For GOP only

[HuskyCaucasian]

I still think Spitzer played Gollum in the Lord of the Rings movies...lol

Ashley Alexandra Dupre... my preeeecccciooooous.

[southsider2k5]

I know this is going to light a fire, but why would you make posters with such similarities???

 

 

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I know this is going to light a fire, but why would you make posters with such similarities???

 

 

 

 

Other than the red shadowing, what are the similarities?

 

Actually, when I saw that poster, I remember thinking of that movies that came out recently... the one that was semi-animated, that had Keanu Reeves in it, live action but painted over... that's what Obama looks like to me. Like an ad for that movie about drugs. I don't recall the name off hand.

 

[southsider2k5]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm1842.cfm

 

The House Budget's $3,000-per-Household Tax Increase

by Brian M. Riedl

WebMemo #1842

 

Despite healthy tax revenues and federal spending that tops $25,000 per household, the House Democratic majority has proposed a fiscal year (FY) 2009 federal budget that:

 

* Raises taxes by $1.265 trillion over five years and $3.911 trillion over 10 years, or more than $3,135per household annually;

* Includes 17 reserve funds that could be used to raise taxes by hundreds of billions more;

* Increases discretionary spending by 8 percent and does not terminate a single wasteful program; and

* Completely ignores the impending explosion of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid costs.

 

The White House has responsibly pledged to veto legislation with tax and spending increases that would follow from these proposals. Congress should start over and write a budget that does not raise taxes on American families or businesses, is in line with the President's spending proposals, and addresses the coming entitlement tsunami. Anything less would likely worsen the economic downturn, make it more difficult for families to make ends meet, and kick serious budget challenges further down the road.

 

Building on a Bad Legacy

 

The Democratic congressional majority promised Pay-As-You-Go (PAYGO) budgeting that would prevent new deficit spending. Yet, last year, they used blatant accounting gimmicks, such as fake sunsets and shifting payment dates, to pass:

 

* SCHIP legislation adding $55 billion to the budget deficit;

 

* A farm bill adding $7 billion to the budget deficit despite record-high farm incomes;

* A student loan bill with $15 billion in new deficit spending; and

* Terrorism risk insurance legislation adding $8.4 billion to the budget deficit.[1]

 

Gimmicks such as abusing the "emergency" designation also helped Congress eventually to secure White House acceptance of most of its proposed 9.4 percent increase in discretionary spending. Despite pledges of fiscal restraint and deficit reduction, FY 2008 was a year of large new deficit spending. There is little indication that this year will be markedly different.

 

The $4 Trillion Tax Hike

 

The FY 2009 House budget resolution assumes $15.973 trillion in tax revenues over the next five years, which exactly matches the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) baseline. The CBO's baseline, however, assumes tax increases of $1.265 trillion over five years and $3.911 trillion over 10 years, or $3,135 per household annually. Taxes on American workers and businesses would rise by an average of 12 percent. Revenues would rise from 18.8 percent of GDP to a near-record 20.3 percent of GDP by 2018.

 

And that may not even be all. The House budget also includes 17 more reserve funds, which effectively gives lawmakers a blank check to hike taxes even more to finance additional spending.

 

The baseline tax increase of $3.911 trillion assumes the expiration of all 2001 and 2003 tax relief, including the expanded child tax credit, marriage penalty relief, and lower 10 percent tax bracket. It also assumes the expiration of all other temporary tax relief and allowing the alternative minimum tax (AMT) to hit an additional 20 million taxpayers. True, lawmakers may choose to keep some of the current tax cuts by raising other taxes instead. For example, the House is planning to avoid the AMT hike by raising other taxes through the reconciliation process, and the budget includes language pledging to retain some of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. However, increasing some tax rates as the price of maintaining other tax policies at current levels is still a tax increase. Taxpayers will still pay trillions of dollars more, regardless of which pocket lawmakers take it from.

 

Some lawmakers have even declared that, because it is already written into current law, allowing the tax cuts to expire does not constitute a tax increase. However, a tax increase is a tax increase, even if lawmakers schedule it years in advance. Under the House budget, millions of Americans would see their marginal income tax rates leap from 25 percent to 28 percent; the estate tax would surge from zero to 55 percent. It would be difficult for taxpayers to believe that their taxes have not been raised.

 

While there is never a good time to raise taxes, pledging $4 trillion in tax increases during a time of economic uncertainty is especially worrisome. Raising tax rates on every taxpayer and business would reduce incentives to work, save, and invest and therefore significantly reduce the economy's long-term capacity to grow and raise living standards. The same Congress that distributed a one-time $1,200-per-household tax rebate in hopes of helping the economy would now turn around and raise taxes by $3,135 per household annually. Even though the budget delays most of the tax increases until 2011, businesses and investors might begin pulling back long-term investment plans in anticipation of higher investment taxes and the resulting slower economic growth.

 

More Spending Hikes

 

Federal spending now tops $25,000 per household annually, and the coming Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid costs of 77 million retiring baby boomers could eventually add another $12,000 per household to the taxpayers' annual tab.[2] Rather than address escalating federal spending and the coming entitlement tsunami, the House budget irresponsibly piles on even more spending and debt.

 

The House budget would boost FY 2009 discretionary spending (excluding emergencies) by $74 billion, or 8 percent, above this year's level. That amount is also $23 billion over the President's proposed $992 billion. If Congress's larger budget becomes part of the spending baseline, it will translate into approximately $283 billion in new spending over 10 years above the President's requested level. That does not include the extra spending that could result from the 17 reserve funds mentioned above.

 

Discretionary spending has already expanded by 45 percent (after inflation) since 2001. While defense spending has received large increases, even non-defense programs have increased by 28 percent under President Bush--at an annual rate that is nearly twice as fast as under President Clinton.[3] Yet the House would provide an additional 8 percent increase.

 

Regrettably, the House budget does not propose any significant offsets for this new spending. Nor does it propose eliminating a single wasteful federal program. Not even wasteful and unnecessary programs like the Advanced Technology Program, which spends much of its $70 million budget subsidizing Fortune 500 companies, would be reduced.[4] In failing to offer spending reductions, congressional budget writers ignored:

 

* At least $55 billion in annual program overpayments;

* $60 billion in corporate welfare;

* $123 billion for programs for which government auditors cannot find any evidence of success;

* $140 billion in potential budget savings identified in the CBO's "Budget Options" books; and

* Massive program duplication, such as the 342 economic development programs, the 130 programs serving the disabled, the 130 programs serving at-risk youth, and the 90 early childhood development programs.[5]

 

By a party-line vote, Democrats on the House Budget Committee also rejected an amendment offered by Representatives Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) and John Campbell (R-CA) to impose a one-year moratorium on earmarks so that a new bipartisan select committee can make recommendations on how to reform the earmark process. The continuation of earmarking-as-usual will likely create more upward pressure on program budgets while also pressuring lawmakers to support large, wasteful spending bills in order to preserve their pork. This is certainly not the change the American people voted for in 2006.

 

Ignoring the Entitlement Crisis

 

The coming collision of 77 million retiring baby boomers with Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid represents the greatest economic challenge of the present era. What Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has recently called the "calm before the storm" ended on January 1, 2008, when the first baby boomers became eligible for early Social Security benefits.[6] In just three years, they will become eligible for Medicare. In the coming decades, the cost of these programs will leap from 8.4 percent of GDP to 18.6 percent of GDP. Without reform, this 10.2 percent of GDP cost increase would require either raising taxes by the current equivalent of $12,072 per household or eliminating every other government program.[7]

 

The budget resolution simply ignores the entitlement problem. Worse, it rejects the President's common-sense proposal to save $8 trillion by reducing Medicare Part B and Part D subsidies for the wealthiest seniors and adjusting payment formulas. The President offered this and other recommendations in response to the Medicare trustees' recent warning that a record 45 percent of Medicare's budget will soon be subsidized out of general tax revenues, leaving just 55 percent funded by payroll taxes and user premiums. The Democratic congressional leadership has thus far chosen to ignore the trustees' warning.

 

This abdication of responsibility will have negative consequences for nearly every American. For every year that Congress chooses to ignore the problem, the nation's 77 million baby boomers move a year closer to retirement, and the price tag of the inevitable reforms increases by hundreds of billions of dollars.

 

Conclusion

 

The House budget resolution pledges to raise taxes by an average of $3,135 per household. This classic tax-and-spend budget pushes up discretionary spending and leaves the nation woefully unprepared to face the coming retirement of 77 million baby boomers. The White House has rightly drawn a veto line in the sand for any budget bills that emerge from this budget resolution. Lawmakers should go back to the drawing board and write a budget that contains no tax increases, meets the President's spending targets, and deals realistically with coming entitlement costs. If they do not, the President should keep his veto pen ready.

 

Brian M. Riedl is Grover M. Hermann Fellow in Federal Budgetary Affairs in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

[NorthSideSox72]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm1842.cfm

Well that doesn't look good. Of course, the article isn't from a new source either, so I'd take it with a grain of salt. I will want to see an actual news agency's report on the budget though. I'll keep an eye out for it.

 

[mr_genius]

well, it seems people are STILL insane with rage over those Muhammad cartoons

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/books/20....html?ref=world

 

wtf?

[southsider2k5]

McCain +7 over Obama and +10 over Hillary

 

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...l_tracking_poll

 

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Advertisment

 

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows John McCain’s lead growing against both potential Democratic opponents. McCain currently leads Barack Obama 49% to 42% and Hillary Clinton 51% to 41% margin (see recent daily results). African-American support for Clinton has collapsed, falling to 55% in the general election match-up. Obama, on the other hand, earns solid support from African-American voters but attracts only 36% of white voters in a match-up with McCain.

 

Over the past month, McCain has gained ground in Ohio, Michigan, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania. Both Democrats continue to lead in New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut and California (see summary of recent state general election polling).

 

On the fifth anniversary of the War in Iraq, the candidates all had something to say on the topic but the politics of the issue have become much more complicated (see Video.) Joe Conason offers a commentary on The Folks Who Brought You Iraq.

 

In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, Obama now leads Clinton 46% to 43%. Before the story broke about his former Pastor, Obama led by eight. (see recent daily results). New polling data released today shows that Clinton leads handily in West Virginia’s Presidential Primary.

 

A Rasmussen Reports analysis looks at the impact of Pastor Wright and Obama’s speech. Many pundits have already weighed in on the topic: Larry Sabato looks at The Crapshoot of Presidential Politics, Froma Harrop considers Divides Obama Doesn't Bridge, Dick Morris says Pastor Wright: This Too Shall Pass, Susan Estrich offers her thoughts on The Speech, Michelle Malkin Says Goodbye to the Glowbama Mystique, and Robert Novak looked at the Democratic Racial Divide.

 

See Obama’s Speech. See Rasmussen Reports video, Can Obama Recover from the Pastor Problem? And watch Scott Rasmussen discuss the Pastor Wright issue on WNYW New York.

 

On Thursday, Barack Obama’s favorable ratings are unchanged for the third straight day—48% favorable, 49% unfavorable. McCain is viewed favorably by 53% of voters nationwide and unfavorably by 43%. For Clinton, those numbers are 43% favorable, 55% unfavorable (see recent daily results).

 

The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows Democrats leading in states with 210 Electoral Votes while the GOP has the advantage in states with 189. When “leaners” are added, the Democrats lead 247 to 229. Recent polling shows that, over the past month, New poll results released today show both Democrats leading in Massachusetts (see summary of recent state general election polling).

 

Daily tracking results are collected via nightly telephone surveys and reported on a four-day rolling average basis. The next Presidential Tracking Poll update is scheduled for Friday at 11:00 a.m. The results are also compiled on a full-week basis and crosstabs for the full-week results are available for Premium Members. See crosstabs for general election match-ups, favorable ratings and Democratic primary.

 

Rasmussen Markets data now give Obama a 73.8 % chance to win the Democratic nomination while expectations for a Clinton victory are at 25.8 %. Market data also suggests that Obama has a 42.6 % chance to become the next President. Expectations for McCain to become President are at 40.2 % while Clinton’s prospects are at 16.5 %. Numbers in this paragraph are from a prediction market, not a poll. Using a trading format where traders "buy and sell" candidates, issues, and news features, the Rasmussen Markets harness competitive passions to provide a reliable leading indicator of upcoming events. We invite you to participate in the Rasmussen Markets. It costs nothing to join and add your voice to the collective wisdom of the market.

 

Each Monday, full week results are released based upon a seven-day rolling average. While the daily tracking result are useful for measuring quick reaction to events in the news, the full week results provide an effective means for evaluating longer-term trends.

 

Daily tracking results are collected via nightly telephone surveys and reported on a four-day rolling average basis. The general election sample is currently based upon interviews with 1,600 Likely Voters. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

 

Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.

 

The Rasmussen Reports ElectionEdgeâ„¢ Premium Service for Election 2008 offers the most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a Presidential election.

 

Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.

 

Daily tracking results are collected via nightly telephone surveys and reported on a four-day rolling average basis. Each update includes approximately 900 Likely Democratic Primary Voters and 800 Likely Republican Primary Voters. Margin of sampling error for each is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

[NorthSideSox72]

McCain +7 over Obama and +10 over Hillary

 

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...l_tracking_poll

One would expect this, given the in-fighting in the Dem party. If this was October, the Dems should worry. But its not.

 

How this situation resolves itself is important - the Dem fight I mean. But ultimately, come July, it will be in the rear-view, and it will be a new race.

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

One would expect this, given the in-fighting in the Dem party. If this was October, the Dems should worry. But its not.

 

How this situation resolves itself is important - the Dem fight I mean. But ultimately, come July, it will be in the rear-view, and it will be a new race.

I completely agree. you worded that far better than i could have. Basically, polling at his point is REALLY pointless. Once this is narrowed to two candidates, the rest will shake it out. I think in the END an Obam / McCain race will favor Obama. but an Obama / Clinton race will favor McCain.

[southsider2k5]

One would expect this, given the in-fighting in the Dem party. If this was October, the Dems should worry. But its not.

 

How this situation resolves itself is important - the Dem fight I mean. But ultimately, come July, it will be in the rear-view, and it will be a new race.

 

I think it is the opposite. The newscycle is 24/7 on Obama and Clinton. The only time McCain even makes the news is when he screws something up. It is amazing 50% of people even realize McCain is still in the race.

[BearSox]

McCain +7 over Obama and +10 over Hillary

 

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...l_tracking_poll

 

And people said the story about Obama's nutjob anti-american pastor wouldn't effect him at all...

[NorthSideSox72]

I think it is the opposite. The newscycle is 24/7 on Obama and Clinton. The only time McCain even makes the news is when he screws something up. It is amazing 50% of people even realize McCain is still in the race.

Could be. But McCain is in an awfully positive light right now, acting like a leader, going overseas, etc.

 

And by the way, in response to Athomeboy, I was NOT saying the polls mean nothing. I was saying they mean something, but not necessarily that McCain is going to be a huge favorite in November.

 

[mr_genius]

Could be. But McCain is in an awfully positive light right now, acting like a leader, going overseas, etc.

 

And by the way, in response to Athomeboy, I was NOT saying the polls mean nothing. I was saying they mean something, but not necessarily that McCain is going to be a huge favorite in November.

 

Yea, there is no way a GOP candidate should be a favorite in Nov. With the economy the way it is, an unpopular sitting GOP president, and massive Democrat turnout / enthusiasm in the primaries. This is an election for the Dems to lose, not the GOP to win (if that makes sense). McCain is pretty much the only chance the GOP had at winning this as he can remain neutral enough to allow the far left wing corrupt the election and paint the Democrat party in a bad enough light to blow this election.

[mr_genius]

And people said the story about Obama's nutjob anti-american pastor wouldn't effect him at all...

 

They were obviously wrong. I'm actually surprised most of the Obama supporters that post here didn't at least realize the rev Wright scandal would effect the election.

Edited March 20, 2008 by mr_genius

[EvilMonkey]

A liberal news joke.

 

A biker is riding by the zoo, when he sees a little girl leaning into the lion's cage. Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the cuff of her jacket and tries to pull her inside to slaughter her, under the eyes of her screaming parents. The biker jumps off his bike, runs to the cage and hits the lion square on the nose with a powerful punch. Whimpering from the pain the lion jumps back letting go of the girl, and the biker brings her to her terrified parents, who thank him endlessly.

 

A reporter has seen the whole scene, and addressing the biker, says, " Sir, this was the most gallant and brave thing I saw a man do in my whole life. "

 

"Why, it was nothing, really, the lion was behind bars. I just saw this little kid in danger, and acted as I felt right. "

 

"Well, I'll make sure this won't go unnoticed. I'm a journalist, you know, and tomorrow's papers will have this on the first page. What motorcycle do you ride?

 

"A Harley Davidson."

 

The journalist leaves. The following morning the biker buys the paper to see if it indeed brings news of his actions, and reads, on first page:

 

BIKER GANG MEMBER ASSAULTS AFRICAN IMMIGRANT AND STEALS HIS LUNCH

 

[lostfan]

Yea, there is no way a GOP candidate should be a favorite in Nov. With the economy the way it is, an unpopular sitting GOP president, and massive Democrat turnout / enthusiasm in the primaries. This is an election for the Dems to lose, not the GOP to win (if that makes sense). McCain is pretty much the only chance the GOP had at winning this as he can remain neutral enough to allow the far left wing corrupt the election and paint the Democrat party in a bad enough light to blow this election.

I have full confidence in the Dems to blow this - there really are no capable Democratic leaders in the party, a few of them show flashes but nothing too concrete. You have the Old Guard turds like Hillary, Kerry, Kennedy, etc. that nobody outside of hardcore Democrats actually likes and Republicans absolutely hate, after that just a bunch of trash with a few decent ones sprinkled about. Obama was the exception for a while but they are blowing it for him too.

 

Hence why I'm not a registered Democrat and it looks to stay that way indefinitely unless they develop a collective spine.

[YASNY]

DETROIT, Michigan (CNN) -- Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick and an ex-aide were charged Monday with perjury and obstruction of justice after prosecutors said sexually explicit text messages between the two contradicted their sworn court testimony.

 

Kilpatrick defiantly declared his innocence just an hour after the charges were announced.

 

"This has been a very flawed process from the beginning," said Kilpatrick at a press conference Monday. "I look forward to complete exoneration."

 

Kilpatrick, who is married, has been snarled in a well-publicized sex scandal since January after The Detroit Free Press reported he exchanged romantic text messages with his then-chief of staff, Christine Beatty.

 

The paper reported in January that in an analysis of nearly 14,000 text messages on Beatty's city-issued pager, it found some from 2002 and 2003 that indicated the two were having a romantic affair.

 

The newspaper report contradicted testimony Kilpatrick gave last August in a court case brought by police officers against the mayor and the city of Detroit alleging the mayor retaliated against the officers for their role in investigating his office. Critics alleged that Kilpatrick committed perjury in the case and called for his resignation.

 

In testimony during that case, Kilpatrick and Beatty both denied having a romantic relationship. Beatty resigned as Kilpatrick's chief of staff on January 28.

 

Prosecutor Kym Worthy said she charged Kilpatrick and Beatty with multiple counts of perjury, obstruction of justice and misconduct in office in a 12-count indictment. The most serious charges carry a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison.

 

Worthy also said others may be charged in the case. She asked Kilpatrick and Beatty to turn themselves in by Tuesday morning.

 

"Even children understand that lying is wrong. Witnesses must give truthful testimony," she said.

 

Worthy had strong words for Kilpatrick during a press conference Monday and said city officials tried to hamper her investigation.

 

"At every bend and turn there have been efforts by the city to block our investigation," she added. "We had to go to court to get documents we subpoenaed on January 31. We have been told some other documents have been destroyed."

 

Last week, the Detroit City Council voted seven to one to ask Kilpatrick to resign, a city clerk said. The vote was non-binding and Kilpatrick has continued on the job.

 

Kilpatrick offered an abject apology to his constituents January 30, but remained adamant he would not resign.

 

"I truly apologize to each and every one of you, individually and to the whole city," Kilpatrick said in a sometimes emotional televised statement.

 

Sitting next to his wife, Carlita, he also apologized to "my entire family, and specifically to the four people I love most in this world" -- his wife and his sons, 12-year-old twins Jelani and Jalil and 6-year-old Jonas.

 

"Over the past few days, there has been some speculation about who is in charge of the city," Kilpatrick said. "Make no mistake about it: Since 2002, I have been in charge of the city. There have been ups and downs. There have been hills and mountains and valleys, but through it all, I remain in charge of the city."

 

On speculation regarding a possible resignation, the mayor said, "Let me be clear: I would never quit on you. Ever. We've got a lot of work to do, and with your help, I'm going to continue to lead this city in getting the work done."

 

Kilpatrick was frank about the pain the allegations have caused his family. "I'm responsible for that," he said.

 

"For the first time in my life, I had to have a conversation with my 12-year-old twin sons about very grown-up things. It was, without a doubt, the hardest conversation that I've ever had in my entire life."

 

Regarding his wife, he said, "Our marriage has not been perfect, but it has been great. Now I've put her in a situation which many couples deal with in the privacy of their own homes. But in our case, it's on the front page of the newspaper."

 

Carlita Kilpatrick also spoke. "Yes, I am angry. Yes, I am hurt and I am disappointed, but there is no question that I love my husband," she said. The couple has been working "through some very painful issues" with help from their pastor and others, she said.

 

"Our family has endured the most painful and intrusive week of our lives," she said. "Our most intimate issues have been laid out for all to see. ... However, this private matter is between me, my husband and God. We are deeply committed to working through these issues together as a family."

 

The mayor and his wife urged Detroit residents -- and the media -- to allow them privacy and space.

 

"If you have to attack someone, attack me," Kilpatrick said. "I would ask that you don't follow my wife, you don't film my kids going to school. I ask you not to have helicopters flying around our home. I ask that you leave them alone. I am the mayor. I made the mistake. I am accountable."

 

He said he could not discuss specifics of the situation because of pending "legal issues."

 

Kilpatrick said he knew residents have been waiting to hear from him, but last weekend, for the first time since he took office six years ago, "I just put everything aside and focused on my family."

 

He said he told his sons that when you make a mistake, "you learn from it. You get up, you dust yourself off and you keep moving forward," adding that he hopes the city will keep moving forward.

 

"God bless you, Detroit," he said. "I love you, and I'll see you at work tomorrow."

 

Hmmm ... I wonder what party this guy is from.

[YASNY]

The previous article was from CNN. This one is from the the NY Times. I still don't know his party affiliations.

 

Mayor Kwame M. Kilpatrick was charged on Monday with misconduct in office, obstruction of justice, conspiracy to commit obstruction of justice and perjury, felonies that could end his political career and send him to prison for a lengthy term if he is convicted.

 

Among the eight felony counts against him, Mr. Kilpatrick is accused of authorizing the city of Detroit to settle an $8.4 million lawsuit with several former police officers “with the corrupt motive” of preventing the release of text messages which would have revealed that he had lied under oath in the case, the charging documents say.

 

Announcing the charges, Kym L. Worthy, the Wayne County prosecutor, declared it a “very sad day” for the city and for all of Michigan, but said that central tenets of life — those that even 6-year-old children understand well — had been breached. “It would be much sadder still if true justice were ignored,” Ms. Worthy said.

 

Mr. Kilpatrick has until 7 a.m. Tuesday to turn himself into the authorities.

 

In a prepared statement he read at a news conference, Mr. Kilpatrick said he was “disappointed” by the prosecutor’s decision “but not surprised.” He expressed confidence that he would be cleared at a trial and said he would concentrate on “moving the city forward” and laid out a schedule of planned initiatives.

 

Daniel Webb, Mr. Kilpatrick’s attorney, said it was highly unusual to bring perjury charges in a civil case, rather than a criminal case, and said he would raise “the issue of selective prosecution” before the judge who is assigned to the case. He said that proving perjury would be difficult because many of the questions in the case were “ambiguous” and many of the answers involved “opinions.”

 

The charges stem from a scandal that has roiled Mr. Kilpatrick’s Democratic administration since January, when The Detroit Free Press published text messages between Mr. Kilpatrick and Christine Beatty, his former chief of staff and a longtime friend.

 

Ms. Beatty also faces seven felony counts in the indictment.

 

The messages from Ms. Beatty’s city-issued pager were laced, at times, with sexual banter, contradicting testimony Mr. Kilpatrick and Ms. Beatty had provided under oath last year that they had never had a romantic relationship.

 

The two, both of whom were married, were questioned about their relationship during a civil trial in which several former police officers accused Mr. Kilpatrick of forcing them out of jobs, in part, because their investigations might have uncovered his romances.

 

The text messages also contradicted testimony the two had provided about the departure of Gary Brown, one of the officers who filed the lawsuit.

 

Mr. Kilpatrick testified that Mr. Brown, then the deputy chief, had not been fired. But a text message from Ms. Beatty to Mr. Kilpatrick referred to their decision “to fire Gary Brown.” Mr. Kilpatrick’s text response, according to The Free Press, seemed to acknowledge the firing. “It had to happen though. I’m all the way with that!”

 

In comments before a room packed with reporters here, Ms. Worthy stressed that her investigation had not “focused on lying about sex.” Mr. Brown and the other police officers’ “lives and careers were forever changed,” Ms. Worthy said. “They were ruined financially and their reputations were completely destroyed because they chose to be dutiful police officers. The public trust was violated. This investigation is about whether public dollars were used unlawfully — and more.”

 

Mr. Kilpatrick, who had long pledged to fight the lawsuit, agreed to settle the case for $8.4 million instead, hours after learning that the officers’ lawyer had copies of the text messages, documents show.

 

Among the youngest mayors of major American cities when he was first elected, Mr. Kilpatrick, 37, won office in 2001 at the age of 31, defeating an opponent who was twice his age. He has faced scandal before, but never to this extent.

 

Mr. Kilpatrick, who is married and has three sons, has apologized to his wife, Carlita, and to the city, but has vowed, repeatedly, to stay in office. He has defiantly accused the news media of creating his woes, and blamed racism for his troubles.

 

In recent days, his administration has been caught up in a swirl of bad news day after day as the scandal has unfolded. Last week, the City Council asked Mr. Kilpatrick to resign. Business leaders have increasingly withdrawn their support, arguing that Mr. Kilpatrick’s problems had become such a distraction that city business had been brought to a halt.

 

Oh, I stand corrected. This article does eventually mention that he's a Democrat. 7th paragraph.

Edited March 24, 2008 by YASNY

[lostfan]

Yeah he was a Democrat but what's it matter really? I would say that not focusing on his party affiliation shows less bias and not more. The original AP article about George Ryan's corruption conviction didn't even mention that he was a Republican at all so it's not like the media is going out of its way to favor Democrats here. (Side note: of course now, 1-2 years later I have no way of backing up this statement.)

 

If you're arguing that the media is biased in favor of liberals more often than not than yeah I agree. But not based off of this.

[EvilMonkey]

Yeah he was a Democrat but what's it matter really? I would say that not focusing on his party affiliation shows less bias and not more. The original AP article about George Ryan's corruption conviction didn't even mention that he was a Republican at all so it's not like the media is going out of its way to favor Democrats here. (Side note: of course now, 1-2 years later I have no way of backing up this statement.)

 

If you're arguing that the media is biased in favor of liberals more often than not than yeah I agree. But not based off of this.

The national papers that picked up Ryan's story sure mentioned it. My buddy in the DC area made sure to call me and let me know he noticed that it was a Republican who got busted in Illinois. I just replied that he was a crook, regardless of party, but thanks for noticing.

[lostfan]

The national papers that picked up Ryan's story sure mentioned it. My buddy in the DC area made sure to call me and let me know he noticed that it was a Republican who got busted in Illinois. I just replied that he was a crook, regardless of party, but thanks for noticing.

I don't doubt that, I also don't doubt there are articles that mention Kilpatrick's party. After all, it's how I found out, it's not like I did any research or anything special.

 

But yeah like I said the media is biased, even when you factor in Fox News and conservative talk radio it just tips the scale, but doesn't even it.

[mr_genius]

Yeah he was a Democrat but what's it matter really? I would say that not focusing on his party affiliation shows less bias and not more. The original AP article about George Ryan's corruption conviction didn't even mention that he was a Republican at all so it's not like the media is going out of its way to favor Democrats here. (Side note: of course now, 1-2 years later I have no way of backing up this statement.)

 

If you're arguing that the media is biased in favor of liberals more often than not than yeah I agree. But not based off of this.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/17/ryan.ap/

 

this AP article? seems to say Republican in the first sentence.

Edited March 24, 2008 by mr_genius

[lostfan]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/17/ryan.ap/

 

this AP article? seems to say Republican in the first sentence.

It was on Yahoo, only reason I remember is because I was reading the trolls posting on what used to be Yahoo's message boards talking about it.

[mr_genius]

It was on Yahoo, only reason I remember is because I was reading the trolls posting on what used to be Yahoo's message boards talking about it.

 

Yahoo and CNN will often use the same AP article.

[lostfan]

Yahoo and CNN will often use the same AP article.

I know, and it probably got updated to include the party name a few hours after I saw it.