Winning the Genetic Lottery

One of the best examples of our society's deranged priority structure is the amount of ink and breath wasted each year on "repealing the death tax". The "death tax" is a semantic construct of Republican spinsters who have managed to motivate working-class Americans to rally behind the cause of helping multi-millionaire heirs and heiresses secure a tax-free inheritance. For all the disingenuous attempts to paint the "death tax repeal" as a security net that will rescue dairy farms and ma-and-pa hardware stores from bankruptcy, this perennial debate is really about ensuring that people like Paris Hilton don't have to pay ANY taxes on the tens of millions worth of assets they inherit. In general, these individuals have done little or nothing to earn the fortune which is being foisted upon them.....other than being conveniently passed through the loins of nobility at birth. And for this alleged contribution to society, "death tax" critics want the rest of us to be taxed at a higher rate for our hard-earned labors so that genetic lottery winners can pay no tax on what is given to them. Misplaced priorities in a time of war and increasing maldistribution of resources? Ya think?

What is most galling about America's children of privilege is that most are incapable of even noticing the advantages that their upbringing has given them. With the rhetoric of wealth-pampering Republican lawmakers guiding them, the George W. Bushes of American life are able to follow a career timeline that begins at age 40 when they're finally bored with being a frat boy, and then steadfastly profess to earning their bounty through "hard work and determination". Fortunes are almost exclusively built by "crony searches" on Pappy's rolodex, allowing them to take advantage of resources not available to 99.5% of Americans while still asserting that their "hard work" should be rewarded by further rounds of tax cuts and regulation rollbacks.....not to mention lectures to struggling working-class families that "you need to pull yourself up by your bootstraps LIKE I DID!", or better yet cries of "class warfare" whenever said struggling families question the value of legislation designed to further enrich people like George W. Bush and Paris Hilton at the expense of other priorities.

Of course, a broader theme can be applied to this argument regarding the global distribution of resources. Seeing news footage this weekend of the carnage following the massive earthquake in Indonesia reminds us that even the poorest Americans have already "won the genetic lottery" compared to at least 80% of the world living in far less hospitable conditions. While it certainly does us good to count our blessings about how good even the least financially endowed Americans have it, going too far with that argument plays right into the hands of the multinational corporate fat cats who would love nothing more than guilt-ridden American working people readily forfeiting their union jobs so that rice farmers from rural China can manufacture widgets for 30 cents an hour in Shanghai. The end result there: the Chinese workers are marginally better off but still dirt-poor, the standards of living for American workers declines, and the major beneficiaries are the same deep-pocketed children of privilege constantly whining about being overtaxed and overregulated.

It is much more difficult to address inequality across the globe than it is here in America. Certainly there is a need to keep an incentive for entrepreneurs to do their thing, but even in the 1950s when the top tax rate was 90% and labor costs were infinitely higher in real dollars than they are today, entrepreneurs were making money and expanding a robust American economy. They were also able to secure that their chickenhawk sons didn't have to fight in the "poor man's war" when they came of age. The same opportunities will be available to children of privilege today without another raid on the Federal Treasury that ensures Junior's inheritance escapes taxation. It's funny how America has never clung to the idea of a privileged nobility the way most of our Western peers have, yet we're more likely that nations that have monarchies to believe our wealthy elites have a birthright entitlement to a whole different set of rules than the peasants surrounding the figurative castles.

The Golden Age of Television is Now

It seems as though most people romanticize the popular culture of their youth to the point of designating it "the best era of music/TV/movies ever!" while engaging their peers in casual discussion about "classic" entertainment. I have always held that belief to some extent, particularly as it pertains to the TV of the 1980's. There's no denying that the 1980's was a perfect time to be a 10-year-old boy since virtually everything on TV was catered to 10-year-old boys (The A-Team, Knight Rider, Airwolf, Dukes of Hazzard, The Fall Guy, etc. etc. etc.) These shows are still fun to watch in reruns and their comic-book appeal and top-notch old-school production values send all the good times of one's elementary TV viewing days rushing right on back. On the other hand, their cleverness and old-fashioned fun only go so far in distracting adult viewers from the bad acting, formulaic plots, and stereotypical cookie-cutter characters. In no way do the best shows of the 1980's (excluding MacGyver, which should go without saying) compare to the best shows on TV today.

I'm not the first person to classify the current lineup of television series (including first-run cable series) as TV's real "golden age". Most critics agree that a random sampling of an average night's programming is evidence enough of how the medium is soaring head-and-shoulders above the television of previous eras, particularly coming off of the dreadful 1990's, far and away the worst era of television in the medium's history. Things started to heat up in 2001, when it became obvious that the networks were making a concerted effort to reintroduce the forgotten action show with a 21st century twist. Two series in particular, 24 and Alias, stood tall as ambitious examples of what modern technology and a more streamlined production process can bring to weekly television in the new millennium. Over time, the former series remained strong while the latter series got goofy, but the bar they set for the TV seasons to come should be celebrated by everybody couch potato in America.

In those years following, the masterfully-crafted and solidly produced NBC police drama Boomtown graced us with an all-too-brief season and a half run; the snazzy special-effects of the WB's Superman-themed Smallville brought new life to that institution; the seemingly cheesy idea about a plane full of survivors crashing on a deserted, haunted island became the best new series of the 2003-04 season on Lost; and the victories go on and on, including some more conventional and short-lived delights such as UC: Undercover and Threat Matrix. Action TV is back with a vengeance and shows no sign of letting up.

But it wasn't until last fall that the Fox network unveiled a series that surpassed my wildest expectations for intelligent plotting, pulse-pumping suspense, and fresh characterizations. I would have never believed Fox could have outdone their existing work with the action-thriller 24, but last year's rookie Prison Break managed to pull it off in spectacular fashion. Clearly inspired by the adrenaline-thumping antics of 24, Prison Break managed to borrow some of that series' kinetic energy without resorting to creative theft. In fact, Prison Break's narrative complexity is much more impressive than that of 24 or Lost, because it's very clear that this series isn't making things up as it goes along. Showrunner Paul Scheuring told reviewers when the show premiered that he had already plotted out the first TWO SEASONS of the series. I was skeptical at first, but watching this first season unfold, it's been an absolute delight watching the puzzle constructed in Scheuring's mind slowly be assembled on our TV screen. As with all shows of this nature, suspending one's disbelief before they hit the sofa is the most vital prerequisite of viewing Prison Break, but what a masterpiece of pulp it has been for those of us able to press that internal suspend button. Having Prison Break and 24 back to back on Monday nights this spring has been a dream come true for me, and with Prison Break having just finished its first season earlier this week, I'm already excited at the thought of what this wild and woolly series has in store for us next year.

Perhaps an even bigger contributor to TV's positive transformation has been CSI. While I admit to being burned out on the CSI franchise and its numerous followers, there's no denying its contribution to primetime storytelling that's a cut above almost anything seen in primetime in the dismal seasons preceding the original CSI's premiere in the fall of 2000. The formula has largely run its course after a collective 12 seasons on the three different CSI series, but I still catch one of the three from time to time and continue to be impressed by the production values and the clever use of science, if not necessarily the increasingly routine motions of the plots. It appears my feelings on CSI being past its prime are not shared by the viewing public, however, as all three franchises are pulling in boffo Nielsen numbers, as are many of its numerous imitators such as Navy NCIS, Bones, and Criminal Minds. I haven't seen any of these series, but I take a glance at them over summer reruns to see if I'm missing anything worthwhile. After all, my experience has been that even the palest CSI imitators have their moments. Last season's otherwise ho-hum Medical Investigation had an episode about a modern-day smallpox outbreak that was perhaps the cleverest hour of television in the entire season.

Soft-core science fiction has returned to the small screen with the success of Lost, the surprise hit of the 2004 season that had an incredible first season of first-rate storytelling and characters. The series has been less consistently strong in its second season, but has still had plenty of gripping moments. Given the constraints of the setting, the writers definitely face a challenge in keeping things interesting on this series as it proceeds into a third season, but I'm optimistic they'll be up to that challenge. As is the case with every successful series, Lost has spawned a litany of similar-themed cousins in the past seasons....some of them good, others not, but none particularly successful with the possible exception of the WB's Supernatural, which I have never seen. Invasion was probably the best of this season's Lost children, but was canceled this week by ABC with only a marginal chance being picked up by another network.

The situation comedy has suffered in both quantity and quality since the days of Seinfeld, but it was definitely time for the sitcom genre to take a backseat after 15 years of primetime domination. The rise of clever, offbeat comedy fare such as My Name is Earl, The Office, and Arrested Development (and to some extent Desperate Housewives, even though it's not technically a situation comedy) will certainly help the sitcom remain relevant on the primetime lineup until its inevitable resurrgence comes to fruition. And now that it's become clear that the "reality show" will never completely consume the television lineup, I have no problem deferring a few hours a week of the primetime lineup to those shows either. Their smaller budgets and high profit margins for their networks help ensure a greater supply of available capital to produce more big-budget fare such as Lost, Alias, 24, and Prison Break, which is a perfectly fair tradeoff for me. Beyond that, there's an undeniable appeal to the Cadillacs of the reality series genre, such as the Machiavellian Survivor and the globe-trotting The Amazing Race which vastly exceeds the quality of the tabloidy newsmagazines (the low-budget profitmakers of yesteryear) that cannibalized multiple hours of the primetime schedule just a few short years ago.

Beyond that, there are numerous shows that receive consistently high marks which I have not been watching. Medical dramas Grey's Anatomy and House are consistently in the top-10 and get tremendous buzz from fans and critics. The medical drama genre has never been a favorite of mine, but in an era with fewer quality shows, I would be tempted to give those shows a look. And living in the ghetto of "basic cable" for most of the last five years, I've never had the opportunity to see acclaimed made-for-cable series such as The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, and The Shield either, but hope the opportunity arises to do so at some point.

With as much quality television that is being produced today, it amazes me how many snobby or ignorant people I still hear say that they don't watch TV, only to sing the praises of a recent feature film that pales in comparison to the average hour of modern primetime television. To each his/her own, but for as long as this pinata keeps showering candy upon me (and I know it won't last forever), count me as a regular nightly viewer of the small screen. Kudos again to the networks for bringing their A-game to the table in the last few seasons.

Bush Triangulates Wisely on Illegal Immigration

Apparently realizing that shilling for the Chamber of Commerce and its endless appetite for cheap immigrant labor has contributed heavily to his political collapse, George Bush made a wise move tonight with his televised primetime address where he unveiled a plan to deploy National Guard troops to our porous Southern border with Mexico. The address still made passing references to his noxious "guest worker program" proposal that amounts to little more than American apartheid, but the focal point of his commentary was border enforcement, which sensible people of all political persuasions recognize as vital to the financial survival of our country. Since existing border security measures are clearly not taking care of the problem, the deployment of National Guard troops to our Southern border is certainly worth a try. If it fails to produce a sufficient outcome, then we'll have to regroup and come up with a Plan B.

The bottom line is that something has to secure the borders beyond some pie-in-the-sky "crackdown on employers who hire illegals" fantasy that is all too often embraced as the only acceptable solution by members of my own political party. While that certainly sounds good, the technology enabling fake identities for illegals is getting more sophisticated all the time, and there's no way that the political muscle of the INS will supercede that of the meatpackers, construction companies, and agribusiness barons caught hiring illegals and putting up the same defense that they've gotten away with for years....that "all the paperwork checked out when we hired him/her". A border security policy that includes "cracking down on those who hire illegals" is shorthand for the status quo going on for another 20 years, and Americans know it. That's why Bush's latest move in the immigration chessmatch has the Democrats' backs against the wall. Americans will almost assuredly embrace the idea of the National Guard patrolling the border. If the Dems are dumb enough to cry foul and boisterously denounce the desperately-needed border security measure, they'll probably lose in this fall's midterms....and they'll deserve to lose.

Patty Wetterling Gets the Nod

It took seven rounds of balloting to seal the deal, but DFL delegates in Minnesota's 6th district decided in favor of children's advocate Patty Wetterling over former Blaine Mayor Elwyn Tinklenberg at Saturday's endorsement convention. Both candidates swore to abide by the endorsement, so it's almost assured that Wetterling will be facing off against GOP wingnut Michele Bachmann for the open seat vacated by U.S. Senate aspirant Mark Kennedy.

The reason Wetterling's nomination wasn't a blowout is the hamhanded way she got into the race. Two years ago, Wetterling was thoroughly slimed by the forces of Karl Rove and Mark Kennedy in her original quest to attain the seat. Reasonable voters recoiled in disgust at the attack ads and Wetterling seemed to have benefitted from it, losing the conservative district by only seven points to the seemingly untouchable two-term incumbent even as Bush steamrolled Kerry by 15 points in the district. At that point, Wetterling got a little too big for her breeches, and after hearing that Mark Dayton chose not to run for a second Senate term, Wetterling fancied herself politically competent enough to challenge Kennedy (already a declared candidate for the GOP) statewide, abandoning the possibility of another run for MN-06 where she would have been an instant frontrunner. Wetterling's Senate candidacy was over almost before it started as the establishment unilaterally lined up behind the more charismatic Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar. Wetterling realized she had made a grave mistake, and her promise to announced MN-06 candidate Tinklenberg that she wouldn't run made Wetterling's political future seem grim.

But of course promises in the political world are made to be broken and Wetterling hoodwinked Tinklenberg in February by changing her mind and pulling off another Congressional race jujitsu, resurrecting her MN-06 ambition even though she publicly admitted she didn't believe she could win the race last year.

Wetterling's journey is generally not the most expedient way of winning a contested endorsement nomination, but she pulled it off on Saturday nonetheless. I was officially neutral in the race, but found Patty's deception and lack of political instinct to be rather unsettling given how difficult it will be to win this district. On the other hand, she has name solid name recognition (as opposed to "Elwyn Tinklenberg") and a respected reputation. She also has the luxury of running against the biggest nut in the Minnesota Legislature, who equates workplace safety regulations with "Marxism". Anywhere else in Minnesota, Bachmann would be DOA, but she's been twice elected to a Senate seat in the northeastern suburbs (Stillwater, Forest Lake, Lino Lakes) that while more Republican than it used to be, would not seem to be a radically conservative as their State Senator.

Looking at this race strategically, Wetterling almost has to win over voters in Bachmann's home turf in northern Washington County. This may seem like a daunting challenge, but I expect there are more independent voters embarrassed by their past decisions to vote for Bachmann than the GOP would like to believe. Beyond that, Wetterling needs a solid victory in the St. Cloud area, where she lives, which ominously for Democratic candidates, is the least conservative part of this district. Working-class second-ring suburbs like Anoka and Blaine should also be fruitful for Wetterling, provided that the bitterness of Tinklenberg supporters in the area didn't completely sour those voters on Wetterling. At the other end of the spectrum, wealthy Woodbury is usually not hospitable to Democrats, but was one of Wetterling's best performers in 2004. It seems unlikely that Bachmann's uber-conservative message will play there if the more traditional Republican message of Mark Kennedy didn't two years ago.

Bachmann's strengths are likely to be the exurbs between Minneapolis-St. Paul and St. Cloud, particularly Sherburne County (Elk River) and Wright County (Buffalo, St. Michael), neither of which I can see electing ANY Democrat under any circumstance given the mass influx of socially and economically conservative yuppies that the once swing area has absorbed in the last decade. These counties represent more than a third of MN-06's population, meaning that a strong performance by Bachmann here will be hard for Wetterling to overcome. Add that to the fact that Bachmann will probably do some pretty strong business in the Stillwater-Forest Lake area which she represents in the state Senate and we're almost assured of a fierce contest even if Wetterling pitches a perfect game in the campaign. Wetterling certainly doesn't have the luxury of making a mistake.

As for Tinklenberg, I hope he and his supporters recognize the importance of putting forth a unified front and enabling the Dems to take back this very winnable seat against the unhinged Bachmann. I can certainly understand the hard feelings Tinklenberg must hold towards Wetterling for her betrayal, but his best play would be to warmly and wholeheartedly endorse Wetterling this week, then lobby for his own insertion on the gubernatorial ticket as Mike Hatch's running mate. Strategically, this would be a fantastic political union, as Hatch needs to win over at least some suburban voters (Tinklenberg is from Blaine) if he plans to beat Pawlenty and Tinklenberg supporters will find it easier to forgive Wetterling if their man gets a prime position on a statewide ticket. The combination is likely to improve turnout throughout the district and improve both Democrats' chances. I sure hope the Hatch campaign is entertaining this same idea rather than opting for some token woman running mate that brings little strategic momentum to the table.

Minnesota Political Races Start to Get Interesting

Even though I recently moved to Iowa, my heart will always be in Minnesota, particularly as it concerns the exciting and unpredictable world of Minnesota politics. This past weekend, several districts held their endorsement conventions. Endorsements from the rabidly partisan activists in Minnesota politics don't necessarily result in primary victories a few months down the road, but will hopefully jump-start the various campaigns into "game-on" mode after a fairly quiet couple of months.

The most encouraging development of last weekend was 6th District Republicans consolidating around wingnut Michele Bachmann as the GOP heir apparent for Mark Kennedy's seat. MN-06, located in the wealthy exurbs on the north and northwest side of the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area and extending as far as St. Cloud, is decidedly unfavorable terrain for Democrats. However, if there's any Republican capable of making independents and moderate Republicans in the area recoil in disgust, it's Bachmann, who has earned the reputation of the biggest crazy in a very crowded field at the Minnesota Legislature. She's on record as saying that gay marriage is the most important issue facing our society today. Not only is this premise way out of the mainstream of Minnesota voters, it negates her entire decision to run for Congress because she would certainly have more pull in prohibiting gay marriage within the confines of Minnesota state government than she would in the U.S. House where gay marriage is well outside of their jurisdiction.

There were three other Republicans challenging Bachmann for the endorsement in MN-06, including moderate St. Cloud Representative Jim Knoblach, fiscally conservative Representative Phil "Dr. No" Krinkie, and a businessman named Jay Esmay, all of whom plan to abide by their party's endorsement and will now drop out of the race after getting crushed by Bachmann in the district endorsement convention. Any of these three would probably be able to keep the seat in Republican hands come November, which makes it all the more sweet that the GOP decided to go with the fringe-right Bachmann in a year where their party is swimming against the tide anyway. But before I get too cocky, this is a staunchly Republican area (Bush beat Kerry here by nearly 15 points) and Bachmann still can win here, which would be the worst of all worlds since she'd embarrass Minnesota on the national stage. The Democrats will choose their candidate this weekend, between 2004's MN-06 candidate Patty Wetterling and former Blaine Mayor Elwyn Tinklenberg. I honestly don't know who's likely to prevail here, and don't even have a preference since both candidates bring their own set of assets and liabilities to the table. Whoever prevails (and both have sworn to abide by the endorsement) has been handed a Christmas gift in May with Bachmann as their opponent. Let's just hope they don't blow it.

The surprise retirement announcement by MN-05 Congressman Martin Sabo in March set off a free-for-all in the DFL with more than a dozen Democratic candidates vying for a sure-fire ticket to Congress in the liberal Minneapolis-based district. Sabo endorsed his former Chief of Staff and DFL Party Chair Mike Erlandson, who I considered the front-runner, but he came in a dismal fourth place in the endorsement process. Erlandson vows to fight on to the primary where he'll still be a contender, but the momentum is now with endorsed candidate Keith Ellison, a young legislator from Minneapolis who is both African-American and Muslim. I don't know much about Ellison but have it good authority that is a passionate and charismatic liberal who often draws comparison to Paul Wellstone. Unfortunately, he comes across much more embittered than charismatic in what little I've seen of him. I have little fear that the as-yet undecided Republican nominee will be able to beat Ellison in this overwhelmingly Democratic district (Kerry won with 72% in 2004) barring an epic scandal, but if Ellison proves controversial, it has the potential to be a drain on the rest of the ticket statewide. There's no indication that will happen, but after several past indiscretions on the part of DFL activists in the endorsement process, I sure hope they know what they're doing here.

In another exciting development, Democratic icon Jim Oberstar in Minnesota's 8th District will get his first real challenge in many years this fall. Former Senator Rod Grams has decided to contest the seat in the long-standing northeastern Minnesota DFL bastion. While it's extremely unlikely that Grams will unseat Oberstar, he does have a feather in his cap being the only Republican to have won this district in recent memory, narrowly defeating lackluster DFL Senate candidate Ann Wynia in 1994 in MN-08. However, he got blown away in the district six years later against Mark Dayton, barely managing to win the district's Republican pockets in the Brainerd lake country. And Oberstar will prove considerably more challenging of a foe than Dayton, and certainly more challenging than Wynia who was on the receiving end of anti-Clinton sentiment on the Iron Range following the signing of NAFTA and the assault weapons ban. With that said, MN-08 is adding new Republicans every election cycle with the northern exurbs near Cambridge and North Branch (Grams' neck of the woods) rapidly growing and the DFL base in the Iron Range slowly shrinking. Combine that with the name recognition and infusion of cash Grams will bring to the table that Oberstar's recent token opponents have lacked and you have the makings of a third-tier contest. If Grams is able to hold Oberstar to less than 60%, the GOP will have accomplished its goal, challenging the DFL on its home turf and possibly strengthening Pawlenty and Kennedy at the top of the ticket.

That's three of Minnesota's eight Congressional districts. As for the other five, it may or may not turn out to be business as usual. Democrat Betty McCollum doesn't have an opponent yet in St. Paul-based MN-04, but it's hard to imagine her being vulnerable. Ditto for conservative Democrat Collin Peterson who represents western Minnesota who is almost certain to win by his usual 2-1 margin against whatever token opponent the GOP throws at him. In MN-03, Wendy Wilde will be this year's challenger to moderate Republican Jim Ramstad. The wealthy suburbs of western Hennepin County are becoming less Republican by the day, but I can't imagine a scenario where Ramstad (good buddy of the late Paul Wellstone) will be swept up in an anti-Republican tide. I wish Wilde luck and hope she can hold Ramstad to under 60%, which would be a coup in itself and set her up for a future run when Ramstad retires.

Potentially more competitive are MN-01 and MN-02, both held by conservative Republicans. There was hope for Time Magazine Person of the Year Coleen Rowley early on, believing she could be capable of picking off two-term incumbent John Kline in this solidly Republican district in the southern suburbs. Rowley's campaign has been lackluster thus far, however, and her aggressive anti-war posturing seems incompatible with the self-absorbed yuppies of Shakopee, Chanhassen, and Apple Valley. State Senator Sharon Marko temporarily threw her hat in the ring in the winter, sharing the conventional wisdom that Rowley was blowing it. Marko has since deferred the candidacy back to Rowley, who is somewhat back on track but still a huge longshot here.

Surprisingly, six-term Republican incumbent Gil Gutknecht in MN-01 is now viewed as more potentially vulnerable, as his opponent, a charismatic Afghanistan war veteran named Tim Walz, has come out of nowhere with some impressive fundraising totals and an air of momentum surrounding his candidacy. This district is not nearly as Republican as it used to be and Walz very much seems to be the right guy at the right time with the potential of painting the district blue. Gutknecht has managed solid if unspectacular margins against token opposition over the last few cycles, but has never been battle-tested in a tight contest. There's no guarantee this race will turn out to be a tight contest, but expect Walz to have some tough questions for Gutknecht regarding his ongoing dronish support for Bush administration policy in Iraq as well as Gutknecht breaking his self-imposed term limit pledge (he campaigned on six terms and not a day more). It's an uphill battle, but if anybody's up to challenge of slaying the plastic dragon, it's Walz.

With the entire legislature and all three constitutional offices (Secretary of State, Auditor, and Attorney General) up this fall along with marquee Senate, Governor and Congressional races, it promises to be a very exciting year in Minnesota politics. Every indication is that the state is poised for a giant leap leftward this fall (which, regretably, could be the last true hurrah for Minnesota's Democrats in the age of endless red-trending exurban expansion). If that comes to pass, there will be at least one excited Minnesota expatriate on November 7.

April's GOP Asshat of the Month

This month's selection for the poster child of GOP insanity was not a slam-dunk. While Tom DeLay clearly makes for an easy target due his spectacular fall from grace, his decision to resign and allow another Republican the opportunity to win his seat was the right move for him politically, so it's hard to pin the asshat label on him. Some other Republican candidates and elected officials engaged in some mildly embarrassing activities in the last 30 days, but it wasn't until this past week that the winner became obvious by saying two stupid things in the past month.

Without further adieu, I present to you the GOP Asshat of the Month for April.....Curt Weldon.

Weldon is a conservative Republican Congressman from Pennsylvania's 7th district, a region which entails the affluent southwestern suburbs of Philadelphia. When Weldon was elected in the 1980's, this district was a Republican stronghold. That is no longer the case. Clinton won the district twice, followed by a comfortable victory for Al Gore in 2000 and an even more decisive margin for John Kerry in 2004. While he's been re-elected comfortably in biannual House contests up until now, he's starting to sweat a little now with the tide turning so strongly against his party, particularly in the Northeast. Thankfully, Weldon's perception of possibly vulnerability is provoking him to make some shocking gaffes early in his faceoff with Democratic challenger and Retired Admiral Joe Sestak.

Sestak's five-year-old daughter was diagnosed last summer with a malignant brain tumor and given only a few months to live. The girl's extensive treatments went so well that doctors upgraded her chances significantly. So how did Weldon respond when Sestak jumped into the Congressional race in attempt to unseat him a few months back? With respect and admiration for a man who served his country in the armed forces? With accolades and wishes of goodwill for his daughter's successful treatments?

Hardly. Weldon criticized Sestak over petty residence issues....and specifically used Sestak's daughter as a weapon in his criticism. Sestak continued to own a house in a northern Virginia (he had previously worked at the Pentagon) out of convenience of his daughter's treatment since she had been attending a D.C. hospital. Meanwhile, he was only renting a home in PA-07, which set off Weldon, who suggested that Sestak should permanently reside in the district where he's running for Congress and commute to D.C. to work every day, as Weldon insists he does. Weldon added that Sestak should have sent his daughter for treatments at Philadelphia area hospitals instead of seeing the doctors who had already been treating her in northern Virginia. Politicians have tried to make hay out of residency requirements before, but none have stooped so low as to invoke the cancer-stricken preschoolers into their smear campaign. It's unlikely Sestak will exploit this blunder by Weldon, but if he did, he could easily make Weldon out to be the 21st century of Ebenizer Scrooge, denying medical treatment for cancer-stricken schoolchildren.

Thankfully, Weldon wasn't done making an ass out of himself after that incident....

Take a look at his latest moonbat ravings from this article at SwingStateProject:

"Veteran Rep. Curt Weldon has a proclivity for calling out shady government doings that have him in mind as a principal target. A year ago, for example, after the No. 2 Republican on the House Armed Services Committee published “Countdown to Terror,” a frontal assault on the CIA’s track record before Sept. 11, he claimed that Clinton administration veterans with ties to the agency were out to get him.
So it’s not surprising that as Weldon girds for the most difficult re-election bid during his two decades representing the Philadelphia suburbs, his campaign is alleging that the CIA is probably abetting the opposition. Last month, his campaign manager Michael Puppio Jr. announced that Weldon’s expected Democratic opponent, Joe Sestak, a former Navy vice admiral, had taken campaign contributions from Mary McCarthy, the CIA operative recently fired for allegedly leaking secret information to the media. McCarthy, who was specifically accused of being a source for The Washington Post’s Pulitzer Prize-winning story on secret CIA prisons overseas, has denied that charge through her lawyer.
The media also has raised suspicions in the Weldon camp. The reporter on the Post article, Dana Priest, wrote a piece last year about Weldon’s book that the congressman viewed as critical.
It’s just a question of following the money, says Puppio. “What’s a CIA analyst doing giving money to a partisan political candidate?” he asks. “I’m not sure she violated any laws, but then when that analyst is alleged to have leaked information to a reporter who in turn is extremely critical of Curt Weldon, that raises some big questions.”

And amidst all of this is Weldon's flakiest headline yet.....a 2004 coronation of goofball Sun Myung Moon from the Unification Church which Weldon attended. Weldon adamantly denied attending this circus at first....until it was revealed that Weldon was the co-organizer of the event. After getting caught in that lie, Weldon then claimed he had intended to attend the coronation, but couldn't because of a scheduling conflict.....until a photo surfaced showing Weldon speaking at the event...right next to a lifesize photograph of Weldon pinning a Unification Church medal on the shirt of Libyan dictator Muammar Qadhafi at a previous gathering. I couldn't make this stuff up.

As for Sun Myung Moon, the Unification Church leader that Weldon apparently sacrificies animals with, he's on record in calling gays "dirty, dung-eating dogs", insists that "Jews killed Jesus Christ, and has speculated that "Satan is clinging to our sexual organs."

I'm sensing that Weldon's religious practices, choice of company to reward with medals(murderous African terrorists), and abrasive treatment of four-year-old cancer patients might be a tad out-of-step with the values of suburban Philadelphia residents. Given Weldon's stature and breezy margins of victories in past campaigns, I had never thought of him as seriously vulnerable up until recently. Any more potshots or howls at the moon and Weldon could find himself one of the most vulnerable Republicans of all in another six months.