Northup For Congress?

Mitch McConnell Hates Kentucky

2008-08-06T15:39:00.000-07:00

http://pitchmitchinaditch.blogspot.com

Anne Northup's Unanimous Endorsement

2007-05-21T03:34:00.000-07:00

Anne Northup's most recent ad for the Republican primary touts "all of Kentucky's largest newspapers unanimously endorse Anne Northup for Governor."

It'd be great if it weren't a lie. The paper she plays up most, the Advocate Messenger, is a Danville paper with a circulation of 10,506 daily and 11,561 Sunday. She fails to mention the LEO, which has a circulation of 38,000, which endorsed Billy Harper. The LEO stated, "We seriously considered endorsing Anne Northup, primarily because of her experience in government and, well, she’s not the scandal-plagued, mildly bigoted compulsive liar that Fletcher is. But she declined our invitation for a sit-down, not just once but throughout three weeks of daily phone and e-mail prodding. Her people finally decided she could give us an interview after we had already put two issues of governor’s race coverage out there."

It should be noted that the Courier Journal also received no response from her, but endorsed her anyway.

Yarmuth for Congress -- A REALITY!!!

2006-11-07T18:25:00.000-08:00

Anne Northup has conceded the race. Despite the best smear efforts of her campaign and the Republican machine, and tons more money, John's message got out and he won the campaign.

Congratulations to John and to Louisville for picking someone who thinks for himself.

Vote Vote Vote Vote Vote

2006-11-06T20:18:00.000-08:00

Year after year people complain that they don't like who is running and because of that, they don't vote.

Well, if you don't like the way things are going these days, vote out the incumbents. and vote for change.

Vote Yarmuth for Congress. Or vote the candidate of your choice.

Just vote!

Comments for Mr. Dicken

2006-11-06T03:48:00.000-08:00

Someone named Jim Dicken seems to take issue with comments made on this website. I'll attempt to address those.

John Kerry is an elitist? Perhaps. But let's not forget that George Bush comes from the same sort of background as Kerry and from a mother who seemed to think Katrina victims were doing pretty well for themselves in the Astrodome.

It seems as though there are questions about Kerry and Bush's discharges. Kerry served and got shot at. Bush served and did shots. There is a difference.

Osama didn't make the war in Iraq. George Bush did, and he failed. You can't spin it any other way. We've been lied to and his own comments are often in conflict with what his people on the ground have said. Bush can't even remember the dozens of times he said, "Stay the Course", and then blames the media for having the audacity for finding them and playing them.

As for 9/11, yes.... we fear death. Our enemy does not. That means that you can't win the war by picking them off one by one. You need different tactics. Bush doesn't understand this.

The fact is, Bush cut and ran from the real war on terror post 9/11. Rather than commit to Afghanistan, even when he had Osama Bin Laden surrounded, he got distracted with a war in Iraq whose real motives have YET to be made clear.

As for your criticisms about John Yarmuth, I would argue that these same accusations could be leveled at your beloved George Bush. His entire career was built on his family name and fortune, and his own business career was checkered with failures. John Yarmuth started a successful FREE newspaper, which isn't easy to do, and has an active and fertile mind, something that Anne Northup doesn't appear to have.

He also has been noted by people with completely opposite views to be a man of honesty and integrity. Given the smears that Anne goes to every campaign, I can't help but think Anne's own honesty and integrity is less important to her than winning.

It's time for a change. I'm voting for Yarmuth.

The Kerry Flap -- Don't Believe the Hype

2006-11-02T04:12:00.000-08:00

Republicans, looking for any scrap of dirt they can hurl at candidates this election, chose to pick John Kerry's comments to some college students and blow it completely out of proportion, knowing that if they bitch long enough and loud enough, the So Called Liberal Media will help them run with the ball.

Does ANYONE really think that Kerry's comments were more than a botched joke?

After all, John Kerry, despite the vicious smear campaign leveled against him by Swift Boat Captains For Slander, served in the military with distinction, getting wounded, and winning medals. He served his country and understood what it was like to fight in a pointless war.

George Bush served his country valiantly too, keeping Texas safe from the Viet Cong and ensuring that bars were able to stay in business during that difficult time. He even ensured our safety by not showing up for duty for awhile.

Kerry's joke was a stretch. But let's face it, John Kerry is to humor what Mark Foley is to the Boy Scouts.

What Kerry said appears to me to be in direct reference to George Bush's own embracing of his own poor track record as a student. This is the guy who said, "To those of you who've recieved honors, awards and distinctions, I say well done, and to the C students... I say, you too can be President of the United States."

If I were the Democrats, I would admonish Kerry for the joke, but point out that this administration, made up of NUMEROUS PEOPLE WHO NEVER SAW BATTLE, waves the flag at the same time they're cutting benefits for troops, sending them into battle with inadequate supplies and troop counts, and went into Iraq without paying any attention to the numerous experts who HAD served who told them it was a mistake, including George Bush's own father. Who is more disrespectful? A guy who botched a joke, or a guy who is responsible for misleading us into a war that killed thousands of our troops and maimed thousands more?

Don't believe the hype. A stupid comment by John Kerry is nothing more than a stupid comment by John Kerry. Republicans got us into the mess in Iraq and they're not going to do anything to get us out.

Vote Democrat!

Last Debate -- Winner Yarmuth?

2006-11-02T03:51:00.000-08:00

Okay, I realize picking a winner in a debate is like picking a winner in your nose. It's all in the eye of the beholder.

Here are my thoughts....

Yes it's rude, but the camera was not kind to Ms. Northup, who looked like she just stepped out of a Mary Kay free trial.

Yarmuth could use an eyebrow trimming.

W Ed Parker could use a specific or two.

Donna Mancini looks like she's been using a bud or two of the marijuana.

In watching the debate I have to say that Anne lost handily. Her criticisms of Yarmuth were easily batted aside (because they were patently false). She was so nervous or ill prepared that she kept referring to her notes, screwing up the main points she was trying to make, referring to the attacks of November 11th and talking about John Yarmuth's wanting to take the phrase "under God" out of the Constitution, which of course is not true. She broke the debate rules in her closing. She said "we have two bridges that are right on the verge of being in full construction". Wow, that's like almost pregnant, isn't it? "We have a VA hospital that we're about to purchase land. We're about to go forward." Running again on two incomplete projects.

Yarmuth was nervous as well, but stayed on message and looked at the camera when speaking, not his notes.

What I find most telling about the debate is that Anne Northup, when she had the chance to question any candidate, chose Donna Mancini, who spent the entire debate looking like a sedated deer in headlights. If she's got so many issues with John Yarmuth, why not address him, since he's your main opponent. The reason? She knows that she can't win a debate one on one and that her issues with him are all things she took out of context to try and use against him.

Top 10 Things Anne Northup Will Soon Be Taking Credit For

2006-10-30T08:02:00.000-08:00

The article below appeared in the CJ today. It appears that there are a few people upset with Annie taking credit for Waterfront Park.

To help Anne, let me find 10 more things she can take credit for:

10) Stimulated the local film and video community by shooting numerous commercials for myself.
9) Promoted free speech, no matter how vile, by brining attention to that awful liberal rag, LEO weekly.
8) Unwittingly revived the career of Diffrent Strokes actor Todd Bridges by saying bridges 13,289 times during my campaign.
7) Allowed that annoyingly partisan group the NAACP to garner some attention for itself by not showing up at their debate.
6) Came back strong after a difficult time recently. By that, I mean my inability to fundraise.
5) Never once pointed out that my opponent isn't a Christian.
4) Showed the value of hard work by always showing myself with my head buried in papers. Signing those special interest checks can wear a person out, but it's worth it.
3) Helped accelerate the funding of the VA hospital in Louisville by making sure there were enough soldiers getting maimed in Iraq to support the need.
2) I never took any campaign contributions from John Mark Karr, Saddam Hussein, Michael Jackson, or Charles Manson. I think. Those contributor databases are huge. Let me get back to you.
1) Demonstrated that in America, it is truly possible for ANYONE to get elected.

Northup ad 'undercutting' non-profit 'success story'

We object to Rep. Anne Northup's use of Waterfront Park to score political points. By posting self-serving billboards proclaiming her "support" for Waterfront Park, she is undercutting this remarkable non-profit and non-partisan community success story. This wonderful park is not her creation, but rather the product of a 20-year coalition that has engaged countless generous corporations, foundations and individuals in making what was once a dream a reality.

Anne Northup tastelessly tries to take election year advantage of Waterfront Park. To the extent that federal dollars have helped the project, we should recognize that these come not from Northup but from all of us who are taxpayers, regardless of political party. Numerous other dedicated public servants and civic leaders, including state and local officials, have played vital roles in building Waterfront Park. Although many have run for election -- including Mayor Jerry Abramson and former Mayor David Armstrong -- none has had the audacity to post billboards seeking political gain from Waterfront Park.

By politicizing this extraordinary community project, Northup shows disrespect for all those donors of every political persuasion and from every walk of life who have contributed so selflessly to Waterfront Park.

ORME WILSON

OWSLEY BROWN II

CHRISTINA LEE BROWN

ELEANOR BINGHAM MILLER

WADE HOUSTON

NANA LAMPTON

Louisville

Northup attacks Yarmuth's Wealth -- Hypocrisy?

2006-10-26T20:17:00.000-07:00

Below is an article about the wealth of both candidates running for the 3rd district. As Anne attacks Yarmuth's making big bucks on his restaurants, maybe we should consider the fact that Anne and her husband are worth even MORE money than John. And I'm guessing that some of those investments she has are in companies that pay at least a few employees $5.15 an hour.

Northup's, Yarmuth's wealth reflects trend
Candidates outline financial assets
By Kay Stewart
kstewart@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

By Kay Stewart
kstewart@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

Third District congressional candidates Anne Northup and John Yarmuth disagree on most issues, but they have at least one thing in common: They are among the richest 1 percent of Americans.

They also are apparently the two wealthiest candidates for a U.S. House seat in Kentucky.

The five-term Republican congresswoman and her Democratic challenger each had more than $1 million in family income last year, according to their personal financial-disclosure reports.

Their wealth reflects a growing trend of millionaire House members and candidates, said Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

Millionaires in Congress are "not unusual at all," he said, adding, "People don't care." He said voters focus instead on issues important to them, such as the Iraq war and the economy.

Northup, 58, listed assets of at least $4.4 million, including her husband's radio supply business, by far the biggest source of the family's income.

Yarmuth, 58, who sold his 40 percent ownership in the weekly newspaper LEO in 2003, reported at least $2.68 million in assets, primarily in two businesses operated by his brothers, including a chain of barbecue restaurants that provided him with nearly all of his income.

Northup and Yarmuth will face each other in the Nov. 7 election to represent nearly all of Jefferson County, where median household income is $46,755.

Mary Gant, a retired teacher and board member of the Kentucky and Louisville chapters of the League of Women Voters, said it's unfortunate if a lack of money keeps talented people from office, but she added that candidates shouldn't be judged on their financial status.

"Integrity is more important," she said.

But Alex Knott, a political editor at the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington-based watchdog organization, argues that the trend is troubling because as the number of millionaires in Congress increases, "what you get at the end of the day is a lot of rich people who are out of touch with the financial needs of most Americans."

Yarmuth acknowledges that he would have a tougher time launching a campaign if he did not have personal wealth. He said he will lend up to $350,000 of his own money to his campaign. Campaign laws stipulate that if he exceeds that amount, Northup could accept individual contributions of $4,200, double the federal limit of $2,100.

Northup, who raised $3.3 million two years ago, and her husband, Robert "Woody" Northup, each will donate the individual limit of $2,100 to her campaign, said Terry Carmack, her chief of staff.

Different views on money
While the two candidates have similar financial standing, Yarmuth said they are far apart on issues related to wealth, from personal investment ethics to tax cuts.

Northup supports making tax cuts permanent, Yarmuth said, while he opposes tax cuts for the richest Americans. She opposes raising the $5.15-an-hour minimum wage; he favors an increase. And while she favors eliminating estate taxes, he says estates valued from $3 million to $5 million and up should be taxed because of the record national debt.

"She votes for every tax policy that favors herself, and I vote for ones that don't favor me," said Yarmuth, who spent $40,000 in tax cut benefits he received on his sale of LEO three years ago running television ads denouncing the tax cuts.

If he wins the election, Yarmuth has pledged to donate his congressional salary -- which would be $168,500 next year -- to local charity.

Northup declined to be interviewed about her personal financial statement, but Carmack said the candidates' disagreement over taxes and other economic issues reflects their backgrounds.

"What the Northups have is the result of years and years of hard work, and what John Yarmuth has appears to be the result of a multimillion-dollar inheritance. That's a big difference," Carmack said.

Northup believes the way to cut the national debt and to grow the economy is through lower taxes, Carmack said, adding that "voters will have a clear choice."

Yarmuth declined to say how much money he inherited after the 1975 death of his father, Stanley Yarmuth, a founder of the conglomerate National Industries, which was later sold.

He said his grandfather, Samuel Klein, a civic leader and wealthy banker, and his mother bequeathed bank stock to him over the years -- it's now BB&T stock valued from $500,000 up to $1 million on his report.

Yarmuth said the vast majority of his wealth comes from three businesses -- LEO, and the two others operated by his brothers. "My two brothers and I worked very hard to build successful companies that had nothing to do with inheritance," he said.

His two largest assets, listed in the financial report as being valued from $1 million to $5 million each, are a 150-restaurant chain, Sonny's, based in Orlando, Fla., and operated by Robert Yarmuth, and Almost Family, a home-health-care company based in Louisville and headed by William Yarmuth.

John Yarmuth reported income of at least $1 million from the restaurant chain and a total of $6,600 in earned income from television commentary.

Northup's earned income last year was $155,709, her congressional salary, while dividends from her husband's company, Radio Sound Inc., which supplies radios to Harley-Davidson Motorcycles, brought in at least $1 million. His salary was not required or listed in the report.

She listed stocks in some 70 diverse companies, including oil companies Exxon Mobil and Chevron Texaco, pharmaceutical giants Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, and Pfizer; and communications corporations Time Warner and Viacom.

Yarmuth said he believes her holdings present conflicts "when she is casting votes that directly affect companies she has substantial interests in." Citing her listing of Exxon Mobil stock valued at a minimum of $50,000, he said that she voted for an energy bill that provided subsidies and tax breaks for oil companies.

Yarmuth said if he's elected he would divest himself of holdings that could mean a personal gain for him if he voted on an issue, including his 70,000 shares of Almost Family stock. The restaurant chain is privately owned, but he said he would consider ways to avoid conflicts, including a blind trust.

Carmack said stocks listed on Northup's report, the vast majority of which are owned by her husband or by the couple jointly, have not influenced her votes or violated ethics rules. He said that she has opposed legislation favored by banking and pharmaceutical interests, among holdings on her report.

And he said Yarmuth can't completely distance himself from his family's home-health-care business, which is affected by federal legislation. "That's impossible," Carmack said.

A 'unique' benefit
Under House ethics rules, members of Congress are to recuse themselves from voting on legislation if it provides them with a "unique" benefit, said Jan Witold Baron, a Washington, D.C., election law and ethics lawyer.

But he said that since legislation that affects companies typically affects all shareholders, members of Congress aren't required to recuse themselves when their votes could affect their own stock values -- and rarely do.

The recently filed reports do not list residential real estate holdings or mortgages, but Northup's home on Lexington Road is assessed for tax purposes at $302,260, and Yarmuth's home on Nitta Yuma Drive is assessed at $666,230, according to county property tax records.

Northup's husband also owns a home on a golf course near Naples, Fla., that he purchased four years ago for $2.35 million, according to Collier County, Fla., property tax records.

And Yarmuth said he has deposited $300,000 on residential investment property on a golf course in Ireland. He declined to give the purchase price but said he will have a mortgage after the sale is completed.

Reporter Kay Stewart can be reached at (502) 582-4114.

DICK! -- Torture is Okay

2006-10-26T19:54:00.000-07:00

Anne Northup's second favorite guy feels that it's okay to torture suspects to get information. Here's a quote from his interview with Scott Hennen.

Q Would you agree a dunk in water is a no-brainer if it can save lives?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: It's a no-brainer for me, but for a while there, I was criticized as being the Vice President "for torture." We don't torture. That's not what we're involved in. We live up to our obligations in international treaties that we're party to and so forth. But the fact is, you can have a fairly robust interrogation program without torture, and we need to be able to do that.

And thanks to the leadership of the President now, and the action of the Congress, we have that authority, and we are able to continue to program.

It's nice to hear torture turned into a euphemism of "robust interrogation", as though it were some really good Folgers coffee. It's obvious that for Bush, Dick, and supporters like Annie Northup, the real goal of our "War on Terror" is not to get information to stop attacks, but to enact a global version of the movie Death Wish where we beat the crap out of anyone who may threaten us and have the believe that they'll gave under pressure and tell us everything we need to know. Now I love the show 24 like the next guy, but experts will tell you that a lamp wire to the privates or a simulated drowning is just as likely to get someone to tell you anything to make the torture stop as it is to give you information you can use.

We should be looking for intelligence. But I guess that if we can't find any in Washington, we sure aren't going to be able to find it in other parts of the world.

This is why Anne Northup, Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the corrupt "Stay the Course" bums need to be kicked out and we need to bring in fresh people who actually WILL work toward national security.

Northup On Rumsfeld -- Hey Anne, What Took You So Long?

2006-10-26T19:37:00.000-07:00

Some are calling Anne Northup's request for Rumsfeld to resign a shameless political move to pander to some votes she might be losing and to show she isn't always in Bush's corner.

Personally, I like to hope she sees what many of us have seen for years. Rumsfeld is an arrogant, small minded man with an ego fourteen times the size of his intellect who cares nothing about the men and women who are dying in Iraq. He got us into a war that cannot be won. He is the most vile person in an administration full of them. He ignored intelligence, he ignored advice from people with much more experience and savvy than him, and he continues to ignore reality.

So I agree with Anne. He should be tossed out on his butt, and soon, before 100s more soldiers die and we still find ourselves having to leave Iraq with nothing "won".

Compassionate Conservatives

2006-10-26T19:19:00.000-07:00

That fat, drug addicted, mouthpiece for Anne Northup and George Bush, Rush Limbaugh decides to attack Michael J Fox over yet another Republican non-issue in stem cell research. Because Republicans feel that it is better to toss embryos than let research happen on them, they feel it's okay to attack a beloved actor and champion for a cure to a horrible disease. Is this what Jesus would do?

This is the guy that these ultra conservatives love: a bloated sad sack windbag who apparently was so troubled with his own rhetoric that he got addicted to hillbilly heroin.

Enough is enough. It's time for real discussion of issues and concern for people by politicians with IQ's higher than their waist size.

VA Hospital shows Anne's committment to what?

2006-10-23T04:09:00.000-07:00

Anne keeps touting her plans for a new VA hospital, hoping to show how loyal she is to her troups. But take a look at what the Disabled American Veterans are saying about her at VoteSmart.org. She's a big fat ZERO!

Top 10 October Surprises Awaiting John Yarmuth's Campaign from Anne Northup

2006-10-22T10:44:00.000-07:00

You just know that Annie is saving up something to run in the last two weeks of the campaign. I did some digging on my own and I would like to suggest Anne use these scandalous items in the final weeks.

10) "John Yarmuth" played backwards at half speed underwater on a record player sounds suspiciously like the Arabic phrase for cross dressing terrorist.
9) John often takes a penny, but seldom leaves a penny at convenience store cash registers.
8) John is actually the one who shot JR.
7) The liberal Yarmuth believes it is okay for cats and dogs to sleep together.
6) John loves watching thespians work.
5) There are numerous accounts of John masticating in several local restaurants, and even at home in front of his kids.
4) John once defenistrated from an open window.
3) John went through the express lane of his local Kroger two items over the limit.
2) The unkind Yarmuth returned tapes to Blockbuster 14 times in ten years without them being rewound, resulting in numerous fines.
1) Yarmuth is responsible for the shortage of Elmo TMX dolls at local retailers.

Annie Northup -- Yarmuth should be criticized for benefiting from something I support

2006-10-20T03:54:00.000-07:00

Annie's latest attack ad (note.... still no recent ads telling us what she's going to do or where she stands that weren't paid for by special interests) criticizes John Yarmuth for saying he believes we should raise the minimum wage when he profits from a restaurant chain that pays its employees minimum wage.

Yarmuth has countered that the restaurants he personally owns pay the higher minimum wage in Florida and that any restaurants paying lower are franchise owners who are free to pay the prevailing wage.

The tone of the ad seems to say is that Annie believes Yarmuth shouldn't profit from the minimum wage. But what Annie "Hey, I'm still olympic champion Mary T's sister" Northup doesn't say is that she is all for $5.15 an hour and thinks that if it is raised, it should be in conjunction with tax cuts for businesses. In other words, she thinks it is perfectly okay for businesses to pay a poverty wage and make lots of money doing so unless they're owned by John Yarmuth.

Lost in all of this is that Anne's got more money than John, and one would have to guess that her investments and personal profits were gained in some part by people who will make less in a lifetime than Anne spends in a couple of weeks on attack ads.

Northup Exposure -- Fighting fire with humor

2006-10-19T19:38:00.000-07:00

Anne Northup gets what she deserves in the Northup Exposure, John Yarmuth's humorous but factual account of Anne's record.

Visit it today. Let's get it the national attention it deserves.

Maybe it's better that Anne didn't hear from the big Dick

2006-10-19T19:33:00.000-07:00

Anne Northup was left out during a recent Republican fundraiser at a Prospect home. Reading the article below, maybe Anne should count her blessings. I'm sure that Anne, in her desire to continue supporting Bush's secret war on the Constitution, believes that the Executive branch should be able to do whatever the hell it pleases. Thank goodness there is a judge who feels otherwise.

I'm guessing they'll accuse the judge of legislating from the bench. Doesn't he realize that's the job of Bush/Dick?

Judge orders Cheney visitor logs opened By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 11 minutes ago

A federal judge has ordered the Bush administration to release information about who visited Vice President Dick Cheney's office and personal residence, an order that could spark a late election-season debate over lobbyists' White House access.

While researching the access lobbyists and others had on the White House, The Washington Post asked in June for two years of White House visitor logs. The Secret Service refused to process the request, which government attorneys called "a fishing expedition into the most sensitive details of the vice presidency."

U.S. District Judge Ricardo M. Urbina said Wednesday that, by the end of next week, the Secret Service must produce the records or at least identity them and justify why they are being withheld.

The Secret Service can still try to withhold the records but, in a written ruling Thursday, Urbina questioned the agency's primary argument — that the logs are protected by Cheney's right to executive privilege.

Republicans have suffered a spate of bad news lately. Ohio Rep. Bob Ney (news, bio, voting record) pleaded guilty in the Jack Abramoff lobbying investigation, Florida Rep. Mark Foley (news, bio, voting record) resigned after reports of his sexually explicit Internet conversations with teenage House pages, and the FBI intensified its corruption investigation into Pennsylvania Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting record).

If Cheney's visitor logs show meetings with lobbyists, releasing them just weeks before Election Day could provide ammunition to Democrats.

"The political price is very high," said L. Sandy Maisel, director of the Goldfarb Center for Public Affairs at Colby College. "Even more than that, Cheney has a vested interest in keeping them out of public eye at a time when people will pay attention to them. After the election, they will pay much less attention."

The newspaper sought logs for anyone visiting Cheney, his legal counsel, chief spokesman and other top aides and advisers.

The Secret Service had no comment on the ruling Thursday. In court documents, government attorneys said releasing the documents would infringe on Cheney's ability to seek advice.

"This case is about protecting the effective functioning of the vice presidency under the Constitution," attorneys wrote.

A lawsuit over similar records revealed last month that Republican activists Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed — key figures in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal — landed more than 100 meetings inside the Bush White House.

The Post cited those records, which were released to the Democratic Party and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, as evidence that the documents should be released.

Close to 3 weeks later, still no NorthupRecord.com

2006-10-16T03:52:00.000-07:00

Anne released a new old attack ad in the past day or so that again attacks John Yarmuth for Social Security, SUVs, taking Under God out of the pledge, and doubling the payroll tax. Rather than give you another repeat of what I've already said about Anne's misrepresentation of these issues, I'll just point out that her campaign registered TheNorthupRecord.com and has yet to put a single thing up on it.

If you can't stand on your own positions, why not falsely attack those of your opponent?

Anne supported Veterans Benefits in the 2004 campaign. But now..... NO COMMENT!

2006-10-15T10:57:00.000-07:00

A recent article in the CJ details how the new VA Enrollment policy means many veterans will lose their VA health benefits.

All you need to know about Anne Northup is in the quote below:

U.S. Rep. Anne Northup, a Republican who has been championing Louisville's new VA hospital, had no comment on the enrollment policy, except to say, "our office would be glad to work with veterans on a case-by-case basis regarding VA medical care."

Good work Anne, rather than investigate the issue and do something for all the men and women who were brave enough to fight for the country, you say you'll deal with it on a case by case basis. Which, in my experience, means you'll reply with a form letter that doesn't address the issue.

Why is it that just two short years ago she was touting how she would take care of Veterans in her campaign website:

Veterans Affairs

As President Calvin Coolidge once said, "The Nation which forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten."

America's veterans understand the truest type of patriotism and selflessness that comes with defending freedom. The commitments of the nation's men and women in uniform have often meant spending long months away from loved ones, executing dangerous missions, and placing a higher priority on the country's safety than on their own lives. Millions of Americans have performed their military duty quietly and all too often without enough recognition. Anne thinks it is only appropriate that veteran heroes are honored, since they have ensured the freedom that their fellow citizens enjoy.Anne Northup believes that because veterans have made sacrifices of the highest order, this country has a duty to take care of them -- particularly those who have suffered long-term physical or mental disabilities as a result of their service.

Congresswoman Northup has been a member of the Veterans Affairs / Housing and Urban Development (VA-HUD) subcommittee since 1999, which oversees the annual budget for the Veterans Administration (VA) and allocates funding for various veterans programs. Through her position on the subcommittee, Anne has led improvements to health care and other services for veterans in Kentucky and across the country.

Of particular interest to local veterans is the availability and accessibility of quality healthcare right here in our community. During her first year serving on the VA-HUD Subcommittee, there were indications that mental health services would be moved to Lexington, KY. Recognizing the unfairness in requiring Louisville veterans to travel to Lexington to receive those services, Northup included language in a bill that directed the VA to keep mental health services in our community. In the same measure, Anne included language that encouraged the VA to establish a new Veterans Outpatient Clinic in Louisville at a location that is nearer to many Louisville veterans than the VA hospital on Zorn Avenue. After several years of steady persuasion and a specific appropriation, a VA clinic opened in Shively.

Moreover, Congresswoman Northup has personally worked on countless veterans' casework issues; persuaded the VA to approve the use of an expensive but effective medicine to help cure veterans with Hepatitis C; and worked to ensure the renewal of a federal grant for Interlink Counseling's homeless-to-work veterans program.

In addition, since Anne has been a member of the VA-HUD subcommittee, she has voted for appropriations that have increased funding for veterans nursing care by a figure that is larger than any proposal made by the Clinton Administration. Since 1997, Northup voted to increase overall funding for veterans benefits by more than 20 percent. More specifically, over the past several years Northup has supported an annual increase of $1 billion in health care benefits for veterans.

This year, Anne supported the U.S. House of Representatives' budget plan, which includes an increase of $2.8 billion in funding to enable the VA to provide care to more than 5 million veterans. This funding will also allow the VA to begin six additional major construction projects on facilities that are vital to the VA's future. Furthermore, the VA will provide care to almost 300,000 veterans with serious mental illness and to an estimated 60,000 homeless veterans. The VA will spend an additional $3.6 billion for veterans in need of various types of long-term care.

In the post-September 11 climate, every American citizen should renew his or her commitment to the values of the nation -- liberty and democracy. In doing so, the national community will remember that veterans, who put their lives on the line for the nation's values, have earned the community's support in their retirement years. As the daughter of a World War II veteran, and as the Congressional representative for over 70,000 veterans who call Louisville home, Anne is especially committed to America's veterans. Congresswoman Northup has and will continue to work to ensure that Congress is dedicated to providing the support for veterans that they deserve.

The Republican-led 107th U.S. Congress has done tremendous work for the nation's veterans. Click here to read about some of the legislation Anne supported that helps veterans in Kentucky's Third District and across the country.

CJ article on the Yarmuth Northup Race. My comments in BOLD>

2006-10-15T08:07:00.000-07:00

My comments in bold on Northup's comments on the race in today's Courier Journal.

Northup, Yarmuth claim different turf
Choices are distinct in 3rd District House race

By Kay Stewart
kstewart@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

To Vincent Walker, the difference between Anne Northup and John Yarmuth is readily apparent, even if he's not sure which one will get his vote.

"It's clear that you've got two distinct choices to make," said Walker, 44, a senior vice president at JPMorgan Chase.

Northup, the five-term Republican incumbent in the 3rd Congressional District, and Yarmuth, founder and former editor of the weekly alternative newspaper LEO, disagree on just about every major political issue -- the Iraq War, education, tax cuts, Social Security and raising the minimum wage.

Donna Walker Mancini of the Libertarian Party and W. Ed Parker of the Constitution Party also are seeking the seat.

With 23 days before the Nov. 7 election, the Northup and Yarmuth campaigns are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars hammering home their opposing themes in attack ads.

Yarmuth portrays Northup as a rubber-stamp for President Bush's unpopular policies, and Northup, while citing local projects she has helped fund, criticizes Yarmuth for liberal opinions he's expressed in public appearances and in newspaper columns.

Yarmuth says Northup "is a big part" of national policies that have made the economy great for big corporations and millionaires, but not so great for working-class people. He says 90 percent of Americans haven't achieved a higher economic status in the past five years.

"I believe government has a role in making lives better for everyone. … Conservatives don't believe that government has a role in changing social and economic outcomes," Yarmuth said.

Northup says Yarmuth "thinks the government is the first, best answer to every single problem we have in this country." And Anne thinks the government is the first best answer for the people of Iraq at the expense of the people here at home.

She argues that the economy is strong, with the number of jobs and incomes rising, and says that's largely the result of 2003 tax cut legislation she supported that was passed by Congress. Yes, a tax cut wiped out by rising interest rates and rising gas prices that inflate the price of everything.
She's called Yarmuth a "tax and spend" liberal with "extreme" positions on a variety of subjects, including Social Security and the minimum wage, positions she says he's shifted to a more moderate stance now that he's a candidate for Congress. Yes Anne, he's a writer of opinions. You know, like Rush Limbaugh, only smart. That means that occasionally he'll raise ideas that are radical to spur thought on the matter. That doesn't mean that as a representative he'll adhere completely to those ideas.

Yarmuth claims she's misinterpreted his words or taken them out of context. Read my blog further to see how.

In one exchange about minimum wage at a debate Friday, Northup said Yarmuth wanted a "living wage" at $10 an hour, based on a proposal of 2006 legislative initiatives posted on the Web site of an organization he founded, the Center for Kentucky Progress. She said that would cause an economic "crisis." But she doesn't say how. And she doesn't explain why the mininum wage is still so low.

Yarmuth countered that he was for working toward that goal, and said in an interview he favored raising the $5.15 minimum hourly wage to $7 over the next two years.

Northup says her position on the powerful Appropriations Committee would not be filled by Yarmuth if he were elected, noting that those seats are granted based on seniority.

Yarmuth said if Democrats take back control of the U.S. House, as he believes they will, he'll have more influence than Northup would.

Yarmuth the'liberal progressive'
Yarmuth, the founder of the weekly newspaper LEO, where he wrote an estimated 800 columns over 15 years, says he takes a "liberal progressive position" on most issues.

He was opposed from the start to the Iraq war. He favors national health care coverage and raising the minimum wage, and is against tax cuts for the richest Americans.

If elected, Yarmuth said health care, the Iraq war, national security and funding education would top his national priority list.

Yarmuth said he believes expanding businesses in Louisville's West End, keeping jobs in Louisville and funding the two new bridges across the Ohio River are the top local concerns.

Northup the conservative
Northup, who favors making across-the-board tax cuts permanent, opposes raising the minimum wage without corresponding tax relief and believes that the United States needs to stay the course in Iraq.

Special-interest groups ranking Northup's voting record paint her as solidly conservative. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, for example, gives her a 93 out of 100, while the League of Conservation Voters gives her a zero.

Northup cites her priorities as winning the war on terrorism, keeping the economy strong, making the country less dependent on foreign oil and closing national borders to illegal immigrants. And yet she criticizes John Yarmuth for having ideas on how to address dependence on foreign oil.

Locally, she says completing two new bridges across the Ohio River, building a new veterans hospital and continued enhancement of the waterfront, including a pedestrian Big Four Bridge, top her list. Again, future projects. What have you done for me lately?

Iraq war
The Iraq war, which Yarmuth called the "dark cloud" over the race, is a prime example of their opposing views.

Yarmuth wants America to get out of Iraq, beginning immediately, with some troops remaining in the region in case they need to be deployed.

Citing recent national intelligence reports that say the U.S. presence is inciting insurgents and that violence will worsen, Yarmuth said: "Nobody has been calling the shots for the U.S. and Iraq right at any juncture in the last 3 1/2 years."

There is just as much reason to assume things will get better if Americans leave than if they stay, he said, adding, "It's the provocative nature of our presence that everybody says has made things worse."

Northup, who supported the invasion of Iraq, said there have been mistakes, citing bad U.S. intelligence on deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. While she said Saddam is not linked to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, he is linked to terrorism and "we went to war against terrorists." So there's no connection but there is? She knows that this statement is false, but figures misleading is better than telling the truth.

She says intelligence reports don't conclude things would improve if the United States leaves. The mission to bring stability and democracy to Iraq is vital to national security, she maintains, adding that a U.S. departure now would allow terrorists to refinance, increase recruits and training and attack America again.

"We will not win the war on terror unless we are on offense and we go after these guys," she said. So essentially, the 583rd position of the Republicans on Iraq is that now it's a Roach Motel for terrorists. We'll bait 'em into the lawless hellhole and then kill 'em.

Safe borders
Northup said she supports closing the borders to illegal immigration, which would improve national security, by building a fence on the Mexican border and increasing electronic surveillance.

Until the border is secured, she said, she's not willing to consider immigration reform measures such as amnesty and worker-guest programs for illegal immigrants.

If I can't keep a neighbor's kid out of my 1/4 acre yard, how does a fence spanning the length of our southern border do it? Besides, who is going to keep the damned thing painted?

Yarmuth said he agrees the borders need to be closed for security and that employers who hire illegal immigrants should be stopped. But he said a guest-worker program for the roughly 12 million illegal immigrants in the country should be addressed at the same time.

Northup said immigration is an example of times when she has opposed President Bush, whose proposals include a worker-guest program along with closing the border with Mexico. So Anne is against the many fine Mexican restaurants we have here in Louisville? My fajitas are at stake here!

Northup also said she supports importing cheaper prescription drugs from other countries, which Bush opposes. And she favors offshore oil drilling near Florida, in opposition to the president.

Energy
On America's energy problems, Northup said that long term, she supports energy conservation measures but in the short haul she supports expanding oil and natural gas exploration by drilling in both the Gulf of Mexico and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

While she said that could be done safely and would make gasoline cheaper, Yarmuth called the approach a "Band Aid" that would not adequately address the short-term problem and would be detrimental to the environment.

Reporter Kay Stewart can be reached at (502) 582-4114.

Context is everything... unless you're trying to mislead voters like Anne Northup

2006-10-10T18:46:00.000-07:00

Anne Northup has spent her entire campaign harping on two issues she says Yarmuth supports. A gas tax and a payroll tax.

Her website has the video of "Yarmuth Calling for Doubling the Payroll Tax."

Problem is that the video doesn't have Yarmuth saying that. It has him talking about how doubling the tax could make Medicare solvent. It's an idea to address a growing problem. Anne Northup and her Republican brethren believe in bigger government with no way to pay for it. But Anne doesn't believe in fixing problems, she believes in easy answers that leave the world a mess for future generations.

The other video is the one I mentioned previously. Again, its an idea to help lessen our dependence on foreign oil.

Can't Anne come up with something new, like ideas of her own?

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice -- Axis of Clueless

2006-10-10T03:27:00.000-07:00

Feel safer these days? A few short years after Bush proclaimed that Iraq, Iran, and North Korea were an Axis of Evil (never mind that at least two of the countries hated each other), what has Anne Northup's good buddy done?

A war in Iraq that has a large chunk of our military bogged down and worn out.

Refused to do much in the form of diplomacy to stem the creation of nuclear weapons by Iran and North Korea, two countries who posed a far greater threat than Iraq.

Feel safer? In the coming days, Bush and the Republicans will posture that because of these threats, we need "tough leaders". So far their strategy of saying whatever pops into their head and hoping the rest of the world falls in line hasn't worked. It's time for people who can balance the need to get tough with the need to have discussions and work for diplomatic solutions.

Bush has failed miserably domestically and abroad. No matter how many times he tells you otherwise, the reality is slowly sinking in

Anne Northup's Republican Apologists on the Foley Scandal -- He's been Punked!

2006-10-09T18:55:00.000-07:00

The aftermath of the Foley scandal has been sickly amusing. The party that criticizes the victim mentality among minorities starts calling themselves victims, even when they "accept the blame".

Take Hastert. Please. He blames the media and Clinton. In a sense, he's correct. Wasn't it the party of conservative values and a Talibanesque FCC who gave us months of hearings about misused cigars and semen stained dresses, and talked about the tremendous abuses of office by a powerful man taking advantage of a young girl?

Rush Limbaugh and a female caller last week blamed the kid, saying "he knew what he was doing". I guess he seduced Foley, who just couldn't resist the siren song of the boy's IMs.

But the worst is the new belief that this whole scandal was essentially a prank by teenage pages. Sounds completely plausible. After all, what teenage boy hasn't pretended to be a homosexual and exchanged pornographic messages with a man more than twice his age so that they could share them with the entire country?

Who thinks it is a prank? Great conservative pundits like James Dobson, Matt Drudge, and Michael Savage.

Ridiculing minors who are sexually abused. Guess that's what Anne Northup means when she talks about the values she and her party support.

Another day, another Northup attack ad....

2006-10-09T16:07:00.000-07:00

Anne continues her attacks on John Yarmuth's positions while not telling us her own. This time she uses the flip-flop card, calling John out for claiming he didn't make certain statements.

According to the Courier-Journal (a paper that Anne regularly dismisses, unless she needs to use it for her ads):

Yarmuth said he had mentioned in his comments at the debate that he wanted to double only the Medicare portion of the tax, which is 1.45percent. That would expand Medicare coverage to everyone and end private health insurance and its premium costs.

He said yesterday that the doubling of the tax would cost taxpayers on average about $600 a year, not the $2,600 a year Northup's campaign claims. He said their use of the quote and figure was a deliberate distortion.

In other words, he has an idea beyond Anne's belief that we can keep putting in less than we take out and somehow make the numbers work out right.

As for John's quote about gas tax, the heavily edited blurry video on the ad appears to have John saying "The single most significant thing I could do as a member of Congress would be to try to promote a tax on larger engines."

Again, this is a quote with no context. Without context, it sounds like this is the first thing John wants to do if elected. But it was delivered at a March forum of the Coalition for the Advancement of Regional Transportation. And as I've pointed out earlier, this is not without precident. The existing Gas Guzzler tax on cars does not apply to trucks and SUVs. John's merely suggesting closing a loophole that might force automakers and consumers to start paying attention to fuel mileage and keep us from having to depend on foreign oil from terrorist breeding grounds. Wonder why she has a problem with that.

He says her ads

are far-fetched

By Kay Stewart

kstewart@courier-journal.com

The Courier-Journal

Democratic congressional candidate John Yarmuth says in a new campaign ad that Republican claims about his positions are as far-fetched as him playing golf with Saddam Hussein or snatching toys from youngsters.

Yarmuth aired the new ad on major stations and cable yesterday to rebut claims made by U.S. Rep. Anne Northup, R-3rd, that he has taken positions favoring legalizing marijuana, lowering the drinking age and abolishing Social Security.

He also accused Northup of dodging "the real issues."

Last week, Northup held a press conference and ran ads quoting excerpts from columns Yarmuth wrote for LEO, an alternative weekly newspaper he founded, and from comments he's made at public appearances. She said those quotes show that some of Yarmuth's positions were "goofy."

Yesterday, Yarmuth's campaign struck back, accusing Northup in an e-mail to supporters of abandoning "truth and logic."

He denied saying one of the quotes Northup's camp attributed to him from a primary debate: that by "doubling the employee payroll tax, and the employer contribution, that we can make Medicare solvent into the foreseeable future."

But Northup's campaign manager, Patrick Neely, produced a video yesterday showing Yarmuth making the statement, which was an issue in the Democratic primary campaign. And the congresswoman's campaign said it had accurately reflected Yarmuth's positions on that and other issues.

Yarmuth said he had mentioned in his comments at the debate that he wanted to double only the Medicare portion of the tax, which is 1.45percent. That would expand Medicare coverage to everyone and end private health insurance and its premium costs.

He said yesterday that the doubling of the tax would cost taxpayers on average about $600 a year, not the $2,600 a year Northup's campaign claims. He said their use of the quote and figure was a deliberate distortion.

Yarmuth also said he didn't recall advocating a tax on "large engines" in SUVs and pickup trucks, another claim in Northup's ad. But Neely produced another videotape from a March forum of the Coalition for the Advancement of Regional Transportation. Yarmuth said: "The single most significant thing I could do as a member of Congress would be to try to promote a tax on larger engines."

Yarmuth said in the interview that at some point, a surcharge on vehicles that get around 12 miles per gallon might be feasible, with the tax proceeds used for incentives to encourage people to buy high-mileage vehicles.

Jason Burke, Yarmuth's campaign manager, said other statements made by Northup about Yarmuth's positions from his LEO columns are either out of context, draw inaccurate conclusions or are no longer relevant because they were made years ago.

Neely, however, said Northup stands by the accuracy of the ad. Yarmuth's "words are what we used in the ad and they are clear," he said.

At one point in Yarmuth's new ad, a picture of Northup with President Bush flashes on the screen, as the voiceover says: "The fact is Northup and Bush have failed our country, and we need to make a change."

Northup, the ad says, "won't discuss the real issues. In fact, she won't discuss issues at all."

It concludes with Yarmuth saying: "We can't change Washington unless we change the people we send there."

Reporter Kay Stewart can be reached at (502) 582-4114.
Edition: METRO
Section: News
Page: 1B

Dateline: louisville, ky
Copyright (c) The Courier-Journal. All rights reserved. Reproduced with the permission of Gannett Co., Inc. by NewsBank, inc.
Record Number: lou34842507

OpenURL Article Bookmark (right click, and copy the link location):

See Anne's record on TheNorthupRecord.com

2006-10-09T04:12:00.000-07:00

If you go to thenorthuprecord.com, which her campaign recently registered, you can see how impressive her record actually is.

What's that? There's nothing there?

Exactly!

Anne Northup AWOL from NAACP debate

2006-10-09T04:05:00.000-07:00

Northup criticized in absentia at debate
NAACP gives her 'F' on voting record

By Kay Stewart
kstewart@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

With Republican U.S. Rep. Anne Northup absent to attend a family dinner, her Democratic opponent, John Yarmuth, told a debate audience last night that Northup for too long has avoided discussing issues relevant to the African-American community.

"As you can see tonight," he said, "she continues to avoid discussing the issues of relevance to African Americans."

Yarmuth was joined by Libertarian candidate Donna Mancini and Constitution Party candidate W. Ed Parker at the 3rd Congressional District debate at Meyzeek Middle School.

About 180 people attended the event, which was sponsored by several organizations including the Louisville branch of the NAACP, the Louisville Urban League and the Interdenominational Ministerial Coalition.

Northup, who is scheduled to participate in several debates with her Democratic challenger this month, said last week that she had a conflicting dinner and can't attend every event, preferring those that address the broadest topics.

The NAACP gave Northup a grade of "F" based on her voting record, and copies of that rating were handed out.

Raoul Cunningham, president of the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, moderated the debate and cited that grade in his opening remarks, adding, "We're nonpartisan."

Patrick Neely, Northup's campaign manager, said last night that "Northup has deep and long-lasting ties to the African-American community. She's been honored to serve them, and we believe the African-American community knows the difference between a partisan rally and thoughtful representation."

In response to questions posed by a panel, Yarmuth said that if elected he'll work for universal health-care coverage and raising the minimum wage. He said he thought the federal No Child Left Behind legislation needed to be scrapped or revised because it wasn't living up to its name.

He received applause several times, including for his observation that 90 percent of Americans have not had their economic well-being increase while corporate profits have risen to record levels in recent years.

Mancini, 55, a registered dietitian, said she believed in less government and that "people should keep their own money and run their own life."

Parker, 82, said he's "studied the present Congress" and concluded that "all of us here are better qualified," adding, "We have a corrupt Congress."

All three spoke against the Iraq war.

Yarmuth said the chances of "accomplishing anything good" are small, and he favors withdrawing troops beginning immediately.

Mancini said all troops worldwide should come home, and Parker, a World War II Navy pilot, said he was fighting "for my country -- not somebody else's."

Vicky Layne, 36, a teacher at Englehard Elementary School, declined to say who she would vote for but expressed disappointment Northup did not attend. "That said a lot," she said.

Layne said she agreed with the candidates that the No Child Left Behind Law has drawbacks and said she was concerned about the Iraq war.

Delquan Dorsey, 32, a member of the NAACP and a community organizer for the Center for Neighborhoods, a nonprofit group, said he was concerned about lagging educational achievement among minorities and the poor and the Bush administration's attitude on the Iraq war.

Although Northup has secured funds for programs in the African-American community, he said her votes on policies "go another way."

Twins Adwin and Ayana Lowry, 13, students at Meyzeek, said they are following the election and that they will urge their parents to vote for Northup. Ayana said Northup has visited their church, New Zion Baptist, adding, "She's done a lot for our community."

Reporter Kay Stewart can be reached at (502) 582-4114.

Frankenstein's Monster Spreads Fear

2006-10-09T03:49:00.000-07:00

If the late great Phil Hartman hadn't been killed by his wife in a senseless act of gun violence, I could see him doing a great Dick Cheney impression. All he'd have to do is reprise his impression of Frankenstein's monster and add a few words. I'd suggest, "fear", "death", "destruction", "Democrats bad" and "trust me."

If Cheney's living in this much fear, it's no wonder he's had 73 heart attacks and has a face that looks like he's trying to birth quintuplets through his nostrils.

This is the type of person Anne supports. Irrational and fear mongering.

The return of the grim speaker
Cheney is back with doom speech casting Democrats as danger to security
By Peter Baker
The Washington Post

Updated: 7:28 a.m. ET Oct 8, 2006
MILWAUKEE - Vice President Cheney sometimes starts speeches with a Ronald Reagan quotation about a "happy" nation needing "hope and faith." But not much happy talk follows. Not a lot of hope, either. He does, though, talk about the prospect of "mass death in the United States."

The not-so-happy warrior of the past two campaign cycles is back on the road delivering a grim message about danger, defeatism and the stakes of the coming election. If it is not a joyful exercise, it is at least a relentless one. Even with poll ratings lower than President Bush's, Cheney has become a more ubiquitous presence on the campaign trail than in the last midterm election.

He takes on not only the traditional vice presidential assignment of slicing up the opposition but also the Cassandra role of warning about dire threats to the nation's security. While others get distracted by Capitol Hill scandal, Cheney remains focused on the terrorists, who are, as he says in his stump speech, "still lethal, still desperately trying to hit us again." Bush, he says, is "protecting America" while the Democrats advocate "reckless" policies that add up to a "strategy of resignation and defeatism in the face of determined enemies."

But the message is carefully targeted. More than half of Cheney's fundraisers in this two-year cycle have been behind closed doors. Even at a lunchtime speech to Wisconsin Republican donors that was open to reporters, gubernatorial candidate Rep. Mark Green did not stand on stage, ensuring no pictures of the two together on the news, and some other Republican candidates did not attend at all.

Rallying the party faithful
That is okay with the White House, which at a perilous moment is counting on Cheney's under-the-radar campaign to rally the base, not the broader public. "The fact that he's willing to go after Democrats as harshly as the Democrats are going after the White House gets the party faithful going," said GOP strategist Glen Bolger.

It happens to inflame the Democratic faithful as well, and party strategists consider him a prime target for their own pitch to voters. "When he threatens Democrats and calls them names, it's something that really fires up our base," said John Lapp, executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's independent expenditure program.

Cheney's fundraising visits often end up as fodder for opponents of those he tries to help. "Dick Cheney, Big Oil and Big Drug Companies Threw Curt Weldon a secret Washington thank you party," reads a Democratic brochure targeting the Republican Pennsylvania congressman. "And we got stuck with the bill."

The campaign comes at a pivotal moment for Cheney. His influence within the administration is widely perceived to be waning as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's star rises. The president in his second term has adopted a more diplomatic approach to problems such as Iran and North Korea than insiders believe would be to Cheney's liking. And as the 2008 presidential sweepstakes heat up, he will be the first vice president in a generation not to be seeking a promotion, leaving him on the sidelines of the most important national discussion.

Champion of conservatives
But White House aides said it would be a mistake to underestimate Cheney even now. Although he is viewed favorably by just 34 percent of the public in the most recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll, he remains a champion of conservatives at a time when the right has been angry at Bush over issues such as deficit spending and immigration. So Cheney's mission is to bring home core Republican voters when they are needed most.

"He's a good carrier of the Republican message," said Michigan GOP Chairman Saul Anuzis, noting that a Cheney visit to Grand Rapids last month raised between $750,000 and $1 million, a record for western Michigan. "He exudes a confidence. He makes you feel good and comfortable that he's vice president of the country."

Cheney's job is "a lot of volume, a lot of what we call McFundraisers," GOP lobbyist Ed Rogers said. Cheney has headlined 111 fundraisers so far in this two-year cycle, bringing in more than $39 million and already surpassing his total of 106 events for the entire 2002 cycle. Cheney is also regularly dispatched to conservative radio shows hosted by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham. He takes the shots the White House does not want Bush to take or wants to test out first. When Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.) was defeated by antiwar challenger Ned Lamont in a primary, Cheney called reporters to say the result would encourage "al-Qaeda types" who want "to break the will of the American people."

Out here on the hustings, Cheney does not come across as the most natural campaigner. A Cheney speech does not draw its audience to its feet. It plods through an argument that is more sobering than inspiring. He delivers even red-meat lines in a flat monotone, sounding more like a chief executive reporting to shareholders than a politician issuing a call to action.

The vice president, though, goes after Democrats by name in a way Bush rarely does, including Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), Rep. John P. Murtha (Pa.) and party Chairman Howard Dean. At a fundraiser in Sarasota, Fla., last week, he also singled out Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.), John D. Rockefeller IV (W.Va.) and Reps. John Conyers (Mich.), Henry A. Waxman (Calif.) and Barney Frank (Mass.).

He talks mainly about terrorism and Iraq, arguing that U.S. withdrawals from Lebanon after the Marine barracks bombing in 1983 and from Somalia after the "Black Hawk Down" ambush in 1993 emboldened terrorists. "If we follow Congressman Murtha's advice and withdraw from Iraq the same way we withdrew from Beirut in 1983 and Somalia in 1993, all we will do is validate the al-Qaeda strategy and invite even more terrorist attacks," Cheney said in Milwaukee. In Houston last week, he accused Democrats of "apparently having lost their perspective concerning the nature of the enemy."

‘Danger to civilization’
The crux of his pitch is what he calls the continuing "danger to civilization." Cheney, who warned in 2004 that the United States would be hit by terrorists if Democrat John F. Kerry was elected president, has not gone that far this time but does say that it "is not an accident" that the country has not suffered another attack since Sept. 11, 2001, giving Bush credit.

Democrats regularly punch back, suggesting Cheney is out of touch and desperate. "At a time when the Bush Administration finds itself increasingly isolated on Iraq, Vice President Cheney today went on the attack," Senate Democrats said in a statement last week. "Instead of ranting and raving on the campaign trail, Bush and Cheney should spend their time on the trail of Osama bin Laden."

Five years after Sept. 11, Cheney's message may be wearing. Some find it too limited. "To tell you the truth, I was a little disappointed," David Huibregtse, head of Wisconsin's Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay party members, said after a speech. "Too much on how great President Bush is doing and very little on why we should vote for the Republicans."

Yet it still resonates in certain quarters. Between fundraisers, Cheney addressed a Michigan National Guard rally, an ostensibly nonpartisan event that nonetheless provided helpful photos of him surrounded by soldiers in uniform.

Dick Szymanski, a manufacturing executive whose son serves in the Marines, applauded the vice president's message. "We respect him," Szymanski said. "It's a very, very hard job that he and the president have, that they've had handed to them. You can belittle people for the things they should or should not have done. But they're there trying to take care of the public."

© 2006 The Washington Post Company
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15176106/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2006 MSNBC.com

Anne criticizes Yarmuth for defending constitutional idea of separation of church and state

2006-10-08T19:23:00.000-07:00

Out of John Yarmuth's opinion column on gay marriage, which contains a lot of historical perspective about the issue, Anne chooses to pull this:

“The only possible basis for denying homosexuals the right to marry is the dubious notion that there is a compelling governmental interest at stake. The Bible and tradition don’t count. ”

The point she's trying to drive home is that John doesn't think the Bible or tradition are important. Of course, she ignores the preceding sentence that says "Not that I or anyone else should allow our laws to be based on ancient documents that are specifically denied any status in our Constitution."

You know the Constitution, don't you Anne? It's that thing you hang on a roll in your bathroom at home.

The truth is that the same people in our government who talk about the threats of religious extremists against our freedom are the very same who want to curtail freedoms in the name of religion.

Republicans don't hold the institution of marriage any more sacred than the Democrats. Given the number of prominent Republicans who have gotten divorced, its clear that the issue is another effort to pander to the base, not to hold any true beliefs or values of their own.

Even TheNorthRupRecord.com is registered?

2006-10-07T21:02:00.000-07:00

In a bit of silliness I hope I inspired, Anne's people have also registered TheNorthRupRecord.com.

Will we ever see anything on these?

Anne Northup Presses the Flesh at St. James Art Show

2006-10-07T08:01:00.000-07:00

As I wandered the St James Art show, I was dismayed at the appearance of the Northup for Congress stickers. Finally we got to St. James Court and saw people handing them out. They were relentless, and I wondered how many people, like myself, did it to be polite.

Later, I saw Anne working another section of the court. She looked so friendly. I wonder why it is that so many of us disconnect the rabid attack dog of her ads when we see her in person. Isn't the friendly woman in front of you who really just wants your vote the same one who turns on the venom for her campaign ads?

I'm wondering how many people out there have, like I have, asked her office to look into something and never heard another word, or heard, "Sorry!". As much as I dislike Mitch McConnell's politics, he does take steps to make things happen when you ask him.

I wonder if Anne happened to get a look at the photography exhibit that had (GASP!) nude people in it. That certainly wouldn't play well to the base, seeing her attending a public event with nudity on clear display.

More interesting comments from her old websites

2006-10-05T20:42:00.000-07:00

What prompts you to ignore good manners, civility and decency? Why is it necessary to express your outrage by disparaging others just trying to do their best?

These comments were written by a Northup supporter in 2004 about protesters of Northup and found on her 2004 website.

Couldn't these same words be uttered about Anne Northup's campaign? Nothing about it has been mannerly, civil, or decent. John Yarmuth's columns were written from the heart with honest thoughts. He was doing his best to make Louisville a better place through the written word. All Anne can do is disparage him by taking his ideas out of context and ignoring the ones that probably fall 100% in line with her own views.

Let's visit Anne's website from four years ago.....

2006-10-05T20:34:00.000-07:00

I know the wheels of progress move slowly, but it's interesting to see Anne's website from four years ago, where she talks about her efforts to build the bridges in Louisville. Really, in four years that's all the further she's moved the effort?

She also uses that great buzzword "liberal" to attack then opponent Jack Conway and even goes to the Republican standby of blaming the media for exposing the fact that she's a lousy candidate on her page marked "The Other Side of the Story."

Anne Northup to the NAACP -- :"You gotta eat!"

2006-10-04T19:51:00.000-07:00

Anne Northup says she's skipping an NAACP debate for the 3rd Congressional District because she has a family dinner to go to. Is it that she wants to eat dinner or is she afraid the other candidates will eat her for lunch over issues that impact minorities.

Her campaign has more dodges than Daimler Chrysler.

NAACP unhappy with Northup
GOP candidate will skip debate
By Kay Stewart
kstewart@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

NAACP leaders are upset that U.S. Rep. Anne Northup is skipping their debate Sunday for 3rd Congressional District candidates that will focus on African-American issues.

Raoul Cunningham, president of the Louisville chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, one of the sponsors, said he learned Monday that Northup will not attend.

Democrat John Yarmuth and candidates Donna Walker Mancini of the Libertarian Party and W. Ed Parker of the Constitution Party are scheduled to attend the debate at Meyzeek Middle School in the Smoketown neighborhood south of downtown, Cunningham said.

The 6:30 p.m. event is free and open to the public and will be held in the auditorium.

Northup said yesterday that she has a conflicting family dinner and already has agreed to several debates this month.

Cunningham said invitations were sent in July for the local NAACP's first congressional debate.

"We're disappointed that she's not coming. I think it's unfortunate. The African-American community is 19.5 percent of the district," he said.

Cunningham said Northup's failure to participate doesn't allow citizens "or especially African-American citizens an opportunity for the candidates to respond to specific questions."

Yarmuth said he wasn't surprised that his opponent would not attend the NAACP-sponsored debate, especially after she had received an "F" from the national NAACP for her voting record.

Tim Chapman, a government and social studies teacher at Meyzeek, said he sent a letter yesterday to Northup signed by 30 teachers asking her to attend.

Keith Look, Meyzeek's principal, said he called Northup's office yesterday.

"The educational opportunity to have something here with full participation is tremendous," Look said. "This is the best a public school gets, to have a debate on a congressional seat."

Reporter Kay Stewart can be reached at (502) 582-4114.

Too Amusing For Words

2006-10-04T19:45:00.000-07:00

That "fair and balanced" friend of Anne Northup, Fox News, decided they too would try to create their own reality on the Bill O'Really? show.

Disgraced Congressman Mark Foley's $1000 too good for Northup to give back.

2006-10-04T19:33:00.000-07:00

$1000 is a lot of money to someone who works for a living, but to someone who campaigns for a living, it seems like a drop in the bucket. Still, even though Anne Northup has millions in her war chest to attack John Yarmuth, she has decided that the $1000 that SICK SICK SICK Foley gave her will not be returned or donated elsewhere. Why? I guess it is because after her "circumstance", she needs everything she can get to fund her campaign. I guess the family values that Northup and her buddies speak of involve the family of her Republican brothers and sisters in Congress.

Foley donated to Kentucky Republicans

Feedback: Offer your thoughts on the Mark Foley situation
By James R. Carroll
jcarroll@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

WASHINGTON -- Former Florida Rep. Mark Foley gave $7,000 from his political action committee to Republican House candidates in Kentucky between 1998 and this year.

U.S. Rep. Geoff Davis, R-4th District, said he is giving his $1,000 to charity. Others say that the money has been spent or that old campaign committees that received the funds are closed.

Foley resigned last week over inappropriate e-mails he sent to a 16-year-old male House page.

Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fletcher's 1998 House campaign received $1,000 from Foley's Leadership 2000 PAC, and Fletcher's 2000 House race got $2,000, federal records show.

Fletcher represented Kentucky's 6th District from 1999 until December 2003.

Asked how the governor would handle the Foley contributions, press secretary Jodi Whitaker said in a statement: "Those accounts are six and eight years old, and they are closed."

U.S. Rep. Anne Northup's 1998 congressional campaign received $1,000 from Foley's PAC. Patrick Neely, campaign manager for the 3rd District Republican, said that money has been spent and won't be returned.

Northup's Democratic opponent, John Yarmuth, said he thinks any contributions affiliated with Foley should be donated to the National Center for Exploited and Missing Children. He said that if Northup contributes $1,000 to the agency, he'll do the same.

Davis received a $1,000 donation in this campaign cycle from Foley's group, renamed Florida Republican Leadership PAC. Davis said he is giving the money to Boone County Court Appointed Special Advocates Inc., an organization involved in legal advocacy for youths.

Former state Rep. Gex "Jay" Williams of Verona collected $1,000 from Foley's PAC for a 1998 House race in Kentucky's 4th District.

There's nothing he can do about that now, Williams said.

"The (campaign) committee has been closed for years," the former lawmaker said. "I didn't even know he contributed."

State Sen. Alice Forgy Kerr, R-Lexington, received a $1,000 contribution from Foley's PAC in the 2004 election, when she ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. House in the 6th District.

Kerr, now running for re-election to the Kentucky Senate, can't do anything about the Foley money, said the senator's campaign adviser, Carla Blanton.

"The campaign account was closed after the 2004 election," Blanton said. "No account exists anymore."

Kerr said in a statement: "I have never met Mark Foley, but don't need to know him to understand that what he reportedly did is vile and disgusting. I am pleased that there is an ongoing investigation to get to the bottom of this sad mess. He deserves whatever punishment comes his way."

Foley's campaign and PAC gave nearly $200,000 to more than 100 other GOP candidates between 1995 and this year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan campaign-finance watchdog.

During that same time, the ex-lawmaker also gave $550,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee, which distributes money to candidates.

Reporter Kay Stewart contributed to this story.

Reporter James R. Carroll can be reached at (202) 906-8141.

The Stink Eye's take on the Northup Record

2006-10-04T04:36:00.000-07:00

From the LEO

On The Scuzz of Campaign Politics: Is Anne Northup a big fat liar? (New attack ads, Web site, more of the same misdirection)

Submitted by The Stink Eye on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 3:43pm. Short News

Note: The Stink Eye thinks context is important, especially during political campaigns, many of which tend to thrive on the lack of it. So for the next five issues, we’ll be here to offer some context and analysis to the squabbling that will no doubt pollute your eyes, ears and minds until Nov. 7. If you’ve got something to say — about us or them — write to citystrobe@leoweekly.com.

It’s been two Fridays since Anne Northup unveiled www.theyarmuthrecord.com, a Web site devoted entirely to making opponent John Yarmuth look like a flamboyant and drug-addled old-person-hater who wants you to sell your SUV and renounce your faith. By the site’s estimation, he also hates people who live in the South End, he’s a class warrior who wants the gays to get married, and would love to feed his son — and yours — booze before he’s 21.

This is, typically, a morally bankrupt and anti-intellectual distortion of reality. Northup has culled 16 years of Yarmuth’s written word — he was a newspaper columnist, a paid provocateur, for God’s sake — and distilled it into what amounts to a position paper from the most liberal jackass the world has ever known.

Here’s some context:
• On abolishing Social Security: Northup’s ad contends Yarmuth favors abolishing the Social Security system. In fact, Yarmuth’s 1992 column predicts the financial collapse of the system, something President Bush also forecasted when he spoke in Louisville in 2004 with Anne Northup. The column suggests something akin to personal savings accounts, a different version of which Bush, more than a decade later, began advocating.
• On legalizing marijuana: Yarmuth’s Nov. 6, 2002 column discusses the Canadian decision to decriminalize marijuana, which he calls “entirely sensible.” It made possession of small amounts of marijuana punishable like a parking violation. Decriminalizing marijuana is different than legalizing it, as Northup’s latest attack ad fails to discern. (The Web site has PDFs of the copies of Yarmuth’s columns that Northup’s campaign made; in this one, as in others, nearly an entire half of the column is obscured by what appears to be a poor copying job.)
• On doubling the payroll tax: Yarmuth suggested in a primary debate that one way to extend Medicare to all Americans would be to double the payroll tax. Northup’s ad misses the hugely important second part of that sentence, as well as this: doubling the payroll tax — by his estimation — would actually cost less to the average worker than paying for health coverage currently does. Of course, if everyone had Medicare — which would require a tax increase — we wouldn’t be paying for private health care. Ultimately, Yarmuth’s concept suggests a way to extend health care to all Americans and, in the process, save them money.
• On lowering the drinking age: Northup’s ad cites a column Yarmuth wrote in July 2002 about drinking a beer with his son, Aaron, then 18, in Ireland. Yarmuth used that to ruminate on the effects of most of Europe’s 18+ drinking laws and how they may work in the United States, given the right political circumstance. He writes that it’s worth “pondering the wisdom of drawing a clear legal distinction between drug and alcohol consumption.”

The Northup ad ends with the candidate saying she approves the message because “voters deserve to know where we stand on the issues.” Of Northup’s three TV ads, none discuss current political issues — nor do any mention that she is A) a Republican; or B) a current incumbent member of Congress (they call her a “candidate for Congress”).

The first ad touts her so-called accomplishments for the 3rd District, citing the Ohio River Bridges Project, airport expansion, more Homeland Security dollars and a forthcoming Veterans’ Hospital. Everything else attempts to smear and attack Yarmuth.

Of Yarmuth’s three TV ads, one mentions Northup by name, a facetious and direct response to the aforementioned Northup ad that suggests Northup’s recent smear campaign is as ridiculous as the Democrat playing golf with Saddam Hussein or snatching toys from children. Northup has issued a response to that one, claiming Yarmuth doesn’t take the campaign seriously.

Still waiting for the NorthupRecord.com? Here's help.....

2006-10-04T03:56:00.000-07:00

Well, as of September 27th, Anne's campaign has registered the following domain names:

thenorthuprecord.com
annenorthuprecord.com
northuprecord.com
theannenorthuprecord.com

Perhaps if she wants to cover all bases and still have a place to post her record, she could try northupsucks.com or annenorthupsucks.com. Both are still available.

And yet.... there isn't a single one operating. Wonder why.

Maybe I just have to give her a few weeks. After all, theyarmuthrecord.com was registered on 9/11 of 2006 and it took about 10 days before she announced it to the public.

But in case you're looking for Anne's stated position on things, at least when she is voting, let me direct you to a few websites:

http://www.dccc.org/gopauctionhouse/members/AnneNorthupKY-3.html

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=BC029269

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/n000143/

More on the Northup Record from Tim Saler at The Stakeholder

2006-10-04T03:10:00.000-07:00

Since Anne won't share her record, we'll try our best to seek it out for you.

This appeared on the Stakeholder.

Congressional Cronies: Anne Northup (KY-03)
Posted by
Monday, October 31, 2005 at 2:59 PM

Ed. Note: Welcome Tim Saler to the Stakeholder, who will be popping in to post in depth on particularly interesting and intense races across the country.

When Anne Northup was running for re-election to Congress in 2004, her campaign told voters that she was not afraid to take on the tough issues. What she didn't tell the voters of Kentucky's Third Congressional District is that her idea of taking on the tough issues is to play follow-the-leader.

Anne Northup has failed in her mission to be an independent voice for Kentuckians. When she was faced with the tough decisions, she caved. When push came to shove, Northup voted with recently-indicted Congressman Tom DeLay 94 percent of the time, often to the detriment of Kentucky families. She doesn't just vote with DeLay; she's in his pocket too.

Anne Northup is among the top ten recipients of dirty money from Tom DeLay's political action committee, ARMPAC. She has received $42,000 from DeLay, even while over half of her constituents earn less than that a year. When she had to choose, she put Tom DeLay and the Republican money machine ahead of average Kentuckians.

The disparity between Northup's record and the needs of her constituents is shocking to say the least. With over 41,000 acres of farm land in her district, she has voted consistently against agricultural legislation that would provide support for family farmers. As a case in point, the National Farmers Union gave Anne Northup a 20 percent ranking for the period of 2003 through 2004. Does Anne Northup care about anyone who actually tries to make a decent, honest living in her district? All signs point to no.

She has tried to act like a Democrat come election time, telling senior citizens that she will not take away their Social Security. But, when it came time to decide between the Republican machine and her constituents, she sided with big money yet again. She voted against strengthening the Social Security lockbox, and she supports the President's plan to privatize Social Security, even when it's crystal clear that it would hurt Kentucky families. The Alliance for Retired Americans gave Northup an abysmal 13 percent rating for 2004, demonstrating in short her complete lack of commitment to the issues affecting senior citizens. The Republicans claim to be the party of family values, but what family teaches its children to say one thing and do another? It's time for Anne Northup to come clean.

Kentuckians are hurting in the pocketbook. They long for the days when Democrats controlled the White House. Democrats balanced the budget, grew the economy, and created widespread prosperity. The Republicans took record budget surpluses in 2001 and flushed them down the toilet, showering the ultra-wealthy with tax handouts. Anne Northup and the Republicans should be ashamed. They have no problem telling the needy in society that they don't deserve a little help, but those who have the most could always use a little more. These are not Kentucky values.

When Kentucky families are struggling to make mortgage payments and send their kids to college, Anne Northup put the interests of the wealthy ahead of the interests of average folks. Rather than cutting taxes for the middle class like Democrats do, Anne Northup and the Republicans slashed the capital gains tax so that wealthy fat-cat money manipulators can buy a third home in the Hamptons. Republicans must answer a fundamental question: where are your morals?

When her district's public schools are performing below the state average across the board, Anne Northup's solution is the same as it's always been: what does Tom DeLay think? Tom DeLay and the corrupt Republican leadership want to de-fund public education. It wasn't too long ago when the Republicans planned to abolish the Department of Education. Now they've got a new message, but they have the same intention.

Anne Northup and the Republicans want to destroy the public education system. Anne Northup has voted in favor of school vouchers, which would strip funding away from public schools in your neighborhood and decrease the quality of education for kids who can't go somewhere else. The National Parent Teacher Association knows the truth about Anne Northup. They gave her a pitiful 0 percent rating for the period of 2003 through 2004. These are not Kentucky values.

Anne Northup and the Republicans say they're for our brave men and women fighting overseas, but they are anything but. The Disabled American Veterans gave Anne Northup a 0 percent rating in 2004, highlighting her failure to support our troops, especially when they come home and need our support the most. Democrats know that you have to support the troops all the time, not just when the television cameras are rolling. That's why they've been fighting for years to expand Veterans Administration health care coverage and benefits. Anne Northup and the Republicans are on the side of the big HMOs and against regular Kentuckians.

Gas prices have shot up through the roof in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, and the Republican reaction has been to repeal environmental protections and give handouts to oil companies. We are supposed to feel bad for oil companies, whose refineries were damaged by the hurricane, and reward them with tax handouts and repealed regulations that Anne Northup and the Republicans voted for. Now it's come out that the oil companies have made record profit in the past quarter, yet the average gas price in Anne Northup's district is still around $2.30 a gallon. Anne Northup has demonstrated her priorities. She cares more about big oil companies making record profits than her own constituents struggling to heat their homes and drive to work.

Anne Northup doesn't care about workers either. She voted to eliminate essential regulations that would improve the safety and health of workers who are exposed to potential injuries on the job. The AFL-CIO, UAW, SEIU, CWA, AFSCME, and IBEW all gave Anne Northup failing grades in 2003 and 2004. When her district is losing good-paying jobs, Anne Northup is more concerned with how she can deliver tax handouts to financiers and speculators on Wall Street.

Kentucky knows it's time for a new direction. That new direction isn't coming from Anne Northup and the crooked politicians she supports, like Ernie Fletcher and Tom DeLay. In 2006, Kentuckians will send the Republican machine a message: we demand better, because we deserve better!

The path to peace and prosperity is in view, and it is found in the Democratic program for America. The Republicans have had their chance to lead, and they have failed.

America can do better than Anne Northup, Tom DeLay, and corrupt congressional Republicans. Together, we will take this country back from the leaders who have betrayed our trust.

Billy Reed on Anne's Staged Seizure of the Yarmuth Record

2006-10-04T02:15:00.000-07:00

From the LEO.

I can’t speak for my colleagues here at LEO, but, personally, I’m thrilled that U.S. Rep. Anne Northup held a press conference in front of our offices on Fourth Street. It’s not often that we radical left-wing journalistic scumbags get such an up-close and personal look at democracy in action, and who would have ever thought our esteemed Congressperson would have brought it right to our doorstep?

This historic event happened the day after the Fourth of July, about the time LEO managing editor Sara Havens and others were just beginning to get over their holiday hangovers. It was such a slow news day that three local TV stations and The Courier-Journal actually dispatched reporters to record it for posterity, and I just can’t understand why the ever-earnest Steve Burgin of WLKY-TV didn’t look real happy about it.

Just before the appointed time, some Northup functionaries arrived to set up a table right in front of our door. On the table they put a podium, with a microphone attached, and a big stack — I’d say it was at least as tall as John Yarmuth — of what looked suspiciously like official papers.

Upon the arrival of Congresswoman Northup, whose tan indicated that she may have been girding for her campaign against LEO founder Yarmuth by spending some quality time at her palatial home in Naples, Fla., our crack LEO news team went on red-alert status.

The security contract: for accompanying a Northup staffer to copy back issues of LEO, at $18 an hour.(As you fans of the Fox News Channel and our Office of Homeland Security already know, red alert stands for “Oh, my God, they’re going to blow us to hell!” and is the signal for Vice President Cheney to either go into a bunker, shoot an innocent bystander or get on a plane to Saudi Arabia.)

Editorial designer Ben “Buddy” Schneider grabbed a camera and turned into Bill Luster, which is quite a feat considering that Buddy is about a zillion times as big as the diminutive C-J star photographer. Staff writer/music editor Stephen George took notebook in hand, in case Rep. Northup said or did something that was actually newsworthy, such as revealing that she’s a secret fan of the Flaming Lips.

Before Rep. Northup began her remarks, I went up to pay my respects. I got to know her family back in the days when I was covering the exploits of her sister, Mary T. Meagher, who was known in the international swimming world as “Madame Butterfly.” I’ve always liked Rep. Northup personally.

“What are you doing these days?” she asked, pleasantly.
“Well,” I said, “besides writing for LEO …”
“You’re writing for them?” she interjected.
And so was I again reminded of the power of the press.
I suppose I shouldn’t have been surprised that Rep. Northup apparently hasn’t read LEO for the six-plus months I’ve been here. After all, she apparently has never read the paper at all, which was the point of her being there at our front door on July 5.

On the campaign trail, Yarmuth has repeatedly said that he will stand behind every column he has ever written for LEO if Rep. Northup will stand behind every vote she has ever made during her four terms in the House.

Taking him at his word, Rep. Northup wants to get those columns and presumably have some of her campaign volunteers go over every one in search of evidence that Yarmuth is a neo-communist liberal pussbag devil who’s every bit as traitorous and unpatriotic as, oh, The New York Times.

I don’t know about you, but I can’t image Rep. Northup hating any of her volunteers so much that she would force them to read 15-plus years’ worth of John Yarmuth columns. This is the kind of tactic you might use to torture Iraqi prisoners — something else we Americans apparently know something about — but not to win elections.

The only punishment worse than having to read that many years’ worth of anybody’s columns, including my own, would be having to read through the stack of papers on the table next to Northup, which turned out to (purportedly) be all of her Congressional votes.

Just looking at the stack was depressing. Going through it all was equally unimaginable, especially considering that — unlike the past issues of LEO — there are no adults-only ads to provide distractions of the come-hither persuasion.

When she stepped to the microphone and began reading her prepared remarks, the TV cameras began rolling and the reporters started scribbling. The crowd of onlookers consisted mostly of LEO employees and a handful of curious passers-by.

(We get a lot of curious passers-by at LEO, some of whom are broke, homeless, demented, angry, inebriated, wild-eyed, semi-violent or any combination thereof. I suppose I should be grateful that none of them stumbled along during Rep. Northup’s press conference, although I do admit to harboring deliciously evil thoughts about possible confrontations that ended with vomit on the Representative’s shoes. I’m sorry. The devil made me do it.)

As she neared the conclusion of her remarks, LEO editor Cary Stemle stepped forward to present Rep. Northup a copy of the current edition of LEO. It was a blatant, transparent and thoroughly admirable attempt to exploit the situation to the newspaper’s advantage.

Parrying Stemle’s thrust, our Congressperson declined to accept the paper by saying, “No, I want them all.”
Happily for LEO, this was all being recorded by the TV cameras and the C-J reporter. From the paper’s standpoint, it was the kind of exposure money cannot buy. Although our surveys indicate that LEO readership has been soaring in recent months, maybe the publicity will generate even more new readers, not to mention advertisers.

(We interrupt this column for a commercial announcement. If you’re a business owner who wants to reach a hip audience of all ages, an audience that’s growing rapidly, you might want to invest some of your advertising budget in LEO. Even now, operators are standing by to take your order. Thank you. We now return to our regular columnizing.)

On the whole, I thought it came off rather well. LEO got a big dose of free publicity. The political pundits got something to talk about — namely, the question of whether Rep. Northup’s sneak attack at LEO might indicate that she has far, far too much spare time on her hands. We were all treated to some excellent street theater. And Rep. Northup got away without being exposed to seamy side of life on Fourth Street, including your basic profane screams from drive-by voters.

In fact — and, again, I can’t speak for my colleagues — I hope she comes back to take a tour of LEO’s, ah, palatial offices, including our kitchen. (Oh, crap. This is my week on kitchen duty, and I haven’t cleaned up a thing. Wonder what David Hawpe does when it’s his turn for kitchen duty at The C-J?).

If she wishes, we also will be happy to show her the office where Yarmuth used to type his columns. His bookshelves seemed filled with more books about golf than about politics, which is sort of embarrassing to some of our long-haired, hippy, bomb-throwing radicals. I mean, when somebody mentions the religious right and the first thing your founder thinks about is Augusta National and “Amen Corner,” it tends to damage your street cred as an alternative newspaper, if you get my drift.

The day after the big event, The C-J stripped the story across Page 2 of its Metro section. As I said, it was a slow news day. Unfortunately, The C-J didn’t take advantage of the photo op. However, our man Schneider got some great photos of Stemle talking to Northup (see cover and these pages). Some, praise be, even show the bald spot on the back of his head, which is arguably growing even faster than LEO readership.

Not to advise the Northup campaign on tactics (everybody knows we’re nothing but a bunch of wacko Yarmuth suck-ups), but the next time she wants to promote LEO, she might want to consider moving the show down the street to The Palace.

After all, its stage is as perfect for theater of the absurd and political grandstanding as it us for an Abbott & Costello Trivia Contest.*

Contact the writer
at billyr@leoweekly.com

*Sponsored by LEO

School shootings, high murder rate in Louisville, and Anne wants to help corrupt gun dealers

2006-10-03T19:48:00.000-07:00

My original headline said "drug dealers". I'm sorry I meant gun dealers. Drug dealers would only benefit indirectly from Anne's vote.

From Josh Sugarmann in the Huffington Post:

(T)he U.S. House yesterday confirmed its role as head cheerleader for gun crime by passing legislation (H.R. 5092) that makes it harder for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to revoke the licenses of corrupt gun dealers. Ignoring, as usual, law enforcement opposition such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police and, well, facts (corrupt gun dealers are the highest volume supplier of illegally trafficked guns), the House voted 277-131 to pass legislation that actually makes ignorance of the law an excuse whenever ATF moves to revoke a dealer's license (which they hardly ever do anyway).

The House had more gun happy legislation waiting in the wings, including a bill to further restrict the access of state and local governments as well as law enforcement agencies to the crime gun trace data that is crucial to stopping illegal gun trafficking, but, mercifully, ran out of time to pass it.

Ms. Northup, of course, was for it, because the NRA was for it. Wonder why she's more willing to be in the pocket of the NRA than she is to support the people who keep us safe.

Northup's Spokeswoman about keeping $36,000 from corrupt congressmen -- No Comment!

2006-10-03T19:27:00.000-07:00

Davis to donate funds from Foley
PLANS TO KEEP MONEY FROM 3 DISGRACED REPS
By John Cheves
HERALD-LEADER STAFF WRITER
WASHINGTON - Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Ky., will give a $1,000 donation he took from Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., to a non-profit, he said yesterday. Foley resigned Friday following reports that he had sent inappropriate e-mails to young men in the House page program.

But even as Davis sought to distance himself from the growing GOP sex scandal, an aide said Davis will keep $45,000 he has taken since 2002 from campaigns and political-action committees of three other House Republican colleagues who fell from grace this year. They are:

n Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas, who resigned and is under indictment for alleged campaign-finance crimes. DeLay gave Davis $30,000.

n Randy "Duke" Cunningham of California, who is in prison for taking bribes. Cunningham gave Davis $11,000.

n Bob Ney of Ohio, who awaits sentencing on federal corruption charges for his involvement with Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Ney gave Davis $4,000.

The donations from DeLay, Cunningham and Ney were legal and won't be returned, said Justin Brasell, Davis' chief of staff. However, in a statement, Davis said he's giving the $1,000 from Foley's PAC to Boone County Court Appointed Special Advocates, a non-profit program for abused and neglected children.

"I am appalled by the actions of Mr. Foley," Davis said. "Had he not resigned, it is my belief that he would have been expelled from the House, and rightfully so. The people of this country will not tolerate this kind of behavior, and neither will I."

No other member of Kentucky's congressional delegation took money from all four of the disgraced House members, although Rep. Anne Northup, also a Republican, received more than anyone but Davis. She has taken a combined $36,000 from all but Foley since 2002.

"We're not going to comment on any of this," said Northup spokeswoman Katie Greenan.

Republican members of Congress who took money from Foley's Florida Republican Leadership PAC are scrambling to unload it, now that Americans are hearing of his sexual approaches to underage House pages, said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington.

It's ironic that Davis -- and so many others -- are keeping the donations from colleagues who sold their offices for money, she said.

"The Foley scandal certainly is troubling, but it had nothing to do with money or campaign fund-raising or influence-peddling," said Sloan, a former federal prosecutor and congressional aide. "Whereas the scandals with DeLay, Cunningham and Ney are all about money. The way they got their money was corrupt, so I'd argue that all donations from them are tainted and should be returned."

Brasell, the Davis aide, said his boss does not feel compelled to return money from colleagues who have been indicted, imprisoned or forced from office, because some Democratic members of Congress have kept donations under similar circumstances.

"Congressman Davis has been outspoken in his condemnation of corruption in Congress," Brasell added.

But actions speak louder than words, said Jim Creevy, campaign manager for Democrat Ken Lucas, Davis' challenger in the Nov. 7 election to represent Northern Kentucky in Congress.

Anne Northup's Campaign Chairman feels true patriots don't support peace?

2006-10-02T19:34:00.000-07:00

Remember the signs that papered Louisville a few years back that said, "Support President Bush and Our Troops"? Well, that was the idea of Anne Northup's campaign manager Ted Jackson. I always found the signs interesting in the way they put Bush ahead of the troops. It sounded more a statement of politics than national pride. It wasn't until I did some digging that I found this article in which Anne's trusted advisor to her numerous smear campaigns seems to take issue with anyone who thinks war is a bad idea.

War with Iraq Local views; Political worker organizes show of support for Bush, U.S. troops
Courier-Journal, The (Louisville, KY)
March 21, 2003
Author: SHAFER SHELDONSTAFF
Estimated printed pages: 2

Ted Jackson

Louisville businessman Ted Jackson was driving to his office on Frankfort Avenue one morning this year when he saw a large sign that read, ``Peace is patriotic.''

Jackson, a 47-year-old Republican political worker who has organized three successful election campaigns for U.S. Rep. Anne Northup, R-Louisville, said he realized he had to respond.

On Feb. 5, he called Viacom Outdoor and signed a contract personally guaranteeing $5,500 for one month's cost for a billboard. His sign went up the next day along southbound Interstate 65, near Jacob Street.

Against a dark blue field with red and white stripes rippling across the bottom, the billboard reads: ``Support President Bush and Our Troops.''

After signing the contract, Jackson called a few friends to help he and they made some phone calls and sent e-mails and quickly rounded up nearly 100 donors who chipped in $10 to $500.

About a third of the contributions came from Democrats, he said two of the friends he called were Tim Mulloy and Bob Gunnell, prominent local Democrats who are Jackson's partners in the Commonwealth Group, a governmental affairs, lobbying and consulting firm.

Jackson, who also set up a Web site called www.supportpresidentbush.net, said he has nearly enough contributions to cover the second, 30-day run of the billboard. And he said he expects to raise enough to have the billboard up ``for as long as needed.''

The message in April will be moved to a different location, a billboard along northbound I-65 near Hancock Street.

Jackson said he has received dozens of positive e-mails about the effort and only a handful of negative ones.

He described as especially touching and rewarding an unsigned e-mail he received recently from the wife of a Fort Campbell soldier. It read, ``I would be one of the first ladies to say I do not want to go to war. But supporting my husband and all of our troops, along with the president, is something I take pride in.''

Jackson said he believes that those protesting the war are a minority, but one that sometimes is ``more vocal and energized and is able to get their message out.''

``Well, we believe we need to get our message out and to be heard.''

Jackson described his feelings about the onset of the war ``as apprehensive.''

``But I support it 100 percent. The risk of not acting is much greater than acting. I trust President Bush. . . . He has the best interest of the country at heart.''

Jackson said people who want to donate to the billboard effort can make checks payable to Viacom Outdoor c/o Ted Jackson 2306 Frankfort Ave. Louisville, Ky. 40206.

- Sheldon S. Shafer

Anne Northup's Campaign registers thenorthuprecord.com. Will it see the light of day?

2006-10-02T19:21:00.000-07:00

Anne Northup's campaign has registered the domain name thenorthuprecord.com as of September 27th. Only a few short days ago, this was available. Is this registered so that Anne might finally give us pages of written records about her beliefs and where she stands, as John Yarmuth has? Or is it just a defensive tactic meant to keep someone else from registering it and attacking her?

I e-mailed Dennis Lindsey, who is listed as the contact for this domain name AND theyarmuthrecord.com to find out when the website might see the light of day. I'll let you know if I hear something. The registration record for the website is below.

WHOIS Record For
thenorthuprecord.com

Certified Offer Service - Make an offer on this domain
SSL Certificates - Make this site secure
Site Confirm Seals - Become a trusted Web Site
The data contained in GoDaddy.com, Inc.'s WhoIs database,
while believed by the company to be reliable, is provided "as is"
with no guarantee or warranties regarding its accuracy. This
information is provided for the sole purpose of assisting you
in obtaining information about domain name registration records.
Any use of this data for any other purpose is expressly forbidden without the prior written
permission of GoDaddy.com, Inc. By submitting an inquiry,
you agree to these terms of usage and limitations of warranty. In particular,
you agree not to use this data to allow, enable, or otherwise make possible,
dissemination or collection of this data, in part or in its entirety, for any
purpose, such as the transmission of unsolicited advertising and
and solicitations of any kind, including spam. You further agree
not to use this data to enable high volume, automated or robotic electronic
processes designed to collect or compile this data for any purpose,
including mining this data for your own personal or commercial purposes.

Please note: the registrant of the domain name is specified
in the "registrant" field. In most cases, GoDaddy.com, Inc.
is not the registrant of domain names listed in this database.

Registrant:
Dennis Lindsey
2306 Frankfort Ave.
Lousiville, Kentucky 40206
United States

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: THENORTHUPRECORD.COM
Created on: 27-Sep-06
Expires on: 27-Sep-07
Last Updated on:

Administrative Contact:
Lindsey, Dennis webmaster@englishemprise.com
2306 Frankfort Ave.
Lousiville, Kentucky 40206
United States
(502) 499-8978

Technical Contact:
Lindsey, Dennis webmaster@englishemprise.com
2306 Frankfort Ave.
Lousiville, Kentucky 40206
United States
(502) 499-8978

Domain servers in listed order:
PARK31.SECURESERVER.NET
PARK32.SECURESERVER.NET

Some highlights from Bush's campaign speech for Northup in 2002

2006-10-02T17:36:00.000-07:00

Bush's campaign speech for Anne Northup was full of nuggets that would be amusing in retrospect if they didn't point to his woeful mishandling of foreign policy.

Some quotes from the speech (full text here)with my comments in italics.

You see, what we need in the political process is people who put the people ahead of partisanship. They put people's concerns and hopes and aspirations ahead of personal success, their own personal success. Wonder how this coincides with her blind following of the administration and her numerous attack ads.

I value her advice. I value her friendship. I value being able to work with her to do what's right for America. I also like the fact that she loves her family. She's got her priorities straight. (Applause.) She loves Woody. (Laughter and applause.) And she loves her kids. I love the fact that Anne is an adopted mom. It shows something special about her heart and her willingness to love. I enjoyed meeting her mother and dad. She probably listens to her mother about as much as I do -- listen to mine. (Laughter.) But she is -- she's got her priorities straight -- her faith, and her family, and the people of Louisville, Kentucky. (Applause.) Judging by the recent letter she wrote asking for campaign donations, it seems as though fundraising comes before any of these.

And we're just traveling today from Washington to here earlier with another fine United States senator, and that's, of course, Jim Bunning. And I appreciate his leadership and his support. (Applause.) I want to thank Ellen Williams. I want to thank State Senate President David Williams. I want to thank the members of the statehouse who are here. I appreciate the fact that Jeff Davis, candidate for the U.S. Kentucky 4th District, is with us. And, Jeff, I appreciate you putting your hat in the ring. Jim Bunning and David Williams, two wonderful men who have no trouble questioning a democrat's sexuality if they think it can get them votes. Wonder how they feel about Mark Foley.

We need to make the tax cuts permanent. We need to make the repeal of the death tax permanent. (Applause.) And Anne understands that. She understands that. That's the kind of mentality we need in Washington. Yes, the mentality we need is to run up a deficit by spending uncontrollably on Iraq while reducing the amount of money we take in, even on the wealthiest. You know, the ones who have no need for the money provided by military service.

I also appreciate the fact that Anne understands that the stakes are high for our future, that our country has entered into a new era, that our homeland is a battlefield, and that our most important job as a government is to protect the American people, is to do everything in our power to keep America safe, is to prevent the enemy from hitting us again. The enemy is still out there. They're people who just hate America, they just do They hate us because we love -- we love freedom. We love our values. We love the fact that our citizens can worship an almighty God freely in America. That's what we love. We love -- (applause.) We love free speech, we love a free press. We love all aspects of our freedom. And the more we love our freedom, the more they hate us. Free speech and free press. We love them both, don't we George? Unless they're one of the hundreds of critical reports that are now surfacing about your handling of Iraq and the "war on terrorism".

And that's why I went to Congress, by the way, because this is our priority, to get them to give us a new type of arrangement about how to deal with the new threat of the 21st century. Listen, I promise you I didn't run -- or you know I didn't run on vote for me, I want government to be bigger. (Laughter.) I ran on vote for me, I'll try to make it work better when it's supposed to work. And one way to make it work better is to collect the agencies involved with the homeland security and put them under one department of homeland security, so that we can make the number one priority of the people that are working hard in these agencies the protection of homeland. So that we can do a better job of protecting our borders.

Yes, George, that Government's just gotten smaller, hasn't it? And that homeland protection worked really well during Katrina.

I also asked for the increase because any time we send our troops into harm's way, they deserve the best pay, the best training, and the best possible equipment. Hahahahahaha..... guess you were lying about that too.

Anne was right, we are enforcing the doctrines, however. We're enforcing the doctrines of this first war of the 21st century. One of the doctrines is, if you harbor one of these people you're just as guilty as they are. If you feed a terrorist, harbor a terrorist, hide a terrorist, you're just as guilty as those who murdered thousands of innocent citizens on September the 11th. And the Taliban found out what we meant. See, it's important in the world, when you say something, that you do it. Unless, of course, you're in Saudi Arabia.

That's the way we think as a nation. We think about peace for our children and other people's children, and we think about liberating people. Because every life matters to us, see. Everybody counts. When I say every life matters, I'm not talking about just American lives. I mean every life around the globe. We believe in the value of human life here in America. That's what we hold -- we hold that dear to our hearts. Unless you're a guy on death row in Texas, then we like shootin' you full of killin' drugs.

One of my jobs is to think ahead and to think -- is to cause debate, and I started that yesterday, to encourage the American people to listen to and have a dialogue about Iraq. And I meant it when I said that I'm going to consult with Congress. I want there to be a discussion about the threats that face America. Tomorrow I'm calling leaders in Russia, China and France to talk about the threats that face us all. I will see Tony Blair on Saturday. I'll see Jean Chretien Monday. My point to you is, not only will I consult with Congress and talk to Congress -- my administration and I will do so -- I will also see many of the leaders of the world and remind them of the facts.

The facts are, this is a man who gassed his own people, has invaded two countries, a person who stiffed the international organization time and time again.

I look forward to the debate. I look forward to the American people understanding the threats we face. But one thing is for certain -- I'm not going to change my view, and it's this -- (applause.) And my view is, we cannot let the world's worst leaders blackmail America, threaten America, or hurt America with the world's worst weapons. (Applause.) And we know President Jackass, that you really didn't consult with anyone did you? Iraq was a done deal.

I believe -- I believe -- I believe that good is going to come out of the evil done to America, because I know America. I know the strength of our country. I truly believe that we have an opportunity to achieve peace. These killers hit us, and in their hatred they have given us a chance to achieve peace. If we're tough and strong, if we stay focused on how to achieve peace, if we remind the world in clear terms the difference between good and evil, and speak clearly about the two, we can achieve peace. We can achieve peace not only for America, we can achieve peace for the people of Israel and Palestinians. We can achieve peace; I believe it. I believe we can achieve peace in South Asia. No, this enemy, these killers hit America. They in so doing created an opportunity to achieve peace. How's that peace process coming Georgie?

They hit us at home, and out of that evil will come some incredible good. America is a compassionate country. The irony of the attacks is that America became a more compassionate place. In the face of the evil, thousands of our citizens understood that in order to fight evil they needed to do so by doing some good. That you can fight evil by loving your neighbor just like you'd like to be loved yourselves. That it's the gathering momentum of millions of acts of kindness and compassion which define the true character of America.

And that's happening. You see, the definition of patriotism has changed in America, for the better. A patriot is not only somebody who puts a hand on their heart, a patriot is somebody who helps somebody in need. A patriot is somebody who mentors a child. A patriot is somebody who goes to their church or synagogue and mosques and organizes a way to feed those who hunger, or house those who need shelter. A patriot is somebody who goes to a shut-in and says, I love you. A patriot is somebody who knows that somebody can't do everything, but somebody can do something to help America change one heart, one soul, one conscience at a time.

Wow, that love and compassion lasted about five minutes when it came to the other party across the aisle, didn't it? And that definition of patriot soon shifted to anyone who bought your load of crap lock, stock and barrel.

And that's happening. No, out of the evil done to America is coming a new culture, a culture which says each of us are responsible for the decisions we make. When was the last time Bush owned up to any wrong decision he made?

More on Anne's Corrupt Reading First Program from David Hawpe

2006-10-02T17:29:00.000-07:00

Opinion; Reading First, Northup's pet education project, mired in controversy
Courier-Journal, The (Louisville, KY)
September 11, 2005
Author: HAWPE DAVID VSTAFF
Estimated printed pages: 4

David Hawpe

Anne Northup's biggest contribution to President Bush's signature domestic program is facing charges of favoritism, conflict of interest, and federal intimidation and badgering.

The inspector general of the U.S. Department of Education is (take your pick) investigating or auditing.

Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana has expressed "considerable concern" to Education Secretary Margaret Spellings about the way Reading First, a major part of the Bush No Child Left Behind legislation, is being administered. He said that "at best, it seems there has been a lack of clarity." He warned, "At worst, one or more officials contracted to work for the Department of Education may be working to further their own interests."

All of which is a long way from ensuring that science-based, research-tested methods and materials are used to teach kids how to read, which was supposed to be the Northup-backed program's purpose.

The congresswoman points to good results achieved by Reading First in many places. She says, "The intent of Reading First is to help states and local school districts establish high- quality, comprehensive early reading programs that actually teach kids how to read. For too many years, kids were passed along, no matter if they could read at grade level or not. I continue to have complete confidence that the Reading First program will effectively teach kids this most basic skill. Because so much is at stake, any individuals who might be inappropriately profiting from this program will and should be held accountable."

There are always those who resist change, including some who complain because they can't profit from it. But let's look at where Reading First came from, and what's being said about it around the country.

Northup introduced the legislation to create a National Reading Panel, out of whose work came Reading First. A Northup re-election Web site credited her with championing a program that, "for the first time, funds reading programs based on proven, scientific research."

In testimony, she disdained "all the federal dollars" spent on liberal favorites such as Title I, Head Start and specific literacy programs for early grade children. She lavished praise on her friend Bush for understanding what liberals don't: "We can no longer throw enormous amounts of money at reading programs that just don't work.…

"There is a serious disconnect between reading research and classroom practice," she testified. "I've seen this disconnect first hand."

But Robert Slavin, co-director at Johns Hopkins University of the Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk and chairman of the Success for All Foundation, says schools have been discouraged from using reading materials his group developed, despite evidence from 50 studies that they are effective. He told USA Today that Reading First relies on the work of "consultants with major conflicts of interest."

The newspaper reported that "several well-known experts have both advised states on federal grant applications and worked for major publishers," and that critics say Reading First "all but forced schools to buy textbooks and related materials from a handful of large publishers, several of which have retained top federal advisers as authors, editors or consultants." The Scott Foresman firm touts two former Reading First officials on its Web site.

An Education Department spokesman says such allegations "have absolutely no merit."

In The Christian Science Monitor, Kenneth Goodman from the University of Arizona College of Education described the work of Northup's National Reading Panel as "raising quantifiable data to the equivalent of truth and saying nothing else is true." One panel member, Joanne Yatvin, wrote a dissent, predicting its report might be misunderstood and misused, by the government and phonics promoters, to dictate reading instruction. "And that is in fact what happened," she told the Monitor.

The Sept. 7 issue of Education Week described "mounting evidence that federal employees may have directed or even pressured states to choose specific assessments, consultants and the criteria for evaluating core reading programs as conditions for getting funding" from Reading First. The story, which cited Kentucky as a case in point, is published in today's Forum.

So much for the Bush claim, in his 2002 campaign speech for Northup, that "We believe strongly in local control of schools."

That speech made clear Reading First was Anne Northup's baby. Bush told a Seelbach crowd, "Anne's biggest contribution - and I mean a significant contribution - was to fight for and get funding for a Reading First initiative.… Anne, working with some of the best experts in the country, calling together the best minds, put in this (No Child Left Behind) bill a significant reading program, one that's not only funded for a billion dollars, but one that recognizes [sic] is a science, not an art."

The disconnect seems to be between what Northup and Bush promised and what they delivered. "We know what works," Bush told cheering Northup supporters. But works for whom?

David Hawpe's columns appear Sundays and Wednesdays on the editorial page. You can read them on line at www.courier-journal.com.

David Hawpe

President Bush embraced U.S. Rep. Anne Northup at a campaign rally in 2002, as Sen. Jim Bunning and her husband, Woody, looked on. At that event, Bush declared his devotion to 'local control of schools.'
Edition: METRO
Section: FORUM
Page: 02H
Column: HAWPE DAVID V

Index Terms: OP OPINION; U.S. CONGRESS; Reading First; Anne Northup; BUSH GEORGE W
Dateline: KENTUCKY, USA=UNITED STATES, LOUISVILLE
Copyright (c) The Courier-Journal. All rights reserved. Reproduced with the permission of Gannett Co., Inc. by NewsBank, inc.
Record Number: lou2005091214012782

Reading First-- Bush lauds Anne for a program the government later criticized

2006-10-02T03:52:00.000-07:00

In a fundraising speech that George W. Bush gave here in Louisville in 2002 at the Seelbach, he said, "But Anne's biggest contribution -- and I mean, a significant contribution -- was to fight for and get funding for a Reading First initiative. It is a federal initiative that recognizes all this talk about structuring our schools, all the talk about making sure the public education system is reformed doesn't matter a whit if our children can't read. And so, Anne, working with some of the best experts in the country, calling together the best minds, put in this bill a significant reading program, one that's not only funded for a billion dollars, but one that recognizes is a science, not an art. We know what works and we expect the curriculum around America to be in place that teaches every child how to read."

But, just four short years later, we see that Reading First was another questionable Republican initiative that may have benefited Republican friends more than the children in danger of being left behind. In a critical report by the Office of Inspector General, the OIG made the following findings:

(W)e found that Department officials obscured the
statutory requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by NCLB; acted in contravention of the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government; and took actions that call into question whether they violated the prohibitions included in the Department of Education Organization Act (DEOA). The DEOA at §3403(b) prohibits Department officials from exercising any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum or program of instruction of any educational institution, school, or school system. Specifically, we found that the Department:
• Developed an application package that obscured the requirements of the statute;
• Took action with respect to the expert review panel process that was contrary to the balanced panel composition envisioned by Congress;
• Intervened to release an assessment review document without the permission of the entity that contracted for its development;
• Intervened to influence a State’s selection of reading programs; and
• Intervened to influence reading programs being used by local educational agencies
(LEAs) after the application process was completed. These actions demonstrate that the program officials failed to maintain a control environment that exemplifies management integrity and accountability.

An Editorial in the Washington Post nicely summarizes the issues at hand:

THE EDUCATION ISSUE

By Michael Grunwald
Sunday, October 1, 2006; B01

President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act was premised on three revolutionary goals. The first was to focus on low-performing schools and students; hence, No Child Left Behind. The second was to beef up the federal role in education, enforcing national standards through testing. The third was to bring facts and evidence to the notoriously squishy world of education policy, promoting teaching methods backed by "scientifically based research" instead of instinct and fad. This was the least-publicized goal, but arguably the most vital; the phrase "scientifically based research" appeared more than 100 times in the landmark 2001 law.

The centerpiece of the new research-based approach was Reading First, a $1 billion-a-year effort to help low-income schools adopt strategies "that have been proven to prevent or remediate reading failure" through rigorous peer-reviewed studies. "Quite simply, Reading First focuses on what works, and will support proven methods of early reading instruction," the Education Department promised.

Five years later, an accumulating mound of evidence from reports, interviews and program documents suggests that Reading First has had little to do with science or rigor. Instead, the billions have gone to what is effectively a pilot project for untested programs with friends in high places.

Department officials and a small group of influential contractors have strong-armed states and local districts into adopting a small group of unproved textbooks and reading programs with almost no peer-reviewed research behind them. The commercial interests behind those textbooks and programs have paid royalties and consulting fees to the key Reading First contractors, who also served as consultants for states seeking grants and chaired the panels approving the grants. Both the architect of Reading First and former education secretary Roderick R. Paige have gone to work for the owner of one of those programs, who is also a top Bush fundraiser.

On Sept. 22, the department's inspector general released a report exposing some of Reading First's favoritism and mismanagement. The highlights were internal e-mails from then-program director Chris Doherty, vowing to deny funding to programs that weren't part of the department's in-crowd: "They are trying to crash our party and we need to beat the [expletive] out of them in front of all the other would-be party crashers who are standing on the front lawn waiting to see how we welcome these dirtbags."

Doherty has since resigned, and Education Secretary Margaret Spellings has pledged to review Reading First, emphasizing that the "individual mistakes" detailed in the report occurred before she became secretary. Still, Spellings expressed full confidence in the overall program: "Thanks to Reading First, struggling students are far more likely to get the help they need from teachers using scientifically based classroom reading instruction."

But the report barely scratched the surface of the incestuous process that dominated the formation of Reading First. The initiative didn't promote scientifically based reading instruction, the third goal of No Child Left Behind. And it's providing ammunition to critics of the second goal, strong national standards. The billion-dollar question is whether it may imperil the first goal: Will some children get left behind?

Bush administration officials frequently say that Reading First does not play favorites or intrude on local control, that states and districts are free to choose their own textbooks and programs -- as long as they're backed by sound science. But aggressive muckraking by the newsletter Title 1 Monitor and reading advocates at the Success for All Foundation have eviscerated those claims, and the inspector general's report officially contradicted them, accusing the department of breaking the law by promoting its pet programs and squelching others. In his internal e-mails, Doherty frequently admitted using "extralegal" tactics to force states and local districts to do the department's bidding. A report by Success for All documented how state applications for Reading First grants that promoted the preferred programs were the only ones approved.

In fact, the vast majority of the 4,800 Reading First schools have now adopted one of the five or six top-selling commercial textbooks, even though none of them has been evaluated in a peer-reviewed study against a control group. Most of the schools also use the same assessment program, the same instructional model, and one of three training programs developed by Reading First insiders -- with little research backing.

"They kept denying it, but everybody knew the department had a list," said Jady Johnson, director of the Reading Recovery Council of North America. "They're forcing schools to spend millions on ineffective programs."

To some extent, the controversy over Reading First reflects an older controversy over reading, pitting "phonics" advocates such as Doherty against "whole language" practitioners such as Johnson.

The administration believes in phonics, which emphasizes repetitive drills that teach children to sound out words. Johnson and other phonics skeptics try to teach the meaning and context of words as well. Reading First money has been steered toward states and local districts that go the phonics route, largely because the Reading First panels that oversaw state applications were stacked with department officials and other phonics fans. "Stack the panel?" Doherty joked in one e-mail. "I have never *heard* of such a thing . . . ." When Reid Lyon, who designed Reading First, complained that a whole-language proponent had received an invitation to participate on an evaluation panel, a top department official replied: "We can't un-invite her. Just make sure she is on a panel with one of our barracuda types."

Doherty bragged to Lyon about pressuring Maine, Mississippi and New Jersey to reverse decisions to allow whole-language programs in their schools: "This is for your FYI, as I think this program-bashing is best done off or under the major radar screens." Massachusetts and North Dakota were also told to drop whole-language programs such as Rigby Literacy, and districts that didn't do so lost funding. "Ha, ha--Rigby as a CORE program?" Doherty wrote in one internal e-mail. "When pigs fly!"

Said Bruce Hunter, a lobbyist for the American Association of School Administrators: "It's been obvious all along that the administration knew exactly what it wanted."

But it wasn't just about phonics.

Success for All is the phonics program with the strongest record of scientifically proved results, backed by 31 studies rated "conclusive" by the American Institutes for Research. And it has been shut out of Reading First. The nonprofit Success for All Foundation has shed 60 percent of its staff since Reading First began; the program had been growing rapidly, but now 300 schools have dropped it. Betsy Ammons, a principal in North Carolina, watched Success for All improve reading scores at her school, but state officials made her switch to traditional textbooks to qualify for the new grants.

"You can't afford to turn down the federal money," Ammons said. "But why should we have to give up on something that works?"

The answer lies in the Reading First grant process, which was almost comically skewed. Michigan was the first state approved, after it simply proposed to adopt the five best-selling textbooks. But when Rhode Island officials proposed to require "high-quality reading programs that meet the test of having a scientific research base," they were rejected. Doherty told them to check out Michigan's list, so they cut and pasted it into their application, while suggesting that districts could still adopt other programs justified by research. They were rejected again. So they limited their program to the textbooks. Only then were they approved. Similarly, Oklahoma unsuccessfully proposed to require reading programs backed by three years of longitudinal data before it got the hint and proposed the Michigan list.

So instead of advocating scientifically based reading programs, Reading First has promoted programs with "key elements" endorsed by a national reading panel, which could describe almost any program. It may not be a coincidence that the initiative was essentially outsourced to a few experts with a dizzying array of apparent conflicts of interest.

For example, when the department needed reviewers to evaluate reading assessment programs, it contracted with a University of Oregon team led by Edward Kame'enui, Roland Good and Deborah Simmons. Good had developed an assessment called Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), and Kame'enui, Good and Simmons had all served on the design team for Voyager Passport, a remedial program built around DIBELS. Ultimately, DIBELS was the only assessment used in Reading First, and Voyager was the most popular supplemental program.

Similarly, the department steered states to just three providers of professional development services: Kame'enui and Simmons at Oregon, Louisa C. Moats at the for-profit Sopris West, and Sharon Vaughn at the University of Texas at Austin. Vaughn was the other member of the Voyager Passport design team, and one of the four chairmen of the secretary's Reading Leadership Academy, which exerted enormous influence over Reading First; the others were Moats, Kame'enui and his Oregon colleague Douglas Carnine. States such as Alabama, North Carolina and Washington specified in their Reading First grants that every one of their reviewers for local proposals would have to be approved by one of those chairmen.

Kame'enui and Simmons also wrote the "Consumer's Guide" that most states agreed to use to evaluate Reading First programs, and ran one of Reading First's three "technical assistance centers" at Oregon. They co-wrote one Reading First textbook, and Kame'enui earned more than $100,000 last year from royalties on another, according to his financial disclosure when he moved to an Education Department job. In her 2004 book "In Defense of Our Children: When Politics, Profit, and Education Collide," Elaine Garan recalled color-coding the various financial connections running through Reading First; when it came to Kame'enui, she wrote, "I ran out of colors."

The department declined a request to interview Kame'enui, but Undersecretary Henry Johnson said the department takes conflicts of interest seriously, and will adopt all the inspector general's recommendations. "We're going to dig into this," he said.

But Johnson said states are ultimately responsible for making sure their programs are scientifically based, which is small comfort for applicants pressured into adopting programs they didn't want. "It's been very frustrating for those of us who really believe in evidence-based programs," said Richard Long, a lobbyist for the International Reading Association, which represents 90,000 reading teachers and specialists nationwide.

Then again, Long thinks spending $1 billion a year on reading is a great idea. And he thinks it's helping kids to read: "Have there been mistakes in implementation? Oh yeah. But teachers in Reading First schools believe progress is being made."

The bottom line, Johnson said, is that Reading First works. A department report found that teachers in Reading First schools spent 19 minutes more per day on reading than teachers in other schools, and were more likely to place struggling students in reading intervention programs. A new report by the nonpartisan Center on Education Policy suggested that Reading First is having a positive effect on state reading scores, although Johnson said much more needs to be done.

"Despite all the problems with Reading First, there's evidence that it's helping states," said Jack Jennings, the center's president.

Of course, $5 billion over five years ought to help states; the question is whether it's helping as much as it should. Without the kind of rigorous studies the law promised but the implementers failed to deliver, it's not clear.

But it is clear that Reading First has been a terrific boon for the textbook publishing industry, and for the department's favored programs. For example, the company that developed Voyager Passport was valued at about $5 million in a newspaper article before Reading First; founder Randy Best, whose Republican fundraising made him a Bush Pioneer, eventually sold it for $380 million. He then put Lyon and Paige on his payroll.

Local domination of education is an American tradition, and Bush took up a storied cause in challenging it; reformers since Horace Mann have promoted national education policy as a way to encourage common culture and equal opportunity. But local-control advocates have always warned that empowering heavy-handed federal bureaucrats would breed self-serving, one-size-fits-all solutions. Now, Reading First is making them look like prophets.

grunwaldmr@washpost.com

Michael Grunwald is a

Washington Post staff writer

An Open Letter from Leslie to John Yarmuth

2006-10-01T18:30:00.000-07:00

Found this on My Space Via Technorati

An Open Letter to 3rd District Congressional Candidate John Yarmuth

Hi, John –

Sorry for yakking your ear off at last week's Waterfront Wednesday concert. I'm sure you're already tired of having well-meaning folks accost you and thrust their own personal political "wisdom" upon you, but it's something of an occupational hazard. The good news is, it usually happens most to the well-liked underdog candidate, and that's you. Hey, we carp because we care.

Your most recent ads are a step in the right direction, but you're still letting Northup's machine lead you astray. You're a tad off-message right now as a result of pure self-defense, and you need to re-focus. You're correct to swing back hard, but next inning, pitch her a ball she has to catch and return.

Northup's platform is simple and weak in several key areas. Her biggest flaw is her blind loyalty to Bush, to which you've already alluded. Take the next step and make the point that her commitment to the so-called "War on Terror" is a single-sided one (we'll kindly let go for the moment the fact that wars on nouns such as terror and poverty are almost always unwinable). She's committing more federal money – and more Kentucky lives – with Bush's ill-advised "stay the course" strategy. That kind of money can be better spent here at home, beefing up homeland security in areas specific to Kentucky, such as railroad security (not much passenger safety at risk here, but plenty of hazardous material travels our rails every day!) and riverport security (ditto), not to mention the obvious terrorist target threat issues of having the UPS hub here in Louisville and having Ft. Knox right down the road. She's all about Iraq, and it needs to be all about the 3rd Congressional district of Kentucky. Make her fight the war on terror on our ground, not on foreign soil. While you're at it, make her read the 9/11 Commission Report. Seems like not many Republican lawmakers have.

Her healthcare platform is pure GOP propaganda – all about caps on lawsuits. Sure, that's part of the problem, but only part. That would help reduce liability costs for physicians, which I'm all for, but also for the pharmaceutical industry and its multi-billion dollar lobby. She's all for allowing US citizens to buy their prescription drugs from Canada, but for pete's sake, why should they have to? Bush says he can control AIDS in Africa for approximately $300 per year per person. Why does it cost over $2400 per year per person here? Why is the pharmaceutical industry allowed to pat itself on the back for providing low or no cost drugs to the impoverished rather than being forced to curb its hideously monstrous advertising budget to make the drugs affordable to everyone in the first place? It's plain to see they're spending as much or more (probably much more) on advertising than they are on research. And while you're at it, ask why that same industry can seemingly make enough Viagra for every federal inmate who wants it for obviously recreational purposes, but can't seem to promise enough flu vaccine for a potential pandemic? Here in the land of Kentucky Fried Chicken, bird flu ought to be taken fairly seriously, one's personal thoughts on PETA notwithstanding.

Her economic platform is based on immediate job creation rather than long-term sustainability. This means she's willing to dish out tax incentives to mega-monster corporations like Wal-Mart which threaten the mom-n-pop operations everywhere and bring more and more foreign goods into the country which used to be manufactured here. Economic growth needs to be about more than just job creation. It's a short-sighted approach to the problem.

Northup's latest ads say voters deserve to be informed of the issues. So, why won't she share her stand on the issues with voter information sites like VoteSmart.org, which uses a standardized non-partisan National Political Awareness Test for all candidates? (Uh, you might want to answer those questions yourself before you attack her on that one, of course).

MAKE HER DEBATE YOU. You're better informed on a wider spectrum of issues and you're quicker on the draw to boot. Let her stammer the way she does in front of WHAS's Mark Hebert in front of a more public crowd.

Meanwhile, congratulations on the results of the first WHAS-TV viewer poll. Your strong showing proved exactly what I told you the other evening – Northup is fighting dirty because she knows you can win, and she's scared.

No charge for all the free advice, of course!

Yer pal,

Frank N. Stine
(inside joke)

Anne Northup's "Goofy" Take On Values

2006-09-30T22:41:00.000-07:00

Anne Northup said of John Yarmuth, "There's no evidence that John Yarmuth reflects the values that most of the families in this community reflect."

So what do Northup and her GOP brethren think are our community values? Judging by the story below, sexually explicit communications with a minor of the same sex, hypocrisy, and good old fashion cover-ups are what Anne's party seems to hold dear.

You have to wonder why Republican House Majority Leader John Boehner now feels, "The improper communications between Congressman Mark Foley and former House congressional pages is unacceptable and abhorrent. It is an obscene breach of trust" when only a few months ago, he knew about it and said absolutely nothing. Is protecting the party more important than protecting children?

Are these the values Anne Northup thinks we hold dear in Louisville? If so, then give me that wacky "liberal" toy snatching, Saddam golf playing, John Yarmuth any day.

October 1, 2006
G.O.P. Aides Knew in Late ’05 of E-Mail
By CARL HULSE and RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
WASHINGTON, Sept. 30 — Top House Republicans knew for months about e-mail traffic between Representative Mark Foley and a former teenage page, but kept the matter secret and allowed Mr. Foley to remain head of a Congressional caucus on children’s issues, Republican lawmakers said Saturday.

The exchanges began with what Republicans now describe as an “overfriendly” e-mail message from Mr. Foley to the unidentified teenager.

But news reports about the exchanges led to the disclosure of e-mail correspondence with other former pages in which the discussions became more and more sexually explicit. Shortly after he was confronted by ABC News on Friday about the subject, Mr. Foley, who represented a south Florida district, resigned from the House.

The revelations set off a political upheaval, with Democrats and some Republicans calling for a full investigation of Mr. Foley’s conduct and whether House leaders did enough to look into it. Members of the Republican leadership sought Saturday to detail how they had handled the case in an effort to defuse the situation, even as it was emerging as an issue in Congressional races.

Among those who became aware earlier this year of the fall 2005 communications between Mr. Foley and the 16-year-old page, who worked for Representative Rodney Alexander, Republican of Louisiana, were Representative John A. Boehner, the majority leader, and Representative Thomas M. Reynolds of New York, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. Mr. Reynolds said in a statement Saturday that he had also personally raised the issue with Speaker J. Dennis Hastert.

“Despite the fact that I had not seen the e-mails in question, and Mr. Alexander told me that the parents didn’t want the matter pursued, I told the speaker of the conversation Mr. Alexander had with me,” Mr. Reynolds said.

In a chronology of the episode released later on Saturday, the speaker’s office said Mr. Hastert did not recall any such discussion and had no previous knowledge of the matter. “While the speaker does not explicitly recall this conversation, he has no reason to dispute Congressman Reynolds’ recollection that he reported to him on the problem and its resolution,” the statement said.

The statement, issued after senior aides, the House clerk and legal advisers huddled for much of Saturday in the Capitol, said senior staff members in the speaker’s office first learned of the e-mail messages from Mr. Alexander’s office in the fall of 2005 and took steps to investigate.

Aides to the speaker and other Congressional Republican leaders said the messages, which an Alexander aide described to them as “overfriendly,” were much less explicit than the others that came to light after ABC News first disclosed the e-mail correspondence with Mr. Alexander’s page. The aides said Mr. Alexander’s office, at the request of the page’s family, did not show them copies of the messages. In those messages, sent after Hurricane Katrina, Mr. Foley asked about the well-being of the boy, a Monroe, La., resident. He wrote: “How are you weathering the hurricane. . .are you safe. . .send me a pic of you as well.” The page sent the note to a former colleague, describing it as “sick.”

In another message, Mr. Foley wrote, “What do you want for your birthday coming up. . .what stuff do you like to do.”

The e-mail exchanges that came to light after the first news reports were far more graphic. When he was confronted about them on Friday, Mr. Foley resigned. Republican leaders said they had not known about the other e-mail correspondence.

“No one in the speaker’s office was made aware of the sexually explicit text messages which press reports suggest had been directed to another individual until they were revealed in the press and on the Internet this week,” the statement from Mr. Hastert’s office said.

Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers said Saturday that Congress and the public deserved a full report on Mr. Foley’s dealings with the pages, who are high school students who serve as runners and perform other duties. The lawmakers said there should also be an inquiry into the leadership’s knowledge of his activities and its response.

“Anyone who was involved in the chain of information should come forward and tell when they were told, what they were told and what they did with the information when they got it,” said Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York. Mr. King called it a “dark day” for Congress and said, “We need a full investigation.”

Representative Christopher Shays, Republican of Connecticut, said any leader who had been aware of Mr. Foley’s behavior and failed to take action should step down. “If they knew or should have known the extent of this problem, they should not serve in leadership,” Mr. Shays said.

On Saturday night, the House Republican leadership issued a statement that characterized the communications between Mr. Foley and the former House pages as “unacceptable and abhorrent.”

“It is an obscene breach of trust,” the statement said. “His immediate resignation must now be followed by the full weight of the criminal justice system.”

The statement, from Mr. Hastert, Mr. Boehner and the majority whip, Roy Blunt, asked the board that oversees pages “to undertake a full review of the incident and propose additional safeguard measures.”

The leaders also said they had asked for specific rules governing the communications and contacts between pages and lawmakers and called for creation of a toll-free number for pages and their parents to report concerns.

Besides the leaders, other lawmakers and Congressional officers who served on the board that oversaw the page program were aware of the e-mail messages, though the Democratic lawmaker who serves on the board, Representative Dale E. Kildee of Michigan, said Saturday that he had never been informed.

According to lawmakers and the speaker’s office, the page who received the e-mail forwarded the one in which Mr. Foley, 52, asked for his picture, to a colleague in Mr. Alexander’s office, repeatedly calling it “sick” and saying it “freaked me out.”

Mr. Alexander called the boy’s parents, who, Republican leaders said Saturday, told him they did not want to pursue the matter but wanted Mr. Foley to stop.

Mr. Alexander’s office also contacted staff members in Mr. Hastert’s office for guidance on what to do and, according to the speaker’s account, his aides put Mr. Alexander’s staff in contact with the clerk of the House, who oversees the page program. The clerk, who at the time was Jeff Trandahl, referred the matter to Representative John Shimkus, the Illinois Republican who is the chairman of the House Page Board, in late 2005, a spokesman for Mr. Shimkus said.

Mr. Trandahl and Mr. Shimkus confronted Mr. Foley, who insisted he was simply acting as a mentor to the former page, officials said. He assured them nothing inappropriate had occurred.

“They asked Foley about the e-mail,” the speaker’s statement said. “Congressman Shimkus and the clerk made it clear that to avoid even the appearance of impropriety and at the request of the parents, Congressman Foley was to immediately cease any communication with the young man.”

The leadership had other possible avenues for investigating the e-mail messages beyond questioning Mr. Foley, including an inquiry by the ethics committee or even the Capitol police. But aides said that while the contents of the messages are disturbing in hindsight, they did not set off alarms initially.

On Saturday, Mr. Shimkus’ spokesman, Steve Tomaszewski, said, “Obviously Foley lied about the other e-mails.”

Mr. Tomaszewski said Mr. Shimkus would not comment on any other conversations he had with House leaders about the matter because it was referred to the ethics committee by a vote of the House on Friday. A spokesman for Mr. Alexander did not respond to telephone and e-mail messages.

Kevin Madden, a spokesman for Mr. Boehner, said Saturday that Mr. Boehner had had a “brief, nonspecific” conversation about the subject with Mr. Alexander in the spring but that he could not recall with certainty whether he had discussed it with other leaders.

Democrats moved quickly to criticize Mr. Reynolds, who while overseeing House campaigns nationally is facing the potential of a serious challenge from Jack Davis, a wealthy businessman who has vowed to spend at least $2 million of his own money in the contest. “Tom Reynolds had a moral obligation to protect our children,” said Curtis Ellis, a spokesman for Mr. Davis.

Carl Forti, a spokesman for Mr. Reynolds, said the congressman became aware of contact between Mr. Foley and the young page this past spring, when Mr. Alexander brought it to his attention. Mr. Forti said that Mr. Alexander had told Mr. Reynolds of an e-mail exchange between Mr. Foley and the page, but that he did not show Mr. Reynolds the e-mail messages and their contents.

Strategists for both parties said it was too early to tell what impact the episode might have on Congressional elections now five weeks away but said at a minimum it could lower the already dismal public view of incumbents and discourage conservative voters.

It directly affected the race for the seat of Mr. Foley — the third Republican to resign this year under a cloud. Tim Mahoney, the Democrat who had been running an uphill and barely watched race against Mr. Foley, used the new attention to his campaign on Saturday to accuse the Republican leadership of covering up for him.

“It’s now clear from all the reports coming in from across the country that the Republican leadership team has been well aware of this problem with the pages for well over a year,” Mr. Mahoney said at a campaign stop at Palm Beach International Airport. “It looks to me that it was more important to hold onto a seat and to hold onto power than to take care of our children.”

At the Justice Department, an official said that no investigation was under way but that the agency had “real interest” in examining the circumstances to see if any crimes were committed.

Several of Mr. Foley’s former colleagues demanded a criminal inquiry.

Representative Robert E. Cramer, an Alabama Democrat who was co-chairman with Mr. Foley of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, condemned Mr. Foley’s actions as “shocking and disturbing.”

“Anyone, including Foley, involved in this type of behavior should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” Mr. Cramer said.

Kate Zernike contributed reporting from New York, David Johnston from Washington and Abby Goodnough from West Palm Beach, Fla.

Northup -- The Yarmuth Obsession

2006-09-30T19:00:00.000-07:00

On Anne's website, you'd think her News section would be filled with campaign stops, information about legislation, her work, etc. Nope, Ms. Low Self-Esteem can't run on her own merits, so even her News section is chock full of comments about John Yarmuth. The Score, as of today: Stories about Yarmuth 8 Stories about Anne 6.

See for yourself here.

Ultimate Golf Foursome -- Yarmuth, Saddam, Osama, and Kim Jong Il

2006-09-29T07:17:00.000-07:00

I think I'd have taken this a little bit further and done a complete parody of Anne's ad about Yarmuth's stand on the issues, but this is funny in its own right.

See a pattern here? Here's Anne's campaign strategy from 2002

2006-09-28T04:30:00.000-07:00

Descriptions and analysis of Anne Northup's ads from 2002. It's clear that she has one mode, attack the other guy. Does she have such low self esteem that she can't campaign on her own merits?

WATCHING THE CAMPAIGNS
Courier-Journal, The (Louisville, KY)
October 18, 2002
Author: Al CrossSTAFF
Estimated printed pages: 3

Analysis by Al Cross

The Courier-Journal

Candidate:Anne Northup,Republican

Election:3rd Congressional District,Nov.5

Producer:McCarthy,Marcus &Hennings

SCRIPT:

Narrator:If you ran the state budget and had a surplus,would you use the money to start a prescription program for Kentucky seniors,or build more golf courses?Jack Conway was a top aide to Governor Patton for six years. Patton and Conway chose (pause)more golf courses.Thirty-one states chose to start prescription programs for seniors.But under Patton and Conway,Kentucky spent $25 million of the surplus for golf courses,zero for a prescription program. The priorities of Jack Conway.Conway lookalike:Yeah!

VIDEO:

Black and white shots of state Capitol dome and elderly woman with medicine.Type on screen:``Prescription program?'' then ``More golf courses?'' Color shots of golfers,,Patton and Conway with arms around each other 's shoulders at a Conway event,a golf cart heading down a fairway at sunset,a golf ball rolling into the hole,and a Conway lookalike celebrating his putt.U.S.map is labeled ``31 states start prescription programs.'' Conway lookalike swings a golf club and celebrates his drive as ``$25 Million for Golf Courses ''is superimposed. Map reappears with Kentucky highlighted and ``0 for prescription programs '' label..Conway lookalike makes and celebrates a putt as ``The Priorities of Jack Conway ''appears on screen.

ANALYSIS:

This is the second ad in which Northup has blamed her Democratic challenger for the lack of a state prescription-drug benefit,a major issue at the federal level.(The Republican Party paid for the first adNorthup 's campaign is paying for this one.)While viewers may find this ad more engaging because it has a humorous bent and uses a Conway lookalike and sprightly background music,it is just as misleading as the first one,and less accurate. Contrary to the ads ' assertions,,Conway was in no position as an aide to Patton to choose whether to establish a state prescription-drug program.However,he opened himself to these attacks by saying that he helped oversee the state budget,which could imply that he played a role in writing the budget.There is no evidence of that,and Patton said in an interview this week that Conway played no such role.

It is inaccurate to say that the state spent $25 million of its 1998 surplus for golf courses, and highly misleading to suggest that the spending was an alternative to a prescription-drug program.The budget passed that year authorized $25 million in bonds,or official borrowing, for golf courses.The annual debt service for those bonds is about $2.3 million,an infinitesimal part of the overall two-year budget of $30 billion.The first-year cost of a state prescription- drug benefit proposed this year would have been about $25 million,about 11 times as much as the annual debt service for the golf courses. This ad also misleads by indicating that 31 states had started prescription programs when the state had a big surplus.By the end of 1998,no more than 14 states had started such programs.The figure of 31 is for 2000. Budget issues aside,this ad 's other aim is to more closely associate Conway with Patton, whose image and name evoke negative reactions among many voters because he is facing sex-for-favors allegations,which he has denied.Conway has not been tied to the scandal, so this ad borders on guilt by association,just as the last one did.

--Analysis by Al Cross,The Courier-Journal

BY DEVON MORGAN,THE COURIER-JOURNAL
Edition: MET;METRO
Section: FORUM
Page: 11A

Index Terms: ES ELECTION STORY; AN ANALYSIS; Q QUOTE; POLITICS; ELECTION; CAMPAIGN; ANNE NORTHUP
Dateline: KENTUCKY, USA;UNITED STATES
Copyright (c) The Courier-Journal. All rights reserved. Reproduced with the permission of Gannett Co., Inc. by NewsBank, inc.
Record Number: lou2002101810080895

I'm not even sure of the appropriate comment here....

2006-09-27T20:08:00.000-07:00

Click here to read a letter Anne sent to her supporters courtesy of bluegrassreport.org. I know how it made me react. I'd like to hear your comments.

The Yarmuth Record -- Anne's attempt to lose?

2006-09-27T19:22:00.000-07:00

Reading some of the items Anne Northup's chosen, you have to wonder if these items are the worst she could find out of hundreds of columns. Some of the ones she chooses contain offenses that she herself is guilty of.

Take the one that she chooses this quote from:

On Anne Northup -
“Rep. Northup, Carmack said, on numerous occasions had told contributors to take a hike when they suggested she owed them her vote. He is right. I should have been more careful about the way I made my points, because his interpretation is not what I intended . . . While I certainly believe that the contributions to Northup by business interests affect her votes on certain issues, I don’t believe those contributions are made in exchange for specific votes. Rather, I believe those special interests expect Northup to vote their way more times than not. Singling her out could create the impression for some readers that I believe she is more pliable than other politicians. I don’t.”
–LEO March 28, 2001 (Upon Further Review)

In the article, John says "Sometimes people get a different impression of what you write than the one you were attempting to communicate. Sometimes it's their fault; sometimes it's the writer's." One could argue that the staffers who spent hours scouring these columns were looking for that "different impression".

But you have to wonder if they were reading closely. Anne's lackeys apparently didn't read the section of the article that said, "My greater concern about American electoral politics is that candidates can, with impunity, lie to the public about their own record and their opponents." Ring a bell, Anne?

So where is "TheNorthupRecord.com"

2006-09-27T04:04:00.000-07:00

Ann's latest distorted smear attack ad on John Yarmuth ends with this tag: "I'm Anne Northup and I approved this message because voters deserve to know where we stand on the issues."

Since Anne's not told us anything beyond the fact that she likes "working together", when will we get the dramatically intoned ad telling us where SHE stands on issues, or even better, TheNorthupRecord.com.

It would be nice to see her display her voting record, her written position on issues, and perhaps open up any speeches she made years ago.

I checked. It's available. If she needs help buying it, I'll do it for her. So how about it Anne, why don't you live up to the promise you made in your own ad. Let me know where YOU stand on the issues.

Anne's unspoken message -- Drinking bad -- Getting Shot at Good

2006-09-26T19:53:00.000-07:00

Yet another out of context statement in Anne Northup's latest political smear against John Yarmuth says that he "supports lowering the drinking age".

Yarmuth didn't say he supported it, he said, "it is something we should consider". He then provides some points to ponder, such as the fact that this may lead us to have more control over drinking among that age, and perhaps even reduce the problems associated with underage drinking. He never says that he thinks every kid should be out getting drunk, or that the bars should be full of 18 year olds.

I find it ironic that Anne puts out an ominous ad about John Yarmuth's suggestion that there might be a benefit in lowering the drinking age, but seems not to have a problem with sending 18 to 20 year olds halfway around the world to fight in a fruitless war in Iraq.

Missing the point on "art"

2006-09-26T19:32:00.000-07:00

I know Anne's a former teacher, but I'm guessing that since she so devoted to George Bush, she probably goes more with her gut than bothering to open up large books like the dictionary or trying to understand differing points of view.

She takes John Yarmuth to task for calling a picture of the Virgin Mary made of elephant dung "art."

Webster's defines art as:

the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects; also : works so produced

If Anne had read the article, she'd have realized that it was a commentary on politicians making issues where there are none. The portrait, under the definition above, definitely is art. John doesn't call it good or great. And he doesn't say it is something he would hang on his wall. One of the points he makes, and one that any parent or former teacher should appreciate, is that openly criticizing this work as offensive, you wind up drawing more attention to the exhibit in question, and have more people going to the exhibit just to see what you criticized.

By taking this comment out of context, Anne's trying to make it look like John's somehow anti-Christian or anti-Catholic. This is something that his personality, his record, and his columns don't support. Shame on Anne for trying to play the religion card.

Money makes the world go 'round......

2006-09-26T04:28:00.000-07:00

Look at the data below about the difference in what Anne Northup has raised vs. John Yarmuth. The money she has received from political action committees is almost as much as John's total campaign. All those special interests tossing money her way has meant that she doesn't really have to support her own campaign, given her paltry contribution of $4000 to her own efforts compared to Yarmuth's $233,000 dip into his own pocket.

That difference in money can buy a lot of negative ads in the coming months. But it makes you wonder who exactly Anne will have to repay favors to if she wins in the coming year, given that she's put a fraction of 1% of her own money into her efforts for reelection.

Anne M. Northup (R)*

Raised: $2,154,343
Spent: $332,415
Cash on hand: $1,854,187
Last Report: 6/30/2006

PACs: $813,238 (38%)
Individuals: $1,272,481 (59%)
Candidate: $4,000 (0%)
Other: $64,624 (3%)

John A. Yarmuth (D)

Raised: $854,981
Spent: $437,152
Cash on hand: $417,929
Last Report: 6/30/2006

PACs: $5,000 (1%)
Individuals: $516,679 (60%)
Candidate: $233,301 (27%)
Other: $100,001 (12%)

Northup against the First Amendment?

2006-09-25T19:20:00.000-07:00

"If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable."

William Brennan -- Supreme Court Justice

Anne Northup seems to find fault in the Yarmuth Record with John Yarmuth's stance on flag burning. Essentially his position is that he is against it, but he'll defend your right to do so.

Anne, of course, is for legislation prohibiting it.

While this may seem like the mark of a true patriot, the true symbol of the United States is that sacred document The Constitution. Our country was founded on the belief that you should be able to air your grievances against the government. While burning the flag is a coarse, crude method of doing so, it should remain protected if we wish to continue to separate ourselves from the countries we proclaim as our enemies. To punish people who burn the flag to protest the United States or its government only dishonors the men and women who have fought so hard to protect not a flag, but an idea that free speech and the exchange of ideas is a sacred right.

Anne criticizes Yarmuth for avoiding Vietnam

2006-09-25T17:17:00.000-07:00

As we know, Anne likes sending our boys to fight and die in a fruitless war. So its no surprise that one of the John Yarmuth she takes issue with is a 1992 LEO editorial in which he says, in part "Bill Clinton was like millions of other 22-year-old men of the era, reluctant to die in a futile war, concerned about his fellow citizens who had no options, confused by the conflict between moral and civic responsibilities. I was a 1969 college graduate, and I was prepared to use all of my wits and my family’s influence to avoid Vietnam, if not the military."

I guess Anne was willing to go had her number come up in the draft. Oh wait, I forgot, women weren't drafted.

I wonder if she's ever reflected on the actions of the man she slavishly follows, George W. Bush. I guess she assumes that W used none of his father's influence to ensure that during Vietnam he was serving when he wanted to safely at home in the Texas Air National Guard. He certainly wasn't alone among his Republican brethren in avoiding Vietnam.

Anne on Guns -- Has Anne Flip Flopped?

2006-09-25T15:50:00.000-07:00

Anne's website The Yarmuth Record also makes an issue out of Yarmuth's obvious distaste for guns, the NRA, and the Second Amendment.

Anne's own record suggests that maybe she was once in Yarmuth's Corner.

Look at these stats from vote-smart.org.

2005 Representative Northup supported the interests of the Gun Owners of America 50 percent in 2005.

2004 Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all Congressional candidates in 2004, the National Rifle Association assigned Representative Northup a grade of A (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).

2003-2004 Representative Northup supported the interests of the Gun Owners of America 40 percent in 2003-2004.

2003 Representative Northup supported the interests of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence 0 percent in 2003.

2003 Representative Northup supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 33 percent from 1988-2003 (Senate) or 1991-2003 (House).

2003 Representative Northup supported the interests of the Gun Owners of America 40 percent in 2003.

2002 On the votes that the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered to be the most important as of 2002, Representative Northup voted their preferred position 37 percent of the time. These scores are cumulative for each representative's time in their current office. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered votes from 1988-2002 in the House and 1991-2002 in the Senate when determining these scores.

2002 Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all Congressional candidates in 2002, the National Rifle Association assigned Representative Northup a grade of B (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).

2001-2002 Based on the results of a questionnaire the Gun Owners of America assigned Representative Northup a grade of C- (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F-).

2000 Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all Congressional candidates in 2000, the National Rifle Association assigned Representative Northup a grade of C (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).

1999-2000 Representative Northup supported the interests of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence 50 percent in 1999-2000.

1999-2000 Based on the results of a questionnaire the Gun Owners of America assigned Representative Northup a grade of D- (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F-).

It looks like it took awhile for Anne to come around to the party line on the issue of guns. But eventually she went from a D- to an A, and reduced her support for organizations who are anti gun. Anne notably switched sides on the issue when she voted for repealing gun limits in Washington D.C. in 2004 after voting to keep the limits in 1999.

Northup Supporters march in fear

2006-09-24T06:55:00.000-07:00

As you read about Anne Northup's lackeys marching ahead of John Yarmuth passing out yet another piece of their smear campaign against him, you have to wonder why they're trying so hard. After all, Anne's been in office for almost 10 years. Doesn't she have a strong record she can stand on and put into nice brochures to hand out?

The truth is that Anne Northup doesn't have much to stand on, so she spends every election cycle smearing her challengers. She spends handily to attack them election after election. Ask Jack Conway. Ask Eleanor Jordan.

So instead of dignifying Northup's campaign against him, John Yarmuth should turn it around and ask the media to focus on why she won't run on her own record.

Yarmuth: Northup's ads distort positions
By Kay Stewart
kstewart@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

By Kay Stewart
kstewart@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

One day after her new ad campaign savaged his record, Democratic challenger John Yarmuth accused U.S. Rep. Anne Northup of distorting his positions, saying there's "not one accurate claim."

But during yesterday's downpour, Northup's campaign manager, Patrick Neely, countered: "That's like saying, right now, it's not raining outside."

Northup held a press conference Friday to unleash new TV and radio ads and a campaign Web site devoted solely to expose "goofy" positions she says Yarmuth has held.

She cited Yarmuth for once having endorsed abolishing Social Security, getting rid of "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance, doubling the payroll tax, legalizing marijuana and lowering the drinking age.

Yarmuth didn't respond Friday to Northup's attack, instead letting his campaign manager, Jason Burke, say that none of those ideas represent Yarmuth's current positions.

Yesterday, Yarmuth, at a scheduled grand opening of his western Louisville headquarters, said he hadn't responded because he hadn't seen Northup's ads and didn't know what he would be responding to.

Yarmuth said Northup took individual statements and distorted them.

"I would be happy to explain columns I wrote," he said, adding, "This election is about where this country is going."

He said Northup needs to be held accountable for her votes on issues such as supporting the Iraq War, tax cuts and her opposition to increasing the minimum wage.

Neely said Northup will be talking about her voting record during several debates with Yarmuth next month.

Her campaign continued its focus on his record yesterday at the Fairdale Parade in southern Jefferson County, a major draw on the political campaign circuit.

Yarmuth and Northup each walked at a distance from each other in the pouring rain.

Ahead of Yarmuth's group, Northup supporters passed out fliers along the route to people huddled under umbrellas.

Headlined, "Yarmuth?" above his picture, the flier included quotes attributed to him, including one under his picture: "I don't have a lot of friends in Louisville's South End, blue collar neighborhoods either. I also don't go into those neighborhoods either."

The quote ends, "But none of these facts carry implications beyond the simple fact that I don't go there. It is undeniable that people want to be with people who have common interests."

Yarmuth said yesterday that he was addressing people's common interests, not making a statement about South Louisville.

Reporter Kay Stewart can be reached at (502) 582-4114.

Northup supports clueless voting.

2006-09-23T12:40:00.000-07:00

Interesting how Anne Northup's website trying to take John Yarmuth's comments out of context has this humdinger, "Millions of Americans will go to the polls next week and cast clueless votes.”

The implication is that ultra liberal John Yarmuth thinks voters are stupid sheep. But Anne once again excerpts his quote like a bad movie review without any context (although she does attach the article). In the article, found here, John Yarmuth says that voters go to the polls ill informed, but that both the news media and the candidates themselves do little to improve the situation. He essentially saying that voters, candidates and the media all do themselves a disservice by not pursing the truth behind the positions candidates hold.

Is it really possible that Anne DISAGREES with that statement? Does she think it's better to have voters going to the polls with as little information as possible beyond some saturation bombing of negative ads by her campaign?

The answer is obvious. Of course she does. After all, a voter who fears that the liberal Democratic candidate is going to open up the borders to every bomb toting terrorist, allow people to marry farm animals, and sell the country to the UN is one that will vote for them. As Bush shows us every day, ignorance is bliss.

I also have to wonder why Anne doesn't highlight Yarmuth's comments in the editorial about Jim Bunning, the Kentucky elected Senator for Cincinatti who doesn't pay any attention to the news. Does she think it's okay for a Senator to not read newspapers or pay any attention to news sources except for the ones that are favorable to his own positions? Maybe she herself is guilty of ignorance when it comes to the news.

And why not highlight the comment about her friend in Indiana, Mike Sodrel? Does she truly believe that labor friendly Democrats are more likely to support jobs going overseas than her Republican brethren who are so deeply in the pockets of big business they are covered in lint?

The truth here is that Anne likes cluelessness. The truth is the biggest thorn in the side of Republicans these days.

Pledge of Allegiance -- Bush doesn't care about history. Guess Anne doesn't either.

2006-09-23T12:19:00.000-07:00

Another issue that Anne makes about Yarmuth is that he supports removal of "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance.

First, it's out of context. Yarmuth essentially says that he doesn't have a problem with the phrase "under God" being in the pledge, but that he sees in the context of the Constitution (surely the Republican's remember that document, it's the one they keep on a roll in the bathroom), the phrase has no place in a pledge recited in public schools, especially when it is being taught and students are required to say it.

Some history of the Pledge of Allegiance courtesy of Wikipedia. A socialist(!) Baptist minister named Francis Bellamy created the pledge as an advertising campaign for a kids magazine in order to sell flags. As Yarmuth points out, the phrase "under God" was nowhere to be found in the original pledge. The United States Congress officially recognized the Pledge as the official national pledge on December 28 , 1945. The words "under God" were not added until 1954.

The issue at hand that Yarmuth was discussing is detailed in the following excerpt from wikipedia:

In a 2002 case brought by atheist Michael Newdow, whose daughter was being taught the pledge in school, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the phrase "under God" an unconstitutional endorsement of monotheism. The majority of Americans opposed this ruling, and it was denounced almost unanimously the following day by both houses of Congress. In 2004, the Supreme Court heard an appeal of the ruling and rejected Newdow's claim on the grounds that he was not the custodial parent, and therefore lacked standing, thus avoiding ruling on whether the phrase was constitutional (see Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow).

Given Anne's unflagging support for President Bush's misguided war on Iraq, and the reasons being given (this week, anyway) for going there, you would think Anne would also support this Supreme Court decision. After all, stepping on religious freedoms (including freedom from it) is something evil doers like Saddam Hussein do on a daily basis. Maybe she just didn't take the time to read the whole article. After all, she's busy doing something. Maybe if she ever gets around to printing her own record, we'll find out.

Anne loves our Auto Workers.... except when it comes to supporting their interests

2006-09-22T22:36:00.000-07:00

Anne's latest commercial criticizes John Yarmuth for his stance on SUVs as an attack on the workers at our local Ford plant, where some SUVs are created. On TheYarmuthRecord.com, a website that Anne's heavily financed campaign created to take John's opinions out of context and to crticize the fact that he actually is an independent thinker, the best they could come up with was this quote: “The single most significant thing I could do as a Member of Congress would be to try to promote a tax on larger engines.” (SUV's and pickup trucks)

I find it hard to believe that a person with such big pocketbooks supporting her campaign and has probably ridden in many luxury cars has never heard of the Gas Guzzler tax. Since 1978 this tax has been applied to CARS that don't meet certain gas mileage standards, which today consists mostly of luxury and sports cars. Trucks are exempt.

Does Anne really have a problem, in this day and age of record gas prices, of supporting measures to increase pressure on raising gas mileage standards in all vehicles?

And if Anne wants to have us believe that Yarmuth desires to hurt the autoworkers in the area, maybe she could explain her own voting record in regards to issues supported by the United Auto Workers. From vote-smart.org:

Representative Northup supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 21 percent in 2005

Representative Northup supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 13 percent in 2004.

Representative Northup supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 7 percent in 2003.

Representative Northup supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 8 percent in 2002.

Representative Northup supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 8 percent in 2001.

Representative Northup supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 0 percent in 2000

Ask yourself why Anne's already in attack mode.

2006-09-22T20:35:00.000-07:00

She's been in Congress for almost 10 years, so surely she has more to say about her own record then telling us about some future projects that may see the light of day in our lifetime.

Instead, she's used her vast campaign war chest to attack John Yarmuth. Anne did a lot grandstanding about her inability to get copies of all of John's LEO articles since he created the publication years ago. Her campaign paid to make copies of hundreds of issues of the newspaper, and apparently has had her staffers going over it ever since. Her commercials publicize these editorials, using the fact that she can take quotes out of context of either the editorial itself or the situations on which they are based to try and portray a negative picture of John.

But ask yourself.... who would YOU want representing you? Do you want a person who can't find anything of note in 9 years of public service to put in her own ads? Do you want a person who has spent most of those 9 years in blind service to her own party while ignoring the greater good of her state or her country? Do you want a person who thinks that putting opinions into print and occasionally changing your mind are bad qualities? If so, then vote for Anne Northup. If you want positive change for this community, then consider a vote for John Yarmuth.

Anne has spent 9 years bashing her opponents with all the money that the Republican Party can give her. She's a bully because she can be. Send her a message and vote for John Yarmuth on election day.

LEO's Comment on Anne Northup's Attack Ads -- Context is Everything

2006-09-22T16:48:00.000-07:00

Yes, attack ads work, but only if you let them. Before you take Anne's ads to heart, consider that John's never been afraid to get his opinions and ideas to the public, and unlike the blind follower of the architect of the Iraq war (which was planned months before 9/11), isn't afraid to admit when he's wrong.

Anne claims that John will say anything to get elected. The truth seems to be that Anne will say anything about John to get elected. Anne. Why don't you grow up, accept some responsiblity, and become a leader, not a follower.

City Strobe: Please, enough with the negativity
By LEO Weekly

A screen capture: of the Anne Northup political advertisement that criticizes John Yarmuth for his stance on the gas tax and the Senior Prescription Drug Program.As surely as the leaves turn in fall, Republicans in Louisville’s TV market have begun anew their negative campaign offensives. 3rd District U.S. Rep. Anne Northup launched an ad last week attacking Democratic contender and LEO founder John Yarmuth (who no longer has ties to the newspaper) for what her campaign calls a change in position on the gas tax and the senior prescription drug program. The ad ends with this contention: “Either John Yarmuth doesn’t know his own positions, or he’ll say anything to get elected,” and it compares Yarmuth’s most current TV ad (he has released two so far, both focused on issues and neither of which mentions Northup) to his LEO editorials.

The Northup ad offers no context and, as a result, is misleading.
The first examines Yarmuth’s position on the federal gas tax. The LEO editorial referenced in the commercial is from May 22, 1996. In it, Yarmuth argues that cutting the federal gas tax would not solve the problem of a temporary spike in gas prices, and if the federal tax were to be cut, raising the state tax could be necessary. At that time, the federal gas tax was 4.3 cents per gallon.

Now, more than a decade later, the federal gas tax is closer to 20 cents a gallon, the price of gas has almost tripled, and even President Bush is publicly questioning America’s dependence on foreign oil. Clearly much has changed on this issue in the past 10 years.

The second point Northup’s ad asserts is that Yarmuth opposes the Senior Prescription Drug Program that he supported in a June 26, 2002 editorial. A quick read for context reveals again that the ad is misleading. In the editorial, Yarmuth called for a bipartisan approach to creating and passing a plan that works for senior citizens, which ultimately did not happen: Medicare Plan D, as it is now, significantly benefits the 10 largest U.S. drug companies while disallowing the government to negotiate price with drug companies. In reality, that leaves such decisions to insurance and drug companies to negotiate, which Yarmuth’s editorial contends should not be allowed to happen. Republican or Democrat, that’s simply not a change in position.

On a related note, Yarmuth has signed the League of Women Voters’ 2006 Ethical Campaign Pledge, which aims to keep such smearing and negativity out of this year’s campaigns. Northup did not sign it, nor did 2nd District U.S. Rep. Ron Lewis (R).

The pledge covers federal and state legislative races, the mayoral race, Metro Council races, and many municipal races. A majority of those who signed are Democrats, though several Republicans in state and local races also pledged not to smear. —Stephen George