Ahead, on my right, I saw the Alaska Right to Life (RTL) booth, where a poster caught my eye, taking my breath away. It featured the sweetest baby girl swathed in pink, pretend angel wings fastened to her soft shoulders.

“That’s you, baby,” I whispered to Piper, as I have every year since she smiled for the picture as an infant. She popped another cloud of cotton candy into her mouth and looked nonchalant: Still the pro-life poster child at the State Fair. Ho-hum.

Well, I still thought it was a nice shot, as I did every time I saw it on its advertisements and fund-raiser tickets. It reminded me of the preciousness of life.

It also reminded me of how impatient I am with politics.

A staunch advocate of every child’s right to be born, I was pro-life enough for the grassroots RTL folks to adopt Piper as their poster child, but I wasn’t politically connected enough for the state GOP machine to allow the organization to endorse me in early campaigns.

Time and again, Palin uses her large family for political purposes, and then complains that they’re “off limits” when she decides they’re under attack. We’ve seen it with the use of her son Trig–Palin put him on national TV at the 2008 Republican National Convention, and has occasionally accused liberals of wanting to kill him. We’ve seen it with Bristol Palin, whose pregnancy became a national story, and with Track Palin, whose military service Palin has referred to again and again. But it seems like Piper Palin’s star turn for Alaska Right to Life was the first political deployment of a Palin family member.

Revelation one: John Edwards, who at that point was several months into his career-killing affair with Rielle Hunter, told Kennedy that it would be “right for the party” if he endorsed him.

I know you’ll do that and when you do what’s right for the party you will be with me. It can make all the difference. We can win this. I’ll win Iowa.

Revelation two: Bill Clinton definitely lost Kennedy after his attacks on Obama, but what really got Kennedy angry was when Clinton claimed that his wife was not really voting for a war in Iraq by voting for the 2002 resolution. Clinton “cited the support for the resolution by Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel.”

Kennedy, who had led the opposition to the war, was furious. “It was a vote for war,” he said firmly. “I was there. I said it at the time. That resolution was a vote for war. Everybody understood it.”

Revelation three isn’t as big of a surprise. When Kennedy endorsed Obama, “his endorsement came with conditions. Kennedy wanted a commitment from Obama that as president he would push for universal health care. He wanted it to be a first priority of an Obama administration. Obama agreed.”

Upon his installation as attorney general, Eric Holder declared, “We will protect the civil rights of our fellow citizens, all of our fellow citizens – in the workplace, in the housing market, in our educational institutions and in the voting booth, as well as in their day to day lives.”  I believe that the House Judiciary Committee has an obligation to determine whether Mr. Holder’s deeds match his words, especially in light of the many unanswered questions posed by the Commission on Civil Rights and members of Congress.

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to the Department of Justice is currently dominated by George W. Bush appointees like Peter Kirsanow, who excitedly blogged about a letter from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to the Department of Justice concerning the incredibly important case.

How flimsy is this story? Both Wolf and Kirsanow quote “civil rights activist Bartle Bull” to prove that the actions of two fringey activists, who made no perceptible impact on the election, represented “the most blatant form of voter intimidation I have encountered in my life in political campaigns in many states, even going back to the work I did in Mississippi in the 1960s.” But Bartle Bull has an ax to grind; he endorsed McCain for president (“Do you suppose that Obama, or talky Joe Biden, can land an A-4 at night on a flight deck of an aircraft carrier in heavy seas?”) and has run around hyping this story for eight months.

“Every Senate seat is important,” said Van Dongen. “When you think of the amount of money involved in the recount and the subsequent proceedings — whatever it was, $2 million, $3 million, $4 million — that’s the smallest amount you’ll see spent on a Senate seat anywhere in the country, in any state.”

Van Dongen would have been ready to raise funds for more Coleman challenges — “I think there would have been a broad base of support” — but he supported the decision. “It’s his decision to make. From our perspective it’s a loss to the U.S. Senate and a loss to the free enterprise cause, and I hope to see him in public life again.”

–

You can follow TWI on Twitter and Facebook.

For a recap of how we got to this point, and a breakdown of the state high court’s ruling, check out this piece from The Minnesota Independent’s Paul Demko.

Franken will hold a press conference at 5:15 EDT.

–

You can follow TWI on Twitter and Facebook.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) just issued a statement calling on Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) “to respect the votes of his constituents and the decisions of his state’s highest court.”

He should put politics aside, follow his state’s laws and finally sign the certificate that will bring this episode to an end.

There’s good reason behind Reid’s call for urgency. Senate Democrats might number 60 officially, but with Sens. Edward Kennedy (Mass.) and Robert Byrd (W.Va.) both out indefinitely with illnesses, party leaders can use all the help they can get for the tough legislative battles that loom this summer.

UPDATE: The decision is here (pdf). The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that Franken is “entitled … to receive the certificate of election as United States Senator from the State of Minnesota.” Whether Minnesota’s Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty interprets this as an order to certify the election — which he has said he would obey — remains to be seen.

2nd UPDATE: The Minnesota Independent has more details.

I’m prepared to sign [the certification] as soon as they give the green light. I’m not going to defy an order of the Minnesota Supreme Court. That would be a dereliction of my duty.

But what’s the “green light?” If the court rules for Democrat Al Franken but doesn’t specifically order the governor to sign a certificate? Will he? Signs point to no; he suggests that he’d abide by a stay if one was issued by a higher court. And there would be considerable pressure on Pawlenty to wait for former GOP Sen. Norm Coleman’s next move even if the state Supreme Court ordered the signing of a certificate; that action could, theoretically, be stayed. (Obviously, there is no precedent for a senator being certified and then being pulled out of the body while a higher court re-evaluates his election. If Franken is certified, he will be a senator.)

–

You can follow TWI on Twitter and Facebook.

You’re offering little more than … Coleman’s theory of the case but no concrete evidence to back it up.

If Dietzen doesn’t rule for Coleman it’s more or less impossible for Coleman to win at the state Supreme Court. Really, for all of the fuss about Pawlenty’s decision not to run for governor in 2010, the only remaining question is whether the five justices order an election certificate as they rule for Franken.