A Utah boy, age 8, was charged with lewd conduct after his 14-year-old babysitter persuaded him to touch her breasts during a game of truth-or-dare.

After hiring the teenager to baby sit, Grosbeck got the feeling something was wrong.

“It was just that sense that something wasn’t quite right with this 14-year-old girl,” she said. She asked her son what had happened. “He just came right out as if nothing was awry, and just started talking about what had happened.”

Grosbeck went to police and child protection workers, and the case went to the district attorney, after which her son, age eight, had been charged with an act of lewdness with a minor.

Grosbeck says the Salt Lake County District Attorney told her both the child and teenager were equal participants. But Mrs. Grosbeck didnÂ’t believe that.

“My son is eight, he’s a little boy. He does not have the ability to participate on the same level as a fourteen-year-old,” she said.

Although the charges against her son were dropped, she is concerned that the same thing could happen to other victims of sexual abuse.

“I don’t want parents to be afraid to go to the state agencies that are supposed to be protecting our children when things like this happen, out of fear that their children are going to be charged

The district attorneyÂ’s office confirmed the charges had been made, and that they had been dropped. Other than that, they wouldnÂ’t comment. The Division of Child and Family Services also declined to comment.

Sounds to me like some folks in Salt lake City need to be fired. An 8-year-old in such a situation is clearly the victim -- unless we want to make "willing participation" a defense available to child molesters everywhere.

Posted by: Greg at 05:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.

As we approach the sixtieth anniversaray of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I suspect we will see more articles discussing the decision to use the weapon. This morning I've come across two that strike me as grist for the mill.

"Why Truman Dropped the Bomb" author Richard B. Frank offers a persuasive rebuttal of those historians who take a critical or revisionist view of Truman's decision to drop the bomb. In it, he argues that the traditionalist view of the decision is more accurate and better explains why Truman used the bomb.

There are a good many more points that now extend our understanding beyond the debates of 1995. But it is clear that all three of the critics' central premises are wrong. The Japanese did not see their situation as catastrophically hopeless. They were not seeking to surrender, but pursuing a negotiated end to the war that preserved the old order in Japan, not just a figurehead emperor. Finally, thanks to radio intelligence, American leaders, far from knowing that peace was at hand, understood--as one analytical piece in the "Magic" Far East Summary stated in July 1945, after a review of both the military and diplomatic intercepts--that "until the Japanese leaders realize that an invasion can not be repelled, there is little likelihood that they will accept any peace terms satisfactory to the Allies." This cannot be improved upon as a succinct and accurate summary of the military and diplomatic realities of the summer of 1945.

The displacement of the so-called traditionalist view within important segments of American opinion took several decades to accomplish. It will take a similar span of time to displace the critical orthodoxy that arose in the 1960s and prevailed roughly through the 1980s, and replace it with a richer appreciation for the realities of 1945. But the clock is ticking.

In "What would you have done? ", Max Hastings argues that a decision that may be easy to question in hindsight was the one which seemed most reasonable to those charged with making the decisionin 1945.

The decision-makers were men who had grown accustomed to the necessity for cruel judgments. There was overwhelming technological momentum: a titanic effort had been made to create a weapon for which the allies saw themselves as competing with their foes.

After Hiroshima, General Leslie Groves, chief of the Manhattan Project, was almost the only man to succumb to triumphalism. He said: "We have spent $2bn on the greatest scientific gamble in history - we won." Having devoted such resources to the bomb, an extraordinary initiative would have been needed from Truman to arrest its employment.

Those who today find it easy to condemn the architects of Hiroshima sometimes seem to lack humility in recognising the frailties of the decision-makers, mortal men grappling with dilemmas of a magnitude our own generation has been spared.

In August 1945, amid a world sick of death in the cause of defeating evil, allied lives seemed very precious, while the enemy appeared to value neither his own nor those of the innocent. Truman's Hiroshima judgment may seem wrong in the eyes of posterity, but it is easy to understand why it seemed right to most of his contemporaries.

I raise a question with my students each year, one which brings out the stark calculus Truman faced.

"You are the president duing time of war. Your military advisors present you with a weapon that could end the war at the cost of a few hundred thousand enemy civilian lives. Failure to use this weapon will likely cost the lives of up to a million American troops and at least an equal number of enemy lives, both military and civilian. What do you do?"

I've had only one student ever argue against dropping the bomb -- and even then, she questioned how she would be able to justify that decision to the families of a million dead American soldiers.

That is why I really think the question is not "How could Truman justify dropping the bomb?" Rather, the appropriate question is "How could Truman justify NOT dropping the bomb?" And i think the answer is that he could not have justified a negative decision, regardless of what evidence there was of Japanese disarray. He had a primary responsibility to safeguard the lives of American soldiers.

Posted by: Greg at 04:17 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 736 words, total size 5 kb.

I'm starting to think we need to begin impeachihg judges who inhibit national security. U.S. District Judge Audrey Collins strikes me as a good candidate to start with.

A federal judge has ruled that some provisions of the U.S. Patriot Act dealing with foreign terrorist organizations remain too vague to be understood by a person of average intelligence and are therefore unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Audrey Collins found that Congress failed to remedy all the problems she defined in a 2004 ruling that struck down key provisions of the act. Her decision was handed down Thursday and released Friday.

"Even as amended, the statute fails to identify the prohibited conduct in a manner that persons of ordinary intelligence can reasonably understand," the ruling said.

Collins issued an injunction against enforcement of the sections she found vague but specified that her ruling applies only to the named plaintiffs and does not constitute a nationwide injunction.

"I'm pleased that the court has recognized that people have a right to support lawful, nonviolent activities of groups the secretary of state has put on a blacklist," said David Cole, the attorney and Georgetown University law professor who argued the case on behalf of the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Humanitarian Law Project.

***

"The court finds that the terms 'training,''expert advice or assistance' in the form of 'specialized knowledge' and 'service' are impermissibly vague under the Fifth Amendment," the judge concluded at the end of 42-page decision.

Excuse me, but given that money is fungible and knowledge and skills can be used to aid terrorist activities, it would strike me that ANY assistance to a terrorist organization constitutes impermissible aid. If they are on the list, there you can't give them money, give them assistance, or do work for them. PERIOD.

So I guess it is now permissible for someone to go set up a computer network for al-Qaeda and design their websites. Yeah, it may aid in terrorist activity, but you can't really understand that it violates the law.

Posted by: Greg at 03:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 353 words, total size 2 kb.

You don't get much bluer than Massachusetts, and in particular the city of Boston. That is why I believe this story is important -- it shows what the allegedly "pro-minority" Democrats do when they have power.

In a lawsuit filed yesterday, the Justice Department alleges that the city and its poll workers interfered with voters' rights by ''improperly influencing, coercing, or ignoring the ballot choices of limited English proficient Hispanic and Asian-American voters" and of generally ''abridging" their voting rights by treating Hispanic and Asian voters disrespectfully at the polls and by failing to provide adequate translation services for them.

The lawsuit says the Justice Department has been urging the city to comply with the Voting Rights Act since 1992, spanning a period when the city's Hispanic and Asian populations have swelled, making the groups a potentially formidable political force. Justice Department lawyers contend that the city has failed to respond to repeated requests to improve the city's treatment of Hispanic and Asian voters with limited English skills. It does not provide specific instances of violations of voters' rights.

''The violations of the Voting Rights Act that we discovered in Boston are deeply disturbing, and there is no place for such misconduct in 2005," Bradley J. Schlozman, acting assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division, said in a prepared statement released yesterday. ''Furthermore, despite having had an unequivocal obligation -- for 13 years -- to provide Spanish language information to voters who need it . . . the City of Boston has consistently fallen well short of the mark."

Under the Voting Rights Act, if more than 10,000 of a city's voting-age citizens are members of a single-language minority with limited English skills, all elections materials must be available in their first language. The city is required to offer all ballots and instructions in Spanish for the 34,000 Hispanic citizens of voting age in Boston. The federal law also forbids officials from imposing any requirement or procedure that denies or abridges the rights of minority citizens to vote.

It's Florida and Ohio all over again -- except with actual evidence of actual violations of the voting rights of minorities.

Posted by: Greg at 03:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 378 words, total size 3 kb.

Cook County GOP Chairman Gary Skoien offered a reward for evidence tying Chicago Mayr Richard Daley to the latest corruption scandal in his administration on Tuesday.

On Thursday, Skoien was fired from his job as executive vice president and chief operations officer at The Prime Company, a real estate development company. The reason?

Prime GroupÂ’s chief executive officer, Mike Reschke, delivered the news to Skoien that he was out as executive vice president and chief operations officer.

Reschke says SkoienÂ’s actions went too far.

“I’m not very happy with what Gary did,” Reschke said. “I think it was inappropriate and irresponsible. I don’t think he should continue in his role with the company.”

Reschke praised Daley as the greatest mayor in America -- but somehow overlooked the latest scandals to his his administration. A federal investigation of a $38 million program that allows the city to outsource its hauling work, which has already resulted in 21 guilty pleas, and another in which federal prosecutors have charged two city hall officials with rigging the cityÂ’s hiring system. It seems that good-will from city officials is more important to Reschke than honest government. Folks might want to consider that before doing business with Prime.

Not, of course, that Skoien is unemployed. His primary source of income comes from his work as chief executive officer of Horizon Group Properties Inc., which owns factory outlets around the country.

Posted by: Greg at 03:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 246 words, total size 2 kb.

Not many newspaper articles move me to tears. But this line did.

Shannon Maxwell says her husband doesn't remember rolling his wheelchair through a ward at Bethesda Naval Hospital just days after brain surgery in January, searching for Marines. He does remember the first thing he told her after awakening: "I want to be with wounded Marines."

Her husband is Lt. Col. Tim Maxwell, one of the highest ranking members of the US military wounded in Iraq. He suffered his head wound and other injuries last October. He still struggles with memory issues and some physical problems. But the Marine officer refuses to let that stop him from doing something for his fellow Marines.

This spring, his solitary mission evolved into an informal effort approved by Marine brass. Maxwell has recruited several other injured Marines to help wounded comrades — most of them very young and far from home.

They tell them what to expect during surgery, therapy and recovery. They help them negotiate the military health system. They have heartfelt talks with wives and parents.

They also display graphic photos of their own wounds to show that even the most grievous injuries can heal. Mostly, they try to lift spirits during what is probably the most trying period in the lives of these soldiers.

"I want these families to know that their guys aren't forgotten," Maxwell said. "There are Marines here for them, right by their side."

Maxwell says the military will provide a small office and vehicles as he recruits more volunteers. A 10-bed living quarters for wounded Marines will open at the base on Aug. 8, he said.

This is incredible stuff -- most of us, faced with such injuries, would probably be more concerned about our own healing and own progress. This man is truly one of a band of brothers, and he wants to make sure that each one of his brothers knows he is not forgotten. Along the way, he has picked up a few fellow Marines to help out with this project.

Maxwell finds camaraderie in what he calls his "wounded warrior team." There's Staff Sgt. James Sturla, 26, a tank commander whose right hand was "de-gloved" — the skin, tissue and muscle ripped from the bone — during an attack in western Iraq in September. And there's Gunnery Sgt. Ken Barnes, 35, whose left arm was shattered by a roadside bomb in central Iraq in November.

If you read no other article I've linked to from my blog, I beg you to read this one. It will inspire you and move you. It might even bring a tear to your eye, too.

God bless you, L. Col. Maxwell, SSGT Sturla, and Gunnery Sgt. Barnes. You are truly the sort of men who make this country great -- and who make the Marine Corps what it is.

MORE COMMENTARY at Spartacus.

Posted by: Greg at 07:24 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 486 words, total size 3 kb.

Astronomers have discovered a tenth planet in our solar system.

A California astronomer has found what could be a new planet, a body of rock and ice which orbits the sun every 560 years.

If confirmed, the discovery would be the first of a planet since Pluto was identified in 1930.

California Institute of Technology astronomer Michael Brown says the new body is the most distant object ever detected orbiting the sun and ranks as the solar system's 10th planet.

The possible new planet is at least the size of Pluto and was discovered orbiting about 14.5 billion kilometres from the sun.

Dr Brown says the object is a typical member of the Kuiper belt - which extends from the orbit of Neptune out through the solar system for about 3,000 million kilometres - but its sheer size in relation to the nine known planets means it can only be classified as a planet.

However, Dr Brown conceded that the discovery would likely rekindle debate over the definition of a 'planet' and whether Pluto should still be regarded as one.

Dr Brown says the new object was detected in January by the Samuel Oschin Telescope at the Palomar Observatory near San Diego.

He says the planet went undiscovered for so long because its orbit is tilted at a 45-degree angle to the orbital plane of the other planets.

Fine. I accept that the thing qualifies as a planet, especially if it is larger than Pluto (the status of which is still disputed by some astronomers).

Word is, though, that the discoverer may want to name the newly discovered planet Xena, after the title character of Xena: Warrior Princess. Dare I say that such a name is a bit undignified? I would suggest several possibilities from Greco-Roman mythology that are more fitting and also in keeping with the current naming protocol for planets -- Apollo, Vulcan/Hephaestus, Minerva/Athena are all excellent choices. One would honor the manned space program, another would still have the pop-culture connection, and the third would honor the goddess of the Parthenon, one of humanity's greatest achievements.

But I suppose the discoverer is probably entitled to naming privileges. I guess I could get used to "Planet Xena".

Posted by: Greg at 06:43 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 373 words, total size 2 kb.

I didn't get the chance to look at the fatwa issued by CAIR-associated clerics and scholars yesterday. I finally got to look at it on the group's website tonight, and I've added bold type where I see some ambiguity.

The Fiqh Council of North America wishes to reaffirm Islam's absolute condemnation of terrorism and religious extremism.

Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives. There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism. Targeting civilians’ life and property through suicide bombings or any other method of attack is haram – or forbidden - and those who commit these barbaric acts are criminals, not “martyrs.”

The QurÂ’an, IslamÂ’s revealed text, states: "Whoever kills a person [unjustly]Â…it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind." (QurÂ’an, 5:32)

Prophet Muhammad said there is no excuse for committing unjust acts: "Do not be people without minds of your own, saying that if others treat you well you will treat them well, and that if they do wrong you will do wrong to them. Instead, accustom yourselves to do good if people do good and not to do wrong (even) if they do evil." (Al-Tirmidhi)

God mandates moderation in faith and in all aspects of life when He states in the Qur’an: “We made you to be a community of the middle way, so that (with the example of your lives) you might bear witness to the truth before all mankind.” (Qur’an, 2:143)

In another verse, God explains our duties as human beings when he says: “Let there arise from among you a band of people who invite to righteousness, and enjoin good and forbid evil.” (Qur’an, 3:104)

Islam teaches us to act in a caring manner to all of God's creation. The Prophet Muhammad, who is described in the Qur’an as “a mercy to the worlds” said: “All creation is the family of God, and the person most beloved by God (is the one) who is kind and caring toward His family."

In the light of the teachings of the QurÂ’an and Sunnah we clearly and strongly state:

1. All acts of terrorism targeting civilians are haram (forbidden) in Islam.

2. It is haram for a Muslim to cooperate with any individual or group that is involved in any act of terrorism or violence.

3. It is the civic and religious duty of Muslims to cooperate with law enforcement authorities to protect the lives of all civilians.

We issue this fatwa following the guidance of our scripture, the Qur’an, and the teachings of our Prophet Muhammad – peace be upon him. We urge all people to resolve all conflicts in just and peaceful manners.

We pray for the defeat of extremism and terrorism. We pray for the safety and security of our country, the United States, and its people. We pray for the safety and security of all inhabitants of our planet. We pray that interfaith harmony and cooperation prevail both in the United States and all around the globe.

Now let's look at the problem with this statement. It condemns attacks on "innocent lives" and "civilians". Those phrases constitute loopholes so big you could fly the space shuttle through them.

Define "innocent lives". Was Theo van Gogh an innocent, or did film which "insulted" Islam make him guilty of an offense that required blood atonement? How about Salman Rushdie? Is he an innocent, or may Islamists murder him becasue of The Satanic Verses? Are Jews in Israel innocents, or is there presence there an offense that requires genocide? Was Daniel Pearl an innocent, or did his Jewish faith constitute a legitimate basis for his kidnapping and murder? For that matter, is any non-Muslim an innocent, given that we offend against the Muslim faith by our very refusal to drop our infidel ways and take up the practice of Islam?

But some might argue that the later use of the word "civilians" makes up for that. However, that phrase lends approval to the attack on the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, the murder of a Navy SEAL on a hijacked plane, the bombing of the Khobar towers and the USS Cole, and the suicide attack on the Pentagon on 9/11. For that matter, it also constitutes a justification for continued attacks on US troops by insurgents in Iraq. It is unclear to me if the condemnation extends to embassy personnel or governemnt officials.

So even a cursory reading of the document shows that terrorism is not really condemned by this fatwa -- merely some terrorism, and the extent of the condemnation is unclear. That very ambiguity makes the fatwa fundamentally unacceptable. Why the lack of clarity?

Well, Stephen Emerson points out who the folks behind this fatwa really are, and what their prior connection to terrorists has been.

The Chairman of the Fiqh Council, Taha Jaber Al-Alwani, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the case against Sami al-Arian, the alleged North American leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, whose trial began in June 2005 in Tampa, Florida. Mr. Alwani has been named in court documents as an official of several entities in northern Virginia suspected of being connected to terrorist financing. Documents released in the Al Arian trial show that Alwani funded the Islamic Jihad front groups in Tampa.

Another past trustee of the Fiqh Council, Abdurrahman Alamoudi, is serving a 23-year prison sentence for illegal financial dealings with Libya and immigration fraud, has admitted to his part in a plot to assassinate the Saudi Crown Prince, and has vocally announced his support for the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah. Additionally Alamoudi was just named by Treasury as having been a financier for Al Qaeda.

In 1998, Fiqh Council member Sheikh Muhammad al-Hanooti, gave a speech calling for jihad against the United States and the United Kingdom, saying that “Allah will curse the Americans and British” and “Allah, the curse of Allah will become true on the infidel Jews and on the tyrannical Americans.” Additionally, Hanooti is strongly linked to Hamas, having served on the board of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP). A 2002 INS memo extensively documented IAP’s support for HAMAS and noted that the “facts strongly suggest” that IAP is “part of HAMAS’ propaganda apparatus.”

On October 28, 2000, Muzammil Siddiqui, the President of FCNA, at a rally in Lafayette Park in Washington D.C., said, “America has to learn -- if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come!"

In the past 4 years, several CAIR officials have been convicted of or charged with various terrorism-related offenses.

CAIR has championed and defended officials of Islamic terrorist groups including Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzook, Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami al-Arian, Palestinian Islamic Jihad fundraiser Fawaz Damra, and the radical Egyptian cleric Wagdy Ghoneim.

CAIR has repeatedly attacked the prosecutions of Islamic terrorists arrested and/or convicted since 9-11 and has attacked the government’s freezing of Islamic terrorist fronts as part of a “war against Islam” by the United States.

CAIR has led protests against the deportation of radical Islamic clerics who have called for Jihad or who have been fundraisers for Hamas.

CAIR has asserted that the indictment of Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami al-Arian on conspiracy to murder more than 100 people was “politically motivated” and instigated by “the attack dogs of the pro-Israeli lobby."

CAIR has been named as a defendant in a civil lawsuit filed by the family of former FBI official John OÂ’Neill, who was killed on 9-11.

One of the signatories to todayÂ’s fatwa is Fawaz Damra who was convicted of immigration fraud related to his ties to Palestinian Islamic Jihad and denaturalized. He is currently awaiting a deportation hearing.

Another signatory, the Muslim American Society, is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States and whose publications have repeatedly supported suicide bombings.

Are we really supposed to believe these folks are condemning terorism? One would think that theeir expulsion from the room would be the first move of any group seeking to condemn terrorism in a complete and unambiguous manner. For more complete documentation on the terrorist links, click here.

Posted by: Greg at 06:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1389 words, total size 9 kb.

Theo van Gogh, who was martyred for his exercise of freedom of speech, was murdered last year by an Islamist terrorist. His murderer remains unrepentant. Now Islamist punks are harrassing his son, Lieuwe van Gogh, age 14.

The 14-year-old son of controversial film director Theo van Gogh, slain by an Islamic extremist last November, is said to have been threatened and assaulted by Moroccan teenagers in Amsterdam and insulted by his classmates. The allegations were made during an interview the boy's grandparents gave to the Dutch television channel Nova. Amsterdam police have not confirmed any threats or aggression against Lieuwe van Gogh.

The family lawyer, Gijs de Westelaken, specified that after the murder, which profoundly shocked Dutch society, Lieuwe was attacked by some young Moroccan youths while he was walking the dog. The boy is said to have suffered bruising, but only spoke about the incident to his mother and did not lodge a police complaint.

On another occasion he is said to have been threatened with a pistol by two young men of North African descent in the neighbourhood where his father had lived. Neighbours called the police but when they arrived the attackers had fled.

According to his grandparents, Lieuwe was also subject to harrassment and insults at school, and was forced to change class after various classmates told him "it is a good thing your father is dead".

When will we in the West act to rid ourselves of the ihadi pigs in our midst? Therre are many fine and upstanding Muslims in our societ, and I welcome them, but we must make such extremism as unacceptable in our societies as Klan and Nazi activity.

Posted by: Greg at 05:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 296 words, total size 2 kb.

I'm still backing Condi in 2008, but would like to see Vice President Cheney declare for the nomination.

“The day I say Dick Cheney is going to run for president, I’ll kill myself,” [Hearst columnist Helen Thomas] told The Hill.

And this is supposed to keep him from running?

Although this does actually put me in agreement with Ann Coulter, a most unusual event.

What is it with these Arabs and suicide?

And screw Media Matters if they don't like the satire.

Posted by: Greg at 05:17 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 84 words, total size 1 kb.

San Antonio Express-News fifth-columnist Mansour El-Kikhia insists he won't apologize for Muslim terrorist attacks. He also does not think other Muslims or Muslim organizations should apologize for them either. That's fine with me, because I don't see him (or them) as bearing any personal responsibility for those attacks.

Unfortunately, and has often been the case with individual Muslims and Muslim groups, we don't get an unambiguous condemnation of terrorism, either.

It is rejection of U.S. and British policies in the Middle East, not Islam, that has promoted terrorism against America. And for the benefits of those who do not know, 95 percent of Middle Easterners are Muslims. Hence, it is only natural that those opposing the United States and Britain in the region would be Muslims. In India, they would have been Hindu; in Latin America or Northern Ireland, they would have been Catholic.

More important, it was the British and the United States that drew first blood. The Middle East didn't come to America or go to Britain; rather, America and Britain went to the Middle East. Both powers used and abused regimes, toppling some and keeping others in power. They never thought that the people they were helping suppress were human beings with needs, beliefs and emotions. They didn't care as long as their interests were served.

In other words, not only are non-terrorist mainstream Muslims not reponsible for the terrorist attacks, the terrorists are not responsible for them. Rather, terrorism is the fault of the US and the UK, and it is therefore the wictimized nations that are responsible and need to apologize.

No, Mansour, I didn't expect you to apologize. But that does not mean that i find your apologia on behalf of the terrorists acceptable, either. If you find the need to defend the terrorists, please go back home to Libya and do it from there.

More commentary on GOPBloggers, Strata-Sphere. and Decision '08.

Posted by: Greg at 02:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 333 words, total size 2 kb.

NASA wants the shuttle flying by year's end, if possible.

NASA Chief Michael Griffin said Friday he hasn't given up on launching another space shuttle later this year, despite suspending flights until the space agency can stop foam insulation from snapping off and threatening the spacecraft. He said he has set up a "tiger team" to try to solve the problem as quickly as possible. "We don't expect this to be a long drawn-out affair," he said by telephone from Washington in a briefing with reporters in Houston.

My concern? You've had this problem for a quarter century, and it contributed to one horrible accident. Two years of work didn't fix the problem. What makes you think you can get it fixed in time for a year-ending launch?

Please understand that I want to see it happen, but I also recognize that another catastrophic failure will have dire results for NASA and the manned space flight program.

Posted by: Greg at 05:59 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 163 words, total size 1 kb.

That is, of course, why liberals oppose allowing recruiters in public schools and deride military service. In New York City, Councilman Charles Barron (whose racist statements and antics in favor of dictators and cop-killers are legend) is seeking to ban military recruiters from city shools in violation of federal law, claiming that they "prey" on minority students, "taling advantage" of them.

What says one of those students, after graduating from one of those schools and performing exemplary service in the armed forces?

If Mr. Barron doesn't believe that serving one's country is an honor and not a trick, let him have a chat with Corporal Charles Grant - one of the black youngsters Mr. Barron thinks is being taken advantage of by the military. Corporal Grant, aged 22, told The New York Sun he joined the military when recruiters came to his high school in the Bronx, Adlai E. Stevenson, four years ago. He's part of the 82nd Airborne Division, served both in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and received Army commendation medals in both wars.

In response to Mr. Barron's view that he had been taken "advantage of," Corporal Grant described his military career to The New York Sun as "actually an advantage for me," providing him with "mental, physical, and financial stability" while many of his high school peers fell on hard times. More importantly, he was proud to be of "service to the country" and "part of something great," "providing a blanket of comfort for the next generation." Corporal Grant, in his wisdom, values his military career so highly that he persuaded his older brother, Gary, to join the military a few months ago, and his brother is set to graduate from his Army training program today.

So whose word do we take -- a former member of a terrorist organization whose words and actions betray a contempt for the values of this nation, or one of the soldiers who has put his life on the line so that such a disgusting individual has the freedom to make contemptible comments? I think the answer is obvious.

God bless you, Corporal Grant. And when you finish with your service, come back home and run against Barron. There are lots of real Americans out here who would gladly support your campaign.

Posted by: Greg at 05:49 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 401 words, total size 2 kb.

Some folks complain that the Minutemen and other similar groups are vigilantes. I think they are wrong, especially since those doing the criticizing are opposed to any effort to control immigration and secure our borders.

Well, Congressman John Culbertson has a solution to that problem -- he wants to permit states to establish Border Militias to help enforce the nation's immigration laws.

Adding an unusual proposal to the searing debate over illegal immigration, U.S. Rep. John Culberson of Houston introduced a bill late Thursday to let Texas and other border states establish armed militias to catch people trying to illegally cross from Mexico and Canada.
ADVERTISEMENT

The bill, which he called a "thunderclap," is more than a solitary, symbolic gesture by the Republican lawmaker: It has 46 Republican co-sponsors.

It comes as the White House, Congress and local officials are becoming increasingly immersed in efforts to find the best way to secure the borders and perhaps also establish a "guest worker" program to let immigrants stay in the United States as temporary legal residents.

Gov. Rick Perry indicated he is open to Culberson's idea.

"Illegal immigration has become a pervasive problem in this country, and it is a drain on our economy," Perry said. "Regardless of the mechanism, the federal government must provide a stronger presence along the border and must provide substantially more funding for border protection."

Among Culberson's co-sponsors are 10 Texans, including freshmen Reps. Ted Poe of Humble and Michael McCaul of Austin.

The measure's stated goal is to let governors create a Border Protection Corps of citizens to shield the country from "uniquely devious, criminal, cowardly and fanatically determined" terrorist organizations.

Culberson said the militia provisions in the Constitution must be invoked because the U.S. Border Patrol lacks the resources to deal with any surge in illegal crossings by people who may have ties to terrorist groups.

"The tools are all there in the Constitution," Culberson said. "America's best defense against terrorists trying to sneak into our country is to trust the good hearts and the good sense of American citizens."

This sounds like an excellent way of meeting the criticisms offered against the Minutemen. They will be trained, regulated, and officially deputized for the task for which they organized. They will be able to do more than merely take pictures and make phone calls -- they will be authorized to take action and actually stop the immigration criminals. And they will provide needed relief for the under-staffed Border Patrol.

Good for John Culbertson, and his 46 co-sponsors. Call your congressman and encourage him to join as a co-sponsor.

Posted by: Greg at 04:42 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 443 words, total size 3 kb.

The winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are History and Fantasy by Right Wing Nut House, and Anonymous Rectal Intercourse by Hog on Ice.  Here are the full results of the vote.

Posted by: Greg at 03:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.

If you only speak English, you won't understand the music or on=-air personalities on the top radio station in Dallas. That's because KESS-FM has a format devoted to Mexican music.

A Spanish-language radio station beat its English-language competitors for the first time in the Dallas-Fort Worth market to gain the No. 1 spot among listeners.

Playing Mexican regional music, KESS-FM outranked urban contemporary KKDA-FM in the most recent Arbitron spring ratings. Another Spanish-language station, KLNO-FM (94.1), rounded out the top five in the DFW listener survey, which was conducted from March 31 to June 22.

"It's not a fluke. It's only going to get better," said Betina Lewin, director of Hispanic marketing at Spanish Broadcasting System in New York.

Spanish-language radio stations have regularly reached the top five in New York, Los Angeles and Miami.

In the Houston-Galveston market, Mexican regional station KLTN-FM dropped to the fourth spot after being second in the two previous listener surveys.

El Paso's KBNA-FM was No. 1 in the Arbitron winter survey with its Spanish contemporary format.

And KESS-FM's owner, Univision Communications Inc., has already made history in U.S. broadcasting. Its television network gained the top spot in prime-time viewing among the coveted 18- to 34-year-old demographic during the final week of June, according to Nielsen Media Research.

I'm not surprised by this development -- here in the Houston area, there are already more Spanish music stations than there are country music stations.

Posted by: Greg at 01:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 255 words, total size 2 kb.

Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt doesn't think that HPD officers have any business enforcing immigration laws. Not only that, he indicated his opposition to HPD providing assistance to federal immigration officials.

During the question-and-answer portion of the program, Hurtt said HPD should not assist in the enforcement of immigration laws, as some city leaders have recently suggested. Already struggling with a staffing shortfall, HPD could not take on the extra burden, he said.

"Immigration is a federal responsibility," he said. "We'll do our job and they should do theirs."

On the other hand, Chief Hurtt has made it clear that he intends to use HPD officers to harass and interfere with the Minutemen and their legal activities when they come to Houston this fall.

Then again, maybe Hurtt has a point. According to statistics released yesterday, Houston homicides are during Hurtt's tenure as chief.

Thanks to reader Mary Leverett for pointing me to this article which i had overlooked.

Posted by: Greg at 03:41 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 165 words, total size 1 kb.

The city of Galveston is looking to ensure the preservation of one of the few structures to make it through the 1900 hurricane. The city will begin a fundraising effort toraise $5 million to purchase the "Bishop's Palace" from the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston and refurbish the structure. In the process, it will also make possible the renovation of one of the island's other historical structures, St. Mary's Cathedral Basilica, which was built in 1847.

As mayor of Galveston, Lyda Ann Thomas will spearhead a $5 million fund-raising campaign for the city to purchase and refurbish the 112-year-old Chateauesque home, which towers above Broadway, the island's main street. The Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston has owned the historical home since 1923 and operated it as a museum since 1963.

Thomas and Archbishop Joseph A. Fiorenza have agreed in principle to the sale of the structure to the city, they said Wednesday.

"Historically, it is one of the most important buildings in the country," Thomas said. "It attracts more visitors than any of our other house museums on the island."

The city and the archdiocese have not yet agreed on a sale price for the building, which is in need of repairs, including work to stop a leaking roof. No tax money will be used for the purchase or restoration, the mayor said.

"We can see from the street the deterioration that has been occurring," Thomas said. "I just decided to go up and talk to the archbishop and see if the archdiocese would be willing to let the citizens begin to raise money to restore the building, since the church was struggling with it."

Fiorenza conceded that the Bishop's Palace is a financial burden on the archdiocese, adding that running a museum is "not particularly our mission." He said he thinks the city can do a better job of maintaining it.

"The city has great experience in managing historical homes and museums," Fiorenza said. "We feel under the direction of the Galveston Historical Foundation that beautiful architectural gem will be better preserved as a great tourist attraction for the city of Galveston."

Although the foundation operates several Galveston attractions, including three home museums, it has not been determined whether it will run the Bishop's Palace.

"That is a possibility down the road," said Marsh Davis, head of the historical foundation. "It's going to take some time to gauge the feasibility of it all. But the foundation will be part of the planning process."

The foundation wants to ensure covenants attached to the deed in perpetuity "protect every square inch inside and out" of the structure, Davis said.

The Friends of the Palace campaign, announced at a news conference Wednesday, intends to raise approximately $5 million during the next five years.

"Initially, we will be looking for around $3 million, part of which will be for the purchase," Thomas said. "Part of that $3 million will be used for immediate repairs."

The Bishop's Palace began its life as a private home, and was given as a gift to Bishop Christopher Byrne in 1923. Besides Byrne, no other Bishop ever lived in the structure.

According to Archbishop Joseph Fiorenza, proceeds from the sale of the Bishop's palace will be used to aid in the renovation of St. Mar's Cathedral Basilica, the oldest Cathedral in the state of Texas and the oldest church building on Galveston Island.

All in all, this sounds like a win for everyone.

Posted by: Greg at 03:00 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 575 words, total size 4 kb.

This little story comes out of my hometown outside of Houston. It appeared in the local "throw-away" paper that turns up on the lawn each Wednesday.

Seabrook City Councilman Paul Richard Sammons, 36, was arrested at his home on La Rochelle early Saturday morning in an incident involving a gun.

When police arrived at the scene in response to a call about a man with a gun, they arrested Sammons and charged him with deadly conduct, a Class A misdemeanor, according to Lt. Sean Wright.

He was taken to the City of Seabrook Jail and booked, after which the case was forwarded to the Harris County district attorney's office, Wright said.

So I checked out the local media.

Channel 11 covered it.

Seabrook police arrested a member of the city council over the weekend.

Councilmember Paul Richard Sammons was arrested and charged with deadly conduct.

The police department says officers found him with a gun, but the specifics about what happened have yet to be released.

An arraignment is scheduled for Friday on the deadly conduct charge.

Sammons is serving his second consecutive term on the Seabrook City Council.

And that's it -- none of the other local media, including the Houston Chronicle (our "paper of record" here in Harris County), covered the story at all.

Let's see. Local elected oficial arrested on a weapons charge. Cops are keeping mum. Press is virtually silent. Is it a cover-up? Or just piss-poor coverage?

Posted by: Greg at 05:11 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 250 words, total size 2 kb.

I've always laughed when that line shows up in the credit card commercial about identity theft.

And I haven't been able to get it out of my head since seeing this story.

Japanese scientists have unveiled the most human-looking robot yet devised - a "female" android called Repliee Q1.

She has flexible silicone for skin rather than hard plastic, and a number of sensors and motors to allow her to turn and react in a human-like manner.

She can flutter her eyelids and move her hands like a human. She even appears to breathe.

Professor Hiroshi Ishiguru of Osaka University says one day robots could fool us into believing they are human.

Repliee Q1 is not like any robot you will have seen before, at least outside of science-fiction movies.

She is designed to look human and although she can only sit at present, she has 31 actuators in her upper body, powered by a nearby air compressor, programmed to allow her to move like a human.

My girl robot -- indeed.

UPDATE: Dirty Harry, Tony B, and Kim DuToit have some related comments.

Posted by: Greg at 03:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 190 words, total size 1 kb.

Yesterday it was triumph.

Now we know it could have been tragedy.

And we have no idea of what the future holds.

NASA has announced that all shuttles will be grounded due to more problems with foam insulation breaking free during launch. Discovery will complete its mission and return, to be followed by...?

The shuttle Discovery, like Columbia, shed a large chunk of foam debris during liftoff that could have threatened the return of the seven astronauts, NASA said today.

While there are no signs the piece of insulation damaged the spacecraft, NASA is grounding future shuttle flights until the hazard can be fixed.

``Call it luck or whatever, it didn't harm the orbiter,'' said shuttle program manager Bill Parsons. If the foam had broken away earlier in flight, when the atmosphere is thicker increasing the likelihood of impact, it could have caused catastrophic damage to Discovery.

``We think that would have been really bad, so it's not acceptable,'' said Parsons' deputy, Wayne Hale. But he said early signs are Discovery is safe for its return home.

A large chunk of foam flew off Discovery's redesigned external fuel tank just two minutes after what initially looked like a picture-perfect liftoff Tuesday morning. But in less than an hour NASA had spotted images of a mysterious object whirling away from the tank.

Mission managers did not realize what the object was - or how much havoc it would cause to the shuttle program - until Wednesday after reviewing video and images taken by just a few of the 100-plus cameras in place to watch for such dangers.

Officials do not believe the foam hit the shuttle, posing a threat to the seven astronauts when they return to Earth on Aug. 7. But they plan a closer inspection of the spacecraft in the next few days to be sure.

``You have to admit when you're wrong. We were wrong,'' Parsons said. ``We need to do some work here, and so we're telling you right now that the ... foam should not have come off. It came off. We've got to go do something about that.''

The loss of a chunk of debris, a vexing problem NASA thought had been fixed, represents a tremendous setback to a space program that has spent 2½ years and over $1 billion trying to make the 20-year-old shuttles safe to fly.

``We won't be able to fly again,'' until the hazard is removed, Parsons told reporters in a briefing Wednesday evening.

Damn!

Posted by: Greg at 02:54 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 417 words, total size 3 kb.

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
ARTICLE VI; Cl. 3
The Senators and Representatives..., and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. [Emphasis and bold added.]

Do inquiries by Senators about the intersection of religious beliefs and the performance of official duties constitute a religious test under the terms of the Constitution? Does the refusal of a Senator to vote to confirm a candidate because of that candidates "deeply held personal/religious beliefs" constitute a violation of the Article VI, Clause 3 of the US Constitution? Those are questions we have dealt repeatedly over the last several years. They arise again with the nomination of Judge john Roberts, a faithful practicing Catholic, to the US Supreme Court..

Let me answer the question forthrightly in the negative -- neither situation constitutes a violation of the constitutional ban on religious tests.

Let me explain, in the context of discussing an editorial in the New York Sun.

Senator Durbin of Illinois, fresh from slandering American GIs by comparing them to Nazis, introduced a new slander into the public debate after meeting on Friday with President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge John Roberts. Mr. Durbin, according to several press reports, asked the nominee to the high court whether he had considered potential conflicts between the moral imperatives of his Roman Catholic faith and his responsibilities as a judge.

Mr. Durbin's press secretary, Joseph Shoemaker, promptly denied that his boss asked such a question. But law professor Jonathan Turley, who reported on the meeting between Mr. Durbin and Judge Roberts in a Los Angeles Times column that appears on the adjacent page, said he heard about the conversation directly from Mr. Durbin - and confirmed the senator's account with Mr. Shoemaker as well. Mr. Durbin has since clammed up.

Based on the senator's performance so far, it's no doubt a wise policy, one that would serve him well all the way through the confirmation hearings, in which Mr. Durbin will participate as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Interrogating a nominee in respect of his religious beliefs is not only grossly inappropriate. It's unconstitutional. In Article 6, the Constitution provides that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." No, ever, any. It's the most emphatic single sentence in the entire Constitution.

Now let me say that I find the position taken by Senator Durbin to be repugnant. However Durbin, an anti-Catholic Catholic if there ever was one, has raised an important question. How would this nominee respond if the law required one outcome to a case but his faith compelled a different one? On its face, this is not an improper question. In light of the current War on Jihadi Terrorism, it would be prudent to raise a similar question with a Muslim nominee to a high office which dealt with defense, national security, intelligence, or homeland security. Would it constitute a "religious test" for office? No -- it would go to the heart of the issue of the nominee's ability to properly carry out the duties of the office. The issue is not one of religious beliefs per se. Rather, it is focused on the ability of the nominee to do the job for which he or she is nominated. In the current situation, it is designed to determine whetehr or not Judge Roberts has an appropriate sense of the role of a judge and the temperment/character to carry perform in that role.

Now please note tahtDurbin seems to reserve his religious scrutiny for his fellow Catholics who are more faithful to Catholic teachings than he is, and for Protestants with a more fundamentalist/evangelical bent. There is no record of his making such inquiries of jews or non-Christians, nor of those Christians whose religious views are less respectful with the historical tenets of Christianity. As such, I find his questions tinged with a religious bigotry which is fundamentally unAmerican -- but the questions themselves are reasonable and proper.

Now we all know that these religious questions are primarily a proxy for questions about abortion and the religion clauses of the First Amendment. Again, these are proper areas for scrutiny. If a hypothetical nominee were, for example, a member of the Christian Identity Movement (White Supremacy dressed up with a facade of theology), would it not be proper to inquire about the nominee's ability to uphold the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the US Constitution, as well as the Civil Rights Acts enacted pursuant to them? Of course it would -- and the failure of the nominee to give "the right answers" would be a more than sufficient basis for rejection without running afoul of Article VI.

But how does that square with the many weighty and serious quotes from the Founders regarding religious tests for office?

How could the Founders of America have made it any more plain? From Tench Coxe, in his examination of the Constitution ("No religious test is ever to be required of any officer or servant of the United States. The people may employ any wise or good citizen in the execution of the various duties of the government") to William Lancaster of North Carolina ("... we form a government for millions not yet in existence. I have not the art of divination. In the course of four or five hundred years, I do not know how it will work. This is most certain, that Papists may occupy that chair, and Mahometans may take it" ) to Luther Martin ("there were some members so unfashionable as to think that a belief of the existence of a Deity, and of a state of future rewards and punishments would be some security for the good conduct of our rulers, and that in a Christian country it would be at least decent to hold out some distinction between the professors of Christianity and downright infidelity or paganism") to Edmund Randolph ("A man of abilities and character, of any sect whatever, may be admitted to any office or public trust under the United States"), the Founders debated the religious test from every angle and then, by an overwhelming margin, excluded it.

The answer, of course, is to understand what constituted a religious test in the mind of an educated American in the latter part of the eighteenth century -- to strictly construe the original intent of the text at the time of its writing and adoption. These were men whose context was fundamentally British, and whose historical points of reference were usually those which came from that heritage. It is no accident, for example, that the rights protected in the Bill of Rights are a reaction to the abuses of the British monarchs over the previous two centuries. Viewed in that context, the prohibition on religious tests is designed to prevent the imposition of "test oaths" which excluded members of certain sects from holding public office or exercising certain rights. The most famous of these were the anti-Catholic oaths which forced individuals to repudiate certain tenets of the Catholic faith and the authority of the pope. Those who refused to take such an oath were barred from public offices and faced certain restrictions on their liberties. Such is not the case with Durbin's questions, which could NEVER rise to the level of a "religious test" in the sense intended by the Founder. Durbin's refusal to vote for a candidate because of those views also does not violate the religious test provision, any more than my refusal to vote for a Satanist does.

Mr. Durbin insisted to reporters last week that he wasn't interested in applying a "litmus test" to judicial nominees. The senator told Judge Roberts, "If you will be honest and forthcoming, you're going to find a warm reception from our side of the aisle, even if we disagree with you on any given issue." But two days later, Mr. Durbin went on NBC's "Meet the Press" to say that if Judge Roberts did not find an implied right to privacy in the Constitution, on which the right to abortion is based, "It would disqualify him in my mind."

Now notice, please, that Durbin's basis for giving or denying his vote is NOT religious, but is instead based upon constitutional interpretation. That is a legitimate basis for a Senator to use in making a decision. After all, a nominee who stated that he believed that Plessy is right and Brown is wrong would merit rejection. While I disagree with Durbin's litmus test (and it is a litmus test, despite his protestation to the contrary), I don't have a problem with rejecting a nominee on the basis of jurisprudential principles, regardless of the source of the "deeply held personal beliefs" which lead to such a conclusion. I wish we on the conservative side had made a practice of doing so over the last few decades.

Yet the Democrats persist. "You wouldn't run for the United States Senate or for governor or for anything else without answering people's questions about what you believe," Senator Bayh of Indiana said this week. "And I think the Supreme Court is no different." This attitude is the side effect of using the courts to make laws rather than interpret them. But it will be an even greater debasement of the Constitution to see the judicial nomination process tarred by religious bigotry. Forty-five years after America finally elevated a Catholic to the presidency we will see whether Senators Durbin, Leahy, Schumer, Kerry, and Kennedy recognize that Judge Roberts can't be tested on his "deeply held personal beliefs" in respect of religion.

Now I will agree with one statement here -- it is a debasement of the Constitution for religious bigotry to enter into the confirmation process. That said, it is not a violation of the Constitution for religious bigots like Senators Durbin, Leahy, Schumer, Kerry, and Kennedy to reject a nominee based upon such bigotry, any more than racist Senator Robert Byrd's votes against the only two African-Americans ever nominated to the Supreme Court did not violate the Constitution despite violating fundamental principles of human decency. For all their appeals to that which is worst in human nature, their questions and their votes do not violate the Constitution. To claim otherwise is to violate the very originalist principles that we conservatives ask our judges to apply.

Posted by: Greg at 05:17 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1792 words, total size 11 kb.

All archaeological and anthropological research on ancient man in America could be stopped by an amendment proposed to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act by Senator John McCain. An editorial in today's Seattle Times does a fine job of explaining what is at stake.

EIGHTY years after the Scopes trial dealt a blow to the anti-evolution movement, a similar face-off between science and religion is slated tomorrow in the U.S. Senate.

This time the issue is whether to preserve the right of science to discern the stories of the earliest Americans or to accede to beliefs of some Native American tribes that all ancient remains belong to them — even when there is no provable connection.

An action against science could stall the court-ordered study of Kennewick Man, the 9,300-year-old remains stored at the University of Washington's Burke Museum.

Science should win again.

The Senate Indian Affairs Committee hearing likely won't draw 1,000 spectators, as crowded around the Dayton, Tenn., courthouse for the trial of high-school teacher John Thomas Scopes, accused of illegally teaching evolutionary theory. But the debate no doubt will be as passionate as that rendered by William Jennings Bryan, for the prosecution, and Clarence Darrow, for the defense.

At issue now is whether to amend the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act with the addition of two words: "or was." So the act would redefine Native American to be "of, or relating to, a tribe, people, or culture that is ... or was ... indigenous to the United States."

That means modern-day tribes could claim the remains from ancient tribes that long since moved on or died out — even remains of their ancestors' foes.

The proposed change is in response to last year's unequivocal federal rulings that scientists should be able to study Kennewick Man. When the skeleton was found in 1996 on federal land, the government quickly moved to repatriate the remains to four tribes that claimed them. Eight leading scientists sued and won. This month, they are studying the remains for the first time.

The tribes argued their oral histories say they always have been in the Northwest and contain no references to visitors — contrary to scientific evidence of widespread migration.

The federal courts sided with science, finding none of the Act's required proof of a connection to the tribes. Republican Sen. John McCain's proposed amendment would remove that burden of proven affiliation.

In other words, science would be stopped based upon the unsubstantiated claims of native American rligious traditions.

This would be like preventing the excavation and study of dinosur fossils because some whack-job points out that T-Rex isn't mentioned in Genesis.

Before anybody says "stem cells", please recognize that this is not about denying federal funding -- this is about preventiing all research.

And, of couse, the sponsor of this lousy legislation is John McCain. has he ever sponsored a worthwhile bill?

Posted by: Greg at 04:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 494 words, total size 3 kb.

Yeah, I know that sounds like a bit of a stretch, but this decision by PA Gov. Ed Rendell seems to make that outcome the likely conclusion.

Even though Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll makes occasional malaprops and mistakes in judgment, Gov. Ed Rendell says he'll stick with her when he runs for re-election next year.

Asked yesterday if she'll be his running mate on the Democratic ticket in 2006, Rendell said, "I have no reason to expect differently."

Rendell told a state Capitol news conference that as lieutenant governor, Knoll takes her job seriously and "has conducted herself in office with dignity. A lot of people have been touched by the fact she is a caring and sensitive individual."

There is continuing speculation among some Democratic officials that Rendell might want a different running mate next year. Knoll's age, 74, and her occasional bouts of confusion in running the Senate during late-night sessions have raised some doubts about her performance.

But Rendell said, "Name me one thing the lieutenant governor has done wrong, substantively. Sure, she occasionally makes some malaprops, such as referring to me as Edward G. Robinson

So Rendell plans on keeping the confused, mind-fogged, Marine-hating, America-betraying witch on the ticket. Plenty of us will remember what she has done wrong.

Looks Like We've Made A Difference!">End This Arrogant Pol's Career
Looks Like We've Made A Difference!
Knoll Responds
Goodrich Family Accepts Apology

Posted by: Greg at 03:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.

Oh, the humanity!

A tractor-trailer truck overturned on Interstate 10 this morning near South Wilmot Road, scattering 30,000 cases of Bud Lite beer along the highway.

The incident shut the left lane of I-10 West for hours, according to a state Department of Public Safety spokesman.

The driver, whose name was not available early today, sustained minor injuries and was expected to be released from a hospital this morning, said Frank Torres.

The DPS officer did not know what caused the truck to overturn about 5:30 a.m., but expected the freeway's left lane to be closed until at least 8 a.m. while workers clean up the beer.

"I don't know if it's cans or bottles," Torres added.

Posted by: Greg at 03:14 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 135 words, total size 1 kb.

Really.

I mean, a Catholic parish has set up a monument to those slain by abortion. It is on church grounds, and is a reflection of the teachings of the church. On the last three months, the monument has been desecrated seven times -- vandalized and knocked off its pedastal. Do you think we have a prima facie case for treating this as a hate crime?

"When it's the seventh time, I question whether this is some sort of desecration or hate crime," said the church pastor, Father Henry Zinno. "When it's constant, obviously someone is making an effort to knock it down. By the seventh time there is a clear message."

The pastor has called the police. He's asked the church's 1,600 families to pay close attention as they drive by. And he had metal bars installed on the front and back of the stone memorial.

And still, the 4-foot monument that has been blessed by the bishop keeps being knocked to the ground.

"We keep putting it back up and calling the police," Zinno said, adding that it takes three or four men to lift it each time. "There's not much we can do."

But when Zinno found the stone rectangle lying on its side this weekend, he knew something more had to be done.

"Every time something like this happens, we announce it to parishioners," he said. "People got pretty upset about it."

The church has decided to put up motion detector lights. And a parishioner agreed to put iron rods into the monument to make it impossible to move.

One does not "accidently" knock over a piece of stone that takes three or four people to re-seat.

The wind does not simply start blowing it over.

This is a deliberate malicious attempt to silence a religious message.

It is an intentional act of hate against those who believe the truth that the monument proclaims.

It is a planned assault on rights explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution by those who seek to coerce acceptance of one which is not there at all..

Posted by: Greg at 01:47 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 361 words, total size 2 kb.

Space Shuttle Discovery has successfully launched, taking astronauts into space on the shuttle for the first time since the destruction of Space Shuttle Columbia on reentry in 2003.

Thundering upward atop a pillar of fiery exhaust, Discovery soared safely into orbit today to end a near 30-month ban on NASA shuttle flights imposed by the 2003 Columbia accident.

The shuttle and its seven astronauts lifted off from the Kennedy Space Center at 9:39 a.m. CDT, climbing steeply on a northerly course into a brilliant blue sky.

The rush of emotion that accompanied the dramatic display of NASA's long recovery from Columbia's demise was evident in the cockpit as the final moments of the countdown ticked away.

The firing room in the Launch Control Center was hushed of all but the crisp exchanges between NASA launch and test directors made their last moment safety checks and reporterd the outcome to the mission management team.

"We are go for launch!," barked Wayne Hale, the mission managment team chief.

"Our long wait may be over. On behalf of the many millions of people who believe so deeply in what we do. God speed," Leinbach told Discovery commander Eileen Collins and her six colleagues.

"The crew is go for launch!" Collins barked.

"Our hopes and prayers are with you," added Mark Taffet, the Discovery test conductor.

"Thank you very much," said Collins.

And then they were off.

Collins' crew includes pilot Jim Kelly, flight engineer Steve Robinson as well as mission specialists Andy Thomas, Wendy Lawrence, Charles Camarda and Soichi Noguchi of Japan.

God speed you all on this voyage, and bring you home to us safely.

And may I add a special congratulations to friends Roger, Tracy and Kevin just down the road at Johnson Space Center. I know your hearts have ached these last 30 months -- may this success help to soothe the loss and sadness.

Posted by: Greg at 03:59 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 321 words, total size 2 kb.

The family of SSGT Joseph Goodrich has accepted the apology of Lt. Governor Catherine Baker Knoll.

"We asked for an apology and that's what we got," said Rhonda Goodrich, Joseph Goodrich's sister-in-law, who has been speaking on behalf of the family. She said the apology was accepted, although the family had also wanted Knoll to apologize to the Marine Corps.

"Probably, in all honesty, she didn't even know she was acting inappropriately, she's so out there," said Goodrich, of Indiana. "The business card, I will always believe, was handed out as campaign fodder."

Knoll said in her letter that she arrived too late to offer her personal condolences. That rankled Rhonda Goodrich, who said she believed Knoll came to get publicity.

"She didn't have time to be with Amy or Joe's parents, but she made time for the TV cameras," she said. "That's where I'm still a little bitter."

Goodrich said Knoll remarked to Joseph Goodrich's aunt that "our government" was opposed to the war.

And just to back up Rhonda's comment about Knoll not having time for the family, but being quite available to the press on the day of the funeral, Annie O'Neill of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette provides us with the photographic evidence.

One development I've noted -- and which is also noted by the Post-Gazette -- is that Rhonda Goodrich has now come under attack by the Left. It seems that she was involved in a protest against a taxpayer-funded pre-election program featuring Michael Moore at the local university. That appraently makes her a "Right Wing activist" with an axe to grind whose complaints should be dismissed as "exploiting her brother-inlaw's death for political reasons." I guess that those making such statments believe that only Left Wing activists may avail themselves of the First Amendment right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Such statements, I believe, tell us more about them and their moral depravity than it does about Rhonda.

(Hat Tip -- Michelle Malkin)

Previously:
End This Arrogant Pol's Career
Looks Like We've Made A Difference!
Knoll Responds

Posted by: Greg at 03:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 353 words, total size 3 kb.

Reuters included this little gem of an error is an article about Sony buying the movie rights to Richard Clarke's first novel.

His novel, "The Scorpion Gate," will be published in October by Putnam Adult. The studio hopes the film adaptation will be the first in a series of John Clancy-style political thrillers. The project will be produced by former studio chief John Calley.

Uhhhh -- I think you mean TOM Clancy?

I know mistakes happen -- but isn't that what editors are for?

I wonder when and if they correct the error -- and if they acknowledge having done so.

Posted by: Greg at 03:16 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 115 words, total size 1 kb.

Reading that headline, you may think I am nuts. After all, who could be against justice for slain police officers (or any murder victim)? Certainly not me, which is why I oppose the bill. It does nothing to get justice for murdered cops -- and has the effect of lowering the maximum sentence for cop-killers who manage to skip across the border into Mexico. Speaking as the brother of a cop, I don't find that acceptable at all.

Bob Baker, president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, does a good job of explaing the problem with this well-intentioned bill sponsored by Congressman David Dreir.

Mexico has become a fugitive paradise, willingly harboring and giving sanctuary to hundreds of murderers who have fled the United States after their crimes. A 2001 Mexican Supreme Court decision in essence halted all extraditions of Mexican citizens, or those Americans of Mexican descent. That decision forbade Mexico from extraditing any person, whether or not a Mexican citizen, if that person faced a sentence that carried the possibility of life imprisonment, saying it would violate the Mexican constitution and was "cruel and unusual punishment." In addition, Mexico has consistently refused to extradite murderers if they faced the death penalty.

Dreier's legislation only worsens the situation.

The legislation, ostensibly designed to get cop killers returned to the United States, gives exclusive jurisdiction over such cases to the federal government. Washington then gets to decide, in negotiation with the foreign government harboring the cop killer, the sentence the killer will face. Only after the sentence is agreed upon would there be an extradition. The terms of the extradition treaty would preclude any state prosecution.

Yeah, that's right -- if someone managed to slip out of the US, they would be subject to a lesser penalty than if they were caught within the borders of the United States. Prosecution would be handled by the Federal Courts, with state charges forbidden (a violation of federalism). That's not acceptable to me, and shouldn't be to any American.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley succinctly pointed out these shortcomings in a blistering letter to Dreier. Cooley noted that while nicely titled, Dreier's legislation is nothing more than a sleight of hand that would, in the end, cheapen the sentence for the murder of police officers, acquiesce to the demands of Mexico, and provide an incentive for the murderers of law enforcement officers to flee to Mexico.

Let me be clear. If -- God forbid! -- something ever happens to my brother, I want to see the creep involved get the maximum possible penalty. (If it isn't the death penalty, I want 5 minutes with the cameras off so that I can administer 9mm of justice on behalf of my sister-in-law and my niece and my nephew.) What I do not want is for some Joe Wilson-type mint-tea-and-cookies diplomat to sit down with his corrupt Mexican government amigo and work out a sentence in advance of the trial and without regard to the penalties set forth by law.

The district attorney also pointed out that the Peace Officer Justice Act ignores the plight of all the other violent crimes committed by those who flee the country. It also discounts the considerable experience and expertise of local prosecutors who routinely prosecute murder cases.

I also object to the fact that this does nothing for the victims of crimes against ordinary citizens. This December will be the tenth anniversary of the "thrill-kill" murder of a former colleague's daughter by a couple of Mexican gangbangers who jumped back across the border. One was eventually arrested in Mexico, but the same ruling that prevents the extradition of cop killers also prevents the extradition of Kristie's murderer. Where is the justice in ignoring the deaths of ordinary Americans?

In the end, all I can say is that the status quo is better than the Dreier bill.

Posted by: Greg at 03:06 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 662 words, total size 6 kb.

Michelle Malkin has been chasing down Lt. Governor Catherine Baker Knall's response to the outrage at her conduct at the funeral of SSGT Joseph Goodrich.

Knoll won't speak publicly about her conduct. She won't hold a press conference to take questions about her conduct. She won't take press phone calls on the matter. She is even refusing calls from constituents and veterans groups on the matter.

And here is her "letter of apology".

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 25, 2005 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Office of the Lieutenant Governor Commonwealth News Bureau Room 200, Main Capitol Harrisburg, PA 17120 LT. GOVERNOR CATHERINE BAKER KNOLL LETTER OF APOLOGY HARRISBURG: July 25, 2005

Dear Mrs. Goodrich,

I am writing to further apologize and clarify what happened at the funeral of your beloved husband, Joseph. As a wife and mother, I can only imagine how difficult it must be to lose your spouse so suddenly. As an adored member of your family and one of PennsylvaniaÂ’s sons serving with soldiers from across the commonwealth, SSGT Joseph Goodrich, is one of this nationÂ’s heroes.

As I said in my phone message to Rhonda, after I learned through press reports that your family was offended by my attendance, I was incredibly upset. I wanted to assure you once again that my intention was not to add to what must be a tremendously, heartbreaking, difficult period.

The war on terror is an immensely personal conflict for the thousands of people whose families continue to serve with honor, and I have attended dozens of funerals to offer my sympathy and condolences to the families of soldiers who have paid the ultimate sacrifice.

My heart and prayers are with your family, and to the families of all the men and women serving the cause of freedom in the fight against terror. I unfortunately, did not arrive at the church services for SSGT GoodrichÂ’s funeral in time to offer my personal condolences to you. As I also mentioned on RhondaÂ’s phone message, as I do with many Pennsylvanians I meet, I offered my business card so she could contact me, and as a sign of my willingness to help the family through this difficult time in any way I can. To do anything that was deemed insensitive was completely counter to my intent.

Sergeant GoodrichÂ’s service was beyond the call of duty. If my regard for his familyÂ’s grief was seen another way, it is thoroughly regrettable. The fact that you have been offended deserves and receives my most profound apology.

I will continue to support our troops in my role as Lt. Governor and support our President as an American. That I somehow conveyed an impression that was interpreted as other than that will forever be saddening and upsetting to me.

Again, please accept my heartfelt apology and deepest sympathy.

Sincerely,
Catherine Baker Knoll
Lieutenant Governor

Let's assume that the explanation of the business card issue is accurate. It sounds sort of reasonable, and is at least plausible. I'd be willing to let that go -- EXCEPT for what she conspicuously leaves out of the "apology".

Yeah, that's right. There is something that is not addressed.

You know. The comment.

"I want you to know our government is against this war."

The letter completely fails to address what she said to this hero's family in the church during the funeral. She glossed over the most egregious offense by saying she 'supports the troops' -- and offered a Durbinesque apology for impressions, feelings and interpretations by the family. SHE NEVER APOLOGIZES FOR WHAT SHE SAID!

More commentary from The Anchoress, Bill Hennessey, Rambling's Journal, Brian J. Noggle and Blackfive.

Posted by: Greg at 10:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 612 words, total size 4 kb.

Yesterday, I helped make a fuss over the disgusting actions of Pennsylvania Lt. Governor Catherine Baker Knoll, along with many other folks around the blogosphere, including Blackfive and Michelle Malkin. Well, we seem to have had some effect.

Written apologies will be sent to a fallen Marine's relatives angered by Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll's uninvited appearance at the soldier's funeral and her criticism of the war in Iraq, Gov. Ed Rendell said Sunday.

Rendell said he will send a personal letter to the family of the late Marine Staff Sgt. Joseph Goodrich, of Westwood, and will ask Knoll to do the same. Goodrich, 32, a police officer and infantry unit leader, died July 10 in a mortar attack in Hit, Iraq.

Rendell said he hadn't spoken with Knoll about the incident, but was disturbed by the family's charge that she made a political statement against the war.

"It's not the business of state government to support the war, but our state supports the men and women who are fighting this war," Rendell said during an appearance in Mt. Washington.

Lt. Governor Knoll, on the other hand, is trying to backpedal through her spokesperson -- but has failed to speak herself, or to contact the offended family.

Knoll spokesman Sean Pendrak would not comment specifically on the Goodrich family's allegations.

"Obviously, the lieutenant governor extends her most sincere condolences to all families who have lost loved ones in the fighting," Pendrak said. "She also wants to convey her support of all of our fine young men and women in uniform."

That support means little to Rhonda Goodrich, who believes Knoll was more interested in jump-starting next year's re-election bid than offering genuine sympathy to mourners.

"She never said to anyone, 'If there's anything I can do to help, just call my office,' " Goodrich said. "It seems like she's going to funerals and using business cards as campaign fliers."

Rhonda Goodrich remains angry, but she is grateful for one thing.

"I'm glad she didn't sit down next to me and say those things," Goodrich said. "I would have smacked her on the spot."

You know, part of me wishes that Knoll HAD sat down next to Rhonda -- she might have gotten a small measure of what she deserves.

Now if we can just get this woman out of office -- she is still a disgrace.

(Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin, Narcissistic views on News/Politics, Blackfive, and Irish Pennants)

And look -- Chris Muir has taken notice!

Posted by: Greg at 03:01 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 428 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Greg, thanks for posting the toon, even when I had to make corrections!

Posted by: chris Muir at Mon Jul 25 05:11:27 2005 (g/gbg)

2 Hey, what an honor. Chris Muir graced your website, Greg.

Posted by: mcconnell at Mon Jul 25 06:41:41 2005 (yJZQw)

3 Chris --

What can i say -- I've been a fan forever. The mistakes just prove you are human, not a god.

Or maybe that you are merely a demi-god.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Mon Jul 25 09:01:09 2005 (ajHgW)

4 If gods are fat, well then...

Posted by: chris Muir at Mon Jul 25 09:57:46 2005 (g/gbg)

5 I am not convinced even these 'apologies' rise to the minimal standard of an apology. Both Rendell's and Knolls' comments (which last I looked were only hinted at by Michelle Malkin) were more caveat ridden excuses instead of meaningful apologies.

If you are interested here is my latest post with a link to the Rendell post

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/425

Mark me down as unsatisfied and unimpressed.

Posted by: AJStrata at Mon Jul 25 10:11:33 2005 (67DAA)

6 There is nothing for Scholl to apologize for. Rhonda Goodrich is a Right Wing activist exploiting her brother-in-law's death for poltiical reasons. Shame on her. Hopefully, as more people in the media figute out who Goodrich is, the chickens will come home to roost. She successfully manipulated people, but it won't last.

Posted by: June Gordon at Mon Jul 25 19:36:57 2005 (+vcVQ)

7 And you base your assessment on what, exactly, June? I mean seriously -- if you are ging to make that accusation, what is the evidence for it?

Clearly you don't really have any evidence or understanding of the details -- after all, you can't even bother to get Lt. Gov. Knoll's name correct.

But since you raised the issue -- Who is Rhonda Goodrich, and what should we "figure out" about her? And what constitutes her "Right Wing activis[m]".

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Tue Jul 26 00:17:20 2005 (pCcWs)

8 Fact: It was a memorial service for a fallen service member. A time for FAMILY and FRIENDS to come together and remember the departed and to grace his memory. This official, as far as I have been able to discern, was neither. Since when is it good manners to intrude upon a family's grief.

Posted by: Jan Perry at Tue Jul 26 06:53:45 2005 (uNVZy)

9 June Gordon,
Nothing "will come out about me"....To accuse someone of exploiting a loved ones ( A heros ) funeral is obscene...The event we ,NOT taxpayers sponsered against Michael Moore came about because the university would not let Ann Coulter counter Moore.Professors gave extreme amounts of extra credit to those students who would see Moore. None given to the other side
You know nothing of me or my beliefs, you know nothing of the Marine Corp either. I have received hundres of letters from Marines and Marine family who are disgraced at Knolls words and actions.
My family ( not just myself have been talked to by the press to verify the dispicable behavior of Knoll.
So write these Marines and ask who they are minipulating!
Republican or demorcrat is not the issue. The issue is a women holding as a high ranking officials gave her unwanted opinion to a grieving family memebr of a fallen Hero.
Get a grip June
Rhonda Goodrich

Posted by: Rhonda Goodrich at Tue Jul 26 12:15:21 2005 (P93XD)

10 Rhonda, you are a hypocrite. (Assuming of course that the person who posted is the Right Wing activist.) Your motivation for attacking Knoll is that she does not share your politics, not her attending the funeral. She has attended many such funerals, and despite the presence of many Republicans no one else sunk so low as to attack Knoll for political reasons. Your antics at rallies against anything you consider 'liberal,' including the puerile displays at Michael Moore events, pale in comparison. Yes, some people have figured out that you are the person in the wrong. It was graceful of Knoll to apologize, but she had no real reason to do.

(Rhymes, your question is answered as well.)

This foolishness about 'private' funerals needs to stop. People attend funerals they are not expressly invited to often. Nor is Knoll alone in attending the funerals of soldiers in her area to pay respects. The governor of Oregon has tried to attend the funerals of all soldiers killed in Iraq. There is nothing wrong with that. We need to focus on things that unite us, such as regret for people who die young, instead of succumbing to the incitements of trouble makers like Rhonda Goodrich.

Posted by: June Gordon at Tue Jul 26 14:31:17 2005 (+vcVQ)

11 Actually, you have provided exactly ZERO in the way of evidence. And would you clarify which "people have figured out that [Rhonda is] the person in the wrong"

After all, I could use your letter about Guide Dogs in Ragged Edge to claim that you are an activist against the disabled.

Ultimately, Knoll arrived late for the funeral and didn't meet with the widow or parents of the deceased soldier -- but was more than willing to talk to the press outside the Church. That doesn't sound like paying respects to me. Neither does making anti-war statements to other family membrs in the Church during the funeral.

Knoll is a disgrace.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Tue Jul 26 15:01:03 2005 (AOU2g)

12 "and despite the presence of many Republicans no one else sunk so low as to attack Knoll for political reasons. "

Please tell that to the the hundreds of people who wrote Tribune -Review, Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Called numerous radio stations , flooded the Lt Gov office with emails and phone calls....Marines from all over the country
You madam seem to be the be activist here.

"Your antics at rallies against anything you consider 'liberal,' including the puerile displays at Michael Moore events, "

Only one Rally in 38 years, not Rallies,
The university would not balance the debate and denied students request for balance.
Me an activist? You do sound like a lefty activist.You make no sense and ramble on about things you know nothing about.
This is the last post to you Ms.Gordon. Clearly you are the minority in your feelings on this issue . Do some research before you spew off. It really makes you look ignorant....It's people like you who should Thank and be so utterly gratefull to hero's like SSGT.Goodrich...Without them you'd be obsolete.

(to Greg)
Your email did not come through ,please resend

Posted by: Rhonda Goodrich at Tue Jul 26 16:29:42 2005 (P93XD)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

No, I'm serious -- who is responsible for feeding the children? Is it the parents, or is it the government?

That is my reaction to an editorial in today's Houston Chronicle.

Last month, needy children ate more than 2 million free, nourishing meals thanks to the Houston Independent School District. The Galena Park school district fed wholesome meals to 48,000 hungry youngsters.

Both school systems should be commended for recognizing the importance of a reliable, accessible source of food for children whose parents can't provide it. So it's inexplicable that both districts left the same kids utterly adrift when both shut their doors to prepare for the school year.

Now wait just one minute here. What is the business of a SCHOOL district? Is it providing an education for its students, or is it the complete care and feeding of the kids year round? I think the answer is obvious to sensibele, thinking people. That would explain why the Chronicles editorial staff gets the answer wrong.

Now I have to be careful here, because I work in one of these districts, but it seems to me that we have lost focus on the mission of the public schools. That mission is the intellectual, social, and moral education of children. It is not to be a one-stop medical/feeding/day-care center. During the school year, my district offers a free day-care program for the offspring of our students, a free/low-cost heath care clinic for students, and a free/reduced lunch program for all students. This summer it offered free breakfast and lunch for any "child" who walked in off the street, regardless of income -- and "child" was defined as AGE 20 AND UNDER! That's right. We had "children" age 18-20 (what most thinking people would generally refer to as "adults") walking into school buildings and being fed at taxpayer expense. What was even more absurd, the regulations imposed by the federal government forbade the sale of these same meals to school employees who were working in the building, including those of us who were actually teaching summer school!

Now, though, that the program is over, the Chronicle is upset that these districts are shirking some sort of purported moral responsibility to feed the children when there is no school in session.

Like other school districts around the country, Houston and Galena Park are eligible for reimbursement from the federal government for food and operating costs of student free meal programs. The government pays $2.74 for each meal a child consumes, which can be used to hire staff to handle the food and monitor the number of meals served. But as summer school ends and the fall semester starts to loom, school systems apparently find it difficult to keep serving the federally-funded meals on their campuses. Galena Park stopped serving its meals Friday; HISD shut most of its 256 cafeterias several weeks earlier.

This needless lapse in stewardship should not be allowed to happen. Even if entire school systems must close their doors for maintenance, the schools can still act as conduits to get that free food to poor children. Even after a district has ended its program for the summer, it can restart it again as a sponsor for another site, almost until the start of the school year. All the district needs to do is contact nonprofits, whether community centers or churches willing to provide a site where children can eat. Schools can invite teachers or contract cafeteria personnel to freelance as food managers at the interim locations. More than likely, some parents and other community members would be happy to oversee a meal program for free.

Arranging interim food service in the summer might be time-consuming, but what task could be more urgent?

I don't suppose that the Chronicle ever considered proposing that private groups run such programs without government money or oversight. After all, how can we possibly expect there to be positive results without government involvement? And I can't help but laugh at the notion that teachers should volunteer to run such programs -- after all, Texas teacher salaries are only about $6000 below the national average. Why doesn't the Chronicle send its employees out during the middle of the day to run such programs if, as they claim, "there is no task which could be more urgent"? All of this overlooks such antiquated notions as having the children fed a meal at home, prepared by a parent or other family member.

It's certainly feasible: In San Antonio, the schools have organized an almost seamless transfer of summer meals. There is no excuse for Harris County school districts to deny the same services for our own hungry children.

Right now, tens of thousands of Houston children are going without needed meals. Administrators at HISD and GPISD should get on the phone to help them right now. They'll likely find plenty of nonprofits eager to lend a hand. Galena Park Boxing Academy, which is also a child enrichment center, has space for 200 children to eat free meals at once, academy President Kenny Weldon said. The facility can even supply a monitor.

"Of course we'd be willing," Weldon said. "What do you do — take care of kids for one part of the year but not the other?"

But then again, maybe I am too hard-hearted. Maybe the editorial is right. Children need to be fed year-round, and parents are clearly not up to the task.

But what about other school breaks and holidays? These children should not be left to fend for themselves for a week or two at Thanksgiving, Christmas, or Spring Break! Clearly, the cafeterias must remain open during those times off as well.

And what about the irresponsible practice of sending children home on Friday afternoon and closing the cafeterias over the weekend? It seems absurd that we would expect children to survive through a Saturday and a Sunday without a hot breakfast and lunch. School districts need to keep the cafeterias open on the weekend as well, to avoid subjecting our nation's children to two whple days without nutrition.

I've also got a solution to what I see as the "dinner problem". By extending the school day by two or three hours, we can make sure that each student gets a hot dinner, ensuring three square meals a day. The interim time could be devoted to additional instructional time, though I certainly see the objections of those who see the extra classroom time as educators over-emphasizing academics.

But what I've not managed to solve is how to guarantee that evey child gets a bowl of ice cream and a kiss on the forehead before bed. What do you think -- are parents up to such a task?

Posted by: Greg at 02:15 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1136 words, total size 7 kb.

For once I agree with the Houston Chronicle on something.

It's official: Lance Armstrong makes it a magnificent seven

Lance Armstrong closed out his amazing career with a seventh consecutive Tour de France victory today -- and did it a little earlier than expected.

Because of wet conditions, race organizers stopped the clock as Armstrong and the main pack entered Paris. Although riders were still racing, with eight laps of the Champs-Elysees to complete, organizers said that Armstrong had officially won.

The stage started as it has done for the past six years -- with Armstrong wearing the race leader's yellow jersey. It ended the same way, too -- with him celebrating, this time by a comfortable margin of more than 4 1/2 minutes.

One hand on his handlebars, the other holding a flute of champagne, Armstrong toasted his teammates as he pedaled into Paris to collect his crown. He held up seven fingers -- one for each win -- and a piece of paper with the number 7 on it.

When it was over, Armstrong saluted the race he's made his own.

"Vive le Tour, forever," he said.

Well done!

Posted by: Greg at 01:23 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 197 words, total size 1 kb.

Once again, the Israelis are making noise about the "unjust" sentence of traitor Jonathan Pollard, who betrayed the United States by spying for Israel.

Knesset Law Committee chairman Michael Eitan, a former chairman of the Knesset Pollard caucus, expressed disappointment with the US legal system. Israel has proven to be more humane than the US, Eitan said, noting that nuclear spy Mordechai Vanunu served only 18 years.

"Pollard is serving a sentence disproportionate to his crime," Eitan said.

He said he believed that the Pollard case could now only be resolved between the US president and the Israeli prime minister.

Now I'll agree that the sentence is disproportionate to the crime -- but unfortuantely, Pollard did not qualify for the death penalty which he richly deserved. And it is an injustice that he is serving this sentence alone -- but the Isaelis refused to turn over those officials who recruited and coordinated his betrayal of the United States, as well as those who approved his spying.

Let me offer Israel this easy-to-understand message from one American citizen -- shut up about Pollard, and quit trying to get him released. Remember that you are the JUNIOR partner in this strategic relationship, and that you need the US much more than we need you, given that you suck at the US foreign aid teat to the tune of at least $4 billion annually. Any American president who lets Pollard go will be rejected by the American people, if not impeached. So Pollard will stay in a US prison, where he belongs, until he rots -- and that is how it should be. Deal with it.

Posted by: Greg at 01:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 287 words, total size 2 kb.

Congressman Tom Tancredo makes an excellent point in response to those who criticize his misreported, mishcharacterized "nuke Mecca" statement.

Fundamentalist Muslims have advocated the destruction of the West since long before the attacks of Sept. 11, long before the Madrid, London and Bali attacks, long before the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, long before the attack on the USS Cole and the 1993 WTC bombing.

In many respects, the decision of "moderate" Muslims to acquiesce to these actions and even provide tacit justification for them is just as damaging to global safety and security as the attacks themselves.

Until "mainstream" Islam can bring itself to stop rationalizing terrorist attacks and start repudiating and purging people like Ali and Hajjar from its ranks who do, this war will continue. As long as this war goes on, being "offended" should be the least of anyone's worries.

Exactly -- and until "condemnations" of terrorism and extremism by Muslim groups and organizations stop having a "but" in them, I don't care if how offended the Muslims are.

Posted by: Greg at 10:36 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 178 words, total size 1 kb.

I really didn't. I never imagined hat anyone could sink lower than the arrogant politician I listed below. I didn't think that any so-called American could degrade our honored war dead and their faimlies any further.

And now I find that I am wrong. That someone could do this to the pregnant widow of a dead soldier is so incredibly infuriating.

Vandals are compounding the grief of a Tri-state soldier's family.

Not even 24-hours after Private First Class Tim Hines's wife and family said goodbye at his funeral, American flags that had adorned their Fairfield yard were piled beneath a car and burned.

Hines' sister-in-law woke up to hear her car alarm around 5:30 a.m. and saw her car on fire.

As firefighters brought the fire under control they discovered a pile of around 20 American flags underneath the car.

Neighbors say Hines' wife's family had flags line their front yard and on the porch.

Those were taken as well as flags in neighboring yards.

Hines was injured in Iraq and flown to Walter Reed Hospital in the Washington, D.C. area, but succumbed to the injuries before he could return home.

Hines' wife Katy is eight-months pregnant with their second child. She buried her husband on Friday.

Katy Hines had just moved back into her parents' home and woke up to find her sister's car consumed by flames.

Investigators believe the flags piled underneath were used to start the fire.

There are no words -- only fury.

And yet some still want to claim that their "dissent" is a higher form of patriotism than support for our troops. Yet such actions prove that it is really treason.

God bless and comfort the Hines family -- and may He righteously deal with those who committed this evil act.

(Hat Tip -- NeoBabble, Instapundit, Along The Tracks, The Anchoress, and The Violence Worker.)

UPDATE -- I've just come across this article, which adds a beautiful act of kindness to this sad story.

Hines met his wife, Katy, at Cincinnati Christian School. They had a 2-year-old daughter, Lily, and Katy expects to give birth to their second child in about two weeks.

An anonymous donor gave Cincinnati Christian $130,000 to cover tuition for Hines' children.

I do not know who you are, but God bless you for this gift. May you be richly reqarded in heaven.

Posted by: Greg at 10:20 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 407 words, total size 3 kb.

Staff Sgt. Joseph Goodrich of Indiana, PA died on July 10, 2005, fighting for his country in Iraq. He is a hero, and as such he and his family deserve to be treated with the utmost respect. That is why the actions of Pennsylvania Lt. Governor Catherine Baker Knoll are particularly egregious.

Now put yourself in the place of the Goodrich family. You have lost a family member. You are at the funeral in a church full of mourners. And then someone you don't even know shows up at the church and plunks down among the family. I'll let Rhonda Goodrich, Staff Sgt. Goodrich's sister-in-law, pick up the narrative.

In a phone interview, Goodrich said the funeral service was packed with people "who wanted to tell his family how Joe had impacted their lives."

Then, suddenly, "one uninvited guest made an appearance, Catherine Baker Knoll."

She sat down next to a Goodrich family member and, during the distribution of communion, said, "Who are you?" Then she handed the family member one of her business cards, which Goodrich said she still has.

"Knoll felt this was an appropriate time to campaign and impose her will on us," Goodrich said. "I am amazed and disgusted Knoll finds a Marine funeral a prime place to campaign."

Goodrich said she is positive that Knoll was not invited to the funeral, which was jammed with Marines in dress uniform and police officers, because the fallen Marine had been a policeman in McKeesport and Indiana County.

"Our family deserves an apology," Rhonda Goodrich said. "Here you have a soldier who was killed -- dying for his country -- in a church full of grieving family members and she shows up uninvited. It made a mockery of Joey's death."

What really upset the family, Goodrich said, is that Knoll said, 'I want you to know our government is against this war,' " Goodrich said.

Yeah, you read that right -- during the funeral for one of our honored war dead, this arrogant BITCH of a politician had the audacity to look a member of the family in the eye say "I want you to know our government is against this war."

I'm sorry -- I've never been a big believer in having politicians at funerals unless they are friends of thedeceased, the family or are otherwise invited guests. They certainly should not be showing up in any sort of "official capacity" without clearing it in advance with the family. And no one at a funeral should do or say anything to add to the distress or the grief of the surviving family. There are other times and places for that.

But that is what Lt. Governor Knoll did. She showed up uninvited. She dishonored the deceased hero. She deeply hurt and offended the family.This woman needs to be driven from office by the people of Pennsylvania and loyal Americans everywhere -- whether they be supporters or opponents of the war in Iraq. Some things are simply beyond the pale. Dishonoring a dead Marine and distressing his family falls into that category, and must be reason to end her career.

Further commentary on this issue from Blackfive, Large Bill Pontificates, Pennywit, Media Lies, The Indepundit, and Michelle Malkin (who even quoted me!)

Posted by: Greg at 03:33 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 554 words, total size 4 kb.

1 Greg I agree,rude witch can't behave herself no better than that she deserves to run out of office actually the old fashioned way via a mob of angry tax payers.this modern way of doing politics doesn't work!it is a proven failure!one way would be to get her out of office but my personal favorite is for her to be run out with a stick or a pipe.

Posted by: Lisa Gilliam at Sat Jul 23 17:45:14 2005 (ynXtq)

2 Couldn't agree more. How dare she. How DARE she?

Dishonring someone from my hometown (Indiana, PA) while she was at it, too. Let's run Jabba the Hutt (Gov. Rendell, who looks like aforementioned Star Wars character) and his minion out of Harrisburg.

Posted by: B. Minich, PI at Sat Jul 23 19:52:44 2005 (XX1SF)

3 Sounds like she's been taking lessons in etiquette from DailyKos.

Posted by: marcus at Sat Jul 23 21:18:49 2005 (mq+EB)

4 I'm out here in Iraq with the 3d Battalion, 25th Marines, SSgt Goodrich's unit. I can't articulate the disgust and the revulsion I feel upon reading this news.

As a Marine Corps officer, it is unethical for me to express political opinions, but my opinion of this sorry excuse for a human being has nothing to do with politics. After seeing dozens of my fellow Marines in my battalion get killed these past few months, I always felt that at the very least that these men were being honorably brought back to their families and laid to rest with as much dignity as our nation could afford to provide.

This woman has misrepresented our government, and poorly represents the state of Pennsylvania. If Pennsylvanians have any self-respect at all, they will take whatever legal methods are available and toss her out of office immediately.

Posted by: Mike Rentner at Sat Jul 23 22:48:49 2005 (ru0sP)

5 More proof, as if any were needed, that the Dems are becoming completely unhinged. And as they continue to slander Rove, Tancredo and Roberts, they will remain silent about her, as they did about Durbin, Dean and Reid.

Posted by: Jim O'Sullivan at Sun Jul 24 01:19:00 2005 (ywZa8)

6 This is exactly what happens when desperation rears its ugly head in trying to hold onto Democratic powers by doing the most ridiculous, most abusive, and the most asinine actions. She gets the Howard Dean Award.

Posted by: mcconnell at Sun Jul 24 03:38:51 2005 (2J8V4)

7 Don't count on Dem moonbats being run out of Pennsylvania.

The Democrats own the labor unions and the bloated urban/state public employees. Resistance is futile.

I lived in Pittsburgh for a few years where the Dems drove the city to near bankrupcy and still overwhelmingly got re-elected. PA is one of the most corrupt states in the nation - just look at the Turnpike Commission for starters.

I wish the story had ended with someone at the funeral decking this hag.

Posted by: onecent at Sun Jul 24 06:48:46 2005 (i5+jM)

8 onecent - have to concur about Pittsburgh - why they kept electing Murphy until he wanted to leave himself is beyond me.

Philly is even worse, and they outvote the rest of the state.

However, Rendell isn't invincible - I think he can be defeated with the right candidate. Just not sure who that will be (though Lynn Swann would be interesting - being a former Steeler could be enough to get him the Pittsburgh vote, though that would turn off most Philly fans. )

Posted by: B. Minich, PI at Sun Jul 24 16:52:47 2005 (ChDjf)

9 I thought politicians go to military funerals all the time? You guys make it sound like she got on the podium and insulted the family. Could it be that she actually took the time to attend a funeral of a Marine and to pay her respects? Do you need an invitation to go to a funeral? If so, why the hell do you need obituaries? I don't get it.

Posted by: ChenZhen at Sun Jul 24 21:29:32 2005 (tRstH)

10 Politicians go to funerals when they're invited.

And they don't campaign and hand out cards.

And for Pete's sake, they don't tell family members that their loved one died doing something that they don't support! And claim that the entire "government" doesn't support the reason why he died.

Get a clue, Chen Zhen

Posted by: Mike Rentner at Sun Jul 24 22:54:47 2005 (ru0sP)

11 Chen -- i think I address that point in my post. Let me repeat what I said.

I'm sorry -- I've never been a big believer in having politicians at funerals unless they are friends of the deceased, the family or are otherwise invited guests. They certainly should not be showing up in any sort of "official capacity" without clearing it in advance with the family. And no one at a funeral should do or say anything to add to the distress or the grief of the surviving family. There are other times and places for that.

Politicians/celebrities at a funeral take the focus off the deceased, and so making an appearance is inappropriate unless there is a relationship o prior clearance. Clearly thiswas not the case here -- and there was clearly no intent to honor the deceased. What's more, this woman's conduct was not acceptable -- it would be like going to the funeral of a slain narcotics officer and saying "I oppose the war on drugs"; or the funeral of this poor girl missing in Aruba and telling relatives "she would still be alive if she hadn't been out acting like a slut".

In short, it is conduct that was the problem.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Mon Jul 25 02:15:21 2005 (xtWQW)

12 I agree with Onecent, someone should have knocked this insensitive bitch on her ass. Her showing up at the funeral shows a total lack of class, handing out her card and telling the family "our government disagrees with the war" is a slap in the FACE. If I lived in PA. I would make it my mission to have her but ousted from office and run out of town on a rail.

Posted by: rick in texas at Mon Jul 25 07:16:07 2005 (QR3qh)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Today's horrific terror attack in Egypt has taken at least 88 lives, according to the most recent reports.

Egypt's president vowed Saturday to hunt down terrorists who unleashed a rapid series of car bombs and another blast in this Egyptian Red Sea resort, devastating a luxury hotel and a coffee shop and killing at least 88 people in the nation's deadliest terror attack.

The early morning attacks, which used more than a half-ton of explosives, came just two days after the latest strikes in London and sent an already jittery world reeling again. At least 119 people also were wounded, the Interior Ministry said.

With two extremist groups claiming responsibility, Egypt tightened security at other busy tourist sites like the Pyramids and Luxor, and the government and British tourist agencies sent large aircraft to the Sinai to fly home nervous tourists.

"This cowardly, criminal act is aimed at undermining Egypt's security and stability and harming its people and its guests," President Hosni Mubarak said during a live national broadcast. "This will only increase our determination in chasing terrorism."

Let's hope that Mubarak is able to run these folks to ground. Terrorists are teh enemies of all humanity.

But despite the admissions of guilt by al-Qaeda associated jihadi swine, guess who is being blamed for the attack on television bradcasts in the Arab world. You got it -- the Jews!

Shortly after the attacks, Egypt's state-run television interviewed retired army general Fuad Allam. He said that he was almost certain that Israel was behind the attacks at Sharm e-Sheikh and Taba.

According to Fuad, investigations have shown that the mastermind of the Taba attack was a Palestinian "apparently linked to Israel's security forces."

He added: "I'm almost certain that Israel was also behind this attack because they want to undermine our government and deal a severe blow to our economy. The only ones who benefit from these attacks are the Israelis and the Americans."

Allam's remarks were re-aired several times during the day by Egyptian TV. Other commentators who made similar charges against Israel included political figures and prominent journalists and editors.

Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, the Arab world's leading satellite TV stations, also hosted a number of commentators who claimed that Israel was behind the latest wave of terror in Egypt.

Dia Rashwan, an expert on Islamic terror groups, from Cairo, said in a phone interview with Al Arabiya: "Israel is the only country that benefits from this," he said, referring to the attacks in Sharm e Sheikh.

Dismissing the theory that Al Qaeda was behind the attacks, Rashwan explained: "We are giving Al Qaeda more credit than it deserves. What happened here negates the possibility that the attacks were carried out by ordinary elements. This is the work of an extraordinary element – one that benefits from such attacks. All the available details indicate that only the Israelis could have done this."

Majdi Birnawi, another "security expert," told Al Jazeera that he was confident that the Mossad was behind the attacks. "I believe that Mossad or some other [Israeli] security organization carried out this attack," he claimed.

Birnawi said he believed Saturday's attacks were in response to the attack at the Taba Hilton Hotel, in which 12 Israelis were killed. "Everyone knows that there are no Israelis in Sharm e-Sheikh," he said. "There are only Western tourists there. That's why it's wrong to assume that the perpetrators were targeting Israelis."

So I guess it doesn't matter if their co-religionists make a voluntary confession -- only Israel could possibly be guilty for this and every act of evil in the world. Such rampant anti-Semitism is but one more symptom of the disease of Islamist radicalism that underlies such terrorist acts.

Posted by: Greg at 03:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 638 words, total size 4 kb.

Congratualtions to Houston City Councilman Mark Ellish for his move to undo the city's sanctuary policy and have HPD officer's trained to enforce immigration law.

Since 1992, Houston police officers have been officially forbidden from enforcing immigration law in most cases. Other city departments generally take a "don't ask, don't tell" approach toward immigrants, officials acknowledge.

Now those policies are under attack. Locally, City Councilman Mark Ellis called this week for training HPD officers to enforce immigration laws. And in Washington, D.C., congressional conservatives have proposed legislation to require local police to help patrol for illegal immigrants.

Ellis, a Republican, said city officials should have heeded a 2002 proposal from then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to increase federal and local cooperation on immigration law.

"If we had done what Ashcroft and the Bush administration had asked us to do, we wouldn't have the Minutemen coming to Houston," Ellis said of the Arizona-based organization opposed to illegal immigration that has announced it will begin patrols in Houston in October.

Ellis said he does not advocate using HPD officers for raids or roundups, but critics say they fear that would be the result of such a policy change.

"It's so unjust to stop someone and ask them for their papers because they look Hispanic," said Harris County District 6 Constable Victor Treviño.

Now the only problem with Treviño's comment is that nobody is talking about random stops to check papers. What is being talked about is allowing police to inquire about immigration status and to cooperate with immigration officials who want to check the status of those being held in the city lock-up. Treviño is simply being dishonest when he talks about anything else.

ICE spokeswoman Luisa Deason said her agency would still appreciate closer cooperation from Houston police in searching for illegal immigrants who are also criminals. She noted that HPD will not let immigration officials in the city jail to check the immigration status of those detained.

An investigation last year by the Congressional Research Service cited 31 cities across the country with policies that prevent local authorities from enforcing immigration laws. That includes Houston, Katy and Austin, as well as cities such as Fairbanks, Alaska.

Some conservatives in Congress, including U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, support legislation that would cut off federal funding to such "sanctuary cities."

Not only will this extend to law enforcement, but other city departments may undo the unofficial ban on checking immigration status.

But the policy has never been formally approved by the City Council and does not officially govern other departments. Before he became a city councilman, immigration attorney Gordon Quan lobbied for a law that would make Houston a "Safety Zone" for illegal immigrants. The proposal died in 1997 after garnering no council support.

But even without the official policy, city officials outside the Police Department are not encouraged to cooperate with immigration officials, Quan notes. He does not see any point in revisiting the issue.

"I just think it would be very divisive to talk about this immigration policy," he said.

Yeah, Mr. Quan -- it might well divide you from some of your voters, namely the ones who support the enforcement of American immigration laws and those who believe in American sovereignty.

But most frightening of all is this comment by Constable Treviño.

But Treviño said that if citizens and even police started entering Hispanic neighborhoods and asking locals for their documents, it would create a major backlash.

"It'll be worse than the Civil War," he said.

So what you are saying, sir, is that there is a lawless minority among us -- folks who have broken the law to come to this country -- which will engage in acts of violence in the event we begin to enforce the laws of this country. Do you not see that it is therefore incumbent upon law enforcement to root them out, and to get them out of this country for the safety of American citizens and those aliens legally in the country? Do you not see that you are advocating surrender to the immigration criminals, jin the same manner as those who advocate appeasement of the jihadi terrorists? Frankly, sir, if you cannot bring yourself to support the enforcement of the law, you are unfit to hold your job and should resign.

Posted by: Greg at 03:39 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 730 words, total size 5 kb.