Case In Point

Going "Legit"

2005-12-02T16:08:00.000-08:00

For some time, we've been writing simultaneously for this site and for a name-brand website with a large but somewhat single-focused readership. If only the day-job that pays the bills didn't take so much time, we could continue to post on both sites daily. But.

Blogging has been fun, and we highly recommend it for folks who find themselves shouting at the television, or the radio, or the liberal in the next office. Expressing your frustration as TRUTH and INTELLIGENT OPINION and ETHICAL IDEAS in a blog is more constructive - and maybe someone will actually listen.

If the big-boy website starts getting politically correct, we'll come back here. But for now, if you want to know where to find us, send us an email. And if you don't...

you will probably never miss us.

Setting the Agenda

2005-12-02T09:41:00.000-08:00

It's inconceivable that conservatives should be depressed.

The economy is growing at a healthy 4%, and would be even better if it hadn't been hit by some 24 hurricanes this year, as well as supporting two expensive wars.

The mission is Iraq is almost complete, and when it is, we will have been responsible for establishing a democratic stronghold in the Middle East that is even now forcing its neighbors to emulate it by degree to keep their own people from rebelling.

Europe is once again finding out that appeasement leads to disaster. This is causing a shakeup in their governments that may may give them incentive to fix their own problems before we have to - once again - rescue them.

The stock market is approaching 11,000.

Canada's liberal government has fallen.

Christmas is coming and this year, it's going to be called "Christmas," not just a generic "holiday."

But conservatives are depressed. Why?

It's President Bush's fault. Well, of course. That's a given.

But this op ed piece in the Wall Street Journal has a good point. The President is willing to govern for results, not for popularity in the polls. President Bush pays no attention to the media, which prevents distraction from the administration's goals by snarky, silly, emotional, biased reporters cruising for a Pulitzer. But in declining to use the bully pulpit to set the agenda for public discourse allows the media to do so. And we all know where their natural tendencies will take them.

It's like campaigning. You've got to keep the message in front of the people. Right now, the message is driven by those who make their living dramatizing, sensationalizing, and horrifying stories to get market shares and readership - the media. That message is then being used by those whose living depends upon retaking governing power - the Democrats.

It's a dangerous combination.

Fighting Back for Christmas in Oregon

2005-12-01T15:13:00.000-08:00

Lars Larson, a nationally syndicated radio talk show host broadcasting from Little Moscow (the president's nickname for Portland, Oregon), has joined the fight for Christmas. He and a group of local churches are making a stand in Pioneer Square, the meeting-and-greeting, Starbuck's-swimming, street-musician-infested, Macy's-facing public square in the heart of the city. Below is the press release we received (we added the festive Christmas colors):

Everyone is invited to join us as we begin a new tradition at Pioneer Square, “The Christmas Cross” sponsored by The Portland Area Christian Churches and the Lars Larson Show of radio station 750 KXL. When asked about the display Larson said, “we’re putting the Cross in the Square to remind people of the real reason for the season. Letting local government re-define the ‘Christmas Tree’ as a ‘Holiday Tree’ is an insult not only to Christians everywhere, but to other religions as well. You shouldn’t have to hire a lawyer in order to say ‘Merry Christmas.’”

The Cross will be on display in the Square from the morning of December 19th and available for viewing through Christmas Eve, December 24th 2005. The Lars Larson Show can be heard Monday through Friday from 11am to 2pm in Portland on Newsradio 750 KXL and throughout Oregon, Southwest Washington and parts of Idaho on 17 affiliate stations via the Radio Northwest Network.

This is why Lars gets so much hate mail in blue-state Oregon. And why the conservatives love him.

Keeping On Keeping On

2005-11-30T09:07:00.000-08:00

Who decides the story of the week?

Absolutely nobody we know has recently changed his or her mind about the war in Iraq. Those who have backed the President and the troops in their efforts are unwavering. They intend that we finish the job. Those who opposed the war in the beginning still do. They want the troops home now. So why is the media reporting that support for the war is dropping, plummeting, tanking, as though we're on a free-fall toward a revolution?

The 24-7 coverage of this non-existent crisis mimics a campaign media blitz. It couldn't have been better choreographed if Dick Morris had designed it. Cindy Sheehan sells 100 books and we are told this represents a catastrophic drop in the president's approval rating. Four peaceniks who wanted to "dialogue" with the terrorists found themselves captured by them (is "duh!" a sufficiently concise response?), and we are told this demonstrates how much the world hates us because of our aggression in Iraq.

From what we can tell, the only Americans making this a big issue right now are the politicians in Washington. And we all know why they bluster and posture and whisper with their advisors about what position would be most advantageous on any particular day. The rest of the folks are just keeping on keeping on.

We need to find the media something else to focus on; sorta like distracting a two-year old with a favorite toy. How about the fall of the liberal government in Canada?

Naw, they aren't interested.

Maybe a good snowstorm would get their attention - they like to be filmed standing outside in bad weather...

Reality is Hard

2005-11-29T08:32:00.000-08:00

A self-proclaimed delegation of lifelong pacifists who feel that the "occupation" in Iraq is a mistake travelled to that country ten days ago to prove that "dialogue, not confrontation, should help to bring about conciliation" in the war on terror.

So, how are they doing?

Four of them were kidnapped as they left a mosque in Baghdad.

Now the "occupying" Marines and their Iraqi trainees are going to have to rescue this "peacemakers team" from their own idealism. Literally.

Signs of Christmas

2005-11-29T08:25:00.000-08:00

We've started looking for signs of Christmas. It's hard to find them these days.

The American Family Association reports that they perused the commercial ads from last Sunday's editions of two southern newspapers, the Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal and the Memphis Commercial Appeal, looking for signs of Christmas.

Of the eleven major corporations placing 260 pages of promotional inserts in these newspapers, only one - McRae's/Belks - mentioned the word "Christmas."

The others managed to market all the accoutrements of the season in the most generic way. Imagine the contortions they must have gone through to avoid saying...

Christmas trees.
Christmas lights.
Christmas ornaments.
Christmas cards.
Christmas gift ideas.
Christmas candles. Christmas wrapping paper.
Christmas ribbon.
Christmas candy.
Christmas wreaths.
and of course, Christmas stockings.

I'm sorry. They are just NOT "holiday" stockings.

Guess they didn't want to offend anyone. Except the Christ-ians. But they're always fair game, being part of the oppressive majority against which the minority must always rebel. And if that argument doesn't work, how about this - Christians are, by definition, forgiving folks, and won't retaliate against ignorant offenses.

Of course, they can always choose where to spend their "holiday" money.

Do you want to know the ten companies that eschue the "C" word? Best Buy, Dell, Kroger, Lowe's, Office Max, Penney's, Sears, Staples, Target, and Walgreens.

***
UPDATE: It looks like Boston got a "Christmas tree" after all! The Nova Scotian donor of the annual tree said he would rather feed it to a chipper than let Boston rename it a "holiday tree." He got his way.

***
UPDATE TWO: The mayor of Encinitas, California, says his town is sponsoring the Encinitas Christmas Parade on December 3. "Somewhere, somehow - nobody seems to know who" -- had changed the name to the Encinitas Holiday Parade. The mayor changed it back. Now, the Girl Scouts Seacost Service Unit, the Leucadia Town Council and the Bernese Mountain Dog Club of Southern California have decided not to participate. Their loss.

***
UPDATE THREE: Speaker of the House Dennis Hassert has proclaimed that there will be no holiday tree, as it has been called in recent years, at the U.S. Capitol. "The Speaker believes a Christmas tree is a Christmas tree. It is as simple as that." Score one more for Christmas!

A Poll We Like

2005-11-28T00:27:00.000-08:00

RT Strategies conducted a poll to find out how Americans feel about Iraqi war criticism spouted by the Democrats in Congress in the past few weeks. RT Strategies appears to be "fair and balanced," since the "R" is Thomas Riehle, a Democrat, and the "T" is Lance Tarrance, a Republican.

The question was, does criticism of the war by Democrats hurt troop morale? The answer was an overwhelming "yes."

In fact, 70% of the folks surveyed said that troop morale was hurt; with 44% saying morale is hurt a lot. This included Democrats, 55% of whom said the same thing.

Even more important for Congress to understand is that a majority of the folks don't buy the claim that the anti-war criticism is well-intentioned. They believe the motive is purely political.

Yep. So how about we all tell 'em to knock it off.

One Marine's Words

2005-11-27T12:12:00.000-08:00

We received this email and thought it worthy of printing in its entirety. We hope you agree...

I don't know if the war in Iraq is ultimately unwinnable, but what I do know makes me skeptical of those who say so.

I do know that since Vietnam, liberals have viewed every exercise of American military power (with the exception of those undertaken by Bill Clinton) as preludes to disaster. The very first question Ronald Reagan was asked at his first presidential press conference concerned El Salvador. The question: Did he think it was going to turn into another Vietnam? Democrats invoked Vietnam with every other sentence during the long and nasty controversy about aiding the resistance in Nicaragua. More recently, just days into the Afghanistan war, The New York Times ran a front-page lament calling that conflict a new "quagmire."

Liberals seem always to believe that America will lose its wars, and when it doesn't, that it should.

It is obviously deeply painful to contemplate the more than 2,000 American dead, and many others gravely injured in Iraq. And charities like Fisher House welcome concrete demonstrations of Americans' concern for military families. But one does not sense that members of the military share the belief so widespread in the press and Congress that the Iraq war is going very badly and that the original decision to fight was a mistake.

One Marine, Sgt. Todd Bowers, who did two tours in Iraq, described the attitude of many press types. "They didn't want to talk to us." Why? I asked. "Because we were gung-ho for the mission." Bowers, who was saved from grievous injury when a bullet lodged in the sight of his rifle (a sight his father had purchased for him), is chary about the press.

In his first tour, he noticed that members of the press were reluctant to photograph Iraqis laughing, giving the thumbs up sign, or cheering. Yet Bowers saw plenty that would have made fine snapshots. In Baghdad, Al Kut and Al-Nasiriyah, Bowers reported no signs of anti-American feeling at all among Iraqis.

Fallujah, of course, was different, as the city was a hotbed of terrorism, and the battle of Fallujah was one of the fiercest engagements of the war. During the battle, Bowers found himself sharing a ride with an embedded reporter for the AP. He was asked what he thought of the destruction. Bowers responded that it was "Incredible, overwhelming. But it definitely had to be done." He also stressed that because the enemy had fought so dirty, tough calls had to be made. Later, he saw himself quoted in newspapers around the country to the effect that the destruction was "overwhelming" as if he could not cope. He had also made some anodyne remarks about rebuilding the damaged areas of the city, and responded "Where to begin?" when asked about the plans. He was speaking of the water treatment plants, medical facilities, and schools American forces were about to help build, but his comments were offered as evidence of the futility of the situation -- the very opposite of th is eager Marine's intent.

There was plenty of progress to report, if the press had been interested. When the battle of Fallujah was over, the Marines set up a humanitarian relief station in an abandoned amusement park. Together with Iraqis locally hired and trained for the purpose and with an assist from the Iraqi ministry of the interior, they distributed rice, flour, medical supplies, baby formula, and other necessities to thousands of Iraqis. For six weeks, Bowers reports, the distribution went beautifully, "like a well-oiled machine." Not worth a story, apparently. Only when something went wrong did the press see something worth reporting. A small group of Iraqis were turned away from the food distribution point, though they had been waiting in line for hours. They were given vouchers and told they could come to the front of the line the next morning when supplies would be replenished. These few unhappy souls were then besieged by press types eager to tell their story.

At the same site, the Marines had repaired an old Ferris wheel. The motor was dead, but when two Marines pushed and pulled by hand they could get the thing turning to give rides to the children of the Iraqi employees. They did so for hours on end. A photographer from a large American media company watched impassively. "Why don't you take a picture of this?" demanded one Marine. The photographer snorted, "That's not my job."

Mona Charen
November 25, 2005

If the "official" media won't tell the real, true, and complete story of our troops' work to free and stabilize Iraq, it becomes our duty to do so. Pass it on.

It's All "Academic"

2005-11-25T00:23:00.000-08:00

Doing her part to indoctrinate America's youth on social issues of the past and present, the professor of Anthropology 380 at our local university showed a "documentary" called The Fog of War last Monday. This film depicts Japan as victim of American aggression in World War II. Showing footage of bomb-ravaged Japan after the war, the narrator claims that the only reason American soldiers were not tried for war crimes for the wanton destruction of an innocent and beautiful culture was because they won.

The conservative student who reported this to us said that his classmates were in tears by the end of the film. In the discussion that followed, there was general condemnation of the United States and a demand that our military stop killing and maiming the people of the world just because they “disagree with the American way of life.”

They would likely be in agreement with Chris Matthews, who just a few days ago lectured, "If we stop trying to figure out the other side, we've given up. The person on the other side is not evil -- they just have a different perspective."

Our student friend was furious. He wanted so much to remind his classmates that the United States didn’t start that war, and that many American lives were lost liberating Europe and stopping Japanese suicidal continuation of a lost cause. But he was concerned that he would be quite alone in his viewpoint and wasn’t sure he could handle the entire class by himself.

He also couldn’t remember how many Americans died in WWII.

We helped him out. It was 407,316. That was 1 of every 327 Americans.

We hope he writes in that answer on the test. Just for a little perspective.

Not only are the liberals rewriting history in the war on terror, they’re rewriting it all. And most of the kids believe the lies. "Whoever controls the youth, controls the future."

Oh, The Irony

2005-11-23T00:17:00.000-08:00

Remember Representative Jack Murtha (D-PA), the infamous Congressman who demanded that our troops be pulled out of Iraq forthwith, and had his resolution voted down in such big numbers that he himself voted against it? He placed an internet poll on his website asking the public to support his position, and was once again surprised - only 12% of the voters agreed with him.

Oops.

Representative Murtha has now removed the poll results from his website. Guess this information shouldn't be disseminated - folks might find out support for the war isn't "declining rapidly" as we've been told this past couple of weeks.

***
And while we're on the subject of polls, 50% of respondents to a Canadian poll say their confidence in the socialized health care system of that country is falling. More and more Canadians are supporting privitized medicine. According to the 2005 Health Care in Canada Survey, 45% of the general public, 49% of the nurses, and a whopping 74% of the physicians in Canada want to pay to be able to get quicker access to medical services than they can under the socialized system.

Oops.

Don't tell Hillary that socialized medicine means long waits, doctor shortages, and mediocre care.

Media Overboard

2005-11-22T22:08:00.000-08:00

Last Sunday, a gunman opened fire in a shopping mall in Tacoma, Washington, wounding several shoppers and taking hostages. But when the phone rang in the store where the gunman was holed up, it wasn't a hostage negotiator, it was a reporter. The media, in its zeal to get the story, tied up the phone lines and even talked with a hostage in the middle of the incident.

Ed Troyer, Pierce County sheriff, took them to task. "We thought the media was supposed to report, not participate." The sheriff told them, "If you do it again, there will be problems."

We should send Sheriff Troyer to talk to Bob Woodward, Bob Novak, Judith Miller, Matt Cooper, Walter Pincus, and all the other reporters who participated so much in the Valerie Plame non-outing incident that they became the story. Every time that incident starts to fade away, somebody in the media "remembers" some conversation or "hints" at their source's name, or writes a book to generate a new headline - often with their own names in it.

Are there NO ethics in "journalism"?

The Power of Instant Communication

2005-11-22T00:45:00.000-08:00

A weird thing happened while Vice President Cheney spoke this afternoon at the American Enterprise Institute. The live CNN telecast suddenly placed a large black "X" over VP Cheney's face. It flashed on and off quickly, several times. All the while, the caption at the bottom of the screen read "I do not believe it's wrong to criticize."

Accident or subliminal message?

This evening, Matt Drudge appeared on the FOX television show Hannity & Colmes to report this strange event. While they were discussing the implications of bias in the media, a representative from CNN called the show and claimed the "X" was the result of a computer "glitch." A repeating glitch, evidently.

Within a few minutes, a frame from the CNN telecast with the "X" clearly visible was posted on the Drudge website as evidence.

Notice to the media - you can't easily get away with shenanigans in this age of digital recording, internet communication, and 24-hour news. So if you accidently appear biased, you'd better make it right immediately before it becomes someone else's story. And if you do it on purpose, don't whine when you're held accountable. There's always somebody watching.

Blacks Support ANWR Drilling

2005-11-22T00:40:00.000-08:00

Times, they are a'changing. Follow this line of thinking...

Democrats need the African-American vote if they are ever to win again in national elections.

The high cost of heating oil this winter is hitting African-Americans hard.

Heating bills could be reduced with an increased production of domestic oil.

But Democrats oppose drilling for domestic oil in ANWR.

Are African-Americans making the connection?

Yep.

Project 21 , part of the National Leadership Network of Conservative African-Americans, is advocating for drilling in ANWR. Making the case that low-income and minority households need Congressional support in finding alternative energy sources, these activists are suddenly fighting side by side with...Republicans.

Will they change party affiliation? Maybe not. But will they vote Republican in the next election?

Wouldn't that be a good idea.

Don't Buy the Hype

2005-11-22T00:21:00.000-08:00

For the past week, all we've heard in the news is how support for the war in Iraq is declining rapidly. Reporters breathlessly announce that the president's ratings, his credibility, and his leadership are plummeting. Congressmen who may or may not have been there claim that this war is less popular than the Korean Conflict or the Vietnam war.

This smacks of a marketing blitz.

No one we know has changed their position on this war since day one. Those of us who support the president and his policy against terrorism still stand fully behind him. We see that the mission is almost accomplished in Iraq and moving toward victory every day.

Those who are against the war haven't changed their minds either. Perhaps they have been more vocal in the past few days, but that is because they feel a little safer piling on because their leadership - using the term loosely - is doing so.

But as usual, while the loudmouths are complaining and accusing and making fools of themselves, our troops are quietly and competently doing their jobs, protecting us all and leading the middle east toward democracy.

The negative marketing won't work if we don't buy it.

"At the Right Time, We Will Have a Position"

2005-11-21T06:20:00.000-08:00

So said Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) about the war in Iraq. Last Friday.

You're a little late, Congressman! The "right time" passed years ago. Now you are just posturing and scheming to regain power, and the whole country knows it.

Congress vs. Ninth Circuit

2005-11-21T00:23:00.000-08:00

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals went too far this time, and the victims - parents and children in Palmvale, California- may not have to wait for the Supreme Court to overturn the ruling. Congress stepped in!

The House on Wednesday passed a resolution urging the Ninth Circuit to reconsider its ruling in Fields vs. Palmdale School District. This was the case in which the most liberal and most frequently overturned court in the country told parents they have no right to decide when sexual topics would be presented to their children at school.

In a decision that would have been more suited to the former Soviet Socialist Republic, the Court had said:

"Parents are possessed of no constitutional right to prevent
the public schools from providing information on that subject
to their students in any forum or manner they select."

The House of the United States of America disagrees. Its resolution stated:

"The fundamental right of parents to direct the education of
their children is firmly grounded in the Nation's Constitution
and traditions. [The court ruling] undermines the fundamental
right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children."

The resolution, of course, is nonbinding. But it sends a message, at a time when Congress is considering whether the Ninth Circuit should be split into two or even three different courts. Perhaps Congressional action should first be to eliminate the positions of the three judges who heard this case.

Just so you can keep track, the resolution was sponsored by Republican Representative Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania. It passed 320-91, with 22 representatives failing to cast votes - including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California.

A Lesson in Handling the Press

2005-11-21T00:09:00.000-08:00

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is NOT the highly placed administration source for information about Valerie Plame. There was never a doubt. Why not?

Because when Secretary Rumsfeld spoke to Bob Woodward in 2004, he immediately published a transcript of the interview so there would be no question about what was said.

He also began the interview with disclaimers that would explain any lapses in detailed memory.

And just to make really really sure there would be no false accusations in the future, he had witnesses present. Several of them.

That's how you talk to the media.

(Thanks to ElephantsInAcademia for point the way to this story.)

Democrats Defeated - 403-3

2005-11-18T21:48:00.000-08:00

The Democrats have been screaming this week about wanting to get the troops out of Iraq immediately, led by Representative John I-Didn't-Say-That-The-Video-Lies Murtha of Pennsylvania.

Today, the Republicans called their bluff and made the Democrats put their votes where their mouths are. And the Democrat "strategy" of cut-and-run was soundly defeated.

That should send a message of support to the troops and a message of American strength to the terrorists!

Of course, the Democrats are now screaming foul. They voted against the resolution themselves, calling it a publicity stunt.

Folks know who the publicity seekers are, and they would prefer to have serious adults in charge.

***

By the way, the three who voted for the resolution did not include Representative Murtha, after all his blustering. They were Jose Serrano (D-NY), Robert Wexler (D-FL) and Cynthia McKinney (D-GA).

In addition, six Democrats couldn't even bring themselves to take a stand either way; they voted "present" instead: Michael Capuano (MA), William Lacy Clay (MO), Maurice Hinchey (NY), Jim McDermott (WA), Jerrold Nadler (NY), and Major Owens (NY).

Republicans Show Backbone

2005-11-18T16:35:00.000-08:00

The House is voting on whether it's a good idea to withdraw from Iraq, and Republicans are forcing the Democrats to show their true colors.

Great move! The Republican House finally drew a line in the sand - which their constituents have wanted for I don't know how long. Well done, and let's keep this momentum rolling!

Woodward Has a New Deep Throat

2005-11-17T01:13:00.000-08:00

If you haven't been following the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson/CIA false "outing" story, skip this posting. Reading it would be like trying to follow an episode of a daytime soap when you don't know all the convoluted connections among a cast of complicated characters.

Anyway.

Bob Woodward of the Washington Post testified before the Special Prosecutor Monday that he had engaged in conversation with a "senior administration official" who was NOT Scooter Libby about "Joe Wilson's wife" two weeks before Bob Novak's article about Valerie Plame was published. This would make Woodward the first reporter to have heard about the CIA employee in relation to this story. It would also make Scooter Libby NOT the first administration official to have talked about Valerie Plame to a reporter.

Woodward says he did talk with fellow Post reporter Walter Pincus about the CIA wife/employee. Pincus denies any such conversation took place.

All this new information complicates the case against Scooter Libby and raises more questions about who the "senior administration official" could be.

It also puts Bob Woodward back in the limelight, and one must wonder about the revelation and the timing of it.

Woodward says that he didn't reveal this information earlier because he was writing a book and didn't want to be distracted by a pesky subpoena to testify. He also didn't want to risk going to jail for refusing to reveal his source, as Judith Miller did, even though he could have done a lot of writing without distraction in jail.

Woodward didn't even tell his editor about the alleged conversation until recently.

It sounds too convenient. But what do we know...

Liberals are NOT Adolescents

2005-11-16T19:22:00.000-08:00

I was flipping through the National Library of Medicine and came across the developmental milestones for a Liberal under the four-year-old section:

PHYSICAL AND MOTOR

Gains weight at the rate of about 6 grams per day
Attains a height that is double the length at birth
Shows improved balance
Hops on one foot without losing balance
Throws a ball overhand with coordination
Skillfully cuts out a picture using scissors
May not be able to tie shoelaces
May still wet the bed (normal)

SENSORY AND COGNITIVE

Has a vocabulary of over 1500 words
Easily composes sentences of 4 - 5 words
Can use the past tense
Can count to 4
Will ask the most questions of any age
May use words that aren't fully understood
May begin using vulgar terms depending on their exposure
Learns and sings simple songs
Tries to be very independent
May show increased aggressive behavior
Readily discloses personal family matters to others
Commonly has imaginary playmates
Has an increased comprehension of time
Is able to distinguish between 2 objects based on simple criteria such as size, weight
Shows less egocentric behavior
Believes that thoughts and emotions are causative events
Lacks moral concepts of right and wrong
Is rebellious if expectations are excessive

What Kind of Peace?

2005-11-16T00:18:00.000-08:00

There is a small red town in the middle of a blue county in a blue state on the left coast. This small town puts on the absolute best Veterans’ Day parade you’ve ever seen – three hours of antique fire trucks carrying loads of boy scouts, Shriner bagpipes and drum corps, military trucks and tanks with World War II and Korean vets riding side by side with active service personnel, high school marching bands, and of course, floats festooned with red-white-and-blue banners, flags, and memorials. Spectators wear jackets and hats labeled with their military units – or the units of their sons and daughters now serving. Those who still can, wear their old uniforms.

It’s a wonderful celebration.

This year, entry number 134 was a group called “Veterans for Peace.” They walked the parade route, mostly baby-boomers, many sporting the beards and beads of the sixties, but some young people as well, military age but with no evidence of service. They carried signs demanding “peace now,” and “bring our troops home,” and “peace with honor.”

The spectators watched in silence. Occasionally, one person or a couple would clap and yell, but no one nearby joined in.

We confess to being pleased with this response. Disapproving but respectful, it was a model of tolerance that is not followed when the situation is reversed; we know this from personal experience.

But there is a question we really truly seriously would like answered by the Veterans for Peace and the Mothers for Peace and the Put-Your-Self-Identifier-Here for Peace groups popping up all over the country today:

What kind of peace do you want?

Is it the utopian kind of peace where the lion lays down with the lamb and everyone loves everyone like a brother? If so, how do you achieve it when there are people in the world with different cultures, beliefs, desires for power and domination who don’t submit to your way of thinking?

Is it the kind of peace where everyone in the world complies with a common authority for the good of all? If so, whose authority would be supreme? Yours? Ours? How do you make people comply? What happens to people who disagree?

Is it the live-and-let-live kind of peace where impenetrable borders are necessary to allow countries of peaceful people to be protected from the warlike behaviors of the rest of the world? How would you live in isolation in the “global society” of the 21st century? And who gets to live in your peaceful country? Who would protect your borders? What happens when the rest of the world joins forces against you? Why do you think they wouldn’t – they’re warlike, remember?

Is it the tolerant kind of peace where you show the way for the world by modeling compassion, social justice, multi-culturalism, and enlightenment? France is the beacon of enlightenment and look what’s happening there; they’ve got nightly riots they can’t control.

Is it the kind of peace that exists when non-peaceful people are eliminated so they can’t disturb, disrupt, or harm peaceful people? Oops, that’s called war.

We want to know what you want. Be specific.

Don’t just complain that we could have had peace if George Bush hadn’t started a war. Don’t just stand there with your signs and demands and act superior because you want peace (as though the rest of us don’t). Don’t just tell us to bring our troops home, because abandoning the battlefield does not establish peace; it simply gives the enemy more power, territory, and recruits.

Look at the reality of the world today and tell us what kind of peace you want and how to achieve it.

Or else go home and let the rest of us figure this out.

Did Bush Lie about Iraq?

2005-11-15T21:30:00.000-08:00

Click here.

What's Going On Here?

2005-11-15T00:09:00.000-08:00

We are dumbfounded about the topics selected by the media to promote as "stories" this last week. And even more appalled about the behaviors being reported.

We want answers to a few questions...

Retail businesses are avoiding the phrase "Merry Christmas" so they won't offend non-Christians this "holiday season." Why aren't they worried about the 85% of the American population who are Christians?

One athiest claims that the phrase "In God We Trust" on currency makes him feel like a second-class citizen. He compares this offence with the long outlawed practice of providing separate drinking fountains for whites and blacks. (But, there is no separate currency for athiests, so we really don't understand that argument.) Because, as a minority of one, he can't remove the phrase from our dollars and coins through the legislative process, he's threatening to take the issue to court, where he will only have to convince one other person - a judge - of his position. When are the Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Deists going to start suing?

An 18-year-old boy is evidently told by the parents of 14-year-old girl that he is too old for her, so he shoots them dead. Did he think he and the girl would then live happily ever after?

Four Iraqi terrorists blow themselves up in Lebanon, murdering dozens of innocent people, and the Muslim world comes unglued - because there was such shock that Muslims killed Muslims. And they think we're biased?

For 17 nights in a row, kids in France have set hundreds of cars on fire in an endless revenge party. If your child came home in the middle of the night smelling of gasoline and smoke, what would you do - let him go out again the next night or ground him?

The President "corrects the record" - again - about pre-war intelligence, and the Democrats accuse him of "escalating the debate." So if stating the facts is not enough, how does one end the debate?

An 18-year-old college student loses all her money in an online Texas Hold-em poker game, and she complains that the public schools had not taught her that gambling could be addictive. How did this idiot get into college?

Marla Mapes - of the Dan Rather phony documents scandal - says that as a "journalist" she can write anything she wants, and it's the responsibility of the critics to prove her story inaccurate. So, journalism is a game of "Truth or Dare" now? (Haha, I fooled you. Give me my Pulitzer!)

Jordanians are furious at the "homocide bombings" that occurred in their country. Thousands have been protesting in the streets, shouting, "Burn in hell, al-Zarqawi." If we staged such a protest in this country, would we be arrested for "hate speech"?

The President's approval rating is at an all-time low, according to Gallup polls. Why is it that no one asks us?

Enough. This is too aggravating.

Fighting Back, Part 2

2005-11-14T21:36:00.000-08:00

Hit 'em again, Mr. President!

Speaking in Alaska today, President Bush said this about the War on Terror, the Democrats, and Saddam Hussein:

Reasonable people can disagree about the conduct of
the war, but it is irresponsible for Democrats to now
claim that we misled them and the American people.
Leaders in my administration and members of the
United States Congress from both political parties
looked at the same intelligence on Iraq, and reached
the same conclusion: Saddam Hussein was a threat.

Let me give you some quotes from three senior
Democrat leaders: First, and I quote, "There is un-
mistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons." Another
senior Democrat leader said, "The war against terror-
ism will not be finished as long as Saddam Hussein is in
power." Here's another quote from a senior Democrat
leader: "Saddam Hussein, in effect, has thumbed his
nose at the world community. And I think the President
is approaching this in the right fashion."

They spoke the truth then, and they're speaking politics
now.

The truth is that investigations of intelligence on Iraq
have concluded that only one person manipulated
evidence and misled the world -- and that person was
Saddam Hussein.

Keep saying it, Mr. President. Democrats may be playing politics, Republicans in Congress may be wimping out, but the people will stay with you if you stay tough. They voted you into office to fight this war; now let's win it in Iraq and at home.

It's About Time

2005-11-14T18:07:00.000-08:00

Finally. The President is fighting back against the 'Bush Lied, People Died" slander. And not just in speeches - on the official White House website. Read Setting the Record Straight.

George Soros Supporting Republicans?

2005-11-11T01:42:00.000-08:00

A provision to allow drilling for oil in ANWR was inserted last week into a budget bill in the Senate - the provision passed because the Democrats couldn't filibuster an appropriations bill and didn't have the votes to defeat it.

This week, the House proposed a similar bill - but surprisingly, a group of "moderate" Republicans in what is called the "Republican Main Street Partnership" removed the ANWR measure.

So what gives?

The leadership of a political advocacy group called the "Main Street Individual Fund" claimed credit and bragged about the ANWR defeat yesterday, and in doing so, perhaps revealed more than they wanted to, because now bloggers are looking into their activities.

And here is what we found...

The Main Street Individual Fund is a 527 organization affiliated with the Republican Main Street Partnership. One of its major contributors is George Soros.

George Soros.

Why would George Soros be supporting Republicans?

To split the party. The GOP had better get a clue.

Here is the official membership list of the Republican Main Street partnership.

Here is the web page with information about the 527.

California Props Defeated

2005-11-09T06:28:00.000-08:00

The voters were mad about the special election, because it "wasted" $50 million of the state's money. So they voted down the state spending limitation bill?

They were mad at Governor Arnold, so they took the unions' side and the teachers' side against him?

They hated all the negative television ads bombarding them night after night, so they voted in the negative on all the ballot measures?

Sounds like spite, not good sense. And it will cost all Californians, 'cause they didn't fix anything yesterday.

Plame Story - Documented, Part 4 (pending)

2005-11-09T00:13:00.001-08:00

We've been working on Plame - Part 4, with Joe Wilson as the focus. But new accusations against Mr. Wilson have been made by Retired Major General Paul E. Vallely, and we now must re-research the whole piece.

Here are the new big questions: did Joe Wilson "out" his own wife, long before Bob Novak wrote a column about her? And if so, why did the Special Prosecutor ignore it? Even more basic, why did the Special Prosecutor never call either Joe Wilson or Valerie Plame to testify?

As Drudge, says, "developing..."

Plame Story - Documented, Part 4 (pending)

2005-11-09T00:13:00.000-08:00

Rampaging "Youths"

2005-11-07T13:53:00.000-08:00

I've seen stories about Europe going up in flames from these rampaging "youths." I've seen commentary on the continuous French appeasement strategy. I've seen comparisons between Muslim fanaticism in France versus Muslim fanaticism in the Middle East.

But I have yet to see the huge numbers of unassimilated "immigrants" in France and throughout Europe be compared to our Mexican invasion problem. Right now, there is little reason for unrest in our American Southwest. But given the spark, what we are seeing in Paris could be happening in Los Angeles very soon.

The Real Liar in the Plame Story

2005-11-04T01:12:00.000-08:00

Surprise, surprise - an op-ed piece in the L.A. Times, of all places, that tells the truth about "Plamegate."

The liar in the story is now, and always has been, Joe Wilson. If you've read previous postings here, here, here, and here, you already knew that.

But now a liberal newspaper has admitted it as well.

Here's the best part:

So much for the lies that led to war. What we're
left with is the lies that led to the antiwar
movement. Good thing for Wilson and his pals
that deceiving the press and the public isn't a
crime.

Another Ninth Circuit Outrage

2005-11-04T00:41:00.000-08:00

First, third, and fifth grade students in Palmdale County (California) were given a survey to "assist in designing a program...to overcome barriers to learning." Parents were asked to sign consent forms in advance.

But the parents were not told that sex would be a topic of the survey.

Survey questions included whether the children thought about sex, thought about touching other children's private parts, or whether they could "stop thinking about having sex."

These questions were asked of six year old children!

The parents sued. And lost. And lost again in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

This is what the Appeals Court ruled:

Parents are possessed of no constitutional right to prevent
the public schools from providing information on that subject
to their students in any forum or manner they select.

If the court can take the side of the school in this sickening case, how can any parent feel safe sending children to public schools?

The case is Fields v. Palmdale School District, 03-56499.

It's All in the Numbers

2005-11-03T00:01:00.000-08:00

Last year, the Gross National Product in the United States rose 4.4% - the greatest increase in 20 years.

Unemployment held at 5.1% in October, even after Hurricane Katrina put many people out of work.

The deficit is $150 billion LESS than projected at this time.

In the past five years, the S&P 500 company profits have risen 75%.

At the same time, the movie industry is suffering losses. Today, Warner Brothers Entertainment fired 250-300 employees in a proactive move due to projections of lower revenue in the future.

Large newspaper conglomerates such as the LA Times and the New York Times are also struggling with lost subscriptions and have laid off employees.

Could there be a connection?

The economy is growing, the President has made strong moves to protect us and our future, our young men and women are exhibiting incredible courage and conviction in fighting for democracy halfway around the world, millions of individuals are donating money and time to help victims of natural disasters, and in spite of all the nonsense in the "news," Americans continue to go to work, raise their families, and enjoy living in the greatest country in the world.

The media and the movie stars only see lies, make dire predictions, and disparage leaders and regular folks alike. It appears that Americans have had enough of it.

Long live the free market system.

The Plame Story, Documented - Part 3

2005-11-02T00:32:00.000-08:00

Part 1 is here. Part 1b is here. Part 2 is here.

Judith Miller has a special place in this story...

Why did Judith Miller refuse to testify, when other reporters did?

Judith Miller of the New York Times was subpoenaed to testify before the grand jury about conversations she may have had in 2003 with anonymous sources about Valerie Plame, even though Miller never wrote about Plame or the Joe Wilson Niger trip.

Miller refused to testify and on October 7, 2004, was cited for contempt of court. She fought the subpoenas and citation, then spent 85 days in jail, from July to September of 2005, before relenting. She made a deal to limit her testimony to conversations with only one source, Scooter Libby, and turned over edited notes about her conversations. Following Miller’s testimony on September and October of 2005, Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald sought indictments against Libby for obstruction of justice, perjury, and lying.

In his press conference last week, Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald said that he had wanted to end the investigation in October of 2004 but was unable to. Rush Limbaugh then wondered on his radio show how important Judith Miller’s refusal to testify at that time was. Did she want to avoid embarrassing President Bush right before the election? If so, Rush said, this may be why the rest of the media and the Democrats seem to hate her.

Several disparaging articles have been written about Miller by her colleagues and competitors. Rather than defend the reporters’ time-honored refusal to reveal their sources, the New York Post said that Miller is “no martyr” in refusing to testify and claimed that her newspaper, the New York Times “decided it was above the law.”

The Washington Post said that “Miller was more intent on keeping their conversations secret than [Libby] was.” The article further offered one explanation, “going to jail was Miller's way of transforming herself from a journalistic outcast (based on her gullible pre-war reporting) into a much-celebrated hero of press freedom.”

The “gullible pre-war reporting” referred to the time from 2001-2003 when Miller was embedded with a “special military unit hunting for unconventional weapons.” Miller claimed to have “clearance to see secret information as part of my assignment.” She wrote stories about Saddam Hussein’s ambitions to build WMDs, evidently based on information from Ahmed Chalibi, the Iraqi National Congress leader, with whom Miller was acquainted.

In a Washington Post article on June 25, 2003, Miller’s role as an imbedded reporter was described thus: Some military officials said Miller acted as a “middleman” between the Army and Ahmed Chalibi, the Iraqi National Congress leader. She was reported to have led the MET Alpha unit to Chalibi’s compound, where they found and took custody of Saddam Hussein’s son-in-law Sultan. Miller “exercised influence” over the unit in getting them involved in the interrogation of Sultan, which was not within the unit’s authority. “Anonymous military” personnel accused Miller of “almost hijacking the mission.” The military tried to “pull…back” the “rogue” unit, but Miller allegedly threatened to write a negative story if the order was not rescinded.

Whether Judith Miller is a friend of the Bush administration, a controlling anti-terrorism wannabe, or a confidante of Scooter Libby is uncertain, but we do know she has had run-ins with Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald before.

As U.S. Attorney in Chicago in 2001-2002, Fitzgerald investigated three Islamic “charities” with alleged ties to terrorism (Benevolence International Foundation, Global Relief Foundation, and The Holy Land Foundation). Judith Miller and Philip Shenon, both of the New York Times, allegedly tipped off one of the foundations to an impending raid; the group was then able to destroy evidence before warrants could be served. The Times rejects the accusation, and a federal judge has dismissed the subpoenas for Miller’s and Shenon’s phone records.

In addition, in June of 2002, Miller wrote an article critical of Fitzgerald for the handling of an Egyptian-American pilot who had been an informant against al-Qaeda.

The rest of the story is yet to be told; we’ll have to wait for the trial of Scooter Libby.

We're Alitists!

2005-11-01T19:08:00.000-08:00

How about you?

Judge Sam Alito for Supreme Court.

Michigan Voters Asked to Ban Racism

2005-11-01T18:24:00.000-08:00

Citizens of Michigan gathered more than 500,000 signatures to place a measure on the next statewide ballot that would ban racial preferences in university admissions and hiring. Imagine that! - Basing such decisions on MERIT, appropriate PREPARATION, and maybe even, gasp, test SCORES.

A national group opposing the ballot measure has an interesting and very descriptive name. It's called [We Don't Care What Anyone Else Wants, We Want What We Want and We'll Get It] "By Any Means Necessary."

What they want is to continue racism in admissions...

...even if it sets up for failure students who do not have the prerequisites and are not prepared for the rigor of university coursework.

...even if it denies students without minority status the higher education for which they are qualified.

...even if it diminishes both the academic experience and the degrees earned by all students in a university that holds lowered standards.

...even if it costs the taxpayers millions of dollars to provide remedial courses in math, reading, and writing for underprepared university students who should logically be getting those prerequisites at the many fine community colleges that are open to all.

They also want to continue racism in hiring...

...even if it prevents universities from acquiring the most qualified faculty to instruct and mentor the next generation of scientists, teachers, mechanics, and entrepreneurs.

...even if staff that run the computers, answer the telephones, process the files, and generally handle the business of the university are unable to earn promotions they deserve through their competence and hard work.

...even if university communities becoming increasingly divided, hateful toward minorities whom they suspect of getting jobs because of their status instead of their qualifications.

...and finally, even if there is no white male left on campus.

Or maybe that's the idea.

By the way, the headline in the Detroit News read, " Affirmative Action Vote Sought." Ours is more accurate.

Alito Nominated to Supreme Court

2005-10-31T07:47:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, the conventional wisdom was that the President would not announce his choice for the Supreme Court on Halloween in fear that the nominee would be called a "trick" rather than a "treat." Once again, the President shows that he is not afraid. He gave us what we asked for, a strong constructionist judge.

Now it's us to us to fight for Judge Samuel Alito.

And did Fox news really say the Republican Senators who introduced Judge Alito were "abusive in their praise"??

No Bias Here

2005-10-30T09:17:00.000-08:00

The AP headline of the weekend, repeated by news agencies all over the world:

Rove Escapes Indictment.

Well, golly.

A bunch of other folks weren't indicted in the Plame Game, either. Where are these headlines?

Joe Wilson Escapes Indictment... for repeated lies about Iraq, uranium, the administration, and his wife's role in sending him to Niger.

Valerie Plame Escapes Indictment...for violation of federal nepotism laws.

Valerie Plame's Unnamed Bosses Escape Indictment...for sending an unqualified, anti-Bush liar to investigate such a serious allegation as the attempted purchase of WMD materials by Saddam Hussein in Africa and then allowing him to write an op-ed piece about his supposedly clandestine work.

George Tenet Escapes Indictment...for failing to provide and confirm intelligence about WMDs for the administration, for changing his mind and recommendations about the intelligence over and over, and then for blaming the President when the intelligence appeared to be faulty.

Robert Novak Escapes Indictment...for first publishing the name "Valerie Plame" and disclosing that she is a CIA "operative." If Valerie Plame truly was a "covert agent," this story should have been the focus of the investigation. Evidently, this was a bogus focus.

And finally, just because...

Hillary Clinton Escapes Indictment...as usual.

Libby Indicted

2005-10-28T19:04:00.000-07:00

In a press conference today, special prosecutor Fitzgerald announced that Lewis “Scooter” Libby was being indicted for obstruction of justice, lying, and perjury for allegedly lying to the grand jury in the Plame case.

It was a “procedural indictment” in which Libby was accused not of an underlying crime, but of lying during the investigation of a crime.

According to the indictment, Libby claimed that he first heard the name Valerie Plame and her relationship to Joe Wilson from reporter Tim Russert, and that he passed on that information to other reporters as gossip. The special prosecutor said the truth is that Libby knew about Plame from his conversations within the administration and gave that information to reporter Judith Miller before any conversations with other reporters on the subject. The special prosecutor also specifically said that Libby did not discuss Plame’s name with Tim Russert.

The prosecutor stated that at the time Valerie Plame’s name was “classified” and that her identity was not widely known. He repeatedly talked about “blowing her cover” and how that act had “endangered” us all. But there was no indictment related to that alleged act.

So, here are the questions that remain:

If Valerie Plame was a “covert agent” for the CIA and Libby gave that classified information to Judith Miller (who does not have “clearance”), why was he not charged with a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982? That, after all, was the original reason for the investigation. [The special prosecutor said that “obstruction of justice” was just a serious a charge, but that doesn’t answer the question.]

Judith Miller never used the name or information she was allegedly given, since she never wrote a story about this subject. But Robert Novak did. So who was his source and why were there no indictments against that person? [The special prosecutor had no comment to that question.]

Libby evidently turned over notes to the special prosecutor that proved he lied. Why would he do that? Should he not have taken the Fifth Amendment?

If Libby had taken the Fifth Amendment, would the prosecutor have had any evidence with which to indict him?

The prosecutor stated that it will be up to a jury to decide if Libby’s actions were accidental mistakes or purposeful ones. We’ll have to wait and see.

The Plame Story - Documented, Part 2

2005-10-28T00:43:00.000-07:00

Part 1 is here. Part 1b is here.

This is Part 2 - the reporters and the White House staffers.

Who are the reporters involved in the Plame case, and what did they do?

Robert Novak was the first reporter to use Valerie Plame’s name in print. He called her an “operative” in a column on July 14, 2003, published in the Washington Post and other newspapers.

Novak has never revealed his source for the article and was not subpoenaed by the special prosecutor. He did say that his source was “no partisan gunslinger,” and on CNN on September 29, 2003, Novak said he stumbled on the story himself. “Nobody in the Bush administration called me to leak this.”

In the same interview, Novak said the CIA told him Plame was “an analyst – not a covert operator and not in charge of undercover operators.”

Also, in a column for Townhall.com on October 1, 2003, Novak wrote: “To protect my own integrity and credibility, I would like to stress three points. First, I did not receive a planned leak. Second, the CIA never warned me that the disclosure of Wilson's wife working at the agency would endanger her or anybody else. Third, it was not much of a secret.”

Matt Cooper is a reporter for Time magazine. He is married to Democrat strategist Mandy Grunwald.

On July 17, 2003, following the article by Robert Novak that named Valerie Plame, Cooper wrote a followup column (with Massimo Calabresi and John F. Dickerson) that suggested the administration had “declared war” on Plame’s husband, Joe Wilson. The article featured an interview with Joe Wilson, followed by an “exclusive interview” with Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff. Libby is quoted as saying the Vice President was unaware of Wilson’s trip to Niger until it became public.

Cooper answered questions posed by the special prosecutor in September of 2004 about his conversations with Libby, with the approval of Libby himself. Cooper said Libby did not “touch on the identity of Wilson’s wife.”

There is no record on the internet that Massimo Calabresi or John F. Dickerson were called to testify.

Cooper also said he spoke with Karl Rove. He wrote an email to his editor that he had had a “two minute” conversation on July 11, 2003. Cooper had asked Rove “what to make of the flap over Wilson's criticisms [about faulty intelligence over WMD’s in Iraq]...Rove offered him a ‘big warning’ not to ‘get too far out on Wilson.’ Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by…CIA Director George Tenet…or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, ‘it was, KR said, wilson's [sic] wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip.’ The e-mail characterizing the conversation continues: ‘not only the genesis of the trip is flawed an[d] suspect but so is the report…[Rove] implied strongly there's still plenty to implicate iraqi [sic] interest in acquiring uranium fro[m] Niger ...‘" There is no record that Rove either identified Valerie Plame by name or appeared to believe she was a “covert agent,” and Cooper has not stated otherwise.

On July 6, 2005, Cooper agreed to testify before the grand jury to avoid being sent to jail for contempt. He said he had received “last minute” permission from his source, Karl Rove.

Walter Pincus, reporter for the Washington Post, was subpoenaed to testify before the grand jury regarding a source he called “an administration official” in a July 12, 2003 column about Wilson being sent to Niger at the suggestion of his wife, a CIA analyst. He gave a deposition on September 15, 2004 instead. He did not reveal the identity of his source, but was not required to because the source had “already identified himself” to the special prosecutor.

Pincus also answered questions about his conversations with Scooter Libby, with Libby’s approval. He said their conversations did not “touch on the identity of Wilson’s wife.”

Judith Miller, reporter for the New York Times, researched the Plame/Wilson story, but has never written an article about it.

Miller was subpoenaed in August of 2004 to testify about conversations she had with a “specified government official” about the Plame story. Miller refused to testify about her source(s) and was sent to jail for 85 days before she relented. The Washington Post reported on February 15, 2005 that the special prosecutor knew the identity of the unnamed source and wanted to question her about conversations “on or about July 6, 2003” with that person.

Miller had evidently had conversations with Scooter Libby, but he had waived confidentiality a year earlier, according to Libby’s attorney. Miller said she agreed to testify only after “finally” obtaining a “personal, voluntary” waiver from Libby. However, she also made an agreement with the special prosecutor to “limit his questions solely to her conversations with Libby.” What other source she is still covering for is unknown.

After her grand jury testimony, Miller said she “discovered” notes about her conversations with Libby, which she then turned over to the special prosecutor.

There is no public record that Scooter Libby “outed” Valerie Plame to Judith Miller, and Judith Miller has not stated otherwise.

[The backstory about Judith Miller will appear in a future posting.]

Who are the White House Staffers under media “suspicion” at this time in the Plame case, and what did they do?

Lewis “Scooter” Libby is Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff. According to Judith Miller, Libby was frustrated about “selective leaking” by the CIA that served to “distance themselves from what he recalled as their unequivocal prewar intelligence assessments.” Miller said that Libby thought this was an attempt to “shift blame on the White House” as part of a “perverted war” over Iraq.

Libby evidently had conversations with Miller, Cooper, NBC’s Tim Russert, and the Post’s Glenn Kessler about the CIA and/or the Plame story. Libby gave an interview for Cooper’s article. Russert and Kessler, with Libby’s permission, testified to the grand jury about those conversations, and both said that “no confidential sources were involved.” Walter Pincus said the same thing. No one has come forward and publicly said that “Scooter” Libby “outed” Valerie Plame.

A Washington Post article on September 16, 2004, states that four reporters had testified that Scooter Libby did not “disclose Plame’s name or identity to them.”

Karl Rove is the Deputy Chief of Staff in charge of policy for President Bush. Rove has testified four times before the grand jury. Although the subject and content of his testimony have not been disclosed, during the critical time frame prior to and immediately after the publication of Robert Novak’s article, Rove is reported to have talked with:

- Matt Cooper. According to a “source close to Rove,” Rove testified that “the purpose of their conversation was welfare reform, not Wilson or Plame.”

According to Cooper’s own email to his editor, Rove said it was “wilson's [sic] wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized” Joe Wilson’s trip to Niger. Rove neither used Plame’s name nor appeared to believe that she was a “covert agent.” This conversation was initiated by Cooper and the comment was in response to a question by Cooper, which negates the claim that Rove called reporters and deliberately “outed” Valerie Plame.

Rove’s attorney said that Rove gave Cooper permission to testify about their conversations. It is unknown what he said to the grand jury.

- Lewis “Scooter” Libby, according to a “source familiar with Rove’s account.” The conversation was “confined to information the two men heard from reporters.” There is nothing unacceptable about Rove talking with Libby about these matters.

- Robert Novak. But Novak himself said his source was “no partisan gunslinger” and there is no published account of any conversations between Rove and Novak.

- Supposedly, Rove also testified that he learned about Plame from “someone else outside the White House, but could not recall who.” Again, this is from an anonymous source, not Rove himself.

Rove maintains that he did not name Plame or disclose her status. To date, no one has come forward and publicly said he did.

Part 3 will tell the back story about Judith Plame. Coming right up...

The Plame Story - Documented, Part 1b

2005-10-27T18:32:00.000-07:00

Part 1 is here.

In case Part 1 didn’t make it clear who the real culprit may be in the Plame/Wilson case, here it is in plain English: THE CIA.

The CIA initiated the investigation. On September 28, 2003, the Washington Post reported: “At CIA Director George J. Tenet's request, the Justice Department is looking into an allegation that administration officials leaked the name of an undercover CIA officer to a journalist, government sources said yesterday.”

A letter was sent from the CIA to Representative John Conyers (D) of the House Judiciary Committee. “Acting independently and with great secrecy, the CIA contacted the Justice Department with ‘concern’ about articles in the press that included the ‘disclosure’ of ‘the identity of an employee operating under cover.’ The CIA informed the Justice Department that the disclosure was ‘a possible violation of criminal law.’”

Former prosecutor and Independent Counsel Joseph E. diGenova says there has been a ‘war between the White House and the CIA over intelligence” and that the CIA appears to be “using the sort of tactics it uses in covert actions overseas. He makes the case that the CIA “launched a covert operation” against a sitting president when it sent Joe Wilson to Niger.

DiGenova says the claim that Valerie Plame was an undercover agent is a smoke screen. On Imus in the Morning (carried on radio and MSNBC-TV), he said, “It seems to me somewhat strange, in terms of CIA tradecraft, that if you were really attempting to protect the identity of a covert officer, why would you send her husband overseas on a mission, without a confidentiality agreement, and then allow him when he came back to the United States to write an op-ed piece in the New York Times about it.”

Just More Threats of Annihilation

2005-10-26T09:59:00.000-07:00

"There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in our inner cities will wipe off this stigma ('African-Americans') from the face of the American world," a professor told students Wednesday during a diversity conference called "The World without Color."

NO WAIT!! Hold on, that's not the quote! Here it is:

"There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) on the southern U.S. border will wipe off this stigma (Mexico) from the face of the American world," a state Representative told students Wednesday during an Immigration conference called "The World without Cheap Labor."

STOP!! No really...this is the ACTUAL QUOTE FROM AN "ELECTED" PRESIDENT:

"There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this stigma (Israel) from the face of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad told students Wednesday during a Tehran conference called "The World without Zionism."

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury, any (Islamic leader) who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad said.

The "hard-line" President of Iran. Who is building nuclear weapons. To destroy our ally.

Hello American media? Oh... y'all are checking out Karl Rove's garage. Sorry I bothered you.

The Plame Story - Documented

2005-10-26T00:24:00.000-07:00

In case you haven't followed the story (and who could?), here is a question-and-answer summary of the Plame Game. Read it before the indictments come down...

What crime is alleged to have been committed in the “outing” of Valerie Plame?

The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982.

This law protects “covert agents” whose identity and “intelligence relationship” is being actively concealed. The law makes it a felony to knowingly disclose their names to anyone not authorized to receive classified information.

“Covert agents” are defined as individuals working for or with an intelligence agency whose identity is classified and who are serving or have served outside the country within the last five years. (There are other criteria that do not apply to this case.)

Was Valerie Plame a ‘covert agent,’ or had she been within the past 5 years?

No.

Former covert CIA agent Fred Rustmann said: Plame had worked under extremely light cover overseas before 1998, after which she got married, had children and worked for at CIA headquarters in Langley as an analyst, which she did not conceal. Most of the Wilsons' neighbors and friends knew that she was a CIA employee.

That should have been the end of story.

However, just to satisfy curiosity, here is more information that anyone would want to know…

Was Valerie Plame’s name or identity a secret?

No.

Clifford May reported that before the publication of Plame's name, he already knew it and so did many others. In fact, he wrote on September 29, 2003 in NRO, “Who didn’t know?...That wasn't news to me. I had been told that — but not by anyone working in the White House. Rather, I learned it from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhand manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of."

Valerie Plame’s husband, Joe Wilson introduced Plame to the crowd at a Nation magazine luncheon where he was to receive an award. Plame herself posed with her husband for a photograph in Vanity Fair. The picture and descriptions of Wilson/Plame self-publicity are here. More here.

On October 2, 2003, Joe Wilson told the Washington Post that he and his wife had already discussed who would “play them in the movie.”

Who first publicized the name Valerie Plame?

Bob Novak.

Novak used Valerie Plame’s name and called her an “operative” in a column on July 14, 2003, published in the Washington Post and other newspapers.

Did Novak believe that Plame was a covert agent?

No.

Novak told the Washington Post on 28 September 2003 that the CIA told him "it's doubtful she'll ever again have a foreign assignment. They said if her name was printed, it might be difficult if she was travelling abroad, and they said they would prefer I didn't use her name. It was a very weak request. If it was put on a stronger basis, I would have considered it."

In addition, on September 29, 2003, on CNN, Novak said the CIA told him Plame was “an analyst – not a covert operator and not in charge of undercover operators.”

And, in a column for Townhall.com on October 1, 2003, Novak wrote: “To protect my own integrity and credibility, I would like to stress three points. First, I did not receive a planned leak. Second, the CIA never warned me that the disclosure of Wilson's wife working at the agency would endanger her or anybody else. Third, it was not much of a secret.”

But, even though the Intelligence Identities Protection Act was not violated, everyone wants to know:

Who was Novak’s source?

He has never said.

He only called his source, “no partisan gunslinger.”

[That would certainly not be Carl Rove, now would it? Nor would it be Dick Cheney. Or even Lewis “Scooter” Libby.]

Also, on September 29, 2003, on CNN, Novak said he stumbled on the story himself. “Nobody in the Bush administration called me to leak this.”

The “story” Novak was pursuing was Joe Wilson’s trip to Niger, and Novak said that when talking with a “senior Bush administration official” about this, Novak was told that the trip was “inspired by his wife.”

The full quote, in the Townhall.com column of October 1, 2003, is this: “During a long conversation with a senior administration official, I asked why Wilson was assigned the mission to Niger. He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife. It was an offhand revelation from this official, who is no partisan gunslinger. When I called another official for confirmation, he said: "Oh, you know about it." The published report that somebody in the White House failed to plant this story with six reporters and finally found me as a willing pawn is simply untrue.”

So why has this story been perpetuated for two years?

The real story is what Joe Wilson did and why; and how his wife, Valerie Plame, participated in it, and why.

The “what,” according to Joe Wilson:

Joe Wilson was sent to Niger by the CIA to investigate claims that Saddam Hussein had tried to acquire uranium there for nuclear weapons. Wilson claimed he had been sent to Niger to answer questions for the Vice President. He wrote that “while the C.I.A. paid my expenses (my time was offered pro bono), I made it abundantly clear to everyone I met that I was acting on behalf of the United States government.”

Wilson went to Niger in February of 2002. He reported: “I spent the next eight days drinking sweet mint tea and meeting with dozens of people: current government officials, former government officials, people associated with the country's uranium business. It did not take long to conclude that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place.”

He then returned to the United States and gave an oral report to the CIA, stating that Saddam had NOT sought uranium from Africa.

In June, Wilson told the Washington Post that he concluded the Niger intelligence was based on documents that had clearly been forged because "the dates were wrong and the names were wrong." He claimed that President Bush lied in his State of the Union address when he said, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa"

On July 6, 2003, Wilson published an Op-Ed piece for the New York Times titled “What I Didn’t Find in Africa.” The column questioned the legitimacy of the war in Iraq, based on the information Wilson did not find during his trip to Africa. Wilson suggested that the administration was selecting the intelligence it liked to promote its case for war.

The real “what,” according to a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigative report, witnesses, and supporting documents:

Joe Wilson was sent to Niger by the CIA after his wife, Valerie Plame, recommended him for the job. The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee has written documentation of this – including a memo from Plame to the deputy chief in the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

Valerie Plame's actions may have violated federal nepotism laws. In his book “The Politics of Truth,” Wilson himself notes that the law against nepotism would forbid his wife from recommending him for the job, which may be why he denied she had anything to do with it.

The Vice President denied that he had sent Wilson to Africa, or even knew that someone was going. On “Meet the Press” on September 14, 2003, Vice President Cheney was asked if he had seen a report by Joe Wilson. Cheney answered: No. I don’t know Joe Wilson. I’ve never met Joe Wilson. A question had arisen. I’d heard a report that the Iraqis had been trying to acquire uranium in Africa, Niger in particular. I get a daily brief on my own each day before I meet with the president to go through the intel. And I ask lots of question. One of the questions I asked at that particular time about this, I said, ‘What do we know about this?’ They take the question. He came back within a day or two and said, ‘This is all we know. There’s a lot we don’t know,’ end of statement. And Joe Wilson—I don’t know who sent Joe Wilson. He never submitted a report that I ever saw when he came back” [emphasis added].

On July 11, 2003, CIA Director George Tenet made an official statement, which contradicted Joe Wilson’s claims that he was sent by “the government” (meaning Cheney): “In an effort to inquire about certain reports involving Niger, CIA's counter-proliferation experts, on their own initiative, asked an individual with ties to the region to make a visit to see what he could learn” [emphasis added].

Tenet’s statement also contradicted Joe Wilson’s characterization of his findings: “He reported back to us that one of the former Nigerien [sic] officials he met stated that he was unaware of any contract being signed between Niger and rogue states for the sale of uranium during his tenure in office. The same former official also said that in June 1999 a businessman approached him and insisted that the former official meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss ‘expanding commercial relations’ between Iraq and Niger. The former official interpreted the overture as an attempt to discuss uranium sales [emphasis added].

The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigated the entire incident, and found Joe Wilson to be a liar:

About his wife’s role – Valerie Plame did recommend Wilson for the trip to Niger.

About his information - did not debunk intelligence about attempted uranium sales to Iraq; it bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts.

About his conclusions - "Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the 'dates were wrong and the names were wrong' when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports."

About his accusations against the administration – The administration did not know about the CIA concerns regarding intelligence, because the CIA did not tell them.

Here and here are summaries of the report.

Here is the entire Committee report in pdf, if you want to read it yourself.

The “why”:

The CIA is anti-Bush and “leaks like a sieve.”

The CIA is full of Democrats.

The CIA funds anti-administration studies (which may be illegal). On September 7, 2004, the Washington Times reported: “The CIA's Counterterrorist Center has spent more than $15 million in the past three years funding studies, reports and conferences produced by former Democratic administration officials and other critics of the Bush administration. The latest effort was a $300,000 grant by the CIA to the Atlantic Council for a study co-authored by Richard A. Clarke, the former counterterrorism official who wrote a best seller accusing the Bush administration of failing in the war on terrorism by invading Iraq.”

The CIA covers up when caught. “The key CIA official involved in funding anti-Bush propaganda is one Bonnie Mitchell, who so far has declined to comment. When the Washington Times tried to reach her (September, 2004), a CIA spokesman tried to reprise the Valerie Plame affair by claiming that Ms. Mitchell is an ‘undercover agent.’ In fact, however, she routinely identifies herself as a CIA analyst at public gatherings.”

“The CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into 16 fateful words in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address.” This was confirmed by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee .

The CIA tried to help Kerry win the election. "’The products of the [CIA’s Counterterrorist Center] have a consistent theme: They criticize the Bush administration and provide ammunition for the Kerry campaign,’ said one U.S. official who has read the resulting reports and studies.”

After Tenet left, it wasn’t better. The New York Times, November 13, 2004 (after the election), reported: “Nor is this feud over. C.I.A. officials are now busy undermining their new boss, Porter Goss. One senior official called one of Goss's deputies, who worked on Capitol Hill, a 'Hill Puke,' and said he didn't have to listen to anything the deputy said."

Valerie Plame, who works for the CIA, and Joe Wilson, her husband, are also anti-Bush. Plame contributed to American Coming Together. (She listed her occupation as “retired,” even though she was still on CIA staff.) She also donated $1,000 to John Kerry’s campaign.

Joe Wilson took “a prominent role” in the Kerry campaign, “joined forces” with Win Without War (the group claiming that the President misled Americans about weapons of mass destruction and collaborated with MoveOn.org), called Vice President Cheney a “lying son of a bitch,” and the President a “liar.” He donated $2,000 to the Kerry campaign, $2,000 to Senator Ted Kennedy, and $2,000 to Senator Hillary Clinton.

What do Matt Cooper, Lewis Libby, and Judith Miller have to do with this?

That will be part 2, coming right up…

Senator Coburn Having an Impact

2005-10-24T21:36:00.000-07:00

Our now-favorite Senator Tom Coburn, chair of the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, is truly making a difference in Washington. First, he took on the pork-promoting Senators from Alaska, provoking a nasty response about violating the unwritten rules of Congress. But now, he's got a group of six senators to join him in trying to rein in the infuriating spending projects that are wildly inflating the federal budget.

Senators Brownback, DeMint, Ensign, Graham, McCain, and Sununu will hold a press conference with Senator Coburn tomorrow to launch a plan of "fiscal responsibility."

We'll keep you posted.

Shut It Down

2005-10-21T20:28:00.000-07:00

The Koran-flushing report was a fake; but this one comes from a credible source:

"...inmates crowded into filthy, rat-infested cells, leading to an
explosion in the number of prisoners with infectious diseases...
cells are akin to dungeons in the Middle Ages...conditions [are]
catastrophic...suicide attempts rose 10 percent last year, while
incidents of self-wounding and hunger strikes were up 25
percent..."

If this information is true, we have to support the ACLU and their civil rights attorneys in efforts to bring this travesty to the attention of the government and make immediate changes.

Except they're not doing anything about it.

These are prisons in France.

Gotcha.

DeLay vs. the Judge, Round 1

2005-10-21T19:37:00.000-07:00

Moveon.org has a web page devoted to Representative Tom DeLay. It includes an online petition for visitors to sign and send, asking Congress to fire Rep. DeLay for "repeated and flagrant ethical misconduct." A list of "misconduct" attributed to Rep. DeLay also appears on the page.

We have now learned that Judge Bob Perkins, who presided over the arraignment proceeding of Rep. DeLay and is the assigned judge in the case, contributes financially to Moveon.org.

He didn't volunteer to recuse himself. Why not? Did he think no one would notice?

Rep. DeLay's attorneys made a motion to remove him. Now we'll see what the judge's boss does.

Support Senator Coburn

2005-10-21T01:27:00.000-07:00

Senator Tom Coburn (R) of Oklahoma is in trouble - with his fellow senators.

It seems he violated an age-old tradition that forbids one senator from messing with the pork projects of another senator.

Senator Coburn has a "very different philosoph[y] on how we serve our country," said Senator Kit Bond (R) of Missouri.

No kidding. Senator Coburn was acting sensibly, responsibly, and intelligently on behalf of the American people.

He wanted to divert the $223 million dollars the Senators from Alaska had slid into the highway bill to build a "bridge to nowhere" toward one of the bridges in New Orleans that really needs fixing. The Alaskan bridge is going to connect Ketchikan to an island of 50 residents. (For the amount of money it will take to build the bridge, the not-so-funny joke goes, every resident could have a Lear jet. And there is already an airport on the island to accommodate them.)

This gaff by Senator Coburn was so serious, it was called "a threat to every person in my state," according to the very senior Senator Ted Stevens (R) of Alaska.

Oh, please.

The Miers' Questionnaire

2005-10-21T00:03:00.000-07:00

The crying and gnashing of teeth continues over the nomination of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court. Some of the Senators didn't think her answers to their questionnaire were sufficient and have asked her for more information. To her opponents and even some of her supporters, this is further "evidence" that she is not the best nominee for the position (to put it mildly).

However, thanks to the Washington Post and the internet, the questionnaire and the answers are available to all to read, and we suggest everyone do so before taking a side on this nomination.

To help you along, consider Ms. Miers' response to question #28 regarding "Judicial Activism." Then, we'd like to hear what you think.

…The courts cannot be the solution to society's ills, and the
independence of the courts provides no license for them to be
free-wheeling. And, of course, parties should not be able to
establish social policy through court action, having failed to
persuade the legislative branch or the executive branch of the
wisdom and correctness of their preferred course. Courts are
to be arbiters of disputes, not policy makers...

"Judicial activism" can result from a court's reaching beyond
its intended jurisdiction to hear disputes that are not ripe,
not brought by a party with standing, not brought in the
proper court, or otherwise not properly before the court
because of the case's subject matter. An additional element
of judicial restraint is to be sure only to decide the case
before the court, and not to reach out to decide unnecessary
questions. The courts have the essential role of acting as the
final arbiter of constitutional meaning, including drawing the
appropriate lines between the competing branches
of government. But that role is limited to circumstances in
which the resolution of a contested case or controversy
requires the courts to act.

...Courts should give proper consideration to the text as
agreed upon, the law as written, and applicable precedent.
Then our system of justice can achieve appropriate
stability, clarity, and predictability. Those values cannot
be effectively pursued unless the law and the facts deter-
mine the outcome of a case, rather than the identity of the
judge before whom a case is brought...

"Judicial activism" can occur when a judge ignores the
principles of precedent and stare decisis. Humility and self-
restraint require the judiciary to adhere to its limited role
and recognize that where applicable precedent exists, courts
are not free to ignore it...Any decision to revisit a precedent
should follow only the most careful consideration of the
factors that courts have deemed relevant to that question.
Thus, whether the prior decision is wrong is only the begin-
ning of the inquiry. The court must also consider other
factors, such as whether the prior decision has proven
unworkable, whether developments in the law have under-
mined the precedent, and whether legitimate reliance
interests militate against overruling.

…I was able fully to appreciate the difference between the
role of those who are to make the law and those who are to
interpret it...

…a fuller appreciation of the role of the separation of powers
in maintaining our constitutional system. …Judicial review
by the Supreme Court, including determining the meaning
of the Constitution and declaring unconstitutional the actions
of another branch of government, is a tremendous power
exercised by judges who are not accountable to the
electorate. Because their power is so great, and because it is
largely unchecked, judges must be vigilant in exercising their
power in a humble, prudent, and limited way. The courts
must always be ready to decide cases according to the
Constitution and laws of the United States, and to do so fairly
and without regard to the wealth or power of the litigants
before them. But it is just as important for the courts to
stand ready not to decide in instances that do not call for a
decision.

…Criticism of courts that overstep their role is justified. We
must zealously guard, however, the independence of the
courts…While life tenure and independence should not be a
license to usurp the rule of law in favor of a rule of man,
they provide an essential structural protection to ensure
that judges are able to make decisions based only on the
fundamental vision of the Founders -- the rule of law.

Riot, Version Two

2005-10-20T21:44:00.000-07:00

The Washington Post, a member of the "we're not biased" media, blamed the riot in Toledo, Ohio, on neo-nazis. Their headline on October 16 read:

"White Supremacists Riot in Toledo, Ohio."

As we reported, it was very clear from the live coverage on television that the people running through the streets with rocks and baseball bats, attacking police officers, and burning down a local bar were black gangbangers.

Today, the WaPo issued a correction. This time, they referred to the rioters as "protesters" against the neo-nazis.

What wimps. How emasculating it must be to serve the political correctness god!

Trial of Saddam, Day 1

2005-10-20T00:20:00.000-07:00

The first trial of Saddam Hussein began today in Iraq. He is charged with the massacre in Al-Dujaile in 1982.

If you would like to know what happened that day, read an account from one of the victims here.

The identities of the judges have been kept a secret to protect them, and today, only one, Rizgar Mohammed Amin, appeared on camera. According to DebkaFile, it was a surprise that Judge Amin, a Kurd, was assigned to be the lead judge in the trial. The Kurds had evidently been afraid that if they were involved in sentencing Saddam, there would be repercussions against their people for "generations to come."

Imagine the courage, the determination it took for Judge Amin to take on this historic and dangerous task.

Mohammed, Omar, and friends took the day off to watch the trial, as did many Iraqis. They said the streets of Baghdad were empty, as everyone gathered around television sets all over the city. At first, they were impatient for instant and final justice; but as the session went on, they began to appreciate that the brutal deeds of "the tyrant" would be revealed, in painstaking detail, for all the world to see. There is satisfaction in that, and a pleasurable anticipation that justice will eventually come.

On the other hand, it was rather ironic that the trial is being held in the former Baath headquarters. There are some Iraqis who are seething these days, both that their power was taken from them by the Coalition of the Willing, and that their fellow countryman won't trust them with power again in post-Saddam Iraq.

That brings to mind some parallels with current events in this country, but we'll leave it for another day. Today is another historic occasion for Iraq.

We've Been Saying This All Along

2005-10-19T00:19:00.000-07:00

From the L.A. Times today, a statement of profound truth. Really. Don't laugh.

"The owners of the Fourth Estate have a unique ability to
direct the searchlight of inquiry upon others while remaining
powerfully positioned to deflect it from themselves."

Exactly. The L.A. Times, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, and other liberal newspapers are immune from criticism, because they control the stories they print. And the arrogance that comes with unfettered power has resulted in a blatant, mocking bias that is insulting to red-blooded (as opposed to blue-blooded) Americans.

The only recourse for the public is to stop buying the papers. And, lo-and-behold, that's happening in record numbers.

Think the Fourth Estate will get it before it goes broke?

What a Drag

2005-10-18T00:03:00.000-07:00

The Media is so tiring. It takes a lot of work to separate the news from the sensationalism, the bias, and the flat-out lies.

To be factually accurate, the headline this weekend should have read:

"Black Gangbangers in Toledo Burn Down Local Bar."

Instead, we get

"Neo-Nazis Start Riot."

The Neo-Nazis, as dispicable a group as that is, were not even present when the riot started. Their planned rally never took place; they had left when the police told them to. There was no provocation for the destruction caused later by the gangsters; we watched it live on television and identified it as simply "mob rule." The media coverage of this event was an example of political correctness at its worse. The news anchors couldn't even use the word "black" or "gangsters;" they called them "anti-neo-nazi protesters," for crying out loud!

***
The frenzy around the Valerie Plame nonsense is now focusing on Judith Miller and whether she will be fired for messing up the story. We can't figure out if her media colleagues are mad at Judith because she embarrassed the profession or because she failed to nail Karl Rove.

Today, there was great media concern about her safety as she appeared at the National Journalist Convention where she was supposed to receive an award for going to jail to protect her source. She claims she doesn't remember who her source was, but that irony doesn't even register with her journalism colleagues. The media has made this "story" all about the media, when it should be all about the lies of Joe Wilson, which have been documented - and even published in the recent past. A web search is all that's necessary to put together this story. Guess we'll have to do it ourselves...

***
Information about the events at the University of Oklahoma in which a student blew himself up outside the football stadium is contradictory. But instead of finding out what really happened, the media is investigating the bloggers who are trying to ascertain the facts. The namecalling from both sides is nauseating. And still, no one knows the truth about Joel Hinrichs' death.

***
And right now, the airwaves are full of fear about Wilma, a tropical storm that may or may not become a hurricane, that may or may not hit landfall, and that may or may not head toward the United States. We really, really hope we won't have to watch another insane "reporter" in hip boots standing in the driving rain to tell us how bad the weather is.

If we had a few more researchers and a few less "personalities," maybe we could get some news.

Earle vs. Delay

2005-10-17T00:43:00.000-07:00

Here is what we know so far…

John Colyandro, executive director of Texans for a Republican Majority (TRMPAC) allegedly drew a check for $190,000 from corporate donations in 2002. He allegedly gave the check to Jim Ellis, director of Americans for a Republican Majority (ARMPAC). This is legal.

Jim Ellis allegedly forwarded the check to Terry Nelson, Deputy Director of the RNC, who deposited it. This is also legal.

The Republican National State Elections Committee apparently gave donations to Texas House candidates. This, too, is legal.

Christine Iverson, the RNC spokesperson, said the donations to the Texas House candidates were taken from a non-corporate account that was completely different from the corporate-related account into which the TRMPAC check was deposited.

Tom DeLay’s fundraising work for TRMPAC, ARMPAC, and others assisted Republicans in taking control of the Texas House in the election of 2002 for the first time in 130 years. As a result, the House redrew congressional districts in Texas in a way that was more favorable to Republicans than it had been.

Last week, Travis County D.A. Ronnie Earle convinced the third grand jury (the first one had a technical problem, the second refused to indict) to hand down indictments against Tom DeLay for a campaign contributions “laundering scheme.” The prosecutor claimed that TRMPAC wanted to donate the $190,000 to seven Texas Republican House candidates, and since the PAC could not do it directly (corporate funds cannot be donated to candidates in Texas), it concocted a plan to send the corporate donations to the RNC, which in return would send individual donations, totaling the same amount, to the Texas candidates. The prosecutor claimed to have a list written by Ellis to Nelson of candidate names, amounts, and instructions about the money “exchange.”

The problem is, D.A. Ronnie Earle does not have such a list. It wasn't stolen from the evidence room. It wasn't temporarily misplaced. It doesn't appear to exist! When attorneys for the defense demanded a copy of the “list” in court on Friday, the prosecution simply admitted it did not have it.

The prosecution tried to offer what it called a “similar” list, with names of 17 Republican candidates from 2002, with dollar amounts by the names of nine totaling $230,000. This is what the assistant D.A. said:

“Despite the fact that the state cannot conclusively prove that
the said document is a duplicate (or copy thereof)…the state
believes that the document is at least factually related” to the
list described in the indictment.

Why does that sound familiar? Oh, yah... the National Guard documents about President Bush - the ones that may have been forged but were "factually accurate."

Anyway, after three years of investigation, prosecutor Ronnie Earle finally gets the third grand jury to indict with the claim that he has a smoking gun – the “list.” But he doesn’t really have it.

He must be really frustrated.

So must the Democrats, who have been excitedly waiting for the downfall of one of their most powerful enemies in Texas. And they really thought they could do it this time, especially since they won a warmup game earlier this year.

In May, Bill Ceverha, treasurer of TRMPAC, was successfully sued in Texas state district court for failing to report $613,433 in corporate campaign contributions and expenditures of $684,507 to the Texas Ethics Commission in 2002. The judge ruled that the money was spent “in connection with a campaign for an elective office” and not, as Ceverha contended, for legal administrative purposes. He was required to pay $196,660, to be divided among the five plaintiffs, all losing Democrat candidates in the 2002 legislative election. (Note: The plaintiffs had wanted $1.2 million.)

The Democrats at that time called the case a first step in going after Tom DeLay.

But will it happen?

The Iraqi Referendum

2005-10-15T19:27:00.000-07:00

The Iraqis have now voted on their constitution, in large and peaceful numbers. And now we await the results.

While the American media have not weighed in yet, the Iraqi blogosphere is full of analysis and commentary. Here is a sampling...

Sooni says the reason for the large turnout is that the Islamic Iraqi Party, one of three major representatives of the Sunni Arabs in Iraq, decided to vote for the constitution. This effectively ended the boycott by Sunnis and allowed them to participate in the voting process.

Sooni believes the lack of terrorist attacks at the voting stations was a decision by Zarqawi in order to find out - through a free poll, as it were - who is with him and who is not. He also may not have wanted to chance killing Sunnis who may be voting against the constitution, since they comprise most of his followers.

Akba lists the provinces and general voter numbers. He believes the large turnout in Mosul, Kirkuk, Diyala, Baghdad, and the provinces of Sallahaddin, Naynawa, and Anbar indicate that the constitution will be defeated. These are all areas in which Sunnis and Turkmen who are against the constitution live.

Hammorabi expects an 80% "yes" vote. He calls this a "big bullet in the head of terrorism."

Omar is excited about today and posted a video of Iraqis dancing after they voted. He noted that a friend who once thought the process was fraudulent, i.e., directed by America, now believes his vote will make a difference. Omar does not predict an outcome.

In the comments sections of several blogs, Iraqis expressed opinions about the election, their provisional government, the Sunni position, and the terrorists. Much of it was complaining of one type of another.

We wonder if they truly realize that their ability to publicly comment, to question, to complain is the result of the liberation granted them by the coalition of the willing?

Alaa certainly does. Last week, he smacked down the liberals in America for their "cut and run" rhetoric.

"Here we have the U.S.A. and Great Britain and their
smaller friends, an alliance that has defeated Nazi Germany
and the mighty Reich, and have had the stomach to ob-
literate Japanese cities with atomic bombs. Here we have the
Americans, the descendants of those who wrested a whole
continent by shear obstinacy and fought for every inch of land
with blood and sweat. Here we have nations that have waded
through rivers of blood and mud and marched through
entire continents to become symbols of human perseverance
and enterprise. Yes all this history and yet we have some who
think that our miserable 'Sunni Triangle' poses an insurmount-
able problem and that one should 'cut and run' and 'bring home
troops immediately' etc. etc.

"I salute President Bush who does not care much for this kind
of defeatism and treats it with the contempt it deserves."

Well said. Congratulations today to American and coalition troops, and to American and coalition leaders, for making free elections possible in Iraq. Congratulations to Iraqi citizens for honoring the gift by making their voices heard.

The Bankruptcy Deadline

2005-10-14T19:07:00.000-07:00

The new bankruptcy law goes into effect this weekend. Among the darling quotes in this AP article:

"It was a very hard decision because I've incurred these debts and I need to pay them," she said. "But it was such a weight."

She was fearful medical expenses from a cancer diagnosis could add to her mounting credit card debt. "That's when I decided to stop dillydallying," said Moore, 51. "It just sounds like it's going to be much more difficult and expensive later."

...financial trouble left him with $35,000 in debt. "It hasn't happened overnight," said Bennett, who has a wife and 2-year-old son. "It will be much easier now to keep the creditors at bay."

The fact that "thousands of people armed with bulging files of paperwork" lined up today to avoid personal responsibility is astonishing. Bravo to President Bush for forcing accountability in the new law, and good luck to all of those companies trying to get their money back from fleeing debtors.

The "Staged Interview" with Soldiers

2005-10-14T18:14:00.000-07:00

Sgt. Ron Brown was one of the soldiers in the 42ID's Task Force Liberty who spoke with President Bush in the televised interview from Iraq yesterday. There has been a big media bruhaha claiming that this event was "staged."

Go here and read what really happened, from one of the real soldiers who was really there.

The media is so wrong, so often. And this hero believes it is ON PURPOSE. Shame on them.

The "Religious Left" Revealed

2005-10-14T00:05:00.000-07:00

A "Conference on Spiritual Activism" was held at Berkeley this summer to discuss the religious differences between conservative and liberal Americans. Michael Lerner and Jim Wallis, both liberal activitists who were members of the SDS in the 1960's, were in charge.

The themes were, first, opposing the war in Iraq, and second, sex. The rest of the conference was devoted to bashing the Religious Right.

Sounds like we missed an enlightening discussion.

But here's the best part...

The conference opened with a "visualization exercise" to summon the spirits of:
the archangels,
Adam and Eve,
Hindu deities,
Socrates,
Aristotle,
Moses,
Jesus,
Buddha,
Muhammad,
Confucius,
Leonardo da Vinci,
White Buffalo Woman,
anthropologist Jane Goodall,
environmentalist Rachel Carson,
Gandhi,
Anne Frank,
Mother Theresa, and the
Dalai Lama.

So they really are the party of inclusion!

Let it be known, however, that they did not include Allah.

Or God, for that matter.

Our Supreme Court Nominee

2005-10-13T13:02:00.000-07:00

We have found the perfect justice for the Supreme Court and would like to present him to you.

He has never practiced law, unfortunately, but we hope you won't hold that against him.

He has spent most of his career in government-type positions, in a state attorney general's office, as a legislative aide, and as an assistant secretary for civil rights in the Department of Education. He also worked for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. We know that isn't great preparation for the federal judiciary, but he's a good, solid conservative and we still think he's perfect.

He was a judge for one year on the D.C. Circuit Court.

Oh, and he did attend Yale, which would make a lot of "elitist" critics happy.

What do you think? Should we nominate him?

His name is Clarence Thomas.

Gotcha.

This Would Help

2005-10-12T01:13:00.000-07:00

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is the largest and busiest of the circuit courts. The Ninth Circuit covers 38% of the country's land mass and 20% of its population. The court heard 14,272 cases last year, and took about five months longer to reach decisions on each case than in other circuits. In addition, because the Ninth is the only circuit in which a panel of 11 judges - rather than the full court - decides cases, it takes only six judges for a majority.

On Monday, Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski from Alaska and Republican Senator John Ensign from Nevada introduced a bill to split the Ninth Circuit in two, creating a new Twelfth Circuit. It is hoped the two new courts will be better able to handle the case load, reach more cities in the rotation, and allow all the judges assigned to the court to review all the cases, as is the procedure in other circuits.

What is left unsaid is that the Ninth Circuit is also the most liberal of the courts with a reputation for the highest reversal rate by the Supreme Court. In the 1996-97 session, the Ninth Circuit was overruled 27 out of 28 times; from 1996-99, 54 of 63 cases were reversed. In 2000-01, 11 of 15 cases were reversed. Many of these cases were overturned unanimously, an amazing event for the often "5-4" divided Supreme Court.

We should note that President Clinton appointed 14 of the 23 judges.

The court has long been known as a "rogue court" and a "runaway court," and the option to split it was discussed but rejected in the years when the Democrats controlled the Senate.

But now is the time. Senate Bill 1845, the Court of Appeals Restructuring and Modernization Act (CARMA) is the second attempt this year to add a new circuit. It's long needed and will be a welcome change.

Iraqi Constitution

2005-10-12T00:31:00.000-07:00

Shouldn't this be the front page headline of every newspaper in the world?

!!! Iraqis Reach Breakthrough Deal on Charter !!!

The Sunni leadership is now supporting the Iraq constitution, which greatly increases the probability that it will be approved by voters next Saturday. The Sunnis withdrew opposition when negotiators agreed to an amendment process that would be implemented in the next parliamentary session.

A new free country with a new democratic constitution. Way to go, Iraq. Way to go, U.S.A.

Go, Governator!

2005-10-11T01:00:00.000-07:00

The Governator of California is taking on teacher tenure, union political spending, government spending limits, and redistricting practices in one fell swoop in a special election next month. And it’s getting dirty.

Labor unions have collected more than $70 million to oppose the ballot measures, and have been pounding Governor Schwarzenegger personally in a series of television ads.

The governor, predictably, is fighting back, taking his case directly to the people. In a recent speech in Anaheim, he said:

"Let me tell you a story behind those untrue ads. After I
had been in Sacramento a while, the system basically came
to me and said, 'You're new, Governor. Here's how it works
in Sacramento. Just give us the money, don't talk about
quality, don't rock the boat... or else.' Those attack ads you
see on television are the 'or else.' But I will not be deterred."

It appears that Californians are rooting for the Governator. At this point in time, some polls show that all four propositions are expected to win.

But the labor unions are ramping up efforts to defeat them. The most recent strategy is to threaten to boycott any California corporations that donate to the governor’s campaign. On September 21, Chevron, Bank of America, Safeway, Hewlett-Packard and other companies received threatening letters from the presidents of the California Teachers Association, the United Nurses Association of California, the Peace Officers Research Association of California, and the California Professional Firefighters.

Proposition 75 in particular, has the unions riled. And why the fear? If the measure passes, unions will not be able to spend a member’s dues on political issues without the consent of the individual member.

That means, for example, that the teachers’ union won’t be able to fulfill its 2005-06 platform plank to boycott Walmart and Gallo wines unless each member agrees to allow his or her dues to be used for that purpose. And how many teachers in the classroom actually want to boycott the company that gives them great prices on school supplies? Or the inexpensive wine that helps them recover from a day with the kiddies?

The Governator’s got guts. Go to JoinArnold.com and donate.

Oregon Over the Line - Again

2005-10-11T00:56:00.000-07:00

Oregon is in the news with another wacky law. The state that is proud of its continual rebellion against the world that moved on after the 1960s, that legalized assisted suicide and medical marijuana, dedicates 10% of its transportation taxes to bike paths, hugs trees, and caters to the spotted owl, now also will allow live public sex acts. Or so says the Oregon Supreme Court.

This is a natural consequence of social liberalism. How can you ever draw a line of acceptable behavior when you espouse tolerance, peace, and acceptance above all virtues and refuse to judge anything harmful, undesirable, or evil?

We wonder how the responsible people of Oregon - and there must be a few, outside Little Moscow* - will respond to this ruling.

***
* "Little Moscow" is the president's (and the president's father's) pet name for Portland, Oregon. Imagine.

Who is REALLY After Tom Delay?

2005-10-10T12:25:00.000-07:00

It is often a good idea when trying to find the culprit in a scandal to follow the money. In the case of the current troubles of Tom Delay, several money trails lead to one person. Even with his billions of dollars and a self-proclaimed mission, George Soros was unable to defeat President Bush in the last election, but it sure looks like he is still working to bring down the Republican Party through its leadership.

Money Trail Number One. George Soros’ Open Society Institute supports a group of non-profits, including The Campaign for America’s Future and the Public Campaign Action Fund. In March, these groups sponsored a TV ad campaign that accused Tom Delay of corruption.

Money Trail Number Two. George Soros is a business partner of Frank Pearl. Mr. Pearl is the founder and chairman of Perseus Books, which published an “anti-Delay” book called The Hammer: God, Money, and the Rise of the Republican Congress.

Money Trail Number Three. One of the authors of the above referenced book, Lou Dubose, is also currently working in a documentary that focuses on the investigation and indictment of Tom Delay.

Money Trail Number Four. George Soros and friends spent $140 million to influence Congress to pass the McCain-Feingold Act. The campaign finance issue made John McCain famous, and continues to do so, not in small part because another of George Soros’ organizations, the Open Society Institute, also contributes to Senator McCain’s own organization, the Reform Institute for Campaign and Election Issues. Senator McCain is now “investigating” Tom Delay.

Money Trail Number Five. George Soros founded and funds a liberal coalition of 32 influential special interest groups called America Votes, whose sole purpose in the last election was to defeat President Bush. The president of that organization is Cecile Richards. Cecile Richards’ mother is former Texas governor Ann Richards, who lost the governorship to George W. Bush after her first term in office (which ended her political career). Governor Richards is the “best known patron” of Texas prosecutor Ronnie Earle. Ronnie Earle just indicted Tom Delay.

Does this sound like a coordinated effort to destroy a man’s career? Or is it just coincidence?

And folks think there’s a right-wing conspiracy…

Read more by Richard Poe here.

The Big Truth

2005-10-07T00:37:00.000-07:00

Think tanks are known for researching and analyzing issues, then publishing reports in the attempt to influence public policy. Most think tanks are conservative because, well, maybe, because their focus is finding and disseminating truth, translated into positive solutions to problems.

There is a new think tank, the Third Way, which calls itself "progressive," a term the liberals have been trying out recently. (Perhaps they don't realize that "progressive" has traditionally been a code word for communist. Or perhaps they do.)

Anyway, Third Way has published a report that tells Democrats what they need to do to regain power. It seems, laudably, that they have tried to copy conservative think tanks and tell the truth.

And that may cause them a bit of trouble.

The analysts, William A. Galston and Elaine C. Kamarck, are reportedly close to former President Clinton, and not surprisingly, they advise Democrats to copy the Clinton strategies of the 1990s. It is necessary, according to the report, for Democrats to move toward the center in rhetoric and selection of issues, because:

Liberalism is not a viewpoint shared by other Democrats,
let alone Americans as a whole.

AND

There are not enough left-leaning voters to win elections.

How about that? How often have we been told that the country is divided down the middle? It seems THAT'S NOT TRUE!

The Democrats' top strategists admit it. That’s why Democrats have to pretend they are not liberal, copy the ideas and positions of conservatives, and try to tear down the conservatives in power with slander and trumped up charges. They're even trying to change their name to "progressives!"

They cannot win as the liberals they are, because most Americans are not liberal.

Do not let them push you around with this half-the-country-is-blue nonsense. Tell them what their own think tank reported.

The Strategery of the President's Pick

2005-10-06T00:05:00.000-07:00

There is a lot of discontent with the President’s choice of Harriet Miers as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Most of it is coming from conservatives, who point to an array of shining stars in the judicial system – Pricilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown, Michael Luttig, Edith Jones and others – who would have been outstanding picks for the position. Choosing a relatively unknown presidential staffer with no judicial experience seems odd at best and irresponsible at worst.

However, I believe there may be a Bush “strategery” afoot.

See if you think this makes sense…

The Supreme Court hears a relatively small number of cases each year, and those are selected by the justices themselves. The Courts of the past 50 years have increasingly selected cases through which they can force their personal social or political agendas on the American people through “judicial fiat,” even if the cases had nothing to do with the Constitution.

However, a new Supreme Court with a solid group – not yet a majority, but getting there – of “strict constructionists” who understand the proper constitutional role of the federal judiciary will choose to hear only those cases which legitimately fall under their jurisdiction. And if this new Supreme Court accepts only cases that comprise constitutional issues, many more decisions of the lower courts will stand. And therein lies the “strategery.”

President Bush has been appointing judges throughout the system that are conservative interpreters of the law rather than judicial activists: Brown in the DC Circuit, Jones in the 5th Circuit, Luttig in the 4th Circuit, etc.. Why would the President move any of them from the positions they now hold? Their roles will be increasingly important as the Supreme Court’s role diminishes.

Imagine, for example, Judge Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Austin, Texas) upholding a decision by a Texas court to limit social services to illegal aliens because it is a state’s right to make such a law; and the Supreme Court choosing not to hear the case on appeal. Judge Owen becomes a very important player in that scenario.

It takes a team to win a game, and I believe President Bush has been quietly recruiting a conservative team all over the country.

That puts the addition of a new player on the Supreme Court in a whole different light.

Can't Trust Walter Cronkite Anymore

2005-10-05T12:24:00.000-07:00

On Larry King last Friday, September 30, 2005, Walter Kronkite sadly and permanently burst the bubble he created during my childhood years as "the most trusted man in America." The man who every evening on CBS told us, "that's the way it is," finally told us what he thinks about us. And how insulting were his words.

"We're an ignorant nation right now," Mr. Cronkite said. "We're
not really capable, I do not think the majority of our people, of
making the decisions that have to be made at election time and
particularly in the selection of their legislatures and their
Congress and the presidency, of course. I don't think we're
bright enough to do the job that would preserve our democracy,
our republic. I think we're in serious danger."

I bet Mr. Cronkite doesn't include himself in that royal "we" he considers too ignorant to choose wisely. But the "ignorant masses" tend to vote for decency and freedom and limited government and strong defense. Those are the issues that preserve our democracy.

So what kind of voter does that make Mr. Cronkite?

Judicial Ramblings

2005-10-05T06:43:00.000-07:00

William Rehnquist had no experience as a judge when he was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Nixon. He had been an assistant attorney general and then worked for the Justice Department. Although Justice Rehnquist was not a "strict constructionist," he was a conservative and an honorable man, and these characteristics served him well on the Court.

May Harriet Miers, another nominee with no judicial experience, be even better, joining Justices Thomas, Scalia, and Roberts as defenders of the original intent of the Founders in interpreting the Constitution.

***
By all accounts, Justice Clarence Thomas should have been named Chief Justice when Rehnquist died. He will probably never get that honor now. How does he feel, knowing that he has been caught in the fallout of the current political climate in which there is rabid opposition of the left to any decision by President Bush? He undoubtedly realizes that one less fight now saves energy for future ones, but how unfair this was.

Surely Jesse Jackson should have stepped up to claim discrimination, shouldn't he?

***
Had the President chosen Clarence Thomas as Chief Justice, Justice David Souter would have been in charge of the Court during the confirmation process. How does he feel, knowing that the President preferred elevating a newcomer to the position of Chief rather than let Souter be in control for even one minute? Justice Souter is already the subject of widespread derision over the Kelo decision and is facing a well-deserved attempt to take his house and land in retaliation; have these events penetrated the "cloistered environment" in which he lives to make him understand how off-base he is?

***
There has been a flurry of commentary about Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, mostly hoping that she will be next to step down. Given that Justice Ginsburg is very open about her desire to use international law rather than the Constitution as a basis for rulings, it is no surprise that rational Americans would prefer that she not continue on the Court. But does she read blogs to know how they feel?

***
In the 1930's, when President Roosevelt declared that the Supreme Court was out of touch with reality, he threatened to "pack the court" by appointing nine additional justices to overrule the "nine old men" who were then serving on the Court. The Court got the message and began to condemn it own prior decisions, calling them "unwarranted judicial departures from the text of the Constitution."

Will we see the same response today, now that an "originalist" President, backed by the majority of Congress and the American people, is demanding adherence to the Constitution in Court rulings?

We certainly hope so.

The DeLay Allegations

2005-10-05T00:47:00.000-07:00

In 1993 Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle charged Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison with illegally using state personnel and equipment for political purposes. It was believed at the time that both the charges and the timing of them (five days after a special election in which the Senator won her seat) were politically motivated.

The investigation and accusations were highly publicized for several months. But when the case finally came before a judge in 1994, DA Earle tried to drop the charges before the jury was sworn in. It seemed that the DA had no case, but didn’t want to go to trial because “double jeopardy” would prevent him from bringing the same charges against the Senator later if he did find evidence of wrongdoing.

Interestingly, the judge refused to play the game with the DA and started the trial. So DA Earle refused to put on a case. The Senator was acquitted.

Why is this important? This is the same DA who just indicted Tom DeLay.

And this is what the DA bragged to the Democrat PAC Texas Values and Action Coalition last May:

“This case is not just about Tom DeLay. If it isn’t this Tom
Delay, it’ll be another one, just like one bully replaces the
one before.”

But who is the real bully in these stories?

Read the allegations and decide for yourself.

***
UPDATE: You know the old saying that indictments are so easy that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich? So how solid is the evidence when DA Ronnie Earle couldn't get the grand jury in Travis County to indict Tom DeLay?

According to this article, DA Earle had to go to different grand jury and claim to have "new evidence" in order to get the indictments this week.

Pretty suspicious, doncha think?

The Other Katrina Story

2005-10-04T06:11:00.000-07:00

The state of Mississippi was the hardest hit by Hurricane Katrina, and entire towns were wiped out for miles inland by the storm serge which leveled all the buildings in its path.

But while the nation's attention was directed toward the screaming from New Orleans, the people of Mississippi have gone quietly about taking care of their refugees, cleaning up the mess, and implementing long term plans to restore the essential services so residents can start to rebuild.

Why haven't we heard complaining from Mississippi? Has it been drowned out (no pun intended) by its neighbor to the west?

I spent some time with Mississippians last week and can tell you. They. are. not. complaining.

Mississippians know the storm was not the fault of the federal government and that it is not the job of the federal government to prepare them before such a disaster or take care of all their needs afterward. Governor Barbour was responsible for the preparations, and he handled them calmly - requiring residents to leave the areas in the storm's path, ensuring that transportation and fuel were available, and making all lanes on the freeways outbound to hasten evacuation. After the storm, Governor Barbour publicly ordered his law enforcement officials to deal harshly with lawbreakers and looters, and as a result, there were few reports of lawbreaking. The Governor worked with local authorities to allow access to volunteers to help the victims, and the volunteers came by the thousands, mostly from churches and other private organizations.

If you've been in the south, you know there is a church on every street corner. And the affiliated congregations both from Mississippi and other states came - and are still coming - driving hundreds of miles with vanloads of food and supplies to distribute, and then returning home to collect more.

This is the way it's supposed to be: strong leadership facilitating the strength and generosity of the people.

Take note, Louisiana. Take note, government-is-god liberal America.

Serious Judicial Disappointment

2005-10-03T20:26:00.000-07:00

President Bush is running from a fight.

All over the country, conservatives were girding their loins for battle - FINALLY judicial activism and the liberal worldview were going to be debated in direct language, in primetime, and FINALLY our esteemed senators were going to repay us for our trust, support, money, and votes. And we get an unknown White House lawyer to fight over?????

There are so many things wrong with this...

1) Lawyers are paid to argue. Judges are paid to listen, then interpret.
2) Judicial activism comes from judges acting like lawyers. How will this lawyer take to acting like a judge?
3) She has no paper trail. Hell, you can't even get a $10/hr job without a resume full of relevant experience.
4) Harry Reid likes the pick.
5) The fence-sitter, finger-in-the-wind moderates like the pick.
6) The "extremists" on BOTH SIDES don't like the pick.

President Bush is sounding less and less like a Texan and more like a rich guy from Kennebunkport, Maine. Is he going to spend the rest of his term paying off friends, or getting down to the business of TAX REFORM or SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM which we haven't heard a peep about lately.

President Bush - either lead, follow, or get out of the way.

Harriet Miers Nominated

2005-10-03T07:05:00.000-07:00

President Bush has nominated Harriet Miers as the next associate justice of the Supreme Court.

Advantages:
* Not a judge, so no judicial record for the Democrats to trash.
* Female, as many folks on all political sides wanted.
* Approved in advance by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, which could undercut Democrat opposition.

Disadvantages:
* Not a judge, so we don't know if she's a strict constructionist or a judicial activist.
* One of President Bush's insiders instead of a female we know and wanted.
*Approved by Harry Reid!!??

Chuck Schumer just stated on Fox News that this nomination is important because it is "the swing vote" on the Court. There is no such thing! But thank you, Senator Schumer, for once again clarifying the liberal view of the role of the courts.

Liberals want the courts to be political environments in which opinions are based on politics and decisions are often made by swing votes! That's why their questions to nominees are about personal beliefs on abortion and the death penalty. Liberals want to know what potential judges believe, and support those who hold liberal beliefs. There is an expectation that liberal judges will rule according to those beliefs, which makes other liberals happy.

But judges are not supposed to be politicians; the court must not rule on personal beliefs or political viewpoints, but on the law.

Conservatives don't ask what a nominee believes on a given issue; they ask what the nominee will base his/her rulings on, and support the nominee who responds that adherence to the Constitution and the rule of law are the basis for all judicial rulings. Conservatives expect judges to rule according to the law and will work through the political process to pass good laws.

That's what the Constitution states.

So who is Harriet Miers and what kind of justice will she be? We'll be looking for evidence that she is not a "swing vote," a political activist, a liberal. We want an objective judge who knows and follows the Constitution.

GovernmentGoneMad

2005-09-30T04:11:00.000-07:00

We understand a lot of folks are mad at the federal government right now because of a perceived lack of concern and speedy response to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. That's old news.

What concerns us at the moment is the do-all, fix-all promises we're getting to the situation. In what other time in history has it been the responsibility of the feds to make everyone "whole" after a natural distaster?

Consider the cities that have been ravaged in the past. Galveston at the turn of the century. The Chicago fires. The earthquakes in San Francisco. Did we require the feds to rebuild those cities?

Of course not. So why now? Why should the government rebuild New Orleans, to the taxpayer tune of $400,000 per NO resident?

Why are we now so dependent upon government for everything? This is disturbing, and in our opinion, is a grave threat to this land of the free, home of the brave, free enterprise, personal initiative and responsibility nation.

Free Abortions???

2005-09-29T00:05:00.000-07:00

Of all the services to provide hurricane victims, this one is not on our list. But, any opportunity to market their viewpoint and propaganda...

Inside the Bubble

2005-09-28T00:55:00.000-07:00

During the last presidential campaign, filmmaker Steve Rosenbaum and his crew followed John Kerry around the country, filming "the rest of the story" as it happened. Rosenbaum, a life-long Democrat and Kerry supporter, intended to release the film just before the election as his contribution to the series of documentaries (or in some cases, "political docu-dramas") that were intended to influence the electorate.

The film is opening this Thursday.

And it's not flattering to the candidate.

We have seen the trailer (and you can too, by linking from Lucianne.com), which features such disrespectful and vulgar comments and activities that we cringed. The profanity has been deleted in the trailer, making it safe to watch but somewhat disjointed because there are more bleeps than words.

While other bloggers are discussing the disfunctionality of the Kerry campaign as revealed in this film, we are interested in the character - or lack thereof - it reveals. Knowing they were being filmed, knowing the American people would see and hear them in action, the Kerry klan still behaved like nasty little children. They knew the "regular folks" don't like that sort of thing - that's why they used a precocious little girl at the Democrat National Convention to impertinently chastise the Vice President of the United States for a "bad word" he once used - but they had no qualms about using gutter talk and politically-incorrect suggestions themselves, on camera.

So what does this say? They were absolutely arrogant in their collective belief that they could do whatever they wanted and still win. And they really are nasty little people.

The thought that they came close to taking over the government of our country is horrifying.

Keeping the Record Straight

2005-09-27T00:40:00.000-07:00

The word is getting out.

Surprise! American troops are not bogged down in a quagmire in Iraq. They are methodically taking out the terrorists, with few casualities and with the help of the Iraqi citizens. Yesterday, they found and killed Abu Azzam, the number two terrorist in that country.

Surprise! Mother Sheehan did not raise the son she has been so publicly mourning. (Her ex-husband and his second wife raised Casey Sheehan, doncha know.) And her true colors were revealed in neon when she complained that she wasn't getting enough media coverage in Washington D.C. because of Hurricane Rita. So she upped the ante yesterday by getting herself arrested in front of the White House. Did anyone notice?

Surprise! ANSWER, which is not just an anti-war protest group, has been funding Ms. Sheehan. ANSWER is a front for the Party for Socialism and Liberation, a Marxist-Leninist Communist organization. Ramsey Clark is part of the organization; remember that come election time.

And...

The biggest surprise! The L.A. Times, which is not a conservative newspaper, has discovered that the reporting of death, mayhem, rape, murder, looting, and gang activity during Hurricane Katrina was greatly exaggerated. And they published the story!

There is hope that the truth will be heard.

Lesson Learned?

2005-09-26T00:42:00.000-07:00

We have long been supporters of a Palestinian state. A state, with borders and a government, can be held accountable for the actions of its people much more easily than a loosely knit group of multinational terrorists who declare alliance to a creed rather than a country. And it's easier to find them when they commit acts of war.

The Palestianians found that out this weekend, and events validated the wisdom of the Israeli government in turning over the Gaza strip to the Palestinians, painful as it was.

Hamas held a rally on Thursday to celebrate their takeover of the Gaza strip. In typical style, rockets and other weapons were carried in the beds of trucks, displayed by "militants" who yelled and fired guns in the air. But there was an accident, rockets exploded, and 15 people were killed; dozens more were wounded, many of them children.

In typical style, Hamas blamed Israel. Palestianian "militants" couldn't possibly have made such a mistake; Israel must have fired a rocket at the crowd to set off the explosions.

So, in typical style, the Palestinian "militants" fired a rocket over the wall into Israel. This made a total of 40 rockets that have been fired at Israel since their withdrawal from the territory.

And that was enough.

This weekend, the Israelis began air strikes in Gaza. The BBC is reporting that the Israelis killed two Islamic Jihad "militants," including a commander; knocked out power in the eastern districts of Gaza City with missiles; damaged the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine headquarters; and hit an area used by militant rocket squads. Arial Sharon has declared that his country will continue this action, "whose aim is to hurt the terrorists and not to let up."

Hamas has now asked for a ceasefire. Did they learn the foolishness of their typical style?

Like ducks in a barrel. And they thought they had won a great victory, forcing Israel to give them that land.

Way to go, Israel.

Whoever Quits Firsts, Loses

2005-09-26T00:25:00.000-07:00

This weekend, the neighborhood kids concocted a skateboarding game using a complicated racetrack/obstacle course combination over a two-block radius. There were several rules about boundaries and timing, but the most important rule was this:

Whoever quits first, loses.

When even twelve-year-olds understand the fundamental concept of sticking with the game until the end, what can we say about the anti-war protesters who converged on Washington D.C. on Saturday to stomp their feet and scream their nasty rhymes and demand that we leave Iraq?

Do they not get it, or do they not care?

When you're in a war, you don't quit until the enemy is defeated. Period.

"First tell the Devil to rest, then I'll rest too."
- St. John Bosco

Where are They?

2005-09-23T18:31:00.000-07:00

We have heard a lot about the Red Cross, the Salvation Army, the Southern Baptist Convention, and various other church and civic organizations who are staffing shelters, providing food and supplies, driving buses, and volunteering in schools to help the refugees from Hurricane Katrina and now Hurricane Rita.

What we would like to know is:

How many shelters has the ACLU opened?

How many meals have the People for the American Way served?

How much gasoline has Jesse Jackson delivered?

How much debris have the American Athiests cleared off the neighborhood streets?

How many refugees are Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, or any of the other wealthy whiners housing?

???

That's what we thought.

Even the Canadians Get It

2005-09-23T01:27:00.000-07:00

Well, at least one Canadian anyway.

David Warren decries the Bush Bashing Blame Throwing over Katrina:

"There's plenty wrong with America, since you asked...But
one of them would not be disaster preparation. If something
happened up here, on the scale of Katrina, we wouldn't even
have the resources to arrive late. We would be waiting for the
Americans to come save us, the same way the government in
Louisiana just waved and pointed at Washington, D.C. The
theory being, that when you're in real trouble, that's where
the adults live."

Oh, yah. And when a Canadian supports us, we should support him by reading what he has to say. Go do that.

Jesus Did It Better

2005-09-22T01:33:00.000-07:00

There's big news in Britian - a cleric has unveiled a condensed version of the Holy Bible, designed for busy business folks who can't take time to read more than an "executive summary." The miniature book, expected to become a best-seller, is called the "100-Minute Bible."

Nice try, but in the real Bible, Jesus didn't need 100 minutes to summarize the important stuff. He only used 48 words.

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all
your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and
greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love
your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets
hang on these two commandments."

Matthew 22:37-40

Don't Get Stuck on Stupid!

2005-09-21T07:00:00.000-07:00

The phrase of the year!

This is General Russel Honore taking over a press conference (from Flailing Ray Nagin) about the latest New Orleans evacuation:

"You're asking last storm questions for people who are
concerned about the future storm. Don't get stuck on
stupid, reporters. We are moving forward. And don't
confuse the people please. You are part of the public
message. So help us get the message straight."

They didn't listen. They're reporters, remember, not mere messengers.

One of them insisted on asking the General to speak "a little bit more about why that's happening this time, though, and did not...last time." He got another blast from the Good General:

"You are stuck on stupid. I'm not going to answer that
question. "

Take note, Scott McClellan. That's how you handle the press.

I hereby nominate Russel Honore for head of Homeland Security, FEMA, the INS, the ICE, and the Supreme Court.

Make bumper stickers!

An Award to "Covet"

2005-09-21T02:19:00.000-07:00

This sounds like a sick joke. Even if it's true, it's a sick joke.

NewsMax.com is reporting it.

A Chinese company is honoring ex-president Bill
Clinton by naming a new line of condoms after him
- along with a companion line of condoms that will be
named after his ex-girlfriend, Monica Lewinsky.

The Company is Guangzhou Haokian Bio-science. The Chinese names of the items will be Kelitun and Laiwensiji.

Coming soon to a Walmart near you.

Axis of Evil - Two Down, One to Go

2005-09-20T07:44:00.000-07:00

The New York Times is reporting the North Korea has agreed to end its nuclear weapons program. All they want in return is security, economic benefits, and energy.

Well, shoot, security will be automatically increased once North Korea stops threatening everyone with nukes.

And we can pay them. We pay everybody else. Maybe the Hollywood Hypocrites would hold another televised fundraiser to get the folks to give a little more.

Energy? That one may be more difficult. The free oil we got for invading Iraq hasn't shown up yet, and our own oil drilling capabilities have been reduced temporarily by bad weather.

Maybe China would contribute. After all, China is the second biggest consumer of oil in the world, and their increasing competition with the U.S. is one of the things making prices go up. (And you thought it was 'cause of American SUV's.)

Anyway, we'll work it out. And the French will take credit. Only then will the media get ahold of the story; they certainly can't do it now and take the chance that President Bush's approval ratings will go up...

What's the Deal?

2005-09-19T13:03:00.000-07:00

Former President Clinton just gave an ugly Bush-bashing interview to ABC. I thought he was our buddy now that he and President Bush #41 are palling around soliciting money for Katrina victims.

Did they have a fight or something?

I can't find anything at this particular moment coming up for a vote, or any important summit, or some conservative legislation that Clinton would like to sabatoge. So what's the deal?

***
UPDATE: The daily Rasmussen polls show President Bush's approval rating didn't plummet after Hurricane Katrina. In fact, it is exactly the same as it was on September 1, before all the hoopla. And pretty much the same as it's been all month.

Maybe Mr. Clinton is trying to convince folks they are wrong to continue approving of the President by reminding them of all the bad things he has allegedly done.

It won't work.

Oh My

2005-09-19T00:36:00.000-07:00

Mark Steyn is at it again. He's become one of our favorite writers, and not just because he's conservative. The man is really good. His latest article in the Chicago Sun-Times comments on the confirmation hearings of Judge John Roberts. He says,

It was obvious on the first day about 20 minutes in
-- i.e., about halfway through Joe Biden's first question
-- that the Democrats had nothing on Roberts. But
they're game guys and, like the fellow in a tight spot in
a caper movie, they stuck their right hands in their
pockets, pointed them through the material and
pretended they had a real gun in there. By the second
day, their pants had fallen down, but they bravely stood
there waggling their fingers at the nominee and insisting
they had enough firepower to blow his head off.

Go read the rest. It's worth the click.

Integrity of the President

2005-09-16T01:02:00.000-07:00

President Bush took responsibility for the 'inadequate" response of the government after Hurricane Katrina devastated the southeastern part of the country. He then promised to make it right.

Amazing.

What other country in the world would have had the lights back on in New Orleans so quickly? The levees repaired? The water pumping out? Bourbon Street back in business within three weeks?

What other country would have the capability of transporting, housing, feeding, and clothing hundreds of thousands of displaced people so quickly? Getting their children in schools within three weeks?

What other country would have suffered the largest natural disaster in its history with so few casualities? (Remember how many thousands of people died in the last heat wave in France???)

We should be singing the praises of everyone who has contributed to this phenomenal achievement. We should be honoring the courage of the residents of the affected areas who survived through tremendous hardship and are already planning to rebuild.

But we demanded an apology from the President instead.

What's refreshing is that he gave it. He said, "The buck stops here," and he took responsibility. The man has character and integrity.

Unlike a previous president who insisted he "didn't have sexual relations..."

Public Bloviating

2005-09-16T00:47:00.000-07:00

Fred Thompson, former senator, current star of Law and Order, and appointed shepherd of Judge John Roberts, said today that Senator Joe Biden thinks Judge Roberts is the best candidate he has ever seen. Senator Biden told Senator Thompson so, and Senator Thompson repeated it on the Sean Hannity radio show.

So what's all the public blustering and whining about? Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy and Patrick Leahy and Chuck Schumer all evidently have a Jekyll and Hyde thing going; when the cameras turn on, they convert from the "personable" guys they are in private and become the indignant adversaries we always see. Ted Kennedy in particular, according to Senator Thompson, is nice in private and very helpful, especially when someone dies.

[So I have to have someone die for Kennedy to be nice to me? responded Sean.]

The first question is, wouldn't the Democrat Party be better served if their leaders stopped playing to the cameras and acted like "nice guys" that people could, maybe, like a little?

The second question is, why was Dianne Feinstein left off the list of "personable" Democrat Senators on Senator Thompson's list?

Never mind.

Bush Makes Unprecedented Proposal

2005-09-15T08:19:00.000-07:00

An amazing story was buried an AP report published in The Guardian yesterday. The headline was:

Annan Seeks to Restore U.N. Credibility.

The seventh paragraph, however, comprised a summary of the speech made by President Bush. It read as follows:

Bush broadened the terrorism fight beyond the
military arena, saying world leaders have ``a solemn
obligation'' to stop terrorism in its early stages.
Declaring that poverty breeds despair and terrorism,
he challenged leaders to abolish all trade tariffs and
subsidies to promote prosperity and opportunity in
poor nations, a move that would be worth billions of dollars.

Wow! Abolishing all trade tariffs! That idea won't get anywhere with the "developed" nations, but wouldn't it jumpstart the "developing ones"? Eliminating trade barriers might provide more money to them than all the aid we currently send (and that gets diverted into the pockets of corrupt leaders).

In addition, the President actually stated that terrorism has its roots in poverty. Whether or not we agree on that point, it was made.

Why isn't this all over the news so we can discuss its anticipated benefits and challenges, the implications to power differentials, probable supporters and detractors, potential winners and losers, etc.? This isn't a ho-hum proposal to be ignored.

Ooo, Ick

2005-09-15T01:56:00.000-07:00

Did you know China uses the skin of "executed convicts" in beauty products such as collagen for lip and wrinkle treatments? They say this is "traditional" and nothing to "make such a big fuss about."

Not only is this disgusting, but it poses a risk of infection.

According to this article in the Guardian, Dr. Wang Guoqi says that it is common to harvest organs and skin from prisoners immediately after they have been shot - even when their hearts are still beating. The Chinese government has denounced him as a liar.

It's pretty tough to decide whom to believe, since this isn't being blamed on Bush. I'll just leave it at ooo, ick.

Complete the Mission

2005-09-15T00:06:00.000-07:00

Who has the "moral authority" to talk about the war in Iraq? Would a Lt. Colonel who is recovering from wounds suffered in a battle in Mosul suffice?

We think so. And LTC Eric Kurilla, a "legendary warrior," is worried that our government will withdraw the troops from Iraq too soon.

"Without a strong Coalition military presence in the near
term, all our gains would be eroded," Kurilla predicted,
"Worse, we'd be consigning our Iraqi allies, who have
become increasingly effective fighting side by side with us,
to a brutal civil war against an enemy that is savagely
intent on clinging to a power they should never have
possessed."

We should listen to him. He's been there. And he knows what he's talking about.

Read the whole thing at Michael Yon's place.

More Moral Authority

2005-09-15T00:05:00.000-07:00

Who on the Iraqi side of the current War on Terror has the "moral authority" to speak about feelings in that country? Would a Colonel in the army suffice?

Colonel Abbas Fadhil, Iraqi base commander at Taji, recently presented his American counterpart with 1,000,000 Iraqi dinars for victims of Hurricane Katrina.

In presenting this donation, Colonel Fadhil said, "We are all brothers. When one suffers tragedy, we all suffer their pain." In an accompanying letter, he wrote,

"I would like to console all the ASTs who helped us
rebuilding our country and our Army. We appreciate the
American's help and support. Thank you."

Listen to this man. He is there and he knows. Americans are appreciated. We are doing a good thing in Iraq.

Uh Oh

2005-09-14T00:30:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, I heard the first opinion from Judge John Roberts that causes concern. During the Senate confirmation hearing, he said he agrees with the 1967 court ruling involving contraceptives for married couples.

The case was Griswold vs. Connecticut, in which the Supreme Court struck down a law prohibiting the use of condoms by married couples. The law was indeed outdated, but it should have been left to the state of Connecticut to repeal. Instead, the Supreme Court usurped the state's authority and in the ruling also created a "right to privacy" that has since been used to defend all kinds of conduct, including abortions and homosexuality.

The Court acknowledged that that there is no "right to privacy" in the Constitution, but declared that there are "penumbras" within the Constitution that they interpreted to include this right. "Penumbras" are "shadows"!

No wonder we can't get a handle on how the Constitution should be interpreted these days- judges think it contains "shadow rights"!

And Judge John Roberts agrees. Uh oh.

Baby Torres Died

2005-09-14T00:12:00.000-07:00

In the midst of national disasters, wars, and judicial nomination hearings, we should take a moment to mourn the loss of Susan Catherine Anne Torres.

She was born five weeks ago. Her mother had been on life support for three months, just long enough for the baby to have a chance of living.

She didn't make it.

We have so many medical skills, so much knowledge and technology, but some things we just can't fix.

Our prayers go out to the family.

On the First Day

2005-09-13T00:46:00.000-07:00

The confirmation hearings for Judge John Roberts got off to a rousing start yesterday. We listened to four hours of posturing by the committee members.

Sigh, politicians. Why is it always about them? (Note post below.)

Judge Roberts finally got a chance to speak around 3:30 p.m. He said exactly what we hoped and expected of a "strict constructionist." He said he has no agenda. He is open to listening to his colleagues' views. He is committed to confronting every case with an open mind, and deciding it according to the law. He will "show no fear or favor."

He spoke of President Reagan and the need for an independent judiciary. He spoke of the inspiration of Justice Rehnquist.

He compared the judge's role with that of an umpire. Umpires don't make the rules, they enforce them. They call balls and strikes; they do not pitch or bat. No one ever goes to a ball game to see the umpire.

He spoke of humility.

It was just right. It was about three minutes long.

Today will be tougher.

Monday Night Football

2005-09-12T19:36:00.000-07:00

There's a football game on tonight. I don't know who is playing, because the game is advertised this way on Comcast:

ABC kicks off its 36th and final season of this prime-time
series...

Sigh, the media. Why is it always about them?

A Country Weekend

2005-09-12T00:57:00.000-07:00

I spent the weekend in "fly-over country" and was gratified to learn that the ranchers and farmers of mainstream America are still the solid, self-reliant, and generous folk that built this country and continue to keep it running.

Out at the homestead, there is no cell phone service and limited cable TV. The only cable news is CNN, and the folks don't watch it because they don't trust that the reporting is accurate. They do watch football, college football, because they know some of the kids who are playing.

A good Saturday morning is spent sitting on the tailgate of a pickup in the neighbor's field, talking and drinking a beer, waving at the folks who drive by headed for town and the week's supply shopping.

Saturday afternoon, at least this particular one, was spent in a big shed doubling as a community center - eating all the traditional foods one expects at a country potluck. The salads were nestled in a child's wading pool filled with ice. The dessert table was twice as long as the entree table, although no one would use the word entree without rolling their eyes.

This was a farewell gathering for one of their own, who had just died of cancer. It seemed that everyone in the county was there. In a nod to the 21st century, photos were displayed on a continuous loop on a large television screen - set up in the bed of a Ford 350, king cab, black. The television was surrounded by bouquets of flowers, decorated with antlers and fishing rods.

I understand why these Americans are so balanced and strong: they're living life, instead of watching and worrying about what's on TV. It was uplifting to be there.

A Little Balance from New Orleans

2005-09-12T00:44:00.000-07:00

The media is making a nuisance of itself. In the scramble to get stories about the aftermath of Katrina, reporters have become so annoying that the pastor of our denomination, who was serving 200 meals a day to refugees, wrote in an email, "We had to make an agreement among ourselves to hold hands when we met a reporter so we didn't slap 'em. "

And you can't believe the stories they do come up with. Hugh Hewitt has a compilation of the projected death tolls, which range from a few hundred to 10,000, all without any corroboration.

So, if you'd like to read an accurate and unbiased account of the days after the hurricane in New Orleans, take a look at the photo gallery by Alvaro R. Morales Villa, a resident of the French Quarter, who took before, during, and after pictures and posted them with descriptions. Sometimes, an amateur does it better.

Krauthammer on Katrina

2005-09-09T05:38:00.000-07:00

We bow to the master. Read it.

Hunger Strike

2005-09-09T00:24:00.000-07:00

The headline of this story reads: Hunger Strikers Pledge to Die in Guantanamo.

Fine. They can commit suicide any way they want, as long as they don't take anyone else with them.