Why the waving of the flag doesn't impress me anymore...

It breaks my heart... I feel like I'm letting down people who I respect and admire deeply... but I can't stand the hypocrisy anymore...

"Support the troops" means "sacrifice more Americans"...
"God is on our side" means "I don't care if the government lied..."
"Look, I am wearing a flag pin!" means "I don't have to do anything else!"
"I'm a Republican" means "My head is up my tailpipe and I don't have to pay attention!"

Is anybody paying attention??? Idahoans don't seem to give a rat's ass about our Congressmen and how they FAIL to support our veterans...

Good grief, Senator Larry Craig (formerly Chair of Veterans Affairs) was given consistently FAILING grades by various veterans' associations for the past ten years... did anybody notice?? NO! As long as he was a Republican, Idaho trusted him... as offensive as his betrayal to our veterans should have been, people supported him... until he started playing footsie in a mens' restroom!

And now... their President who shall only be spoken of in reverent tones (or one shall be not "supporting our troops" or is "unAmerican") has committed yet another betrayal to the men and women who are risking their lives for his war...

During the State of the Union, to thunderous applause, Bush fed out more BS to America by stating that:

"Our military families serve our nation,
they inspire our nation,
and tonight our nation honors them."

That would be wonderful... IF HE ACTUALLY MEANT IT!!

He said that in reference to his proposal to allow our military men and women the ability to transfer their unused educational benefits to their family members.

Does anybody care that he neglected to include it in the budget he sent to Congress? How about a press conference where he can explain this to America, okay?? (He can add it to his explanation of all of the lies, where is bin Laden, and how does he define "Mission Accomplished" today.)

May I suggest that you contact your representives and ask them "WTF?"

No, don't do that...
Just ask them if how they plan on addressing this issue... if at all.
If you are an Idahoan, you know you're just going through the motions... but do it anyway!! Save their response letter for their next campaign!

Winning the war? At what cost?

In a casual conversation the other day, a very sweet but very conservative gentleman commented that America needed to "win the war".

First of all, can someone tell me what we "win"? Is there a prize, a trophy, a ribbon that I don't know about?

Or is this about ego? Is this like the man who refuses to ask directions-- because he refuses to admit he's lost?

Are we banging our heads against the wall... in order to demolish the building... in order to say we cleared the lot for a new structure? What good is it to have a new structure after we've bashed our brains in for twenty years trying to remove the wall?

Just think, if the taxpayers in my congressional district (2-Rep. Mike Simpson) didn't spend our $206.6 million that we are instead spending on the Iraq War in FY2008, our district would be able to provide...

• 56,247 Idahoans with Health Care OR
• 171,088 Homes with Renewable Electricity OR
• 5,088 Public Safety Officers OR
• 3,920 Music and Arts Teachers OR
• 52,071 Scholarships for University Students OR
• 22 New Elementary Schools OR
• 1,903 Affordable Housing Units OR
• 131,142 Children with Health Care OR
• 23,974 Head Start Places for Children OR
• 3,920 Elementary School Teachers

This is our money... used for the war in Iraq. I guess Idaho doesn't have residents needing health care, children needing teachers or schools, young people needing help with tuition, or families needing affordable housing.

So... tell me... who's winning what here? And who is really paying for it?

A lot of talk, a lot of BS

Support the troops, support the troops, support the troops...

It's on bumper stickers and car magnets, t-shirts and hometown banners...

I even see it on corporate advertisements... "We Support The Troops!!!"

When certain individuals want to condemn me for my beliefs and opinions, one of the "bullets" they shoot me with is how THEY support the troops and I don't... (Of course, these are the same people who elect representatives like Larry Craig, Mike Simpson, and Mike Crapo (who SAY they support our veterans but have failed them miserably!) ...

And now this...

Army Suicides Highest in 26 Years

WASHINGTON -- Army soldiers committed suicide last year at the highest rate in 26 years, and more than a quarter did so while serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a new military report… Last year, "Iraq was the most common deployment location for both (suicides) and attempts," the report said.

Why Isn’t the Press on a Suicide Watch?

You’d never know that at least 3% of all American deaths in Iraq are due to self-inflicted wounds. And that doesn’t include the many vets who have killed themselves after returning home.

{Thank you, Caro from MakeThemAccountable.com, for sharing this...}

I won't hold my breath waiting for mainstream media to provide coverage... not when "Support the Troops" is such a popular bumper sticker... but doesn't really mean anything real to the average American... who seem to follow the mindset of Barbara Bush:

“Why should we hear about body bags and deaths and how many, what day it’s going to happen, and how many this or what do you suppose? Oh, I mean, it’s, not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?” (ABC/Good Morning America)

UPDATE 8/17/07

The Times-News (local Magic Valley regional daily paper) DID insert an AP article in today's issue. Section C, Page 6.

On one hand, KUDOS for publishing this article and informing Americans about the tragic and painful consequences experienced by our brave men and women for serving our country.

On the other hand, SECTION C?? PAGE 6?? Personally, I consider our military men and women and their issues a HUGE priority for America, considering we are AT WAR and they are risking and sacrificing their lives for our country. Put the four losers who murdered their friend in the back pages -- they are NOT worthy of front page news. Yes, they are also someone's loved ones, but they chose to rob and murder others rather than bravely serve our country. Who do YOU think deserves the front page?

My opinion: If it has to do with our troops, it needs to be on the front page. Every time. No matter what.

Dropping the ball in Idaho...

Letter to the Editor sent to Times-News, March 21, 2007 originally posted March 2007.

Representative Simpson recently stated that “We must continue to support the troops and provide them with the resources they need to do the job so they can return home safely.”

However, this week he joined other Republicans opposing a requirement for our troops to be properly prepared for their mission and protected with armor.

This shouldn’t be surprising considering his record of supporting veteran issues and concerns. In 2006, Simpson received a “C” from Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and a 66% rating from Disabled American Veterans. (He improved from 2003-2005--where he was rated ZERO each year.)

Senator Craig recently published a statement distancing himself from the Walter Reed situation. After reading it, one might conclude Craig is committed to veteran’s issues. It might be shocking to learn IAVA gives Craig a D- last year. DAV rated him 20% (2005 = 42%, 2004 = 0%). The Retired Enlisted Association also gave Craig a 0% rating for 2004.

Unfortunately, Senator Crapo repeats the pattern. In 2006, IAVA gave Crapo a D. Crapo followed Craig’s footsteps, earning the exact same scores from DAV during 2004-2006. Another repeat in 2004 with a 0% rating from TREA.

Idahoans need to ask themselves if this is acceptable. As our troops return from the Middle East, they will need our support. We cannot continue to slap happy yellow ribbons on our cars and claim we’ve have done our duty for our military. The Walter Reed situation proves that Americans have dropped the ball. We need to be involved, informed, and vigilant. We need to demand accountability from our representatives. If we fail that, we have failed our country and the men and women who so bravely and faithfully give so much of their lives in our name.

They deserve better from us.

Interesting poll at KMVT (local CBS affilliate)

Last night I checked our local media websites to see if there had been any coverage of our demonstration in front of Senator Crapo's office. Even though I had been told that a KMVT representative had briefly stopped by, there wasn't anything on their website.

However, I found the results of their poll VERY interesting--considering the red/conservative/"Bushie" mentality that pervades the Magic Valley...

QUESTION:
Do you agree with President Bush in commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby?

RESULTS:
Yes 26%
No 74%

Hmmmmmm.... even if people are afraid to publicly stand up and speak out, perhaps they are at least THINKING clearly! Now if we can only get them to speak up... Hey, Crapo/Simpson/Craig... are you listening???
The opinions expressed in this poll do not necessarily represent the collective views of our community, this station or its management.

Lead, follow, or get the f*** out of the way...

Across America, citizens are discussing the actions of the GOP representatives who must have fallen asleep last November and are still sleepwalking through legislation, blindly following the map of their dark prince and NOT listening to their constituents or making choices in the best interest of our military.

It started this morning over at DailyKos and continued after lunch... citizens who support the troops and have high expectations from our representatives... blogging all over the place!

Here in Idaho, Red State Rebels has linked to Idaho bloggers who are expressing their frustration with Mike Simpson's hypocrisy and poor record of supporting our military and our veterans.

Simpson conveniently issued a press release today, continuing his verbal commitment to fully fund the troops. Similar to his testimony before Congress on February 16, 2007, he reminds us:

"...the one thing we must not do is cut off funding for our troops. Americans will not stand for it as our Armed Servicemen and women deserve better.”

Idahoans, join me in reminding Rep. Simpson that the troops also deserve adequate armor and weaponry, responsible leadership from Congress, a defined mission and an EXIT PLAN, and appropriate resources when they come home!

Join me in reminding Simpson that as an elected Republican representative from the beginning of this war, he's had plenty of time and funding to provide for our troops and our veterans... and he's FAILED.

Join me in informing Simpson we will no longer allow him to continue representing Idaho like he has been. He needs to realize that America gave GOP four years to accomplish their mission in Iraq and they've failed to do so. This administration has failed our country and our military in oh-so-many ways...

Simpson's had his chance to lead... he now has two choices remaining... what's it going to be?

Mike Simpson does NOT support troops OR Veterans

March 21, 2007

Dear Representative Simpson,

“Supporting the troops” is more than a bumper-sticker phrase. It actually requires action which DO support our troops during and AFTER deployment.

On February 16, 2007, you expressed shame about congressional “posturing” and “hyperbole”. You stated that Congress owes honesty to their constituents and “to the men and women fighting this war.”

I agree, Congress owes honesty to all Americans. That is what we’ve been asking from you for years now: Honesty and accountability.

• Honesty about why we are in Iraq.
• Honesty about the mission, the plan, the exit strategy.
• Accountability to the military, to the generals, to the taxpayers, to the voters.
• Honesty and accountability about how well our troops are prepared.
• Honesty and accountability about their needs for armor, weapons, and troop numbers.
• Honesty and accountability regarding the private subcontractors providing supplies, etc.

You asked your “colleagues to put themselves in the positions of the thousands of soldiers on the ground in Iraq.” You were trying to make a point that criticism of the war is sending a “terrible message” to those “brave soldiers”.

What kind of message do you think our soldiers receive when they are lacking appropriate armor, weapons, training, and medical care? What kind of message do they receive when their food is spoiled and their water is contaminated? What kind of message did we send them with the Walter Reed situation? What kind of message do they receive when they needed more troops and were denied over and over and over again…until this pitiful, too little, too late “surge”?

In particular, you state that the two things that keep them going is the “thought of returning home” and the “knowledge that you are doing something to protect your nation from terrorism”.

How do you think they feel about returning home in a casket due to inadequate armor and exhausted, poorly trained, and limited troops? How do you think they feel about returning home and having to fight the bureaucracy for their benefits and medical care? How do you think they feel about returning home to shattered families due to their long seemingly unending absences after their third and fourth deployment? How do you think they feel when they are reminded that the 9/11 terrorists were from countries OTHER than Iraq and you played a “bait and switch” game with their lives and loyalty?

You then state that “While our brave military men and women are putting their lives on the line every day in Iraq to preserve our freedoms, Congress is debating a resolution designed to do nothing more than embarrass the President.”

Is THAT what you think this is about? Embarrassing the President? With all due respect, sir, but are you really this out of touch? The majority of Americans do NOT support this war or this administration. The majority of Americans believe they have been deceived about the purpose of the war in Iraq. The majority of Americans want our troops home as soon as possible because they do not believe there is any further purpose for them to stay and die in Iraq. This is NOT about the President. This is about our BRAVE SOLDIERS who need to be brought home—safely and quickly.

“I believe that we should be above playing politics with war. We must continue to support the troops and provide them with the resources they need to do the job so they can return home safely.”

Those are YOUR words, Mr. Simpson. You claim that you want to provide the troops with the resources they need to do the job.

Then PLEASE explain to your constituents why you were among the Republicans who opposed requiring that the troops sent to Iraq be properly prepared for their mission and protected with armor.

"As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They're not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time."

Rumsfeld's statement was UNACCEPTABLE in 2004 and it is even MORE UNACCEPTABLE today. As we are now entering the fifth year of this war and we are sending yet more troops into battle, you CANNOT allow us to send them without what they need to survive the fight!

In addition, I have learned that:

• In 2006, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave you a grade of C and you supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans only 66 percent of the time.
• In 2005, you received a ZERO rating from the Disabled American Veterans.
• In 2004, you also received a ZERO rating from the Disabled American Veterans. For that same year, on the votes that The Retired Enlisted Association considered to be the most important, you voted their preferred position ONLY 33 percent of the time.
• In 2003, on the votes that the Disabled American Veterans considered to be the most important, you voted their preferred position ZERO percent of the time and you received a 50 percent rating from American Veterans.

You moralize about congressional “posturing” and “hyperbole”. You cry out that Congress owes honesty to their constituents and “to the men and women fighting this war.”

As far as I can tell, you do not support our brave men and women while they are bravely serving our country nor do you support them after they return home to their families. Pretending otherwise as you lecture the Democrats is dishonest and hypocritcal.

Shame on YOU.

{FAXED to Twin Falls and DC office on Wednesday March 21, 2007 at 12:00pm. You can contact Rep. Simpson here.}

Abandoning the troops... isn't that a crime or something?

Why were so many people "shocked" about the Walter Reed situation under Republican leadership in the executive and legislative branches?

Because we're lazy and not paying attention.

Why do so many Americans stereotype the Republicans as being the party that supports the troops?

Because we're lazy and not paying attention.

Too many Americans are not doing their "homework" and are relying on "stereotypes" and assumptions.

This laziness is doing a HUGE disservice to the Americans who are risking and sacrificing their lives, their physical and mental health-- as well as the traumatic impact it has on their families during and after deployment.

To put it mildly, it is unpatriotic to consider this "acceptable".

To be blunt, it is treasonous.

Even AFTER the last election, where Americans attempted to get the message across to our elected officials that we wanted change, Republicans are still not getting it.

Ask yourself...

• Do you have a "Support the Troops" bumper sticker on your car?
• Do you ever say the words "I support the troops"?
• Do you have a child, parent, spouse, lover, friend, or neighbor who served in the military or is currently serving in the military?
• Do you vote?
• Do you pay taxes?
• Do you consider yourself a Christian?
• Do you consider yourself compassionate?
• Do you consider yourself a patriotic American?

If ANY of these apply to you, then you have an OBLIGATION to do the following (it will take much less time than an 18-month deployment, I promise!):

• Watch this video. (Come on, it's ONLY 30 seconds long, you can give that much time to our troops, can't you?)
• Check out the grades given to our Congressional representatives by the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. Don't just take a minute or two and just scan the last two columns (even though that alone will shock most people!)... but TAKE THE TIME to contact your own representative and either thank them for supporting our veterans... or demand an explanation! (One of my own state's senators was the head of Veteran's Affairs and HE received a D-!!)
• Find out which Republicans STILL unanimously opposed requiring that the troops sent to Iraq be properly prepared for their mission and protected with armor. {Idahoans, MIKE SIMPSON IS ON THIS LIST!!! Is this acceptable to you???} They say they "support" the troops and then they vote to kill them by continuing to vote unanimously to send unarmored, untrained, unrested (and even, Salon and the Hartford Courant tell us, wounded and mentally unstable) troops to Iraq. This is unacceptable to me and should be unacceptable to EVERY American no matter WHICH political party they belong to...

White House gambled, and lost, war in Iraq

Letter to the Editor: Times-News

White House gambled, and lost, war in Iraq

Americans must stop enabling this administration's addiction to gambling with America's human and financial resources. We've lost 3,024 American lives while spending $360 billion (that's billion with a "B") on this poorly planned and horribly managed war.

At some point, America must recognize this war as the money pit (and a body pit) that it is and call it a day. We may not have accomplished all that some wished, but there is nothing wrong with acknowledging that the goal of "winning" in Iraq is no longer in America's best interest.

America can no longer continue this gamble. We've experienced a horrific losing streak, our accounts are empty, and we're borrowing from our grandchildren (including borrowing their parents - some which will never be paid back). To continue gambling like this, to throw more of our Americans and our dollars into Iraq, is a desperation play.

Whether with chips or human lives, our country is headed for ruin if we don't wake up and start recovery here at home.

DIANA ROWE PAULS
Gooding
[Published January 18, 2007]

Speak up to Idahoans and our reps:

• Review the escalation tally and see what your representatives had to say
• Write the President and Congress plus MORE
  Letters to the Editor links (South Central Idaho)
  Letters to the Editor general links
• Forward an email to President Bush urging him turn away from this unwise escalation
• Stop the Escalation by contacting your representatives in Congress
• call them again today. Dial (800) 614-2803 to reach the Congressional switchboard and report back on what you learn by e-mailing StopTheEscalation@americanprogressaction.org.
• Please send this message to your Representatives: End War Funding, Begin War Investigations

NOTE: Mike Simpson is "Leaning toward Support" and Mike Crapo has "Refused to Answer". Both Sali and Craig are listed as supporting Bush. Maybe if Idahoans turn out in force and contact them, perhaps Simpson and Crapo may be influenced in making the right decision... I don't have ANY hope for Sali and big doubts for Craig, but it still wouldn't hurt to contact them as well. SAVE THEIR RESPONSES!

For Sale: Idaho

We know that we are in debt... Iraq, Katrina, etc., has immeasurably damaged our country financially in addition to the personal damage to our citizens. I recognize that sacrifices will need to be made in order to get America back into financial shape and stability.

But, as we enter another political season, with some repeat offenders representing us in Boise as well as in Washington DC, we need to remember that some politicians believe that selling off our public lands the answer to their problems.

Is this really in Idaho's best interest? And will we REALLY know what the money will be used for? National debt? Katrina? Iraq?

Simpson's plan seems to be in limbo now, but has it really gone away? Or will new deals be made? Can we trust Otter and Kempthorne to stand up and protect our lands? Simpson tried to sell his project by promising that the money is to be earmarked for "rural schools" --which appeals to many Idahoans considering our concerns about education. But we need to remember that the federal government has already failed to make the originally agreed-upon payments for prior land agreements! They've shown they can't be trusted to pay Idaho's children what they've promised... and we want them to sell our children's heritage? Is this worth it?

For those of us in the Magic Valley, did you know that one of the proposed sections for sale was "the 10,701-acre L-shaped tract [that] runs east from the Little Camas Reservoir and north to Anderson Ranch Reservoir, and then east again to Salix Creek 20 miles west of Fairfield." I can't find a current reference to this parcel, but it was listed at one time. Please don't support any project like this if you don't know which lands are being sold! Or you will end up mapping your future hunting/camping/fishing/etc. trips around private (second) homes and "No Trespassing" signs...

Here are some articles to read... become informed and speak up!
Winston-Salem Journal
Idaho Press-Tribune
Idaho Mountain Express
Western Democrat
New West
Stand Up and Oppose CIEDRA Wilderness Bill
More articles and postings...

Contact your representatives and tell them that Idaho is not for sale!
Write letters to the editor as well. Educate Idahoans about what our government has planned for our recreational lands!

We can't afford to take our eyes off the ball in this game, folks...

Buy Idaho Quick... before it's all sold off!

Thanks to our fellow Idahoans who supported Club For Growth's spokesman Sali, "Write the Check Out to" Simpson, "Put A Dollar In My Pants and I'll Dance For You" Otter, "Children are just little widgets" Luna, and "Let Me List Your Property" Jones, we can say "Goodbye" to the Idaho we've known and loved.

We are truly the best state money can buy...

This isn't an election... it's an INTERVENTION.

Can it be any more clear? Rep. Mike Simpson is an enabler to GOP incompetence... he ignores the crisis in Iraq, the economy, the debt, the health care and educational system, and the abuses of power by his friends DeLay and Foley. It's time for a change. It's time for Jim Hansen.

Mike the pimp?

It's been clearly obvious that our government, including Rep. Mike Simpson, is willing to sell the American people out to the highest bidder. They want to sell our wilderness, they want to sell our air and water quality, they want to sell our high-paying jobs to countries overseas (while ferociously protecting our minimum wage jobs from the "illegals"--gee, thanks!), and so on. They protect the interests of the huge corporations (pharmaceuticals, oil companies) while family farms and businesses wither on the vine. The government is more than willing to sell us out to those who are willing to pay for them.

Americans must demand change. We need to "fire" those who do not represent citizens but only represent the almighty dollar. The most effective way to do that is to evaluate our current representatives and determine whether they are working for Idaho or do they work to serve others.

For example, let's evaluate Representative Mike Simpson. At the GOP Auction House, I discovered some interesting facts about Rep. Simpson which stimulates some serious questions about whether he represents Idaho or whether he represents the Republican party:

What will Michael Simpson put on the Auction Block next?

HOW SIMPSON RESPONDS TO HIGH ENERGY PRICES

• Rep. Simpson voted against cracking down on the oil and gas industries price gouging.
• Rep. Simpson voted for the GOP energy bill that gave billions to oil, gas and nuclear industries.
• Big oil and gas industries have given Rep. Simpson $42,450. Any surprise?
  

REP. SIMPSON PUTS BIG BUSINESS AHEAD OF AMERICAN WORKERS

• Rep. Simpson voted to strip overtime protection from millions of workers.
• Rep. Simpson voted to allow federal loans to American companies that have escaped paying U.S. taxes by moving offshore.
  

GOP "HEALTH CARE"

• Big drug interests have given $4,250 to Simpson over the Representative's career. They know who their friends are.
• Rep. Simpson voted for the GOP Medicare Prescription Drug Bill that will give billions to businesses and the health care industry, while forcing seniors to accept annual increases in premiums and deductibles and a growing gap in coverage for the prescription drugs they buy.

TIES WITH THE GOP LEADERSHIP

• Simpson has taken $1,000 from House Majority Leader John Boehner.
• Simpson received $22,165 from House Majority Leader John Boehner's "Freedom Project" PAC.
• Simpson voted with President Bush 89% of the time.
• Simpson voted the GOP party line 95% of the time.
  

TIES WITH TOM DELAY AND JACK ABRAMOFF
Simpson has taken:

• $6,171 from Tom DeLay's ARMPAC.
• $1,000 from convicted DeLay associate Jack Abramoff.
  

With all of these ties to the DeLay/Abramoff mess, is it any surprise that Simpson has:

• Voted to weaken House ethics rules when DeLay proposed doing so as GOP Majority Leader.
• Voted with Tom DeLay 94% of the time (through 3/31/2006)
  

SUPPORTING OUR TROOPS

• Rep. Simpson voted to continue awarding contracts to Halliburton even if the Pentagon's own audit processes found that more than $100 million of their contractor's costs in Iraq were unreasonable. No surprise that Halliburton gave Simpson $3,000.
• Rep. Simpson opposed expanding access to the military's TRICARE health insurance program to thousands of Reservist and National Guard members, even though 20 percent of all Reservists do not have health insurance, and 40 percent of Reservists aged 19 to 35 lack health coverage.
• Rep. Simpson voted against granting a $1,500 bonus to every American service member serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, including National Guard and Reserve forces.

THE ENVIRONMENT

• 1,861 water systems in 29 states have been contaminated with MTBE, exposing as many as 45 million Americans to this potential carcinogen, but Rep. Simpson voted to protect the companies responsible from lawsuits by communities that need their help to clean up these systems.
• Rep. Simpson voted against bipartisan reform of the Endangered Species Act.
• Rep. Simpson voted for a massive sell off of public lands to mining interests.
  

HOW DOES SIMPSON SUPPORT...

HIGHER EDUCATION?
While tuition costs are rising for ordinary Americans, Rep. Simpson voted to cut Federal student aid by $12.7 billion -- the biggest such cuts in history.

STEM CELL RESEARCH?
Rep. Simpson sided with social conservatives against patients with debilitating diseases and voted against expanding Federal funding of stem cell research.

[Sources available at "What will Michael Simpson put on the Auction Block next?"]

How can someone who receives 80% of his money from OUT OF STATE honestly be able to represent the interests of Idaho?

Fortunately, Idaho has an alternative alternative with Jim Hansen. To start out with, Jim is ONLY accepting contributions UNDER $100. Yes, he has friends and family from out-of-state who are sending their $100 to Jim to support him because they believe in him, but I think that we can handle that much better than competing with a PAC sending thousands of dollars to a politician because they are purchasing a "service" (i.e. vote) from him. Most Idahoans cannot compete with PACS and thousand dollar contributions. Most of us can handle sending a donation under $100.

Check Jim out and ask yourself... who do YOU want in DC? Someone who works for out-of-state organizations or political parties... or someone who works for the people in Idaho?

Is "Staying The Course" in Idaho's best interest?

I wanted to write a letter explaining why I support Jim Hansen but while I was doing "research", I found a post written by Julie Fanselow on her political blog, "Red State Rebels" and she said it better than I could. Please take the necessary time to get to know what Jim stands for...and educate your friends, family, and neighbors. Can America really survive two more years of the "same"? "Staying the course" is just as unhealthy for how America's government is being run, as it is for the way the war in Iraq is being handled...

..."Conventional wisdom says Democrat Jim Hansen has no chance of beating GOP incumbent Mike Simpson, even in what's looking like a very Democratic year. I say: Let's prove conventional wisdom wrong.

Jim Hansen has run an amazing and inspirational grassroots campaign. In town after town across southern Idaho, he has shown up for lunch at the senior center and walked the halls of schools and hospitals, talking with thousands of Idahoans to learn what's on their minds. Sure, all politicians do a little bit of that, but for Jim, it's not "just politics," it's his passion. It's how he grew up, watching his Dad - Rep. Orval Hansen, a Republican who served 1968-1974 in Congress - travel from town to town and really listen to folks.

Jim tells the story of one man he met in southeast Idaho who is a lifelong Republican, but who will be voting Democrat this year because his son was killed in Iraq and he still doesn't know why we're there. He tells of people who say that they've never, ever seen the incumbent in their town. And that's the main reason we need to retire Mike Simpson: He has reached a point where he takes his constituents for granted, at best, and that's probably being charitable.

Jim Hansen is a man of his word, and a man who has refused to let money run his campaign. If he wins, he will have won on a principle of taking no money from PACS and capping individual donations at $100. What a message that would send to the rest of America - that seats in Congress need not go to the highest bidder.

Mike Simpson has been ruined by the toxic combination of power and money. This June 7 item from The Hill newspaper depicts a Mike Simpson who was "barely been able to contain his dislike" for Bill Sali, who had just won the Idaho 1st District GOP primary with 26% of the vote. "There’s a serious question about whether he can win the race," Simpson said, adding that the obstinate Sali made controversial conservative firebrand Helen Chenoweth-Hage look "like a dream." But within one week ... one week ... Simpson had endorsed Sali and sent him a $2,000 check. "I can tell you that Congressman Simpson is committed to keeping the majority in power," his spokeswoman told the Spokesman-Review.

At a fundraising concert and rally last night for Jim Hansen, someone onstage said "If Tom DeLay is the disease, Jim Hansen is the cure." Well, I'll take that a step farther: If Mike Simpson is the disease, Jim Hansen is the cure. Mike Simpson has been rising ever higher in GOP power circles. He's tight with John Boehner, who replaced DeLay, and who has come under scrutiny in everything from his ignorance of Mark Foley's inappropriate behavior toward pages to his ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Like too many Congressmen from both parties (but, let's face it, mainly from the GOP), he seems to increasingly have an attitude that he is above the law. That's about as far away from "conservative" as you can get.
There is going to be some long-overdue House cleaning this fall. Shouldn't Idaho have a hand in it? Let's do our part by retiring Mike Simpson and sending Jim Hansen to represent real change and true Idaho values in Congress.

Click here to learn more about Jim, and here to donate to his campaign via my ActBlue page."

I want to also include a reference to one of the comments, from Elizabeth:

So many of us complain about money in politics and corruption in DC, but the most many of us are willing to do is vote. That leaves the rest of the process in the hands of the wealthy and corporate interests. We need to exert our ownership over the process, but that also includes responsibilities that extend beyond the voting booth.
...
Jim is the real deal, and his self-imposed campaign contribution limits show that. The Party isn't too happy about his position, because it is in opposition to the status quo for fundraising. The more the merrier.
Jim is providing an opportunity for average people to participate in the campaign process in a meaningful and powerful way. I wish he could speak personally to every voter as there would be no question who would win the election.
...
Here is a letter to the editor I sent to the Statesman. They've confirmed the letter but it hasn't been published yet.

"Mike Simpson says his campaign donors “philosophically agree” with him on the issues. Does that mean Simpson is in philosophical agreement with donors such as convicted felon Jack Abramoff or his former coworkers at DC lobbying firm Cassidy & Associates, Laura Neal and Lawrence Grossman? Do Simpson’s contributors represent his values?

According to the FEC, the majority, over 76%, of Simpson's campaign money comes from PAC and corporate contributions. Top donors include those from Cassidy & Associates and from Cavarocchi, Ruscio, Dennis Associates, another lobby group with ties to Abramoff.

Only 18% of individual contributions are from Idahoans, representing 7% of the total dollar amount. Of that 7%, nearly 60% is from Idaho Power executives. Does this mean that Simpson has more in common, philosophically, with corporations and lobbyists than ordinary Idaho citizens?

It’s clear that corruption is rampant in national politics, and Idaho’s representatives are not insulated. Craig and Otter have also been beneficiaries of the Abramoff cartel’s largesse.

Why the good, hard working people of Idaho would find this acceptable is beyond me. While elected Republicans claim to share the values and beliefs of Idaho citizens, it’s clear their hands and hearts lie elsewhere. Vote for change in November."

Additional posts:
Mike Simpson says pork is a constitutional right
Republican Congressman Mike Simpson sent out a "Dear Colleague" letter ... In his letter, Simpson vigorously defended the practice of congressional ... Simpson went on to say that earmarking was fiscally conservative and that in fact, ...
mike simpson: protector of idaho
when will people start to realize that this land, the land in question in this bill, is their land? visit it or not, its ours! mike simpson can't decide to sell it, it is not his. the whole damn congress shouldn't have that power. when ...
hey, mike, who's turf are you standing up for?
"we are getting more authoritative," said rep. mike simpson (r-idaho), an appropriations committee member who behind closed doors ... that last quote is from the same mike simpson who insisted that pork projects are a constitutional right.
Jim represents Idaho citizens, not PACS
We also need to be aware of the 2nd Congressional District race between Representative Mike Simpson and Jim Hansen.

What Republican's think of Bill Sali (R)

Bummer! Doesn't include U.S. Representative Mike Simpson's(R) threat to throw Sali out a third-floor window at the statehouse!

Mike Simpson: Protector of Idaho

Just surfing around and I discovered this comment on another blog in reference to Mike Simpson and his Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act of 2004:

The bill looks to me to be no more than a land give-a-way to County seats that may then turn around and sell each block conveyance to interested private parties for development.

When will people start to realize that this land, the land in question in this bill, is their land? Visit it or not, its ours! Mike Simpson can't decide to sell it, it is not his. The whole damn Congress shouldn't have that power. When we elect folks who make it plain that they intend to take what is ours and give it away at the first opportunity we jeopardize our future and our legacy.

This is not a party problem, and it is not a problem with the political system if you ask me. Plain and simple it is a personal problem. Americans are lazy bastards it's true, but imagine how angry any one of us would get should Mike Simpson come along and give away a chunkk of anyone's back yard? Not my back yard!

Is their no indignation over such foolhardiness because the Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act of 2004 doesn't contain a provision for back yards in Boise?

So, while Idahoans expect our public servants to understand and respect our way of life and to protect our interests, Simpson focuses on raping and pillaging our natural resources?

Hey, Mike, who's turf are you standing up for?

Posted at Townhall.com:

The Washington Post this morning has a piece about the power of the Congressional Appropriators, led on the House side by Jerry Lewis:

Twice last month, Lewis and his committee nearly derailed high-profile legislation, first forcing GOP leaders to pull their 2007 budget blueprint from House debate and then bringing consideration of a major lobbying and ethics bill to a halt Thursday. Only after House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) pleaded, saying that his reputation was at stake, did committee members allow the lobbying bill to proceed to a vote, now scheduled for tomorrow.

Those actions are underscoring a political truism often uttered by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.): Congress has three political parties -- Republicans, Democrats and appropriators. Traditionally, the appropriations committees in both chambers of Congress have operated with bipartisan comity and an independent streak. GOP leaders tried to rein them in after the Republican takeover in 1994, but Lewis in recent weeks has emerged as a force, reasserting his panel's independence.

"We are getting more authoritative," said Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), an Appropriations Committee member who behind closed doors spoke vociferously against the lobbying bill, which he thought unfairly singled out the panel. "We are standing up for our turf."

That last quote is from the same Mike Simpson who insisted that pork projects are a Constitutional right.

Mike Simpson says pork is a constitutional right

Posted at Townhall.com:

...Republican Congressman Mike Simpson sent out a "Dear Colleague" letter entitled "The Other Side of Earmarking." In his letter, Simpson vigorously defended the practice of congressional earmarking, asserting that to not allow earmarking would be to defy the Constitution. Simpson went on to say that earmarking was fiscally conservative and that in fact, it cuts the growth of government spending.

Yesterday, Arizona Congressman Jeff Flake sent out his own "Dear Colleague" which took issue with Simpson's position.

In reference to Simpson's claim that earmarking is Constitutional, Flake points out that James Madison, the architect of the Constitution, vetoed the first ever attempt to include earmarks in a spending bill in 1817 saying that earmarking was not an enumerated power of Congress.

Flake goes on to point out that rather than curtailing the growth of federal spending, as Simpson claims, earmarking has been responsible for ballooning costs associated with spending bills, most notoriously in last years pork-laden Transportation bill.

Flake's entire letter is worth a read. So is Simpson's, if only to understand the still predominant warped mindset of too many in Congress.

After what I've been learning about who contributes to Simpson, I shouldn't be surprised that he is strongly fighting for the right to approve pork projects. He must EARN those dollars, you know.

I think it's time for a change... let's send Jim Hansen to DC so we can have a representative who has Idaho citizens and our needs in mind... rather than sending someone owned by PACS and corporations.

Simpson: Support Bush investigation or explain why not...

I went to Progressive Democrats of America to send a letter to my House Represenative in Idaho (Simpson).

"Please co-sponsor and support H.Res.635, which will create a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, and retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment.

If you are unable or unwilling to co-sponsor and support this resolution, I would appreciate a response explaining your reasoning."

I will post his response... if I get one.

More crawly things under rocks...

Thanks, Alan, for posting this at MREater...

Sunday, March 12, 2006
Craig linked to Duke Cunningham

The Idaho Statesman reported on Friday, and again in more detail on Sunday, how Larry Craig received $43,500 from Brent Wilkes, who bribed Duke Cunningham.

Craig at first insisted that he had done nothing wrong, but Dan Popkey continued to dig and found that two days after Wilkes's staffers visited Craig, Craig introduced an amendment that would have directed a $3 million contract to Wilkes's company. Craig later decided to give the campaign contributions to charity. So, if he did nothing wrong, why did he give up the donation?

On Sunday, the Statesman also reported about flights on corporate jets taken by Sen Crapo, and by two SUVs leases by Rep Simpson at taxpayer expense.

The Statesman didn't dig up any dirt on Rep Otter. I tried to link to the article, but couldn't find it online.

Read the complete article at the Idaho Statesman--talk about flip-flop and coincidence!

I found a website that is doing a "Senator-Watch"... so far, none of Idaho's esteemed gentlemen are listed but it wouldn't hurt to keep an eye out!