if we’re fried by a nuke, we’re not free

as someone said, the constitution isn’t a license for foreign countries to assume control over America [paraphrased]

The Founders’ clear intent in crafting the document and with respect to such oath was to value liberty above all else. We could be well treated slaves in a quisling government with an intact Constitution and be secure. Security is not the major charge within the Constitution to the elected leadership. It is liberty.

“We are there now.”

John, William, Others:

I have documented exhaustively and comprehensively the Iranian Threat; this ELIMINATES Sellers as a reasonable alternative, inasmuch as SECURITY is the major charge within the Constitution to the elected leadership.

I have documented pragmatically and contemporaneously the stark realities within the 6th District that are reminiscent of my prior support for Gerlach and my subsequent support for Schroder; this ELIMINATES Welch as a reasonable alternative, inasmuch as his D-lib tendencies have been recently re-revealed.

“Are we there yet?”

http://www.facebook.com/reqs.php#!/welchforpa?ref=mf

Welch For PA I believe that a “deficit commission” is a step in the right direction. My hope is that Congress will follow suit, with a focus on reining in wasteful spending and reducing our national debt.

The issues you raise are assuredly problematic, illustrative of why I preferred Curt Schroder.

http://www.freindlyfirezone.com/index.php/local-news/item/6-explosion-in-the-6th-congressional-district-could-the-implausible-occur?

Is State Rep. Curt Schroder A Dark Horse For The Endorsement?

Hollywood couldn’t have scripted the drama any better in the GOP’s nomination race for Pennsylvania’s 6th Congressional District.

Try to follow along:

Four-term incumbent Jim Gerlach tells the world — repeatedly — that he would NOT seek re-election, opting instead to jump into the gubernatorial fray.

Based on Gerlach’s word, popular Chester County State Representative Curt Schroder announces he would seek the GOP nomination for the open seat, raising nearly $200,000 in just a few months. Based on political sources close to the race, he was clearly on the path to the Chester County endorsement. (Chesco accounts for a majority of the district, which also includes parts of Montgomery and Berks counties).

But in September of 2009, a wrench is thrown into the mix. After running in another congressional district for half a year, self-funding 33-year old millionaire Steve Welch bows to pressure from Party bosses, quitting his effort in the 7th Congressional District (CD) to make way for former gubernatorial candidate Pat Meehan, long a favorite of the Delco Machine. He then jumps into the 6th CD race, despite the fact that he does not live in that district.

After the New Year, Schroder, Welch, and several lower-tier candidates kick their campaigns into full gear, only to be shell shocked to learn that Jim Gerlach has changed his mind once again, and would be running for Congress after all.

Are you getting all of this?

Rep. Schroder, sensing fundraising difficulties if he chose to oppose the incumbent, begrudgingly dropped out of the race. Welch, with his ample funds, is still vying for the nomination.

So where does the race stand?

It’s anyone’s guess.

Over the last month, several straw polls of Chester County committee people provide a startling picture of the volatility in the Republican ranks. Gerlach received less than 60% of the vote in the first round, and only slightly more the following week. Given that these committee folks are the same ones who will vote to endorse a candidate at their convention this Saturday, Feb. 20th, (where 60% is necessary to earn the endorsement), and they have known the incumbent for well over a decade, many eyebrows have been raised. There is a growing sentiment that perhaps an election is in order — not a coronation.

Both candidates have major political baggage which makes the outcome of both the May primary and November general election far from certain.

Congressman Jim Gerlach

In a typical election year, the power and resources of incumbency trump most challengers, particularly in a primary. But 2010 is shaping up to be an explosive year where anything can happen, and no scenario is off the table.

That said, Gerlach retains the upper hand at this point. His name recognition is vastly superior to that of newcomer Welch, and his brand, for now, is still largely a positive one.

Remember that for the last eight years, Gerlach’s opponents and well-funded special interests have spent a fortune — a conservative estimate is well over $10 million — painting the congressman as a far-right-wing conservative Republican out of touch with the 6th District. Since Pennsylvania’s GOP primary is a closed one, meaning only Republicans can vote in it, that label is not a bad one to have.

Combine that with Gerlach’s proven ability to win general elections in otherwise horrid years for Republicans (2006 and 2008), and it’s hard to argue with conventional wisdom that the incumbent will once again triumph.

But things have changed, and Gerlach is carrying some new negatives which could prove decisive in the primary—and perhaps the general.

For starters, the campaign is broke. Since Gerlach’s warchest was transferred to help fund his failed gubernatorial bid, the congressional campaign had only $5,000 cash on hand as of just a few weeks ago, although staffers claim they have commitments for several hundred thousand dollars.

Against a typical opponent, the lack of funds at this point might not be a huge issue. But against a self-funder like Welch, who has already pumped in over $500,000 of his own fortune and has $650,000 cash on hand — with millions more if he needs it—, the lack of a significant warchest should be disconcerting to Gerlach.

On the issues, Gerlach will have to deal with conservatives’ wrath because of his voting record in a number of hot-button areas. The Congressman voted in favor of TARP (the first major bailout), the Medicare Prescription Drug program, commonly described as one of the largest expansion of welfare benefits in U.S. history, and Cash for Clunkers, while major increases in the deficit and national debt occurred on his watch. And here’s the kicker for many fiscal conservatives: much of this spending took place while Republicans were in charge of the House, Senate and White House.

If Gerlach can be tied into the “Business As Usual” crowd that is “part of the problem,” with voters believing that it shouldn’t just be an anti-Democrat year but an anti-incumbent one, he could be the recipient of a severe voter backlash.

But the one issue above all that could doom Gerlach is his support for Card Check, the bill proposed by labor unions that, among other provisions, would eliminate the secret ballot in union elections. Card Check is such a make-or-break topic for a huge number of Republicans that this issue alone could be enough to topple an incumbent.

According to the AFL-CIO website, Gerlach, along with former GOP colleagues Curt Weldon and Mike Fitzpatrick, all signed on as sponsors of Card Check in 2006. However, the Gerlach campaign denies that he favors Card Check, pointing to his vote in 2007 against the bill.

But in this environment, playing coy and stretching the truth could put an incumbent on the unemployment line very quickly.

The reality is that these three Republicans played games in 2005 and 2006, deciding to take both sides. Figuring that the GOP would be in power for decades (a woefully short-sighted outlook), Gerlach and Company thought that they could appease Big Labor by signing onto a bill that would never see the light of day.

Which was correct, for about another year, until Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats were swept into power.

His 2007 vote against Card Check has done little to mollify conservatives, who continue to think Gerlach’s heart leans toward Labor.

Despite meaningless polls showing Gerlach with a sizable lead over his unknown opponent, the potential of millions being unleashed on the 6th District Republicans in the coming weeks by Steve Welch, combined with many who are still fuming because of Gerlach’s broken word on retiring from Congress and backstabbing Curt Schroder, makes this race not just far from over, but one that hasn’t even begun.

Steve Welch
New to the political scene, Welch comes to the table with the most important weapon in campaigns: money. After selling his successful bio-tech company for a large sum, he decided on a foray into politics as his next professional move.

For six months, he ran unopposed in the 7th District, where Democratic incumbent Joe Sestak is not seeking re-election. Instead, Sestak is challenging Arlen Specter for U.S. Senate. The open seat became quite attractive for Pat Meehan, whose gubernatorial bid never got off the ground.

It’s here that Welch’s baggage began to pile up.

After repeatedly stating that he would remain in the 7th District race, even against a Meehan challenge, Welch yielded to Party pressure and abandoned the race. His decision to change his sights to the 6th District, even though he was not a resident, was viewed by many as a failure in his first real test of independence. Instead of standing by his principles, he caved in to the Delaware and Chester County party bosses.

The carpet-bagger issue was so difficult to overcome that Welch moved into the 6th District several months ago.

And even though the residency issue has been resolved, Welch continues to feel Republican wrath on a number of other issues.

First, he played loose with the truth when he claimed to have raised more than $250,000, when public records showed that number to be only $50,000. It’s one thing to slightly round up fundraising numbers, but such a huge discrepancy rubbed many the wrong way. This was the kind of doublespeak that voters have come to expect from Congress.

(NOTE: In all likelihood, Gerlach did the same thing. After claiming he had raised $1 million in the governor’s race, campaign finance disclosures put that number at a quarter million dollars less.)

Much more detrimental to Welch, though, is his Democratic past —the very recent past. Many GOP activists are having a difficult time reconciling how Welch can be part of the solution for the Republican Party when he:
A) Gave money to Democrat Joe Sestak. And Sestak is no ordinary Democrat, but one of the few who can make Arlen Specter look conservative.
B) Registered as a Democrat in 2006, and remained a D through the 2008 election, switching back to the GOP before running for Congress.
C) Admitted voting for Barack Obama in the 2008 primary election.

Given these facts, it’s a tough sell for Welch to claim he is a “lifelong” Republican.

While money doesn’t solve everything, it keeps one in the game. Whether or not Welch’s funds can alleviate his major negatives remains to be seen.

If he is able to make a strong showing at the nominating convention, and makes Jim Gerlach the issue for why a change is needed, he remains a serious threat to the incumbent.

But the $64,000 question is whether committee people and the Republican voters of the 6th District will:
A) determine that Gerlach is damaged goods and needs to go, and
B) if Steve Welch, with his Democratic ties, is the answer.

For those looking for another option, chew on this possibility:

What if, at this week’s convention, a committee person decides that enough is enough with candidates whose veracity and judgment are seriously flawed, and nominates a candidate with a solid Republican track record? Someone with the credentials and experience necessary to represent the 6th District better than the current field?

What if someone nominates State Representative Curt Schroder?

He may yet have the support of the committee, and could, at the very least, deny the endorsement to Gerlach or Welch.

Crazy? Sure— in most election years. But so was the unthinkable result in Massachusetts with Scott Brown’s victory.

This is 2010. Change is already upon us, and the rising tide may yet turn into a raging tsunami.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter whose news site, The Artorius News Bureau, is slated to launch in this month. Readers of “Freindly Fire” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on a Philadelphia-area talk radio show, WCHE, and makes numerous other television and radio appearances. He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/20100219_IAEA__Iran_may_be_trying_for_warhead.html

IAEA: Iran may be trying for warhead
By Warren P. Strobel and Margaret Talev

McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON – The U.N. nuclear watchdog said yesterday that it suspected that Iran may be trying to develop a nuclear warhead that could be placed atop a missile – its sharpest challenge to date of Iran’s claims to be pursuing an exclusively peaceful nuclear program.
The report by the International Atomic Energy Agency conflicts with a 2007 U.S. intelligence community assessment that Iran halted its nuclear-weapons program in 2003. It is more in line with reported European and Israeli estimates that Iran, along with enriching uranium that could fuel a nuclear bomb, is experimenting with constructing a warhead.

The Vienna-based IAEA said it had collected “broadly consistent and credible information” from various sources about Iran’s military-related nuclear activities.

“Altogether, this raises concerns about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile,” it said.

Senior Obama administration officials called the report disturbing and said the U.S. assessment of Iran’s nuclear ambitions was under review as part of a new National Intelligence Estimate. They spoke on condition of anonymity.

The 10-page IAEA report also confirms that Iran has begun enriching uranium to a purity of nearly 20 percent, closer to what is needed for nuclear bomb fuel.

A U.S. official, however, said Iran was producing about 100 grams a day of the 20 percent pure uranium – at a rate that would take it five to seven years to have enough for a bomb if it were enriched further. Weapons-grade uranium is roughly 90 percent pure.

Perhaps more worrisome, the IAEA said Iran has moved most of its current stock of low-enriched uranium to a pilot enrichment plant, indicating it is planning to convert it to the more pure form.

The steps Iran is suspected of taking toward a warhead have been cited in previous IAEA and media reports.

The agency’s overall conclusions, however, suggest a hardening stance from the IAEA in dealing with Iran under the agency’s new director-general, Japan’s Yukiya Amano.

The report also seems likely to affect high-stakes diplomacy over new sanctions on Iran. China is resisting a U.S.-led push for new action by the U.N. Security Council.

His sponsorship of the Card Check bill to deprive workers, under threat of union organizing, of secret ballots struck at the heart of American democracy. They’re just workers and Jim needed some union support, right? Throw them under the bus.

When power is elevated over principle, it should not be a surprise if the outcome should turn out to be neither. We do not need another Arlen Specter.

You may refer to media reports that stated that Iran had informed the IAEA that it “will increase its ability to make nuclear warheads” and that its uranium enrichment was “just below the threshold for high enriched uranium.” Those reports were generated from a Feb. 5 AP article titled “Iran moves closer to nuke warhead capacity.” The AP withdrew it on Feb. 9 after their information was debunked and they substituted one titled “Iran to stop enrichment if given nuclear fuel.” Note that the threshold for weapons grade fuel is 90% and that IAEA reports confirm that Iran had not been able to break 3.5%.

The problem with the AP’s substitute article is that Iran had on Feb. 2 accepted Western demands for third-party (French) enrichment of 3.5% stock to 20%. The product was to be used in fuel rods in their US-built Tehran reactor which produces medical isotopes for 850,00 Iranians who rely on nuclear medicine. You must be aware that Iran’s acceptance was rejected. They have thus indicated that they will perform their own enrichment. The IAEA reported on Feb. 10 that Iran is proceeding with a “modest” program to enrich 11 pounds of 3.5% stock in 164 centrifuges, but they cited the program in a letter as being in technical violation for proceeding too quickly.

On Feb. 18, the AP ran an article titled “3 World Powers Criticize Iranian Enrichment” (Russia, France, US) in which the AP echoed Western concerns that Iran seeks nuclear weapon. Ironically, however, the article also disclosed that such powers had, in a letter leaked to the AP, questioned whether or not Iran indeed has ability to produce 20 percent enriched uranium. Additionally, MI6 have disclosed belief that Iran does not have the capacity to produce the fuel rods.

IAEA Director Yukiya Amano himself has disclaimed any evidence that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Fundamentally, however, the cited media reports are about nuclear payload being mounted into a warhead, none of which exist.

Iran will remain mired in the third world for decades. Its per capita GDP is close to that of Botswana. It represents no threat to the Constitution.

I am not speaking for Pat in these comments but in my own capacity. You should revert to him on this matter, but I believe that you have labored under bad information.

1. Unlike Gerlach, he never pledged not to re-run for his seat. This is illustrated by the fact that the two people who had expressed interest therein IMMEDIATELY withdrew, deferentially. Neither publicly nor privately did he pledge not to re-run; this contrasts with Gerlach.

2. Welch is, indeed, giving Gerlach [richly-deserved] “hell,” but Welch is fatally flawed, for reasons aforementioned.

3. It is not surprising that internal polling–if made public–is going to favor the campaign that “bought” it; this is not dissimilar to how a lawyer will spin a client’s status…telling him/her what is desirable to hear. Nevertheless, it would not be surprising that he would be receiving this level of support when few people have yet heard of his [weak] competition.

4. I spoke with Sellers and sent him documentation on the Iranian Nukes, but he continues to avoid confronting this existential threat to Western Civilization. Therefore, regardless of $$$-concerns during upcoming years, he has failed to fact-facts that carry immediacy…thus the conclusion that he is, indeed, a neo-isolationist.

5. We are not the world’s policeman, perhaps, but we need to be pragmatic; the UN is paralyzed by China (and Russia) and, thus, the apologists for Sellers must confront today’s IAEA Report…or admit they are consciously ignorant of stark reality.

6. Gerlach has a generally OK record, as a Republican and, under proper circumstances, will generally vote as he views his District…as its representative. He is worthy of respect and, thus, all Republicans should hope he is both renominated and re-elected.

7. Gerlach is basically a good-guy, albeit excessively ambitious and–as noted–neglectful of a loyal colleague. He is obligated to do SOMETHING to provide Curt some degree of durable recompense.

Chris Wilson also stated “With solid numbers like these, Jim is a virtual lock to win the Republican primary. Any primary challenge to Jim Gerlach at this point would only serve Nancy Pelosi and Democrats in Washington.”

I beg to differ, if the Democrats need a vote from across the isle, who will they call? Their good ole buddy Jim! My only questions are: What did Gerlach get in return for selling out the American People? What will the price be for a HealthCare vote?

Maybe Mr.Wilson thinks if you tell a story long enough, people will believe it as fact.