Klan Announces They Will Have A Presence at Debate

In what is sure to be a headache already for Secret Service members and other security officials in charge of making sure the candidates are safe during tonight's debate, a wild card has been thrown into the deck. The Klan is planning to show.

Confirming rumors that have been circulating the past few days, the Mississippi White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan have announced that they will have members present in the audience for tonight's scheduled Presidential debate between candidates John McCain and Barack Obama at the University of Mississippi in Oxford.

The Klansmen will be “invisible,” trying to blend in just as anyone else, the emperor of the MWK said in an e-mail.

The emperor wrote, “The Mississippi White Knights will have officers and Klansmen on hand for the presidential debate on September 26, 2008. Our people will be in Oxford and on the campus ‘invisible.’ That means our people won’t be in regalia or demonstrating. So, I guess you’ll just have to guess which of the people present are Klansmen.

“Please feel free to contact me if you have any other questions about the Mississippi White Knights.

‘NON SILBA SED ANTHAR’

Emperor,

Mississippi White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.”

The e-mail came from the address, emperor@mississippiwhiteknights.com, but the sender would not identify himself nor respond to more questions.

The Latin words, “Non silba sed anthar,” translate to: “Not for oneself but for others,” a motto the Klan has used since the 19th century.

Why it should be a surprise to anyone that the Klan should put a presence at a Presidential debate in Mississippi where the first non-white candidate for a major party will be in attendance? This is a possibility and a scenario that should have been expected and made ready for from the outset, for which the Secret Service, undoubtedly, has contingency plans in place and ready. If not, then they are sorely deficient in their security arrangements.

Race has been an under the surface issue for this campaign from the outset, from the primary season in which other candidates tap danced around the issue in order not to be offensive to the Obama campaign to Obama's campaign using his race as a tool, themselves, proclaiming any and all disagreements with Obama to be based in racist attitudes. There are many, many reasons not that Obama is undesirable for the Presidency that have nothing to do, whatsoever, with his race, and those are the reasons that should be focused upon by the voting public who intend not to vote for him in the upcoming November elections.

The Klan, with it's bastardization of Confederate regalia and their adoption of the emblems of a proud nation that lasted for less than five years, has been and remains a thorn in the side for true Southerners who have, since the inception of the Confederacy in 1860, desired nothing more than the rights of the state, and more importantly, the individual, taking precedence over the powers of the federal government.

Does the Klan have the right to have a presence at tonight's debate? As American citizens interested in the political process of the nation, yes. To create a disturbance by promoting hatred based in nothing other than outdated notions of racial superiority of one skin color over another? It is a shame and a disgrace that in the 21st century such attitudes are still around and fomented by those who live their lives promoting the hatred of others who are different. In contrast and comparison, the same can be said of those members of the Islamic world who promote the same sort of hatred from their standpoint. It could be argued that there is no difference between the Klan and al Qaeda save the color of skin of their members.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.

Iraqi Benchmark Reached During U.S. Economic Crisis

During the focus by the American media on the circus activity going on in Washington in regards to the nation's economy and House and Senate efforts to devise a plan to fix it, an important benchmark achievement has gone all but unnoticed in Iraq.

Iraqi Parliament members have unanimously passed a resolution opening elections in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces next year, opening the door for a more stable political environment in the country and allowing for a new, more secular and more inclusive legislative body to be elected. The current system, which allowed religious authorities to dominate in the previous elections, have been reworked in order to make the electoral process more secular and less open to religious influence. It also allows for women to occupy approximately 25% of legislative seats, and will allow Sunni sects inclusion into the process, which they have boycotted since 2005, but who have allied themselves with U.S. troops in fighting against the al-Qaeda, thus allowing them to compete for positions within the the Iraqi government.

As always in Iraq's halting journey toward a new order, the reform was not complete. Elections were put off in the province surrounding the volatile city of Kirkuk, where Kurds, Sunni Arabs and other groups compete for power, and in three Kurd-run provinces. Staging fair and peaceful elections will be another major challenge: In the south of Iraq, competition among Shiite parties, including those of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and Mahdi Army leader Moqtada al-Sadr, could easily spill over into violence. The importance of securing the elections is one good reason for President Bush's decision to withdraw only 8,000 of the 146,000 remaining U.S. troops in Iraq between now and February. Still, the precipitous drop in violence in Iraq during the past year offers strong reason for hope that a good election can be held -- and that the new Sunni and Shiite leaders who emerge will be well positioned to jump-start reconstruction in the provinces and negotiate with each other.

This latest benchmark has been what Ambassador Ryan Crocker has been calling one of the most important for the Iraqi's to reach and achieve. Another key benchmark expected to be reached is the distribution of revenue from Iraq's oil industry into the provinces and local economy. Perhaps, in light of the current economic crisis that is distracting the nation, for the moment, from Iraq and it's ground gaining, it should be noted that the strategy of gradual withdrawal of forces from the country has allowed it the time to develop a political system in which such benchmark achievements have been possible. Should the balance and pace that have been established be disrupted by an escalated withdrawal of American forces, it remains possible that the political stability that the region has been working toward might be undermined.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.

Boehner Takes Democrats to Task

In a letter from House Republican Leader John A. Boehner (R-OH) to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), the issues of a day of fruitless negotiation are addressed, making clear, in no uncertain terms, the Republican stand on the "joint proposals."

Despite claims by House Democrats early on that there was a "joint proposal" that had been prepared in dealing with the economic package being bandied about by legislators, a group of Republicans have asserted that no such joint proposal had yet been agreed upon yesterday, leading to a letter sent from House Republican Leader John Boehner to House Speaker Pelosi, detailing the position of the Republicans on the issues that still need to be addressed before any proposals can be considered "joint," and taking to task certain House members, and the speaker herself, for allowing word to be given that such an item existed, leading to misinformation and confusion in an already confusing and difficult situation.

In his letter to the speaker, Boehner threatened that "a large majority of Republicans cannot - and will not - support Sec. Paulson's plan" unless she actively considers some of the measures offered by his working group.

"In the interest of the men and women we represent in Congress, I hope it does not come to that conclusion," Boehner said in his letter to the speaker.

With Republicans still overwhelmingly opposed to Treasury's bailout proposal - as well as the principles on which House and Senate Democrats agreed to on Thursday - Democratic leaders can't do much until GOP leaders iron out concerns on their side of the aisle. Leaving a meeting of Democratic leaders on Friday, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer said, "The reality is that you're going to need very significant votes from both sides of the aisle."

Mentioned in particular in Boehner's letter were House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) and Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd Christopher Dodd (D-CT) for "announced that a bipartisan deal was at hand even though the reservations about the underlying proposal I had expressed to you had not been addressed. Each time such announcements were made, or even rumored, I or my staff made it clear to media and to your staff that any such deal did not include House Republicans."

Given the activity of the Democrats during yesterday's negotiations in their conduct in public eyes, it brings their reliability, honesty, integrity, and fitness to hold office into question in the eyes and minds of many American citizens. If elected officials can't be trusted to be honest in something as simple as announcing that there was no agreed upon proposal in their attempts to handle a time of crisis, what else are the Democratic officials prepared to lie about to the American people?

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.