Rudy Giuliani Changes Tune on Civil Unions

Presidential hopeful Rudolph Giuliani has made a sharp departure from his previously stated stance on civil unions and has spoken out in opposition to a civil union law passed by the New Hampshire state Senate.

"Mayor Giuliani believes marriage is between one man and one woman. Domestic partnerships are the appropriate way to ensure that people are treated fairly," the Giuliani campaign said Thursday in a written response to a question from the New York Sun.

"In this specific case the law states same sex civil unions are the equivalent of marriage and recognizes same sex unions from outside states. This goes too far and Mayor Giuliani does not support it."

The New Hampshire law is titled, "An act permitting same gender couples to enter civil unions and have the same rights, responsibilities, and obligations as married couples."

Previously Giuliani had made no secret of his support for civil unions. In February 2004, he told Fox News’ Bill O'Reilly, when asked if he supported gay marriage, "I'm in favor of . . . civil unions."

And in 1998, then-New York City Mayor Giuliani signed into law a domestic partnership bill that a gay rights group, the Empire State Pride Agenda, praised as setting "a new national benchmark for domestic partner recognition."

Regarding Giuliani’s change of position, the Sun observed: "Despite Mr. Giuliani's long history of supporting gay rights — or rather, because of it — yesterday's statement is likely to lead many to question whether the former mayor is concerned that his socially liberal record and positions aren't flying in the Republican primary. While he still holds a commanding lead in the national polls, he has taken a hit over the last month or so after reiterating his support for the public funding of abortion.”

Among other leading presidential candidates, Mitt Romney opposes the New Hampshire measure; Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards support it; and John McCain has taken no position, saying the civil unions issue is a matter of states’ rights.

N.C. lets mentally ill avoid gun list: State doesn't report those committed

Jim Nesbitt and Jessica Rocha, Staff Writers

Thousands of people involuntarily committed to psychiatric institutions by North Carolina courts aren't in a national database aimed at preventing gun sales to people with dangerous mental illnesses.

Although it is a felony to knowingly sell a gun to anyone so troubled, North Carolina court clerks keep commitment records under wraps because of privacy provisions in state mental health statutes. That means they don't show up in the FBI-run National Instant Criminal Background Check System that gun dealers and law enforcement use to determine whether a customer can legally purchase a firearm.

"We have no authority or directive to report this information to anybody," said Dick Ellis, spokesman for the N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts, which oversees courthouse operations. "Unless we're told directly to do so, we don't give our records over to anybody."

After last week's killing spree at Virginia Tech University by student Seung-Hui Cho, the availability on the NICS database of involuntary commitment orders and other court rulings related to mental health has become a major issue. Privacy concerns are pitted against public safety fears.

Despite a 2005 court declaration that Cho was a danger to himself, he was able to legally purchase two handguns he used to kill 32 people and himself at Virginia Tech. A Virginia judge ordered Cho to undergo a mental health evaluation, but the ruling didn't show up on the background check.

Federal law prohibits gun sales to people who fall into 10 categories, including felons, illegal immigrants, subjects of domestic violence restraining orders and anyone committed to a mental institution or ruled "mentally defective."

But the 10-year-old background check system depends on states to forward information, particularly court orders related to mental health. In the year ending last July, there were 56,124 confidential special proceedings in North Carolina courts. Those included involuntary and voluntary commitments to mental institutions but also hearings to suspend the licenses of attorneys, according to records with the N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts.

Experts say legislators have created exemptions to the mental health privacy provisions, including a requirement that courts report commitments for substance abuse to the Department of Motor Vehicles. Unless legislators provide a similar exemption for the database, court clerks won't give up those records, Ellis said.

Two ways to get in

As a result of this cloak of privacy, North Carolina mental health filings to the NICS database fall primarily under two categories, said John Aldridge, special deputy attorney general and leading authority on state firearms law. Both depend on the diligence of the local official in charge of the records.

One is an open court result in a criminal case, such as being found not guilty by reason of insanity. The other is a record of being turned down by a sheriff for a pistol-purchase permit or concealed-carry permit.

North Carolina sheriffs, who are responsible for background checks on applicants for both permits, can check commitment records on concealed carry permits because applicants waive their privacy rights. They aren't allowed to check commitment records for pistol purchases but may learn of such orders by other means and deny permits.

It's also up to sheriffs to decide whether to forward permit denials to the NICS database. So far, North Carolina sheriffs have forwarded 319 mental-health-related denials since the database was created in 1998, Aldridge said.

House ponders change

Today, the state House will consider a bill that would allow sheriffs to inform other sheriffs if they deny a pistol permit for mental health reasons.

Though it keeps involuntary commitments confidential, North Carolina is one of 22 states that report mental-health related information to the NICS, federal officials say.

But the number of North Carolina filings pales beside the 80,000 mental-health-related entries that Virginia has made in the NCIS database.

Since the Virginia Tech killings, there have been calls to make involuntary commitment orders an exception to medical privacy laws -- something both mental health advocates and gun rights adherents successfully opposed in 2002 when the measure was introduced in North Carolina.

"We need to lower the threshold so that all people who show signs of being a danger to themselves or others are reported," said Lisa Price, executive director of North Carolinians Against Gun Violence, a gun-control group that pushed the 2002 legislation as part of an anti-gun-trafficking package. "Keeping guns out of the wrong hands -- that's our goal."

F. Paul Valone, president of Grass Roots North Carolina, a gun rights organization, vows to fight any attempt to remove the confidentiality cloak from involuntary commitment orders.

"The intention behind that legislation was to foment additional gun control in North Carolina, and we won't tolerate that," Valone said.

Mark Botts, an expert on mental health records and confidentiality at the UNC-Chapel Hill School of Government, said legislators already have written several exemptions into the law, including the DMV measure. Sealed court records relating to mental health treatment are also legally shared for child or elder-abuse investigations and can be unsealed if the information is considered in the public interest.

In the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre, Botts said a similar exemption should be made for the gun database.

"I don't think it has to be that polarizing," he said.

Fred Thompson Not the Energizer Bunny

By Ronald Kessler

The knock on Fred Thompson is that he is not exactly the Energizer Bunny.

Republican operatives were amazed at the contrast between the 1994 Senate campaigns run by Thompson and Bill Frist, both from Tennessee. Frist ran a tightly organized, business-like effort. Thompson’s effort was amateurish, and he was not inclined to push himself to hold fundraisers.

In deploying volunteers to call voters, Frist’s campaign used computerized lists of telephone numbers. They had been pre-selected based on clues that the voters might be inclined to listen to a pitch for Frist. When making calls, volunteers read from a carefully prepared script.

In contrast, the Thompson campaign gave workers pages torn from local telephone books. The campaign told workers to try the numbers and did not supply them with specifics on what to say when they called. Because of the lack of organization, volunteers flocked to Frist’s campaign.

If Thompson makes it to the White House, it will likely be as disorganized an operation as Bill Clinton’s White House was. However, Thompson recently told a close friend that he honestly does not know if he wants to run. Near the end of his first term as senator, he made a similar statement to supporters and ultimately decided against running for a second term.

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney has garnered more endorsements from members of Congress than any other candidate, Republican or Democrat. While endorsements do not translate directly into votes, they do help encourage state leaders to jump on one bandwagon or another.

In the latest poll by ccAdvertising, which conducts private polls for members of Congress, 9.96 percent of those who said they intend to vote in a Republican caucus or primary in California, Iowa, New Hampshire, New York or South Carolina said they will vote for Romney. That compares with 3.1 percent in January when the poll was taken in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

“If I were on the Romney team, I would be pleased by the progression that I am seeing,” Gabriel S. Joseph III, president of ccAdvertising, tells me. “You have money in the bank, and you are making progress. People like to go with winners or those that they think will be.”

In the ccAdvertising poll, Rudy Giuliani leads with 24.67 percent. Next is John McCain with 18.21 percent, then Newt Gingrich with 10.08 percent.

What is most interesting, Joseph says, is that 28.95 percent of those polled say they have no preference, indicating the race is wide open. That means a candidate like Romney with little name recognition has a good chance of climbing in the polls as he gets his message out.

“Politics is a form of marketing,” Joseph said. “Sometimes just mentioning someone’s name gets people interested. The way you sell a Lexus automobile is you mention Lexus, Lexus. People will say, ‘I’ve heard a lot about Mitt Romney.’ You ask them, ‘What have you heard?’ They’ll say, ‘I’m not sure, but I’ve heard a lot about him.’ So at this point I think this is what the polls are measuring.”

Making the Secret Service Happy

Most political operatives believe the presidential nominees will be decided next February by a few of the 20 states that so far have opted for early primaries. What that means for candidates is anybody’s guess.

“This primary season is turning into the most challenging Rubik’s Cube that we’ve faced in our lifetime,” says Ben Ginsberg, Romney’s counsel who previously was counsel to the Bush-Cheney campaign in 2004.

But the Secret Service knows exactly what early primaries mean: potentially fewer candidates to protect down the road. So far, based on the public record, the Secret Service counts 15 potential candidates

By law, the Secret Service provides protection of major presidential and vice presidential candidates and their spouses. The secretary of Homeland Security determines who are the major candidates after consulting with an advisory committee consisting of the speaker and minority leader of the House, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, and one additional member selected by the other members of the committee.

The secretary of Homeland Security decides when to begin protection of candidates. Protection of spouses begins 120 days before the general election.

The Secret Service is already asking most of its 3,000 agents for their preferences on types of candidate protection assignments. For example, agents can ask to join a general protection shift, operations and logistics, or transportation details.

If only two candidates emerge from the primaries, the Secret Service will save tens of millions of dollars.

Hillary: Bill Could Be My World Ambassador

Hillary Rodham Clinton said Saturday that if she is elected president, she would make her husband a roaming ambassador to the world, using his skills to repair the nation's tattered image abroad.

"I can't think of a better cheerleader for America than Bill Clinton, can you?" the Democratic senator from New York asked a crowd jammed into a junior high school gymnasium. "He has said he would do anything I asked him to do. I would put him to work."

Clinton spoke at a town hall-style meeting Saturday where she took questions from about 200 people. When asked what role the former president would play in her administration, she left no doubt it would be an important one.

"I'm very lucky that my husband has been so experienced in all of these areas," said Clinton, who pointed to the diplomatic assignments her husband has carried out since leaving office, such as raising money for tsunami victims.

Although former president Clinton was impeached after an affair with a White House intern, he remains a very popular figure in much of the world and is considered an effective diplomat.

That's precisely what America needs in the wake of a war in Iraq that's left America isolated and hated throughout much of the world, Hillary Clinton said.

"I believe in using former presidents, particularly what my husband has done, to really get people around the world feeling better about our country," she said. "We're going to need that. Right now they're rooting against us and they need to root for us."

The former president can also be a political asset to his wife's campaign. While his image with the electorate is mixed, he remains immensely popular among Democrats.

When it was announced last year that he would be the main speaker at the Iowa Democratic Party's largest annual fundraiser, the event sold out overnight.

On Saturday, Hillary Clinton chatted with activists in Marshalltown and mingled at a coffee shop in Newton before raising money for Rep. Leonard Boswell.

She was scheduled to visit Dubuque on Sunday.

In Marshalltown, she was pressed on immigration issues in a city where a raid at a local meatpacking plant led to the detention of nearly 100 workers. Clinton called for more assistance for cities with significant numbers of undocumented workers.

"You've got to have more help for communities when you have a lot of undocumented workers because they have costs associated with that and they don't set immigration policy," Clinton said.

She also said any immigration reform must be tougher on businesses that hire illegal immigrants.

She said nothing will affect the issue until leaders of countries, such as Mexico, improve the economic lives for millions living in poverty.

Clinton also said she would raise taxes for the wealthy, who she said "aren't paying their fair share." She also praised the economic policies of her husband that brought budget surpluses.

GOPAC Is Back

Michael Steele, who just took over as chairman of GOPAC, wants Republicans to know the organization will soon be back as the powerful force it once was under Newt Gingrich.

Steele, the former Maryland lieutenant governor, has replaced J.C. Watts Jr. as chairman of GOPAC, a section 527 political action committee that supports Republican candidates with direct donations and training in running for office.

Steele tells NewsMax that Republicans face a shrewd foe. In effect, he said, Democrats have wheeled themselves out as Trojan horses, ingratiating themselves with voters by pretending to adopt Republican values but then voting as traditional Democrats.

Political Trojan Horses

“I’m here to say we’re dealing with a new type of political opponent — one who has learned and studied us very well as Republicans and has created great Trojan horses,” said Steele, who lost his race for Senate last year. “They come in and they run like Republicans. They espouse their perspective on a number of the core issues that Republicans have been successful on. On pro-life and gun control issues, these guys are hawkish as anyone else. That’s how they’ve won, and that’s how they’re going to continue to win elections, unless we’re prepared to expose the horse for what’s inside.”

What’s inside, Steele told me, are the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Steny Hoyer, and Harry Reid.

“What you see inside is a liberal left leadership that is not necessarily going to stand there and promote the same agenda that these individuals who got elected to Congress in ’06 seemed to be promoting,” Steele said.

The way Democrats have exploited the Bush administration’s firing of eight U.S. attorneys is another indication of their savvy, Steele said.

“You put in place this effort to focus on a troop surge and to get some real momentum for the administration’s policy in Iraq, and there’s some signs that that momentum is beginning to take hold, that there’s some success on the ground,” Steele said. “And all of a sudden — boom. You take three steps back with something that’s within the prerogative of the executive branch to do, and that is to hire and fire those at-will employees for whatever reason.

“Bill Clinton fired 93 of them, for goodness sake, and no one blinked an eye. George Bush fired eight in the second term, and you think it’s Armageddon.”

Thus, the Democrats turned innocuous, if poorly handled, firings into a front-page story.

“You just scratch your head and say, ‘These guys are good. Wish we’d learn to be better,’” Steele said.

To win back federal and state offices, Steele said, Republicans must “begin to set the agenda and articulate a vision of Lincoln Republicanism that is in my view reflective of a greater responsibility and opportunity for individuals to continue to create jobs here at home and to provide the level of security that we need to provide across our country, and across the globe.”

Steele is on the lookout for attractive potential candidates. In effect, GOPAC will teach them the craft of running for office.

“We will be focused on building the farm team,” Steele said. “We’re looking much more holistically at the future and saying that we want to build a grass-roots organization that’s focused not just on the talents of the candidate but the talents of the team around that candidate so that we can build a better campaign operation.”

Delaware Gov. Pete du Pont started GOPAC in 1979. Under Newt Gingrich in the 1980s, GOPAC became the Republican Party’s top education and training center. The former House speaker organized campaign seminars and put out workbooks and audiotapes.

GOPAC Is Back

Under Watts’ leadership, GOPAC more than tripled its fundraising, collecting nearly $9 million during the last election cycle. GOPAC trained thousands of Republican activists and assisted Republican organizations in recruiting candidates for local office. GOPAC also provided direct campaign support to candidates in 17 states.

“Our goal is to increase our fundraising,” Steele said. “My theme for the next two years is, ‘GOPAC is back,’” a motto that will soon be added to a re-designed GOPAC Web site.

“We have five state elections that we want to see some success in: New Jersey, Virginia, Mississippi, Kentucky, and Louisiana,” Steele said. “We’re going to bring in a strong team of people to help us build the successes that we need.”

Orwellian Fairness

One of the most Orwellian named pieces of regulation in human history is set to make a comeback, if left-leaning bloggers and Democrat legislators get their way.

It’s the "Fairness Doctrine" and in the past was part of the regulatory function of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Under its regulatory thumb, broadcasters were required to provide equal reply time to anyone who claimed their opinions had been derogated.

The regulation was properly eliminated in the 1980s. Similar to the decency rules of the FCC, the Fairness Doctrine was justified at the time because of a scarcity of broadcast frequencies and because radio and television stations as public trustees are not necessarily entitled to First Amendment protections.

The demise of Don Imus’ radio and television shows has provided impetus to proponents of a renewed version of the fairness doctrine. In reality, though, the “new and improved” Fairness Doctrine, if passed, will be a means of restoring a liberal media monopoly.

Democrat Rep. Maurice Hinchey has proposed the Media Ownership Reform Act, which melds the old Fairness doctrine with other draconian speech squelching legislation. And Democrat Rep. Dennis Kucinich has been talking about having hearings on the Hill to determine whether the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated.

Michael Moore’s Cuba Stunt

Just in case anyone thought Michael Moore had taken an early retirement from his unethical approach to movie making, a report from the New York Post shows the filmmaker is seeking to undermine one of the nation’s institutions once again.

Moore's production company has engaged in a scheme designed to bolster the ridiculous argument that medical care in Fidel Castro's totalitarian dictatorship is superior to health care in the United States.

As part of Moore’s latest film “Sicko,” which deals with the subject of American health care, the deceptive director transported ground zero workers with respiratory ailments to Cuba to prove that the care provided in the U.S. is inferior to the care offered at Fidel’s centrally planned “paradise.”

In typical Moore fashion, the factually challenged filmmaker used ailing 9/11 workers as pawns to apparently satisfy his personal ambition.

An ill worker who was allegedly promised to be taken to Cuba was left behind by Moore. Michael McCormack, a disabled medic, was contacted via phone.

“What he [Moore] wanted to do is shove it up George W.'s rear end that 9/11 heroes had to go to a communist country to get adequate health care,” McCormack told the Post.

Moore went to Cuba minus McCormack.

“It's the ultimate betrayal,” McCormack said. “You're promised that you're going to be taken care of, and then you find out you're not. He's trying to profiteer off of our suffering.”

In a tape of a telephone conversation between McCormack and a Moore producer, a female voice indicated, “Even for the people that we did bring down to Cuba, we said we can promise that you will be evaluated, that you will get looked at. We can't promise that you will get fixed.”

Moore’s popularity in communist Cuba has been solid ever since a pirated version of his movie, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” was shown on state-owned TV.

McAuliffe: Early Primaries Help Hillary, Obama

Democrats and Republicans need to re-examine the presidential primary calendar after next year's election because the system puts too much emphasis on money, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee said Monday.

Terry McAuliffe, now chairman for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign, told an audience at Brown University that the rush by states to move their primaries to early next year favors front-runners like Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.

"I think the early primaries will help people who have the ability to raise money - help Hillary, help Barack," he said. "I'm not sure Bill Clinton could have made it through 1992 with the system we have now."

McAuliffe said Democrats and Republicans should come together to form a commission to come up with a new approach to the primary system. He said after the speech that he did not favor any particular system, but he would like a commission to study the options, such as a regional primary system.

About a dozen states, including California, New York and New Jersey, have already moved their primaries or caucuses to Feb. 5, just 22 days after the leadoff Iowa caucuses. About a dozen others are considering a similar move.

"It's going to go very fast," McAuliffe said.

Hillary Has One Senate Endorsement

Sen. Hillary Clinton is said to be among the hardest working and most respected senators, so say the media spinmeisters.

But so far, Sen. Clinton has won the endorsement of just one senatorial colleague in her bid to run for president, according to The Hill newspaper.

The lone Clinton supporter is, not surprisingly, Sen. Charles Schumer, her fellow Democrat from New York.

Hillary has also won the endorsement of 26 members of House of Representatives. But here's another interesting factoid: of the 26 House members backing Clinton, all but five are from her home state of New York.

Hillary’s base of congressional support appears narrow and shallow when compared to other presidential candidates who have backing that is far more diverse.

For instance, the four senators and 24 congressmen who are backing Mitt Romney are from 15 different states. Of the nine senators and 17 congressmen backing Sen. John McCain, only four are from his home state of Arizona.

Just three of Rudolph Giuliani’s backers are from his home state, New York.

Despite being the Democratic front-runner, the Democratic establishment appears timid in embracing Sen. Clinton early. Even her home state governor, Democrat Eliot Spitzer, has yet to endorse her.

Ditto Democratic congressional players. They are keeping their cards close to the vest. Nine of Sen. Barack Obama’s 12 congressional backers are from his home state, Illinois, and eight of John Edwards’ 14 supporters are from his home state of North Carolina.

Nancy Pelosi on Jay Leno: 'I Respect' Bush

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday on NBC's "Tonight Show with Jay Leno" she has no plans to back down on her differences with the president over funding for the war on terror.

Bush "wants a blank check on the war," she said.

The nation's first woman House speaker steered away from questions about the 2008 presidential race and spoke cautiously about her relationship with the president.

"I respect the office he holds, and I respect him," she said.

Pelosi also defended her recent trip to Damascus, Syria, and said her decision to wear a scarf over her head as she entered a historic mosque was in keeping with tradition.

Leno asked Pelosi whether she had thought about running for higher office.

"No, I like speaker of the House," she said. "I think there are people who want to do that, and I wish them all well."

Howard Stern to Imus: 'Say F**k You!'

Shock jock Howard Stern is no fan of embattled Don Imus, but he said he knows what his fellow talk show host should have told critics: "F**k you.”

"He's apologizing like a guy who got his first broadcasting job,” Stern told his Sirius Satellite Radio audience after Imus apologized for his derogatory comment about the Rutgers women’s basketball team.

"He should have said, "F**k you, it’s a joke.”

Former radio host Bob Grant – no stranger to controversy – also weighed in on the Imus flap, according to the New York Daily News.

Grant was fired from New York radio powerhouse WABC over a remark he made about Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, who was aboard a plane that crashed in Croatia in 1996. Grant told a caller: "My hunch is [Brown] is the one survivor. Maybe it’s because at heart I’m a pessimist.” After Brown was found dead, Grant’s WABC contract was terminated.

"Everything doesn’t come out the way you want,” he said regarding Imus’ comment.

"There were many times when I’d be going home and say to myself, ‘What the hell did I say that for?’ But that’s the pace you work at. That’s what people don’t take into account.”

MSNBC Drops Imus Simulcast Amid Furor

MSNBC said Wednesday it will drop its simulcast of the "Imus in the Morning" radio program, responding to growing outrage over the radio host's racial slur against the Rutgers women's basketball team.

"This decision comes as a result of an ongoing review process, which initially included the announcement of a suspension. It also takes into account many conversations with our own employees," NBC news said in a statement.

The decision also was announced on air.

Imus triggered the uproar on his April 4 show, when he referred to the mostly black Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos." His comments have been widely denounced by civil rights and women's groups.

The network's decision came after a growing list of sponsors - including American Express Co., Staples Inc., Procter & Gamble Co., and General Motors Corp. - said they were pulling ads from Imus' show for the indefinite future.

But it did not end calls for Imus to be fired from the radio portion of his program. The show originates from WFAN-AM in New York City and is syndicated nationally by Westwood One, both of which are managed by CBS Corp.

Bruce Gordon, former head of the NAACP and a director of CBS Corp., said Wednesday he hoped the broadcasting company would "make the smart decision" by firing Imus.

"He's crossed the line, he's violated our community," Gordon said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "He needs to face the consequence of that violation."

Gingrich Suggests Gonzales Should Quit

Joining a growing list of Republicans, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should consider resigning. The possible presidential candidate said the botched firing of U.S. attorneys has destroyed Gonzales' credibility as the nation's top law enforcer.

"I think the country, in fact, would be much better served to have a new team at the Justice Department, across the board," Gingrich said. "I cannot imagine how he is going to be effective for the rest of this administration. ... They're going to be involved in endless hearings."

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who is helping lead the investigation into the firing of eight federal prosecutors, said Gingrich's comments pointed to building bipartisan support for a new attorney general.

"This is another important voice who believes that the attorney general should step down for the good of the country and the good of the department," Schumer said in a statement. "We hope both the attorney general and the president heed Speaker Gingrich's message."

Gonzales, a former White House counsel who became attorney general in 2005, is scheduled to testify April 17 before the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is a congressional showdown believed to be a make-or-break appearance for Gonzales.

The committee also has pledged to compel the testimony of White House officials such as Karl Rove and former counsel Harriet Miers to determine the extent of White House involvement. On Friday, Monica Goodling, the Justice Department's liaison to the White House, abruptly quit after telling Congress she would not testify.

After the firings earlier this year, Gonzales initially asserted that the dismissals were performance-related, not based on political considerations, and that he was not directly involved in the decisions.

But testimony from his former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, as well as e-mails between the department and the White House contradicted those claims, leading to a public apology from Gonzales.

On Sunday, Gingrich harshly criticized Gonzales' judgment in allowing the firings to escalate into such a political scandal.

Gingrich noted that a president has every right to fire U.S. attorneys for any reason. Therefore, he said, all Gonzales had to do was to say that Bush wanted new people. Instead, Gingrich said, the attorney general made a series of misstatements from which he was forced later to backtrack.

"This is the most mishandled, artificial, self-created mess that I can remember in the years I've been active in public life," Gingrich said. "The buck has to stop somewhere, and I'm assuming it's the attorney general and his immediate team."

In recent weeks, several Republicans have joined Democrats in saying Gonzales should consider resigning, including Sens. John Sununu (news, bio, voting record) of New Hampshire and Gordon Smith of Oregon and Reps. Dana Rohrabacher of California, Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Lee Terry of Nebraska.

Other Republicans, including administration allies Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas, have acknowledged that Gonzales badly mishandled the matter and needed to explain himself quickly.

"I think the confusion and the ham-handed way that these firings was done certainly undermines the confidence of the Justice Department," Kyl said Sunday. "And part of his effort to come up and testify before the Hill will be to restore some of that confidence."

Schumer said the controversy is the latest evidence of a leadership failure at the department.

"The gravity of this situation is shown by the fact that several Republicans have called for the attorney general to resign," he said. "The fact that the attorney general is the president's friend and was the president's counsel for years does not alone make him qualified to be attorney general."

Gingrich and Schumer appeared on "Fox News Sunday," and Kyl spoke on ABC's "This Week."

John Edwards’ Phony Fox Attack

For the second time in recent months, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards has canceled his participation in a debate because of Fox News Channel’s involvement.

Since August 2000, the former North Carolina senator went on FNC 33 times without objection.

In what seemed like a desperate attempt to distinguish himself from Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, when far-left activist groups like MoveOn.org started pressuring him, Edwards bowed to bloggers’ demands.

“We believe there's just no reason for Democrats to give Fox a platform to advance the right-wing agenda while pretending they're objective,” Edwards’ deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince whimpered to The Associated Press.

The Edwards campaign suggested that the carefully coiffed candidate is “'looking forward to a different debate hosted by the institute and CNN in South Carolina in January 2008.”

Based on his quick cave-in to pesky lefties, Edwards has shown that for either of his Americas, when push comes to shove, he’ll roll like a baloney sausage.

Pelosi Is Our Neville Chamberlain

With her trip to Syria, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi achieved two things: She undercut her own credibility in Washington, and she spotlighted what is wrong with the Democrats' approach to national security.

The spectacle of Pelosi making nice with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus and accepting at face value his claim that he is ready to "resume the peace process" with Israel had a large portion of official Washington tittering.

At the same time, Syrian authorities were telling the local press that there had been no change in its position. And Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Pelosi that "a number of Senate and House members who recently visited Damascus received the impression that despite the declarations of Bashar al-Assad, there is no change in the position of his country regarding a possible peace process with Israel."

Pelosi's Charade

Moreover, Pelosi misrepresented Israel's position to Assad, announcing that she had delivered a message from Olmert that "Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. Olmert quickly issued a statement denying that.

Even the Washington Post saw through the charade.

"Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented Israel's position, but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr. Assad's words were mere propaganda," an editorial in the paper said. The editorial added that "Ms. Pelosi's attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish."

While that is certainly true, the specter of Pelosi naively chatting with Assad and announcing that she had helped achieve a diplomatic breakthrough also highlights all that is wrong with the Democrats' approach to foreign police today.

Syria hosts the exiled leadership of Hamas, as well as other Palestinian radical groups, and is a major supplier of funds to Hezbollah. Syria is also believed to be involved in the assassination of Lebanese political figures and allowing its territory to be used by jihadists fighting against the United States-led coalition and the coalition-backed government in Iraq.

History Repeats

Pelosi's willingness to undercut the president and accept the word of the chief of state of a sponsor of terrorism is on a par with the Democrats' effort to set a timetable for fighting the war in Iraq. It brings to mind the efforts of Joseph P. Kennedy, the founder of the Kennedy dynasty, to appease Adolf Hitler.

As ambassador to the Court of St. James, Joe Kennedy met on June 13, 1938 with Herbert von Dirksen, the German ambassador. The two got along famously, and Dirksen later reported on the conversation in great detail to Baron Ernst von Weizsäcker, the German state secretary.

According to that report, Kennedy confided to the German ambassador that Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister, was anxious to have some sort of settlement with Germany. By saying this, he undercut Great Britain's negotiating position with Hitler. Moreover, Kennedy said President Roosevelt was not anti-German and wanted friendly relations with Hitler. However, no European leader spoke well of the Germans because most of them were "afraid of the Jews" and did not "dare to say anything good about Germany . . ." Kennedy stated.

Even as the two met at the German embassy in London, Hitler was planning to gobble up most of Europe and exterminate the Jews. The following year, World War II began after Hitler invaded Poland.

"Speaker Pelosi is the Neville Chamberlain of our time," said Brad Blakeman, a Republican strategist who was an aide in the Bush White House. "Cowering to and appeasing the dictator of a terrorist state was a disgrace to the high office she holds. The Sryians used this visit to validate their bad behavior by propagandizing the whole visit and her anti-war stance."

The Pelosi visit underscores that, when it comes to dealing with our enemies, the Democrats live in a dream world. Yet when another terrorist attack occurs in the U.S., they will be the first to say President Bush did not do enough to protect the country.

Pelosi visits market, mosque in Syria

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi mingled with Syrians in a market and made the sign of the cross at a Christian tomb Tuesday during a visit to pursue dialogue with the country's leader. President Bush denounced the trip, saying it sends mixed signals to Syria's government.

Pelosi's visit to Syria was the latest challenge to the White House by congressional Democrats, who are taking a more assertive role in influencing policy in the Middle East and the Iraq war. The Bush administration, which accuses President Bashar Assad's government of supporting terrorism, has resisted calls for direct talks to help ease the crisis in Iraq and make progress in the Israel-Palestinian peace process.

Soon after Pelosi's arrival in Damascus, Bush criticized her visit.

"A lot of people have gone to see President Assad ... and yet we haven't seen action. He hasn't responded," he told reporters at a Rose Garden news conference. "Sending delegations doesn't work. It's simply been counterproductive."

Pelosi, a California Democrat, did not comment on Bush's remarks before heading from the airport to Damascus' historic Old City. She was scheduled to meet Assad on Wednesday.

Wearing a flowered head scarf and a black abaya robe, Pelosi visited the 8th-century Omayyad Mosque, shaking hands with Syrian women inside and watching men in a religion class sitting cross-legged on the floor.

She stopped at an elaborate tomb, said to contain the head of John the Baptist, and made the sign of the cross. About 10 percent of Syria's 18 million people are Christian.

At the nearby outdoor Bazouriyeh market, Syrians crowded around, offering her dried figs and nuts and chatting with her. She strolled past shops selling olive oil soaps, spices and herbs, and at one point bought some coconut sweets and eyed jewelry and carpets.

Democrats have argued that the U.S. should engage its top rivals in the Mideast — Iran and Syria — to make headway in easing crises in Iraq, Lebanon and the Israeli-Arab peace process. Last year, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended talks with the two countries.

Bush rejected the recommendations. But in February, the U.S. joined a gathering of regional diplomats in Baghdad that included Iran and Syria for talks on Iraq.

Visiting neighboring Lebanon on Monday, Pelosi shrugged off White House criticism of her trip to Syria, noting that Republican lawmakers met Assad on Sunday without comment from the Bush administration.

"I think that it was an excellent idea for them to go," she said. "And I think it's an excellent idea for us to go as well."

She said she hoped to rebuild lost confidence between Washington and Damascus and will tell Syrian leaders that Israel will talk peace with them only if Syria stops supporting Palestinian militants. She has said she will also talk to the Syrians about Iraq, their role in Lebanon and their support for the Hezbollah militant group.

"We have no illusions but we have great hope," said Pelosi, who met with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank city of Ramallah earlier Tuesday.

The United States accuses Syria of allowing Iraqi Sunni insurgents to operate from its territory, backing the Hezbollah and Hamas militant groups and trying to destabilize the Lebanese government. Syria denies the allegations.

Relations reached a low point in early 2005 when Washington withdrew its ambassador to Damascus to protest the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Many Lebanese blamed Syria — which had troops in Lebanon at the time — for the assassination. Damascus denied involvement.

Washington has since succeeded in largely isolating Damascus, with its European and Arab allies shunning Assad. The last high-ranking U.S. official to visit Syria was then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage in January 2005.

The isolation, however, has begun to crumble in recent months, with visits by U.S. lawmakers and some European officials.

Syria treated Pelosi's visit as a diplomatic victory. "Welcome Dialogue," proclaimed a front-page headline in one state-run newspaper next to a photo of Pelosi.

Syria's ambassador to the U.S., Imad Moustapha, described the visit as a "positive step" but said "it does not necessarily mean that the U.S. administration would suddenly change its position."

In comments to the state-run Al-Thawra daily published Tuesday, he said the visit should be a "reminder that even though we might disagree on politics, we should remain diplomatically engaged in dialogue to reach some understandings."

Obama Still Hiding White Grandma

NewsMax’s recent story about Sen. Barack Obama’s white grandmother by independent journalist Andy Martin has created a firestorm across the Web.

In his commentary "Free Obama’s White Grandma," Martin details how the Obama campaign has "locked his granny away and refused to allow her to be seen."

Obama’s father was a black Kenyan, and his mother was a white woman from Kansas. His white grandmother, his mother’s mother, is Madelyn Dunham.  She raised Obama after he returned to Hawaii from Indonesia, where his mother had gone to live after separating from his Kenyan father.

But Martin alleges that the Obama campaign has been hiding Madelyn, while at the same time producing photos showing Obama with his black step-grandmother, Sarah Hussein Obama – even though she never saw the future senator until the 1980s.

Martin maintains that the moves are politically motivated – presidential hopeful Obama is hiding his white background to solidify his support in the black community.

Since publishing Martin’s story, NewsMax has been deluged by pro-Obama bloggers who claim Martin’s report is "racist," "inaccurate" or just "totally wrong."

Many direct our attention to a photo that appeared in the Chicago Sun-Times, purportedly showing Obama with a black woman who is identified by the Times as Madelyn Dunham, Obama’s grandmother.

In fact, the Sun-Times, not NewsMax or Martin, is in error. The woman pictured on the Sun-Times Web site is not Madelyn Dunham, but Obama’s Kenyan grandmother Sarah Hussein Obama.

Readers who are troubled by the coverage of Obama’s grandmothers would do better to send their complaints to the Sun-Times rather than NewsMax.