Hook, Line, And Sinker

They call it the Fish Empathy Project. That is PETA's latest campaign. It's goal? To get us big bad carnivores to show a little love to God's finned creatures by not fishing or eating seafood.

"No one would ever put a hook through a dog's or cat's mouth," said Bruce Friedrich, PETA's director of vegan outreach. "Once people start to understand that fish, although they come in different packaging, are just as intelligent, they'll stop eating them."

Really? Tell that to the Koreans and Chinese!

But why are they seeking this goal (other than being fuzzy-minded leftists)?

"Fish are so misunderstood because they're so far removed from our daily lives," said Karin Robertson, 24, the Fish Empathy Project manager and daughter of an Indiana fisheries biologist. "They're such interesting, fascinating individuals, yet they're so incredibly abused."

Oh please.

Fortunately, scientists are ready to dispute this absurdity.

"Fish are very complex organisms that do all sorts of fascinating things," said University of Wyoming neuroscientist James Rose. "But to suggest they know what's happening to them and worry about it, that's just not the case."

Which is good. After all, I wouldn't want that fillet of sole or rainbow trout to have gone through an existential crisis between the water and my plate.

And even if they cannot get us to stop eating fish, the PETA people want "more humane" commercial fishing practices -- such as a requirement that fish be stunned before being filleted on commercial boats.

For a look at the "winners" behind this goofiness, jump back to Matt Forge's piece in the Entertainment section at Lone Star Times. And to think he didn't even need to work over with Photoshop the picture over with Photoshop!

Posted by: Greg at 07:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 294 words, total size 2 kb.

Academy Of Intolerance?

A military academy is supposed to train strong leaders. Its students take an oath to uphold the Constitution, and should be prepared to respect the rights of all citizens.

Sadly, the Air Force Academy seems to be failing in that regard.


The problem, according to Lt. Gen. John W. Rosa Jr., superintendent of the Air Force Academy, is that non-Christian students are uncomfortable.

"Some students had a feeling that 'If I'm not a Christian, I feel like I'm having Christianity crammed down my throat,"' Rosa said.

According to Rosa, their level of discomfort is striking.

In surveys done in August, more than 30 percent of non- Christian students said Christian cadets are given preferential treatment, while less than 10 percent of Christian students felt that way. Only a little more than half of non- Christian students reported they "have not felt pressure to be involved in religion" at the academy.

But when it comes down to pointing out problems, Rosa would only name one.

For example, Rosa said that when the film "The Passion of the Christ" was in theaters, some cadets e-mailed their squadrons to suggest seeing it together. The film, a graphic depiction of Jesus' death, was particularly popular among evangelical Christians.

"People felt they were being coerced," Rosa said.

Good grief! They felt coerced by an invitation to view the movie with a group of their peers! Mel Gibson's film is the top grossing picture of all time, and was also the most controversial new release of the last 50 years. Of course people would suggest that their friends go to see it. And given the subject matter, it is no surprise that some would even use it as a tool of peer-to-peer evangelization. But to call an email from a peer that SUGGESTS that a group go to see the movie is hardly coercion -- at least not if you have a spine.

Rosa believes he sees where the problem arises.

Many cadets bring their family's religious values to the academy with them, Rosa said, and don't realize they might be crossing a line when they talk about religion with others. He said the academy intends to address the problem by educating cadets about tolerance.

"It's not mean-spirited. It's all they know," Rosa said. "We must ensure a climate free of discrimination and marginalization."

Ah, I understand. It is those darn Christian again. They aren't content to stay down in the catacombs. They feel like they actually have a right to come up in the sunlight and talk about their faith on the same basis they might talk about politics, football, or tomorrow's English exam. We'll just hold mandatory indoctrination classes, to re-educate these ignorant folks who think that it is acceptable to freely talk about God in 21st century America.

The frightening thing is that the general does not see the inherent contradiction present in his plan. In an effort to make sure that the minority's feelings remain unscathed, the majority will be told that the exercise of their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and free exercise of religion will be restricted via the establishment of the religion of tolerance.

And we inch forward toward the day when Americans of faith will find that they are a marginalized majority, unwelcome in the classroom, the government, and the halls of government.

Posted by: Greg at 07:03 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 563 words, total size 4 kb.

Blogger Problems!

I'm not sure why, but a number of my posts over the last few days hve not appeared. I have finally gotten them to post correctly today. So go back and take a look at what I've posted that is dated over the past few days.

Posted by: Greg at 05:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.

Is Faith Genetic?

Do genetics play a role in religious faith? One American geneticist seems to think so.

Dr. Dean Hamer, of the National Cancer Institute, makes his claim based upon a study of 2000 volunteers.

Dr Dean Hamer, the director of the Gene Structure and Regulation Unit at the National Cancer Institute in America, asked volunteers 226 questions in order to determine how spiritually connected they felt to the universe. The higher their score, the greater a person's ability to believe in a greater spiritual force and, Dr Hamer found, the more likely they were to share the gene, VMAT2.

Studies on twins showed that those with this gene, a vesicular monoamine transporter that regulates the flow of mood-altering chemicals in the brain, were more likely to develop a spiritual belief. Growing up in a religious environment was said to have little effect on belief. Dr Hamer, who in 1993 claimed to have identified a DNA sequence linked to male homosexuality, said the existence of the "god gene" explained why some people had more aptitude for spirituality than others.

Needless to say, this raises questions. Is the notion of faith undercut if belief is predetermined by genetics? Does it do away with the notion of God?

Dr. Hamer says no. In fact, he claims just the opposite.

"Religious believers can point to the existence of god genes as one more sign of the creator's ingenuity - a clever way to help humans acknowledge and embrace a divine presence."

You can read more about the subject in his book, The God Gene: How Faith Is Hard-Wired Into Our Genes.

Posted by: Greg at 05:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

O'l Dirty Bastard -- Dead At 35

Rapper O.D.B., AKA Ol' Dirty Bastard AKA Dirt McGirt AKA Big Baby Jesus AKA Russell Jones, died today in New York of an apparant heart attack. He was in the studio at the time of his death, working on a comeback album following his release from prison last year on charges of drug possession and escaping a drug treatment facility.

O.D.B. was among the founders of the Wu-Tang Clan, a group of rappers who helped change the face of the genre in the early 1990s. But for all his talent and influence, his erratic behavior and drug use wil will be the things he is most remembered for. O.D.B. is known to have fathered at least a dozen children, by a multitude of women, making him yet another poster child for male irresponsibility among the younger generation. And it may yet be determined that his high-flying lifestyle was the cause of his death.

And yet, I cannot help but be touched by one quote from the AP article announcing his death.

His mother, Cherry Jones, said she received the news of her son's death in a phone call, which she called "every mother's worst dream.''

"To the public he was known as Old Dirty Bastard, but to me he was known as Rusty. The kindest most generous soul on earth,'' her statement said. "Russell was more than a rapper, he was a loving father, brother, uncle, and most of all, son.''

I just wish that the young people who idolize him would realize that the "live fast, die young, and leave a beautiful corpse" lifestyle advocated by so many of the "gangstas" in the entertainment industry impacts lot just the "playas", but also those who love them. No mother should have to bury her child, and certainly not because of a self-destructive hedonistic lifestyle.

Posted by: Greg at 05:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 317 words, total size 2 kb.

Some People Don't Have A Clue

Eric Deggans of the St. Petersburg Times writes a mildly interesting column about the whole gay marriage issue. In it he talks about those who suggest that the Democrats should have come out agaisnt gay marriage, and why he believes that strategy would be wrong. The analysis isn't bad, neither rising above nor settling below that which the average local columnist writes. If that were all, I wouldn't bother commenting.

Deggans, however, also shows why he and many liberals don't have a clue regarding a key point on this issue.

As a black man married to a white woman, I couldn't help wondering what might have happened if Americans had voted on interracial marriage back in 1968, when the Supreme Court ruled that laws against such unions were unconstitutional. According to a Gallup poll from back then, 72 percent of respondents disapproved of the idea.

I couldn't imagine someone telling me my marriage was "too much, too fast, too soon," even then.

Expecting the Democratic Party to turn its back on a minority group fighting for equality feels too much like throwing out the baby with the bathwater - parroting a prejudice voters wouldn't believe coming from the party of Barney Frank and Ted Kennedy, anyway.

There was a time when black people were told their demands for equal housing, schools and voting rights were "too much, too soon," and they turned to the courts for victories they couldn't win at the ballot box. Can anyone blame today's gay activists - with 40 years of black-focused civil rights history behind them - for an unwillingness to wait now?

What Deggans misses is that there is a fundamental difference between the struggle for full equality for African-Americans and the gay marriage issue. More than one, actually.

• Equal rights for blacks was already contained, explicitly, in the US Constitution. The battle that was waged for decades was about enforcing what was already there, not reading into the document that which never existed and which its authors would have repudiated.
• By 1968 interracial marriage was already legal in most states outside the South, and had been for decades. While there was social stigma, the law in most places generally supported such marriages. Gay marriage is an innovation that has had to be created by courts from scratch, via a usurpation of the legislative function and the rejection of the beliefs of the people.
• A high melanin level doesn't raise moral issues. Homosexual activity does, at least for the overwhelming majority of Americans.
• Interracial marriage did not require a wholesale redefinition of the marriage, whereas gay marriage does.

Unfortunately, Deggans assumes that all opposition to gay marriage is based upon bigotry and hatred. It isn't. That allows him to discount the views of the majority without having to examine them. And it also allows him to ignore the fact that a majority of Americans, including the President, are willing to see the creation VIA THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS of some form of civil unions that will protect the rights of gay couples and their families by guaranteeing inheritance rights, medical decision-making and hospital visitation rights, and child custody rights. Many would also include healthcare and Social Security benefits, as well as adoption rights. But what most of us will not do is allow the courts to usurp the role of The People in the constitutional order of government.

Posted by: Greg at 09:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 575 words, total size 4 kb.

Help A Kerry Supporter

We keep reading articles that say Kerry voters are ready to flee the country because President Bush won. Here's a site that has been set up to help them.

Among the destinations available are the following:

• Anarchists: Antartica
• Anti-Americans: Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, or Venezuela
• Communists: Cuba, North Korea, or Vietnam
• Leftists: France, Germany, Italy, or Spain
• Socialists: Canada, Denmark, England, Finland, Norway, or Sweden

Posted by: Greg at 08:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

"Marlboro Marine" Profiled

We've seen the picture.


I've blogged on the response to it, both here and at Lone Star Times.

Now see the face behind the camouflage and the cigarette.


He is Marine Lance Cpl. James Blake Miller, a 20 year-old from Jonancy, Kentucky. And he's down to his last four packs of Marlboros. The Los Angeles Times, not may favorite paper in the world, does a halfway decent profile of the guy. I'm not sure that he is as nonchalant about the war or as disinclined to reenlist as the article makes him out to be -- but on the other hand, he sounds just like a lot of our men and women in uniform, folks who are in for a time of service to their country but who then want out so they can pursue the American Dream. In Miller's case, it sounds like that means doing auto body work.

My favorite part of the story? The explanation of the name of his hometown.

"It's named after my great-great-great grandparents: Joe and Nancy Miller," the Marine explained. "They were the first people in those parts."

God, don't you love this country, and the people who make it great.

Posted by: Greg at 07:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 204 words, total size 2 kb.

Couldn't Happen To A "Nicer" Guy

I don't like Bill Maher, and I don't know many folks who do.  So I took a little bit of guilty pleasure to find this on The Smoking Gun.

NOVEMBER 11--Comedian Bill Maher was slapped yesterday with a $9 million palimony suit by an ex-girlfriend who alleges that the HBO star subjected her to physical and verbal abuse, including "insulting, humiliating and degrading racial comments." In the below Los Angeles Superior Court complaint, Nancy Johnson, a centerfold model and former flight attendant also known as Coco Johnsen, alleges that Maher, 48, reneged on promises to pay her expenses and purchase a Beverly Hills home. Johnson, who says she dated Maher for 17 months before splitting from him in May, also contends that the performer promised to marry her and have children. Johnson, pictured at right, does not detail the degrading racial comments allegedly made by Maher, and recounts only one episode of supposed physical abuse by the host of HBO's "Real Time." She charges that Maher pulled her arm and shook her at one party, causing "injuries to her back and neck," and later that evening warned he'd hit her on the head with a hammer if she was unfaithful.

You know, I bet he didn't try any of that stuff with Ann Coulter.

Posted by: Greg at 07:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 2 kb.

Gold Star Mom Trashes Moore

Eva Savage of Livingston, Tennessee, lost her son, Marine Cpl. Jeremiah Savage, in Ramadi, Iraq, on May 12, 2004.  His was one of the pictures abused by Michael Moore on his website.  I cannot do her words justice, so I include the entire content of her remarks.  Mrs. Savage is outraged by Moore's disgraceful actions.

''I am the mother of a United States Marine. Jeremiah was killed in action in Ramadi, Iraq on May 12, 2004.

''People like Moore would have you believe that we hold President Bush responsible for my son's death. Michael Moore has not spoken to me — ever. So he cannot profess to know how I feel. He is a coward who thrives on the lives of others by twisting the truth and rewriting it to suit his own agenda.

''Lance Cpl. Jeremiah Edward Savage was a United States Marine. He was not drafted. He chose to join. It takes a special person, someone with a sense of honor, duty, commitment and courage to be a member of the Armed Forces. My son believed in his mission, in his duty to protect the way of life all Americans enjoy.

''A few Americans take that for granted and would have you believe that our military heroes have died in vain. My son did not die in vain. The only way that would be true is if you believe people like Michael Moore. My son died for Moore's right to use the First Amendment. But if Moore had said those same things about Saddam Hussein as an Iraqi, he would no longer be living.

''Michael Moore wants us to believe that the picture of President Bush's face — a mosaic of the lost lives of our soldiers in Operation Iraq Freedom — is a statement that President Bush is responsible for lives lost in vain. Let me tell you what I see: I see heroes who gave the ultimate sacrifice so we can continue to be free. I see faces that make up the face of our commander in chief who is not afraid to stand his ground, not afraid to say 'enough is enough' and will not back down to the terrorist, not afraid to cry with a mother, a wife when he meets with them, not afraid to admit he prays to the living God. I see honor, duty, commitment and courage. I see Semper Fidelis (Always faithful).

''I will continue to speak out against closed-minded co-wards like Michael Moore. I used to be afraid to say what I thought for the way someone would think of me. Not any more. You do not walk in my shoes, Mr. Moore. You do not know what I feel or think. Until you have stood where I stand, do not put words in my mouth.

''I have a voice, and it is about damn time I stop being silent. My son died giving me the right to speak, and speak loud. I will not allow his name or even his picture be disgraced.''

Some things need no further amplification.

Posted by: Greg at 05:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 521 words, total size 3 kb.

Inane Letters

It's Veteran's Day, and American troops are in combat.  So of course the Houston Chronicle will run letters attacking the troops -- for smoking in a combat zone.

Yeah, that's right.  Not one, but TWO letters complaining that a Marine getting a break from the Battle of Fallujah was shown with a cigarette.  Oh, the horror of it all!  These Smoking Nazis are concerned about the impact such a photo will have on "the children."

First we get Dr. Daniel Maloney of the Woodlands, who writes,

I was shocked to see the large photograph on Nov. 10. A tired, dirty and brave Marine rests after a battle — but with a cigarette dangling from his mouth! Lots of children, particularly boys, play "army" and like to imitate this young man. The clear message of the photo is that the way to relax after a battle is with a cigarette.

The truth is very different from that message. Most of our troops don't smoke. And most importantly, this young man is far more likely to die a horrible death from his tobacco addiction than from his tour of duty in Iraq.

Yeah, Doc, you are probably right.  The young man in the picture probably shouldn't be smoking.  But do you really have nothing better to do than chastise a Marine in combat for smoking?  One would hope you have something better to do with your time, not to mention a higher standard of decency.  Were I one of your patients, I would be looking for a new physician right about now -- and I encourage any reading this to do so.

Then there is Maynard Hovland of League City.  His entry in the "Disrespect for Veterans" competiton is shorter and more absurd.

I opened the Chronicle this morning and got slapped in the face by a huge picture of a "battle weary" Marine with a fine looking cigarette hanging out of his mouth.

I respect everyone's rights, but do we really need to encourage our young people to think that this is part of required military gear?

Well, I'm glad to know you respect people's rights. I'm sure that young man respects your right to write such an inane letter to the editor to show your disdain for his putting his life on the line for your freedom. If seeing someone with a cigarette is such a traumatizing event, I can only assume that you don't watch movies or leave your home for fear of becoming psychologically scarred by the sight of a tobacco product in use.

I'm no fan of smoking.  I've lost too many loved ones to lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, and other smoking related maladies.  But I do have a sense of proportion about that particular vice, and it seems to me that any creature comfort our fighting men can get in a war zone is one that I'm not going to criticize.

So to all our men and women in uniform, far from home and in harms way on another Veteran's Day, the smoking lamp is on.  "Smoke 'em if you got 'em!"

Posted by: Greg at 05:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 521 words, total size 3 kb.

Wallace B. Jefferson, Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court

It was a historic day for Texas.

AUSTIN -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia administered the oath of office today to Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson, the first black person to preside over the nine-member Texas Supreme Court.

A mere fourteen decades after emancipation, Texas has a Chief Justice who is the descendant of slaves. For thirteen of those decades, Texas politics were controlled by Democrats.

[Gov. Rick] Perry first appointed Jefferson to the court in March 2001 to fill a vacancy created when Alberto Gonzales left to become White House counsel for President Bush.

Apparently the Democrats were unable to find even a single qualified black candidate to serve on the court for one and a third centuries, but Republicans could easily find such a candidate, along with qualified Hispanic candidates.

Jefferson won election to the court in 2002. His term expires in 2006.

But we all know, for the media and the Democrats and the "civil rights" leaders all tell us so, that Republicans are the party of racism and segregation, while the Democrats are the party of equal opportunity and inclusion for minorities.

Yeah.

Right.

Sure.

Actions speak louder than words.

Posted by: Greg at 04:59 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 213 words, total size 2 kb.

Cornyn's Irrational Logic On Specter

My senator, John Cornyn, has made this absurd statement to explain why he will likely support Arlen Specter's bid to become chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"Based on what he told me yesterday -- if that is his position and if it is his public position and it is one we can rely on going forward -- I would not have an objection to him serving as chairman," Cornyn told reporters.

Hold on, Senator. Your use of the word "if" in that sentence should be reason enough to oppose Specter. You really don't know, and can't know, his position. Given his recent contradictory statements (both before and after the election) and his treatment of Robert Bork, the single most qualified nominee to the Supreme Court of the latter half of the twentieth century, it seems clear that anything he says now is a self-serving statement to secure the center seat. There is no way anyone can be sure where he stands.

It is really simple, Senator Cornyn. Arlen Specter should not even be permitted to SERVE on the Judiciary Committee, much less run it! If you cannot see that, perhaps it is time for those of us who work the grass roots of the party to start encouraging a primary challenge designed to make you a one-term senator.

Posted by: Greg at 07:34 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 229 words, total size 2 kb.

Blue To Leave The Union?

Secession?

Well, that's the position of Mariel Garza of the LA Daily news. She proposes that the entire West Coast secede and form its own country -- Caliwashegon. She's basing that on the fact that the red/blue map shows her part of the country to have voted for the losing candidate.

"Theoretically, it's possible," said Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional law professor at Duke University who formerly taught at the University of Southern California. "Realistically, it won't happen."

But just for the sake of giving into the hypothetical, here's how it could go: First, California leaders would have to get a mandate from residents to declare the state a republic. Neighboring states would, I guess, do the same. We would need lots and lots of money. Hey, Darrell Issa, time to break out your checkbook again. This is your chance to be secretary of state.

Once the residents are in accord, our leaders, headed presumably by President Arnold Schwarzenegger, inform Washington, D.C., that, um, sorry, we won't be participating in your little republic anymore.

Here's the tricky part. If no one else in the rest of the country objects - if Texas, Iowa, New York and all the others are glad to be free of the Left Coast wackos, good riddance - then we are home free. If not, it's time for Civil War II.

Well, setting aside the fact that such a plan is unconstitutional (not that the Democrats have cared about the Constitution since Franklin Delano Roosevelt), there is the fact that the states in question are not particularly blue -- just a few counties.


Yeah, that's right. The hate-filled rhetoric of the Ranting Left finds a receptive audience among only a relatively few counties. Most parts of most of the Blue States are not blue at all. They are filled with people who are supportive of the president and the War on Terror, people who see al-Qaeda as a bigger threat than the GOP.

But we can be gracious. We'll let Ms. Garza have California and all the rest on a county-by-county basis. That will do a way with a good chunk of her "sixth-largest economy in the world and a population larger than most countries." And by the way, Mariel, my relatives up in Oregon and Washington tell me that the local liberals even (perhaps especially) hate Californians, so I doubt you'll get the neighbors to join you in leaving the Union.

Hasta la vista, baby!

Posted by: Greg at 07:25 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 419 words, total size 3 kb.

Why Voters Rejected Gay Marriage

Every Sunday, I rush to the keyboard to get my weekly dose of Las Vegas Review-Journal columnist Vin Suprynowicz. And most weeks I am not disappointed by this iconoclastic libertarian.

Vin offers a different take on the adoption of gay marriage bans by 11 states this week (and 13 this year). I think he may have a good point, one which has been missed by the commentators I've read.

Look at the huge margins of victory for the "marriage is between one man and one woman" ballot measures adopted in 11 states Tuesday. Voters have shown no recent enthusiasm for jailing anyone for practicing homosexuality, thank goodness. The general attitude is laissez faire -- leave them alone as long as they don't frighten the horses. So what are these "gay marriage" votes really all about?

It's not at all far-fetched for parents to worry the next step could be federal "civil rights" lawsuits complaining the number of openly gay schoolteachers and chaperones in their local school doesn't meet "federal guidelines."

Conservatives aren't saying gay marriage is the start of the socialists' campaign to destroy the wholesome social institution of marriage; they seem to see it as something more closely approaching the last straw.

As I've been discussing with Jason over at Positive Liberty, I'm open to the whole concept of civil unions -- provided they are adopted legislatively rather than judicially -- to protect certain legitimate interests of homosexuals in relationships. I know very few (if any) folks who want to prevent someone from passing property to their same-sex partner or deny that partner the right to be present in a hospital room during a partner's serious illness (or even direct the medical care of that partner). Where we get hung up is calling the status of such partners "marriage" (we object to the redefinition), anti-discrimination laws (which have the effect of discriminating against many religious believers) and mandatory spousal benefits for partners (for the same reason). There are not many Rev. Fred Phelps-types out there, and most conservatives (even Christian conservatives) I know are more grouped around the libertarian paradigm. We are more than willing to co-exist in peace with homosexuals if they are willing to co-exist in peace with us -- but we will fight back when we believe we are under attack. To that end, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision on gay marriage and Mayor Newsom's antics in San Francisco have been the 9/11 of a culture war in our society, and the amendments have been our response.

Posted by: Greg at 05:07 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 432 words, total size 3 kb.

Mrs. Sharpton Leaves Al

According to my friends at Lone Star Times, after 23 years of marriage, Kathy Sharpton has left her husband, former Democrat presidential candidate, Rev. Al Sharpton.


I can only assume it is because the defeat of John Kerry guarantees that Al won't become the nation's first Secretary of Racism and Anti-Semitism.

Posted by: Greg at 10:11 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.

Arlen Specter -- Rebel Without A Clue

Fresh from having had his Senate seat saved for him by President Bush and fellow Pennsylvanian Senator Rick Santorum, prospective Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter has had the audacity to warn the President not to select conservative pro-life nominees for the Supreme Court. Already there are hints of a possible revolt against the elevation of Specter to chairman.

When asked Wednesday about Specter's impending chairmanship, another Republican on the panel, Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, did not offer a ringing endorsement.

"We'll have to see where he stands," said Cornyn, a close friend of Bush who worked to get all of the president's nominees through the Senate. "I'm hoping that he will stand behind the president's nominees. I'm intending to sit down and discuss with him how things are going to work. We want to know what he's going do and how things are going to work."

We need to encourage Cornyn and other conservatives on the committee to abort a Specter chairmanship. If you need any more reason to question Specter's judgement, all you have to do is look at this quote.

Specter also bemoaned what he called the lack of any current justices comparable to legal heavyweights like Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Benjamin Cardozo and Thurgood Marshall, "who were giants of the Supreme Court."

"With all due respect to the (current) U.S. Supreme Court, we don't have one," he said.

Though he refused to describe the political leanings of the high court, Specter said he "would characterize myself as moderate; I'm in the political swim. I would look for justices who would interpret the Constitution, as Cardozo has said, reflecting the values of the people."

Thurgood Marshall as a giant of the court? Marshall was hardly a giant as a justice (though he was probably the greatest courtroom advocate of his generation). Even a cursory reading of his opinions shows a sloppy jurisprudence which was more concerned with reaching a desired result than providing a reason for that result which was grounded in the Constitution.

On the other hand, we have a Chief Justice who is one of the great historians of the Supreme Court, and two associate justices (Scalia and Thomas) whose opinions are scholarly masterpieces of originalism and textualism. No giants on today's Supreme Court? Only if one isn't looking for them!

And as for the Cardozo quote, I need only note that such a jurisprudence would leave the Republic without the anchor of the Constitution, for "reflecting the values of the people" is usually the excuse a judge uses to substitute his own views for the text of the Constitution itself.

Posted by: Greg at 11:19 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 449 words, total size 3 kb.

Chronicle to Bush -- Repudiate Your Principles To Unite Country

With exit polls showing that moral issues were a key issue for American voters who returned President Bush to office, the Houston Chronicle had this little bit of advice to offer him.

Bush could demonstrate his sincere desire for a more united nation by discouraging the use of wedge issues and spurious constitutional amendments that have no chance of passage and would erode states' prerogatives and individual rights if they were adopted. When he has an opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court justice, as he soon might, Bush could nominate a jurist who is respected on both sides of the aisle, one likely to respect the precedent set by Roe v. Wade.

So, what needs to happen is that the President needs to repudiate the voice of the majority that elected him in order to gain the support and cooperation of those who will never support or cooperate with him!

But then they go on.

Bush will need a measure of Democratic cooperation to battle the problems the nation faces: uncontrolled deficits that could hobble the economy; an insurance crisis that threatens the health care and solvency of middle-class families and the profitability of the companies they work for; widespread resentment of U.S. foreign policy around the world, particularly among Arabs and Muslims who prefer tyranny and chaos to U.S. hegemony.

Yeah, I suspect he would need some help from the Democrats to battle many of those "problems the nation faces," which appear to have been taken word for word from the Democrat Platform adopted in Boston this summer.

But most disgusting is the unwarranted cheap shot at Talmadge Heflin, whose defeat had been a major goal and editorial policy of the Houston Chronicle for months.

While liberals might seem to have more to gain from a conservative administration's offer of harmonious cooperation, conservatives also must adapt and bend or be supplanted. Southwest Houston, where a Democratic newcomer unseated the Republican chairman of the Texas House Appropriations Committee, offers a telling example. Perhaps the constituents of the diverse district found appealing Hubert Vo's history as a hardworking immigrant. Perhaps they resented state Rep. Talmadge Heflin's family values. These include making it harder for some children to get health insurance, and using the courts in an unjust attempt to take a child away from its mother.

Kicking a man when he's down, and using half-truths to do it is pretty low -- but typical of those who set policy for that paper.

Posted by: Greg at 11:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 428 words, total size 3 kb.

VICTORY!

President Bush was reelected.

John Kerry has conceded, showing great grace and class. I hope he genuinely means the things he said in his concession.

May God bless our reelected president and our nation in the years ahead.

Posted by: Greg at 04:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 40 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, We Survived!

Precinct 333. had a good day yesterday. We voted over 1400, and had over 700 early vote. That means that given our registration 0f 3100, we had a total turnout of over 67%.

Special thanks to several people.

Janet, my Democrat counterpart who served as alternate judge, was a joy. She is proof that people of good will exist on both sides of the aisle.

My darling wife, the Loyal Opposition, came and worked for me despite feeling less than her best. That's why I love her.

Northstar, from TPRS, helped make my day a lot easier by picking up some of the slack when I didn't even realize I needed it. I may disagree with him, but he is a good guy.

And thanks as well, to all my other clerks. and to the library staff.

Posted by: Greg at 11:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.

John Kerry's Daddy

No, not George W. Bush, who is going to kick Kerry's butt on Tuesday.

John Kerry's REAL daddy.

Las Vegas Review-Journal columnist Vin Suprynowicz writes about the life and philosophy of Richard Kerry, whose membership in the Achesonian pro-appeasement wing of the State Department was well known as far back as the days of Harry Truman. He became involved in the internationalist movement in the 1950s, wrote a book opposing the Vietnam War as early as 1965, and was still criticizing the anti-Communist ideology of the Dulles brothers (and every administration between Eisenhower and Bush 41) in a book published in 1990, the year AFTER the Berlin Wall fell.

A lot of folks have moaned that the current presidential campaign has us "re-fighting the war in Vietnam." It goes deeper than that. This campaign, in many ways, is a replay of the isolationist debate of the 1930s, as revived in the "Better Red Than Dead" leftism of the 1950s.

President Bush believes the way to defeat Islamic terrorism is pretty much the way we defeated first Hitler and Tojo -- and then Russian communism. Use a full-court press; take the war to them on their own turf.

But John Kerry doesn't see the need to fight a war at all. That's what all this "nuance" business is about. It's all a misunderstanding, you see, based on American "ethnocentrism" -- on the notion that America is somehow "exceptional," that we can or should set some kind of shining example of freedom to the other cultures in the world.

That's all wrong, apparently. It represents an oversimplified "either/or" dualism, when what we need to do instead is embrace "a more sophisticated relativism."

Whether it be the communists murdering millions in pursuit of the lunatic collectivist vision of a couple of German crackpots, or Islamic mullahs beating women who go out in public with their arms uncovered and executing college professors who theorize that Mohammed might once have shaved his armpits -- and clownishly blowing up our occasional skyscraper -- we have to get over this "us vs. them" nonsense. The answer is to consult, to negotiate, to reach a compromise.

With Joe Stalin. With Mao Tse-Tung. With Pol Pot. With Osama bin Laden.

Branding these people "communists" or "terrorists" or "mass murderers" is "just name-calling," see. No one culture is superior to any other. And these guys are reasonable; they'll compromise. Maybe if we just offer them Czechoslovakia. ...

Yep -- that's the choice we face on Tuesday. The will for victory over our enemies, or the repudiation of American foreign policy since WWII and its replacement with a policy of negotiation in the face of murderous evil.

Posted by: Greg at 02:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 452 words, total size 3 kb.

Farewell To A NASA Legend

Friday marked the last flight of NASA's KC-135 aircraft used to induce temporary weightlessness. Often referred to as "the vomit comet," the plane had been in service for nine years.



As a Texan who has spent the last seven years living near Ellington Field in Houston, where the plane has been based, I've seen this aircraft come and go a lot of times. It's a beauty to watch in flight -- though a bit disconcerting to have come in for a landing (at 500 feet) over your right shoulder from behind when you are on your way to the supermarket.


The Houston Chronicle provides an interesting note.

But test director John Yaniac proudly told those who attended a post-flight briefing that over the years, the plane's crew had cleaned up at least 285 gallons of vomit.

"It's been a pleasure flying on this aircraft," he said.

Yeah. I guess you aren't the guy with the hose, the bucket, or the mop.

Posted by: Greg at 01:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 171 words, total size 1 kb.

"Article Of Faith" -- A Liberal Term Of Derision

Dr. Francis J. Beckwith, Associate Director of the J. M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies and Associate Professor of Church-State Studies at Baylor University, has a piece up over at Southern Appeal. In it he notes that the new liberal term of derision for religious belief is to call it an "article of faith."

For those of us who maintain that marriage between a man and a woman is normative and that human beings are intrinsically valuable from the moment they come into existence, Kerry?s position is condescending and insulting. By calling our views ?articles of faith,? not only does Kerry reveal a deep ignorance of what is an ?article of faith,? he implies that these views are held by many of his fellow citizens for no reason. This is because in the circles that Kerry runs ?articles of faith? are those beliefs that you are required to believe because ?that?s your religion? and not because you actually may have thought about them. That is, Kerry doesn?t seem to think that there are rational believers, individuals who have actually evaluated the competing arguments over the issues people are deeply divided and have concluded that the socially conservative positions on abortion and marriage have good support and thus are in fact true. But not just "true for me" or "true for you," but actually true for everyone.

In the end, the position espoused by Kerry presumes that religious belief is inherently irrational, and that religiously based beliefs are therefore not a fit basis for seeking a political end. Such a position betrays the entire heritage of the American political tradition. Consider the civil rights movement. Martin Luther king's position was undergirded by religious belief. It was an "article of faith" that all men could live together in brotherhood and good will, treated as equals. His message bristled with religious metaphor. Does this make the cause of civil rights unworthy, and a matter upon which there should be no legislation lest someone else's "article of faith" be disrespected? Hardly! Why, then, should the beliefs of religious Americans on abortion, homosexual marriage, or fetal stem cells be treated any differently?

Posted by: Greg at 01:31 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 375 words, total size 3 kb.

Red Sox Win!

They cap the most magnificent baseball comeback of all time by sweeping the St. Louis Cardinals. Congratulations, boys!

And may it be the only win for Boston for the next week.

Posted by: Greg at 11:16 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

Lone Star Times Debuts

It is finally here. KSEV radio's successor to Chronically Biased is here. It's called The Lone Star Times, and it came online yesterday around 5:15 pm. Go take a look, and find out more about the ambitious project.

Posted by: Greg at 11:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.

Farewell, Cowgirls!

RodeoHouston has eliminated the nightly "opening act," the Catalena Cowgirls.

My wife and I have season tickets. Hopefully we will get the Cowgirls back next year, assuming public outcry doesn't get Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo between now and this spring.

Posted by: Greg at 11:31 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 45 words, total size 1 kb.

Sometimes A Headline Says It All!

From today's Houston Chronicle:

Heinz Kerry's problem? She's a spoiled, rich brat

And I love the wrap-up.

Not to worry — there's not much to hear. Her story, stripped of hyperbole, comes to this: She was the child of privilege, and now she is the adult of privilege. Her doctor father was rich and so was her first, late husband. All her money is inherited.

After her marriage in 1966 to John Heinz, heir to the ketchup fortune, she quit her job as a translator and settled into the pampered world of the super-rich.

So she hasn't had a real job for 40 years.

Oh, yes, she does give away Heinz money. She calls herself a philanthropist.

Not exactly a job ordinary Americans can relate to. Or a first lady.

Yep -- that sums it up nicely.

Posted by: Greg at 11:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 149 words, total size 1 kb.

Riots? "Not If We Win."

Apparently the Democrats are planning to violently take to the streets if they lose. Elizabeth Edwards, whose mouth is almost as deadly to the campaign as Teresa's, was involved in the following exchange.

Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic vice-presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards, said the election would not result in riots if it ended in a victory for Sen. John Kerry. Mrs. Edwards' assertion was in response to a supporter at an event in Pennsylvania who expressed fears that the election result will produce riots.

"Uh ... well ... not if we win," Mrs. Edwards said in an exchange aired on C-SPAN.

In the same article, we find out that the Leadership Council on Civil Rights doesn't care about vote fraud or voter intimidation -- at least not if those who are hurt are white.

LCCR also reiterated its concerns about the need to protect the voting rights of blacks, Hispanics, American Indians, Asians and other minorities, urging Mr. Ashcroft to "reach out to election officials across the country to ensure they are doing all they can to combat efforts to intimidate minority voters."

Which tells us all we need to know about the state of Martin Luther King's Dream in the modern "civil rights" movement.

Posted by: Greg at 05:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 215 words, total size 2 kb.

Archbishop Speaks on Faith, Morals, and Democracy

Denver Archbishop Charles J. Chaput makes an excellent point in his commetary in the Chroinicle.

Lawmaking inevitably involves some group imposing its beliefs on the rest of us. That's the nature of the democratic process. If we say that we "ought" to do something, we are making a moral judgment. When our legislators turn that judgment into law, somebody's "ought" becomes a "must" for the whole of society. This is not inherently dangerous; it's how pluralism works.

Law and morality usually (should, in fact) go hand-in-hand. It is not a violation of the Constitution to enact a moral precept into law. Indeed, it is the responsibility of people of every faith to seek to enact laws that deal with fundamental moral issues.  That is, in the end, the obligation of each believer -- to work to enact that which they believe makes for a more just, more moral society.

Words are cheap. Actions matter. If we believe in the sanctity of life from conception to natural death, we need to prove that by our actions, including our political choices. Anything less leads to the corruption of our integrity. Patriotism, which is a virtue for people of all faiths, requires that we fight, ethically and nonviolently, for what we believe. Claiming that "we don't want to impose our beliefs on society" is not merely politically convenient; it is morally incoherent and irresponsible.

As James 2:17 reminds us, in a passage quoted in the final presidential debate, "Faith without works is dead." It is a valid point. People should act on what they claim to believe. Otherwise they are violating their own conscience, and lying to themselves and the rest of us.

Salt and Light!

Posted by: Greg at 05:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 297 words, total size 2 kb.

Persecution in Communist Vietnam

"Unauthorized" religions are still persecuted in Vietnam. Even an inoffensive pacifist group like the Mennonites canÂ’t be allowed to exist unmolested, because they acknowledge a power higher than the state.

In the September 24 attack, government officials confiscated [Pastor Nguyen Cong] Chinh's property and farm animals, set fire to the house and chapel, and then used two bulldozers to flatten the remains. Chinh was out on a pastoral visit at the time, but his wife and children were arrested by officials and detained at Vinh Quang district headquarters from 9:30 am to 4:30 pm that day. Mrs. Chinh, who is seven months pregnant, reported being hit in the stomach and stepped on while in custody. Chinh reportedly went into hiding after returning to the scene briefly after the destruction was complete.

Vietnam has been designated a "Country of Particular Concern" by the US Department of State because of its persecution of religious believers.

Posted by: Greg at 05:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 158 words, total size 1 kb.

Smart Lawyers, Dumb Columnist

You know that you will automatically get bias when you read a Rick Casey column. The man’s job is, of course, to offer opinion without a smidgin of objectivity or honesty. Since coming to the Chronicle, he has become the “designated hitter,” writing on issues that the Chronicle news pages won’t touch at all for fear of being seen as too partisan. That comes through in the opening paragraphs of this column.

District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal's response to my offer to pay the way for up to 12 felony prosecutors to see The Exonerated at the Alley Theatre was a single sentence: "I'll go if you sit through a capital murder trial." I told him I was asking for two hours. He was asking for at least two weeks.

Well why SHOULDNÂ’T he ask for two weeks? ThatÂ’s how long a real trial takes, not the two hours of cherry-picked material that Jessica Blank put in her play. CaseyÂ’s goal was to get an emotional response to a play as a means of changing policy. Rosenthal was trying to get Casey to change his opinion based upon exposure to the real work of prosecutors and judges. Those are two very different things. But when three prosecutors did take him up on the offer, that wasnÂ’t sufficient. They actually watched the play with a critical eye, knowing it to be a piece of propaganda. Even if they accepted at face value every bit of evidence about the innocence of the playÂ’s subjects that the playwright includes, that should not lead to the automatic conclusion that the system is broken, capital punishment should be abolished, and the prosecutors who handled the cases did something wrong. And as professionals, these prosecutors know that. Casey is most displeased by their failure to adopt his (and BlankÂ’s) position on the criminal justice system.

I think most audiences understand that. And most in the audiences for this play were open to the emotional impact of the personal injustice of being wrongfully convicted. The prosecutors weren't. The lesson I learned, with apologies to Hamlet, is that the play's not the thing wherein we'll catch the conscience of a prosecutor.

Yeah, Rick, thatÂ’s right. Trained in logic and law, experts in the workings of the criminal justice system, a prosecutor is not going to suspend his or her disbelief ESPECIALLY when the playwright admits her piece is a work with an agenda. They are smarter than that. Too bad you are not.

Posted by: Greg at 04:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 422 words, total size 3 kb.

Do These People Understand The System?

Well, Nick Lampson is going after Ted Poe something fierce in the Texas 9th Congressional District. It seems that probation officers havenÂ’t been enforcing some of the sentences that Poe imposed as a judge, sentences which included restitution and child support for killers who got probation from juries. And as far as the families are concerned, it is all Ted PoeÂ’s fault.

"If he can't keep promises to me, I don't know how he can keep promises to millions of people," said Sherri King, whose 6-year-old son was killed in a wreck caused by a drunken driver in 1999.

But the judge isnÂ’t the one who oversees probationers, Ms. King. Have you been in touch with the probation officer? With the prosecutorÂ’s office? After all, they have the responsibility to enforce the terms of the probation and violate the offender. Is it just that the judge is easier to blame? Or that you are a partisan who doesnÂ’t mind using your family tragedy for political ends? Lampson, of course, is more than willing to politicize the issue.

"Ted Poe's entire campaign is based on the premise that he's a victim's advocate," Lampson said. "There is a clear pattern of failing to consider the needs of the victims' families and follow through on Poe's terms of sentencing."

I wonder, did the congressman or one of his staffers try making a phone call to see if the situations could be rectified? I doubt it, otherwise he would be trumpeting it. Besides, if the situation got resolved there would be no issue to use for the campaign.

Posted by: Greg at 04:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.

Hunting v. Killing

Did John Kerry REALLY go hunting the other day?

Outdoor writer Larry Moore doesn't think so.

John Kerry did no homework for his hunting trip -- no landowner contacts, no scouting trips, no dog training. He probably did not even buy his own camouflage jacket. He probably could not recite the laws governing his hunt -- which means he did not read his Ohio Hunting Guide or the federal migratory bird rules. John Kerry is a poster boy for the Humane Society of the United States and PETA - groups that object to hunters just walking out into the fields and shooting things. What John Kerry did is not hunting -- it was killing.

Ouch!

Posted by: Greg at 04:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.

Leftist Brit Rag Publishes Call For Bush Assassination!

Blogs for Bush is a great source of information on the election. Today they link to this piece from The Guardian.

After a mouth-foaming rant against the president ("lying, sniggering, drink-driving, selfish, reckless, ignorant, dangerous, backward, drooling, twitching, blinking, mouse-faced little cheat"), columnist Charlie Brooker concludes with the following (I've added the bold-faced type):

On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?

Let's hope the British government acts against Brooker for this threat. If not, a Special Forces team should be dispatched to take Mr. Brooker for an extended vacation at Guantanamo Bay.

Posted by: Greg at 04:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 2 kb.

Some Things Are Too Good To Pass Up!

Hat Tip: The Libertarian Enterprise

Posted by: Greg at 03:39 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

Voter Intimidation By Democrats In Florida!

A glitch in the Florida early voting law leaves voters without the protection of a "buffer zone" and freedom from intimidation at polling places.

And the Democrats are taking full advantage of it, in an attempt to disenfranchise as many GOP voters as possible.

Examples include
* blocked doors;
* anti-Bush rallies next to line outside the polling place;
* physical assault of voters;
* verbal abuse of suspected Republicans;
* terroristic threats against suspected Republicans("Where's my shotgun?");
* electioneering next to voting booths by individuals wearing Kerry stickers.

Republicans have signed affidavits about the intimidation, and have complained to both the Florida Secretary of State and the Florida Democrat Party.

The response of the Democrats?

"We have had incidents as well," said Christine Anderson, spokeswoman for the Kerry campaign. "We've had quite a few."

She said the party hasn't taken affidavits from voters and found it shocking the Republicans were so focused on the issue rather than working to make sure people can vote.

Ms. Anderson, Republicans ARE trying to make sure people can vote. Apparently for you, though, that means "working to make sure people can only vote Democrat."

Posted by: Greg at 07:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 203 words, total size 2 kb.

And The Verdict Is...

Sinclair was reasonably balanced in its news special last night. Unless, of course, you are a political hack directly associated with the Kerry campaign.

After the program, Kerry spokesman Chad Clanton called it "a premeditated smear" that obscured "the plain truth -- John Kerry was a war hero who was decorated for bravery." Referring to Sinclair's top executives, he said: "It's not surprising that these guys who have given all this money to the Bush campaign did what they did."

But spokesmen for several liberal and public policy groups said in a conference call that the program was far better than they had been led to expect and that they saw no reason to support earlier Democratic demands for equal time. "In general, it appears Sinclair listened to the American people," said Gene Kimmelman, Washington director of Consumers Union. "Sinclair certainly was acting like a broadcaster should tonight."

I didn't get to see the broadcast, since I don't live in one of the markets where Sinclair broadcasts. But media reports indicate it was fair and balanced -- or at least as fair and balanced as CBS News or ABC News reports are. And I still wish that Sinclair would have broadcast the entire Sherwood documentary. It would have been equal time to all the biased "Kerry was a war hero and Bush was AWOL" nonsense put out by the mainstream media. Stolen Honor (SEE IT HERE)wouldn't have needed equal time -- it would have BEEN equal time.

I sent the following to both the FCC and the FEC this morning.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press....

Dear Commissioners,

I open my letter with the above as a reminder of the Constitutional imperative at stake in the Sinclair Broadcasting Group controversy. Congress (and by extension its creations, such as the FCC and FEC) have no business restricting political or journalistic speech. In light of this clear directive of one of our founding documents, I urge you to reject any and all complaints leveled against Sinclair Broadcasting Group.

Let us examine the content of Sinclair's special, broadcast in each of their markets yesterday. It contained approximately 5 minutes of Stolen Honor, an anti-Kerry documentary made independently of the Bush campaign. But that was balanced by slightly less than 5 minutes of Going Upriver, a pro-Kerry documentary made by individuals associated with the Kerry campaign. Portions of the broadcast discussed journalistic ethics and disparate coverage of the Vietnam-era records of the two candidates. Sinclair offered the Kerry camp the opportunity to be represented by either the candidate or a surrogate, but that offer was declined. By any standard, SInclair met standards of objectivity -- even though the tradition of American journalism dating back to the founding of the Republic is for the press to be a partisan force (hence newspapers around the country named for various political parties -- Federalist, Whig, Democrat, Republican). What was broadcast by Sinclair was clearly a news program, and therefore beyond the reach of the FCC under the First Amendment.

Yet let us presume for a moment that the special fell outside the boundaries of news, and that it was actually an unpaid political speech requiring equal time. Such an analysis is equally flawed in a Constitutional sense. Americans are not required to give equal time to speech antithetical to their own beliefs. And in light of the continuing media attacks upon the President's Vietnam-era service record, and the focus on John Kerry's alleged "war hero" status, it can be reasonably argued that the Sinclair broadcast constituted "equal time" to balance off the conventional wisdom as propagated by the media. Even a broadcast of Stolen Honor in its unedited entirety would not have outweighed the last several months (or years, in the case of attacks on George Bush's service record) of coverage slanted to give advantage to the Democrats. There is no need to give equal time (as the Kerry campaign requests), as the Sinclair special IS equal time.

In closing, this American urges you to do your duty as government official, and to act to uphold the supreme law of the land -- the US Constitution. Any law, rule, regulation, administrative decision, or court opinion to the contrary is null and void if it is in conflict with the clear meaning of that charter which authorized and frames the federal government. Abide by the terms of your oaths of office, and reject each and every attempt to punish Sinclair Broadcasting Group and its stations for engaging in what the Founding Fathers would have unambiguously viewed as speech protected by the First Amendment.

Posted by: Greg at 04:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 782 words, total size 5 kb.

No Respect For Our Troops

Michelle Malkin brings us a transcript of Kerry surogate Larry O'Donnell's recent McLaughlin Group appearance. Notice the great respect he demonstrates for our men and omen in the field. Given Kerry's betrayal of an earlier generation of fighting American soldiers, I can't help but believe that the comments represent the candidate's views as well.

MR. O'DONNELL: Look, it's not our job to lie about war to make troops feel good. And I don't care what they feel.

MR. BLANKLEY: I don't --

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let me finish.

MR. O'DONNELL: I don't care what they feel about the truth of this war. If John Kerry thinks this war is a mistake and if the United States of America elects him president, the troops are going to have to live with that. And they know better than anyone else whether it was a mistake or not.

MR. BUCHANAN: The commander-in-chief should not undermine the troops --

MR. O'DONNELL: He's not undermining anything.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you want to make a point here?

MR. BUCHANAN: He'd demoralize them.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: All right, the human --

MR. O'DONNELL: I don't care if they're demoralized. They have to go to war and be prepared --

MR. BUCHANAN: The commander-in-chief does care.

MR. O'DONNELL: -- to live with the debate that goes on in the United States about whether it's right or wrong.

MR. BUCHANAN: But if you're going to be commander-in-chief, you cannot be demoralizing the troops in wartime, even if you think the war is a mistake.

See why we need more courageous folks like Sinclair Broadcasting to show even a little bit of Stolen Honor?

Posted by: Greg at 04:04 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 282 words, total size 2 kb.

The Religious Question Unasked

Peter Steinfels of the New York Times approvingly cites a recent E. J. Dionne Jr. piece in his column.

By demonstrating political relevance, religion has finally gained a little respect. "Thus may some good come out of this often rancid campaign," the inveterately optimistic E. J. Dionne Jr. wrote this week in his syndicated Washington Post column. Noting the bumper sticker announcing that "God is NOT a Republican ... or a Democrat," Mr. Dionne welcomed the recognition that "religious people are not monolithic in their views." Likewise, "the myth that religion lives only on the political right is being exploded."

They are, of course, partially correct. As my old professor, Dr. Thomas Droleskey, once shouted at me in an exasperated voice, "Salvation comes through Christ and His Church, not the Republican Party." God isn't a member of any political organization, and we end up with abominations like Hezbollah (The Party of God) when people start thinking that He is.

But what Steinfels and Dionne really need to deal with is the answer to the unasked question -- Is GOD monolithic in HIS views?

And if God is monolithic in His views, doesn't that mean that (at least) one party is so wrong on the issues that no true Christian can cast a vote for its candidates?

Posted by: Greg at 03:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 2 kb.

Teresa Insults Laura -- And All Teachers

"Well, you know, I don't know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and she has a sparkle in her eye, which is good," Heinz Kerry said. "But I don't know that she's ever had a real job — I mean, since she's been grown up. So her experience and her validation comes from important things, but different things."

Really? She taught school and worked as a school librarian for nine years, from the time she finished college in 1968 until she married the president in 1977. I'm a teacher, and I'll tell you right now that it is real work -- and sometimes very difficult work. That Heinz Kerry has so little respect for us and what we do is pretty disgusting. And we won't get into the question of whether or not being a full-time stay-at-home mom constitutes work.

I'm not aware of Teresa Heinz Kerry ever being employed. She grew up a child of colonialist privilege in Mozambique (where blacks were brutally suppressed by the Portuguese colonists -- such as her family). And I can't find any information about her ever having a job, "real" or otherwise. Her marriage to the heir to a billion dollar fortune and his subsequent death put her in the position to be a "philanthropist". And tax lawyers put her in a position to pay only 12.3% of her income in taxes, which is less than the percentage paid by most Americans who make significantly less. I guess rich liberals really ARE different.

Please be aware that AP has changed the story from when it was originally posted. It originally was headlined Heinz Kerry Separates Self From Mrs. Bush. The current headline is Heinz Kerry Sorry for Laura Bush Comment. The article contains an apology and an admission that she "forgot" about Laura Bush having worked in education for nine years. And Teresa claims to have been "full-time in workforce," but somehow the AP leaves out what she supposedly did full time. Must be signing grant papers, because I can't imagine her working full time while married to John Heinz.

Posted by: Greg at 02:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 363 words, total size 2 kb.