What's Up With Chronically Biased?

Dan Patrick and the folks with KSEV-AM radio in Houston started Chronically Biased several months ago an antidote to the bias found in the Houston Chronicle.

Posting has been decreasing recently, and now there is a graphic announcing that "life as we know it" will be altered in six days.

Check it out -- and be sure to check it out in six days. Something big must be in the works.

Posted by: Greg at 01:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.

How Many Bills?

Bush says Kerry has passed five. Kerry says the number is 56. What is the correct answer? According to Factcheck.org. The answer lies somewhere in the middle.

There are eleven Kerry authored laws, if you include a couple that don't bear his name but came out of a House-Senate conference committee in a form substantively similar to the original Kerry bill passed by the Senate. Five are cited by the Bush campaign.

* S.791: Authorizes $53 million over four years to provide grants to woman-owned small businesses. (1999)
* S.1206: Names a federal building in Waltham, Massachusetts after Frederick C. Murphy, who was killed in action during World War II and awarded (posthumously) the Medal of Honor. (1994)
* S.1636: A save-the-dolphins measure aiming “to improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations.” (1994)
* S.1563: Funding the National Sea Grant College Program, which supports university-based research, public education, and other projects “to promote better understanding, conservation and use of America’s coastal resources.” (1991)
* S.423: Granting a visa and admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident to Kil Joon Yu Callahan. (1987)

The Kerry camp offers two more.

* H.R.1900 (S.300): Awarded a congressional gold medal to Jackie Robinson (posthumously), and called for a national day of recognition. (2003)
* H.R.1860 (S.856): Increased the maximum research grants for small businesses from $500,000 to $750,000 under the Small Business Technology Transfer Program. (2001)

The Associated Press and FactCheck.org find these as well, which while not technically bills have the force of law.

* S.J.Res.158: To make the week of Oct. 22 – Oct. 28, 1989 “World Population Awareness Week.” (1989)
* S.J.Res.160: To renew “World Population Awareness Week” for 1991. (1991)
* S.J.Res.318: To make Nov. 13, 1992 “Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day.” (1992)
* S.J.Res.337: To make Sept. 18, 1992 “National POW/MIA Recognition Day." (1992)

Nothing very substantive in that, is there? And that still only gets us up to eleven, which is far short of the 56 Kerry cited.

How does Kerry reach the higher number? Go look at the things he uses to pad his claim. There may be a total of 56 measures passed (less than three a year since he entered the Senate), but most do not even qualify as law. After all, does anyone really consider S.Res.123: To change the name of the Committee on Small Business to the "Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship." (2001)to be a significant legislative accomplishment?

Hat Tip to Blogs for Bush.

Posted by: Greg at 07:32 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 431 words, total size 3 kb.

Scorching Sinclair Censors

Any writer who trusts in the literacy of his readers sufficiently to cite Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange is likely to get a mention here. And in this case it is clear that such a citation is exactly why Thomas Mitchell of the Las Vegas Review-Journal excoriates those on the Left who want to censor Sinclair Broadcasting's upcoming news special on John Kerry.

Even though the Sinclair officials have invited Kerry to appear and discuss the film, Sen. Reid and his fellow government censors dismissed that out of hand as a ruse and mewled: "Equal time rules exist for a purpose -- to prevent the airing of one-sided political content without equal response time given to the opposing view or candidate. In this case, it is impossible to imagine how the equal time rules would be satisfied if this plan is allowed to go forward."

That is called prior restraint, senator, and has generally been much frowned upon by the courts. How does anyone know whether the broadcast will be unfair or one-sided until after it has taken place? Never mind that many of the 24 percent of the nation's households that can even access one of Sinclair's stations probably receive it via cable or satellite and not over the people's public airwaves.

That does raise an interesting question -- for those ho receive the signal via cable rather than the airwaves, how does this differ from the Sundance Channel's stream of anti-Bush propaganda. I don't hear any of the would-be censors of Sinclair calling for a stop to the broadcast of Uncovered: The Whole Truth About The Iraq War that is set for tonight, nor of any of the other items in their October anti-Bush film festival. Why does the Sinclair broadcast rankle so, but not the ongoing partisan pap from the left?

Mitchell goes on, making it clear how little faith these political commisars have in the American people.

o listen to the apoplectic Democrats, you'd think every voter in America, like Burgess' Alex, was going to be doped up, strapped down, with eyelids clipped open and forced to watch "Stolen Honor" until they are so brainwashed that the very sight of John Kerry would induce physical revulsion. This does considerable damage to the First Amendment guarantees of free speech and press, while ignoring the concomitant concept that the informed voter is perfectly capable of sifting through the chaff of lies and distortions to find a grain of truth.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, no one will be forced to watch this broadcast. Granted there will be preemption of some regularly scheduled features, but that is a matter between Sinclair and the viewers of its various stations , and the networks with which they are affiliated. Unless, of course, these worth office holders think that Americans are too lazy to change the channel, too ignorant to know the difference between truth and falsehood, and too stupid to be allowed to govern themselves without guidance from their ideological "betters".

Check out his conclusion as well. If you stop and think about it, that might stop the censors in their tracks.

Posted by: Greg at 07:12 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 527 words, total size 4 kb.

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Protect Detroit Voting Rights!

We keep hearing that Republicans are out to disenfranchise black voters this year. Observers are being dispatched to protect African-Americans from nefarious GOP vote suppression plots.

Detroit News columnist Nolan Finley suggests that maybe someone needs to go observe in Detroit. But despite the foot-in-mouth comments by one GOP official, it isn't the Republicans who need watching.

Michigan runs clean, efficient elections; there's no recent history of voter disenfranchisement in the state.

Except in Detroit. Under City Clerk Jackie Curry, Detroit elections are always an adventure. The city has more spoiled ballots, longer lines at precincts, far more misdirected voters than any other state community.

Curry, a black Democrat, has disenfranchised more African-American voters than the worst of the Jim Crow poll thugs.

If state Democrats truly wanted to protect the voting rights of blacks, they'd dispatch their entire poll-watching army to spend Election Day patrolling Curry's office.

Posted by: Greg at 03:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 156 words, total size 1 kb.

What Kerry DIDN'T Call Her

Did anyone else notice what is significant by its absence in the following Kerry quote?

And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as.

Do you give up?

It is the name of the Cheney daughter, Mary Cheney, who is (and has been for years) an "out" lesbian. Kerry was so intent upon using her for her own nefarious political purposes that he was unwilling to call her by name. To have done so would have required him (and the audience) to focus on her as a human being, not as a sexual orientation. It is therefore clear that the comment had nothing to do with a desire to make life better for Mary (a staffer on the Bush/Cheney campaign, by the way), but was instead simply a tool. He gave no respect, and in response deserves only contempt.

Imagine if the question had instead been about the War on Drugs, and Kerry had said this instead.

And I think if you were to talk to your brother Jeb's daughter, who is a drug addict, she would tell you that . . . .

We all know there would have been hell to pay. It would have been cold, heartless and manipulative to air someone's family laundry. And to refuse to show the basic respect implicit in using her name would be seen as outrageous.

I won't even get into Elizabeth Edwards' reprehensible attack on Lynne Cheney. I guess it is true that bad breeding will show at awkward moments. I'll be voting to take out the trash on November 2.

UPDATE: A friend emailed me regarding the initial reference to Mary Cheney's sexual orientation during the Vice Presidential Debate. He said that he didn't think Edwards mentioned her name, either. Sure enough, when I checked out the transcript here's what I found.

Now, as to this question, let me say first that I think the vice president and his wife love their daughter. I think they love her very much. And you can't have anything but respect for the fact that they're willing to talk about the fact that they have a gay daughter, the fact that they embrace her.

So that makes twice that Kerry and Edwards have indecently used Mary Cheney's sexual orientation for campaign purposes without even having the decency to use her name.

Posted by: Greg at 05:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 422 words, total size 3 kb.

Kerry Contradiction

Did anyone notice the following two statements by Kerry on religion during the debate. They came only a few seconds apart, but completely contradict each other.

First he chanted the traditional liberal mantra about not imposing his faith on others.

I believe that I can't legislate or transfer to another American citizen my article of faith. What is an article of faith for me is not something that I can legislate on somebody who doesn't share that article of faith.

But then he came back a few sentences later with this.

My faith affects everything that I do, in truth. There's a great passage of the Bible that says, "What does it mean, my brother, to say you have faith if there are no deeds? Faith without works is dead."

And I think that everything you do in public life has to be guided by your faith, affected by your faith, but without transferring it in any official way to other people.

That's why I fight against poverty. That's why I fight to clean up the environment and protect this earth.

That's why I fight for equality and justice. All of those things come out of that fundamental teaching and belief of faith.

Now hold on. He won't impose any "article of faith" on others, but he fights against poverty and for equality, justice and the environment out of the fundamental teaching and belief of his faith. But doesn't that mean he is seeking to impose those things on Americans who disagree with his approach to and definition of equality (such as on homosexual marriage or affirmative action), justice (ditto), and the right of man to have dominion over the earth in order to subdue it? Doesn't that mean he is seeking to impose his religion-based belief on those he wants to tax at higher levels in order to fund programs for the poor?

The two positions are contradictory -- and can be reconciled only if you accept that he doesn't really have a religious objection to abortion, and therefore has no problem with imposing his beliefs upon the rest of us.

I also liked the brief moment of Kerry candor and honesty when he referred to abortion as "some other right that's given under our courts today". After all, it isn't in the Constitution.

But my favorite moment of the night came when President Bush started to attack Kerry's use of "two leading national news networks" as experts on the intricacies of his Medicare proposal --

In all due respect, I'm not so sure it's credible to quote leading news organizations about — oh, never mind.

Posted by: Greg at 04:45 PM | Comments (88) | Add Comment
Post contains 441 words, total size 3 kb.

GOP Requests End To Liberal Terrorism

The following was sent to AFL-CIO President John Sweeney by Gov. Marc Racicot, Bush-Cheney '04 Campaign Chairman.

Mr. John Sweeney
President
AFL-CIO
815 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
October 11, 2004

Dear Mr. Sweeney:

Over the past several weeks, acts of violence and vandalism have occurred at Republican and Bush-Cheney campaign headquarters across the country. In addition to the injuries, property damage and disruption associated with these acts, these events have created a threatening and intimidating atmosphere abhorrent to our democratic process.

On October 5th, according to news reports, witnesses, police reports and admissions of your members, the AFL-CIO, as part of a national strategy, protested at more than a dozen of our campaign and party headquarters across the country. In many locations, the protestors attempted to enter, or entered, campaign or party facilities. As one protestor said, "Actually, we're storming into an office." In Orlando, Florida, injuries and damage were sustained. Protestors forced their way into the facility, fracturing the arm of one staffer, and vandalized the office. In Michigan, protestors entered a headquarters and engaged in activities apparently intended to disrupt volunteers trying to make phone calls.

Protests by your organization come on the heels of several other incidents at Bush-Cheney '04 offices around the country, including a break-in at our Seattle office where laptop computers were stolen from the Washington State Bush-Cheney Â’04 executive director and the state Republican Party 72-hour director. Just last night in Canton, Ohio, a Bush-Cheney '04 staffer was forced to lock herself in an office while another break-in was in progress. The facility was seriously damaged and property was stolen. Additionally, gun shots have been fired into Bush-Cheney '04 offices in West Virginia, Florida and Tennessee, windows broken in West Virginia and campaign staffers threatened. In Wisconsin, a supporter of the President had a swastika burned into his front yard simply because he had a Bush-Cheney '04 lawn sign. We urge your support in helping us ensure the safety of all individuals working on our campaign and others as we are making every effort to secure the safety of all participants in the political process.

I hope you will put an end to protest activities that have led to injuries, property damage, vandalism and voter intimidation. We will hold you and your organization accountable for the actions of your members and urge you to immediately discontinue any coordinated protest efforts that result in damage to our facilities, or injury to people who may hold different political views than your members, but who share an equal right to be involved in the political process without suffering violence, intimidation and threats.

Respectfully,

Gov. Marc Racicot, Bush-Cheney '04 Campaign Chairman

We must act to stop these acts of terrorism. We must be prepared to defend ourselves against those who would violate our civil right (make that HUMAN RIGHT) to participate in the electoral process in this country. And if attacked, we must be prepared to do so by any means necessary -- including the use of deadly force. Sadly, I fear we live in a time during which a small number of Democrats and their supporters have made the full exercise of our rights under the Second Amendment a political imperative if we are to preserve our nation.

Posted by: Greg at 05:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 556 words, total size 4 kb.

Libertarian Debate Case Advances

Last week I commented on a Libertarian Party suit to stop the third presidential debate if their candidate is not included. Well, guess what. They've actually gotten a court hearing and a court order compelling Arizona State University and the Commission on Presidential Debates to respond to the suit in court tomorrow, October 12. Given that the university still has not raised private funds to cover the debate expenses makes it hard to argue that the debate will not be conducted using public funds.

I think the Libertarians have a point about the heavy-handed actions of the Commission. Get these quotes from the article.

An attorney for the university accepted service, but security guards at the commission's headquarters in Washington ordered process-servers to leave the building, Mr. Euchner said.

and

Indeed, Mr. Badnarik and the Green Party nominee, David Cobb, were arrested Friday night after they crossed a police line at the presidential debate in St. Louis. Mr. Badnarik said he was trying to serve the lawsuit on a representative of the debate commission. The two candidates were released after being given tickets for trespassing and refusing a reasonable order from a policeman.

and

In August, a federal judge in Washington sharply criticized the Federal Election Commission for ignoring evidence of bias on the part of the debate commission. Judge Henry Kennedy Jr. noted that in 2000 the debate commission gave security guards "facebooks" with pictures of third-party candidates and instructed the guards to prevent those in the photos from entering the debate venues, even with valid audience tickets. "The exclusion policy appears partisan on its face," Judge Kennedy wrote.

Seems to me that the debate commission operates in a pretty heavy-handed way. Here's hoping they get slapped down hard.

Posted by: Greg at 05:30 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 298 words, total size 2 kb.

Anti-Catholic Kerry Campaign?

The folks over at Blogs for Bush wrote on this item last night. Talk about an outrage!

For the entire story arc, you need to go to The Meandering Mind of a Seminarian to see how a group of Catholic seminarians (in Roman collar) and supporters were treated when they attempted to enter the Americas Center in St. Louis for a Kerry event for which they had tickets. Even when they offered to leave thei signs with security, they were still denied entry -- perhaps because of their religion(?). And so many liberals claim that the Kerry campaign doesn't screen their events.



From part one of the report. Notice that a letter from the ACLU, which is supposed to be like Scripture to a liberal, has no effect on Kerry campaign staff.

After a longer wait a young lady claiming to be a staff member of the Kerry/Edwards campaign approached. She asked to see the signs, so we showed them to her. As soon as she realized that the signs said things such as "You CANT be Catholic and pro-choice. She said that we would be unable to enter with the signs. I produced a document from the ACLU that said otherwise. At this point we began to be accosted by various Kerry supporters. They were right up in my face, screaming and yelling. With their arms flailing they informed me that I was not welcome there. Others screamed "Who are you to tell me that my daughter who was raped cannot have an abortion." We remained calm and prayerful.

From part two detailing what happened outside including when the tolerant, pro-gay Kerry supporters exited. COuld you imagine the uproar if conservatives hurled such epithets at a group -- the homosexual lobby would be in an uproar.

We split up to cover both entrances to the building, and we commenced our pro-life witness. As people entered the building they hurled insults at us, and one person tore up one of our signs and proclaimed that we were nothing but a bunch of “pedophile hookers.” She was a great representative for the Kerry/Edwards supporters; she showed us what “tolerance” – a supposed virtue of Kerry supporters – is all about.

and

When the event was over Kerry supporters poured out of the building just as fast as the obscenities and ridicule poured out of their drunken mouths (yes, many of them were rather intoxicated). We were hailed as pedophile hypocrites who needed to clean our own house before we tell them what to do. We were accused of being the scum of the Catholic Church and homosexuals. We were accused of harboring criminals and being oppressive of women and African Americans. We had some “homosexuals for Kerry” stand in front of us and make out…that was a great photo-op for many of the Kerry supporters. Needless to say it was a very ugly scene, but during it all we remained calm and prayerful – which infuriated them all the more.

The blog owner also supplies a way to contact the Kerry campaign about the incident. Tell them what you think!

If you would like to voice a complaint about what I wrote about below the person to contact is:

Mr. Rick Siger

901 15th St. NW

Washington DC 20005

(202) 682-3500

Good job, folks!

Posted by: Greg at 12:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 558 words, total size 4 kb.

Support Sinclair Broadcast Group!

Sinclair Broadcast Group is planning to broadcast Carlton Sherwood's documentary Stolen Honor during prime time sometime during the period of October 21-24. The documentary, which documents the effects of John Kerry's anti-war activism and statements upon the men held as POWs by the North Vietnamese. Sinclair, which owns 62 television stations in 39 markets, will potentially reach nearly one quarter of the viewing public with the broadcast, including major markets such as Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Sacramento and Las Vegas. The company also has stations in the swing states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Wisconsin. The broadcast may also qualify as news, exempting it from equal time and fairness rules, although the company plans to invite Kerry or a representative to appear as part of a panel discussion following the broadcast.

The Left, needless to say, is apoplectic!

"It's not the American way for powerful corporations to strong-arm local broadcasters to air lies promoting a political agenda," said David Wade, a spokesman for the Democratic nominee's campaign. "It's beyond yellow journalism; it's a smear bankrolled by Republican money, and I don't think Americans will stand for it."

Hold on, David -- Sinclair IS the local broadcaster in this case. It owns the stations!

Similarly, liberal blogger John Aravosis is frothing over at Americablog.org. The publisher of liberal attack sites such as StopDrLaura.com and DearMary.com wants to see a campaign organized to "take those stations down."

We need to know which of our local stations is in bed with the president and this right-wing zealot and we need to destroy them. I'm talking get every single advertiser to leave those stations. Publish the advertisers email and phone and contact them, demanding that they stop funneling their money to partisan un-American TV zealots who are trying to throw our election.

In other words, a vocal segment of the Left is going after Sinclair. They have succeeded before in their attempt to muzzle speech with which they disagree.

WE MUST SUPPORT THE COMPANY IN ITS ATTEMPT TO USE ITS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT JOHN KERRY!

We must contact Sinclair and let them know we support their public service. Here's how.

Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc.
10706 Beaver Dam Road
Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030
410-568-1500 (Main Telephone)
410-568-1533 (Main Fax)

David D. Smith
Sinclair CEO
dsmith@sbgnet.com

M. William Butler
VP of Programming and Promotions
bbutler@sbgnet.com

Mike O'Malley
Corporate Webmaster
webmaster@sbgi.net

And their stations -- contact as many as you can in support of the broadcast.

* WTTA - Tampa
* KMWB - Minneapolis
* WPGH & WCWB - Pittsburgh
* KOVR - Sacramento
* KDNL - St. Louis
* WBFF & WNUV - Baltimore
* WTTV & WTTK - Indianapolis
* WLFL & WRDC - Raleigh - Durham, NC
* WZTV & WUXP - Nashville
* WCGV & WVTV - Milwaukee
* WSTR - Cincinnati
* KSMO - Kansas City, MO
* WTTE & WSYX - Columbus, OH
* WFBC & WLOS - Asheville, NC
* KABB & KRRT - San Antonio
* WTTO & WABM & WDBB - Birmingham, AL
* WTVZ - Norfolk, VA
* WUTV - Buffalo, NY
* KOCB & KOKH - Oklahoma City
* WXLV & WUPN - Greensboro, NC
* WKEF & WRGT - Dayton, OH
* KVWB & KFBT - Las Vegas
* WCHS & WVAH - Charleston, WV
* WRLH - Richmond, VA
* WEAR & WFGX - Mobile, AL
* WSMH - Flint, MI
* WDKY - Lexington, KY
* KDSM - Des Moines
* WSYT & WNYS - Syracuse
* KBSI & WDKA - Paducah, KY
* WUHF - Rochester, NY
* WGME - Portland, ME
* WMSN - Madison, WI
* WEMT - Tri-Cities, TN
* WGGB - Springfield, MA
* WYZZ - Peoria, IL
* WTWC - Tallahassee, FL
* WMMP & WTAT - Charleston, SC
* WICS & WICD — Springfield, IL
* KGAN — Cedar Rapids, IA

The major media has ignored this part of Kerry's background long enough -- it must be exposed now, before it is too late. This is not an attack upon his military service, but rather an examination of his words and actions AFTER he returned from Vietnam.

UPDATE: Apparently the boycott sites are already being set up. Supposedly they are http://boycottsinclair.blogspot.com/ and http://www.stopsinclairnow.com/.

UPDATE 2: Apparently there is another boycott site, and they even have a great database of network advertisers to contact and support. Show some class and tell them to stand firm with Sinclair for the sake of America's future. You will certainly out-do the liberals, who have already been cautioned by the site's owner not to be abusive towards advertisers like a number of folks on their side have.

Posted by: Greg at 05:55 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 787 words, total size 6 kb.

Missed You Guys, But Needed Some Time And Space

It's been a busy time. Teaching during the day. Teaching at night. Trying to spend quality time with my beloved spouse and the four-legged furry person who calls us Mom & Dad. My posting frequency may decrease just a bit as I work to add a little balance to my life.

I've also had to stand back and look at what I've been writing. A lot of it is good. And a lot of it says what I feel very well. But from time to time I paint with a broad brush, and I sound like I think every liberal is the enemy. I don't believe that. Most are decent people -- our friends, neighbors, family members -- who have reached a different conclusion. Those are the people we need to try to reach, not attack. And to the degree we can engage in constructive dialogue with them, that is good for America and good for our own souls. Remember, the greatest of God's gifts is love.

Does that mean that there are not those whose words and actions make them a malign influence? No, it doesn't. Does that mean we shouldn't go on the offensive when necessary? Hardly. But it does mean that we have to remember that the political conflict we fight is one which is brother against brother, parent against child, and husband against wife. It doesn't profit us to win the policy battle if we destroy the people and relationships which should be central to our lives.

Ann Coulter has a new book out -- How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must). In it she offers suggestions that conservatives need to make sure we aren't defensive, always outrage the enemy, and never apologize to, compliment, or show graciousness to a Democrat. That is bullshit. She seeks to remake conservatives into political jihadis who are the mirror image of the folks she claims to despise on the Left (and I doubt she even believes this crap, given her long relationship with Bill Maher). In other words, we must become what we hate to win. That is fundamentally wrong.

So to my Conservative readers, know that I'm not backing off on my principle if I try to dial back the rhetoric a notch or two. And to those on the Left, know that a more civil tone does not equate to weakness. What I am seeking to do hear is preserve the bonds that hold us together as a nation, as one people, and encouraging all to do the same.

Posted by: Greg at 05:25 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 442 words, total size 3 kb.

Anti-Catholicism Lives

Some folks don't understand the concept of a religious mission. Ellen Goodman is one of those, as she again proves in her latest column. Or maybe she does -- but would rather take another opportunity to engage in a bit of Catholic-bashing, since Catholicism isn't in line with her fuzzy-wuzzy feel-good belief-system.

When I was a kid I just assumed the separation of church and hospital. It's not that I didn't believe in the power of prayer, but when my appendix burst I wanted a guy in a white coat, not a white collar.

Yeah, Ellen, but did you ever stop to think about why the local hospital was St. Anne's, Lutheran, or Beth Israel Hospital? Or why there were so many nuns at some of them? Could it be that there was a union between religion and the hospital?

The first time I realized how different things were in the Bush era was when W. David Hager was appointed to an advisory board of the Food and Drug Administration. Hager was an ob-gyn who prescribed Corinthians and Romans for PMS. After that we saw the government take contraceptive information off one Web site and put phony links between abortion and breast cancer on another. That was just the beginning.

Really? If that were so , Hager would have long ago lost his license rather than gotten a high level appointment. Could it be that he dispensed some good-old spiritually based words of wisdom to his patients? And if he did, is that a problem? Or would you like to impose a gag-order on physicians, inserting the yourself and/or the government into the relationship between a woman and her doctor? I seem to recall your having objections to that in another context. And as for the link between abortion and breast cancer, there were a number of peer-reviewed studies that showed a link between the two, and the verdict on the connection is still out.

Welcome to the era of faith-based medicine.

The administration has just announced that, for the first time ever, federal employees will be offered a Catholic health plan. Starting in November, workers in 31 Illinois counties can enroll in a plan created explicitly according to Catholic tenets and marketed as "faith-based."

This plan is noted most for the things that it doesn't provide: Abortion, of course, even in the case of rape. Contraception, including emergency contraception. Sterilization. Artificial insemination and most other fertility treatments.

We don't know yet what the faith-based health plan will do about paying for other treatments that might challenge Catholic teachings. Will end-of-life care be determined by the patient or the latest directive from Rome?

Gee, Ellen, what's wrong with giving folks the option to not fund activities that violate their religious beliefs and to reject coverage for themselves and their families. And I'm reasonably sure that the policy spells out the end-of-life issues. Based upon only four years of graduate level theological training in a Catholic seminary, I believe the only difference from what you might see in any other hospital setting would be that you cannot cut off nutrition or hydration unless doing so would prevent harm to the patient (such as cutting off hydration when a patient's kidneys have shut down). That would be your first appeal to anti-Catholicism -- the concern about Rome controlling anything in America.

This plan is defended as a "choice." If you don't want it, don't choose it. But if this is an opening wedge, choice may not be so simple, especially in the 100 counties across the country where Catholic hospitals are the sole providers.

What? You raving secularists haven't put your money here your mouth in regard to compassion for the poor and destitute and those in need of medical treatment by opening hospitals in those 100 counties? Not, I would guess, that many of those counties are all that far from other counties with a non-Catholic hospital. But that is anti-Catholic shot number two -- a concern that non-Catholics will be controlled by Catholics since Catholics control the hospitals.

It's no surprise that the first faith-based plan is Catholic since 11 percent of all hospitals are run by Catholics. Many provide the exact same services as their secular counterparts, but the church has long led the fight against abortion and also against state laws that mandate contraceptive coverage. At last count, only 28 percent of their 600 emergency rooms offered emergency contraception to rape victims.

Ah, here we go. Back to your focus on crotch-related issues. You know, Ellen, you really need to seek psychological help for that problem. It seems like a good chunk of your columns end up coming back to the genitals and what folks do with them. Sounds a bit obsessive-compulsive to me.

Oh, my, anti-Catholic attack number three -- Catholics using the legislative process to impose their agenda, never mind that Catholics are American citizens too, and have every right to do so. Yes, Ellen, the Catholic Church is against abortion and artificial contraception. Yes, FAITHFUL Catholics (unlike FAITHLESS Massachusetts legislators whose names begin with K) seek to influence public policy to that end. And that 28% is about 28% too many, and I would guess they are predominantly in states that REQUIRE hospitals to provide such services, regardless of the fact that such services are contrary to the religious mission of the hospitals in question.

But this health care "first" is only a piece of the growing story of faith-based medicine. Another piece is in the "conscience clauses" being pushed to let health care workers and whole institutions opt out of providing health care, especially reproductive care, on religious grounds.

Just this month, the House of Representatives passed a provision that protects employees and hospitals from laws requiring them to provide abortions or even abortion referrals. Last July, Mississippi joined Arkansas and South Dakota in giving health care workers and institutions the right to refuse performing any medical service on moral or religious grounds. Meanwhile we have pharmacists lobbying to refuse handing over emergency contraceptives as if the drugstore were their personal chapel.

Well, I have no problem with a "conscience clause" for an individual. No health care worker should perform a medical procedure against his beliefs. How would you like a doctor who opposes sterilization performing your vasectomy?

Imagine that -- having a "pro-choice" policy regarding abortion and birth control, one that allows those who dissent from YOUR orthodoxy to refuse to participate. I realize that promiscuous sex, contraception and abortion are all sacraments in your mind, but others dare to believe differently. How kind of you to agree that there is something reasonable about such conscience clauses -- or to at least pretend that you do, with your condescending jab about "personal chapels", which implies that you believe that anyone who would take advantage of such a provision is somehow a religious fanatic who shouldn't be in the medical field.

But how do you define an institution's conscience? Is it the collective belief of the doctors, the employees, the patients? Or is it an edict of the bishops?

It's really quite simple, Ellen, and is probably spelled out in the incorporation papers, charter, and mission statement of the institution. If it was founded by a religious group as part of the religious mission of that group, and if it remains affiliated with that group, then the standard theological tenets of the faith should apply. And if that means that bishops have a say in the matter regarding a Catholic hospital, then so be it. Quit appealing to anti-Catholic bigotry -- this is number four.

And while we are talking about faith-based medicine, since when is a hospital or a health care plan a religion? This year the California Supreme Court ruled that Catholic Charities of Sacramento had to provide its employees with birth control coverage because the charity didn't just serve or employ Catholics. Well, neither does a hospital.

Actually, yes a hospital or health-care plan is part of a religion if it is founded by a religious community with a religious mission. The California Supreme Court blew it in the decision it made. By that logic, the parish school down at St. Miscellaneous is also not a religiously based institution, because Bob the janitor is a Baptist and the school takes any family that can come up with tuition, regardless of religion. Do you really think that such a result is reasonable? According to the logic of the decision, the absence of discrimination based upon religion is evidence that an organization is not religious -- and the very discrimination needed to remain a religious organization is illegal under other statutes.

As Frances Kissling of Catholics for a Free Choice says, "All health care institutions receive most of their money from the government. If they want to be truly private, they wouldn't take Medicare or Medicaid. Then they could be run like a Christian Science Reading Room."

Anti-Catholic attack number five -- the Catholic Church getting government money! And attack number seven in the same paragraph, because anytime Frances Kissling is quoted an author is presumed to be engaging in an anti-Catholic attack. After all, the group she heads has no membership and is fully funded by liberal foundation grants.

We used to talk about doctors playing God. Now religion is playing doctor. What happens when the church defines medicine and the government gives it a religious seal of approval?

Another anti-Catholic attack. That makes eight. The Catholic Church will control medicine.

Will there be a sign on the emergency room door warning that this hospital does not remove feeding tubes? Will a young woman even be told that she can have her eggs harvested before chemo for later use? Will an AIDS patient be advised about condoms?

Well, since there is nothing to prevent the transfer of a patient to another hospital, the feeding tube rule is not that big a deal. And based upon my conversations with at least two Catholic medical ethicists, yes the young woman will be advised about the possibility of egg harvesting -- and its unavailability at the hospital. As far as the AIDS patient goes, the more responsible option is to advise him or her to STOP HAVING SEX, so as not to risk spreading the disease. Only those who believe that sexual activity is the highest purpose in life would think otherwise.

"Can you imagine if Jehovah's Witnesses opened a hospital, got funding, and then said oh, by the way, we don't do transfusions?" asks Susan Berke Fogel, who co-chairs the American Bar Association's ethics committee. What if a Jewish hospital insisted on circumcising all boys, she adds provocatively. Would that too be approved as faith-based medicine?

At some point doesn't religious practice become medical malpractice? We can only pray.

Ah, the logical fallacy presented by the parade of horribles. She's gone from folks being up-front about the ethical limits imposed by their faith to a group hiding its beliefs until it has its hands in the public till. She's gone from refusing to perform certain procedures to forcing people to receive them. Those are hardly the same thing -- but Ellen doesn't care. And she gets in her final, implicit attack -- that being faithful to Catholic medical ethics makes a physician guilty of malpractice. And then she ties it all up with a blashemous bow.

It's a pity you have no faith Ellen. Why must you tear down and attack those who do?

Posted by: Greg at 03:18 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1924 words, total size 12 kb.

Was This REALLY Necessary?

I can't understand why the following made its way into Randy Cohen's column on ethics in the Houston Chronicle -- which comes from the New York Times. After all, the question was about the ethics of releasing a pet gerbil into the wild (a truly worthy use of Chronicle editorial space, don't you think?).

"Gerbils are Mongolian desert rats," Dr. Rebecca Campbell, a veterinarian in Manhattan, told me. Unless you plan not only to re-educate your pet but fly to Mongolia to release it, you may not set it free. (Incidentally, if there's a prize for pet marketing, I'd like to nominate whoever changed "Mongolian desert rat" to "gerbil." That's even better than "compassionate conservative.")

Excuse me! Where did that come from? What purpose does it serve in the discussion of the topic at hand? Why didn't some editor strike it out as irrelevant and inflammatory? Would a statement such as, for example, "That's even better than calling racial discrimination "affirmative action," have made it into the column?

If Cohen wants to write political commentary, so be it. But let him label it as such -- not slip it into columns surreptitiously.

UPDATE: Randy Cohen Responds

Thanks for the note, but I believe youÂ’ve misread me. It wasnÂ’t
conservatives but deceptive nomenclature that I was denigrating. In my
view, the terms I compared were devised in pursuit of advertising and
promotion, not accuracy and clarity, an unfortunate use of language
regardless of oneÂ’s politics.

But it does seem that you take a narrower view of these things than I
do, prescribing sort of "free speach zones" where particular topics may
be addressed. I think it entirely apt in a column on ethics, or most
anything else, to refer to the great events of the day.

RC

I have to admire Randy Cohen for responding. It would have been easy for him to ignore one more email from a disgruntled reader.

I'll accept at face value what his statement of what his goal was. I still, however, think that what he did was drop a little piece of political bias into the middle of an otherwise unrelated column.

And no, I don't think that I am prescribing "free speech zones" for politics. I again agree that there should be more reference to the great events of the day. More political discussion is better. But a "drive-by shooting" like this doesn't really qualify, does it? In context, the reference still seems gratuitous and out of place. Do you really mena to tell me that, of all the marketting references you could have made, the best one (or only one you could think of) was the term used to describe the president in his first election campaign -- especially when we are only a month from election day?

Posted by: Greg at 01:15 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 473 words, total size 3 kb.

Killers for Kerry

On September 9, an unidentified man interrupted a question and answer session following a screening of the film Stolen Honor, which honors POWs and notes John Kerry's role in making their imprisonment longer and subject to more pressure to betray their country like he did. He disputed the film and praised Senator Kerry

The man has now been identified.

He is Kerry campaign and Democratic National Committee staffer Wayne F. Smith, the Kerry campaignÂ’s veterans outreach operation.

Old media accounts and "Stolen Valor," a 1998 book by Vietnam veteran B.G. Burkett, show that Smith, a Vietnam War medic, was sentenced to hard labor for being AWOL before his 1972 drug-related manslaughter conviction. Smith later obtained a college education and became executive director of the Justice Project, which attempts to use DNA evidence to exonerate unjustly convicted felons.

I think that says it all about Kerry's attitude towards veterans -- his outreach director is an AWOL convicted druggie and killer.

And yet there are still people out there who think Kerry has the judgement necessary to be president.

Posted by: Greg at 08:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 183 words, total size 1 kb.

United States Race-Baiting Commission

Shriveled up old race ho' Mary Frances Berry has again shown why her agency should be zeroed-out in the next budget cycle. In a move intentionally timed to come before the election, the US Civil Rights Commission will release a rreport on President Bush's record on civil rights. Past practice has been to hold these reports until after the election, as was done with the 2000 report on the Clinton record on civil rights.

But that isn't all. The report was completed by Berry and her staff without seeking or permitting any input by Republican members of the commission, and was presented to them in its final form on Wednesday. Agencies cited in the report have not been permitted to review, correct, or rebut report assertions, despite the fact that "affected agency review" is standard practice in Washington to ensure the accuracy of reports before they are released.

Among the points of indictment by the biased report are the No Child Left Behind Act's testing and accountability standards being applied to poor and minority children, support for school vouchers, and the reduction of rental subsidies (never mind the fact that minority home ownership is at its highest level in history). But this is the most shocking.

And, oh yes, the President is accused of being soft on civil rights for nominating a Hispanic (Miguel Estrada) and an African-American (Janice Rogers Brown) to the appellate bench. Never mind their ethnicity, these conservatives have a judicial philosophy that the report says will lead to the "eventual weakening of civil rights laws." So Mr. Bush is insensitive to civil rights if he doesn't appoint minorities but he's also insensitive if he does. That's about all you need to know about the objectivity of this political exercise.

Like I said, zero-out the agency in the next budget. It no longer serves a useful purpose.

Posted by: Greg at 07:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 318 words, total size 2 kb.

Oil-For-Palaces Enablers

Guess which three nations kept the UN's Oil-for-Food program from being effectively monitored. France, Russia, and China.

In a briefing paper given yesterday to members of the House subcommittee investigating the program, the investigators said their review of the minutes of a United Nations Security Council subcommittee meeting showed that the three nations "continually refused to support the U.S. and U.K. efforts to maintain the integrity" of the program.

What's more, the UN wasn't even willing to really look too closely at what happened to the money from oil sales permitted under the program.

The paper also accuses the United Nations office charged with overseeing the program of having "pressed" contractors not to rigorously inspect Iraqi oil being sold and the foreign goods being bought. The program office, headed by Benan Sevan, who is also under investigation by a committee appointed by the United Nations, turned a blind eye to corruption charges, the paper says, because it apparently saw oil-for-food "strictly as a humanitarian program."

The program operated in such a way as to make it a perfect breeding ground for corruption -- and the extent of the problem is not fully known due to US stonewalling of investigations.

The paper concludes that the program's greatest weakness was a lack of transparency. "Most transactions involving the program were done behind closed doors or sometimes illicitly," it states. The lists of oil purchasers and aid providers were not known. The United Nations internal audits continue to be withheld from United Nations members and the public.

Maybe rather than having US military and foreign policy "pass the global test" like John Kerry wants, the United States should insist that all UN actions pass the United States' test! Yet one more reason to support the president's reelection.

Posted by: Greg at 07:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 298 words, total size 2 kb.

Libertarians Seek To Stop Non-Inclusive Debate

Libertarian presidential candidate Michael Badnarik is on the ballot in 48 states and the District of Columbia, and failed to make the cut in New Hampshire and Oklahoma only because of technical errors in submitting petitions, not a failure to obtain sufficient signatures. Despite the fact that this places him on more than enough ballots to potentially win the electoral college, Badnarik is not included in the presidential debates because the Commission on Presidential Debates requires that included candidates have 15% support in polls by five different polling groups.

So the Arizona Libertarian Party has taken action. Arguing that the requirements make the debates nothing more than a contribution to the two major parties, they want the October 13 debate at Arizona State university cancelled, and have filed suit in state court to make sure that happens.

Party Treasurer Warren Severin said Thursday that the cost of the debate - estimated at more than $2 million - amounts to an unconstitutional gift of taxpayer funds for the two major parties. Severin, one of the plaintiffs in the legal action, wants a Maricopa County Superior Court judge to block the use of any public funds, a move designed to kill the event.

ASU publicist Carolyne Kennedy said there are no tax dollars involved. She said the out-of-pocket expenses are going to be borne by local individuals and businesses.

Severin said he's not convinced that ASU has, in fact, received sufficient donations to cover those costs. But even if it has, he said the university continues to devote staff time to putting the Oct. 13 event together.

All-in-all, not an unreasonable position to take. After all, if a candidate is clearly national in the scope of his campaign, why shouldn't he be included in a debate?

Besides, I'd like to see Michael Badnarik up there. I have a certain admiration for the Libertarians, and would love to see them grow as a political national force. They certainly don't fit the stereotype of "all politicians are the same." And since more political speech, debates, and ideas are healthier than fewer, his inclusion (along with nadir) would be a good thing for America.

Posted by: Greg at 07:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 371 words, total size 2 kb.

Jerry Rubin -- Leftist Wuss Makes Faux Protest

Liberal activist Jerry Rubin is going on an anti-Nader hunger strike -- sort of. He is seeking to persuade the independent candidate Ralph Nader to drop out of the presidential race.

"I know Ralph Nader and I don't think he's doing the right thing," Rubin said Saturday, adding the consumer advocate's campaign is dividing the progressive political movement.

"Greens, progressives and Democrats are more divided how than they were in 2000 because of him," Rubin said.

And I was all prepared to offer some admiring words about Rubin's commitment, his willingness to "put his money where his mouth is", so to speak, until I came across the following sentence.

He said he plans to consume only herbal tea and juice until Oct. 9 and, after that, only water until Nov. 2 if Nader doesn't take a meeting with hi

What a wuss! What a wimp! Why aren't you going all the way, Jerry -- no food, no liquids, nothing at all -- until Nader drops out? Why don't you make it clear that you are serious about this by saying "Hey, Ralph! Your failure to drop out will result in your murder of Jerry Rubin?" Could it be that you now that Nader IS a serious candidate, with a serious message, and that you realize that by dropping out he would be selling out, just like you have, to the Democrat Party plutocratic elite?

Until you are willing to do a Bobby Sands hunger strike, stop trying to get face-time in the media!

Posted by: Greg at 04:46 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 269 words, total size 2 kb.

Two New Additions

I've added two new listings over on the sidebar.

The first is for a great blog I just encountered -- UNCoRRELATED. The author seems like someone I would like to sit down with over a beer or three and talk politics.

The other is the great new listing site, BlogExplosion. It brings exposure for surfing listed blogs -- sort of "pay to play." You get a hit for evry two member sites you visit. Sounds like a deal to me. I've already found a couple I'll be revisiting.

Posted by: Greg at 03:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

A Sad, Sad, Sad Story -- Please Pray For All Touched By This

High school kids and cars. They make me crazy sometimes, since I teach 10th graders. This morning was another reminder of how terrible that combination can be. This isn't my school (it's a good 30 miles away), but seeing the pictures on the news tonight of one car ripped in half did the same to my heart. They weren't my kids -- but they could have been.

Four young lives -- and the other driver -- gonein a flash. May God have mercy on their souls.

Posted by: Greg at 05:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 112 words, total size 1 kb.

Put Up Or Shut Up, Nancy!

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi today claimed that the 2003 redistricting of Texas was illegal. This despite the redistricting being upheld by state and federal courts and the US Department of Justice. Her target, of course, is House Majority Tom DeLay, who saw several associates indicted by political hack Ronnie Earle as part of a political witchhunt

That said, I have a challenge for the Wicked Witch of the West Coast. If you can find a single statute or provision of the US or Texas constitutions violated by the redistricting itself, I will take you out for lunch at Seabrook's finest dining establishment, Tookie's, and let you order anything off the menu. I'd recommend the Squealer.

Posted by: Greg at 05:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 128 words, total size 1 kb.

More Florida Vote Problems -- Courtesy Of Leftists

Florida Secretary of State Glenda Hood is reporting that tens of thousands of would-be voters who think they registered during independent voter registration drives may not be.

Some groups failed to complete sections of the registration forms that dealt with citizenship, mental competence, or felony convictions, rendering the applications void. Other groups are under investigation for committing fraud or trying to change party registration for some voters without informing them.

One leftist group is crying foul over Hood's directive that incomplete forms not be turned back over to groups to complete.

A group seeking copies of the incomplete applications in an effort to help people complete them said some counties turned over thousands of forms until Hood's office informed supervisors state law prohibits them from handing out copies of voter records except to specified groups, such as political committees and parties. Now the Washington-based Advancement Project isn't receiving any of the forms and fears thousands of people won't be able to vote.

"Clearly, way over the number that could determine the election," said Judith Browne, a lawyer with the group, which promotes multiracial participation in the democratic process. She was referring to President Bush's disputed 537-vote victory in Florida that gave him the presidency in 2000.

That group, America's Families United, has even sued (so far unsuccessfully) over the issue.

"It seems like every time that we try to take steps to help voters to make sure they get on the rolls and to make sure they are protected, the state and the counties put obstacles in the way," said Browne.

Yeah -- little things like THE LAW.

Of course, the leftists ignore the actions of Florida officials to remedy the problem.

Acting Duval elections supervisor Richard Carlberg said his office is trying to call the 1,441 applicants to let them know they won't be able to vote unless the forms are completed, but said many of the phone numbers on the forms aren't working numbers.

Hood said her office is only trying to help elections supervisors follow the law and that incomplete forms must be rejected.

Hood recommended that people who were registered by a group instead of at their county elections office check to make sure they were actually registered. She also said anyone registering to vote outside a county office should double check to make sure all information is accurate, forms are completely filled out and that the group plans to turn the applications in before midnight Monday.

Individuals taking responsibility and initiative to ensure that they are properly registered -- what a concept. The very notion of personal responsibility reeks of opposition to the Democrat Platform and must surely, somehow, discriminate against and disenfranchise minorities and octogenarian transplants from New York.

Posted by: Greg at 05:29 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 471 words, total size 3 kb.

Will They Punish Us With Nude Pictures Of Leonard Nimoy?

A Canadian Judge has banned United Federation of Planets representative Reni Sentana-Ries, Grand World Councillor, Lion of Judah and Guardian of the Arab Prophetess Uthrania Seila, has been banned from using the Internet. The Starfleet emissary, more mundanely known as Reinhard Mueller of Edmonton, is accused of violating hate speech laws by promoting racial hatred of Jews.

Here's where the case gets interesting.

While Mueller has denied the charges, Judge David McNab made it a condition of his bail which forbids him from using the Internet.

Mueller objected saying access to the Internet is a right of all citizens of earth and said he needs it to research his defence. McNab said there were other avenues available for him to do legal research.

MuellerÂ’s defence is original. According to court documents Mueller will claim that there was no problem with his site until he demanded the removal of the monetary system and insisted people comply with the universal order of stellar economics.

In another excerpt, Mueller warns that if the new economic world order isn't implemented will earn judgment from the Starfleet Commanders on your leadership heads!

Let's stipulate that this guy is a real nutjob. That said, I'm much more concerned about judges restricting access to the fastest growing technology and the threat to free speech than I am about some whacked out guy spouting insane "prophecies" on his website. My concern is that these "hate speech" prohibitions are going to work their way into American law, especially if we allow folks on the left to regain political power. After all, they would likely classify most of Christian teaching as "hate speech" and shut down most conservative talk radio under the same rubric.

So I'm going to hope that Mueller manages to "live long and prosper," because in this case "the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many". . . even if that seems illogical.

Posted by: Greg at 04:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 339 words, total size 2 kb.

I've Missed You Guys!

It's been quite a week.

Grades.

An unexpected late meeting.

Work to prep for my classes.

A minor family illness that necessitated TLC.

And a desire to spend more time with the Loyal Opposition rather than in front of a computer.

I'll try to be more regular.

Posted by: Greg at 02:31 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.

Disunity In The Sacred Places.

Yet another chapter in the long history of conflict between different groups of Christian faithful in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher occurred today. A group of Greek Orthodox priests and Franciscans got into a fistfight over whether or not a door in the church built over the Savior's tomb should be open or closed during a procession.

Over the course of over a millennium, an uneasy truce has developed between different Christian groups regarding rights to certain spots in the building, the right to repair or decorate walls, and even the right to live on the building's roof. This conflict was both encouraged and mediated by the Ottomans and other Muslim rulers in Jerusalem.

Monday's fight broke out during a procession of hundreds of Greek Orthodox worshippers commemorating the 4th century pilgrimage by Helena, mother of Emperor Constantine, to Jerusalem. Tradition says that during the trip, Helena found the cross on which Jesus had been crucified.


Church officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that at one point, the procession passed a Roman Catholic chapel, and priests from both sides started arguing over whether the door to the chapel should be open or closed.

The fight was broken up by Israeli police using clubs, and the procession continued.

There have been other conflicts in recent years.

In 2003, Israeli police threatened to limit the number of worshippers allowed to attend an Easter ceremony if the denominations did not agree on who would lead the ceremony. Police brokered a last-minute deal and the ceremony passed peacefully.


But a year earlier, the Greek patriarch and Armenian clergyman designated to enter the tomb exchanged blows after a dispute over who would be first to exit the chamber.

And how do we expect to ward off the jihadis if we cannot resolve our own disputes in fraternal love?

Posted by: Greg at 01:42 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 315 words, total size 2 kb.

Hey, Dude, Where've You Been?

It's that awful point of the semester -- grades are due. Those of you who teach (or who love a teacher) know the horror of that time. I've not had much blogging time, not trying to finish the grades for 170 students.

To quote Doug MacArthur -- I shall return!

Probably today.

Posted by: Greg at 03:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.

Company's Coming!

Bad weather is coming to Precinct 333! It looks like we have about a 38% chance of this one making landfall right here.

The low pressure remains of Hurricane Ivan that wandered in the Gulf of Mexico today swelled into a tropical storm that's expected to assault the Texas and Louisiana coasts Thursday.

The storm, with sustained winds of 40 mph at 8:30 p.m., likely will make landfall between western Louisiana and Houston late today or early Friday, said Tom Bradshaw, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service's southern regional office in Fort Worth.

Surf is high down along Todville Road, the main coastal road here in Precinct 333. When we reach high tide, I expect to see the road flood in spots -- though that still leaves the Loyal Opposition (and the dog) a couple of ways out if it gets too bad.

But we've ridden a couple storms out in our home, and expect to do the same with this one. The fury was expended elsewhere.

Still, keep all of us in your thoughts and prayers.

And by the way -- since it died down to a low pressure center it may get a new name.

Bradshaw said the storm, which had been called called Tropical Depression Ivan earlier today, would likely be renamed Matthew once it reached tropical storm strength. The hurricane center had not changed the name by 9 p.m.

Posted by: Greg at 07:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 238 words, total size 2 kb.

Burn In Hell In Flaming Pig Fat!

We've apparantly taken out the spiritual leader of Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi's Tawhid and Jihad, the group that has been cutting off heads of Americans in recent days. Sheik Abu Anas al-Shami was killed in a missle attack on September 17.

Good riddance.

Find the remains, coat with bacon grease, and return to the family as a warning to other terrorist scum.

You're next, al-Zarqwi!

Posted by: Greg at 05:48 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.

Stupid Letter, Stupid Decision -- But Still Constitutionally Protected

Back on December 2, 2003, the Tucson Citizen printed a letter to the editor. The author suggested that going to a mosque and killing five Muslims for every soldier killed in Iraq.

Printing it was stupid.

There was outrage, and rightly so.

Muslim families kept their kids home from school out of fear of violence.

Apologies were made, and the author of the letter clarified that he meant mosques in Iraq, not those in the area.

And that should have been the end of it. Except for folks filing lawsuits in an attempt to gut the First Amendment. On January 13, two Muslims filed suit alleging assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress against Muslims.

You can express your opinion but not — especially with what's going on in the Middle East — if you put some people's lives at risk," said plaintiff Aly Elleithee, an accountant and immigrant from Egypt. "Somebody has to be accountable for what they did."

A trial judge dismissed the assault claim, but allowed the other claim to stand.

"Clearly, reasonable minds could differ in determining whether the publication of the letter rose to the level of extreme and outrageous conduct," Judge Miller wrote.

The Arizona Supreme Court is now deciding whether to overturn that decision.

It should be a no brainer. After all, no specific threat was made, nor did the publication of the letter put anyone's life or safety in immediate danger.

"If the trial court's ruling is allowed to stand, political speech that falls well short of advocating immediate violence may be subject to sanction in Arizona — making this state a uniquely risky jurisdiction in which to publish news and commentary," the Citizen's lawyers wrote in the appeal.

Without any immediate physical threat to anyone, publication of the letter is constitutionally protected, the newspaper's appeal said.

If this decision is allowed to stand as rendered by the Ninth Circuit wanna-be, then the First Amendment is trumped by the first person to say they are scared or their feelings have been hurt. And all it will take is one overly sensitive member of the minority to trump the freedom of speech of the majority.

Posted by: Greg at 05:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 380 words, total size 3 kb.

Free Press And Open Courts -- What A Concept!

The ACLU, a great supporter of keeping the press free, public records public, and courts open, has been dealt a blow in a Nebraska case -- in which it attempted to have a judge gag media outlets that wanted to report the name of an individual suing to remove a Ten Commandments monument from a public building. The organization had worried that allowing the name of its client to be reported would lead to harassment and because of an earlier death threat.

ACLU attorney Amy Miller told Kopf that revealing the name in print would put the man's life in jeopardy.

"Lives are at stake," she said. "You might as well paint a target on the man's back."

Funny, I'm not aware of any actual attacks on anyone who has sued to have a cross or Ten Commandments monument removed from a public place. The old "Thou Shalt Not Kill" thing sort of prevents that kind of thing.

And besides, the newspaper is operating on principle here.

World-Herald attorney Michael Cox said sealed evidence presented to the court shows that "the cat is out of the bag."

"Everybody knows who it is," Cox said.

Cox said the paper had the right to publish his name and doing so would not put him at risk.

"He is not going to die because of what the World-Herald does," Cox said.

Following the hearing, Cox said he did not know when or if a story would run revealing the man's name. He said a larger investigative piece related to the case was being pursued.

Larry King, executive editor of the World-Herald, said the man thrust himself into the public eye by bringing the lawsuit.

"This is not a case in which an individual, through no fault or action of his own, found himself in the middle of a dispute," King said. "This man is trying to force a city to make a controversial change it doesn't want to make. If you want to change public policy, it should not be a surprise that you could be publicly identified."

Sounds reasonable to me. If you want to raise a claim in court, you should have to identify yourself. He filed the suit because "he has to see the monument from a street passing by the park on his way to work every day and when he attends events in the park." Why shouldn't the public, which overwhelmingly supports the monument, be allowed to know who is suing the government to remove a monument that the public overwhelmingly supports? Isn't that a part of open government and open courts?

Posted by: Greg at 02:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 452 words, total size 3 kb.

How Do Teachers Educate Their Kids?

The Washington Times notes today that about a quarter of teachers in large urban school districts send their kids to private schools. Why is that?

"Teachers, it is reasonable to assume, care about education, are reasonably expert about it and possess quite a lot of information about the schools in which they teach. We can assume that no one knows the condition and quality of public schools better than teachers who work in them every day."
"They know from personal experience that many of their colleagues make such a choice [for private vs. public schools], and do so for good and sufficient reasons."

Now some want to argue it is because public education is broken. While I'll concede that is true in some places, I don't think that is the answer.

As a public school teacher in an urban district, I may have some insight into the issue (though I have no kids). It is gained from working with a diverse group of colleagues who havemade a variety of choices. Some have students in our school. Others live outside the district and send the kids to the school closest to home. I know many who make the choice for a religious education (you would be surprised how many conservative Christian teachers there really are). I even know one who homeschools his daughter along with his wife. Each has made the choice to do what he or she sees as best for their own children.

And I think that is the key -- choice. So do the authors of the article.

Posted by: Greg at 02:42 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.

Wow -- Thanks!

Since Saturday I have had almost 1000 pageloads on this blog -- most related to the Beslan entry.

Thanks to all who linked!

Posted by: Greg at 05:41 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

The People Kerry Betrayed -- And Why He Must Not Get The Chance To Do Worse

John Kerry's Senate testimony and the Winter Soldier Investigation painted a picture of American fighting men in Vietnam as monsters raping and ravaging their way across the countryside. That picture was and is false. Ask the Vietnamese people. Michael P. Tremoglie did, and what he found was very enlightening.

A few weeks ago, I did just that. I met with a group of Vietnamese refugees--past and present. Some were among the 1980s "Boat People," who fled the horror of Communist Vietnam on rafts, boats, and pieces of driftwood, risking their lives in the process. Others were more recent arrivals. All fled the purported utopia Vietnam was supposed to become according to Kerry and his anti-war colleagues.

Ask Quyen V. Ngo.

He was a boat person rescued by an American merchant ship after three nights at sea. Fifty-nine years old, Quyen was a schoolteacher in Vietnam and a Captain in the South Vietnamese army (ARVN).

. . .

I asked him if the Communists committed genocide after they obtained power. He said the Communists killed many people. Those who were not killed were placed in re-education camps. There they worked 12 hours a day and had little food.

Ngo never witnessed any atrocities by American soldiers, neither did he hear of any American atrocities. He said he did not believe a thing Kerry said about American troops, systematically committing war crimes. He thinks Kerry fabricated this.

He felt sorry for those who opposed the war because they did not see the truth about the war and the Communists. As far as he is concerned, they betrayed the American and Vietnamese soldiers. Testimony like Kerry's, Ngo believes, resulted in encouraging the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong Communists to kill more Vietnamese and American soldiers.

Or perhaps you could ask the survivors of the Montagnards.

Currently, Human Rights Watch (HRW) has cited several examples of atrocities by Vietnam's Communist rulers. One such was the Easter week massacre. Montagnards, protesting the lack of religious freedom, were killed. According to HRW ". . . sources in the Central Highlands confirm . . . hundreds of demonstrators were wounded and many were killed by security forces . . . ."

Remember, John Kerry is the man who said in his Senate testimony that all political groups would be represented in a Communist Vietnam. We now know that to be false, and those who believed that tragically wrong.

Do we really want to give Kerry the chance to make such a mistake again, when the fate of another people rides upon his clear thinking?

Posted by: Greg at 04:47 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 459 words, total size 3 kb.

Corrupt New Mexico Judge Urged To Resign.

When Democrats sued to get Ralph Nader off the ballot in New Mexico, state District Court Judge Wendy York obliged them by ruling that Nader could not appear on the ballot.

Now it appears there is a conflict of interest in the case. Wendy E. York of Albuquerque, New Mexico donated $1000 to the John Kerry campaign earlier this year. This appears to violate the state judicial ethics code, which says, in part, that

"A judge is disqualified and shall recuse himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where: (1) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party's lawyer ..."

Clearly a campaign donor to one candidate has a conflict of interest when they are given the power to knock an opposing candidate off the ballot at the request of their preferred candidate's party.

State Sen. Rod Adair, R-Roswell, has called on York to resign by Monday. If she fails to do so, he and a multi-partisan group of other political leaders from around the state will seek to have York sanctioned and removed from the bench.

Joining Adair in Saturday's complaint were Frank Clinard, a Libertarian; Steve Cabiedes, a Green Party candidate for Bernalillo County Clerk; Arville Sullins, a Democrat from Roswell; and Elizabeth Cook, president of Concerned Citizens of Albuquerque, according to a news release from Adair.

Seems like honest government requires getting this woman off the bench.

Posted by: Greg at 12:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 264 words, total size 2 kb.

Kerry Lies Again!

Kerry likes to lie to the American public. Examples include his Vietnam record, his treasonous activites following the war, his Senate record, his vehicle ownership, his finances, his plans for his presidency, and a story he used to tell about a wonam losing her health insurance. Now the Manchester Union Leader has found another one.

At an August 27 event in Daly City, Calif., Kerry was introduced by a woman named Lori Guy. She said that after her employer cut her pay in 2000, she piled up huge credit card bills and was regularly charged late-payment fees. Kerry used her story to attack President Bush for not protecting the middle class. He then claimed he would prevent credit card companies from charging large fees.

Now I could point out that the pay cut came in 2000 during "the best economy in 50 years" (as touted by Democrats) during the early stages of the Clinton Recession that the Bush tax cuts in 2001 helped alleviate. But if I did, I would miss the even more important story, the one found when the San Jose Mercury News interviewed Ms. Guy.

She told the paper that she is still with the same company, and after several raises makes more money than ever before. Since all of this happened within the span of the last four years, her real story is that during the Bush administration she went from being heavily in debt to being in the best finanical shape of her life. Funny that John Kerry never mentioned that.

In other words, under the Democrats she suffered a pay cut and crushing debt. Under the Republicans she prospered. Its a pity that John Kerry had to lie again in his quest for the presidency. I guess those talks with Bill Clinton really helped.

Posted by: Greg at 03:14 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 306 words, total size 2 kb.

Louisiana Voters Ban Gay Marriage, Civil Unions

By a 4/1 margin, Louisiana voters approved a state constitutional amendment to ban homosexual marriage and civil unions in the state. Louisiana is the second of eleven states to vote on the issue since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court determined that John Adams and his fellow authors of the Massachusetts Constitution intended to allow homosexuals to marry one another.

Homosexual leaders announced their plan to challenge the ban, claiming that legislators and voters were too stupid to know what they were doing.

"The Christian Coalition did an excellent job of deceiving the legislature and the voters into believing that this amendment only dealt with the issue of marriage," said Randall Evans, an attorney for Forum For Equality, a statewide civil rights organization. "Now, 500,000 Louisianians will have to look to the courts for protection of their constitutional rights."

And the rest of the people of Louisiana will have to look to the courts to protect their right to have their vote count, and to be permitted o make social policy in their state. Folks such as Mr. Evans are Exhibit 1 in the case for a Federal Marriage Amendment.

Posted by: Greg at 03:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 203 words, total size 1 kb.

Anyone Need A Talk Show Host?

As the lovely and multi-talented Michelle Malkin reports, KIRO-AM talk host Brian Maloney has been fired by the station over his criticism of Dan Rather and CBS News' handling of the forged memos smearing the president.

"On the talk show that I host, or hosted, I said I felt Rather should either retire or be forced out over this," said Brian Maloney, whose weekly "The Brian Maloney Show" aired for three years on KIRO-AM Radio, a CBS affiliate here.

Maloney says he made that statement on his Sept. 12 program. He was fired Friday, he said.

Apparently he missed the "Rally 'Round Rather" memo directing him to help the network stonewall any meaningful investigation of their fraud.

Why did he speak out against Rather?

"I really felt he was taking the network's credibility down with him," Maloney said in a telephone interview.

"Talk-show hosts have generally had a lot of independence in these kinds of issues," he said. "Nobody's ever said, 'You can't criticize CBS News.'"

So if you happen to have an open slot on your talk radio station, it seems that there is an honest man looking for a position. Give him a call.

Posted by: Greg at 02:34 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 208 words, total size 1 kb.

Liberal Hypocrites Picket O'Neill Home

Fifteen leftist picketers protested in front of the home of Unfit for Command author John O'Neill in Houston today. The stench of hypocrisy was overwhelming.

John Cobarruvias, head of Bay Area New Democrats (BAND), was there, acting as spokesman. He denounced O'Neill in a manner that is so patently absurd that it is virtually impossible to take him seriously (scratch that, I've been reading his letters in the local paper for years -- it is always impossible to take him seriously).

"Who in their right mind would attack a veteran who actually volunteered to go to Vietnam?" protester John Cobarruvias asked. "Attacking a veteran who went to war, who got shot at, is wrong."

But hold it. Isn't John O'Neill ALSO "a veteran who went to war, who got shot at"? Doesn't that give him at least equal right to speak out on matters of public concern, such as the record of the man who Cobarruvias wants to be the next president?

But Cobarruvias didn't stop there.

"They have done the most indespicable (sic) thing that a man could ever do and that is attack an American veteran," Cobarruvias said. "We are going to do whatever it takes within the law to stop this and if it means coming to this man's house and protesting him within the law, that is what we are going to do."

Well maybe that answers my question -- John Kerry must be the ONLY veteran above criticism -- anyone else, including other Vietnam combat veterans who served with Kerry, may not utter a single word to impeach his actions or motives.

O'Neill, who was attending his daughter's wedding, released a statement urging protesters "to read the book and then engage in a civil debate over its contents."

"It is our experience that protests and book burnings occur not against books that are false, but against books that are true," the statement said.

It's tempting to give everyone John Cobarruvias' home address and phone in this posting. I know they are listed and easily found. But maybe it is better that I don't. After all, we conservatives don't feel a need to intimidate and harass our political opponents into silence, the way Mr. Cobarruvias and his BAND of thugs apparently need to do. After all, we have the truth on our side.

Posted by: Greg at 02:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 397 words, total size 3 kb.

You Can't Say That At School!

As a teacher, I hate to hear about kids suing a school. But I've just got to back this young man. For the First Amendment to mean anything, people have to be able to peaceably dissent from and orthodoxy that the government wishes to impose.

Tyler "Chase" Harper had the audacity to dissent from the "Gay is OK" message put forth by his school. When the school sponsored a "Day of Silence" to protest the alleged harassment of homosexuals and others, Chase wore one which read "Homosexuality is shameful" and "Romans 1:27." When he wore it a second day, he was suspended.

"This particular phrase is harmful and offensive to people and shouldn't be permitted," school district attorney Jack Sleeth told U.S. District Judge John Houston.

Really, Mr. Sleeth? Haven't you read Tinker v. DesMoines, which holds that students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door? DO you mean to say that religious speech and speech opposing homosexuality are not constitutionally protected? Or are you contending that Tinker, the landmark student's rights case that permitted students to wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War, was wrongly decided? Or do you mean to say that the precedent only applies to those who espouse a liberal message?

ironically, Sleeth goes on to justify the suspension and ban on the grounds that the district has a goal of promoting, get this, "tolerance of all viewpoints." Well, Mr. Sleeth, why does the district refuse to promote the tolerance of Chase's viewpoint? It seems to me that they are suppressing a viewpoint they don't support, rather than tolerating it. And you can't claim it was causing disruptions in the school, because not one fight or disruption can be documented on the day the shirt was permitted. All you can point to is hurt feelings and people being offended.

As a public school teacher, I hope this bunch goes down hard, and that Tinker gets reaffirmed. Maybe we'll see an end to absurdities like the one at my school, which banned a t-shirt with a "Wanted Dead or Alive" poster of Osama bin Laden, or one worn by a student who was a Civil War buff honoring Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest. Or the ones at other schools where kids are suspended for wearing Pepsi shirts on Coca Cola day, or a Green Bay Packers shirt on Minnesota Vikings day.

Posted by: Greg at 11:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 410 words, total size 3 kb.

More Unprovoked Democrat Violence Against Republicans

Blogs for Bush links to this piece about unprovoked Democrat violence in Gainseville, Florida.

You see it all started when David McCally saw a life-size cut-out of the president in GOP headquarters as he walked down the street. Not content to go on his way and allow those with whom he disagrees to to have political material he disagrees with in their own office, McCally (an instructor at Santa Fe Community College) entered the office and punched the cut-out in the face.

"I don't like old brother George. Truthfully, I kind of did it lightheartedly. I was just walking over there to order chicken, and I saw the cutout and I just walked in there and punched it.

That's when county GOP chairman Travis Horn stepped outside to confront McCally. Big mistake, but then again, you don't always know when you are dealing with an irrational political extrimist. They tend to blend in with the more "normal" folks in the Democrat party.

When Horn went outside, he said McCally came up to him. "He proceeded to say how he had a Ph.D., and he was smarter than me. I'm a stupid Republican," and other comments laced with obscenities, he said.

Horn said he was hit and knocked into a wall.

His lips were cut and his nose injured.

"I then proceeded to defend myself," he said. "I used the minimum force necessary to subdue him."

The police report states Horn kicked McCally because McCally was holding on to Horn's legs.

Police happened to be pulling into the area at the time, Horn said. A police report states officers saw McCally throw what they later learned was the first punch.

"Of course I'm going to have a restraining order filed against him," Horn said. "I certainly will seek his removal from the classroom. Obviously he's shown a serious lack of judgment."

College officials confirm that McCally has been temporarily suspended, pending an administrative review. As a part-time instructor, it would appear that McCally does not have tenure.

And you have to love Travis Horn's response to all of this.

"If I have to take a beating every day for George W. Bush to be president, I'll do that. My passion for my beliefs continues unabated."

Posted by: Greg at 10:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 386 words, total size 3 kb.