February 19, 2005
Headline Spin
It is always amusing to examine headlines 9especially in the Houston Chronicle) to see how stories get spun by a paper.
Look at the headlines in two Texas papers about a new poll on support for the war in Iraq.
Poll: War support shrinking in Texas (Houston Chronicle)
and
Most Texans still back war (Fort Worth Star-Telegram)
I guess it all comes down to a question of what editorial line you want to take on the war.
Look at the headlines in two Texas papers about a new poll on support for the war in Iraq.
Poll: War support shrinking in Texas (Houston Chronicle)
and
Most Texans still back war (Fort Worth Star-Telegram)
I guess it all comes down to a question of what editorial line you want to take on the war.
Posted by: Greg at
02:17 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.
An African Pope?
Word has it that Cardinal Francis Arinze of Nigeria, one of the more conservative members of the Curia, is considered high on the list of possible successors to Pope John Paul II should his death come soon. While that might seem jarring to many people, it wouldn't be the first time an African has served as successor to St. Peter. In fact, there have been three, dating to the earliest centuries of Christianity.
The article also discusses a number of other saints from Africa, though I'm inclined to dispute the assumption implicit in the article that "African" necessarily means "black." After all, the Roman Empire was a European empire, and it is more probable that folks such as Augustine and Monica (for example) were of European ancestry, or more closely related to the Berbers of North Africa. But certainly the Egyptians mentioned were likely to reflect the current ethnic makeup of Egypt, as were folks such as Saint Antonio Vieira, Saint Benedict the Moor, Saint Martin de Porres, St. Moses the Black, and more recent martyrs like St. Charles Lwanga (who is surprisingly not mentioned in the article).
Pope Saint Victor I was born in Africa and bore a Latin name as most Africans did at that time. A native of black Africa, Saint Victor was the 15th pope and served during the reign of Emperor Septimus Severus, who was also African and had led Roman legions in Britain. Victor I is credited with reaffirming the holy feast of Easter to be held on Sunday as Pius has done. An outspoken pontiff, Victor I condemned and excommunicated Theodore of Byzantium for denying the divinity of Jesus Christ and added acolytes to the attendance of the clergy. He was crowned with martyrdom and served as pope for ten years, two months and ten days. He was buried near the final resting place of the apostle Peter, the first pope in Vatican. While some historians contend that St. Victor died in 198 A.D. of natural causes, others have suggested that he suffered martyrdom under Servus. He is buried in St. Peter's Basilica in Vatican City near the "Convesso." Pope Saint Victor I feast day is July 28.
Pope Saint Gelasius I was born in Rome of African parents and was a member of the Roman clergy from youth. Of the three African popes, Gelasius appears to have been the most active. He occupied the holy papacy four years, eight months and eighteen days from 492 A.D. until 496 A.D. Saint Gelasius expanded upon Miliatades' work with the Manicheans, exiling them from Rome and burning their books before the doors of the basilica of the holy Mary. He is credited with delivering the city of Rome from the peril of famine and was a writer of strong letters to people of all rank and classes. He denounced Lupercailia, a fertility rite celebration. He asked them sternly why the gods they worshiped had not provided calm seas so the grain so the grain ships could have reached Rome in time for the winter. He persuaded Femina, a wealthy woman of rank, to return the lands of St. Peter, taken by the barbarians and the Romans, to the church. He designated that the lands be used to support the poor who were flocking to Rome. Pope Saint Gelasius I feast day is November 21.
Pope Saint Militiades I occupied the papacy from 311 to 314 A.D., serving four years, seven months and eight days. Militiades decreed that none of the faithful should fast on Sunday or on the fifth day of the week because this was a pagan custom. It was Militiades who led the church to final victory over the Roman Empire. Saint Militiades was buried on the famous Appain Way. Pope Saint Militiades I feast day is December 10.
The article also discusses a number of other saints from Africa, though I'm inclined to dispute the assumption implicit in the article that "African" necessarily means "black." After all, the Roman Empire was a European empire, and it is more probable that folks such as Augustine and Monica (for example) were of European ancestry, or more closely related to the Berbers of North Africa. But certainly the Egyptians mentioned were likely to reflect the current ethnic makeup of Egypt, as were folks such as Saint Antonio Vieira, Saint Benedict the Moor, Saint Martin de Porres, St. Moses the Black, and more recent martyrs like St. Charles Lwanga (who is surprisingly not mentioned in the article).
Posted by: Greg at
02:02 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 642 words, total size 4 kb.
February 18, 2005
Grading Day Round-Up
Well, another evening of grades, grades, and more grades – and a quick round-up of today’s highlights.
You’ve just gotta love it when someone finds a creative loophole in a law. Like this guy in Boise, who discovered that he could give his patrons sketchpads and pencils to create “serious artistic merit” to the display of nudity. As a result, his girls are transformed into “art models” rather than strippers, who may not perform fully nude in town.
African Muslim charities are complaining that laws intended to stop the funding of terrorists are hurting them. My response? Too bad – too many of your “charities” have been little more than fronts for al-Qaeda, Hamas, or other terrorist groups. Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas.
Mike Adams writes another funny column, this one dealing with both the proliferation of “erectile dysfunction” commercials and discussions in today’s society – and the causes of the condition in his case. Trust me, this one is worth the read. And as one of my colleagues said a couple of weeks ago in the teacher’s workroom – “in case of erections lasting more than four hours, have your wife call all her girlfriends.”
In a move that causes mixed emotions for me, the Senate has passed legislation banning discrimination based upon genetic makeup or genetic predisposition to medical conditions. While I think that the move to protect the most personal information we have is laudable (you don’t get more personal than DNA), I’m not a big fan of government imposing ANY non-discrimination rules on private employers. Companies that make irrational decisions to discriminate will suffer financially, and those making rational decisions to discriminate will profit – neither one of which should be stopped by the government. But if we are going to have such laws (and it appears we shall have them for a very long time), one that prevents an employer from deciding things based upon your DNA seems reasonable.
And speaking about employers and employment decisions, a casino in New Jersey is going to fire overweight waitstaff. Employees who gain more than 7% of their body-weight will be suspended pending a 90-day, company-paid weight-loss program. I guess I wonÂ’t be gambling at the Borgata.
Bill Maher once again displayed that he is both a bigot and a moron. He appeared on “Scarborough Country” this week and described Christians and other religious believers as having “a neurological disorder.” So much for the adhering to the talismanic principle of “tolerance” that you and your fellow liberals insist must come before all else.
Deroy Murdock points out the many REPUBLICAN contributions to Black History that are overlooked by black activists who are aligned with the Democrat Party that fought tooth and nail against freedom and liberty for blacks. It is worth a read, and includes a link to the House Policy Committee's 2005 Republican Freedom Calendar, which can be downloaded for free. The calendar contains daily facts about the GOP's leadership in the field of emancipation, womens' rights, civil rights, and the inclusion of minorities based upon merit. Take that, Howard Dean!
Columnist Gil Spencer comments on the decision of a Philadelphia judge to throw out charges against the Repent America protesters who were arrested at Outfest. He notes that gay activists try to spin the situation into one of “incitement to riot” or some other exception to the First Amendment, but that the argument doesn’t work. The answer to speech that someone hates is more speech, not censorship.
You’ve just gotta love it when someone finds a creative loophole in a law. Like this guy in Boise, who discovered that he could give his patrons sketchpads and pencils to create “serious artistic merit” to the display of nudity. As a result, his girls are transformed into “art models” rather than strippers, who may not perform fully nude in town.
African Muslim charities are complaining that laws intended to stop the funding of terrorists are hurting them. My response? Too bad – too many of your “charities” have been little more than fronts for al-Qaeda, Hamas, or other terrorist groups. Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas.
Mike Adams writes another funny column, this one dealing with both the proliferation of “erectile dysfunction” commercials and discussions in today’s society – and the causes of the condition in his case. Trust me, this one is worth the read. And as one of my colleagues said a couple of weeks ago in the teacher’s workroom – “in case of erections lasting more than four hours, have your wife call all her girlfriends.”
In a move that causes mixed emotions for me, the Senate has passed legislation banning discrimination based upon genetic makeup or genetic predisposition to medical conditions. While I think that the move to protect the most personal information we have is laudable (you don’t get more personal than DNA), I’m not a big fan of government imposing ANY non-discrimination rules on private employers. Companies that make irrational decisions to discriminate will suffer financially, and those making rational decisions to discriminate will profit – neither one of which should be stopped by the government. But if we are going to have such laws (and it appears we shall have them for a very long time), one that prevents an employer from deciding things based upon your DNA seems reasonable.
And speaking about employers and employment decisions, a casino in New Jersey is going to fire overweight waitstaff. Employees who gain more than 7% of their body-weight will be suspended pending a 90-day, company-paid weight-loss program. I guess I wonÂ’t be gambling at the Borgata.
Bill Maher once again displayed that he is both a bigot and a moron. He appeared on “Scarborough Country” this week and described Christians and other religious believers as having “a neurological disorder.” So much for the adhering to the talismanic principle of “tolerance” that you and your fellow liberals insist must come before all else.
Deroy Murdock points out the many REPUBLICAN contributions to Black History that are overlooked by black activists who are aligned with the Democrat Party that fought tooth and nail against freedom and liberty for blacks. It is worth a read, and includes a link to the House Policy Committee's 2005 Republican Freedom Calendar, which can be downloaded for free. The calendar contains daily facts about the GOP's leadership in the field of emancipation, womens' rights, civil rights, and the inclusion of minorities based upon merit. Take that, Howard Dean!
Columnist Gil Spencer comments on the decision of a Philadelphia judge to throw out charges against the Repent America protesters who were arrested at Outfest. He notes that gay activists try to spin the situation into one of “incitement to riot” or some other exception to the First Amendment, but that the argument doesn’t work. The answer to speech that someone hates is more speech, not censorship.
Posted by: Greg at
12:20 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 590 words, total size 5 kb.
February 17, 2005
Tomb of St. Paul Found
For all my fellow archaeology geeks, here's another fun one for you.
An official announcement is pending.
A sarcophagus which may contain the remains of St. Paul was identified in the basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls, reports Giorgio Filippi, a archeology specialist with the Vatican Museums. The sarcophagus was discovered during the excavations carried out in 2002 and 2003 around the basilica, which is located in the south of Rome.
An official announcement is pending.
Posted by: Greg at
12:21 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 82 words, total size 1 kb.
While I’m Working On Grades
It is that awful time of the marking period – the weekend before grades are due. As usual, a torrent of late work has come crashing onto my desk. It may be a while before I get back to regular posting.
So, without further ado, I give you a host of “stories that have caught my eye.â€
Freedom of speech and freedom of religion won a round in Philadelphia today as a judge dismissed all charges against members of a Christian group arrested at Philadelphia’s Outfest. The judge indicated that a thorough review of video of the incident. "We are one of the very few countries that protect unpopular speech. And that means that Nazis can March in Skokie, Ill. ... That means that the Ku Klux Klan can march where they wish to," Judge Dembe said. "We cannot stifle speech because we don't want to hear it, or we don't want to hear it now.â€
We kept hearing last year during the campaign that Clear Channel was conspiring to suppress liberal voices. Guess again – the nation’s largest radio network is trying out a liberal talk format on about 40 stations nationwide. They want to see if it is a moneymaker for them – which is exactly why so much of their programming is conservative.
Seems that Ward Churchill has been drawing criticism for a long time – and the folks out at Colorado have been ignoring it. Little things like plagiarism, poor scholarship, false claims of Native American heritage, and even threats or acts of violence against others have been raised for years, but the university has failed to investigate the matters further.
Even a court order isn’t sufficient in Massachusetts if a hospital wants to kill a patient. Barbara Howe has ALS, and her daughter, Carol Carvitt, has a court order allowing her to make medical decisions for her mother and forbidding the removal of life support without her consent. But Dr. Britain Nicholson, Massachusetts General Hospital 's chief medical officer, has ordered life support be removed next week. This makes the Terri Schiavo case look benign, as Ms. Cavitt is simply trying to uphold her mother’s expressed wishes regarding the removal of life-support – the very argument used to authorize Terri’s husband to order herexecution food and water to be cut off.
It seems that the next royal wedding won’t take place in Windsor Castle after all, but in the local town hall. A quirk in British law would require that Windsor Castle be opened to the general public for weddings if Charles and Camilla were to be married there. So, it is off to the historic Windsor Guildhall for the civil ceremony.
Arizona has a “stupid motorist law†which authorizes government agencies to bill folks for the cost of their rescue if they drive around barricades or ignore the orders of safety personnel. It is about to be applied for the first time, after Paul Zalewski of Cave Creek decided to drive his Hummer across a flooded street. Zalewski is to be billed for over $800 for the helicopter rescue of himself and his six passengers, including three children.
Proving that she doesn’t know that her 15 minutes are up, former Apprentice competitor Omarosa Manigault-Stallworth is complaining that executive producer Mark Burnett is racist in his handling and presentation of black players. "Once you start looking at how all the black men are perceived as lazy and laid-back and nonaggressive," she said, "and all the black women are quite the opposite, I do think there is a pattern." Yeah – it shows what happens when you bring affirmative action hires into a highly competitive program.
Andrew Hyman cogently presents the case that certain Democrats are lying when they say that President Bush’s re-nomination of judicial candidates who have been filibustered have been rejected by the Senate. Rather, he argues, Senate Rule 31 makes it clear that they have not been rejected – and that same rule does not allow for the use of a filibuster as a means of rejecting a candidate at all.
Look who gave money to support Lynne Stewart’s defense fund – George Soros. How is it that a man who claims to love America gave money to a woman committed to destroying it? And why wasn’t this disclosed by the Mainstream Media when he was bankrolling the Kerry campaign with soft-money donations to liberal 527 organizations?
Bravo to FBI agent Robert Jordan for refusing to back off his comments that there are “people here in Oregon that have trained in jihadist campsâ€. I just hope that he got the name of all in attendance at his meeting with local Muslims and other community members in the Portland area. After all, if they were offended by comments that are clearly true, they may be part of the problem. Quite frankly, we need to quit apologizing to offended Muslims for speaking the truth – that there are members of the Muslim community who are active supporters of terrorism. The professionally offended need to take offense at the disloyalty of members of their own community, not at folks who comment on that reality.
Bravo to Colin Levey for pointing out that journalists have no greater rights under the First Amendment than any other American. No one is required to tell them anything or turn over information to them. They have no right to obstruct justice or withhold information from law enforcement. Those who pretend otherwise are engaged in a self-aggrandizement that can and will lead to their own downfall.
And why does this story make me think of Howard Dean and the Democrat Party?
So, without further ado, I give you a host of “stories that have caught my eye.â€
Freedom of speech and freedom of religion won a round in Philadelphia today as a judge dismissed all charges against members of a Christian group arrested at Philadelphia’s Outfest. The judge indicated that a thorough review of video of the incident. "We are one of the very few countries that protect unpopular speech. And that means that Nazis can March in Skokie, Ill. ... That means that the Ku Klux Klan can march where they wish to," Judge Dembe said. "We cannot stifle speech because we don't want to hear it, or we don't want to hear it now.â€
We kept hearing last year during the campaign that Clear Channel was conspiring to suppress liberal voices. Guess again – the nation’s largest radio network is trying out a liberal talk format on about 40 stations nationwide. They want to see if it is a moneymaker for them – which is exactly why so much of their programming is conservative.
Seems that Ward Churchill has been drawing criticism for a long time – and the folks out at Colorado have been ignoring it. Little things like plagiarism, poor scholarship, false claims of Native American heritage, and even threats or acts of violence against others have been raised for years, but the university has failed to investigate the matters further.
Even a court order isn’t sufficient in Massachusetts if a hospital wants to kill a patient. Barbara Howe has ALS, and her daughter, Carol Carvitt, has a court order allowing her to make medical decisions for her mother and forbidding the removal of life support without her consent. But Dr. Britain Nicholson, Massachusetts General Hospital 's chief medical officer, has ordered life support be removed next week. This makes the Terri Schiavo case look benign, as Ms. Cavitt is simply trying to uphold her mother’s expressed wishes regarding the removal of life-support – the very argument used to authorize Terri’s husband to order her
It seems that the next royal wedding won’t take place in Windsor Castle after all, but in the local town hall. A quirk in British law would require that Windsor Castle be opened to the general public for weddings if Charles and Camilla were to be married there. So, it is off to the historic Windsor Guildhall for the civil ceremony.
Arizona has a “stupid motorist law†which authorizes government agencies to bill folks for the cost of their rescue if they drive around barricades or ignore the orders of safety personnel. It is about to be applied for the first time, after Paul Zalewski of Cave Creek decided to drive his Hummer across a flooded street. Zalewski is to be billed for over $800 for the helicopter rescue of himself and his six passengers, including three children.
Proving that she doesn’t know that her 15 minutes are up, former Apprentice competitor Omarosa Manigault-Stallworth is complaining that executive producer Mark Burnett is racist in his handling and presentation of black players. "Once you start looking at how all the black men are perceived as lazy and laid-back and nonaggressive," she said, "and all the black women are quite the opposite, I do think there is a pattern." Yeah – it shows what happens when you bring affirmative action hires into a highly competitive program.
Andrew Hyman cogently presents the case that certain Democrats are lying when they say that President Bush’s re-nomination of judicial candidates who have been filibustered have been rejected by the Senate. Rather, he argues, Senate Rule 31 makes it clear that they have not been rejected – and that same rule does not allow for the use of a filibuster as a means of rejecting a candidate at all.
Look who gave money to support Lynne Stewart’s defense fund – George Soros. How is it that a man who claims to love America gave money to a woman committed to destroying it? And why wasn’t this disclosed by the Mainstream Media when he was bankrolling the Kerry campaign with soft-money donations to liberal 527 organizations?
Bravo to FBI agent Robert Jordan for refusing to back off his comments that there are “people here in Oregon that have trained in jihadist campsâ€. I just hope that he got the name of all in attendance at his meeting with local Muslims and other community members in the Portland area. After all, if they were offended by comments that are clearly true, they may be part of the problem. Quite frankly, we need to quit apologizing to offended Muslims for speaking the truth – that there are members of the Muslim community who are active supporters of terrorism. The professionally offended need to take offense at the disloyalty of members of their own community, not at folks who comment on that reality.
Bravo to Colin Levey for pointing out that journalists have no greater rights under the First Amendment than any other American. No one is required to tell them anything or turn over information to them. They have no right to obstruct justice or withhold information from law enforcement. Those who pretend otherwise are engaged in a self-aggrandizement that can and will lead to their own downfall.
And why does this story make me think of Howard Dean and the Democrat Party?
Posted by: Greg at
11:26 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 946 words, total size 7 kb.
While IÂ’m Working On Grades
It is that awful time of the marking period – the weekend before grades are due. As usual, a torrent of late work has come crashing onto my desk. It may be a while before I get back to regular posting.
So, without further ado, I give you a host of “stories that have caught my eye.”
Freedom of speech and freedom of religion won a round in Philadelphia today as a judge dismissed all charges against members of a Christian group arrested at Philadelphia’s Outfest. The judge indicated that a thorough review of video of the incident. "We are one of the very few countries that protect unpopular speech. And that means that Nazis can March in Skokie, Ill. ... That means that the Ku Klux Klan can march where they wish to," Judge Dembe said. "We cannot stifle speech because we don't want to hear it, or we don't want to hear it now.”
We kept hearing last year during the campaign that Clear Channel was conspiring to suppress liberal voices. Guess again – the nation’s largest radio network is trying out a liberal talk format on about 40 stations nationwide. They want to see if it is a moneymaker for them – which is exactly why so much of their programming is conservative.
Seems that Ward Churchill has been drawing criticism for a long time – and the folks out at Colorado have been ignoring it. Little things like plagiarism, poor scholarship, false claims of Native American heritage, and even threats or acts of violence against others have been raised for years, but the university has failed to investigate the matters further.
Even a court order isn’t sufficient in Massachusetts if a hospital wants to kill a patient. Barbara Howe has ALS, and her daughter, Carol Carvitt, has a court order allowing her to make medical decisions for her mother and forbidding the removal of life support without her consent. But Dr. Britain Nicholson, Massachusetts General Hospital 's chief medical officer, has ordered life support be removed next week. This makes the Terri Schiavo case look benign, as Ms. Cavitt is simply trying to uphold her mother’s expressed wishes regarding the removal of life-support – the very argument used to authorize Terri’s husband to order herexecution food and water to be cut off.
It seems that the next royal wedding wonÂ’t take place in Windsor Castle after all, but in the local town hall. A quirk in British law would require that Windsor Castle be opened to the general public for weddings if Charles and Camilla were to be married there. So, it is off to the historic Windsor Guildhall for the civil ceremony.
Arizona has a “stupid motorist law” which authorizes government agencies to bill folks for the cost of their rescue if they drive around barricades or ignore the orders of safety personnel. It is about to be applied for the first time, after Paul Zalewski of Cave Creek decided to drive his Hummer across a flooded street. Zalewski is to be billed for over $800 for the helicopter rescue of himself and his six passengers, including three children.
Proving that she doesn’t know that her 15 minutes are up, former Apprentice competitor Omarosa Manigault-Stallworth is complaining that executive producer Mark Burnett is racist in his handling and presentation of black players. "Once you start looking at how all the black men are perceived as lazy and laid-back and nonaggressive," she said, "and all the black women are quite the opposite, I do think there is a pattern." Yeah – it shows what happens when you bring affirmative action hires into a highly competitive program.
Andrew Hyman cogently presents the case that certain Democrats are lying when they say that President Bush’s re-nomination of judicial candidates who have been filibustered have been rejected by the Senate. Rather, he argues, Senate Rule 31 makes it clear that they have not been rejected – and that same rule does not allow for the use of a filibuster as a means of rejecting a candidate at all.
Look who gave money to support Lynne Stewart’s defense fund – George Soros. How is it that a man who claims to love America gave money to a woman committed to destroying it? And why wasn’t this disclosed by the Mainstream Media when he was bankrolling the Kerry campaign with soft-money donations to liberal 527 organizations?
Bravo to FBI agent Robert Jordan for refusing to back off his comments that there are “people here in Oregon that have trained in jihadist camps”. I just hope that he got the name of all in attendance at his meeting with local Muslims and other community members in the Portland area. After all, if they were offended by comments that are clearly true, they may be part of the problem. Quite frankly, we need to quit apologizing to offended Muslims for speaking the truth – that there are members of the Muslim community who are active supporters of terrorism. The professionally offended need to take offense at the disloyalty of members of their own community, not at folks who comment on that reality.
Bravo to Colin Levey for pointing out that journalists have no greater rights under the First Amendment than any other American. No one is required to tell them anything or turn over information to them. They have no right to obstruct justice or withhold information from law enforcement. Those who pretend otherwise are engaged in a self-aggrandizement that can and will lead to their own downfall.
And why does this story make me think of Howard Dean and the Democrat Party?
So, without further ado, I give you a host of “stories that have caught my eye.”
Freedom of speech and freedom of religion won a round in Philadelphia today as a judge dismissed all charges against members of a Christian group arrested at Philadelphia’s Outfest. The judge indicated that a thorough review of video of the incident. "We are one of the very few countries that protect unpopular speech. And that means that Nazis can March in Skokie, Ill. ... That means that the Ku Klux Klan can march where they wish to," Judge Dembe said. "We cannot stifle speech because we don't want to hear it, or we don't want to hear it now.”
We kept hearing last year during the campaign that Clear Channel was conspiring to suppress liberal voices. Guess again – the nation’s largest radio network is trying out a liberal talk format on about 40 stations nationwide. They want to see if it is a moneymaker for them – which is exactly why so much of their programming is conservative.
Seems that Ward Churchill has been drawing criticism for a long time – and the folks out at Colorado have been ignoring it. Little things like plagiarism, poor scholarship, false claims of Native American heritage, and even threats or acts of violence against others have been raised for years, but the university has failed to investigate the matters further.
Even a court order isn’t sufficient in Massachusetts if a hospital wants to kill a patient. Barbara Howe has ALS, and her daughter, Carol Carvitt, has a court order allowing her to make medical decisions for her mother and forbidding the removal of life support without her consent. But Dr. Britain Nicholson, Massachusetts General Hospital 's chief medical officer, has ordered life support be removed next week. This makes the Terri Schiavo case look benign, as Ms. Cavitt is simply trying to uphold her mother’s expressed wishes regarding the removal of life-support – the very argument used to authorize Terri’s husband to order her
It seems that the next royal wedding wonÂ’t take place in Windsor Castle after all, but in the local town hall. A quirk in British law would require that Windsor Castle be opened to the general public for weddings if Charles and Camilla were to be married there. So, it is off to the historic Windsor Guildhall for the civil ceremony.
Arizona has a “stupid motorist law” which authorizes government agencies to bill folks for the cost of their rescue if they drive around barricades or ignore the orders of safety personnel. It is about to be applied for the first time, after Paul Zalewski of Cave Creek decided to drive his Hummer across a flooded street. Zalewski is to be billed for over $800 for the helicopter rescue of himself and his six passengers, including three children.
Proving that she doesn’t know that her 15 minutes are up, former Apprentice competitor Omarosa Manigault-Stallworth is complaining that executive producer Mark Burnett is racist in his handling and presentation of black players. "Once you start looking at how all the black men are perceived as lazy and laid-back and nonaggressive," she said, "and all the black women are quite the opposite, I do think there is a pattern." Yeah – it shows what happens when you bring affirmative action hires into a highly competitive program.
Andrew Hyman cogently presents the case that certain Democrats are lying when they say that President Bush’s re-nomination of judicial candidates who have been filibustered have been rejected by the Senate. Rather, he argues, Senate Rule 31 makes it clear that they have not been rejected – and that same rule does not allow for the use of a filibuster as a means of rejecting a candidate at all.
Look who gave money to support Lynne Stewart’s defense fund – George Soros. How is it that a man who claims to love America gave money to a woman committed to destroying it? And why wasn’t this disclosed by the Mainstream Media when he was bankrolling the Kerry campaign with soft-money donations to liberal 527 organizations?
Bravo to FBI agent Robert Jordan for refusing to back off his comments that there are “people here in Oregon that have trained in jihadist camps”. I just hope that he got the name of all in attendance at his meeting with local Muslims and other community members in the Portland area. After all, if they were offended by comments that are clearly true, they may be part of the problem. Quite frankly, we need to quit apologizing to offended Muslims for speaking the truth – that there are members of the Muslim community who are active supporters of terrorism. The professionally offended need to take offense at the disloyalty of members of their own community, not at folks who comment on that reality.
Bravo to Colin Levey for pointing out that journalists have no greater rights under the First Amendment than any other American. No one is required to tell them anything or turn over information to them. They have no right to obstruct justice or withhold information from law enforcement. Those who pretend otherwise are engaged in a self-aggrandizement that can and will lead to their own downfall.
And why does this story make me think of Howard Dean and the Democrat Party?
Posted by: Greg at
11:26 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 951 words, total size 7 kb.
February 16, 2005
Eminent Domain -- A Threat To Free Exercise Of Religion?
As traditionally understood, eminent domain is the right of government to take property at fair market value for a public use, usually for parks, roads, schools and the like. Over the last 50 years or so, it has expanded to include takings for urban renewal. But in recent years the power has been used to seize property from owners unwilling to sell to private developers favored by the city because of the potential for increased tax revenue. Next week, in Kelo v. City of New London (Conn.), the Supreme Court will examine that issue. The outcome could be particularly critical for churches.
The logic applies not just to churches, but also to private schools, hospitals, charities, and other untaxed entities. Take the land, sell it at a bargain-basement price to a developer, and get it on the tax rolls would be the temptation facing every land-locked community or fast-growing municipality. In effect, not-for-profits would be at the mercy of government.
As would owners of modest homes -- for the Kelo case isn't about a church, it is about taking homes in an older middle-class neighborhood for redevelopment as a marina and high-dollar condos.
Hopefully the Court will safeguard the rights of all property owners, and guarantee that our churches are not driven from town in the pursuit of additional taxes.
The question is which direction the court will go in Kelo and what impact it might have [cases involving the use of eminent domain against churches to increase tax revenue]. Some expect new limits on government power. A landmark ruling on eminent domain at the state level - used for 20 years as precedent in many cases, including by the state court in Kelo - was reversed by the Michigan Supreme Court just six months ago.
In the 1983 decision in Poletown v. City of Detroit, the Michigan court approved the taking of 500 acres to sell to General Motors for a plant. Hundreds of homes and businesses and six churches were condemned. In July 2004, the court called the Poletown decision "a radical departure from constitutional principles" and overturned it in County of Wayne v. Hathcock.
"f one's ownership of private property is forever subject to the government's determination that another private party would put one's land to better use, then the ownership of real property is perpetually threatened by the expansion plans of any large discount retailer, mega-store or the like," the court said.
The US Supreme Court accepted the Kelo case shortly after the Michigan court rendered that decision.
The logic applies not just to churches, but also to private schools, hospitals, charities, and other untaxed entities. Take the land, sell it at a bargain-basement price to a developer, and get it on the tax rolls would be the temptation facing every land-locked community or fast-growing municipality. In effect, not-for-profits would be at the mercy of government.
As would owners of modest homes -- for the Kelo case isn't about a church, it is about taking homes in an older middle-class neighborhood for redevelopment as a marina and high-dollar condos.
Hopefully the Court will safeguard the rights of all property owners, and guarantee that our churches are not driven from town in the pursuit of additional taxes.
Posted by: Greg at
02:50 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 430 words, total size 3 kb.
Impeachment For Judge In Ross Case?
Several weeks ago I commented on the bid by the ACLU to stop the execution of Connecticut death row inmate Michael Ross. Now there is a bid to impeach one of the judges involved in the case, U.S. District Judge Robert Chatigny, on grounds of partiality and improper behavior. Congressman Rob Simmons (R-Conn.) has delivered a letter from Republicans in the Connecticut statehouse to House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) requesting an investigation, which has begun.
Ross had fired his defense team and hired a lawyer to expedite the proceedings after 24 years of court proceedings to determine his guilt and punishment, as well as challenging the death penalty. At that point the ACLU intervened, ostensibly on behalf of Ross' father.
In other words, Chatigny intervened in the attorney-client relationship to the point that he ordered Paulding to act contrary to the desires and directions of his client. What's more, he threatened the man's career if he didn't follow the judge's directives to act contrary to his client's wishes and directives. In effect, the judge's order prohibited the attorney from being an advocate for his client, and turned the case from an adversary proceeding into a virtual conspiracy to thwart that client's pursuit of what he believed to be his interests. That intervention in the attorney-client relationship certainly approaches unethical conduct, if it does not cross the line. Furthermore, indicates a partiality that is unfitting in a judge.
This case bears watching, as it could be the beginning of a trend towards holding biased and activist judges accountable for their malfeasance while on the bench.
“He has exhibited behaviors and decisions that directly contradict the role of an impartial judiciary,” the three-page letter said of Chatigny, adding, “Such abuses of judicial powers should not and must not be tolerated. We strongly urge your committee to investigate the matter fully, and to commence proceedings to redress this misconduct, including the possible removal from office.”
Ross had fired his defense team and hired a lawyer to expedite the proceedings after 24 years of court proceedings to determine his guilt and punishment, as well as challenging the death penalty. At that point the ACLU intervened, ostensibly on behalf of Ross' father.
Finally, on Jan. 24[, 2005], Chatigny, who had not been presiding over the case, issued a stay of execution, which was followed by a flurry of appeals.
Four days after his initial stay, Chatigny held a conference call with lawyers from both sides to discuss a letter sent to the court by a fellow inmate of RossÂ’s arguing that Ross had lost his sanity while in prison and was not mentally competent to ask the court for his own execution.
During this call, Chatigny challenged Ross’s lawyer, T.R. Paulding, who was hired to expedite Ross’s execution, to follow up on the inmate’s insanity claim. When Paulding equivocated, Chatigny berated him, at one point saying, “You better be prepared to deal with me if in the wake of this an investigation is conducted and it turns out that what [the inmate] says and what this former program director says is true, because I’ll have your license.”
In other words, Chatigny intervened in the attorney-client relationship to the point that he ordered Paulding to act contrary to the desires and directions of his client. What's more, he threatened the man's career if he didn't follow the judge's directives to act contrary to his client's wishes and directives. In effect, the judge's order prohibited the attorney from being an advocate for his client, and turned the case from an adversary proceeding into a virtual conspiracy to thwart that client's pursuit of what he believed to be his interests. That intervention in the attorney-client relationship certainly approaches unethical conduct, if it does not cross the line. Furthermore, indicates a partiality that is unfitting in a judge.
This case bears watching, as it could be the beginning of a trend towards holding biased and activist judges accountable for their malfeasance while on the bench.
Posted by: Greg at
02:17 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 488 words, total size 3 kb.
When Tolerance Equals Intolerance
Students in Kentucky's Boyd County are required to participate in a "diversity training." The program, though, does not practice respect for diversity. In fact, it is explicitly opposed to freedom of speech and freedom of religion -- at least if that means believing and saying that homosexual activity is immoral. Or so says a suit filed by the Alliance Defense Fund.
Now I know that there are going to be folks who show up here and argue that the position taken by the school on homosexuality is the correct one -- that it is an immutable characteristic not a chosen lifestyle. That isn't the point, and is really irrelevant. Rather, the problem is that the school district is taking a position on a moral issue addressed by religious beliefs and teachings of students and their families and churches. The school is insisting that it is the arbiter of MORAL AND RELIGIOUS VALUES, and is prohibiting constitutionally protected speech. That goes far beyond the bounds of any legitimate educational mission.
The great irony here is that the training is required under the settlement of an ACLU-litigated suit over the district's refusal to recognize the Boyd County High School Gay-Straight Alliance. In agreeing to recognize the rights of members of that organization, the district abrogated the rights of every other student in the district and their parents. Where is the tolerance and respect for diverse views in such a settlement?
“This mandatory ‘diversity training’ hardly teaches diversity. It not only puts a gag on students who disagree with homosexual behavior, it also actively attempts to change their moral beliefs,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Kevin Theriot. “The Supreme Court is clear on this matter: Americans have an absolute right to their beliefs. This training obviously crosses that constitutional line.”
All middle and high school students in Boyd County schools are required to attend the “diversity training.” School policies and practice do not permit parents to opt their children out of the training, even if it violates their personal beliefs and morality.
In the training session’s video, school employees and other individuals state that homosexuality is a characteristic that cannot be changed and that school policy prohibits any student from telling another student that he or she believes homosexuality is “wrong.”
According to the complaint filed today, “Students are required to undergo this training without expressing any disagreement. This effectively forces the students to speak in agreement with the School District’s view that homosexuality is a safe and healthy lifestyle that cannot be changed.” To read the full text of the complaint, go to www.alliancedefensefund.org/UserDocs/MorrisonComplaint.pdf.
Now I know that there are going to be folks who show up here and argue that the position taken by the school on homosexuality is the correct one -- that it is an immutable characteristic not a chosen lifestyle. That isn't the point, and is really irrelevant. Rather, the problem is that the school district is taking a position on a moral issue addressed by religious beliefs and teachings of students and their families and churches. The school is insisting that it is the arbiter of MORAL AND RELIGIOUS VALUES, and is prohibiting constitutionally protected speech. That goes far beyond the bounds of any legitimate educational mission.
The great irony here is that the training is required under the settlement of an ACLU-litigated suit over the district's refusal to recognize the Boyd County High School Gay-Straight Alliance. In agreeing to recognize the rights of members of that organization, the district abrogated the rights of every other student in the district and their parents. Where is the tolerance and respect for diverse views in such a settlement?
Posted by: Greg at
01:44 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 440 words, total size 3 kb.
But Was It In His Lesson Plan?
There are lots of bits of history I would like to cover in class, but I don’t. After all, do my students really need to know about Catherine the Great’s “riding accident”? The controversy over Lincoln’s sexuality? The FDR’s infidelities? Probably not, and common sense dictates that I keep them out of a high school classroom. And if I were a science teacher, I somehow think I would have steered clear of this lesson, with its much greater potential for harm to a student.
UhhhhÂ… yeah.
Dude – what were you thinking? Let’s forget about 9/11, Oklahoma City, and Columbine. How about just good common sense?
And then there is this line at the end of the story that almost slipped my notice.
He had to be told this? ShouldnÂ’t that have been a basis for closer supervision? I know it certainly would raise some red flags for me.
ORLANDO, Fla. — A high school chemistry teacher was arrested after students claimed he taught his class how to make a bomb, authorities said.
David Pieski, 42, used an overhead projector in class to give instructions in making explosives to students at Freedom High School, including advising them to use an electric detonator to stay clear from the blast, an Orange County sheriff's arrest report said.
In Pieski's classroom in Orlando, authorities found a book labeled "Demo," which includes the chemical breakdown for a powerful explosive, the arrest report said.
UhhhhÂ… yeah.
Dude – what were you thinking? Let’s forget about 9/11, Oklahoma City, and Columbine. How about just good common sense?
And then there is this line at the end of the story that almost slipped my notice.
School officials told investigators that Pieski previously had been told he was not allowed to have any form of explosive on campus.
He had to be told this? ShouldnÂ’t that have been a basis for closer supervision? I know it certainly would raise some red flags for me.
Posted by: Greg at
11:10 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.
Churchill Hiring, Tenure Decisions Bypassed Normal Procedures
Ward Churchill has been at the center of a controversy for several weeks. Many fgolks have asked how it was possible that the usual standards of scholarship and peer review failed, getting him into a tenured position without a doctorate.
The answer is simple. They didnÂ’t fail. The normal procedures were simply bypassed.
Churchill started teaching at the school in the 1980s as a non-tenure track teacher. Ethnic studies was not even a department back then.
Now that isnÂ’t necessarily outrageous. Go ahead and give the guy a chance. Maybe he doesnÂ’t have the doctorate that the job would ordinarily require, but sometimes that can be dispensed with if there is exceptional merit on the part of a candidate. Not to mention, this wasnÂ’t even a tenure-track position. That could come later, with all the usual reviews and evaluations.
But then things got even more interesting. For reasons not discernible in the public record, Churchill was brought before the Board of Regents for a decision on tenure – ten months after being offered the non-tenure-track visiting professorship, in April, 1991. And no one seems able to explain why or how, especially since the normal process for granting tenure .
This is a situation that cries out for examination. Every step of the way, normal processes and procedures were dispensed with and finessed. We need to know why, so that such things do not happen again. After all, an unqualified, plagiarising polemicist was head of a department at a major state university. That should be a matter of concern for folks of all political stripes.
Ward Churchill has been at the center of a controversy for several weeks. Many fgolks have asked how it was possible that the usual standards of scholarship and peer review failed, getting him into a tenured position without a doctorate.
The answer is simple. They didnÂ’t fail. The normal procedures were simply bypassed.
Churchill started teaching at the school in the 1980s as a non-tenure track teacher. Ethnic studies was not even a department back then.
In the 1990 e-mail exchange, [Kaye] Howe, the vice chancellor, noted that Churchill had been invited to be a guest lecturer that fall at Alfred University in western New York State.
Howe sought support from [Charles] Middleton, the dean, to make Churchill a visiting professor in Indian studies in spring 1991. Howe said Churchill could return to his slot in the academic support program if the visiting professorship did not turn into a permanent faculty position.
"I think this would give Ward a significant opportunity," Howe wrote.
Howe told Middleton she had the "highest esteem for Ward."
Middleton responded that he agreed with Howe "in principle." However, he anticipated Bruce Ekstrand, the vice chancellor for academic affairs, would have concerns about Churchill's lack of a doctorate.
Ekstrand - not Howe - had direct authority over faculty appointments. Howe supervised the support programs where Churchill then worked.
Now that isnÂ’t necessarily outrageous. Go ahead and give the guy a chance. Maybe he doesnÂ’t have the doctorate that the job would ordinarily require, but sometimes that can be dispensed with if there is exceptional merit on the part of a candidate. Not to mention, this wasnÂ’t even a tenure-track position. That could come later, with all the usual reviews and evaluations.
But then things got even more interesting. For reasons not discernible in the public record, Churchill was brought before the Board of Regents for a decision on tenure – ten months after being offered the non-tenure-track visiting professorship, in April, 1991. And no one seems able to explain why or how, especially since the normal process for granting tenure .
This is a situation that cries out for examination. Every step of the way, normal processes and procedures were dispensed with and finessed. We need to know why, so that such things do not happen again. After all, an unqualified, plagiarising polemicist was head of a department at a major state university. That should be a matter of concern for folks of all political stripes.
Posted by: Greg at
11:05 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 422 words, total size 3 kb.
Passport-Free Travel – A Thing Of The Past
It looks like we’ll all be needing a passport if we want to see the Canadian Falls or take high tea in Victoria, BC.
This may not seem like much to folks in most of the country. After all, how often do
folks zip into Canada if they live in Missouri? But for those along the
longest unfortified border in the world, international travel has never been
terribly difficult. It appears it will be much more difficult, starting in
three years.
As a Texan, though, I want to know about travel across the southern border. Will a passport be necessary there? Or will it continue to leak like sieve, with little effort made to enforce our nation’s immigration laws?
Seems to me that we are focusing on the wrong place. Canada is not the source of our border problem – Mexico is.
In three years, U.S. citizens and Canadians will have to show passports or a federally issued ID cards linked to Homeland Security databases to re-enter the country from across the border.
The intelligence bill passed by Congress last year mandates the new identification requirements be in place by Jan. 1, 2008.
It also requires that the Department of Homeland Security have by then a registered traveler program for border travelers like those now being tested at five airport sites. The programs allow frequent travelers to avoid extra security inspections by volunteering for background checks.>
This may not seem like much to folks in most of the country. After all, how often do
folks zip into Canada if they live in Missouri? But for those along the
longest unfortified border in the world, international travel has never been
terribly difficult. It appears it will be much more difficult, starting in
three years.
As a Texan, though, I want to know about travel across the southern border. Will a passport be necessary there? Or will it continue to leak like sieve, with little effort made to enforce our nation’s immigration laws?
Seems to me that we are focusing on the wrong place. Canada is not the source of our border problem – Mexico is.
Posted by: Greg at
11:01 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 245 words, total size 2 kb.
Passport-Free Travel – A Thing Of The Past
It looks like weÂ’ll all be needing a passport if we want to see the Canadian Falls or take high tea in Victoria, BC.
This may not seem like much to folks in most of the country. After all, how often do
folks zip into Canada if they live in Missouri? But for those along the
longest unfortified border in the world, international travel has never been
terribly difficult. It appears it will be much more difficult, starting in
three years.
As a Texan, though, I want to know about travel across the southern border. Will a passport be necessary there? Or will it continue to leak like sieve, with little effort made to enforce our nationÂ’s immigration laws?
Seems to me that we are focusing on the wrong place. Canada is not the source of our border problem – Mexico is.
In three years, U.S. citizens and Canadians will have to show passports or a federally issued ID cards linked to Homeland Security databases to re-enter the country from across the border.
The intelligence bill passed by Congress last year mandates the new identification requirements be in place by Jan. 1, 2008.
It also requires that the Department of Homeland Security have by then a registered traveler program for border travelers like those now being tested at five airport sites. The programs allow frequent travelers to avoid extra security inspections by volunteering for background checks.>
This may not seem like much to folks in most of the country. After all, how often do
folks zip into Canada if they live in Missouri? But for those along the
longest unfortified border in the world, international travel has never been
terribly difficult. It appears it will be much more difficult, starting in
three years.
As a Texan, though, I want to know about travel across the southern border. Will a passport be necessary there? Or will it continue to leak like sieve, with little effort made to enforce our nationÂ’s immigration laws?
Seems to me that we are focusing on the wrong place. Canada is not the source of our border problem – Mexico is.
Posted by: Greg at
11:01 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 253 words, total size 2 kb.
February 15, 2005
In Memory Of A Nameless Hero
It may sound funny coming from a middle-aged white guy, but some of my greatest heroes growing up were the Tuskegee Airmen.
Blame it on my dad, a Navy officer who made clear to me at a young age that the qualities he and my mother sought to instill in me are not limited to people who look like me. And one of the prime examples he held up for me were those men who performed such great deeds in their planes. It is why I wept before the Super Bowl, as some of the last of them walked and rolled on to that field. And it is why I wept again today, as I read First Lt. Jennifer MillerÂ’s commentary in todayÂ’s St. Louis Post Dispatch. She has a special connection to that elite group of African-American pilots, military pioneers who proived that plack men could do anything a white man could do -- maybe even better than a white man could do it.
ItÂ’s one of those stories remarkable not for the unusual heroism it conveys. Rather, it leaps out at me because the heroism was so ordinary, so commonplace. Such heroism is the everyday currency of those in combat. And so it was that Lt. Arnold Bernfeld, a 22-year-old bombardier in the 8th Air Force's 509th Bombardment Squadron, 351st Bomb Group, found himself and his B-17 in the sights of a German fighter. It was a situation likely to have only one outcome. The only question was whether or not the bombs in the belly of the plane would be delivered before the crew met their end.
That was the job of the Tuskegee Airmen. Their duty was to protect the men and planes who rained death and destruction down on the enemies of America. They did it well – so well, in fact, that the 332nd Fighter Group never lost a bomber under their care. They were truly the best of the best, and they proved their skills many times over. Sixty-six of their number died in combat, and another thirty-two were held as prisoners of war after being shot down. Rarely in the history of air combat has their like been seen.
I owe my existence to one unknown African-American fighter pilot of a past era.
Blame it on my dad, a Navy officer who made clear to me at a young age that the qualities he and my mother sought to instill in me are not limited to people who look like me. And one of the prime examples he held up for me were those men who performed such great deeds in their planes. It is why I wept before the Super Bowl, as some of the last of them walked and rolled on to that field. And it is why I wept again today, as I read First Lt. Jennifer MillerÂ’s commentary in todayÂ’s St. Louis Post Dispatch. She has a special connection to that elite group of African-American pilots, military pioneers who proived that plack men could do anything a white man could do -- maybe even better than a white man could do it.
When I was little, my family and I took a weekend trip to Dover, Del., to visit my father who was on Army Reserve duty that summer. During our trip, we visited a hanger at Dover Air Force Base where a group of veterans were rebuilding a vintage B-17G from World War II called the "Shoo Shoo Shoo Baby." That July morning, I watched my grandfather stand motionless in front of that Flying Fortress. He had not seen one for at least 40 years.
Looking closely, I thought I saw a tear on my grandfather's cheek, and - as only a child could - I asked, "What's the matter, Poppy Arnold?" We sat down on a nearby bench, and he told me this story.
ItÂ’s one of those stories remarkable not for the unusual heroism it conveys. Rather, it leaps out at me because the heroism was so ordinary, so commonplace. Such heroism is the everyday currency of those in combat. And so it was that Lt. Arnold Bernfeld, a 22-year-old bombardier in the 8th Air Force's 509th Bombardment Squadron, 351st Bomb Group, found himself and his B-17 in the sights of a German fighter. It was a situation likely to have only one outcome. The only question was whether or not the bombs in the belly of the plane would be delivered before the crew met their end.
Suddenly, the German fighter disintegrated in a fireball before his very eyes. My grandfather announced "Bombs away," the pilot regained control of the plane, and the group headed back to England. As my grandfather looked out the nose of the plane, he saw an American fighter plane with a red tail. My grandfather distinctly remembered the pilot, who had shot down the German fighter, looking towards his bomber and saluting. He never forgot the black face of that pilot who saved his life that day, along with the lives of the other nine members of his crew.
That was the job of the Tuskegee Airmen. Their duty was to protect the men and planes who rained death and destruction down on the enemies of America. They did it well – so well, in fact, that the 332nd Fighter Group never lost a bomber under their care. They were truly the best of the best, and they proved their skills many times over. Sixty-six of their number died in combat, and another thirty-two were held as prisoners of war after being shot down. Rarely in the history of air combat has their like been seen.
Posted by: Greg at
03:26 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 614 words, total size 4 kb.
A Filibuster For Frist?
I make no secret about my support for Condoleezza Rice at this early stage of the race for the 2008 GOP presidential nomination. But one of the other prominently mentioned names is that of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. But what does he need to do to distinguish himself from the field?
I donÂ’t know if I agree with that assessment, but I agree that a real filibuster, with the Democrats constantly on television actively obstructing the work of the Senate, is what is needed to get the American people to speak out. I donÂ’t know if there exists film of the Democrat filibusters of civil rights measures, but wouldnÂ’t it be great to run them side-by-side? Even more fun would be the film of Senator Byrd in 1964 and in 2005, seeking to keep minorities from voting then and from becoming judges today.
If Bill Frist is going to distinguish himself from his likely 2008 primary contenders (like Virginia senator George Allen), he needs to be Bush's game-breaking quarterback in the Senate. In fact, one could argue that successfully pushing Bush's agenda through the Senate would so identify Frist with the Bush legacy that he could run as Bush's ideological heir. But to do this, Frist will need to exhibit some of that famed Volunteer-state toughness, and this means breaking filibusters the old-school way, with non-stop debate, sleepless nights, and cots in the Senate required.
I donÂ’t know if I agree with that assessment, but I agree that a real filibuster, with the Democrats constantly on television actively obstructing the work of the Senate, is what is needed to get the American people to speak out. I donÂ’t know if there exists film of the Democrat filibusters of civil rights measures, but wouldnÂ’t it be great to run them side-by-side? Even more fun would be the film of Senator Byrd in 1964 and in 2005, seeking to keep minorities from voting then and from becoming judges today.
Posted by: Greg at
03:24 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.
A Bargain At Twice The Price
Hey, kid, want a bargain basement price for college? Try St. Louis Christian College.
The school sees its primary mission as preparing students for ministry, and hopes to make it possible for more young people to answer their calling. It is also hoped that the tuition-free program will bring about an increase in enrollment.
If it works, it will be the salvation of the college – and a boon to its students. But the question is, will it mark a trend towards decreasing tuition rates everywhere?
In a big, fat, expensive valentine to its 200 students (and parents), the Bible college's board of trustees on Saturday agreed to provide full-tuition scholarships for its resident students starting this fall. That adds up to more than $16,000 in savings over four years.
For a student taking 12 credit hours (though many students take more), the old system cost about $10,000 a year. Cancel the tuition and add a new $450 student services fee, plus increased room-and-board fees and the new total will be about $6,000.
The school sees its primary mission as preparing students for ministry, and hopes to make it possible for more young people to answer their calling. It is also hoped that the tuition-free program will bring about an increase in enrollment.
"Why on earth are we doing this?" Jamie Lankford, St. Louis Christian's director of business, asked at the chapel service.
He answered by ticking off statistics: Three out of five ministers leave the ministry within their first five years. About 50 percent of ministers are at or near retirement age.
With dorm rooms only about a third full, Lankford said, administrators knew they could do more to help fill them. And they could do it by reducing the amount of loans students take out - especially since many students will take on low-paying jobs in the ministry.
If St. Louis Christian can double enrollment, it can offset the costs of the tuition plan, said Tom Wallace, the school's director of development. He's hoping for 70 more students this fall.
The school also anticipates raising about $400,000 in the next two years from area churches, alumni and individuals.
And, for the record, commuters will pay half-tuition (and save about $1,900 a year) while part-timers will get no breaks.
If it works, it will be the salvation of the college – and a boon to its students. But the question is, will it mark a trend towards decreasing tuition rates everywhere?
Posted by: Greg at
03:09 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 352 words, total size 2 kb.
February 14, 2005
Watcher's Council Notice
As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher's Council hold a vote every week on what they consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around... per the Watcher's instructions, I am submitting one of my own posts for consideration in the upcoming nominations process.
Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.
Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.
Posted by: Greg at
05:02 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.
February 13, 2005
RIP -- Sister Lucia de Jesus dos Santos
She was one of the most important Catholic figures of the twentieth century. Many knew her name, but few saw her after she became a cloistered Carmelite nun. After nearly a century of life, and nearly nine decades after she and her cousins claimed to have seen the Virgin mary at Fatima, portugal, Sister Lucia de Jesus dos Santos has passed on to her heavenly reward.
Like the story of the visions at Lourdes, the Fatima visions have great following among Catholics. Like Lourdes, the visions were given not to the powerful or famous, but rather to simple children of the porest class.
V. Eternal rest grant unto her, O Lord.
R. And may perpetual light shine upon her.
V. May the souls of the faithfully departed through the mercy of God rest in peace.
R. Amen.
LISBON (Reuters) - Lucia de Jesus dos Santos, the last of three children who claimed to see the Virgin at Fatima and who revealed a vision the Catholic Church said foretold the attempt to kill Pope John Paul, died on Sunday, the Church said.
Dos Santos, 97, who later became a nun, was the eldest of the shepherd children who in 1917 told of seeing apparitions of the Virgin Mary six times. She died at her Carmelite convent at Coimbra in central Portugal.
"She had been weak for several weeks and had not left her cell," Coimbra Bishop Albino Cleto told the Church's Radio Renascenca.
Like the story of the visions at Lourdes, the Fatima visions have great following among Catholics. Like Lourdes, the visions were given not to the powerful or famous, but rather to simple children of the porest class.
The events at Fatima unfolded against a backdrop of religious persecution under anti-clerical factions that ruled Portugal after the overthrow of the monarchy in 1910.
In 1916 she experienced her first vision, when an angel appeared to the children, she wrote in her memoirs.
On May 13, 1917, the Virgin Mary appeared to her and her cousins Jacinta and Francisco Marta on an oak tree. On her last appearance before an estimated 50,000 onlookers, witnesses claim to have experienced a 15-minute spectacle of bright lights and rainbow colors.
In her memoirs, dos Santos said the Virgin Mary appeared to the children six times in 1917. Jacinta and Francisco died in the influenza pandemic in 1919 and 1920.
The two were beatified, the last step to sainthood, by Pope John Paul during his Fatima visit in 2000.
V. Eternal rest grant unto her, O Lord.
R. And may perpetual light shine upon her.
V. May the souls of the faithfully departed through the mercy of God rest in peace.
R. Amen.
Posted by: Greg at
04:13 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 394 words, total size 3 kb.
Election Results Are In
The people of Iraq have spoken.
About 58% of eligible voters cast ballots, despite a Sunni call for boycotts. natureally, of course, Sunnis are unhappy and question the legitimacy the results.
In other words, we engaged in an electoral crap-shoot and lost, so we plan on continuing to engage in terrorism against the British, Americans, and the Shiite majority that we oppressed during the Saddam years.
What comes next?
In other words, these poor, "disenfranchised" Sunnis who sided with the terrorists will get a chance to vote on the Constitution and potentially derail it -- and then will be able to vote in the elections that follow.
The Shiite-dominated United Iraqi Alliance ticket received 4,075,295 votes, or about 48 percent of the total cast, Iraqi election officials said. The Kurdistan Alliance, a coalition of two main Kurdish factions, was second with 2,175,551 votes, or 26 percent, and the Iraqi List headed by the U.S.-backed Allawi finished third with 1,168,943 votes, or about 14 percent.
Those three top finishers represent about 88 percent of the total, making them the main power brokers as the assembly chooses national leaders and writes a constitution.
About 58% of eligible voters cast ballots, despite a Sunni call for boycotts. natureally, of course, Sunnis are unhappy and question the legitimacy the results.
In an interview with Al-Jazeera television, Mohammed Bashar of the anti-American Association of Muslim Scholars said the fact that there were no international or U.N. monitors in Iraq made him question the figures.
"Those who boycotted the elections are more than those who took part in it," he said. "Boycotting the election does not mean that the boycotter will renounce his rights."
In other words, we engaged in an electoral crap-shoot and lost, so we plan on continuing to engage in terrorism against the British, Americans, and the Shiite majority that we oppressed during the Saddam years.
What comes next?
CONSTITUTION REFERENDUM AND THE NEXT ELECTIONS: Iraqis will vote on the proposed constitution by Oct. 15. If they approve, elections for a permanent government to replace the assembly will be held in December. If voters reject the charter, the National Assembly will be dissolved and a new transitional assembly will be elected in December to take another stab at constitution-writing.
In other words, these poor, "disenfranchised" Sunnis who sided with the terrorists will get a chance to vote on the Constitution and potentially derail it -- and then will be able to vote in the elections that follow.
Posted by: Greg at
07:00 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 321 words, total size 2 kb.
February 12, 2005
Rodeo Is Coming!
Anyone who has ever lived in Texas knows about the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo. As we get closer to opening day (March 1), my wife and I get more excited, and the local news begins to publish more rodeo-related news.
And this story is so heartwarming. Barrel racing is one of my favorite events at the rodeo, the only one in which women compete. I'm hoping that someday little Brittney Holland is among the top 64 competitors in the world, so that I get a chance to see her ride.
Yeah, that's right. Brittney is legally blind, and can only see two letters at a time in her large-print school books. The kid has big dreams, and I hope and pray that they all come true.
Oh, and if you want to learn a bit about the real stars of bull-riding -- the bulls -- check out this article.
And some of us, like basketball fans from Chicago, want to see the bulls win.
So I'll probably be posting a couple more rodeo related articles in the next couple of weeks, and then deluge you with rodeo coverage for those glorious three weeks in March when cowboys and livestock go at it in the Reliant Center.
And this story is so heartwarming. Barrel racing is one of my favorite events at the rodeo, the only one in which women compete. I'm hoping that someday little Brittney Holland is among the top 64 competitors in the world, so that I get a chance to see her ride.
The horse knows the girl's voice.
He knows her touch and the loving way she lays her cheek against his neck and feeds him treats from the palm of her small hand.
Some say that seeing is believing.
But one doesn't have to see to believe.
Fourteen-year-old Brittney Holland believes in her well-trained horse, Dollar, and in her skills and experience as a rodeo performer.
The ninth-grade honor student from Aledo High School also believes what Susan Holland, her mother, has told her since she was 3. When Brittney asked if she would ever be able to see Hayley, her older sister, her mother told her no.
"Britt, you're going to do greater things being blind than you ever would if you had total vision," Susan Holland said.
Yeah, that's right. Brittney is legally blind, and can only see two letters at a time in her large-print school books. The kid has big dreams, and I hope and pray that they all come true.
Oh, and if you want to learn a bit about the real stars of bull-riding -- the bulls -- check out this article.
"Bulls have their own personalities," says Rorey Lemmel, general manager of Stace Smith Pro Rodeos of Texas, a supplier of bucking bulls for the Dixie National Rodeo, running through Wednesday at the State Fairgrounds in Jackson.
Among the 70 or so bucking bulls bringing their reps to Jackson are Speckled Bird, Copper Top, Smokeless Drifter, Bounty Hunter and Dirty White Bull.
"Some fans show up as much for the bulls as for the cowboys," says Mike Mathis of Lufkin, Texas, rodeo announcer for this year's Dixie National.
Riders and fans alike are savvy about certain bulls: They know that some, for instance, may lean either to the right or the left, like a Supreme Court justice or a car with bad brakes.
And some of us, like basketball fans from Chicago, want to see the bulls win.
So I'll probably be posting a couple more rodeo related articles in the next couple of weeks, and then deluge you with rodeo coverage for those glorious three weeks in March when cowboys and livestock go at it in the Reliant Center.
Posted by: Greg at
06:13 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 463 words, total size 3 kb.
Slavery In Niger
Our country abolished slavery 140 years ago, yet activists rant on as if the "peculiar institution" continues on to this day in America. They demand reparations, affirmative action, and special programs. On the other hand, these same activists, usually black, are rarely troubled to raise their voices on behalf of victims of contemporary slavery.
When was slavery banned in Niger? Last year. Yeah, you read that right -- 2004. And yet we hear not a word from any of the usual suspects. Where is Jesse Jackson? Where is Al Sharpton? Yoo-hoo -- Maxine Watters? Nope. Not a one of them has anything to say. I guess that long-dead slaves are more important than slaves who are alive today, continuing to be held in defiance of the laws of Niger and all human decency. I guess fattening their own pocketbooks and campaign coffers in the liberal salons of Hollywood and the Upper East Side matters more than men, women, and children held in bondage. After all, there isn't any money to be made in challenging this chattel status of impoverished blacks in a backwards corner of Africa, while affirmative action, minority contracting, and reparations scams are a source of big bucks for the "professional Negros" of the liberal Left.
But since so-called black leaders in this country won't tell you about them, let's hear about the slaves of Niger from the BBC. Who are these slaves, and what are the conditions they live in?
So the next time you hear some Leftist start the usual litany about American racism, ask them why they are not doing something about enslaved blacks today in Africa. And then give them a boot in the ass, suggesting to them that they need to do something constructive with their passion and outrage. Like freeing men, women, and children in Africa who are slaves, rather than demanding "something-for-nothing" for folks in this country who never have been.
Slavery in Niger is not an obscure thing, nor a curious relic of the past, it is an intrinsic part of society today.
A Nigerian study has found that almost 8% of the population are slaves.
You wonder how this can be in the 21st Century and why people do not know about it?
When was slavery banned in Niger? Last year. Yeah, you read that right -- 2004. And yet we hear not a word from any of the usual suspects. Where is Jesse Jackson? Where is Al Sharpton? Yoo-hoo -- Maxine Watters? Nope. Not a one of them has anything to say. I guess that long-dead slaves are more important than slaves who are alive today, continuing to be held in defiance of the laws of Niger and all human decency. I guess fattening their own pocketbooks and campaign coffers in the liberal salons of Hollywood and the Upper East Side matters more than men, women, and children held in bondage. After all, there isn't any money to be made in challenging this chattel status of impoverished blacks in a backwards corner of Africa, while affirmative action, minority contracting, and reparations scams are a source of big bucks for the "professional Negros" of the liberal Left.
But since so-called black leaders in this country won't tell you about them, let's hear about the slaves of Niger from the BBC. Who are these slaves, and what are the conditions they live in?
Most slaves in Niger today are the descendents of slaves who were kidnapped in wars and raids centuries ago, and were simply born into their status.
Many slaves in Niger are appallingly abused by their masters.
Slave children are taken away from their parents before they are two-years-old, to break the bonds between parent and child and to eliminate any sense of identity.
The children grow up working in the house of the master.
Assibit was born into slavery, as was her mother and her husband
The slave owners encourage the slaves to reproduce to increase their numbers, sometimes even determining when they have sexual intercourse.
They treat the slaves like their cattle.
Slaves are often beaten for small misdemeanours.
They work long hours and are sometimes deprived of food as punishment.
There are documented cases of slaves being stripped naked in front of their families to humiliate them, of female slaves being raped by their owners, and even of male slaves being castrated by their owners as punishment.
So the next time you hear some Leftist start the usual litany about American racism, ask them why they are not doing something about enslaved blacks today in Africa. And then give them a boot in the ass, suggesting to them that they need to do something constructive with their passion and outrage. Like freeing men, women, and children in Africa who are slaves, rather than demanding "something-for-nothing" for folks in this country who never have been.
Posted by: Greg at
03:33 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 549 words, total size 3 kb.
VIP Treatment For French Mumia Supporters
The French hate America. They hate Americans. But they do love American criminals, having shielded murderer Ira Einhorn for decades. They've also permitted confessed child rapist Roman Polanski, one of their citizens, to escape punishment for a crime he pleaded guilty to in 1977. Oh, yeah, and there is one criminal they really love.
This is pretty disguisting stuff -- allowing foreigners to come to America to protest the conviction of cop-killing scum like Mumia. And even more disgusting is this little tidbit.
Heck, we need to make a deal with these foreign slimeballs. You think Mumia is innocent? You think he is a victim of a racist system? Fine -- we'll cut him loose right now, and send him back to France with you right now. Surely you folks wouldn't have any problem with that/ Heck, we'll send any other convict you think is innocent as well. After all, we wouldn't want to go against French opinion on such grave matters. I bet they will just LOVE Paris.
French politicians and activists seeking a new trial and freedom for convicted cop killer Mumia Abu-Jamal were welcomed in a Friday rally at City Hall and given replicas of the Liberty Bell.
Mjenzi Traylor, the city's first deputy director of commerce, told the crowd of about 150 that he was there to "make certain that we are receiving the message that you would like for us to deliver to Mayor Street."
Maureen Faulkner, the widow of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner, later called that greeting an "absolute outrage."
Abu-Jamal was convicted of murdering Faulkner in 1981.
"This man stood over him and shot him, point-blank, in the face," Maureen Faulkner said. "For them to give them replicas of the Liberty Bell and welcome them with open arms, I think it's an embarrassment for the city."
Faulkner said she planned to call Street on Monday to protest the city's actions.
"This is a disgrace," she said. "It is a slap in the face for all of law enforcement."
Street planned to attend the meeting with the French politicians but canceled due to a busy schedule, his staff said.
Instead, Traylor was scheduled to meet in private with Connie Little, the mayor's executive assistant, and the French politicians.
This is pretty disguisting stuff -- allowing foreigners to come to America to protest the conviction of cop-killing scum like Mumia. And even more disgusting is this little tidbit.
Jacques Daguenet, a city councilman from Paris, then decried what he called Abu-Jamal's "racist trial." Paris made Abu-Jamal an honorary citizen in 2003.
"He is the voice of people who have nothing," Daguenet said. "We have to struggle to have him free."
Majid Wannass, a deputy for the mayor of Saint Denis, just outside of Paris, drew cheers when he told the crowd his town would rename a street for Abu-Jamal.
Heck, we need to make a deal with these foreign slimeballs. You think Mumia is innocent? You think he is a victim of a racist system? Fine -- we'll cut him loose right now, and send him back to France with you right now. Surely you folks wouldn't have any problem with that/ Heck, we'll send any other convict you think is innocent as well. After all, we wouldn't want to go against French opinion on such grave matters. I bet they will just LOVE Paris.
Posted by: Greg at
03:18 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 458 words, total size 3 kb.
Jameson Book Returned To Houston Public Library Shelves
I mentioned Mayor Bill White's act of censorship a couple of weeks ago, after complaints about the book from one member of City Council.
That action has been overturned.
Does anyone believe that the memo was really written on February 1? Or that a committee really made the decision? I suspect that any close inquiry will show that Mayor White caught so much heat that the new policy was devised as a cover. That seems to be his modus operandi when faced with public criticism.
But regardless, I'm glad to see the censorship of the book end -- not that I have any interest in reading it.
But apparently others do want to read it. Since Mayor White's censorship decision was reported, the number of request for the system's twelve copies has increased from 20 to 41.
That action has been overturned.
A library system internal memo dated Feb. 1 said a review committee recommended that the books be relocated to the fine arts and recreation section on the third floor of the central library. Books in that section include celebrity biographies.
Michel said Friday that White's decision last month was a temporary measure designed to address community concerns quickly, and that White always anticipated that a library committee would make a final decision.
But no city officials made that claim when the Houston Chronicle published a story Jan. 27 revealing White's decision.
At the time, [Mayor's Office spokesman Frank] Michel said, "We're trying to take action quickly, and we didn't see a need to go through a long bureaucratic process."
Also at the time, Toni Lambert, interim director of the Houston Public Library, issued a news release calling White's decision "a reasonable solution."
Holm said she never was told White's decision was temporary, adding she is "in the dark" about why the committee that issued the Feb. 1 memo was formed.
Does anyone believe that the memo was really written on February 1? Or that a committee really made the decision? I suspect that any close inquiry will show that Mayor White caught so much heat that the new policy was devised as a cover. That seems to be his modus operandi when faced with public criticism.
But regardless, I'm glad to see the censorship of the book end -- not that I have any interest in reading it.
But apparently others do want to read it. Since Mayor White's censorship decision was reported, the number of request for the system's twelve copies has increased from 20 to 41.
Posted by: Greg at
03:05 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 319 words, total size 2 kb.
Freedom Of Religion And Speech Upheld In Sweden
In an appeal of a case that has been used to point out the danger of hate speech laws, a Swedish pastor has been acquitted of charges of violating Swedish hate speech laws for preaching a sermon which condemned homosexuality.
Now I don't agree with all of Green's words -- in fact, I think he is wrong in his more outrageous statements. But that is irrelevant when one considers the principle involved -- does the government have the right to stifle religious speech, especially a pastor's sermons? Absent an incitement to violence, the answer must be a resounding negative.
Naturally, gay rights activists are outraged.
Actually, Ms. Sjodine, you had better hope that the supreme court rules exactly the same way as the appellate court -- or else the next case brought might be against you and your colleagues for hate speech against Christians with whom you disagree. That is the thing about freedom of speech -- you only have as much as you are willing the other side of the argument.
The appeals court ruled that Sweden's law, which was enacted after World War II to protect Jews and other minorities from neo-Nazi propaganda and was only recently extended to gays, was never intended to stifle open discussion of homosexuality or restrict a pastor's right to preach.
The defendant, the Rev. Ake Green, had a right to preach "the Bible's categorical condemnation of homosexual relations as a sin," the court said, even if that position was "alien to most citizens" and if Green's views could be "strongly questioned," according to news-service translations of the court's ruling.
The prosecution had attracted widespread attention in Europe, where laws restricting speech deemed to incite hatred of specific groups are common. Some conservative Christian groups in the United States have followed the case, saying that similar laws that would restrict speech rights are in the works there.
Now I don't agree with all of Green's words -- in fact, I think he is wrong in his more outrageous statements. But that is irrelevant when one considers the principle involved -- does the government have the right to stifle religious speech, especially a pastor's sermons? Absent an incitement to violence, the answer must be a resounding negative.
Naturally, gay rights activists are outraged.
Gay activists said they were dismayed by the ruling. "I don't think the verdict would have been the same if Ake Green had agitated against Jews or blacks or any other group protected by Swedish law," said Maria Sjodine, manager for the Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights. "I really hope this is going to be appealed to the supreme court, and they find him guilty. Otherwise, we are not being treated equally as other groups who are covered by this law."
Actually, Ms. Sjodine, you had better hope that the supreme court rules exactly the same way as the appellate court -- or else the next case brought might be against you and your colleagues for hate speech against Christians with whom you disagree. That is the thing about freedom of speech -- you only have as much as you are willing the other side of the argument.
Posted by: Greg at
02:59 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 415 words, total size 3 kb.
Are You Sure You Want To Flee To Canada?
Hey, Kerry voters! John Leo provides a whole host of reasons for some other option rather than running to Canada. And some of them should really leap out at you. After all, you claim that the US under George W. Bush is a fascist state that unduly restricts your freedom. You might want to reconsider your choice.
There are also the standard problems of higher violent crime rate, candidness cuisine, Canadian football, and Canadian music -- plus the screwed up Canadian healthcare system that sends Canadians south to the US for ordinary American healthcare that they must literally be dying to get in Kanuckistan.
Besides, it is only a matter of time before incorporate Canada into the United States (maybe we'll cut loose Quebec and British Columbia). Might I suggest you consider Cuba, Venezuela, or North Korea instead?
A national infatuation with censorship. Canadians tend to be a benign people who value niceness. So they have a strong tendency to suppress speech that they see as lacking in niceness. Un-nice books and videos are seized at the border or banned from libraries. Any material cited for "undue exploitation of sex" or for being "degrading or dehumanizing" can be banned. Speech is illegal if it "promotes hatred" or spreads "false news." Advertising "directed at children" can be ruled illegal. If the recorded message on your answering machine is deemed discriminatory, you can be prosecuted for it. In Saskatchewan, a newspaper ad listing four biblical citations against homosexuality (just the listing, no text), accompanied by two hand-holding male stick figures with a line drawn across them, was ruled a human-rights offense, and the man who placed the ad was directed to pay $1,800 each to three gay men who were offended by the ad. "Canadians put up with an insane amount of crap that Americans might not," said David Sutherland, former director of the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association.
Canada's trying to be European. Canada has been aping trends in Europe, from the obsession with multiculturalism to the rising contempt for religion, greater censorship, and even a declining birthrate. Canada's birthrate is 1.49 children per woman, well below the replacement level of 2.1. Canada's elites behave much like those of the United States, favoring judicially imposed decisions over democratic and legislative ones. In Canada, a smaller and less varied nation than the United States, the elites meet less resistance. But there are signs of a pushback. Though the Canadian and American press consistently give the impression that gay marriage is overwhelmingly favored in Canada, a February 2 National Post /Global National poll found that two thirds of Canadians oppose gay marriage and would most likely vote against it in a national plebiscite. The polls suggest that Canadians are close to Americans on this issue. It's elite opinion and judges that make Canada look different.
There are also the standard problems of higher violent crime rate, candidness cuisine, Canadian football, and Canadian music -- plus the screwed up Canadian healthcare system that sends Canadians south to the US for ordinary American healthcare that they must literally be dying to get in Kanuckistan.
Besides, it is only a matter of time before incorporate Canada into the United States (maybe we'll cut loose Quebec and British Columbia). Might I suggest you consider Cuba, Venezuela, or North Korea instead?
Posted by: Greg at
02:56 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 490 words, total size 3 kb.
That's Gay!
Lord, how I hate that phrase! I spend an inordinate amount of time trying to break my students of the habit of using the term "gay" as a synonym for "stupid". I've suggested to them that their test packet really doesn't have a sexual orientation, and that they would be offended if I used "black" or "Hispanic" the same way. I've even pointed out that they ought to show more respect to their classmates who are gay (some of them quite openly so).
That said, I think this school in Swansea, Massachusetts went well beyond the limits of common sense in this case.
Come on -- SUSPENSION over the issue? And since the document sent to his mother gives that as the reason, it is disingenuous for the school to come back with a response that there was more to his suspension than the use of the word "gay." In addition, I would have to think that the one place where a student should be able to speak freely would be in the counselor's office.
I'm also curious -- how many other students has the school suspended for the use of the word "gay" in a derogatory fashion?
(Hat Tip to The Education Wonks. Also, be sure to consider making an entry into their Carnival of Education.)
That said, I think this school in Swansea, Massachusetts went well beyond the limits of common sense in this case.
A high-school sophomore has returned to his classes after a one-day suspension for using profanity, but he's still sore about the punishment.
"It's made me sick," said the student, Chris Carreiro. "I've been nerved out about it all week."
Carreiro, 16, and a former class president, says he was suspended for telling a guidance counselor that a teacher was "being gay" a week ago Thursday.
He said he was using "gay" as a synonym for "stupid" or "lame," and was not implying anything about the teacher's sexuality. He and his friends often use the word in that context, he said.
The administration has said the Joseph Case High School student isn't giving the full version of events - that Carreiro was suspended for more than just the use of the word "gay."
But Carreiro says letters his family has received from the school corroborate his story. During a phone interview, Carreiro read one, sent to his mother, which lists the reason for his suspension as "inappropriate language and behavior."
"If there was more to the story, wouldn't they have told my mom?" he asked.
Both Carreiro and the school administration agree that his suspension stemmed from an incident last week.
Carreiro said he was helping a friend with books, and was late for computer class. The teacher sent him to the guidance office for tardiness, he said.
In the guidance office, he told counselor Edward Pettine that the teacher was "being gay," but not that the teacher actually was gay.
"There's a difference," Carreiro said. "There was no homosexual thing. I wasn't using profanity."
Carreiro said the guidance counselor shouted at him, and dismissed him from the office. He later found out that he was suspended, and that Pettine wanted him to serve detention.
Come on -- SUSPENSION over the issue? And since the document sent to his mother gives that as the reason, it is disingenuous for the school to come back with a response that there was more to his suspension than the use of the word "gay." In addition, I would have to think that the one place where a student should be able to speak freely would be in the counselor's office.
I'm also curious -- how many other students has the school suspended for the use of the word "gay" in a derogatory fashion?
(Hat Tip to The Education Wonks. Also, be sure to consider making an entry into their Carnival of Education.)
Posted by: Greg at
02:32 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 515 words, total size 3 kb.
Rice Leads Among Conservative Bloggers
Patrick Ruffini has been running a poll over at his site. Now I'll concede it is uncientific, but its results show that the leader among GOP-oriented folks on the internet is -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. He offers a good breakdown of the results here.
Now what does this mean? Less than meets the eye, I believe. Given that Dr. Rice was not even included in the Gallup poll, it would be expected she would do less well there. Also, as Ruffini notes, this is very early in the cycle. But I think that Dr. Rice has a base of support in the GOP that could make her inclusion on the eventual 2008 a virtual lock, though which spot she would take is an open question. And there is also the question of where George W. Bush would place his support. If his brother ran, would he support Jeb ovr Condi? Or would a privately expressed preference for Condi cause Jeb to sit out the race? The Jeb/Condi dynamic is an interesting one in 2008 -- and might result in the two of them being the 2008 GOP team.
Looking at the complete results, the contenders can be broken down into tiers:
Tier I: Rice (42%), Giuliani (14%), Bush (10%)
Tier II: Romney (7%), Pawlenty (6%), Allen (5%), McCain (5%), Owens?
Tier III: Santorum (4%), Frist (3%), Sanford (3%), Brownback (2%), Hagel?
Why take such a survey so early? Does it hold any predictive value? The honest answer is hardly at all. However, by comparing the opinions of blogosphere activists with the broader electorate, we can detect which candidates may be over- or under-valued in the political marketplace come 2006 and 2007. Measuring which candidates generate the most buzz and excitement online can successfully predict significant events like the Dean surge in late 2003. Compare these results to the Gallup poll of 493 Republicans or leaners taken February 4 – 6:
Giuliani 33%
McCain 30%
Bush 12%
Frist 7%
Other 6%
The most glaring difference is the exclusion of Condi Rice (and the limited selection of candidates generally). Rice could be expected to do well in a traditional poll, though perhaps not as well as in the blogosphere, where she also cleaned up in the Right Wing News poll. In the spring of 1997, not every poll included George W. Bush in its list of potential GOP candidates, but those that did showed him leading decisively.
Now what does this mean? Less than meets the eye, I believe. Given that Dr. Rice was not even included in the Gallup poll, it would be expected she would do less well there. Also, as Ruffini notes, this is very early in the cycle. But I think that Dr. Rice has a base of support in the GOP that could make her inclusion on the eventual 2008 a virtual lock, though which spot she would take is an open question. And there is also the question of where George W. Bush would place his support. If his brother ran, would he support Jeb ovr Condi? Or would a privately expressed preference for Condi cause Jeb to sit out the race? The Jeb/Condi dynamic is an interesting one in 2008 -- and might result in the two of them being the 2008 GOP team.
Posted by: Greg at
02:11 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 417 words, total size 3 kb.
February 11, 2005
Stewart Convicted As Accomplice To Terror
Conspiracy.
Providing material support to terrorists.
Defrauding the United States.
Making false statements.
Those are the charges on which radical lawyer Lynne Stewart was convicted yesterday. The crimes took place in connection with her defense of blind Egyptian cleric Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman. She is not guilty of representing him vigorously, which was her obligation and his right under the Constitution. Rather, Stewart became an active and willing party to communicating directives for terrorist activities during her press conferences.
You think this sounds far-fetched? Think again. This lawyer to members of the radical-chic set hd often expressed her belief that violence and terrorism were proper when directed against our country.
Such hypothetical advocacy of violence, while abhorrant, is permissible under the First Amendment. Were Lynne Stewart to have limited herself to such philosophical statements she would have merited our contempt, but not jail time. But when she became the messenger girl for terrorists, Stewart crossed a bright line from free speech to criminal activity. She deserves no sympathy. Especially because she lacks even the faintest trace of contrition for her crimes.
Providing material support to terrorists.
Defrauding the United States.
Making false statements.
Those are the charges on which radical lawyer Lynne Stewart was convicted yesterday. The crimes took place in connection with her defense of blind Egyptian cleric Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman. She is not guilty of representing him vigorously, which was her obligation and his right under the Constitution. Rather, Stewart became an active and willing party to communicating directives for terrorist activities during her press conferences.
During a visit to Sheik Omar Abdel el-Rahman's cell in Minnesota in 2000, she and a translator conspired to distract prison officials in order to receive and later deliver a coded directive whose purpose was to initiate new terrorist acts in Egypt.
The sheik spoke the directive to the translator, who transmitted it to Egypt. But there was some question in Egypt about its authenticity — until Stewart called a press conference to authenticate it.
What passed between the sheik and Stewart was not an attorney-client matter, which would have been considered confidential, but rather a terrorist communication in the guise of an attorney-client discussion.
She had signed a legally binding document promising not to do any such thing so that she could see the sheik in the first place. Apparently, she figured there was no way the government could prove she had knowingly been involved in transmitting the terrorist message. What she didn't know was that everything going on in the sheik's cell was being taped.
In those taped conversations, Stewart and the sheik actually gloated about how they were tricking prison officials.
That goes well-beyond representation of a client. That falls into the area that is an exception to attorney-client privilege – the attorney becoming a participant in the crime. And make no mistake, Stewart’s activities did make her a party to the conspiracy to bomb New York City landmarks, including the United Nations building.
You think this sounds far-fetched? Think again. This lawyer to members of the radical-chic set hd often expressed her belief that violence and terrorism were proper when directed against our country.
The people killed and injured in pursuit of revolutionary goals deserved it, she said. "I don't believe in anarchistic violence but in directed violence," she once said. "That would be violence directed at the institutions which perpetuate capitalism, racism and sexism, and at the people who are the appointed guardians of those institutions, and accompanied by popular support."
Such hypothetical advocacy of violence, while abhorrant, is permissible under the First Amendment. Were Lynne Stewart to have limited herself to such philosophical statements she would have merited our contempt, but not jail time. But when she became the messenger girl for terrorists, Stewart crossed a bright line from free speech to criminal activity. She deserves no sympathy. Especially because she lacks even the faintest trace of contrition for her crimes.
Posted by: Greg at
11:25 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 488 words, total size 3 kb.
Marquette University – Guilty Of False Advertising?
In his latest column, McCarthyism at Marquette, Professor Mike Adams comments on the recent decision by Marquette University officials to shut down the College Republican Support the Troops fundraiser for adoptasniper.com on the basis that it was incompatible with the values of Marquette as a Catholic university. Adams questions that, in light of certain other activities permitted at or sponsored by the university.
That observation seems accurate to me. Marquette is being very selective in terms of which elements of Catholic theology it is supporting. In doing so, it is following the tenets of the liberal political correctness that has infected much of higher education over the last few decades. Could you imagine the outcry over the university shutting down one of the gay groups?
Having made a pretty damning indictment of the Jesuit institution of higher education. If he stopped there, though, the good professor would have dealt a stinging blow to the university. But as anyone familiar with his work knows, that is not his style. Adams continues on to make a startling demand, based upon the fraud he has demonstrated.
I don’t know that I agree with Dr. Adams’ solution here. It seems simplistic to me. After all, some of those students have been at the university for multiple years It strikes me that the full amount due in refunds should be at least double his proposed total (assuming each member has averaged two years at Marquette), if not an amount closer to $50 million. And this does not get into the question of damages for the devaluing of their degree, nor the necessary expense of acquiring the Catholic formation they believed they would get at Marquette. And then there are the punitive damages, which could take the total well over the $100 million mark.
You have been quoted, Dean McCarthy, as saying that the CR benefit does not “comport to the University’s mission.†Your communications office (414.288.7445) has issued an official statement accusing the CRs of “having a cavalier attitude toward the taking of a human life.â€
I found the university’s official statement to be interesting since your own library refers to Planned Parenthood as “an excellent resource for information on women's health and global reproduction issues.†Furthermore, Marquette’s Association of English Graduate Students (http://www.marquette.edu/aegs/) is
allowed to promote Planned Parenthood on your website. Could it be argued
that Planned Parenthood has “a cavalier attitude toward the taking of a human
life?â€
I also noticed that there will be a Gay and Straight Alliance (http://www.marquette.edu/um/pastoral/glb/)“rose sale†on Valentine’s Day at Marquette University. Does that sale
“comport†with the university’s mission of promoting a “Catholic
identity?â€
You have, according to my research, at least two gay organizations on campus. Both organizations seem to enjoy “unfettered pursuit of truth†at Marquette. They are allowed freedom of speech on your website and freedom of association on your campus. Although, as a private school, you are not bound by the First Amendment, you seem to grant these organizations certain rights voluntarily, in the name of academic freedom.
So, how are we to resolve the university’s position that, a) pro-abortion speech is permissible, b) pro-gay speech is permissible, and c) pro-war speech is impermissible?
The answer is simple: Marquette University is not committed to serving God or the Catholic Church. It is committed to advancing the policies of the Democratic
Party.
That observation seems accurate to me. Marquette is being very selective in terms of which elements of Catholic theology it is supporting. In doing so, it is following the tenets of the liberal political correctness that has infected much of higher education over the last few decades. Could you imagine the outcry over the university shutting down one of the gay groups?
Having made a pretty damning indictment of the Jesuit institution of higher education. If he stopped there, though, the good professor would have dealt a stinging blow to the university. But as anyone familiar with his work knows, that is not his style. Adams continues on to make a startling demand, based upon the fraud he has demonstrated.
Clearly, the true purpose of your university has not been revealed to potential students at Marquette. Instead, they have been fraudulently induced into paying $22,950 per year in tuition under the false promise of, among other things, academic freedom.
Accordingly, I hereby demand a tuition refund in the amount of $23 million. This refund should be distributed to the 1000 members of the College Republicans at Marquette immediately. Since you are the 124,873rd person to receive this letter from me, it is likely that others will be calling upon you (at 414.288.1412) to do the same.
If, for some reason, you refuse to refund the full amount in 30 days, I will ask the CRs to stop engaging in right wing or, as you say, “provocative†tactics, such as the organization of an Adopt a Sniper benefit. Instead, I will urge them to engage in more liberal tactics. Specifically, I will urge the 1000 members to overtake your office with a sit-in, just like the radical leftists did on campuses in the 1960s.
I don’t know that I agree with Dr. Adams’ solution here. It seems simplistic to me. After all, some of those students have been at the university for multiple years It strikes me that the full amount due in refunds should be at least double his proposed total (assuming each member has averaged two years at Marquette), if not an amount closer to $50 million. And this does not get into the question of damages for the devaluing of their degree, nor the necessary expense of acquiring the Catholic formation they believed they would get at Marquette. And then there are the punitive damages, which could take the total well over the $100 million mark.
Posted by: Greg at
11:15 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 740 words, total size 5 kb.
Marquette University – Guilty Of False Advertising?
In his latest column, McCarthyism at Marquette, Professor Mike Adams comments on the recent decision by Marquette University officials to shut down the College Republican Support the Troops fundraiser for adoptasniper.com on the basis that it was incompatible with the values of Marquette as a Catholic university. Adams questions that, in light of certain other activities permitted at or sponsored by the university.
That observation seems accurate to me. Marquette is being very selective in terms of which elements of Catholic theology it is supporting. In doing so, it is following the tenets of the liberal political correctness that has infected much of higher education over the last few decades. Could you imagine the outcry over the university shutting down one of the gay groups?
Having made a pretty damning indictment of the Jesuit institution of higher education. If he stopped there, though, the good professor would have dealt a stinging blow to the university. But as anyone familiar with his work knows, that is not his style. Adams continues on to make a startling demand, based upon the fraud he has demonstrated.
I donÂ’t know that I agree with Dr. AdamsÂ’ solution here. It seems simplistic to me. After all, some of those students have been at the university for multiple years It strikes me that the full amount due in refunds should be at least double his proposed total (assuming each member has averaged two years at Marquette), if not an amount closer to $50 million. And this does not get into the question of damages for the devaluing of their degree, nor the necessary expense of acquiring the Catholic formation they believed they would get at Marquette. And then there are the punitive damages, which could take the total well over the $100 million mark.
You have been quoted, Dean McCarthy, as saying that the CR benefit does not “comport to the University’s mission.” Your communications office (414.288.7445) has issued an official statement accusing the CRs of “having a cavalier attitude toward the taking of a human life.”
I found the university’s official statement to be interesting since your own library refers to Planned Parenthood as “an excellent resource for information on women's health and global reproduction issues.” Furthermore, Marquette’s Association of English Graduate Students (http://www.marquette.edu/aegs/) is
allowed to promote Planned Parenthood on your website. Could it be argued
that Planned Parenthood has “a cavalier attitude toward the taking of a human
life?”
I also noticed that there will be a Gay and Straight Alliance (http://www.marquette.edu/um/pastoral/glb/)“rose sale” on Valentine’s Day at Marquette University. Does that sale
“comport” with the university’s mission of promoting a “Catholic
identity?”
You have, according to my research, at least two gay organizations on campus. Both organizations seem to enjoy “unfettered pursuit of truth” at Marquette. They are allowed freedom of speech on your website and freedom of association on your campus. Although, as a private school, you are not bound by the First Amendment, you seem to grant these organizations certain rights voluntarily, in the name of academic freedom.
So, how are we to resolve the universityÂ’s position that, a) pro-abortion speech is permissible, b) pro-gay speech is permissible, and c) pro-war speech is impermissible?
The answer is simple: Marquette University is not committed to serving God or the Catholic Church. It is committed to advancing the policies of the Democratic
Party.
That observation seems accurate to me. Marquette is being very selective in terms of which elements of Catholic theology it is supporting. In doing so, it is following the tenets of the liberal political correctness that has infected much of higher education over the last few decades. Could you imagine the outcry over the university shutting down one of the gay groups?
Having made a pretty damning indictment of the Jesuit institution of higher education. If he stopped there, though, the good professor would have dealt a stinging blow to the university. But as anyone familiar with his work knows, that is not his style. Adams continues on to make a startling demand, based upon the fraud he has demonstrated.
Clearly, the true purpose of your university has not been revealed to potential students at Marquette. Instead, they have been fraudulently induced into paying $22,950 per year in tuition under the false promise of, among other things, academic freedom.
Accordingly, I hereby demand a tuition refund in the amount of $23 million. This refund should be distributed to the 1000 members of the College Republicans at Marquette immediately. Since you are the 124,873rd person to receive this letter from me, it is likely that others will be calling upon you (at 414.288.1412) to do the same.
If, for some reason, you refuse to refund the full amount in 30 days, I will ask the CRs to stop engaging in right wing or, as you say, “provocative” tactics, such as the organization of an Adopt a Sniper benefit. Instead, I will urge them to engage in more liberal tactics. Specifically, I will urge the 1000 members to overtake your office with a sit-in, just like the radical leftists did on campuses in the 1960s.
I donÂ’t know that I agree with Dr. AdamsÂ’ solution here. It seems simplistic to me. After all, some of those students have been at the university for multiple years It strikes me that the full amount due in refunds should be at least double his proposed total (assuming each member has averaged two years at Marquette), if not an amount closer to $50 million. And this does not get into the question of damages for the devaluing of their degree, nor the necessary expense of acquiring the Catholic formation they believed they would get at Marquette. And then there are the punitive damages, which could take the total well over the $100 million mark.
Posted by: Greg at
11:15 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 747 words, total size 5 kb.
Buckley Prays For Pope’s Death
William F. Buckley loves Pope John Paul II. Yet he shocked many when he said he was praying not for the Pope’s recovery, but for him to quickly pass on to his heavenly reward.
What do you think? Is Buckley right, or is he grossly wrong in his thinking on this point?
And please respectfully confine yourself to that question, not turning this into a more general view on religion, Catholicism, or the Pope himself.
Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the Vatican's secretary of state, said simply, "If there is a man who loves the Church more than anybody else, who is guided by the Holy Spirit ... that's him. We must have great faith in the pope. He knows what to do."
What to do includes clinging to the papacy as a full-time cripple, if medicine, which arrested death by only 10 minutes, can arrest death again for weeks and even months. But the progressive deterioration in the pope's health over the last several years confirms that there are yet things medical science can't do, and these include giving the pope the physical strength to coordinate and to use his voice intelligibly.
So, what is wrong with praying for his death? For relief from his manifest sufferings? And for the opportunity to pay honor to his legacy by turning to the responsibility of electing a successor to get on with John Paul's work? Muriel Spark commented in "Memento Mori": "When a noble life has prepared old age, it is not decline that it reveals, but the first days of immortality." That cannot be effected by the hospital in which the pope struggles.
What do you think? Is Buckley right, or is he grossly wrong in his thinking on this point?
And please respectfully confine yourself to that question, not turning this into a more general view on religion, Catholicism, or the Pope himself.
Posted by: Greg at
11:12 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.
Buckley Prays For PopeÂ’s Death
William F. Buckley loves Pope John Paul II. Yet he shocked many when he said he was praying not for the PopeÂ’s recovery, but for him to quickly pass on to his heavenly reward.
What do you think? Is Buckley right, or is he grossly wrong in his thinking on this point?
And please respectfully confine yourself to that question, not turning this into a more general view on religion, Catholicism, or the Pope himself.
Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the Vatican's secretary of state, said simply, "If there is a man who loves the Church more than anybody else, who is guided by the Holy Spirit ... that's him. We must have great faith in the pope. He knows what to do."
What to do includes clinging to the papacy as a full-time cripple, if medicine, which arrested death by only 10 minutes, can arrest death again for weeks and even months. But the progressive deterioration in the pope's health over the last several years confirms that there are yet things medical science can't do, and these include giving the pope the physical strength to coordinate and to use his voice intelligibly.
So, what is wrong with praying for his death? For relief from his manifest sufferings? And for the opportunity to pay honor to his legacy by turning to the responsibility of electing a successor to get on with John Paul's work? Muriel Spark commented in "Memento Mori": "When a noble life has prepared old age, it is not decline that it reveals, but the first days of immortality." That cannot be effected by the hospital in which the pope struggles.
What do you think? Is Buckley right, or is he grossly wrong in his thinking on this point?
And please respectfully confine yourself to that question, not turning this into a more general view on religion, Catholicism, or the Pope himself.
Posted by: Greg at
11:12 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.
More Inhumanity To Children
This event in North Lauderdale should horrify any person with so much as a scrap of a soul.
Are you sickened? Are you disgusted? Do you believe that those who did this are evil and deserve no mercy from our legal system?
And if you answered “yes” to the above, how can you rationalize that with support for the status quo on abortion in this country, which would have permitted the mother to have this little one’s life terminated by a physician only twenty-four hours earlier?
UPDATE: It seems the story is not true. The “Good Samaritan" is the mother, and she hid the pregnancy from family and friends. Details here, but my questions above still stand.
A newborn boy - believed to be less than an hour old - survived being thrown from a moving car onto a swale alongside a busy street Thursday afternoon, Broward County sheriff's officials said.
The car sped away, and investigators are seeking the parents of the eight-pound, two-ounce child whose umbilical cord was still attached when found by a woman passing by the scene.
Sheriff's spokesman Jim Leljedal said the unidentified woman who found the baby brought him to a nearby sheriff's office. The baby was taken to Broward General Medical Center, which upgraded his condition from critical to serious Thursday night.
"He's doing remarkably well and we're hopeful that he'll recover," Leljedal said.
Another sheriff's spokeswoman, Veda Coleman-Wright, said Thursday night that the boy is improving. It was unclear what injuries the baby may have suffered from being thrown. Investigators are searching for a white, older-model large sedan that eyewitnesses observed leaving the scene. The woman who rescued the baby - which was inside a small plastic bag when tossed from the car - said she observed a man and woman arguing inside the vehicle.
The baby was thrown from the passenger side of the vehicle, landing three or four feet away in the grass. When the Good Samaritan approached what she thought was a package, it began to move and she realized a baby was inside.
Are you sickened? Are you disgusted? Do you believe that those who did this are evil and deserve no mercy from our legal system?
And if you answered “yes” to the above, how can you rationalize that with support for the status quo on abortion in this country, which would have permitted the mother to have this little one’s life terminated by a physician only twenty-four hours earlier?
UPDATE: It seems the story is not true. The “Good Samaritan" is the mother, and she hid the pregnancy from family and friends. Details here, but my questions above still stand.
Posted by: Greg at
08:08 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 353 words, total size 2 kb.
February 10, 2005
The Danger Of Treaties
She thought she was writing about a good way to ban hate speech. What Beth Goodtree really did was give a great reason for signing on to fewer treaties, and making sure that those treaties do not impinge upon the rights of Americans under the Constitution.
Her candidates for prosecution for exercising rights guaranteed under the First Amendment?
The Museum of Modern Art in New York City, for showing The Road to Jenin and other films that present Israel in a bad light vis-a-vis the Palestinian conflict.
Islamist religious leaders who continually call for "death to the Crusaders (Christians) and Zionists."
Saudi Arabia.
Duke University and other schools hosting pro-Palestinian events.
Maybe the time has come for us to reconsider our continued adherance to these treaties as impinging upon national sovereignty and the rights guaranteed to the American people under our Constitution.
Much of today's anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment is promulgated by hate speech. Falsely wrapping themselves in the 'free speech' provisions of various countries, these haters have been given free rein to spread their repugnant political agendas aimed at genocide and ethnic cleansing. However, we can stop this and we have the legal juice to do it. Even as individuals. Here's how:
Remember those pesky Geneva Conventions? We, the United States, signed them, as did Israel, Great Britain, Canada, and many other countries. Well, when we signed them, we agreed to carry out all sections of them. No "one-from-column-A-one-from-column-B" nonsense. America, and all other signatories, agreed to them all.
Therefore, since the US is a signatory to all the Geneva Conventions; and since the Geneva Conventions list 'hate speech' as a war crime of genocide (or the implied potential to encourage genocide); and also since it clearly states* in Articles III and IV that any signatory must amend their constitutions or other legal processes to be in compliance; this makes it clear that "hate speech" as defined by the Geneva Conventions themselves, is not protected under US or any other signatory country's law. "Hate speech" is defined as incitement towards a group based upon national, ethnic or religious affiliation. Also included in this "Hate Speech" part of the Geneva Conventions are people who aid, fund, abet or help in any way.
Therefore, private individuals or groups can sue others in US civil court for violations of the Geneva Convention's Hate Speech provisions - a war crime.
Her candidates for prosecution for exercising rights guaranteed under the First Amendment?
The Museum of Modern Art in New York City, for showing The Road to Jenin and other films that present Israel in a bad light vis-a-vis the Palestinian conflict.
Islamist religious leaders who continually call for "death to the Crusaders (Christians) and Zionists."
Saudi Arabia.
Duke University and other schools hosting pro-Palestinian events.
Maybe the time has come for us to reconsider our continued adherance to these treaties as impinging upon national sovereignty and the rights guaranteed to the American people under our Constitution.
|
* The Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, 26 November 1968 Article III The States Parties to the present Convention undertake to adopt all necessary domestic measures, legislative or otherwise, with a view to making possible the extradition, in accordance with international law, of the persons referred to in article II of this Convention. Article IV The States Parties to the present Convention undertake to adopt, in accordance with their respective constitutional processes, any legislative or other measures necessary to ensure that statutory or other limitations shall not apply to the prosecution and punishment of the crimes referred to in articles I and II of this Convention and that, where they exist, such limitations shall be abolished. | ||
|
| ||
Posted by: Greg at
03:02 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 530 words, total size 4 kb.
An Obscene Court Decision
Why would a court ever consider granting special privileges to a confessed child rapist?
Ordinary folks would have to appear in court in a lawsuit, but there seems to be a special exception here to prevent Polanski from being brought to justice.
The sick bastard entered a guilty plea to drugging and raping a 12-year-old in 1977, only to flea to France prior to sentencing. Because he is a French citizen, he cannot be extradited from France under French law.
And by the way, what did he do upon reaching France? He soon began a relationship with actress Nastasia Kinski -- who was 15 at the time.
FILM director Roman Polanski has won a bid to sue for libel in an English court via videolink in order to avoid the risk of extradition to the US for child sex offences.
In a ruling announced today, England's highest court overturned an earlier Court of Appeal decision that Polanski should be made to live by the "normal processes of the law".
Polanski, 71, who fled America more than 25 years ago after admitting having sex with a child, wants to sue US magazine Vanity Fair over an article he says defamed him.
In a case seen as a test of the rights of libel claimants to avoid having to appear in court to give evidence, Polanski is seeking to use the English courts for the libel action, which Vanity Fair's publishers Conde Nast are contesting.
Ordinary folks would have to appear in court in a lawsuit, but there seems to be a special exception here to prevent Polanski from being brought to justice.
The sick bastard entered a guilty plea to drugging and raping a 12-year-old in 1977, only to flea to France prior to sentencing. Because he is a French citizen, he cannot be extradited from France under French law.
And by the way, what did he do upon reaching France? He soon began a relationship with actress Nastasia Kinski -- who was 15 at the time.
Posted by: Greg at
01:57 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 251 words, total size 2 kb.
Royal Wedding II
Well, it is finally going to happen. Prince Charles will finally marry Camilla Parker-Bowles.
Let’s be honest – it is about time. Diana has been dead for years, and Parker-Bowles is long divorced with no possibility of reconciliation. Better the two simply make official that which has been openly acknowledged for years.
My one criticism is the decision is not that Camilla is divorced and her husband is still alive. Rather, I am amused by the hypocrisy that anyone in Anglican circles would be troubled by the situation, given that the Church of England traces its roots to Henry VIII's need to give himself a divorce from Catherine of Aragon.
The Prince of Wales is to marry Camilla Parker Bowles, it was announced by Clarence House today.
The Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker Bowles will marry on Friday April 8, at Windsor Castle.
Mrs Parker Bowles will use the title HRH the Duchess of Cornwall after marriage.
When Charles becomes King, Camilla will not be known as Queen Camilla but as the Princess Consort.
The move will end years of speculation about a relationship which has spanned decades.
Let’s be honest – it is about time. Diana has been dead for years, and Parker-Bowles is long divorced with no possibility of reconciliation. Better the two simply make official that which has been openly acknowledged for years.
My one criticism is the decision is not that Camilla is divorced and her husband is still alive. Rather, I am amused by the hypocrisy that anyone in Anglican circles would be troubled by the situation, given that the Church of England traces its roots to Henry VIII's need to give himself a divorce from Catherine of Aragon.
Posted by: Greg at
01:44 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 195 words, total size 1 kb.
Is This Justice?
IÂ’m not sure that it is. Speaking as a man, I find the nature of the assault pretty appalling.
Seems to me that a man convicted of attacking a woman who rejected his advances would have faced more serious charges and a longer term in jail. Especially if he ripped of a body part – say a breast – as part of the attack. What do you think?
A jilted woman who ripped off her ex-lover's testicle with her bare hands was jailed for two-and-a-half years today.
Amanda Monti, 24, flew into a rage when 37-year-old Geoffrey Jones rejected her advances at the end of a drunken house party.
She yanked off his left testicle and tried to swallow it, Liverpool Crown Court heard.
But Monti choked and spat it out before a friend handed it back to Mr Jones with the words: "That's yours."
In a statement read to the court, Mr Jones said: "Amanda attacked me in an unprovoked manner and the attack has ruined my life."
Seems to me that a man convicted of attacking a woman who rejected his advances would have faced more serious charges and a longer term in jail. Especially if he ripped of a body part – say a breast – as part of the attack. What do you think?
Posted by: Greg at
01:41 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 175 words, total size 1 kb.
February 09, 2005
Condi For President
Dick Morris wrote an interesting commentary on why the GOP needs a “Draft Condi” movement for 2008.
I agree. As I look at the field as it stands today, it appears that the Democrats will be running Hillary Clinton. After all, what other candidate do they have of her stature and popularity. On the other hand, the GOP has a field of candidates who in all likelihood cannot emerge from the shadow of George W. Bush as he works to complete his legacy. Cheney is out. Frist lacks the appeal, and Rudy stands at odds with the conservative base on social (and personal) issues. More troubling is the lack of a frontrunner.
And then there is Dr. Condoleezza Rice. Attractive, well-spoken, charismatic, intellectual, and a self-made woman, Rice has risen from her start as a Southern black child during the waning days of Jim Crow to a position that would have appeared unattainable by a black woman at the time of her birth a half century ago. She would stand in sharp contrast to Hillary Clinton, who started in the wealthy suburbs of Chicago, married an up-and-coming Bill Clinton, and rode his coattails to power. Rice worked to get to the top, while Hillary got there by virtue of her husband.
What factors does Morris see as helping Dr. Rice in any presidential bid? She is a key part of the team that developed and implemented the Bush policies in the War on Terror. She has academic credentials that she has the intellectual strengths that the Left has argued Bush lacks. Rice’s conservative credentials and strong religious background will make her appealing to the core constituency of the GOP. The symbolism of her candidacy and election would be a capstone on the battle for inclusion of minorities in the public life of the nation. And she appeals to certain demographic groups -- African-Americans, Hispanics and single white women – that formed the core of the recent Democrat coalitions, thereby making it more difficult for any Democrat, including Hillary, to garner enough votes to win the presidency.
In short, Condoleezza Rice appears to be the best choice for the GOP in 2008. However, she has shown no public interest in a run for elective office. It may be that what is needed is a grass-roots campaign to persuade our new Secretary of State to toss her hat into the ring. And as one who doesnÂ’t see any other candidate out there who appeals to me, IÂ’m more than willing to throw my support to her right now.
Of course, she isn’t running — nor is there any indication that she is harboring thoughts of a candidacy. But as her visibility increases, so will her viability. It may just be possible to draft Condi into the race. A real presidential draft movement hasn’t happened since 1952, when Republicans urged Eisenhower to get into the race. A draft-Condi movement seems almost antiquated in this era of ambitious and self-promoting candidates, but it may well fill a deep need in the electorate to vote for someone who is running in response to a genuine call of the people.
Condi Rice is a work in progress. Her rise has been impelled by her merits and achievements rather than any efforts on her part to curry favor in the media. She is still working and still progressing. But keep your eye on this political star. It is rising and may one day be ascendant.
I agree. As I look at the field as it stands today, it appears that the Democrats will be running Hillary Clinton. After all, what other candidate do they have of her stature and popularity. On the other hand, the GOP has a field of candidates who in all likelihood cannot emerge from the shadow of George W. Bush as he works to complete his legacy. Cheney is out. Frist lacks the appeal, and Rudy stands at odds with the conservative base on social (and personal) issues. More troubling is the lack of a frontrunner.
And then there is Dr. Condoleezza Rice. Attractive, well-spoken, charismatic, intellectual, and a self-made woman, Rice has risen from her start as a Southern black child during the waning days of Jim Crow to a position that would have appeared unattainable by a black woman at the time of her birth a half century ago. She would stand in sharp contrast to Hillary Clinton, who started in the wealthy suburbs of Chicago, married an up-and-coming Bill Clinton, and rode his coattails to power. Rice worked to get to the top, while Hillary got there by virtue of her husband.
What factors does Morris see as helping Dr. Rice in any presidential bid? She is a key part of the team that developed and implemented the Bush policies in the War on Terror. She has academic credentials that she has the intellectual strengths that the Left has argued Bush lacks. Rice’s conservative credentials and strong religious background will make her appealing to the core constituency of the GOP. The symbolism of her candidacy and election would be a capstone on the battle for inclusion of minorities in the public life of the nation. And she appeals to certain demographic groups -- African-Americans, Hispanics and single white women – that formed the core of the recent Democrat coalitions, thereby making it more difficult for any Democrat, including Hillary, to garner enough votes to win the presidency.
In short, Condoleezza Rice appears to be the best choice for the GOP in 2008. However, she has shown no public interest in a run for elective office. It may be that what is needed is a grass-roots campaign to persuade our new Secretary of State to toss her hat into the ring. And as one who doesnÂ’t see any other candidate out there who appeals to me, IÂ’m more than willing to throw my support to her right now.
Posted by: Greg at
11:26 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 584 words, total size 4 kb.
Democrat Dayton Done In 2006
He cloed down his Senate office because of fears of terrorism. He disgraced himself during the debate over the confirmation of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. And now he is a lame duck -- Senator Mark Dayton of Minnesota has announced he will not seek reelection to a second term in 2006.
Republicans need to move quickly to find a strong candidate to run for Dayton's seat. Names currently mentioned include Congressmen Gil Gutknecht and Mark Kennedy, as well as former Senator Rod Grams.
Heck, maybe the blogging world can spice things up. How about Lileks, King from SCSU Scholars, or one of the crew from Powerline? Come on, boys, here's your chance to turn blogging into the new frontier of American politics!
Dayton said it has been a "tremendous honor" to serve the people of Minnesota for the past four years. However, he said he did not believe he was the best candidate to keep the seat in the hands of the Democrats.
"Everything I've worked for and everything I believe in depends upon this Senate seat remaining in the Democratic caucus in 2007. I do not believe that I am the best candidate to lead the DFL party to victory next year."
Fundraising was also a factor in the decision.
"I cannot stand to do the constant fundraising necessary to wage a successful campaign," Dayton said. "And I cannot be an effective senator while also being a nearly full-time candidate. Plus, I choose to devote all of my time and energy to the job Minnesotans elected me to do."
In 2000, Sen. Dayton contributed nearly $12 million dollars of his own money to his campaign.
Last month, the Associated Press reported Dayton raised $1.35 million last year, topping his goal of $1 million. However, he finished the year with only $177,000 in the bank.
Republicans need to move quickly to find a strong candidate to run for Dayton's seat. Names currently mentioned include Congressmen Gil Gutknecht and Mark Kennedy, as well as former Senator Rod Grams.
Heck, maybe the blogging world can spice things up. How about Lileks, King from SCSU Scholars, or one of the crew from Powerline? Come on, boys, here's your chance to turn blogging into the new frontier of American politics!
Posted by: Greg at
11:14 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 316 words, total size 2 kb.
The Crime Of Blogging in Iran
So, you think the United States is descending towards fascism and that freedom of speech is gone? You think that Bush is a warmonger who wants to attack other countries under the pretext of promoting freedom? Why donÂ’t you read this story about one bloggerÂ’s plight in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
After three days in prison without being informed of the charges against her, she finally faced an interrogator.
So the next time you read Kos, Atrios, Oliver Willis, John Aravosis or some other liberal blogger going on about the oppressive nature of the “BusHitler Regime”, point them to this article and suggest that their wild fantasies of tyranny and oppression are nothing next to the reality faced by those who are critical of a truly oppressive government.
After three days in prison without being informed of the charges against her, she finally faced an interrogator.
The next day, I was taken to a room down a long corridor and told to sit down. A fat hand with an agate stone ring set an interrogation form in front of me. Then he began asking about my Web log, which has hyperlinks on it to Western feminist groups.
"Do you accept the charges?" the interrogator asked.
"What charges?"
"That you have written things in your Web log that go against the Islamic system and that encourage people to topple the system," he said. "You are inviting corrupt American liberalism to rule Iran."
"I've tried to write my ideas and opinions in my Web log and to communicate with others in Farsi all over the world," I said.
He was displeased.
"These answers will lead us nowhere, and you will stay here for years. Tell us the truth. How much have you received to write these offenses against the Islamic state? How are you and your fellow Web loggers organized?"
How should I respond? I knew my mother must be terribly worried about me. What could I say to make sure I got out?
"We are not organized against the state," I said. "I write because I want to criticize the system. There are some things in our state that should be corrected." "Why don't you write an e-mail directly to the supreme leader's office?" he asked. "The supreme leader considers all criticisms and takes corrective actions."
"I hadn't thought about that," I said. This was nonsense, of course, but I saw an opening. "From now on, I will write directly to the supreme leader and stop writing in my Web log."
"It is too late for that," he said.
So the next time you read Kos, Atrios, Oliver Willis, John Aravosis or some other liberal blogger going on about the oppressive nature of the “BusHitler Regime”, point them to this article and suggest that their wild fantasies of tyranny and oppression are nothing next to the reality faced by those who are critical of a truly oppressive government.
Posted by: Greg at
11:11 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 423 words, total size 3 kb.
195kb generated in CPU 0.0244, elapsed 0.4872 seconds.
56 queries taking 0.4696 seconds, 238 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
56 queries taking 0.4696 seconds, 238 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
