When a media source like the Austin American-Statesman makes such criticisms of a liberal, you know that the person in question has really engaged in extreme actions.

Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle has added several more acts to the already circus-like investigation of alleged Republican campaign funding illegalities.

The latest act unfolded on Tuesday afternoon when Earle disclosed that he had gone grand jury shopping on Friday after an indictment against former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, which was returned last Wednesday, was questioned for its legality.

Working on its last day, a second grand jury declined to indict DeLay on Friday.

Earle's office said it received new information over the weekend, so it went to yet a third grand jury empaneled on Monday, the last possible day under the statute of limitations. That grand jury returned the new indictments.

Earle's panicked rush lends credence to those who complain that he is a partisan playing politics with the grand jury, and it gives ammunition to critics who argue that he has been hapless in his three-year probe.

Earle has been shopping for a friendly grand jury for years, and finally got one that could be led by the nose to indict his political foe with just a couple of hours worth of cajoling after the earlier one refused to give him what he wanted. It is time for a judge to dismiss the whole thing – and for Ronnie to be dismissed by the people of Travis County.

Posted by: Greg at 01:11 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

Mary Mapes got caught doing shoddy journalism. Now she claims to be the victim of a “vast right wing conspiracy”.

She is convinced she was the victim of a group of loosely associated Internet bloggers "with a harsh political bent" who pounced on CBS News minutes after the airing of the now-infamous Texas Air National Guard story on "60 Minutes 2" in September 2004.

The story purported to have proof that George W. Bush received preferential treatment while serving with the Guard during the Vietnam era. The story was based in part on alleged "newly discovered" memos about his attendance record that were later discredited.

"Within a few minutes, I was online visiting Websites I had never heard of before: Free Republic, Little Green Footballs, Power Line," writes Mapes in the first chapter of her new book about the reaction to the story.

"They were hard-core, politically angry, hyperconservative sites loaded with vitriol about Dan Rather and CBS."

Uh, they were loaded with vitriol about the airing of disproven claims using documents of questionable provenance. They were upset that such accusations were broadcast so close to election day. That does not make it a conspiracy – and the fact that the CBS story fell apart within hours is proof enough that this was not a conspiracy. Instead, what you saw was a confluence of expertise and knowledge used to debunk false claims made by a discredited media sources and unethical journalists with an ideological agenda.

Or do you have some actual evidence – not obtained from a secret source and photocopied o prevent examination – that demonstrates you were set up?

Posted by: Greg at 01:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 279 words, total size 2 kb.

I bet my pooch wishes I could have gotten one of these.

Honda Motor Co. has designed a car that's friendly for dogs — part of the Japanese automaker's ongoing effort to create vehicles that are easy to use and comfortable to ride in.

The W.O.W. Concept, which stands for "wonderful openhearted wagon," shown to reporters recently, is an exhibition model with no plans for commercial sale that will be exhibited at the Tokyo auto show later this month.

A special crate for dogs in the glove apartment allows owners to interact with their pets while driving. A bigger crate pops up from the floor in the back seat area and can be folded back into the floor when it's not needed. For even bigger dogs, just buckle them up with a special seat belt to the floor.

I wonder when and if they plan on marketing this car in the United States. I suspect that they would be quite popular with people like me, with no children but a spoiled pet. It certainly would have come in handy during the evacuation.

Posted by: Greg at 01:08 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 190 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Bow WOW.

Posted by: mcconnell at Thu Oct 6 07:45:39 2005 (o58ig)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Whenever I visit family in the area, I always stop in to visit the replica of Lewis and ClarkÂ’s Fort Clatsop, where they spent the winter after crossing the continent. Much of the fort has burned in a suspicious fire earlier this week.

A 50-year-old replica of the fort where the Lewis and Clark expedition spent the soggy winter of 1805-1806 was destroyed by a suspicious fire, authorities said Tuesday.

Volunteer firefighters worked for hours to try to save Fort Clatsop at the Lewis and Clark National Historic Park after the fire broke out Monday night, park superintendent Chip Jenkins said. But "half of the fort was burned up, and the other half is essentially a loss," he said.

The site was being treated as a crime scene, and investigators said they were looking for a truck seen leaving the area as the firefighters arrived.

State police and agents from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives were sending in dogs trained to sniff out the presence of any flammable liquids.

Jenkins said the fort had no electricity or gas source.

The fire happened less than six weeks before a Lewis and Clark Bicentennial event was scheduled to be held at the fort, the culmination of a two-year, national celebration of the explorers' journey West. The expedition had wintered at Fort Clatsop after reaching the Pacific Ocean in November 1805.

"We will rebuild," Jenkins said. "The Lewis and Clark Bicentennial events will go on through the winter."

The current structure was built 50 years ago to celebrate the sesquicentennial of the expedition in 1955. The fort has been the location of interpretive programs that do a superg job of recreating life at the fort during that winter, and has among the best historical programs I have seen at a national park. I hope they catch the perps.

Posted by: Greg at 01:06 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 315 words, total size 2 kb.

Talk about your cases of bad judgement.

A substitute teacher in Lake County, Fla., was terminated and banned from teaching in the county after he ripped out a student's insulin pump during class apparently thinking it was a ringing cell phone, according to a Local 6 News report.

Officials said a ninth-grade student at East Ridge High School, who is a Type I diabetic, was in class Monday when his insulin pump began to beep, indicating he was low on insulin.

Witnesses said the class teacher, Richard Maline, 51, asked the student what the beeping was.

School officials said Maline then grabbed the device, thinking it was a cell phone beeping and detached the tube that connects the insulin pump to the student's leg.

The student went to the school's clinic and had the tube reinserted.

It generally isnÂ’t a good idea to try to snatch something away from a kid unless it presents a clear and present danger, regardless of how insubordinate a student is being. This substituteÂ’s actions, probably taken without even asking for an explanation, are truly beyond the pale.

Posted by: Greg at 01:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 191 words, total size 1 kb.

Now they want to ban the historic symbol of England – the Cross of St. George.

British prison officers who wore a St. George's Cross tie-pin have been ticked off by the jails watchdog over concerns about the symbol's racist connotations.

The pins showing the English flag -- which has often raised hackles due to its connection with the Crusades of the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries -- could be "misconstrued," Chief Inspector of Prisons Anne Owers said in a section on race in a report on a jail in the northern English city of Wakefield.

The banner of St. George, the red cross of a martyr on a white background, was adopted for the uniform of English soldiers during the military expeditions by European powers to recapture the Holy Land from Muslims, and later became the national flag of England.

Oops – might offend the Muslims, so it has to go. After all, we can’t have (nominally) Christian Englishmen and women celebrating their heritage in their own country when it might alienate the immigrant Muslim horde.

What is most amazing is this extreme statement of the demand for dhimmitude by representatives of the Muslim community.

Chris Doyle, director of the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding, said Tuesday the red cross was an insensitive reminder of the Crusades.

"A lot of Muslims and Arabs view the Crusades as a bloody episode in our history," he told CNN. "They see those campaigns as Christendom launching a brutal holy war against Islam.

"Muslim or Arab prisoners could take umbrage if staff wore a red cross badge. It's also got associations with the far-right. Prison officers should be seen to be neutral."

Doyle added that it was now time for England to find a new flag and a patron saint who is "not associated with our bloody past and one we can all identify with."

I’ve got a better idea – perhaps it is time to tell the Muslims to shut up or get out. The British people are entitled to celebrate their Christian heritage, and not be made to apologize for their heritage in their own country.

Posted by: Greg at 03:26 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 367 words, total size 2 kb.

What else can one conclude based upon this statement from todayÂ’s news conference?

Asked by a reporter if she was "the most qualified" person he could find in the country, he said, "Yes, otherwise I would not have" named her.

Dare I suggest a list of other candidates better qualified for the Supreme Court than Harriet Miers?

1. Janice Rogers Brown
2. Priscilla Owen
3. Michael Luttig
4. John Cornyn
5. Edith Jones
6. Consuel Callahan
7. Maura Corrigan
8. Alberto Gonzales
9. Manuel Miranda
10. Miguel Estrada
11. Robert Bork
12. Ted Olson
13. Edith Clement
14. Emilio Garza
15. J. Harvie Wilkinson
16. Bill Pryor
17. Samuel A. Alito
18. Michael W. McConnell
19. Larry D. Thompson
20. Karen Williams

And those are just the Republicans who spring to mind – I won’t get into the liberals who, while repulsive to me in terms of judicial philosophy, are much better qualified, folks like Alan Dershowitz and Larry Tribe.

Posted by: Greg at 03:24 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 1 kb.

Arlen Specter inadvertently summed up a part of my problem with Harriet Miers.

When asked about a timetable for hearings, Mr. Specter suggested that it would in part be up to Ms. Miers, who will have to study "so that she would have the grasp of these very complex decisions."

The Supreme Court is not a place for someone to learn on the job. If she lacks a grasp of Supreme Court jurisprudence, I would have to argue that she is not particularly qualified for the job of Supreme Court justice.

After all, would you want your doctor to have to study up on anatomy before your surgery?

UPDATE: This story popped into my head yesterday as I considered the Miers nomination.

It is reminiscent of the 1970 nomination hearings for Nixon's nominee Judge G. Harold Carswell. Sen. Roman Hruska (R-Nebraska), defended Carswell against the charge that he was "mediocre," declaring "Even if [Judge Carswell] is mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they -- a little chance? We can't have all Brandeises, Cardozos, and Frankfurters, and stuff like that there."

Has Arlen Specter supplied us with the “Hruska Moment” of this nomination battle?

Posted by: Greg at 03:23 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 1 kb.

Arlen Specter inadvertently summed up a part of my problem with Harriet Miers.

When asked about a timetable for hearings, Mr. Specter suggested that it would in part be up to Ms. Miers, who will have to study "so that she would have the grasp of these very complex decisions."

The Supreme Court is not a place for someone to learn on the job. If she lacks a grasp of Supreme Court jurisprudence, I would have to argue that she is not particularly qualified for the job of Supreme Court justice.

After all, would you want your doctor to have to study up on anatomy before your surgery?

UPDATE: This story popped into my head yesterday as I considered the Miers nomination.

It is reminiscent of the 1970 nomination hearings for Nixon's nominee Judge G. Harold Carswell. Sen. Roman Hruska (R-Nebraska), defended Carswell against the charge that he was "mediocre," declaring "Even if [Judge Carswell] is mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they -- a little chance? We can't have all Brandeises, Cardozos, and Frankfurters, and stuff like that there."

Has Arlen Specter supplied us with the “Hruska Moment” of this nomination battle?

Posted by: Greg at 03:23 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 215 words, total size 2 kb.

Ronnie Earle certainly raised the stakes with this charge, and in the process made it even more clear how partisan this indictment is.

While DeLay kept up his drumbeat on television and radio about partisan prosecution, the biggest effect of the new indictment on the criminal case was to make the case harder for prosecutors to prove. Most of the underlying allegations remain the same, but prosecutors now must prove DeLay conspired to launder money, a first-degree felony that carries a maximum life term. The previous conspiracy charge was a state-jail felony with a two-year maximum.

"They've upped the stakes," DeGuerin said.

The reindictment also consolidated DeLay's case with that of two associates, John Colyandro of Austin and Jim Ellis of Washington, on the same charges, according to a statement from Earle's office.

First, the goal now is to destroy Tom Delay personally, not just politically, for daring to stand up to Earle’s political thuggery. Second, by consolidating the cases Earle is seeking to make sure that the jury gets confused as to who did what, making it more likely that the jury will convict DeLay of something because “he must have done something if he is on trial with these other two guys.”

The other interesting detail is that Earle ran the new indictments past members of the expired grand jury over the weekend, after their term was over.

Prosecutors ran the idea of a money-laundering indictment against DeLay by the previous grand jury by phone over the weekend, sources close to the investigation said.

I’m curious – doesn’t that violate ethical and legal restrictions on disclosing material from an investigation and of grand jury proceedings to those outside the process, since the folks consulted were no longer part of a live grand jury? Isn’t that simply one more indication of how far this unethical little weasel from Travis County will go to overthrow the will of the majority of Texans – and the voters of the 22nd Congressional District?

UPDATE: National Review’s Media Blog has an interesting analysis of the new charges and why it may be that Ronnie Earle is again overreaching in an attempt to get a conviction where no actual criminal activity took place. It is also noted that the transaction that took place is substantially similar to other transactions that took place involving groups on both sides of the political fence – with the Democrats converting twice the dollar amount as the Republicans did.

Posted by: Greg at 03:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 417 words, total size 3 kb.

Ronnie Earle certainly raised the stakes with this charge, and in the process made it even more clear how partisan this indictment is.

While DeLay kept up his drumbeat on television and radio about partisan prosecution, the biggest effect of the new indictment on the criminal case was to make the case harder for prosecutors to prove. Most of the underlying allegations remain the same, but prosecutors now must prove DeLay conspired to launder money, a first-degree felony that carries a maximum life term. The previous conspiracy charge was a state-jail felony with a two-year maximum.

"They've upped the stakes," DeGuerin said.

The reindictment also consolidated DeLay's case with that of two associates, John Colyandro of Austin and Jim Ellis of Washington, on the same charges, according to a statement from Earle's office.

First, the goal now is to destroy Tom Delay personally, not just politically, for daring to stand up to Earle’s political thuggery. Second, by consolidating the cases Earle is seeking to make sure that the jury gets confused as to who did what, making it more likely that the jury will convict DeLay of something because “he must have done something if he is on trial with these other two guys.”

The other interesting detail is that Earle ran the new indictments past members of the expired grand jury over the weekend, after their term was over.

Prosecutors ran the idea of a money-laundering indictment against DeLay by the previous grand jury by phone over the weekend, sources close to the investigation said.

I’m curious – doesn’t that violate ethical and legal restrictions on disclosing material from an investigation and of grand jury proceedings to those outside the process, since the folks consulted were no longer part of a live grand jury? Isn’t that simply one more indication of how far this unethical little weasel from Travis County will go to overthrow the will of the majority of Texans – and the voters of the 22nd Congressional District?

UPDATE: National Review’s Media Blog has an interesting analysis of the new charges and why it may be that Ronnie Earle is again overreaching in an attempt to get a conviction where no actual criminal activity took place. It is also noted that the transaction that took place is substantially similar to other transactions that took place involving groups on both sides of the political fence – with the Democrats converting twice the dollar amount as the Republicans did.

Posted by: Greg at 03:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 424 words, total size 3 kb.

Well, sex toys have moved out of the porn shops and into the chain stores.

Sex toys are moving out of the novelty shops and into your local drug store and big-box retailer.

Minnesota-based Target is one of the national chains that will be carrying a new line of women's products that includes a vibrator.

Elexa by Trojan spokeswoman Cassandra Johnson says the products will be discreetly packaged and sold in the feminine care aisle.

Formerly the domain of sex shops, such products have been brought out of the shadows by popular television shows like "Sex and the City."

Johnson says the Elexa by Trojan line should be in stores everywhere by the end of the month.

Is this a healthy development, or is it a sign of our societyÂ’s further obsession with sex?

Posted by: Greg at 02:01 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 140 words, total size 1 kb.

This piece caught my eye while researching Harriet Miers. It involves her position on the issue of gay rights, as indicated on a survey submitted to a homosexual group when she ran for city council in Dallas in the late 1980s.

Miers answered "Yes" to the survey question, "Do you believe that gay men and lesbians should have the same civil rights as non-gay men and women?"

She was noncommittal on several other questions, saying, for example, that she would be willing to discuss the need for a law prohibiting discrimination in housing or public accommodations against people who had AIDS or were HIV-positive.

Asked whether qualified candidates should be denied city employment because they are gay or lesbian, she said, "I believe that employers should be able to pick the best qualified person for any position to be filled considering all relevant factors."

She answered "No" without elaboration when asked whether she believed, both as a citizen and a legislator, that criminalization of the private sexual behavior of consenting adult lesbians and gays should be taken out of the Texas criminal code.

She said Dallas had a responsibility in AIDS education and treatment and that she favored more money being spent in that area "assuming need and resources. I do consider the AIDS illness as a serious total community problem." She underlined "total."

Now I donÂ’t know how her views have changed over the last 15-20 years. IÂ’m told she underwent a religious conversion experience sometime during that period. But it does raise a red flag for me. Does she believe that these issues should be taken out of the political arena via judicial decree, or does she recognize that her policy preferences are not constitutional law? Will she be an activist on these issues, or will she, like Justice Felix Frankfurter, hew to the Constitution despite her liberal policy preferences while still in the political arena? After all, one can support non-discrimination laws as politically desirable while not seeing that policy as mandated by the Constitution.

But I guess that is where my problem comes from. There is no record of rulings, no history of scholarly articles, that give us any clue as to the restraint of activism of a hypothetical Justice Miers. She is a cipher on such matters. And for that reason I continue to oppose her nomination for the court.

Posted by: Greg at 02:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 403 words, total size 3 kb.

Well, Breanna Zipf will at least have to do a bit more time in jail. Judge Brock Thomas used his authority to tack six months of real jail time on to the 10 years of probation the jury gave her for murdering Gwendolen Davey -- and refused to count the 14 months served while awaiting trial towards the jail time.

State District Judge Brock Thomas told Zipf that, though he is required to follow a jury's recommendation of 10 years' probation, he is going to hold her accountable for Davey's death. "It should have never happened," the judge said. "And you're responsible for it."

Investigators said Zipf, then 17, passed out at the wheel of her mother's rental car July 23, 2004, before it struck and killed Davey as the 38-year-old teacher was walking her dog.

In addition to assessing the 180-day sentence, Thomas imposed other conditions.

Zipf must complete a nine-month drug-rehabilitation program; perform 500 hours of community service; obey a curfew allowing her to attend only school or work; and pay restitution to the teacher's family. The amount will be determined later.

Thomas also ordered Zipf to submit to drug and alcohol testing and forbade her to drive while on probation.

Still, the arrogant, spoiled girl is paying a a pretty cheap price for willfully engaging in self-indulgent conduct that resulted in the death of a productive member of society.

Good job, Judge Thomas.

Now we just need to get the legislature to close down the option of probation for murder.

Posted by: Greg at 11:11 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 261 words, total size 2 kb.

Essentially the same accusation -- except that this time Ronnie Earle got a newly empanelled grand jury to ifix the flawed indictment issued last week, using a new grand jury that had not heard most of the evidence provided to the old grand jury.

Why do this?

The new indictment comes hours after DeLay's attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the first case. That motion was based on the argument that the conspiracy charge against DeLay was based on a law that wasn't effective until 2003, the year after the alleged money transfers.

“Since the indictment charges no offense, and since you have professed not to be politically motivated in bringing this indictment, I request that you immediately agree to dismiss the indictment so that the political consequences can be reversed,” attorney Dick DeGuerin wrote in a letter to Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle.

The judge who will preside in DeLay's case is out of the country on vacation and couldn't rule on the motion. Other state district judges declined to rule on the motion in his place, said Colleen Davis, a law clerk to Austin attorney Bill White, also represents DeLay.

Ronnie Earle is such an incompetent partisan hack that he could not even get the law or the facts correct the first time he managed to get an indictment (out of six grand juries that heard evidence). Now he rushed a new grand jury into an indictment that is not any more substantial, but does at least cite the correct statutes.

When the judge gets back in the country, it is time for these charges to be dismissed with extreme prejudice.

Posted by: Greg at 12:10 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 280 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Yeah. Just heard about that. Totally disgusting. 7 different grand jury just to try and level a charge against Tom DeLay? That smells bad as a freshly dropped manure.

What's more, it's funny how Democrats are throwing around that Liberal Ronnie Earle is non-partisan because he indicted 12 Democrats and 3 Republicans during his 28 years as D.A.? Does that mean Democrats break Texas laws with a frequency 4 times greaters than Republicans?



Look at Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Earle

Interesting people he tried to indict, even among those who sat together for lunch.

Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) Members David Bradley (Republican), Bob Offutt (Republican), and Joe Bernal (Democrat) - Earle initiated a criminal investigation against three SBOE members in 2002. Earle accused the board members, who are elected from districts in Texas, of violating the state's "Open Meetings" law when the three met for lunch at a restaurant in Austin, Texas on the day of an SBOE meeting. The law requires a public meeting when elected bodies assemble in a quorum of three or more persons to conduct business. The SBOE members responded that they were simply eating lunch. Earle turned the investigation over to Travis County Attorney Ken Oden, who in turn indicted the members on misdemeanor counts.

Eating at a cafe for lunch is called a quorum? Yet, this cafe was a public place. Mr. Earle sounds much too eager and probably wanted to punish the Democrat who ate lunch with two other Republicans? Interesting to say the least.

Posted by: mcconnell at Mon Oct 3 12:39:30 2005 (CQ3Yp)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Well, the president made his second nomination to replace Sandra Day OÂ’Connor.

President Bush named White House Counsel Harriet Miers, 60, to be associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court today.

Miers, who was Bush's personal attorney in Texas, was the first woman elected president of the Texas Bar Association and was a partner at the Texas law firm of Locke Liddell & Sapp before coming to Washington to work in the Bush administration.

The announcement came just two hours before Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. formally took his seat as chief justice of the United States on the high court's opening day of the 2005 term.

Miers would replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, generally considered the decisive swing vote on many close issues before the court.

If confirmed by the Senate, Miers would be a rare appointee with no experience as a judge at any level. Initial searches of news archives also suggested that Miers has not been an outspoken advocate for or against any particular issue.

The response of the Democrats in this instance bothers me a great deal. They are too accepting and too gracious.

Reaction from Democrats was noncommittal but not negative, mostly because of who she isn't (a prominent conservative judge similar to some of those on the White House short list) than who she is.

Vermont Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Miers has been a Bush loyalist and that "it is important to know whether she would enter this key post with the judicial independence necessary when the Supreme Court considers issues of interest to this administration."

But White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters that both Republican and Democratic senators suggested Miers by name to the president.

One Democrat who appeared pleased by the choice was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.).

"I like Harriet Miers," said Reid, who had voted against John Roberts as chief justice in Roberts' confirmation vote last week, in a statement. "In my view, the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer."

Later when meeting with Miers at the Capitol, Reid noted that 39 other people have been appointed to the Supreme Court without having experience as a judge. He praised her experience as a trial lawyer, an occupation he shares with her.

"So anyone with that background makes me feel good -- someone who has been a courtroom, tried cases, answered interrogatories, done all those things that lawyers need to do," Reid said.

I don’t like it when the opposition is so tepid – we needed a candidate who pissed-off the Left, not one who provoked such a low-key response. That leads me to wonder what they know that we don’t, or what dirt they have on her.

I am, to say the least, disheartened. Not because of the failure of the president to nominate a Hispanic or a sitting judge, though those things trouble me. Rather, I am upset by the lack of credentials on the part of this nominee after the excellent choice of John Roberts for the Court

This is not an individual with the necessary credentials to serve on the Supreme Court. While she may be a superior lawyer, that does not necessarily lead to the belief that she will be a superior judge. She lacks a significant scholarly record. She is a bit older than I would prefer to see. Quite simply, this is a case of “insider-ism” run wild.

National Review puts it well in todayÂ’s editorial on the selection.

Harriet Miers could turn out to be a solid conservative justice, with an intellect and commitment to constitutional rectitude to match Antonin Scalia. The president may believe that she is, and is likely to remain, a solid legal conservative. In accepting the nomination, she said, “It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the Founders’ vision of the proper role of the courts in our society.” That is something of a platitude; but it is, at least, the right platitude.

When the American Bar Association came out for legal, and subsidized, abortion, Miers argued that members of the organization should be allowed to vote on it first. Perhaps she would have similarly democratic inclinations — and a similar willingness to buck elites on moral issues — on the Supreme Court.

But none of this adds up to persuasive evidence that Miers would pull the Court, and its constitutional law, back toward its proper source. John Roberts was a “stealth nominee” in that he did not have declared positions on such questions as the constitutionality of affirmative action and anti-abortion laws. But Roberts possessed stellar professional qualifications, had impressed everyone who came in contact with him, had written well-reasoned judicial opinions, and had conservative legal heavyweights willing to vouch for his soundness.

These things are either not present, or are present to a smaller degree, in MiersÂ’s case. Being a Bush loyalist and friend is not a qualification for the Supreme Court. She may have been the best pick from within BushÂ’s inner circle. It seems impossible to maintain that she was the best pick from any larger field. It seems highly unlikely that she will be the kind of justice who, in combination with Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas, will attract additional votes by the sheer force of her arguments. This nomination was a missed opportunity.

Harriet Miers is not the sort of nominee that we were promised by the president. She lacks the experience and record that a Supreme Court nominee needs to inspire the confidence of the American people. It is my profound hope that this nomination is withdrawn or defeated so that a more acceptable candidate may be put forward.

OTHER VOICES:
Michelle Malkin (Twice)
Captain's Quarters
Q and O
The Moderate Voice
All Things Beautiful
Southern Appeal (multiple times by different contributers to that outstanding blog)
Blogs for Bush (several times)

Posted by: Greg at 10:58 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1003 words, total size 8 kb.

Would someone explain to me why Hillary Clinton feels a need to cut her ties with this marketing person?

A marketing adviser was dropped by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign Monday after a newspaper reported she made disparaging remarks about her fellow New Yorkers who were killed on Sept. 11.

Gia Medeiros, an expert on corporate teen-marketing, "worked on a project that has been concluded; she will not be doing any additional work for us," said Clinton campaign spokeswoman Ann Lewis.

Medeiros was paid $73,462 by the Clinton campaign.

The New York Post reported Monday that Medeiros told a Boulder, Colo. group some weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks that not all of those killed were good people.

"All of those people who died that day, those folks who we've heard toasted as angels and heroes and martyrs, well, they weren't all good people. I used to live in New York. I know it," she said.

"One friend of a friend had a husband who died. When I asked about their relationship, my friend said, `Terrible. He worked too much, drank too much, was never home with her or the kids.' They don't say that in the obituaries," Medeiros said.

Yeah, it is a bit tacky to have said it, but it is also true. Not every martyred victim of the 9/11 attacks was a great person. Some were drunks, others were adulterers, and some were criminals of one sort or another. While the vast majority of those killed that day were good and decent folks, we cannot deny that there were also some truly unpleasant folks who died when the Towers fell. Acknowledging that fact takes nothing away from the atrocity committed that day. Rather, it reminds us that those who died were a cross-section of American humanity, warts and all.

Posted by: Greg at 10:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 2 kb.

Would someone explain to me why Hillary Clinton feels a need to cut her ties with this marketing person?

A marketing adviser was dropped by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign Monday after a newspaper reported she made disparaging remarks about her fellow New Yorkers who were killed on Sept. 11.

Gia Medeiros, an expert on corporate teen-marketing, "worked on a project that has been concluded; she will not be doing any additional work for us," said Clinton campaign spokeswoman Ann Lewis.

Medeiros was paid $73,462 by the Clinton campaign.

The New York Post reported Monday that Medeiros told a Boulder, Colo. group some weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks that not all of those killed were good people.

"All of those people who died that day, those folks who we've heard toasted as angels and heroes and martyrs, well, they weren't all good people. I used to live in New York. I know it," she said.

"One friend of a friend had a husband who died. When I asked about their relationship, my friend said, `Terrible. He worked too much, drank too much, was never home with her or the kids.' They don't say that in the obituaries," Medeiros said.

Yeah, it is a bit tacky to have said it, but it is also true. Not every martyred victim of the 9/11 attacks was a great person. Some were drunks, others were adulterers, and some were criminals of one sort or another. While the vast majority of those killed that day were good and decent folks, we cannot deny that there were also some truly unpleasant folks who died when the Towers fell. Acknowledging that fact takes nothing away from the atrocity committed that day. Rather, it reminds us that those who died were a cross-section of American humanity, warts and all.

Posted by: Greg at 10:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 316 words, total size 2 kb.

Columnist Donald Lambro offers this analysis of the charges against Tom DeLay, and notes that the "conspiracy" was to engage in a common, apparantly legal practice.

Close examination is needed of what, if any, laws were broken. The fund-raising PAC formed by Mr. DeLay (and run by his two associates) raised money to help elect Republican candidates to the Texas legislature in 2002. These funds came from many sources, including donors who gave as individuals within the contribution limits set by law.

This money was apparently mingled in the PAC account with corporate contributions, allowable under Texas law for party administrative expenses. The PAC sent a check from that fund to the RNC in Washington for party-building activities. The RNC, as it does among many states, contributed funds to help Texas Republicans win elections.

The indictment sees all this as an illegal money-laundering. But Mr. Baran and other attorneys I have talked to say that charge is weak at best, because no one can prove corporate money mingled in an account flush with individual contributions was ever used to help elect the Texas candidates.

"The defense is going to be that the corporate money contributed to the Republican Party was not used for the contributions to the candidates. And that's true," Mr. Baran said. "Then the question becomes would the Texas contributions be made at all, but for the corporate money. And that's where the tie-in and alleged laundering comes in."

It is illegal under Texas law to use corporate money to defeat or elect candidates for public office. But campaign finance law experts note that until the McCain/Feingold finance reform took effect in 2002, it was common in both parties to exchange corporate money for "hard money" from individual donors.

Mr. DeLay says his PAC cleared the transactions with its lawyers and the RNC did likewise. And even The Washington Post, no fan of Mr. DeLay, editorialized that while this looked like an end run around the corporate contribution law, the "more difficult question is whether it was an illegal end run."

I can't wait to see Ronnie Earle get his head handed to him again. After all -- given the fingibility of dollars, it is impossible to prove that the money used for these contributions was anything other than donations from individuals -- or that what this PAC did was substantially different than what every other PAC, Republican or Democrat, did to make their influence go further.

Posted by: Greg at 11:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 425 words, total size 3 kb.

Charlie Rangel has been an embarrassment to the United States for decades. His recent statements have shown him to be in the throes of senile dementia.

For the second time in a three months, he has questioned if Dick Cheney is up to the office of Vice President based upon his age and health.

In an interview in August on NY1, the New York City-based all-news channel, Rep. Charles Rangel suggested that Cheney might be too sick to perform his job.

On Friday evening, Rangel was asked in a follow-up talk on the station if he thought Cheney should step down.

"He should never have stepped up in the first place," Rangel said. "He's too old for the job and doesn't have the experience."

Later in Friday's interview, Rangel finished off a list of problems he had with Bush administration policies by adding: "I would like to believe he's sick rather than just mean and evil."

Fine, Charlie, we'll give up Dick Cheney -- but given that he is over a decade younger than you are (64, as opposed to your 75) it seems that you need to lead by example.

And if Rangel will not resign, when will the Democrats (supposedly the party of the old folks and every other special interest group) condemn him as a bigot?

Posted by: Greg at 02:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 227 words, total size 2 kb.

Could it be that actual (as opposed to alleged) corruption isn't all that impotant if the perps are Dems?

Two political action committees linked to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi have been charged with attempting to circumvent to legal limits on campaign giving, the Federal Election Commission has ruled.

According to the March 2004 FEC finding, Pelosi appears to have violated the same kind of arcane campaign finance regulation that spurred the indictment of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay this week.

The San Francisco Chronicle explained at the time:

"The FEC ruled that two Pelosi political action committees created to help Democrats in the 2002 elections were related instead of being independent and therefore violated a rule against giving more than the maximum $5,000 annual contribution."

Pelosi, of course, continues to hold her leadership position, while Tom DeLay has had to relinquish his based upon an accusation.

And to think that the Democrats howled when the GOP attempted to change its internal rules on leadership positions to match those of the Democrats. They insist that the GOP meet a higher standard than they do -- because the GOP is the party of ethics and the Democrats are the party of corruption.

(Hat Tip -- GOPBloggers and Blogs for Bush)

Posted by: Greg at 02:34 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 217 words, total size 2 kb.

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has been declared "rude" for calling upon Hamas to disarm.

The political leader of the radical Palestinian Hamas militant group said Sunday that calls by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for his group to disarm were "rude" interference in internal Palestinian affairs.

In a telephone interview with The Associated Press, Khaled Mashaal also accused the United States of conspiring with Israel against the interests and rights of the Palestinian people.

Rice said last week that Hamas cannot participate in Palestinian politics if it remains armed.

"You cannot simultaneously keep an option on politics and an option on violence," she said in a speech at Princeton University.

So I guess that Hamas is made up of polite terrorists who fire make sure their pinkie is extended as tehy engage in the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.

Tell me -- is there a polite way to deliver a smart-bomb to Khaled Mashaal's house? Or should we be rude and have the Israelis drop it by unannounced?

Posted by: Greg at 02:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.

When Paula and I evacuated for Huricane Rita, we headed to Ardmore, Oklahoma. People have asked why, given that there may have been spots closer for us to stay.

The answer is simple -- we were not going anyplace that we could not be certain that we could take Carmie, our beloved Beagle/Chow/Lab mix who serves as our surrogate child.

That is why I completely understand the point of this article.

All along the Gulf Coast, many people who didn't evacuate for Hurricane Katrina say they stayed because of their pets.

"You couldn't take the dog to the shelter, and I wasn't leaving my dogs," Wendy Morgan said two days after Katrina's Aug. 29 landfall. Morgan's husband, Clint, stayed in their Slidell, La., home with two dogs, braving chest-high storm surge.

Similar stories can be heard from New Orleans all the way to Mobile -- people who remained with animals that they view as family members, instead of abandoning them.

While it's unclear how many of the storm's 1,000-plus casualties died because they stayed behind with their pets, the question of how animals influence potentially life-or-death evacuation decisions is among the troubling issues Katrina spotlighted.

"People are literally dying because they won't leave their pets," said Anne Culver, director of disaster services for the Humane Society of the United States, based in Washington, D.C.

No, we were not going to stay behind and die. Hurricane Rita was going to put our house under at least 15 feet of water if she didn't turn (I thank God she die). But we had to find the closest hotel room which would take a pet -- and that was 400 miles away in Ardmore. We simply could not be sure that any of the designated shelters would take Carmie, and we were not going to leave her in a kennel or the local ASPCA shelter. At a stressful time, we needed her with us. She is our family.

What can be done to make sure people do not die saving their animals? Here are some options.

For those who stay in public shelters, emergency managers and animal groups have begun creating a parallel network of pet shelters.

That solves the problem of people who arrive looking for a refuge with their animals, only to get turned away. For example, a four-person family from Metairie, La., camped in a tent outside the Bayou La Batre Community Center shelter for a while after Katrina because their rat terrier Spot wasn't allowed.

"He's not just a dog; he is family," Larry Harris said.

One option is for owners to stay with their animals, Culver said, maybe separating cats in one room and dogs in another. More common, though, is an arrangement where a pet shelter is set up in a building a short distance from where the people are staying. Owners check their pets in and come back to tend to them during their stay.

Culver teaches a course on how to set up a shelter, encouraging emergency managers and animal groups to make plans well in advance.

Like a shelter for humans, a pet shelter starts with a safe building. It needs plenty of clean water and parking for people to drop off and visit their pets. Also key is a floor that can be cleaned easily, and for areas that could lose power, a generator is suggested.

Beyond that, Culver urges volunteers to gather a cache of pet supplies, including cages, food, bowls and leashes. Owners are urged to bring that equipment, but many don't.

"Inevitably, someone will evacuate and they will have a cat in a pillowcase, because that's all they can handle," Culver said.

Volunteers man the shelter, checking in pets. But owners are supposed to come and feed their animals and walk their dogs, meaning that large numbers of people aren't needed to care for the animals.

In many places, plans are already in place for pet shelters. A Web site tracking pet-friendly shelters found at least 20 counties in Florida have designated them.

In Charlottesville, Va., the local SPCA opened a pet-friendly shelter during Hurricane Isabel in 2001, said Nancy Hartman, an SPCA volunteer. Hartman said the group has a storage unit with cages, food and other supplies ready to go if the shelter is needed again.

Paula and I will evacuate when we have to -- but Carmie has to come with us. There are many like us. Disaster planning officials need to acknowledge that reality.

Posted by: Greg at 01:56 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 753 words, total size 4 kb.

Why are two defense contractors apologizing for an ad depicting a mosque -- remember, they are being used by Islamists to attack Americans -- being assaulted by US troops in a helicopter?

Bell Helicopter and Boeing Co. have issued apologies after an advertisement for their V-22 Osprey aircraft infuriated a major Islamic group.

The ad in the Sept. 24 issue of National Journal, a political affairs publication, depicts U.S. special operations troops rappelling out of a Bell/Boeing-built CV-22 Osprey in an assault on a mosque.

"It descends from the heavens. Ironically it unleashes hell," reads the ad headline.

Bell, Boeing and the National Journal made their apologies after the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) fired off a protest to Bell and Boeing.

Bell spokesman Mike Cox said the ad, developed by the company's agency, TM Advertising in Irving, Texas, was supposed to have been pulled by all publications after it ran one other time nearly a month ago.

The ad content had not been approved by all the people who were supposed to approve it, Cox told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. "The first time the ad ran, we pulled it immediately."

"We took immediate action to cancel any insertions that had been placed and provided explicit instructions for its removal. Despite our directive to the National Journal to replace the ad, it was not replaced as requested, which resulted in its publication this week," Cox said in the company's official statement.

"We recognize that some organizations and individuals may have been offended by its content and regret any concerns this advertisement may have raised. Bell and our partners are evaluating creative processes to prevent this from happening again."

Oh, that's right -- the terrorist apologists from CAIR have complained -- and we don't want them getting their turbans in a knot (actually, I do want them getting their turbans in a knot -- around their necks). After all, they might protest and make the companies appear "insensitive" And we cannot have insensitive defense contractors, can we?

My question is very simple -- when will people quit apologizing for depicting the enemy as the enemy?

Posted by: Greg at 01:45 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 378 words, total size 2 kb.

Would someone care to explain what happened yesterday at http://michellemalkin.com/">the University of Oklahoma?

Here's the press report.

One person was killed in an explosion near a packed football stadium at the University of Oklahoma on Saturday night in what authorities said appeared to be a suicide.

The blast, in a traffic circle about 100 yards from Oklahoma Memorial Stadium, could be heard by some in the crowd of 84,000, but university President David Boren said no one inside the stadium was ever in danger.

"We are apparently dealing with an individual suicide, which is under full investigation," Boren said in a statement. There was no information about the person who was killed, and no reports of any other injuries.

A police bomb squad detonated explosives found at the site of the blast. The area near the stadium was searched by bomb-sniffing dogs.

Hold on -- more than one bomb, and the one detonating in the parking lot of a packed stadium. Doesn't this raise red flags for anyone else. The police expalantion sounds totally bogus!

And then there is this from Free Republic -- not my favorite source, but potentially intersting.

To: bahblahbah

I just got home from the game. They are calling it a suicide bomber and they found another bomb unexploded. One of my son's fraternity brothers was within about 30 yards of the blast and felt the heat on his face outside the science hall which is also near the stadium.

The police were interviewing him and one of the girls that was over at the fraternity (I park there) because she saw two men run in the stadium after the explosion and separate.

It was so loud. I told my son and daughter along with my son's friend that it sounded like a bomb. We didn't have any confirmation until the girl behind us got a call as it had scrolled across the screen.

Last I heard, they were looking for two more suspects, they blew up the second bomb, have bomb dogs all over campus going through the buildings that were open, and they couldn't tell if the person blown up was a man or woman.

Our news has very few details other than FBI is on the scene. Think every Norman cop from the looks of it is on the campus. We had to exit through the east and north sides and walk around as they had the south oval closed off from Lindsey to the Library.

What a scarey situation -- it was so freaky to hear that loud explosion and then absolutely zero news but we could see police cars all around from where we sit in the stadium. Didn't hear a word until the 4th quarter when the lady behind us received a call!

Uh -- this sounds really suspicious IF ACCURATE.

What I want to know is who the bomber was. Is he a foreign Muslim student? Is that why there is no name released yet?

And by the way, what about this report from last week, pointed out by Liberty?

On September 26, 2005 an Oklahoma University student pleaded guilty to bringing an explosive device to the airport. In August he was arrested after police found an improvised pipe bomb in his backpack. He told officials he had forgotten the device was in his bag. He faces up to a year in prison and up to $100,000 for the charge

Are these two incidents somehow connected?

UPDATE: Then again, maybe there is less to this than meets the eye -- except for the fact that suicide by explosive is unusual outside of the context of a terrorist attack. Why did John Henry Hinrichs III kill himself, and why did he choose this method and this location?

Posted by: Greg at 01:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 645 words, total size 4 kb.

I've refrained from writing about the charges against my congressman, Tom DeLay. I think that too many others have done an excellent job analyzing why the charges are flawed and why Delay will likely be acquitted if he ever goes to trial.

Today, though, the Washington Post began an offensive to bolster political hack Ronnie Earle's public image.

Earle has an eccentric streak, clearly, sometimes in the service of projecting a squeaky-clean image. He once filed charges against himself for submitting a campaign finance report a day late. He asked a judge to fine him, His Honor obliged, and Earle was out $212.

Still, Earle can defy pigeonholing. Buck Wood, an Austin lawyer and friend of Earle's, says the prosecutor is "definitely a moderate," and that he's "not involved in the Democratic Party."

Raised on a cattle ranch in the tiny north Texas town of Birdville, Earle served briefly in the Texas House before being elected district attorney. A self-described "radical moderate," he has faced little serious opposition in his reelection campaigns. This comports with commonly heard descriptions of him -- adjectives such as "maverick," "idealist" and "crusader."

Indeed, Earle is a former Eagle Scout more interested in social policy than in collecting death-penalty convictions. He has taught a course at the University of Texas at Austin on "reweaving the fabric of community." Starting in the mid-1980s, he insisted that some of his prosecutors work in the same building as social workers and police officers in an effort to curb child abuse before it occurred.

And he has never hesitated to use his job as a bully pulpit. In a speech two weeks ago before a state lobbying group, Earle said, "corporate money in politics" has become "the fight of our generation of Americans. . . . It is our job -- our fight -- to rescue democracy from the money that has captured it."

Such pronouncements are typical Earle, says Texas Rep. Terry Keel (R), who served under Earle for nearly nine years before seeking public office himself.

"Ronnie has a very deep philosophical belief about good and evil," Keel said. "He sees corporate involvement in politics as an evil to be attacked at any costs."

And the profile even has an extended anecdote that is designed to show how Ronnie Earle is a fearless prosector who won't back down when he is right -- even if he ultimately cannot get at the corrupt officials he is seeking to bring down.

Ronnie Earle, the Texas prosecutor vilified by Rep. Tom DeLay as a "rogue district attorney" and an "unabashed partisan zealot," has heard worse.

There was the time, for instance, that a prominent Texas Democrat vowed to murder him.

"He would hold all these press conferences and say terrible things about me," Earle said, referring to Bob Bullock, the future lieutenant governor whom Earle investigated for allegedly misusing government resources in the 1970s.

"I know at least twice people took guns away from him when he said he was going to kill me."

Earle, a Democrat, was laughing as he recounted the story in the Travis County district attorney's office last week. And like many sagas in Earle's career, the Bullock episode comes with a footnote.

Earle couldn't persuade the grand jury to indict Bullock, who was then the state's comptroller and struggling with a drinking problem. But years later, once Bullock had sobered up, the two men were recounting old times at Bullock's kitchen table.

"You know years ago when you investigated me?" Earle recalled Bullock telling him. "I was guilty as hell."

Now two things struck me with this story. First is the fact that Bullock "just happened" to go on to serve as lieutenant governor -- under George W. Bush (the two offices are elected separately in Texas). Second is that Bullock has been dead for six years, and so cannot defend himself against Earle's claims of murderous designs and confession of criminal wrong-doing.

But that, of course, is how Ronnie Earle works -- he'll attack a political opponent with all sorts of extreme accusations and let them stick to the target like brambles in a briar patch.

It has taken several years and six grand juries to get this nothngburger of an indictment. But we can expect more stories of this "courageous maverick prosecutor" in the weks and months to come.

Posted by: Greg at 01:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 738 words, total size 5 kb.

Remember my July report about the discovery of the solar system's tenth planet? You know, the one the discoverers wanted to name Xena after the Lucy Lawless character from the TV show?

Well, the tenth planet has a moon. And in keeping with the theme, the discoverers have informally named the newly discovered sattelite.

While observing the new, so-called planet from Hawaii last month, a team of astronomers led by Michael Brown of the California Institute of Technology spotted a faint object trailing next to it. Because it was moving, astronomers ruled it was a moon and not a background star, which is stationary.

The moon discovery is important because it can help scientists determine the new planet's mass. In July, Brown announced the discovery of an icy, rocky object larger than Pluto in the Kuiper Belt, a disc of icy bodies beyond Neptune. Brown labeled the object a planet and nicknamed it Xena after the lead character in the former TV series "Xena: Warrior Princess." The moon was nicknamed Gabrielle, after Xena's faithful traveling sidekick.

By determining the moon's distance and orbit around Xena, scientists can calculate how heavy Xena is. For example, the faster a moon goes around a planet, the more massive a planet is.

You know, the naming thing has gotten a bit silly. As I said in July, I think that there remail a number of gods from Greco-Roman mythology that could be so honored without breaking the naming pattern that is in place.

And just think -- if they name it "Vulcan", we could call the moon "Spock".

Posted by: Greg at 01:58 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

I'm a supporter of the war in Iraq. And while anti-American moonbats like Cindy Sheehan may think I don't care about the lives of soldiers who die in this war, I'd argue that my upbringing in a military family is the key reason that I do care about those deaths.

Each death is a tragedy, no matter how right or noble the cause.

Cpl. David Kreuter had a new baby boy he'd seen only in photos. Lance Cpl. Michael Cifuentes was counting the days to his wedding. Lance Cpl. Nicholas Bloem had just celebrated his 20th birthday.

Travis Williams remembers them all all 11 men in his Marine squad all now dead. Two months ago they shared a cramped room stacked with bunk beds at this base in northwest Iraq, where the Euphrates River rushes by. Now the room has been stripped of several beds, brutal testament that Lance Cpl. Williams' closest friends are gone.

For the 12 young Marines who landed in Iraq early this year, the war was a series of hectic, constant raids into more than a dozen lawless towns in Iraq's most hostile province, Anbar. The pace and the danger bound them together into what they called a second family, even as some began to question whether their raids were making any progress.

Now, all of the Marines assigned to the 1st Squad, 3rd Platoon, Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 25th Regiment, based in Columbus, Ohio, are gone except Williams. They died in a roadside-bomb set by insurgents on Aug. 3 that killed a total of 14 Marines. Most of the squad were in their early 20s; the youngest was 19.

"They were like a family. They were the tightest squad I've ever seen," said Capt. Christopher Toland of Austin, Texas, the squad's platoon commander. Even though many did not know each other before they got to Iraq, "They truly loved each other."

All that is left are photos and snippets of video, saved on dusty laptops, that run for a few dozen seconds. As they pack up to return home by early October, the Marines from Lima Company including the squad's replacements sometimes huddle around Williams' laptop in a room at the dam, straining to watch the few remaining moments of their young friends' lives. Some photos and videos carry the squad's adopted motto, "Family is Forever."

The sacrifices of these young men must not be in vain.

I urge you to read about the lives of 11 American soldiers, ended too soon by Islamist terrorist swine, and of their comrade left behind.

Posted by: Greg at 12:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 435 words, total size 3 kb.

Curt Levey has a great piece in National Review explaining that the "living Constitution" theory so beloved of liberals may have died.

May the living Constitution rest in peace. The concept is utterly without meaning as a legal standard and, instead, is a recipe for unrestrained judicial power. Because the Constitution is a contract between the people and their government, its modification should require the consent of the parties to the agreement. Thus, a living Constitution can be analogized to an automobile lease agreement that the car dealer feels free to modify as his notions of a fair deal evolve.

I've used a similar analogy -- how many folks would sign a "living mortgage" that allowed the bank to change the terms over time without the consent of the borrower?

Posted by: Greg at 12:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.

It isn't a hypothetical question -- Texas is under a court order to spend no more money on schools as of today, pending a fix of our school financing system.

State district Judge John Dietz last autumn ruled the Texas school funding system unconstitutional and issued an Oct. 1 deadline for the Legislature to fix the system or stop funding it.

Lawmakers have since failed three times — once during the regular legislative session and in two failed special sessions called for the issue — to overhaul the way Texas pays for public schools.

The state, represented by the office of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, has appealed Dietz's ruling to the Texas Supreme Court. The state's high court is expected to issue a decision in the case within the coming weeks, but it wasn't in the court's Friday package of decisions

Now the appeal to the state Supreme Court should have resulted in an automatic stay, but no actual order has been issued. Some districts, especially those which filed suit, are not sure what they should do. The state attorney general says that the filing of the appeal made the stay automatic, but no court has spoken on the issue.

Not, of course, that the schools do not have the money to open.

Even so, schools receive their funding from the state on the 25th of each month, meaning schools are funded at least until Oct. 25, said Debbie Graves Ratcliffe, a spokeswoman for the Texas Education Agency.

"They've just gotten their payments," she said. "Schools will be open in most parts of Texas — the guys that didn't have hurricane damage will be open."

Yeah, that is true -- but do they have the authority to spend it?

So who knows -- the schools here in Texas may be shutting down sometinme in the next three weeks. Let's wait and see.

Posted by: Greg at 12:19 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 323 words, total size 2 kb.

I like fur, and have no problem with it being worn.

At the same time, i have no problem with those whose moral/philosophical beliefs lead them to refuse to wear fur and to oppose others wearing it. I think they are misguided, but I respect their right to voice such belieft.

What I do not respect is their right to terrorize and threaten those of us who do not buy in to their belief system.

Sadly, that is precisely what has happened to Elle Macpherson, who is trying to get out of a contract to be a contract to promote fur.

Elle Macpherson is trying to get out of a $2.3 million contract to promote fur after receiving a threat from animal rights activists.

The 42-year-old model, who signed on as the new "face" of Blackglama mink in July, believes she will be terrorised by anti-fur extremists.

She has asked her lawyers to negotiate the cancellation of her contract with the US fur manufacturer, despite the fact the new autumn campaign has already been shot and is set to run in the world's leading fashion magazines.

Her decision comes in the wake of increasingly fierce campaigns by anti-fur crusaders, whose latest target was yesterday's Roberto Cavalli show in Milan. As the Italian designer sent models down the runway, a protester from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals briefly claimed front of stage, waving an anti-fur placard.

Macpherson, a mother of two, recently received a letter from PETA vice-president Dan Matthews, warning that she would become a "target" for agreeing to promote Blackglama.

"By making yourself the new face of fur for Blackglama you are also making yourself a top target for PETA and animal activists around the world," Mr Matthews wrote. "When you take money from such a violent industry you also must carry their baggage."

Ms. Macpherson says she fears for the safety of herself and her children, based upon threats of violence made against htem.

I think it is high time that we start rounding up the so-called "animal rights" activists who make such threats of violence and house them along side the al-Qaeda terrorists with whom they morally share so much in common.

Posted by: Greg at 12:11 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 373 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, the last couple of weeks have been rather goofy, and so I've missed making my Watcher's Council posts.

Without further ado, here are the posts for the last three sets of results.

September 16

Council Winners
1) Memorial to Millions of Dead Jews Offensive to Muslims -- The Sundries Shack
2a) Regression -- Dr. Sanity
2b) Sheepdogs Driving the Bus -- Gates of Vienna

Non-Council Winner
1) Tribes -- Eject! Eject!! Eject!!

September 23

Council Winner
1) The Wild, Wild, Wild, Wild, and Wacky World of Cindy Sheehan -- Right Wing Nut House

Non-Council Winner
1) A Knife In The Back -- Junk Yard Blog

September 30

Council Winner
1) WitchesÂ’ Brew at the UN -- Gates of Vienna

Non-Council Winner
1) You Say You Want a Revolution? -- Villainous Company

Congratulations to all, and here's hoping that future hurricanes or other natural disasters do not interfere with giving Watcher's Council honorees their just due in the future.

Posted by: Greg at 11:58 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 165 words, total size 2 kb.

Gwendolen Davey was a bright, motivated kindergarten teacher in at Chambers Elementary School Houston's Alief ISD. She was engaged to be married. One afternoon, she went out to walk her dog and never made it home.

Breanna Zipf was a 17-year-old drug user with a history of blackouts and seizures. She had no driver's license because of her medical condition, which could cause her to lose consciousness behind the wheel and wreck any vehicle that she was driving. Breanna stole her mother's rental car so that she could make a run to a local fast food restaurant.

Their paths crossed when Breanna blacked out after running a stop sign while speeding and ran Ms. Davey down on the sidewalk near her home. Breanna then got out of her car and walked home without making any attempt to render aid to her victim.

On Thursday, Breanna Zipf was convicted of murder. This is a good thing.

On Friday, though, the same jury gave a sentence that constituted a manifest injustice.

One day after convicting Breanna Zipf of murder for a traffic accident that killed a kindergarten teacher, a jury decided Friday that she should serve 10 years' probation.

Zipf, 18, wept after state District Judge Brock Thomas announced the sentence.

Her father said he was glad she would avoid prison.

The father of her victim, however, said he had expected the teen to serve prison time.

"I don't like it very much," said Robert Davey, whose daughter, Gwendolen Davey, was run down July 23, 2004, by a car Zipf was driving.

Thomas will announce the conditions of Zipf's probation in a hearing Monday.

That this irresponsible, self-indulgent little murderer will be permitted to walk the streest where she ran down an innocent woman and left her to dies is an outrage. It is my hope that Judge Thomas will impose the toughest possible conditions upon Breanna Zipf -- conditions that will make it likely that this killer will eventually screw up and do at least part of the 10 years behind bars.

And I urge the Texas legislature to fix this law. No more probation for murderers.

Posted by: Greg at 03:46 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 368 words, total size 2 kb.