Al Gore

Guilty Until Proven Innocent In The Age Of Obama

You know it's bad when your liberal allies in the mainstream media reject your ideas (Atlantic Wire). That's the case with the White House and the Democrat National Committee right now, who can't even get CBS to buy into their allegation that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and some conservative groups are taking foreign money to "buy" the midterm elections (see Media Research Center). The DNC has put out an ad to that affect, even calling certain conservatives and the GOP unpatriotic. The Chamber of Commerce unpatriotic? The irony is stunning, coming from the party of Charlie Trie, Al Gore's "no controlling legal authority," and the Obama campaign's anonymous millions from gift card donations, not to mention forced labor union dues from Big Labor. It proves the axiom that when the left accuses you of something, it usually means they've done it themselves (and are tyring to divert attention from real issues). also is in this game with its own echo television spot. This from the group that takes uncountable sums from the likes of George Soros and the same left who accuses anyone of disagreeing with them as questioning  their patriotism. Even the New York Times has disproven the charge. No matter to the White House, which now includes the Chamber of Commerce, once a health care ally, on its enemies list.

For the left, then, it's about control. Whether through a leviathan government or through intimidation, the left wants absolute conformity. When Bob Schieffer of CBS confronted Obama henchman David Axelrod  about whether he had any evidence of the foreign money allegation, Axelrod snapped chillingly:

Do you have any evidence that it's not?

So, in the Age of Obama, it's guilty until proven innocent! The proof? An allegation, and any allegation will do. Especially when you're desperate.

An incredulous Bob Schieffer can't believe the shear gall from the president's chief of enforcement.

While "Waiting For Superman" Is A Hit, Virginians Still Wait For School Choice

We've said it before and we'll say it again: school choice is coming to Virginia. The questions that remain are "When?" and "How?" There is no "if." In fact, it's not just The Family Foundation (and the public via polls) in support of school choice. It's the mainstream media and Hollywood!

Last Sunday, CBS' 60 Minutes aired a piece on the SEED school in Washington, D.C. SEED, an urban public boarding school similar to charter school initiatives, first opened its doors in 1998. It immediately gave inner city students a chance at educational success that they normally would never think to dream. In a community that normally graduates only 33 percent of its high school students, 97 percent of SEED graduates are accepted into college. Due to its overwhelming success, SEED began another school in Maryland and is working with Ohio and New Jersey to begin schools in those states.

 Sewing SEEDs of education and opportunity: 60 Minutes spotlights a success government-run schools couldn't replicate with all the tax payer money in the world.

In fact, SEED has been so undeniably successfully, it has been heralded by the Obama administration as a "true success story." Even another notoriously liberal institution — Hollywood, of all places — has noticed: The directors of Al Gore's climate change conspiracy film, An Inconvenient Truth, have produced a documentary entitled Waiting for Superman (see Variety review) in which an underprivileged student hopes to win a drawing for a slot at SEED in order to get the opportunity for academic success — and a change in life. Waiting for Superman received the Audience Award for Best U.S. Documentary in this year’s Sundance Film Festival and will be released in theaters this fall. See the trailer below:

A Washington, D.C. student waits for Superman. Virginians still wait for even modest education choice.

As SEED clearly demonstrates, contrary to testimony and liberal senators' reactions in the Senate Finance Committee this past General Assembly (if you haven't yet, you must see this, click here), the benefits of school choice cross racial, socio-economic and political party lines. School choice is the obvious solution for many families. Why has Virginia waited so long to adopt this common sense approach?

This past session, Delegate Jimmie Massie (R-72, Henrico) introduced a bill (HB 599) that would have created a tax credit for businesses and individuals that donate to scholarship funds for children attending K-12. Carefully designed to be fiscally neutral to the Virginia and fiscally positive to localities, this bill would have created a way out of failing schools for low-income families. In partnership with Delegate Massie, The Family Foundation will work this summer to build an even broader coalition of support for school choice initiatives and will once again push for educational freedom next session.

The 60 Minutes segment and Waiting For Superman prove an undeniable truth about human nature: The young naturally are curious and want to learn. Unfortunately, there's a counterbalancing truth as well: Government wants to control and, to that end, provides obstacles to freedom — and its people suffer.

George W. Bush's Solicitor General, Ted Olson, Files Federal Lawsuit To Legalize Same-Sex Marriage

That's right. Ted Olson, who led George W. Bush's legal team in the aftermath of the 2000 election, when Democrat Al Gore tried to steal Florida's vote from the then-Texas governor, and who was successful in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore, has filed a lawsuit in federal court, citing the 14th Amendment, that would strike down each state and federal law and state constitutional amendment banning homosexual marriage. President Bush then named him U.S. Solicitor General, the top litigator at the Justice Department. Olson's legal teammate now is David Boies, Gore's lawyer during the attempted electoral heist. Mr. Olson certainly is entitled to his opinions, but he is more than slightly arrogant and presumtious when he says this, according to the New York Daily News:

"It's not about liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. We're here in part to symbolize that. This case is about the equal rights guaranteed to every American under the United States constitution," said Olson, a prominent Republican.

Olson said he asked Boies, a Democrat, to join his team to present 'a united front' . ..."

Let's make one thing clear: Mr. Olson doesn't speak for all Republicans. He and Mr. Boies, don't speak for all Democrats. In 2006, Virginia voters ratified the Marriage Amendment with 57 percent of the vote. Neither U.S. Senate candidate that year got more than 50 percent. A significant amount of Democrats, including a large percentage of black and Hispanic voters, who voted in most cases for the Democrat senate candidate, cast their ballots for the Marriage Amendment. California's Marriage Amendment last year carried that state with 52 percent of the vote, but large blocs of black and Hispanic voters put the amendment over the top while simultaneously voting for Barack Obama (who, by the way, supports traditional, one-man one-woman marriage).

Just because two elite lawyers get together and create a great photo op based on their previous history, doesn't mean they are unifying two factions. In fact, they are doing quite the opposite. He is correct in one regard, though: this has "nothing to do with liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat." But it has nothing to do with "equal rights," either, and everything to do with special rights. Says the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins:

"The members of Congress who wrote that Amendment in 1866, and the state legislators who ratified it, could not possibly have envisioned or intended such an application, nor can anything in the Amendment be construed to imply such a 'right.'"

But what's really incomprehensible is Mr. Olson's sudden disregard for  states' rights and federalism, something Mr. Olson apparently stood for when he was solicitor general. Since this issue is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, it is not a federal issue. Why he thinks that concept, for which he has fought his entire career, doesn't now apply is puzzling to say the least.

However, there is one paradoxical angle here that should give us reason for optimism: Many homosexual activists don't agree with the lawsuit because a loss in federal court could be a swift, solitary blow to any legal action for years. While that thought may sound reassuring, however, we are sure if Mr. Olson and Mr. Boies fail, others certainly will find another angle. This is only one battle in what certainly now will be a long, protracted cultural war,  where the weapon of choice will be lawyers.