I don’t know how 4 out of 10 constitutes “half”, but the data confirms what we already know – the Mexicans are coming in droves.

In the survey of 1,200 Mexican adults, conducted in May by the Washington-based Pew Hispanic Center, 46 percent said they would like to live in the United States if they had the opportunity. Among college graduates, 35 percent said they would head north.

"Even at the high ends of the socioeconomic characteristics, we see that the propensity to migrate is quite strong," said Pew Hispanic Center Director Roberto Suro in Washington. "Mexico's economy doesn't satisfy their expectations."
The survey also concluded that 21 percent of Mexicans are inclined to work in the United States without proper entry documents.

Maybe yesterdayÂ’s suggestion of invasion and annexation isnÂ’t such a bad idea. After all, they would no longer need to move in order to be in the United States.

Posted by: Greg at 02:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 162 words, total size 1 kb.

If they consider this acceptable, it is clear that they are not the “family restaurant” they claim to be – unless anti-Semitism is one of your family values.

Two diners on a date at a fancy Jersey Shore restaurant were furious when they saw the check — which listed their table as that of the "Jew Couple."

Brooklynite Elliot Stein says he was shocked that a waitress at the Parkhill's Waterfront Grill in Allenhurst [New Jersey] printed the slur instead of a table number on his $36.75 bill.

As if that weren't bad enough, the 23-year-old shoe buyer told The Post, the offensive phrase then turned up on his credit-card statement two weeks later.

The response of restaurant management?

Stein said he took the offensive bill and showed it to Jewish friends seated nearby who said they could not believe it.

When the group started questioning the manager, Stein said she simply told them there was nothing derogatory about the statement.

Stein said he was then asked to leave for making a fuss.

The restaurant's general manager, Malia Wells, yesterday told The Post that the offending phrase was a matter of "poor judgment on the part of a bartender."
The server, shown as Karina on Stein's bill, has since "moved on," Wells said. She would not say whether Karina was fired.

"We are a family restaurant, and we welcome everybody," she said, adding that the words "Jew Couple" were never intended to be derogatory.

And I suppose that “Spic Couple” would be just fine, too. Not to mention “Niggers”, which your fine staff probably also uses. I know I would raise a real fuss if “Fat Couple” showed up on my bill. After all, none of it is meant to be derogatory, right Ms. Wells?

That your manager tossed out the offended couple for daring to challenge the use of a slur on the check tells me there is something much more sinister at work. How about all the decent people on the Jersey Shore making their disgust with bigotry in their midst by finding somewhere else to eat if there isn’t a more sincere apology? It shouldn’t take long to shut the place down if one is not forthcoming.

Posted by: Greg at 02:54 PM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 373 words, total size 2 kb.

If they consider this acceptable, it is clear that they are not the “family restaurant” they claim to be – unless anti-Semitism is one of your family values.

Two diners on a date at a fancy Jersey Shore restaurant were furious when they saw the check — which listed their table as that of the "Jew Couple."

Brooklynite Elliot Stein says he was shocked that a waitress at the Parkhill's Waterfront Grill in Allenhurst [New Jersey] printed the slur instead of a table number on his $36.75 bill.

As if that weren't bad enough, the 23-year-old shoe buyer told The Post, the offensive phrase then turned up on his credit-card statement two weeks later.

The response of restaurant management?

Stein said he took the offensive bill and showed it to Jewish friends seated nearby who said they could not believe it.

When the group started questioning the manager, Stein said she simply told them there was nothing derogatory about the statement.

Stein said he was then asked to leave for making a fuss.

The restaurant's general manager, Malia Wells, yesterday told The Post that the offending phrase was a matter of "poor judgment on the part of a bartender."
The server, shown as Karina on Stein's bill, has since "moved on," Wells said. She would not say whether Karina was fired.

"We are a family restaurant, and we welcome everybody," she said, adding that the words "Jew Couple" were never intended to be derogatory.

And I suppose that “Spic Couple” would be just fine, too. Not to mention “Niggers”, which your fine staff probably also uses. I know I would raise a real fuss if “Fat Couple” showed up on my bill. After all, none of it is meant to be derogatory, right Ms. Wells?

That your manager tossed out the offended couple for daring to challenge the use of a slur on the check tells me there is something much more sinister at work. How about all the decent people on the Jersey Shore making their disgust with bigotry in their midst by finding somewhere else to eat if there isnÂ’t a more sincere apology? It shouldnÂ’t take long to shut the place down if one is not forthcoming.

Posted by: Greg at 02:54 PM | Comments (89) | Add Comment
Post contains 378 words, total size 2 kb.

Stars and Stripes reports this story.

From rubble to avenging angel: The U.S. Navy is using steel from the World Trade Center in a new ship, according to the Navy.

Ten tons of steel from the World Trade CenterÂ’s twin towers will be used in the construction of the USS New York, according to a Navy official.

The San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock is slated to be commissioned in 2008.

“USS New York will ensure that all New Yorkers and the world will never forget the evil attacks of September 11, and the courage and compassion New Yorkers showed in response to terror,” said New York Gov. George Pataki at the ship’s 2002 naming.

The response of WTC 9/11 survivors and the families of those who died is particularly moving.

For Patrick Cartier Sr., the ship is an honorable way to remember his son, James Marcel Cartier, who was killed when the South Tower collapsed.

“You’ve got the very soul of the event in that mangled steel, and all of that steel which housed all the people fell along with them and they were all consumed in that terrible fireball and that collapse,” the New York City man said.

Using the steel for the new ship would capture the spiritual essence of those who died in the World Trade Center, Cartier said.

“If you would you use that steel, it would almost be a resurrection,” he said.

New York City firefighter Bill Butler also praised turning the steel from the World Trade Center into a fighting vessel.

“It’s a great testament to the strong will of the people who died that day,” said Butler, who was in the North Tower when it collapsed.

Butler was in a stairwell on the fourth floor when he heard what he said sounded like two freight trains roaring by in opposite directions.

It took him five hours to get out of the collapsed tower, he said.

Butler said the New York Fire Department supports U.S. troops. “Our thoughts and prayers are with them every single day and we appreciate them defending our freedom, and we’re doing our best on the homefront,” he said.

This will truly be “America’s Ship”.

Posted by: Greg at 02:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 371 words, total size 2 kb.

Senator Patrick Leahy slandered Judge John Roberts in comments designed to pave the way for leftist groups to announce their opposition to his nomination to the US Supreme Court.

Sen. Patrick Leahy says Supreme Court nominee John Roberts holds "radical" views and has been an "eager, aggressive advocate" for policies of the far right.

While stopping short of announcing his opposition to the appointment, the Vermont Democrat's written statement Tuesday was by far the most critical he has made since President Bush nominated Roberts.

Firing his broadside one day after the release of 5,000 pages of Reagan-era records, Leahy said Roberts' views were "among the most radical being offered by a cadre intent on reversing decades of policies on civil rights, voting rights, women's rights, privacy and access to justice."

However, even the AP notes that the recently released documents show nothing of the kind.

In material released Monday, Roberts emerged as an attorney serving in the Reagan White House who held views generally in line with those of other conservatives. He was sympathetic to prayer in public schools, dismissive of "comparable worth," referred to the "tragedy of abortion" and took a swipe at the Supreme Court for being too willing to hear multiple appeals from death row inmates.

"Those papers that we have paint a picture of John Roberts as an eager and aggressive advocate of policies that are deeply tinged with the ideology of the far right wing of his party, then and now," Leahy said in his statement.

In other words, Senator Leahy has just announced that ANY conservative nominee is unacceptable and outside the mainstream.

No mater what the results of the last several elections show.

Posted by: Greg at 12:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 282 words, total size 2 kb.

Senator Patrick Leahy slandered Judge John Roberts in comments designed to pave the way for leftist groups to announce their opposition to his nomination to the US Supreme Court.

Sen. Patrick Leahy says Supreme Court nominee John Roberts holds "radical" views and has been an "eager, aggressive advocate" for policies of the far right.

While stopping short of announcing his opposition to the appointment, the Vermont Democrat's written statement Tuesday was by far the most critical he has made since President Bush nominated Roberts.

Firing his broadside one day after the release of 5,000 pages of Reagan-era records, Leahy said Roberts' views were "among the most radical being offered by a cadre intent on reversing decades of policies on civil rights, voting rights, women's rights, privacy and access to justice."

However, even the AP notes that the recently released documents show nothing of the kind.

In material released Monday, Roberts emerged as an attorney serving in the Reagan White House who held views generally in line with those of other conservatives. He was sympathetic to prayer in public schools, dismissive of "comparable worth," referred to the "tragedy of abortion" and took a swipe at the Supreme Court for being too willing to hear multiple appeals from death row inmates.

"Those papers that we have paint a picture of John Roberts as an eager and aggressive advocate of policies that are deeply tinged with the ideology of the far right wing of his party, then and now," Leahy said in his statement.

In other words, Senator Leahy has just announced that ANY conservative nominee is unacceptable and outside the mainstream.

No mater what the results of the last several elections show.

Posted by: Greg at 12:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 284 words, total size 2 kb.

Ward Churchill is taking a one semester sabbatical this spring, to research and write more anti-American bullcrap on the taxpayerÂ’s dime.

University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill said he plans to take a sabbatical in the spring to finish a book about the repression of the Black Panther party.

Churchill said he needs the one-semester sabbatical to finish his research project, adding that his leave has nothing to do with a CU faculty committee's ongoing inquiry into his writings.

Pauline Hale, a spokeswoman for the university, said CU's regents have not seen the request for the sabbatical and that protocol requires they approve all such leaves.

Churchill said the request was approved at the college level last fall, before controversy erupted in January over an essay he wrote shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, comparing World Trade Center victims with Nazi Adolf Eichmann.

The request was approved by the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, Churchill said, and he had assumed it was approved by the regents.

"I have not heard that anything went awry," Churchill said Tuesday "My assumption was that things went in a normal fashion."

Now it is known that Churchill has a history of academic dishonesty, including plagiarism and just plain making stuff up. Does it really take a work-free semester to do that – especially since his fall class load consists of only one course?

Posted by: Greg at 12:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 255 words, total size 2 kb.

Some anti-American Americans will go to any lengths to draw moral equivalency between terrorists and the US government. Take this response to Star-Tribune columnist Kate Parry, who criticized her own paper for failing to call terrorism terrorism.

When a wedding party of 40 people is wiped out by a misplaced American bomb, these people are just as dead as if a suicide bomber waded into the group and blew himself up. The survivors and their families suffer and grieve just as long and just as hard. How much of a difference, in practical terms and in terms of morality, is there between the two methods of killing the innocent?

Dean DeHarpporte,

Eden Prairie.

Dean fails to recognize, of course, that his letter contains the essential difference between the two. I wonder if Dena would treat poaching deer the same as hitting a deer that runs in front of his car on a dark road, or does he only see the dead deer -- motive and intentionality be damned. A homicide bombing is a fully intentional criminal act of cold-blooded murder, while the other is a sad and accidental twist of fate.

(HAT TIP – Media Blog)

Posted by: Greg at 02:02 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 204 words, total size 1 kb.

The CornerÂ’s Tim Graham points out a bit of liberal hypocrisy when it comes to the lives and health of Americans.

The Los Angeles Times reports that state and federal officials are investigating the deaths of (now) four California women who've died after taking the RU-486 abortion-inducing drug cocktail. The first one most media outlets ignored was teenager Holly Patterson in 2003, but the latest is Oriane Shevlin, a 34-year-old mother of two, who died from a blood infection in June. Wendy Wright at Concerned Women for America and others have been on the FDA's case on this one, which was ram-rodded through the regulatory process in the last year of the Clinton administration.

When it comes to the FDA, the networks would rather obsess over less lethal scandals from corporate greedheads, like, I kid you not, Taco Bell taco shells: "The charge is that Taco Bell taco shells sold in grocery stores contain a gene-altered corn specifically banned from food because of the risk of allergies in people," CBS reporter Wyatt Andrews explained. "While there are no known reports of injury, this finding by a coalition of environmental groups is the most serious evidence so far of the potential danger in some gene-altered food."

Yep – we cannot leave taco shells on the market because they contain grain which has never harmed anyone who has eaten them – but four dead women are not grounds for removing the RU-486 feticide drug.

I’m curious, though. Isn’t DEATH the ultimate infringement on “a woman’s right to choose”? Guess not.

Posted by: Greg at 01:52 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 262 words, total size 2 kb.

Jonah Goldberg makes a point that I have tried to make.

The great irony is that the people who resort to such "arguments" (they're really just insults) are the ones questioning free-speech rights, because they are suggesting the criticism was inappropriate and, in some vague and stupid way, unconstitutional. Right? That is the upshot of what they're saying. I mean, if you immediately assert that someone has the right to say something as a way to rebut criticism, aren't you implying that such criticism violated their rights — which is, by definition, unconstitutional.

The paranoia enters into it when you consider the nature of the accusation. If you immediately assume that criticism from the political Right is tantamount to questioning someone's constitutional right to speak in the first place, what you are really saying (Pace Dan Savage) is that if you scratch a conservative you'll find a Storm Trooper just under the surface. We knuckle draggers may say we're just offering criticism, but what we really mean is that anyone we disagree with has no right to say so. That so many on the Left seem to believe this, says a lot about the intellectual and psychological state of Lefties while saying nothing of interest about conservatives. I don't think it's always a matter of projection — assuming your enemy sees things the same you do — but I do think this knee-jerkery illuminates in a small way the bad faith of the Left. Not only does the "I have the right to speak" tantrum dodge the merits of specific criticisms, it starts from the assumption that as a matter of first principles left-wing protest should never be questioned.

Indeed, that's the reason the Left has rallied so fiercely behind Cindy Sheehan. Wedded to a form of identity-politics logic which says some "authentic" voices cannot be questioned and inauthentic voices need not be listened to, these hardcore left-wing activists love Cindy Sheehan because they think she's above reproach. They immediately resort to the argument "How dare you question a woman who lost her child!" Sheehan's loss is obviously a terrible one. But the death of her son does not make her anymore qualified to rant about Israel and oil tycoons controlling American foreign policy than it would be if her son was alive. But her backers do not care, indeed they don't think anyone has the right to even point this out.

So rant on, Saint Cindy Sheehan of the Ditch, Our Lady of the Martyred Soldier. You have every right to spew your venom towards our president and our country – and even the anti-Semitic rhetoric that has brought Nazi/Klan moron David Duke to your support.

But I have the right to say you are wrong. And the speech-suppressing fascists are those among your supporters who demand silence of those of us who criticize the dishonor you bring to your sonÂ’s name and sacrifice.

Posted by: Greg at 01:30 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 495 words, total size 3 kb.

When Houston Mayor Bill White created the Safe-Clear mandatory towing program for local highways, he meant well. The program has been one embarrassment after another for the city, and has exceeded the expected cost. Now it seems to be a source of victims for criminals.

Andrea Anderson broke down along Highway 59 near Collingsworth. A Safe Clear wrecker was dispatched.

"I was hot and sweaty and waiting for a long time," she said. "I was forced to use the Safe Clear program, where I could have used my warranty tow."
A wrecker from Unified Auto Works towed Anderson's car to Humble. She paid the bill with her check card. Several days later, Anderson checked her bank account and found more than $600 worth of unauthorized charges, along with a list of overdraft fees.

Around the time Anderson was trying to figure out who was draining her bank account, a different woman's car broke down along Interstate 10 near Lockwood. Again, a wrecker from Unified Auto Works was dispatched as part of the Safe Clear program.

The woman talked with the Troubleshooters but asked to remain anonymous. She told them she also paid Unified with her credit card. And soon after, she also got hit with hundreds of dollars in unauthorized charges.

These women had no choice of towing company, and were forbidden to call the company of their choice or use AAA. Thanks, City of Houston, for providing criminals with easier access to victims.

(Hat Tip: Lone Star Times)

Posted by: Greg at 01:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 2 kb.

First it was New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. Now Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano is acting to shore up border security in her state by declaring a state of emergency and setting aside funds to deal with the crisis.

Gov. Janet Napolitano on Monday declared a state of emergency along Arizona's border with Mexico, freeing up $1.5 million in disaster funds to help border counties combat booming illegal immigration and drug smuggling.

Napolitano criticized the federal government for "moving too slow" on border security, evolving into a hot-button, election-year issue in Arizona and across the country.

"This is a federal responsibility, and they're not meeting it," Napolitano said. "I've just come to the conclusion (that) we've got to do what we can at the state level until the federal government picks up the pace."

Napolitano's announcement came three days after New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson issued a similar declaration, complaining that the federal government has failed to stem growing smuggling-related violence to the east of Arizona, an increasingly popular illegal immigration corridor. Both governors are Democrats.

In the mean time, we have the GOP governors of Texas and California doing little or nothing to deal with the crisis along their borders. And we have a GOP president and GOP Congress all talking about amnesty plans and guest workers rather than acting to stem the tide of invading immigration criminals.

WhatÂ’s the deal, Republicans? Do you really want to lose the next few elections?

Posted by: Greg at 01:25 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.

When you have things like this happening in Arizona, it would seem to be time to assert our sovereignty aggressively. Maybe a 50-mile irradiated buffer zone on the Mexican side of the border – or a simple conquest of the corrupt nation and eventual incorporation of its territory as states, once it has brought itself up from Third World standards.

At 11:30 a.m. on April 22 this year, a Mexican helicopter landed in the Robinsons' backyard. Arivaca resident R.D. Ayers had driven to the ranch that morning to visit his injured dog, then under Dr. Robinson's care.

Ayers describes stepping outside the house to see what he describes as "a military Huey-type helicopter" circling, at the same time that a truck from the Tucson Fuel Co. was pulling into the yard. The Tres Bellotas gets its power from diesel generators, and that fuel has to be delivered.

As he approached the chopper, Ayers says six men in black, commando-type uniforms stepped out. Five had ski-type masks over their faces, and they wore body armor and carried automatic rifles. On their sleeves, Ayers saw the word, Mexico.

They stood in a defensive posture around a sixth man, their leader, who identified himself as a member of the Mexican police. He pointed aggressively to the fuel truck and asked what it was doing there. Ayers, in Spanish, told the man he was in the United States, not Mexico, and that he had no business in this country and needed to leave.

But the commander refused to listen and began walking toward the truck, at which point Ayers placed himself between the commander and the truck, again telling him to scram. After a few minutes, the tense confrontation ended when the commander ordered his troops into the chopper, and they split back across the border.

Ayers suspects that the Mexicans--one of Robinson's cowboys identified them as federales, Mexican federal police--were escorting a drug shipment to Tucson, and wanted to haul it in the fuel truck. Or they wanted to steal the fuel. The chopper had followed the truck much of the way down Tres Bellotas Road.

"Men with fully automatic weapons and masks don't just show up to say hello," says a still-outraged Ayers, owner of a backhoe company and a former EMT in Arivaca. He added that if he'd had his gun, he might've fired on the invaders. "I wasn't going to back down. This is my country."

These drug incursions occur with some regularity along the border. The Kays and Robinson say they're personally aware of three such incursions this summer alone, and it's worth noting that the men who recently shot two Border Patrol agents near Nogales also wore black, commando-type gear.

But this episode, like the others, has disappeared into the vapor of national security. Tucson Fuel refuses comment. The Border Patrol won't talk about it, saying its agents got to the Tres Bellotas too late to learn much of anything. The FBI in Tucson took a report the same day and forwarded it to Washington, but they're not talking, either

Or is the US so weak that we cannot protect ourselves from the criminals who run our bad neighbor to the south?

Posted by: Greg at 01:21 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 548 words, total size 3 kb.

I've talked about this case before. Millionaire businessman and government official patronizeds a Masseuse with a prostitition conviction (like we believe all she was giving him was a massage), dumps his family to carry on a public affair with her, and eventually marries her. Oh, yeah, did I mention she's under a deportation order?

Well now, seeking a better venue for their lawsuit against the US government, Ralph and Nicole Yanhong Hu Isenberg have fled Dallas for New York -- on the very day on which Nicole was required to voluntarily leave the United States under an agreementshe signed with the US government.

The choice was clear: Leave the country voluntarily by Monday or be deported.

Instead of catching an international flight, Nicole Isenberg fled to New York City with her husband, Ralph, a former member of the Dallas City Plan Commission, and started preparing a federal lawsuit against U.S. immigration officials.

"We are still trying so hard to have a judge listen to our case and keep our family together," said Mrs. Isenberg, who has a 6-week-old child with Mr. Isenberg and a teenage daughter from her first marriage whom he adopted.

"We won't give up."

Mr. Isenberg, a Dallas real-estate developer, vowed to continue his fight for his Chinese wife's freedom and her green card.

"There is no better place for me to be than New York," he said Monday.

Mr. Isenberg has been grappling with immigration authorities on his wife's behalf since they met about three years ago.

He recently resigned his position on the City Plan Commission after revealing to the media that his 30-year marriage dissolved when he met and later married Nicole – formerly known as Yanhong Hu, a Dallas massage parlor worker who had once been arrested on a prostitution charge.

The misdemeanor charge was unfounded, the Isenbergs said, and was dismissed after she served five months' probation.

Both sides in the Isenbergs' immigration dispute accuse the other of egregious misdeeds.

Paul Hunker III, chief counsel for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Dallas, has characterized Mrs. Isenberg as one of the worst violators of immigration law he has seen.

She is not eligible to adjust her status in the U.S., he said, because she engaged in prostitution, committed fraud by lying about the prostitution charge, overstayed her visa by more than a year and was ordered deported in absentia when she missed an immigration hearing.

Mr. Hunker, learning that he could possibly be named in the Isenbergs' lawsuit, referred questions Monday to spokesman Carl Rusnok.

"She was supposed to have left the U.S. by today. It looks like she has no intention of meeting that agreement," Mr. Rusnok said Monday.

"We will take whatever enforcement actions we deem appropriate. ... ICE is a federal organization. We have ICE agents in New York as well."

Gee, what part of "not eligible to adjust her status" is so hard to understand? The mere fact that she married a millionaire with lots of good political connections is not a basis for her being allowed to stay in the US. She is a convicted prostitute who overstayed her visa and was ordered deported years ago. On what possible basis could they possibly argue against the order to leave a country where she has no legal right to stay? Especially since she agreed to leave, and was given several extensions.

Well, they are using the kitchen sink strategy. Every possible argument is out there. All of them sound like pure bunk (and not the kind where Mrs. Isenberg used to make her moneu on her back). More offensive is the attempt to play the China card.

Mr. Cox [the Isenberg's lawyer], who speaks fluent Mandarin, said Mrs. Isenberg's case has received widespread coverage in China, where Mr. Isenberg has been called "China's son-in-law."

"I hope our government will do the humane thing, the fair thing," he said. "People in China are watching to see if we are fair to a Chinese citizen."

We4ll, Mr. Isenberg, maybe your in-laws have a spare bedroom for you over at their place. You and your wife need to get on the slow boat (or maybe a chartered jet) to China, where you and she can wait until she is eligble to come back to this country under American law.

Oh, and Mr. Cox, since the article makes it clear that you were an active participant in the violation of this agreement, which includes flight from federal authorities, I look forward to hearing that you face the appropriate criminal charges, serve time, and are disbarred as the unethical scoundrel you are.

Oh, I would like to point to one quote from an ICE representative.

"We will take whatever enforcement actions we deem appropriate. ... ICE is a federal organization. We have ICE agents in New York as well."

Send them in -- throw her out.

Posted by: Greg at 05:17 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 829 words, total size 5 kb.

She's already made antin-Semitic comments in the media. Now Cindy Sheehan has a high-profile backer who agrees with her.

Courageously she has gone to Texas near the ranch of President Bush and braved the elements and a hostile Jewish supremacist media to demand a meeting with him and a good explanation why her son and otherÂ’s sons and daughters must die and be disfigured in a war for Israel rather than for America.

Recently, she had the courage to state the obvious that her son signed up in the military to protect America not to die for Israel.

I take it that David Duke has therefore gone back to the Democrats -- right where the Klan has traditionally found its home. I wonder if Senator Byrd has welcomed him with open arms?

And given Duke's past Nazi associations, I can't help but remind folks that the name is short for National SOCIALISTS.

MORE FROM Blogs for Bush, Jack Lewis, Conservative Outpost, T. Longren, Wizbang,.

Posted by: Greg at 03:01 PM | Comments (95) | Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 1 kb.

Three weeks.

That's how long it took one pregnant Mexican woman to be deported and make it back to her illegal US residence in Arkadelphia, Arkansas.

A pregnant woman who was separated from her husband and two small children and deported to Mexico on July 26 has already returned to Arkadelphia, Hispanic activists say.

The woman's story is just one of several desperate efforts to reunite families by those deported in an immigration raid at an Arkadelphia poultry plant. Cesar Compadre, a physician at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences and head of the Hispanic aid organization La Casa, said he met the woman Sunday while providing food and medical care to many of the 30 children left unattended in Arkansas.

"It's the most ridiculous thing; it's like the Middle Ages," an exasperated Compadre said after he and three other doctors treated 25 kids and half a dozen adults.

But Marc Raimondi, spokesman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said it should not come as a surprise when the U.S. government enforces its immigration laws. Since incorporating immigration enforcement within the Department of Homeland Security 2 1/2 years ago, expectations have changed, he said.

"It's not like before when the immigration system was considered optional by some," he told The Associated Press on Sunday. "Our goal is to return integrity to our immigration system through vigorous enforcement."

Compadre said his medical team provided the woman with prenatal care. She said she was taken from Arkadelphia less than three weeks ago, detained in Texarkana and Dallas, dropped off in the middle of Nuevo Laredo, Mexico — just across the Rio Grande River from Laredo, Texas — and immediately made her way back to Arkansas.

"She was traumatized to the point that she's almost unresponsive," Compadre said. "She's back in here and we were able to get her proper prenatal care. It's at least stable at this moment."

Raimondi could not comment on the woman's specific case, but in general, he said, returning to the U.S. illegally after being deported is a serious offense. Depending on the terms of deportation, a repeat offender could face up to 20 years in federal prison, he said.

I guess she really wants another anchor baby -- and we will get the entire extended family up here before too long.

And, of course, those enforcing our nation's laws are the bad guys, according to the slanted news coverage here.

Posted by: Greg at 02:56 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 413 words, total size 3 kb.

MoveOn won't tell you ow Iraq is moving forward. Michael Moore won't do any documentaries about the improved lives of Iraqis after the overthrow of Saddam. And the Ditch Bitch (mustn't be as nasty as the Leftists) Cindy Sheehan and her supporters won't mention any of these accomplishments for which soldiers have given their lives.

Deroy Murdock will, though, with a little help from the liberal Brookings Institution.

Most Iraqis actually see the overall security situation improving. A July 12-17 Tips Hotline survey of roughly 1,200 Iraqis in Baghdad, Basra, Diyala, Irbil, Najaf, and Salah Ad-Din found that 75 percent of respondents believe their security forces are beating anti-government fighters. Twenty percent saw the security situation as “somewhat worse” than in April, and 14 percent found it “much worse,” but 46 percent considered it “somewhat better,” and 16 percent described it as “much better.”

The deaths of 54 American troops in July were maddening and painful tragedies, one and all. But these fatalities were considerably below the 137 GI deaths recorded last November, though only 36 were killed last March.

Infrastructure improvements also are encouraging. A new Kirkuk treatment plant began providing clean water to 5,000 people on June 27, the State Department reports. Another 84 U.S.-led waterworks projects are underway in Iraq, while 114 have been completed.

As Saddam Hussein relaxed in his palaces, his subjects in Kamaliya lived without sewers and relied instead on trenches that often overflowed onto the streets. Now, with Coalition assistance, 8,870 of KamaliyaÂ’s homes will receive sewage treatment. Some 600 local workers will be paid to complete this $27 million project. U.S. government-funded projects employed 110,005 Iraqis in early August.

Some 18,000 pupils will study in rehabilitated classrooms when they go back to school in mid-September. According to U.S. and Iraqi officials, 43 more schools were slated for renovation on August 6. So far, 3,211 schools have been refurbished, and another 773 are being repaired.

IraqÂ’s monthly petroleum exports have grown from $200 million in June 2003 to $2.5 billion last month. This is due both to higher oil prices and to fuel supplies having swelled from 23 percent to 97 percent of official production goals in that period. These key improvements also help explain why IraqÂ’s GDP increased from a World Bank estimate of $12.1 billion in 2003 to a projected $21.1 billion in 2004.

Iraqis who endured Baathist censorship now enjoy a vibrant, free press. Commercial TV channels, radio stations, and independent newspapers and magazines have zoomed from zero before Operation Iraqi Freedom to — respectively — 29, 80, and 170 today.

There is more -- so much more. Make sure that you click both links for some illuminating information about how the war in Iraq is chugging along steadily towards success, and towards better lives for the Iraqi people.

Because after all, Oraqis under Saddam didn't get a choice about sleeping in a ditch.

Posted by: Greg at 02:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 496 words, total size 3 kb.

I guess the premise sounds interesting, but given who is behind it, I'm somewhat concerned.

Ben AffleckBen Affleck is in talks to create and write "Resistance," a potential drama series about a second American Revolution that he'll exec produce with Live Planet partner Sean BaileySean Bailey.

Separate from the deal for "Resistance," Bailey has inked a new two-year, seven-figure pod deal that will keep him at Touchstone TelevisionTouchstone Television though 2007. While Bailey remains a partner in Live Planet, the Touchstone pactpact is for his solo services as a scribe and producer.

As for "Resistance," project marks the first time Affleck will go it alone writing a pilot, and comes on the heels of his deal to script and direct "Gone, Baby, Gone". Affleck and Bailey co-created the 2002 Alphabet reality/drama hybrid "Push, Nevada."

"Resistance," to be produced by Touchstone and Live Planet, will be set in the not-so-distant future, imagining a United States that's been divided into separate countries following a pair of catastrophic terror attacks.

Ensemble skeinskein will follow a band of modern patriots who are attempting to bring back the Bill of Rights and reunify the country. One person familiar with the pitch said the show ultimately will be a hopeful hour because of its pro-democracy bent.

Now this sounds like something I would watch. But do you want to make a guess who the "bad guys" are going to be? I doubt they will be swarthy fellows named Muhammad and Akbar. I suspect that more than a few will have the title "Reverend", and that none will be "Imam".

But then again, I could be wrong. Affleck might actually make a real, honest-to-God patriotic show about in which folks try to restore teh Constitution as written, not as modified by the liberal courts of the last seven decades.

Posted by: Greg at 02:16 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 312 words, total size 2 kb.

I understand the need for vigilance, but i think that situations like this are simply absurd.

Ingrid Sanden's 1-year-old daughter was stopped in Phoenix before boarding a flight home to Washington at Thanksgiving.

"I completely understand the war on terrorism, and I completely understand people wanting to be safe when they fly," Sanden said. "But focusing the target a little bit is probably a better use of resources."

The government's lists of people who are either barred from flying or require extra scrutiny before being allowed to board airplanes grew markedly since the Sept. 11 attacks. Critics including the American Civil Liberties Union say the government doesn't provide enough information about the people on the lists, so innocent passengers can be caught up in the security sweep if they happen to have the same name as someone on the lists.

That can happen even if the person happens to be an infant like Sanden's daughter. (Children under 2 don't need tickets but Sanden purchased one for her daughter to ensure she had a seat.)

"It was bizarre," Sanden said. "I was hugely pregnant, and I was like, 'We look really threatening."'

Sarah Zapolsky and her husband had a similar experience last month while departing from Dulles International Airport outside Washington. An airline ticket agent told them their 11-month-old son was on the government list.

They were able to board their flight after ticket agents took a half-hour to fax her son's passport and fill out paperwork.

"I understand that security is important," Zapolsky said. "But if they're just guessing, and we have to give up our passport to prove that our 11-month-old is not a terrorist, it's a waste of their time."

Now let's be sensible here. We know, just based upon simple logic, that no baby is going to be a terrorist. They may squall and scream in flight (which might seem almost as much of a pain as a hijacking) , but they are unlikely to be carrying explosives. We certainly know that an 11-month old is unlikely to take a crewmember hostage, or do more than projectile vomit during turbulance.

Why are these terror tykes delayed? Because they have a name somewhat similar to someone else.

How common is this?

The Transportation Security Administration, which administers the lists, instructs airlines not to deny boarding to children under 12 - or select them for extra security checks - even if their names match those on a list.

But it happens anyway. Debby McElroy, president of the Regional Airline Association, said: "Our information indicates it happens at every major airport."

The TSA has a "passenger ombudsman" who will investigate individual claims from passengers who say they are mistakenly on the lists. TSA spokeswoman Yolanda Clark said 89 children have submitted their names to the ombudsman. Of those, 14 are under the age of 2.

And those are the kids who have had complaints filed on their behalf. How many more "terrorist twos" are there out there?

Posted by: Greg at 02:08 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 501 words, total size 3 kb.

Carole Keeton McClellan Rylander Strayhorn [YOUR LAST NAME HERE], Texas Comptroller, wants to be Governor of Texas in the worst way. If she ever gets there, I have no doubt she will be governor in the worst way. But to get the office in 2006, the loopy mother of White House Spokesman Scott McClellan will have to knock off incumbent Governor Rick Perry, who succeeded our previous governor, George W. Bush, when he went on to bigger and better things.

Perry is popular with the generally conservative base of the GOP, and is likely to win the nomination . But Strayhorn has a plan -- get Democrats and Independents to vote in the GOP primary.

he call came from a listener telling Carole Keeton Strayhorn he'd eagerly vote for her for governor in November 2006.

Strayhorn shot back Tuesday on Austin radio station KVET-FM: "November is great, but first I need you to vote on March 7. I want Republicans, Democrats, independents. All are welcome," Strayhorn said.

"And bring all your friends with you."

Strayhorn, the Republican state comptroller who is challenging GOP Gov. Rick Perry, has made few campaign forays since announcing her candidacy June 18, a tack that her office attributes to lawmakers remaining in special session to deal with school funding and tax issues.

But the former Austin mayor is well along in testing an unusual message: The March Republican primary is voters' only real chance to choose the next governor.

Her pitch asks voters to assume that the Democratic nominee will not prove to be a serious fall contender. Neither of the only announced Democratic candidates, former U.S. Rep. Chris Bell of Houston and educator Felix Alvarado of Fort Worth, has run statewide. And no Democrat has won statewide since 1994.

Strayhorn, like Perry, was once a Democrat. She also has won GOP primaries in the past.

Yet, her hunt for voters outside the party's base appears to recognize that the incumbent has the edge among Republican loyalists, who are often more conservative than the general electorate.

Let me tell you, speaking as Republican precinct chair here in Harris County, which is the largest county in Texas, that this strategy does not sit well with most Republicans I know. We have this crazy idea that if you want to use the votes of Democrats to get the nomination for governor, you need to run in the Democrat primary. Given the current candidates for the Democrat nomination, I suspect that the nomination would be hers for the taking. It is time for her to go back to that party and seek the Democrat nomination (which she might not get, having abandoned that party once) so she can face Perry in the fall -- and lose.

I'll make you a prediction right now. I'm sure that the Perry campaign and the GOP on both the state and national levels will make sure that every signature on every Democrat nominating petition (and those for Kinky Friedman) in the state is broken down by local precinct and distributed to the precinct chairs for purposes of challenging cross-over voters. After all, Strayhorn and her supporters are correct in noting that a voter can vote in either primary on election day. However, what needs to be considered is that the same law has a limitation on that choice -- if you have signed a nominating petition for an independent or a candidate for particular party, you forfeit the option of voting in the primary of a different party. Those of us serving as election judges will have some idea of who the outsiders are, and we will be ready for them.

Posted by: Greg at 02:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 614 words, total size 4 kb.

UPDATE -- 8/15/05, 4:50 PM Central Time

I have just returned from work, and wish to acknowledge that the purported author of the letter to LST is disputing that he wrote it. As of 10:37 this morning, the linked articles have been pulled pending verification of the email's source. While not yet pulling this piece, I want to acknowledge the existance of the controversey and the response of LST. I've heard nothing from either Prudential Gary Greene or Charles Rubio asking me to do so, despite having contacted them regarding the email mentioned below. At such time as a request is made, or upon the presentation of proof that Mr. Rubio has been framed, , I will take appropriate actions in that regard.

*********

Last week, a legal secretary member at an Ogletree Deakins law firm got fired for sending an email to Michelle Malkin from work. The email contained profane slurs directed agains the talented writer for daring to comment negatively on the Cindy Sheehan story. (I've blanked out the more offensive words)

X-Originating-IP: [216.105.154.202]
From: "Mitchell, Patrick" Patrick.Mitchell@ogletreedeakins.com
To: "'malkin@comcast.net'"
Subject:
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 11:41:22 -0400
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)

YOU STINK you nasty C***! Eat S*** and DIE bitch!!

Within hours, his employer had dealt with the situation.

Dear Ms. Malkin,

I am the Managing Shareholder of the law firm of Ogletree Deakins with offices located across the country. I was very disturbed to learn today that a legal secretary in our Los Angeles office sent you the vile e-mail referenced on your home page. Such remarks are clearly inappropriate in any context and an e-mail such as this certainly should not have been sent during working time using our firm's equipment. The comments of this employee are not reflective of the views or opinions of the firm and are directly in violation of our e-mail policy. As Managing Shareholder, I wanted to extend to you our apologies and let you know that this serious violation of our firm's work rules has resulted in the discharge of this employee.

Once again, let me offer you our deepest apologies for any discomfort that the referenced e-mail has caused. It will not happen again.

Sincerely,

Gray Geddie

The matter was handled properly by the firm within 90 minutes.

I wonder if this item from Lone Star Times will be handled as adroitly by Prudential Gary Greene Realty here in Houston. One of the realtors with the company sent a profane, possibly threatening email to one of the writers for the site, Owen Courrèges.

Name: Charles

Email: carubio@garygreene.com

You guys are a bunch of stupid dumb, very, very dumb F*****. Look me up a****** and meet me face to face. Get in the ring with that facist white trash face of yours. Dare you. In the name of CindyÂ’s virgil [sic] to meet with that war criminal of a human animal come on meet me you stupid f***.

Major mistake, Charles. You don't want to use your professional address to send stuff like that out. I mean you gave Owen and company the ability to find you on your employer's website. It also made it possible to find your company website with its one lonely little listing (Has it been a tough month so far, Charles? I suspect it is going to get worse real quick). They also tracked him down on Houston's IndyMedia affiliate. I also found him in this article in the local throwawy community paper.

I dropped Mr. Rubio a quick note, just to let him know what I think of folks who do stuff like this.

Wow -- I would have thought that someone who thinks he is a professional would have given some thought to using his work email to send a profane letter to a media outlet. Good going, Charles -- now I know not to list my house with Gary Greene or any other company with which you are associated. I wonder if the folks who listed that house with you would feel if they saw your level of professionalism. I wonder how your bosses will feel. Maybe we should find out.

You are welcome to your politics, but your choice to write from work has some consequences. I believe that bad publicity and the destruction of your career qualify as consequences. Do you agree?

I suspect that you will have plenty of free time to go join Ms. Sheehan in her Crawford ditch before too long. My guess is that your letter guarantees that you will need to reside there significantly longer than she does.

I also sent the following to his office manager and several partners in Prudential Gary Greene.

I wonder -- have you folks seen this piece yet from Lone Star Times?

http://lonestartimes.com/index.php?p=1342

I don't think that Mr. Rubio is giving your company a very good image. Since he is using your company domain's email address (and, I would presume, equipment) to send out profane political statement and what could be reasonably seen as a threat against a writer, I think it would be highly appropriate for you to take action.

I know that even though I bought my house through your company and was very happy with the service received, I won't list my house with your company, sell to a buyer who is represented by your company, or buy from a seller represented by your company as long as Rubio remains affiliated with Prudential Gary Greene.

Now let me make this clear -- Rubio is entitled to whatever political beliefs he wants. But when he starts sending out material using his work address, using profane language and seeming to make threats, I think it is important to seek appropriate action from his employer. Charles Rubio made his views a work-related matter when he sent that little message to Owen.

Posted by: Greg at 01:32 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 981 words, total size 6 kb.

We are currently in our second special legislative session here in Texas. Both have been called to deal with education issues, including teacher pay. So what has happened so far? Lots of nice words about teachers (while trying lowering our pension, increasing our contribution to the pension system, an increase in the retirement age and multiple attempts to gut hard-won provisions of state law that let us have a lunch period, planning period, and safe, orderly classrooms), but no movement on the pay raises for teachers, who are paid over $600 below the national average.

But the legislature has passed something.

And there is the Texas statehouse, where lawmakers, meeting in a so-called "education" session, recently sent Gov. Rick Perry a bill giving judges a pay raise while continuing to reward teachers with compliments and promises.

(Guess, in case you haven't heard, which profession's pay is tied, under a longstanding law, to legislators' retirement benefits. Yes, the bill that went to the governor will give those pensions a boost.)

Just so you understand what the legislature gets out of this bill, let me explain the situation. The Texas legislature is a part-time job which pays an annual salary of $7200. Yes, you read that right -- seven thousand two hundred dollars. Legislatorscan retire at age 50 with a pension of around $35,000 with 12 years of service -- and can receive over $100,000 with sufficient years of service and senior leadership positions factored in. Now the legilators could have amended the bill to eliminate the windfall to themselves (which, by the way, is some $6400 annually -- close to the amount Texas teachers are paid below the national average), but they didn't.

Which is not to say judges do not deserve a pay raise -- but look at what they are getting.

The judicial bill, which Perry is expected to sign, will increase the state's contribution to a state district judge's salary from $101,000 to $125,000 a year, which counties can continue to supplement. Salaries for court of appeals judges will rise from $107,000 to $137,500, and for members of the Texas Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeals, from $113,000 to $150,000.

The raises, the first enacted by the Legislature since 1997, will bring judges' salaries in Texas more in line with other states.

Funny, isn't it, that the folks whose pay is being increased to the national average are already making over $100,000 annually, while teachers are only going to see half of their gap closed by this legislation -- and $1000 of that will be an illusion, switching our untaxed health care stipend to taxed salary dollars.

And i won't get into the issue of the failure to appropriate the money needed for new textbooks which are sitting in warehouses waiting for delivery.

These two issues of education funding may go by the wayside -- but at least the elected officials goth theirs during the "education" special session.

Posted by: Greg at 07:25 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 503 words, total size 3 kb.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson has declared state of emergency in four counties along the states border with Mexico. The government of Mexico is displeased.

Richardson cited "violence directed at law enforcement, damage to property and livestock, increased evidence of drug smuggling and an increase in the number of undocumented immigrants" in declaring the emergency.

He said the border security situation "constitutes an emergency condition with potentially catastrophic consequences."

Imagine that -- agovernor is trying to make sure that law enforcement and other citizens are not killed by human smugglers, drug smugglers. and immigration criminals. He's trying to preserve the private property of individual citizens. he's trying to see to it that there is a decrease in the number of individuals violating the territorial integrity of the state by crosing borders illegally. What could he possibly be thinking?

How did the Mexicans respons?

"The Mexican government considers that some of the New Mexico government's statements are generalizations which don't jibe with the spirit of cooperation and understanding needed to address border problems," Mexico's Foreign Relations Department said in a press statement.

In other words, how dare you explicitly criticize the criminal aliens who cross from our country to your state, and, implicitly, the corrupt governemnt that encourages it in exchange for bribes.

Mexico thinks it can dictate our border policy to its own benefit. Its words and actions have been completely unhelpful in ending the problem.

Vincente, I'll listen to your complaints when some government official declares open season on illegals, with no bag limit. Until then, shut up and keep your people on your side of the border.

Posted by: Greg at 07:03 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.

Two men returning from Canada fromt he US were arrested by Canadian authorities with handguns and ammunition strapped to their bodies.

Ali Dirie, 22, and Yasin Mohamed, 23 -- both Canadians from the Toronto area -- face weapons-related charges and are in police custody in Niagara Falls, Ontario, according to a police statement. Ontario's Provincial Weapons Enforcement Team and the Niagara Regional Police Service are investigating.

Detective Sgt. Shawn Clarkson, of the Niagara Regional Police Service, would not say what led border officers to search the men.

The men's vehicle underwent a routine search at about 5:40 a.m. at Peace Bridge, which links Buffalo, New York, with Fort Erie, Ontario.

Interesting, isn't it, what one detail is omitted from the description of these perps. I'll bet you can figure it out from their names. You don't suppose ther emight be a connection to violent extremism in the group that was omitted, do you?

Posted by: Greg at 06:49 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 165 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Well, the ACLU can't touch them over there.

Posted by: mcconnell at Sun Aug 14 13:37:58 2005 (CQ3Yp)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Did you hear about the new ideas bouncing around TSA regarding who is to be searched and what items can/can't be taken on a plane?

The TSA memo proposes to minimize the number of passengers who must be patted down at checkpoints. It also recommends that certain categories of passengers be exempt from airport security screening, such as members of Congress, airline pilots, Cabinet members, state governors, federal judges, high-ranking military officers and people with top-secret security clearances.

The proposal also would allow ice picks, throwing stars and bows and arrows on flights. Allowing those items was suggested after a risk evaluation was conducted about which items posed the most danger.

If approved, only passengers who set off walk-through metal detectors or are flagged by a computer screening system will have to remove their shoes at security checkpoints. The proposal also would give security screeners the discretion to ask certain passengers "presenting reasonably suspicious behavior or threat characteristics" to remove their shoes.

The proposal also would give screeners discretion in determining whether to pat down passengers. For example, screeners would not have to pat down "those persons whose outermost garments closely conform to the natural contour of the body."

Now some of this is just common sense. Miss Hottie in her spandex outfit is not likely to be carrying anything that you cannot already see -- why pat her down, other than for a cheap thrill? On the other hand, Betty bint Burqa might need to be that pat down (or better yet, a full cavity search) to make sure she is not carying anything dangerous.

On the other hand, I don't see why it is a good idea to let folks carry throwing stars and ice picks in the cabin. And I would really like that crossbow to stowed away with the checked luggage, thank you very much. But yeah, let on the nail clippers, knitting needles, and 1 1/2 inch swiss army knives that fit on a keychain.

And as for exempting "members of Congress, airline pilots, Cabinet members, state governors, federal judges, high-ranking military officers and people with top-secret security clearances", I take extreme exception to the proposal. Sure, let the military folks on without a serious search, but I want all those politicians and judges to be subjected to the highest level of security procedures not reserved for Islamists wearing suicide belts and waving machine guns. After all, if they are going to make these laws and regulations that inconvenience the common citizen, they should be subjected to the full measure of these requirements EVERY SINGLE TIME they get on a plane to ensure that they are aware of the burden us common folks face.

Posted by: Greg at 03:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 453 words, total size 3 kb.

Alief ISD, located on the west side of Houston, Texas, has a strict policy for those students who get into fights. Students who "participate" in a fight are expelled. Now the parents of Matthew Meloy, a former student at Hastings High School, are fighting that rule, suing the district after their son was brutally beaten during his senior year.

Meloy says he was jumped by four other students who were bullying another member of the baseball team.

His family blames it on Alief ISD's strict "no fighting" policy.

"He'd write, "Dad, I didn't want to get kicked out. I didn't want to get suspended. I didn't want to fight. I didn't want to do that because I didn't want that to happen', " says his father, Rick Meloy.

Meloy's father says his son was obeying the school district's zero tolerance policy when it comes to fighting.

"He absolutely knew that because that is something that is in the handbook at the school. It's drilled into the students' heads that if you participate in any way you will be expelled," says Jess Mason, the family's attorney.

When asked if they tell kids not to fight back, "We tell them not to assume they can use that as a justification," says the district's Paula Smith.

Just how badly was the 215-pound, 6-foot three-inches Matthew beaten? Well, his injuries included a jaw broken in two places, teeth floating on busted gums and injuries so severe that he couldn't talk. Two years later, he still has additional surgery ahead of him.

This rule and the way it is expalined and enforced makes students incredibly vulnerable. Matthew Meloy was terrified of being expelled just weeks before graduation, which would have destroyed his future plans for a college education at Texas A&M, one of the finest educational institutions in Texas (no matter what I say to the faces of my Aggie friends). Instead he was beaten to a pulp and could easily have been killed.

Will the next victim of this policy be a young woman who fears that any resistance to a sexual assault will result in her expulsion?

It seems to me that the courts need to intervene and hold those who make such policies liable both professionally and personally for the damage that they and their policies cause.

Posted by: Greg at 06:30 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 393 words, total size 2 kb.

I've gotten plenty of interesting comments from the Left in relation to my Cindy Sheehan post. I was polite and respectful of the woman, but it seems that any hint of criticism of the woman regarded by the Bush-haters as "Saint Cindy, Our Lady of the Martyred Son" is grounds for savage (and anonymous) hate speech.

One of the perps posting such attacks on my site appears to be our old friend Ridor, though he denies making the post while claiming he watched someone else do it (*******************).

Look what the guy posted on his site.

Malkin, Drudge, LGF and RWR: When Cindy Sheehan asked for GW Bush to come out of his reclusive Crawford Ranch for few minutes of talk, to have the normal conversation. Show some compassion for the mother of a dead soldier. After all, he is on his 50th vacation in 5 years (10 per years!), he said he wanted a vacation to "reconnect with his folks in Texas" -- this is his chance to be normal and be civilized. Apparently, no. GW Bush dispatched his supporters like Matt "Roehmosexual" Drudge, Michelle "Chink Bitch" Malkin, Little Green Snotballs, that nobody's prick, Rhymes with Right to assault the mother of a dead soldier of her simple request to meet and talk with GW Bush on a casual level.

It is interesting to note that these people did not mention that the secret service agents made an indirect threat that they will arrest the mother because she is the "threat to the national security". Wow, GW Bush is the national figure? Please!

That Roehmosexual, Matt Drudge did this on persistent level, obviously because he regarded her as an annoyance that can bring the downfall of GW Bush's popularity. His current polls are at an all-time low, which is good for me.

That "Chink Bitch" Malkin had the guts to speak for Casey Sheehan, Cindy's dead son -- she said that Casey would be embarrassed of his mother. Excuse me, Michelle, you do not know Casey like Cindy does -- you just write and spew your fucking dumb-ass rhetoric, claiming to speak for people who has nothing to do with you!

As for RWR, he is just an idiot from Texas. Simply put. He claimed that GW Bush did meet Cindy last year. Yes, in front of media! In front of hundreds of persons, but not one on one. Compassion! Compassion! Franklin Delano Roosevelt did it. Abraham Lincoln did it. JFK did it. Bill Clinton attended the dead soldiers' funerals. Did GW Bush? No. GW Bush joked by calling Cindy, "Mom" and even asked his assistant, "Who are they?" -- implied that GW Bush is a buffoon and do not care at all.

GW Bush and his Republican cronies knew the art of media, thanks to the Nixon debacle, to use against the mass. How? To pretend. To stand and pose for 5 minutes so that the pictures can be taken, then when it's over, the families are out due to the "national security". No time for a normal conversation between a true citizen and the nation's President. But he has time to have 50 vacations in 5 years. No conservatives and Republicans will disseminate why GW Bush has 50 vacations in 5 years, but they are willing to destroy the grieving mother of a dead soldier.

How great is it?

First, let me thank you for putting me in the same category as Drudge, Malkin and Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs. I'm honored just to be on some of the the same blogrolls as them, and here you are mentioning me in the same sentence as them for our parts in the conspiracy to defame Mrs. Sheehan that Karl Rove is orchestrating from his Secret Rose Garden Bunker. I'm flattered beyond words that you rate my writing, influence, and importance so high.

Now let me point out that you managed to get a pair of two-fers in your post. Calling the lovely and multi-talented Ms. Malkin a "Chink Bitch" is clearly the first, covering the bases as racist and sexist at the same time. Based upon your subsequent communications with me (which appears below), I have to classify your reference to Matt Drudge as a "Roehmosexual" (my reason for believing that you dictated the comment even if ****** typed it) qualifies as both homophobic and anti-Semitic. Good job. Curiously enough, you failed to find a slur of any kind for Mr. Johnson of LGF, which iis a sign that the quality of your posts is slipping --you usually find at least one intolerant epithet to direct at anyone with whom you disagree. As for my "prick", you lack the necessary clearance to have any information about it.

Now I posted a response in your comments section -- which you promptly deleted. So much for your advertising it as "the Unsafe Zone of Personal Attacks -- Which Means, Fire Away With Your Insults" (proofreading tip -- you don't need that comma).

But you did decide to respond to me at my email address.

From: Ridor [ridor9th@gmail.com]

To: XXXXX [rhymeswithright@gmail.nospam.com]

Date: Aug 12, 2005 9:36 PM

Subject: hey

fyi, ur comment has been deleted as expected.

You accused me of racism, sexism and homophobia -- that is ludicrous. Michelle Malkin called Deaf people "deaf-mute" -- my emails to her has not been responded and she continued to slander Deaf people as "deaf-mute" which is very offensive to start with. So for that, I reserve the right to retaliate back with a "Chink" comment. Deal with it, you fat boy.

Matt Drudge is gay, period. He is quick to accuse and out many people -- even people who questioned GW Bush, Matt was swift to out the person's sexuality -- but what if he was Jewish, will he do the same thing? No. Therefore I reserve the right to call him Roehmosexual.

Sexism? What?

And you fell for McCock's comments -- I *did* not write on your blogsite -- I read, yes, and in fact, someone IN my apartment responded to your comments while I stood and laughed. Rest assured, it was NOT me who commented on your blogsite. After all, who wants to touch your blogsite? Certainly not me.

Please be delusional and remain in your little world with your friends like McWeenie.

R-

--
The One and Only Ridor
Check www.ridor.blogspot.com -- be very afraid.

What can I say? Ms. Malkin gets copious amounts of email. We know that you rarely disagree with anyone in a polite or pleasant fashion. Why would you expect her to take the time to bother writing back.? How does that justify racist and sexist abuse directed at her? It doesn't -- but more on that later.

And then there is Drudge. You insist the guy is gay. I don't know, and don't really care. I respect his right to keep his private life as private as he wants it -- something that was supposed to be a sacred right for homosexuals, according to all the gay advocacy groups. I'm not aware of his having outed anyone over politics (that tends to be the province of hate-mongering gay activists), but I'm sure you can point to his having linked to some story or other from some publication that did so. What is particularly amusing is that you were part of the political feeding frenzy over Jeff Gannon's sexual orientation, so I don't see where you have any room to criticize. And given your reference to Drude's religion, it is clear that you intended the homophobic rhetoric to be laced with anti-Semitism as well. Good job!

As for your comments about me, I challenge anyone reading this to look at my one and only post on Mrs. Sheehan and explain to me how it constituted an attack -- unless discussing an unflattering piece of news is an attack.

Now I won't go into any discussion of the claims you advance on behalf of Mrs. Sheehan. I'm not going to engage in a tit-for-tat game over it. I have, until today, believed that she is being used. I'm not so sure about that any more, based upon some MSM articles I've come across -- but I want to show her son respect by not attacking her.

I think I've already made clear my position on the comments that I continue to believe you wrote -- if you didn't write them, you dictated them to someone else or used voice recognition software. Your explanation reminds me of another famous denial -- "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky."

I can think of only one explanation for the hate that seethes through your writing. It has to be rooted in your childhood.

Now no doubt your early socialization as a child raised by a Klan of inbred hate-mongers in the backwoods of the Appalachians leads you to believe that such bigotry is acceptable in polite society. It isn't -- **************.

Oh, and by the way -- what is your fascination with the penises of conservative heterosexual males like me and McConnell that leads you to comment on them so frequently? Is it desire, envy, or simply another feature of your warped personality that leads you to engage in on-line sexual harrassment? Just curious.

UPDATE: You will notice a couple of spots where I have substituted a chain of asterisk for previously posted material. I made several gratuituous comments in this post which were snarky and hurtful -- and which do not do me credit. They also seem to have cut Ridor very deeply in a way I never intended. I've removed them in realization that I may have crossed a line with them. I won't post the emails, as Ridor made it quite clear they were intended to be private.

Posted by: Greg at 05:19 PM | Comments (65) | Add Comment
Post contains 1640 words, total size 10 kb.

Look, Mom, I'm an interstellar blogging sensation!

I don't know for sure if there is a real transmission or not (I assume that there is, but have no independent way of verifying it), but the price is right and the certificate is cool. Go check them out and sign up.

Posted by: Greg at 11:52 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Good gawd! What if the Kommie Kos Kiddies did the same thing? I can see another remake of the movie "Contact" (Jodie Foster) only this time instead of Hitler...we see the first blog in space...(take your pick)

Posted by: mcconnell at Fri Aug 12 14:47:49 2005 (nXE8W)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I thought about asking this question yesterday, in light of the NARAL ad linking John Roberts to abortuary bombings.

After all, the ACLU defended the rights of followers of the genocidal NAZIs to march in Skokie in the 1970s, well-after the perpetration of the Holocaust.

And they have long supported the right of the KKK to spew their hate-filled rhetoric, despite 140 years of racist terror committed by the group.

So if Roberts is responsible for a terorist act committed by one individual years after his intervention in a case in which the future killer was involved, surely the ACLU must be held responsible for prior actions by the groups they defend.

Posted by: Greg at 12:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 122 words, total size 1 kb.

The winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are Washington's Wasteful Ways: Alaskan Pork Chops by The Education Wonks, and Planned Parenthood Fantasizes About Blowing Up "Anti-Choicers" by The Dawn Patrol.  Full results of the voting may be found over at Watcher of Weasels.

Posted by: Greg at 11:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.

Americans still love Lucy. Lucille Ball is the top rated star on Marketing Evaluations, Inc.'s list of deceased celebrities.

Lucille Ball is America's most beloved dead star. The company that developed the "Q score" that broadcasters and advertisers quietly consult to measure a personality's popularity has done a survey that tests the reputation of performers who have gone on to that big soundstage in the sky.

The redheaded sitcom star of the 1950s and '60s, who died in 1989, has topped past "Dead Q" lists as her comedies seemingly live forever on television, said Steve Levitt, president of Marketing Evaluations, Inc., which conducts the tests.

"What is there not to like about Lucy?" he said.

Bob Hope, John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart and Red Skelton follow her on the popularity list.

Ms. Ball, who died in 1989, was understandably unavailble for comment.

Posted by: Greg at 11:08 PM | Comments (40) | Add Comment
Post contains 149 words, total size 1 kb.

I've not said anything on this site about the Cindy Sheehan situation up in Crawford. She is entitled to her beliefs, no matter how wrong I believe them to be.

My respect for her son's sacrifice has led me to respectfully avert my gaze from the sorry spectacle she is making of herself. Grief can, after all, cause people to do and say irrational things. I have therefore remained mute on the subject (save for one comment satirizing a post by John Aravosis over at Americablog).

But members of the Sheehan family are speaking out, in a statement issued through The Drudge Report.

Our family has been so distressed by the recent activities of Cindy we are breaking our silence and we have collectively written a statement for release. Feel free to distribute it as you wish.

Thanks, Cherie

In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas issue: Sheehan Family Statement:

The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.

Sincerely,

Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins.

I think that says about all that needs saying about Mrs. Sheehan.

By the way, is anyone else struck by the fact that there is so little media coverage of survivors who support the war? Could it be that those are the "dog-bites-man" stories and this is "man-bites-dog"?

UPDATE: From the New York Post.

[Cherie Quartarolo's] e-mail was initially sent to San Francisco radio station KSFO and then reported on the Web site of the Vacaville Reporter newspaper in Casey Sheehan's hometown.

The Post e-mailed Quartarolo, and she responded by identifying herself as the aunt and included a copy of her statement.

KSFO talk-show host Melanie Morgan told The Post that she got to know Quartarolo after a July trip to Iraq by conservative radio personalities.

Quartarolo contacted her after hearing her reports praising U.S. troops.

Quartarolo didn't claim to be speaking on behalf of Casey's father, Patrick Sheehan, who is separated from Casey's mother and who has declined to comment on her protest.

(HAT TIP: GOPBloggers)

Posted by: Greg at 06:00 PM | Comments (25) | Add Comment
Post contains 412 words, total size 3 kb.

First it was the disgusting behavior of the state's Lt. Governor. Now it seems that the majority leader of the Pennsylvania state senate has forgotten that he is the servant of the people, not a feudal lord.

Bill McIntyre did not expect many replies when he e-mailed a tongue-in-cheek greeting to members of the state General Assembly on the one-month anniversary of the vote to give themselves a raise.

"I thought they would just ignore it," McIntyre said.

About a half-dozen replied.

One suggested he walk a mile in their shoes and run for office. Another asked if McIntyre had ever supported a legislative pay raise. Still another sent a two-page letter explaining why he voted for the raise.

Then there was the reply from Democratic Senate leader Robert J. Mellow, D-Lackawanna: "Why don't you get a life? Please do not mail my office another e-mail."

Senator -- if hearing from citizens who disagree with you is a problem, resignation is the proper solution. If you lack the integrity to quit now, I sincerely hope that your constituents remember and purge your disrespectful ass from public office.

Posted by: Greg at 05:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 199 words, total size 1 kb.

Clearly these folks are not sorry about the content of their ad -- merely that htey have been caught. How else can you explain this non-apology from the pro-abortion lobby group after they withdrew their mendacious ad?

"We regret that many people have misconstrued our recent advertisement about Mr. Roberts' record," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America

Misconstrued?

You flat out accused the man of backing the bombing of abortuaries, when his own words in the same documents and oral arguments made it clear that he believed such acts should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. That is a flat-out, full-blown abortion of the truth, not a difference of opinion or the misconstuing of your intent.

If they had any integrity, your board of directors would have fired you by now, Ms. Keenan.

MORE FROM Blogs for Bush, Captain's Quarters, Jawa Report, Conservative Thinking

Posted by: Greg at 04:58 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 163 words, total size 2 kb.

Why on earth would the Brits even consider letting this guy back into their country. After all, in addition to urging assaults on their country, he has been a sponge living on welfare benefits for years.

THE British Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, will refuse a request from the extremist cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed to be allowed to return to Britain for a heart operation on the National Health Service.

As ministers finalise their new rules to exclude Sheik Bakri Mohammed from Britain, the cleric said that he should be allowed back from his holiday in Lebanon for an operation to widen an artery that would cost up to pound stg. 8000 ($18,750) if he had to have private treatment.

Officials believe the 47-year-old leader of the al-Muhajiroun group is trying to test the Home Office's promised immigration rules.

Senior officials said that the Home Secretary could exercise leniency if it were a life-or-death matter but a routine operation was unlikely to be grounds for lifting any ban.

One said: "His heart condition was not serious enough to prevent him flying to Beirut last weekend and I am sure they have very fine hospitals in Lebanon where this procedure could be done."

On the other hand, perhaps they could let him back in and give him appropriate medical treatment.

Lard coated stints, perhaps.

Or better yet, just transplant a pig's heart into this jihadi's chest.

Posted by: Greg at 04:50 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 242 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Pig heart? Nah, too extreme. Let's go for replacing defective heart valves with pig heart valves. And ensure that the hospital menu is all pork.

Posted by: mcconnell at Fri Aug 12 15:09:19 2005 (nXE8W)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I don't know how I would cope with this situation if I were one of these teachers. Guaranteed a paycheck, but with no regular duties and an unclear future, these seventy teachers are in a sort of limbo.

Just days before the start of school in HISD, some contract teachers don't have permanent jobs.

They were all let go when three highs schools deemed low performing by the state were reorganized.

The total number of teachers in this situation? Seventy. Why so many? because state law requires that such chronically low performing schools have a 100% replacement of staff. Personally, that strikes me as a bit inefficient. After all, within that group of teachers are folks whose students did well and who would be an asset to the resonstituted campus.

It is interesting, too, who doesn't have a permanent assignment.

When school starts Monday at Kashmere High, veteran teachers Peter Nagy and Linda Murray won't be there. They've lost their jobs.

"I love teaching," said Peter Nagy, history teacher. "I don't like what HISD has done to me. I think that is utterly unjustified."

Nagy taught history at Kashmere for 20 years.

Murray is a 10-year veteran who taught English. Last year she was Kashmere's teacher of the year.

But as of Thursday, neither one of them has been assigned to a new school.

The school's teacher of the year wasn't scooped up? I wonder why. I mean, here is someone who looks to be an asset somewhere in the district.

Honestly, I'm surprised that the district hasn't mandated their placement somewhere.

Posted by: Greg at 04:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

I think this letter from the Houston Chronicle stands up well all by itself.

Honoring a hero's way home

Last weekend I returned home to Houston on a Continental flight.

As our plane approached the gate, the captain announced that we would be greeted by an arch of water from waiting fire trucks in order to honor a hero on board. At first I was confused, but once we got to the gate, I understood.

We watched from the windows as the ground crew respectfully removed a piece of cargo and placed it in a special van. The size of the cargo, the markings and the fact that it was accompanied by a military officer made it clear that our flight was privileged to accompany a fallen hero, coming home on a final journey.

I do not know who the hero was, or who made the ultimate sacrifice to protect the values that Americans hold dear, but I prayed for the family and friends left to mourn, and for the other warriors who risk their lives to protect us.

I also appreciated the staff at Bush International Airport for its respectful tribute.

JAMES ALLEN
Sugar Land

Thank you to all the folks at Bush Intercontinental Airport who made this tribute happen.

And may God bless this unknown hero and his family.

Posted by: Greg at 12:19 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 229 words, total size 1 kb.

A bunch of liberal exploiters of the masses (they are rich, after all, so their wealth is obviously ill-gotten via the alienation of the sweat and toil of the workers) are promising to donate at least $1 million each to propagandize the proletariat for the Socialist Democrat Party.

The money will be funnelled through an organisation called the Democracy Alliance which, according to a report in the Washington Post, will help fund a network of thinktanks and advocacy groups seeking to halt the shift to the cultural and political right.

The formation of the alliance is a radical rethinking of Democratic strategy and a response to the frustration felt by many liberals at the Republican stranglehold of both the House of Representatives and Senate and the White House.

At last November's elections, President George Bush was returned to office despite the deteriorating situation in Iraq and an uneven economy, leaving many Democrats baffled.

The alliance chairman, Steven Gluckstern, a retired investment banker, told the Post many liberal contributors felt that a dramatic new and more sustained approach was needed, instead of the cash poured into special interest pro-Democrat groups ahead of an election.

"It wasn't only the failure to win, it was the question, 'what does it take to win?'," Mr Gluckstern said. "Among the lessons learned was that to bring back the progressive majority in this country is not just a periodic election investment strategy."

The organisation aims to raise $200m, with more than 80 backers already agreeing to pledge $200,000 a year over five years.

Now hold on. I thought that we needed to get money out of the political process. I thought that think-tanks and interest groups were responsible for corrupting the system by amplifying the voices of the wealthy and rendering the common people irrelevant. You mean such things are noble if they they support liberal causes? Sounds like a hypocritical thing to me.

The alliance is the brainchild of Democratic strategist Rob Stein, who says the left's infrastructure is outdated.

He said there is a big imbalance in the amount of cash that goes into left and rightwing thinktanks. Over the past two years, he said, thinktanks pushing the conservative agenda had received $295m, while leftwing institutions were given just $75m.

Could it be that you folks haven't had an idea since Johnson screwed up Vietnam and the American economy all at the same time? The conservatives have engaged in scholarly research and made serious policy proposals. How much money do you people really need to make false claims of voter fraud, draw magic-marker "No Blood For Oil" signs and test-market the nickname "Chimpy McHalliBusHitler"? I think your donors got ripped off when they wrote that $75 million check.

Posted by: Greg at 02:18 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 466 words, total size 3 kb.

I'm not a hip-hop fan, but I have to admire San Francisco hip-hop station KMEL-FM. They have refused to eject a US Navy recruitment booth from their annual Summer Jam concert, as demanded by anti-American peacenik groups who would have no free speech if not for the protection afforded them by the Navy and the rest of the armed forces.

Clear Channel officials said the Navy and other military recruiters had sponsored the Summer Jam concert for at least 10 of its 19 years. But activists are particularly concerned this year. Only one Bay Area music station has more listeners than KMEL-FM, according to the most recent Arbitron ratings. A Clear Channel official confirmed that roughly 40 percent of the station's audience are people of color.

"For many people in these communities (of color), the military is an escape from the violence they see in their neighborhoods," said Jen Low, an organizer for the protesters. With several branches of the military not reaching recruiting goals and with public opinion polls turning against President Bush's handling of the war, activists see an opportunity to show "the Navy is attempting to use any and all means to meet its goals," according to the activists' letter.

They want KMEL to sever its "ties" with the Navy or grant "counter- recruitment groups equal access to the 2005 KMEL Summer Jam as that granted to the U.S Navy."

Medecki said counter-recruiters were welcome to have a booth at the event at Shoreline Amphitheatre for the same price other sponsors paid -- $5,000 to $10,000.

The aging hippies, trust-fund communists and pro-terrorist anarchists can't come up with that sort of cash -- but plan on buying tickets and distributing literature inside the venue without a booth.

Here's hoping the event and venue have a solicitation policy banning this, and enforce it.

Posted by: Greg at 02:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 2 kb.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Piersol doesn't know his place in the constitutional order of things. He seems to think he is a little king, immune from criticism by the peasants over whom he rules. As such, he demonstrates the arrogance of the imperial judiciary quite well.

Judge bashing begins with the public, the media and politicians, said Piersol, who is president of the Federal Judges Association. Most mainstream media and politicians are supportive of the judiciary, but some are not, he said.

Judges should expect criticism because their decisions have a direct effect on people's lives, Piersol said. But recent events, such as reported threats against Florida Circuit Judge George Greer, who ruled in the Terri Schiavo case, have caused concerns, he said.

Harsh verbal attacks by elected officials are not productive and can be seen as an invitation to retaliate for judicial decisions, he said.

In the Schiavo case, Greer's rulings faced congressional criticism, Piersol said. Greer reportedly received death threats after he ordered Schiavo's feeding tube be removed and denied a petition from the Florida Department of Children and Families and Gov. Jeb Bush to take Schiavo into state custody.

To confront judge bashing, Piersol said judges should communicate with Congress and their critics to try to temper their positions. In individual cases, where judges can't speak for themselves, they should allow judicial allies to speak on their behalf, he said.

Now I'll concede that death threats are never appropriate -- though I can think of a number of judges who merit a good horse-whipping. But if you cannot handle "harsh criticism", then you do not belong on the bench. If you truly believe that your ruling is in line with the laws and the Constitution of the United States, then your conscience should be clear and any criticism should roll off your back as if you are a duck. But if that criticism gets to you, then you might want to examine the reason why -- and not blame the tone of the critics.

But if, Judge Piersol, you really believe that the harsh criticism of you and your court really do harm to you, then you already have the tool in your possession to put a stop to it. Use your contempt power to imprison those whose contemptuous words impair the dignity and the function of the court. And yes, I am serious -- because after all, that power is there to make sure that the courts and their authority are properly respected. You can then make your case before another judge when the habeas corpus hearing is held to contest the legitimacy of the arrest -- and before the Senate of the United States during the impeachment proceedings. Better yet -- order the arrest of some of these Congressmen and Senators who are issuing "invitation to retaliate for judicial decisions." I mean after all, you are a judge, and they damn well had better respect you and your decisions. Who do they think they are criticizing you?..I particularly love this bit of rhetoric, Judge Piersol.

Mainstream media generally have been supportive of the judiciary, but that doesn't include "virulent talk shows," Piersol said.

"Overheated rhetoric does no good," he said. "(These talk shows) can indirectly do harm."

Come on, judge -- order the arrest of Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly. They are a menace, and they do harm by their words. That cannot be permitted, regardless of any purported right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment. The negative effests of such virulent speech must be stopped, for the good of the courts.

But seriously, judge, how about if I stop being sarcastic for a moment or two, though I do not know that I can restrain my contempt for you long enough to treat you like a man worthy of respect. There is a reason that Article III is the third and least detailed of the three Articles which establish the branched of government. The founders made it clear in their statements about the relative power of those branches. The courts were to have the least power of the three branches. They were to be the least dangerous to liberty, and were expected to be deferential to the elected branches. Somewhere along the way, you and your fellow judges forgot that, and came to believe that the two elected branches were to be subordinate to yours, and the will of the people was to be of little import. When the courts resume their constitutional role and quit usurping the place of Congress, the President, and the several states, then maybe we will quit being so critical -- and will give you the sort of deference your office used to deserve.

Posted by: Greg at 01:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 802 words, total size 5 kb.