tipped to me by Anti-Harkonen Freedom Fighter Geoff, coming from that Obama speech just given.

I'm not sure what to think about this. It does seem that AIG has had a rather bad year, so I'm not getting why people should be getting large bonuses. It depends, I guess, on who got the bonuses, and how that compares to normal bonuses. But in this kind of year, I'm having trouble imaging that bonuses are justified.

Whether justified or not, we're seeing creeping nationalization here. Or half-nationalization, where Obama gets the public to support huge subsidies for corporations, which in turn gives him the authority to order them about, and make them, de facto, additional vehicles of government policy.

Another View: from USAToday:

It's tempting to say, go ahead, abrogate the contracts from early last year, and let employees sue. See if they can find a jury that will side with them over losing their sweetheart deals, which even gave "retention" payments "to employees who are downsized."

The downside is that if the payments aren't made, employees could double their money by suing, and the company (now effectively the government as 80% owner) would have to pay their legal bills. The government also shouldn't break contracts lightly. But before we take the word of Treasury and AIG's CEO that this couldn't have been stopped, the contracts should be made public and two questions answered.

Y-Not does some quick math to determine the bonuses represent 0.1% of the bailout money AIG has received. So this may be a case of pennywise, pound foolish.

Posted by: Ace at 07:54 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 608 words, total size 4 kb.

A nothing of a fart of a story. It's news, apparently, that the Red Cross chooses to assign one semantic term to interrogation techniques long known about (sleep deprivation, cold rooms, etc.).

Making this even sillier is that the claims come from the terrorists themselves.

The International Committee of the Red Cross produced in 2007 a secret report, in which it concluded that the treatment of al-Qaeda captives by CIA interrogators "constituted torture," The Washington Post reported Monday.

...

The findings were based on conclusions by ICRC officials who were granted exclusive access to the CIA's "high-value" detainees after they had been transferred in 2006 to the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the report said.

...

The paper quotes an unnamed US official familiar with the report as saying that "it is important to bear in mind that the report lays out claims made by the terrorists themselves."

The report says prisoners at the secret jails were routinely beaten, doused with cold water and slammed head-first into walls, according to The Post.

Between sessions they were stripped of clothing, bombarded with loud music, exposed to cold temperatures, and deprived of sleep and solid food for days, the paper says.

In related news, three large buildings are missing from the southern tip of Manhattan; please contact local authorities if you see them.

Posted by: Ace at 07:32 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

Read the whole thing. Rich, savory schadenfreude, although alarming. Our country elected a dolt.

Not long ago, after a string of especially bad days for the Obama administration, a veteran Democratic pol approached me with a pained look on his face and asked, "Do you think they know what they're doing?"
The question caught me off guard because the man is a well-known Obama supporter. As we talked, I quickly realized his asking suggested his own considerable doubts.

Yes, it's early, but an eerily familiar feeling is spreading across party lines and seeping into the national conversation. It's a nagging doubt about the competency of the White House.

It was during George W. Bush's second term that the I-word - incompetence - became a routine broadside against him. The Democratic frenzy of Bush-bashing had not spent itself when a larger critique emerged, one not confined by partisan boundaries.

...

The tag of incompetence is powerful precisely because it is a nondenominational rebuke, even when it yields a partisan result. It became the strongest argument against the GOP hammerlock on Washington and, over two elections, gave Democrats their turn at total control.

...

Which brings us to the heart of the matter: the doubts about Obama himself. His famous eloquence is wearing thin through daily exposure and because his actions are often disconnected from his words. His lack of administrative experience is showing.

His promises and policies contradict each other often enough that evidence of hypocrisy is ceasing to be news. Remember the pledges about bipartisanship and high ethics? They're so last year.

The beat goes on. Last week, Obama brazenly gave a speech about earmark reform just after he quietly signed a $410 billion spending bill that had about 9,000 earmarks in it. He denounced Bush's habit of disregarding pieces of laws he didn't like, so-called signing statements, then issued one himself.

And in an absolute jaw-dropper, he told business leaders, "I don't like the idea of spending more government money, nor am I interested in expanding government's role."

No wonder Americans are confused. Our President is, too.

The worst confusion is that this Miserable Failure tells us every single day we're in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, but, rather than focus on that, instead spends all of his time hatching plans to nationalize huge segments of the economy having nothing to do with finance or banking.

Krauthammer's complaint -- now echoed by Obama supporter Warren Buffet -- is gaining currency.

Which raises the question -- incompetency or malicious intent? Is Obama delaying actually focusing on the financial crisis -- actually staffing the Treasury Department so that British officials can actually get someone on the phone to coordinate with, and maybe coming up with some kind of plan -- because he doesn't mind the crisis continuing a while? Does he favor allowing capitalism to be discredited further, so that his preferred program of socialism will find public favor?

There's an old adage in politics, offered whenever a political foe is being destroyed by his own actions -- "Never get in the way of an opponent who's self-destructing." Is Obama applying this adage to his true opponent, American capitalism itself?

Posted by: Ace at 07:05 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 556 words, total size 4 kb.

I don't mention them often myself -- I didn't mention this huge Fullerton, CA one at all. But then, I don't really mention rallies as a general matter.

The LAT does. At least when it's a rally for a cause it supports. Even when it's only fifty people.

Posted by: Ace at 06:46 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.