March 31, 2005

Rebel Without A Clue

On Good Friday, Christian Legal Society members at Penn State Law School hide plastic eggs around campus, filled with candy and Gospel messages. This year, they found out someone beat them to it. The unknown culprit hid eggs with blasphemous cartoons inside depicting Jesus questioning his sexuality and calling God an “asshole”.

In a striking stand for the First Amendment, the group did not seek to have the perpetrator punished by the school. Instead, they held a forum to discuss the First Amendment implications of rules and laws against hate speech. Good for them.

The perpetrator finally came forward on Tuesday. He is George Black, a second-year Penn Law student. What does he say about the incident? He calls it a parody, and claims that he was trying to communicate message. The message?


“It's just annoying to me to have these fundamentalist ideas pushed down my throat," Black said in an interview. "It's interference with my education."

Black said he had attempted to voice his opinions through Law School listservs and announcement systems but was not permitted because he did not represent an official student group.


So Black was angry that he is having “fundamentalist ideas pushed down [his] throat.” I’m curious – how are they being pushed down his throat? Are group members tackling and forcing their materials down his throat? Are they hiding their materials in his food, forcing him to consume their literature unaware? Or are they merely engaging in free speech that he dislikes and wants stopped – something they clearly were not interested in doing with his much more offensive speech.

Yesterday, the CLS hosted a discussion about campus free speech led by David French, president of the Philadelphia-based Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, in response to the egg incident. Gebelin said she hoped to foster an open dialogue about Christianity at the Law School. FIRE is an organization that was co-founded by professor Alan Kors in response to a free-speech incident on Penn's campus in 1993.

"If [Black is] interested in having a free exchange, let it be," Gebelin said. "We don't like what he did, [but] we wouldn't want him to be censored."


In other words, they defend Black’s right to speak, even as he uses that right to spew insults their direction and to engage in speech that could reasonably called blasphemy. If he had tried that sort of tactic to mock Muhammad, he would probably have already been banned from the campus for his own safety following the issuance of a fatwa calling for his murder. It seems to me that the CLS has taken a principled stand in trying to create a dialogue, rather than silence their opponent – which seems to be what Black wanted all along. And even after being defended by those he clearly hates, Black doesn’t get it.

Black, however, said the CLS's reaction has been too harsh.

"I thought it was funny," Black said. "I thought it'd be considered offensive, but I didn't think that people would have a stick up their ass about it."


Actually, the thing they have a “stick up their ass about” is freedom of speech, and the tendency in too many public settings to try to limit that speech, at best, to the bland and inoffensive, or, at worst, to the radical polemic of the Left.

(Hat Tip: The Torch)

Posted by: Greg at 10:59 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 565 words, total size 4 kb.

Stop This Prudish Farce

Some people are simply artistic Philistines. Take this case in Indiana.


The Venus de Milo had better wear a top and Michelangelo's David should put on some pants if they're going to be seen at a yard art business.

Bartholomew County officials told the business near Interstate 65 that it must move cement copies of the classical statues — and about 10 others — out of public view because they are obscene under Indiana law.

"It's not fair to point out our business, and personally, I don't find them offensive," Ginger Streeval, a co-owner of White River Truck Repair and Yard Art, told the Daily Journal of Franklin for a story Wednesday.

Frank Butler, the county's zoning inspector, disagreed.

"They have nudity ... and that should not be in the view of a minor," he said.
Indiana's obscenity law prohibits the display of nudity where children might see it, he said.

The law also stipulates that such material is harmful for minors if, "considered as a whole, it lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors."


IÂ’m left speechless by this idiocy.

Posted by: Greg at 10:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 192 words, total size 1 kb.

Muslims Defile Temple Mount

When will Sharon seize control of this holy site from the Muslim barbarians who control it and sweep it clear of the latest defilement by the Ishmaelite horde – and those that they have perpetrated over the centuries?



A carved half-meter tall inscription of the word “Allah” in Arabic was discovered on the Temple Mount’s Eastern Wall, which police suspected had been made by Palestinians construction workers.

The laborers had been doing maitenance work on the wall in recent days.

“This breaks the Antiquities Law; these people are supposed to renovate and fix the wall, not commemorate names (on it), and certainly not names that are irrelevant," Eilat Mazar, a spokesman for the Committee to Prevent the Destruction of Antiquities on the Temple Mount, told Ynetnews.

Ten months ago, the committee said the site, holy to to Muslims and Jews, was "lawless" and lacked "archaeological supervision.


The Temple Mount is sacred to Jews, Christians, and Muslims, but great restrictions have been placed on access to all except Muslims. A Muslim group controls Temple Mount, and has destroyed numerous antiquities while failing to keep retaining walls and other non-Islamic structures in good repair. The time has come for Israel to act, to preserve the religious heritage of both Judaism and Christianity – and those of Islam as well.

Posted by: Greg at 10:51 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 2 kb.

What’s Wrong With This Story About Homeless Vets?

Sometimes stories are written with a slant so dishonest that you just have to be appalled. Take this lead from a story on homeless veterans that appeared in the Detroit News.
Everywhere he looks these days, Ron Johnson sees yellow ribbons bearing the words "Support Our Troops." And every time he sees them, he wonders which troops they refer to.

Johnson, a U.S. Army veteran who has been homeless since losing his job just before Presidents Day, has come to believe that concern for soldiers stops as soon as they're discharged.

"It's fake," said the 53-year-old. "As soon as you're out of the service, you're automatically zero."

Advocates for Metro Detroit's homeless say the number of homeless veterans who, like Johnson, are seeking assistance, is on the rise. The state's largest assistance center for former soldiers reported a 36-percent increase in veterans seeking homeless assistance since last year. Nonprofit groups in Wayne and Macomb counties also reported significant increases.


Sounds awful.. This poor guy, just discharged, is out on the streets after being used and abused by the evil US military. How can you not be outraged? I know I was – right up to the point that I got to this part of the article.

While some veterans recently returned from Iraq and Afghanistan have appeared at area shelters, most are veterans who have been out of the service or the reserves for several years.

Of the 323 veterans who received transitional housing through the Michigan Veterans Foundation, 54 percent were age 31 to 50 and another 39 percent were 51 to 61. Many are not combat veterans.

At 54, Herman Abila recently found himself in need of housing assistance. From 1980 to 1983, he was in the U.S. Army, stationed in places like Colorado and Germany.

"I enlisted because it was a regular job," said Abila, who was a sergeant when discharged and was a member of the U.S. Army Reserve through 1993. "The only thing you have to do to keep the job is keep your nose clean."

Abila was a mechanic until a workplace accident shattered his right elbow. After three surgeries and physical therapy, finding steady work became difficult.

Two weeks ago, his temp job dried up, leaving him with only his disability check.
"I was staying in a motel room but it was eating up my check," he said. With nowhere else to go, Abila turned to Veteran's Haven, which is providing him with temporary housing.


The problem is not with current soldiers returning from combat and being turned out on the streets by an uncaring country. These are older guys, who served in a peacetime military, who are facing hard times as the Rust Belt economy of the state of Michigan flounders. Mr. Abila is not homeless because the government turned its back on him – he is homeless because of an on-the-job injury that limited his employability. Look at the dates. He hasn’t been a reservist since the first year of the Clinton administration – and when Abila was last on active duty, Demi Moore thought it was cool to date a 27-year-old because he would be an older man.

In other words, they are not playing straight with us here. There may be a problem here, but it isn’t what they are telling us.

Posted by: Greg at 10:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 561 words, total size 4 kb.

WhatÂ’s Wrong With This Story About Homeless Vets?


Sometimes stories are written with a slant so dishonest that you just have to be appalled. Take this lead from a story on homeless veterans that appeared in the Detroit News.
Everywhere he looks these days, Ron Johnson sees yellow ribbons bearing the words "Support Our Troops." And every time he sees them, he wonders which troops they refer to.

Johnson, a U.S. Army veteran who has been homeless since losing his job just before Presidents Day, has come to believe that concern for soldiers stops as soon as they're discharged.

"It's fake," said the 53-year-old. "As soon as you're out of the service, you're automatically zero."

Advocates for Metro Detroit's homeless say the number of homeless veterans who, like Johnson, are seeking assistance, is on the rise. The state's largest assistance center for former soldiers reported a 36-percent increase in veterans seeking homeless assistance since last year. Nonprofit groups in Wayne and Macomb counties also reported significant increases.


Sounds awful.. This poor guy, just discharged, is out on the streets after being used and abused by the evil US military. How can you not be outraged? I know I was – right up to the point that I got to this part of the article.

While some veterans recently returned from Iraq and Afghanistan have appeared at area shelters, most are veterans who have been out of the service or the reserves for several years.

Of the 323 veterans who received transitional housing through the Michigan Veterans Foundation, 54 percent were age 31 to 50 and another 39 percent were 51 to 61. Many are not combat veterans.

At 54, Herman Abila recently found himself in need of housing assistance. From 1980 to 1983, he was in the U.S. Army, stationed in places like Colorado and Germany.

"I enlisted because it was a regular job," said Abila, who was a sergeant when discharged and was a member of the U.S. Army Reserve through 1993. "The only thing you have to do to keep the job is keep your nose clean."

Abila was a mechanic until a workplace accident shattered his right elbow. After three surgeries and physical therapy, finding steady work became difficult.

Two weeks ago, his temp job dried up, leaving him with only his disability check.
"I was staying in a motel room but it was eating up my check," he said. With nowhere else to go, Abila turned to Veteran's Haven, which is providing him with temporary housing.


The problem is not with current soldiers returning from combat and being turned out on the streets by an uncaring country. These are older guys, who served in a peacetime military, who are facing hard times as the Rust Belt economy of the state of Michigan flounders. Mr. Abila is not homeless because the government turned its back on him – he is homeless because of an on-the-job injury that limited his employability. Look at the dates. He hasn’t been a reservist since the first year of the Clinton administration – and when Abila was last on active duty, Demi Moore thought it was cool to date a 27-year-old because he would be an older man.

In other words, they are not playing straight with us here. There may be a problem here, but it isnÂ’t what they are telling us.

Posted by: Greg at 10:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 569 words, total size 4 kb.

Hey! You! Outta The Gene Pool!

Gotta love this story, in a sick sort of way. How stupid can someone be?

A teenage gangster has become the first victim of a craze for miniature "designer" guns disguised as key fobs.

Fabian Flowers, 19, a member of Manchester's Longsight Crew, is believed to have shot himself in the head while trying to test the weapon's apparently faulty firing mechanism.

Friends who were with him immediately fled the lap-dancing club where the test firing took place.

The tiny gun - just over 4ins long and with a barrel extending a mere 1½ ins - has never been recovered.

Dozens of similar weapons have been smuggled into Britain from Bulgaria in the past 18 months. They are sold initially as novelty flare guns but then modified by criminals to fire twin .25 bullets.

The weapons, which change hands for several hundred pounds, are notoriously unstable and lack accuracy. However, at point-blank range they are lethal.


Yeah, that’s right – little keychain guns that don’t look like guns. Here’s what seems to have happened.

On Feb 23 last year a group of youths, including some members of the Longsight Crew, were at the High Society club in Stockport.

At some point in the evening Flowers went to the lavatory with some of his friends. Police sources suggest someone had recently borrowed the key fob gun and was returning it.

An inquest yesterday heard that Flowers's final words to his friends were: "I'm going to put it to the test - watch."

One friend said: "He put it to his head and I heard a bang. I got the impression that he thought the safety catch was on and it was perfectly safe."

The gangster died from a single wound to the head. Police initially suspected he had been the victim of a gangland killing but became convinced that he had died at his own hand.

LetÂ’s just call that one a case of Darwin in action.

Posted by: Greg at 10:44 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 338 words, total size 2 kb.

Isn’t This Swell Of NYC?

You’ll have to excuse me. I was under the strange impression that the same First Amendment that applies here in Texas also applied up north in New York. What is this stuff about the city “agreeing” to allow freedom of speech on a public sidewalk? I thought that matter was settled law.

NEW YORK — The city has agreed that First Amendment activities including leafleting, petition-gathering, picketing and holding press conferences can occur on public sidewalks in front of schools, a civil rights lawyer said yesterday.

The agreement between the city and lawyers for the New York Civil Liberties Union was approved March 16 by a federal judge who was scheduled to preside at a trial over a 2003 lawsuit brought by a youth advocacy organization, the Ya-Ya Network, said Christopher Dunn, the NYCLU’s associate legal director.

The lawsuit was brought after students working with the group alleged they were threatened with arrest outside schools for handing out literature telling other students about their rights to keep personal information from military recruiters.
The NYCLU said it was “essential” for such student activities to be allowed to occur outside schools.


Now I will concede that I don’t like the group that is making use of the very rights that the military defends, but we even have to allow losers like these the freedoms that are the birthright of all Americans. And if, as the Supreme Court ruled in Tinker v. DesMoines, students do not shed their freedoms at the schoolhouse gate, how can anyone argue that they lack those freedoms before they set foot on campus?

It is cases like these that keep me from issuing a blanket condemnation of the ACLU and its affiliates. They do, in many cases, get it right when it comes to basic civil liberties.

Posted by: Greg at 10:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 304 words, total size 2 kb.

IsnÂ’t This Swell Of NYC?

You’ll have to excuse me. I was under the strange impression that the same First Amendment that applies here in Texas also applied up north in New York. What is this stuff about the city “agreeing” to allow freedom of speech on a public sidewalk? I thought that matter was settled law.

NEW YORK — The city has agreed that First Amendment activities including leafleting, petition-gathering, picketing and holding press conferences can occur on public sidewalks in front of schools, a civil rights lawyer said yesterday.

The agreement between the city and lawyers for the New York Civil Liberties Union was approved March 16 by a federal judge who was scheduled to preside at a trial over a 2003 lawsuit brought by a youth advocacy organization, the Ya-Ya Network, said Christopher Dunn, the NYCLUÂ’s associate legal director.

The lawsuit was brought after students working with the group alleged they were threatened with arrest outside schools for handing out literature telling other students about their rights to keep personal information from military recruiters.
The NYCLU said it was “essential” for such student activities to be allowed to occur outside schools.


Now I will concede that I donÂ’t like the group that is making use of the very rights that the military defends, but we even have to allow losers like these the freedoms that are the birthright of all Americans. And if, as the Supreme Court ruled in Tinker v. DesMoines, students do not shed their freedoms at the schoolhouse gate, how can anyone argue that they lack those freedoms before they set foot on campus?

It is cases like these that keep me from issuing a blanket condemnation of the ACLU and its affiliates. They do, in many cases, get it right when it comes to basic civil liberties.

Posted by: Greg at 10:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 2 kb.

Should We Be Frightened Or Comforted?

After all, shouldnÂ’t we already have operational control of our own borders?

The U.S. Border Patrol will more than double its fleet of helicopters and airplanes and bring 534 agents to the Arizona border this summer, in an effort to gain "operational control" of the border at this, its most vulnerable point, said U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Robert C. Bonner.

The term was pounded home; Bonner used the phrase "operational control" four times during an hour-long press conference Wednesday to announce this latest federal roll-out to control the Arizona line with Mexico. He also spoke of living in a "post-9/11 era," and "terrorism" as well as "not overnight" and "cost."

Bonner also answered questions that were previously not answered by federal officials. He said nationally, about 300,000 to 400,000 people manage to successfully enter the country illegally each year. He also said that the latest border control effort, the Arizona Border Control Initiative Phase II, will help protect the United States against terrorism, though nobody has been arrested coming in from Mexico on terror-related charges.

"Look, the reason we have to get control along the borders of our country is because we have an enemy that is bound and determined to attack us, and that's al-Qaida and its associated terrorist organizations," he said.

"We will shut down - and I mean shut down - the West Desert Corridor," Bonner said. "We will gain control Â… of what is the weakest part of the border with Mexico." The West Desert comprises the Tohono O'odham Indian Reservation and Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument. It's a sore point for illegal entry and was the focus of the Border Patrol's efforts last year during the first Arizona Border Control Initiative.

The plan this year is to control that area, then turn attention to Cochise and Yuma counties.

Gaining operational control of the border can't happen overnight, Bonner said, but will happen over time.


This is great – they are doing something. But it is years to late and not nearly enough.

Posted by: Greg at 10:32 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 351 words, total size 2 kb.

March 30, 2005

Two Blows Against Racism In Government Employment

We've seen two jury verdicts today ripping governemnt employers who use race as a deciding factor in hiring, firing, and promotion. One case comes from New Orleans, the other from Milwaukee.

The New Orleans case involves the mass firing of employees in the district attorney's office. Upon taking office in 2003, DA Eddie Jordan fired 53 of 77 non-lawyers in the office and hired black replacements.

Under U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval's instructions, jurors had to find Jordan liable if they concluded the firings were racially motivated. Jordan has acknowledged he wanted to make the office more reflective of the city's racial makeup, but he denied he fired whites just because they are white. In fact, he said, he did not know the race of the people fired.

The law bars the mass firing of a specific group, even if the intent is to create diversity.

Both sides agree on the facts of the unusual case: eight days into his term, Jordan fired 53 of 77 white workers who were not lawyers — investigators, clerks, child-support enforcement workers — and replaced them with blacks. Some seven out of 10 whites were fired, to be replaced by blacks.

Months later, 44 of the whites sued him, and the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission later made a preliminary finding that Jordan had been racially biased. One of the plaintiffs eventually dropped out of the suit.

But Jordan has insisted that he paid no attention to the race of his support staff. He has portrayed himself as more focused on the legal staff than the support staff — keeping, he pointed out, 56 white assistant district attorneys.

Jordan and a top deputy who testified have admitted that experience wasn't necessarily their top consideration. Instead, they have made it plain they were looking to populate the office with loyalists.

The whites' lawyers concentrated on showing that many of those who were fired had far more experience and scored higher in job interviews than blacks who were either hired anew or kept on.


Could you imagine the outcry if, in an agency where minorities are over-represented based upon their share of the population (say the EEOC), there were a mass firing of minorities so that whites could be fired to reflect the ethnic makeup of the country? No administrator would even consider such a move, nor should they. Why, then, did Jordan think he could get away with what is clearly the explicit use of racial criteria as the deciding factor in employment?

And then there is the Milwaukee case. A jury determined that 17 white officers were discriminated against a cummulative total of 144 times in the selection of minority candidates for positions as police captains by former Chief Arthur Jones.

Jones said he was disappointed by the verdict.

"I believe that it is a blow to diversification, and I think that's very important to a municipal police department, especially here in Milwaukee," he said.

Jones also defended his record, saying that his promotions included four white females, three black females, two black males, two Hispanic males and one male Pacific Islander with an "understanding" that more than half his 41 promotions to captain were white men.

"I think the numbers speak for themselves," Jones said. "I don't see where any discrimination against white males took place."

Each of the 17 plaintiffs asked for $300,000, an immediate promotion to captain if applicable - two are now captains, two others are retired - and other punitive damages in the initial lawsuit. Testimony in the damages trial is expected to take three days, Curran said, then, the same jury will deliberate over what each plaintiff deserves.

During the trial, Rettko methodically explored how promotions to captain occurred under Jones' leadership.

Under Jones, as under other Milwaukee police chiefs, a candidate for a captaincy was nominated by the chief, then sent to the Fire and Police Commission for approval. The commission rarely levies criticism of a candidate - only one of Jones' nominations received a single negative vote - but the commission sees only one candidate at a time. Several commissioners testified that their roles were to make sure the chief's nominations were qualified to do the job, not to weigh them against other potential nominees. In his testimony, Jones admitted that he picked his nominees mostly by his personal evaluations of their skills, without consulting résumés, personnel evaluations or the men's permanent records in the Milwaukee Police Department.

Rettko sent each of his plaintiffs to the stand to discuss his credentials at length and his thoughts about how those who were promoted compared. Often times, the comparison favored the 17 plaintiffs, which Rettko underscored by repeating that everyone Jones promoted to captain after less than two years in a lieutenant's job was not a white male.


Incredible. Skin-color and genitalia were mor eimportant than qualifications in promotion to senior positions in the police department. makes you feel safe from criminals, doesn't it.

And the worst part is that it will be the taxpayers, not the guilty parties, who will end up paying for the malfeasance in office on the part of these racial bigots.

Posted by: Greg at 04:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 872 words, total size 6 kb.

Maybe It WILL Make You Go Blind!

We all have heard the old wive's tale (old spouse-of-indeterminate-gender's tale, for those from Massachusetts) about a the bad effects of various forms of sex -- everything from hairy palms to insanity. One of my favorite ones's was "It will make you go blind!"

Well, check out this study on Viagra, if you can see the screen.

In a new study, US researchers describe seven patients who developed nonarteritic ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), an eye problem that can result in permanent vision loss, after taking Viagra (sildenafil) for erection difficulties. Combined with past reports, this study brings the total number of sildenafil-related NAION cases to 14.

"For years, we've known that some men who take Viagra will experience temporary color changes in their vision and see things as blue or green," study co-author Dr. Howard D. Pomeranz, from the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, said in a statement. "NAION is a much more serious condition because it can lead to permanent vision loss."

With the exception of one patient whose symptoms began 24 to 36 hours after using Viagra, the patients developed symptoms within 24 hours of use. In all patients, the initial symptoms were blurred vision and some degree of vision loss. In one patient, both eyes were affected, whereas in the remainder, just one was involved.

All of the patients had one or more heart disease risk factors. High blood pressure was invariably present and most men also had high cholesterol levels. Three patients had preexisting eye problems that may have increased their risk of NAION.

The final vision in the patients' affected eye(s) ranged from perfect vision to only light perception, the investigators note in the Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology.


I guess we'll be seeing lots of executives with trophy wives and seeing eye dogs.

Posted by: Greg at 04:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 311 words, total size 2 kb.

It's Not Like A Democrat Would Change Much

At least that was my thought upon getting this news.


Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., on Wednesday ruled out a run for the Senate in 2006, saying he could better serve his constituents by staying in the House and serving on the Appropriations Committee.

Kennedy has been in Boston caring for his mother, Joan Kennedy, who was hospitalized with a concussion and a broken shoulder after a passer-by found her lying in a street Tuesday.

In a statement, Kennedy did not cite family responsibilities as a reason for his decision, but he and his brother and sister recently took temporary guardianship of his mother to ensure she receives treatment for her alcoholism. Patrick Kennedy was seeking to become her permanent legal guardian.

"I am grateful for the support and encouragement I have received to run for the Senate," he said. "But over the past few days, I have determined that I can make the greatest difference in the lives of Rhode Island families by remaining on the Appropriations Committee in the House of Representatives and fighting for their priorities." The committee controls about a third of the nearly $2.6 trillion federal budget.

Kennedy had been encouraged to run for the Senate against Republican incumbent Sen. Lincoln Chafee, after Rhode Island's other Democratic congressman, Jim Langevin, decided not to seek the Senate seat.


I mean be honest here -- Chafee is practically a Democrat anyway.

And I would like to add that my prayers are with the Kennedy kids and their mother as they deal with Joan Kennedy's situation. She has been such a tormented soul for years.

Posted by: Greg at 04:14 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 282 words, total size 2 kb.

March 29, 2005

Mike Rogers Attempts To Silence Another Blogger

This time he went after Richard Shurbet of LimeShurbet.com, for echoing GayPatriot's earlier post calling Rogers a terrorist for his outing campaign.

Shurbert has a number of posts on the matter up on his site, which was briefly shut down by HostingMatters in response to whining by Rogers. Shurbet also offers this banner for folks who want to protest the misdeeds of Mike Rogers.




I'm not gay, and I have many points upon which I differ with both Shurbet and GayPatriot. That said, I don't approve of the tactics and methods used by Rogers to shut down his political enemies. And yes, I freely admit that I hold a particular grudge against Rogers for his outing of an old family friend, Congressman Ed Schrock, last summer.

Posted by: Greg at 05:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 140 words, total size 1 kb.

Pope Likely To Receive Feeding Tube

It appears the Pope John Paul II is likely to return to the hospital to have a feeding tube inserted into his stomach due to difficulties swallowing.

Pope John Paul II may have to return to the hospital to have a feeding tube inserted, an Italian news agency reported today. It stressed that no decision had been made.

The APcom news agency, citing an unidentified source, said the 84-year-old pope might have to have the tube inserted to improve his nutrition since he is having difficulty swallowing with the breathing tube that was inserted Feb. 24.

APcom said the idea of inserting a feeding tube was a hypothesis that was being considered. The procedure involves inserting a tube into the stomach to allow for artificial feeding.

Earlier today, the Italian daily Corriere della Sera reported that the pope's doctors were considering a new hospitalization next week both to perform tests on the breathing tube and to adjust his diet because of problems swallowing.

There was no comment from the Vatican. Nicola Cerbino, a spokesman at Polyclinic Gemelli hospital where John Paul was rushed twice last month, called it media speculation.

Another newspaper, La Repubblica, quoted the pope's Vatican physician, Dr. Renato Buzzonetti, as saying doctors are "reasonably calm" about the frail pope's condition.


This does not sound unlikely to me, given the problems the Pope has had with speaking and swallowing. Inserting the tube is very much in keeping with Catholic teaching on medical ethics, which does not hold feeding tubess to be extraordinary treatment, but rather views the provision of nutrition and hydration as ordinary care which is mandatory unless it causes medical harm to the patient.

Posted by: Greg at 05:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 290 words, total size 2 kb.

Once Again, Prayers For Falwell

As I said when he was hospotalized some weeks ago, I have a number of points on which I disagree with Rev. Jerry Falwell. That said, my prayers are with him during this new period of critical illness.


The Rev. Jerry Falwell is critically ill but "clinically stable" after being admitted to Lynchburg General Hospital shortly before midnight Monday with respiratory arrest, hospital officials said yesterday.

Falwell, 71, one of the nation's leading religious conservatives, was driven to the hospital by his wife, Macel, after complaining of shortness of breath.

"He lost consciousness just as they got to the hospital," spokesman Ron Godwin said. "He slumped over as they were getting there."

He was immediately placed on a ventilator and quickly stabilized, according to the hospital's statement. Doctors expect more details on his condition today.

A hospital spokesman said physicians are trying to determine if Falwell had a relapse of pneumonia.

Falwell was said to be alert and responding to questions, at times by eye contact or nodding.


May God reach out and touch His son, Jerry, and restore him to health; and may He provide a spirit of peace and comfort to the Falwell family.

Posted by: Greg at 05:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 206 words, total size 2 kb.

Johnnie Cochran -- RIP

I was shocked to hear the news.

Johnnie L. Cochran Jr., the masterful attorney who gained prominence as an early advocate for victims of police abuse, then achieved worldwide fame for successfully defending football star OJ. Simpson on murder charges, died this afternoon. He was 67.

Cochran died at his home in the Los Feliz section of Los Angeles of an inoperable brain tumor, according to his brother-in-law Bill Baker. His wife and his two sisters were with him at the time of his death.


My prayers are, of course, with the Cochran family at this time. Whatever disagreements I had with the man (and they were many), I still feel a touch of sadness at his death.

It is also my hope that the US Supreme Court does not use his death as a reason not to decide the case it heard involving an injunction on free speech against one of his critics. While the injunction died with Mr. Cochran, the issue of a complete ban on speech is too important to allow it to be buried with him.

Posted by: Greg at 04:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.

Muslim Group Seeks To Muzzle Critics Of Islam

CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, is seeking to punish National Review for daring to publicize and promote books critical of Islam.

A Muslim civil rights group is urging the Boeing Company to stop running ads in the conservative National Review magazine. The Council on American-Islamic Relations objects to the National Review's promotion of books that "attack Islam and the Prophet Muhammad." Those books include "The Life and Religion of Mohammed," which, according to the magazine's review, exposes the "ugly truth about the founder of the world's most violent religion"; and "The Sword of the Prophet," which "gives the unvarnished, 'politically incorrect' truth about Islam -- including the shocking facts about its founder, Mohammed; its rise through bloody conquest; its sanctioning of theft, deceit, lust and murder." In a letter to Boeing CEO James A. Bell, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad "respectfully" requested that Boeing "address the concerns of Muslims worldwide by withdrawing its advertising support from a magazine that actively promotes anti-Muslim hate." Awad said a copy of the letter would be sent to ambassadors of Muslim and Arab nations in Washington, D.C. Boeing does business with Arab-owned airlines.


I've got a better idea. In light of certain unpleasantness in the fall of 2001, why don't we demand that Boeing cease doing business with all airlines in the Arab world. Better yet, why not stop doing business with all airlines based in predominantly Muslim countries. And while you are at it, stop selling military technology to those countries, too. At least until followers of Islam stop engaging in anti-American terrorism.

And while we are at it, when will the IRS, DOJ, and Homeland Security conduct a thorough investigation of CAIR, an organization with numerous documented connections to terrorist supporters, terrorist groups, and individual terrorists?

And as for Muhammad, from what I can tell from my reading of the Koran and various historical material drawing upon Islamic sources it sounds to me like the books have characterized him correctly.

UPDATE: I put something in whilte typing and forgot to delete it before posting. I was politely asked to fix it. Due to the extremely nice manner in which I was asked, I removed it.

Posted by: Greg at 04:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 381 words, total size 3 kb.

March 28, 2005

Whose Side Are Presidents Bush And Fox On?

I have to ask that question in loght of recent statements calling the members of the Minuteman Project "vigilantes" and "racist migtant-hunters."

And I have to ask whether they are comfortable with the fact that they are on the same side as these folks in opposing what is little more than a glorified neighborhood watch group?


Members of a violent Central America-based gang have been sent to Arizona to target Minuteman Project volunteers, who will begin a monthlong border vigil this weekend to find and report foreigner sneaking into the United States, project officials say.

James Gilchrist, a Vietnam veteran who helped organize the vigil to protest the federal government's failure to control illegal immigration, said he has been told that California and Texas leaders of Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, have issued orders to teach "a lesson" to the Minuteman volunteers.


Where is the concern about these real vigilantes, gentlemen? You know, the vicious predatory gang-members who are out to injure and kill Americans who just want their nation's laws enforced and their nation's border respected.

The MS-13 gang has established major smuggling operations in several areas along the U.S.-Mexico border and have transported hundreds of Central and South Americans -- including gang members -- into the United States in the past two years. The gang also is involved in drug and weapons smuggling.

Gang members in America have been tied to numerous killings, robberies, burglaries, carjackings, extortion, rapes and aggravated assaults. Authorities said that the gang has earned a reputation from the other street gangs as being particularly ruthless and that it will retaliate violently when challenged.


On the otherhand, the Minutemen are going to great lengths to avoid violence -- not that the public an tell that from the overblown statements comming from the two presidents.

"We're not worried because half of our recruits are retired trained combat soldiers," Mr. Gilchrist said. "And those guys are just a bunch of punks."

More than 1,000 volunteers are expected to take part in the Minuteman vigil, which will include civilian patrols along a 20-mile section of the San Pedro River Valley, which has become a frequent entry point to the United States for foreigner headed north.

About 40 percent of the 1.15 million foreign nationals caught last year by the U.S. Border Patrol trying to gain illegal entry to the United States were apprehended along a 260-mile stretch of the Arizona border here known as the Tucson sector.

Many of the Minuteman volunteers are expected to be armed, although organizers of the border vigil have prohibited them from carrying rifles. Only those people with a license to carry a handgun will be allowed to do so, Mr. Gilchrist said.

An operational plan calls for teams of four to eight volunteers to be deployed along the targeted 20-mile stretch of border at intervals of 200 to 300 yards, along with observation posts and a command center.

Mr. Gilchrist said some of the patrols and posts will be right on the U.S.-Mexico border, while others will be located farther north. The volunteers also have been told to "make lots of noise and burn campfires at night to be very visible."

According to guidelines issued to the volunteers earlier this month, organizers said they expect that they will be targeted by various protest groups and others and that some protesters would try to provoke confrontations.

"If we are to send the message loud and clear to President Bush and Congress, it is imperative we stay within the law," Mr. Gilchrist said.

"If one single person steps over the line for their personal gratification, we are all stained with that irresponsible behavior and labeled forever as a fringe element that embarrasses all who are counting on us to make this historic statement," he said.


In other words, the Minutemen are taking precaustions to avoid violence, while these street-thugs and the usual band of left-wing malcontents are outstop them from engaging in legal activity. And yet somehow the two presidents see the Minutemen as the bad guys in all this, and are united in their opposition to their lawful activities.

Sadly, someone is likely to die during the month of April along the Arizona/Mexico border. Even more sadly, it might be one of the Minutemen, folks out there trying to do the right thing for their country. And the blame will belong on the shoulders of two presidents who have done little to stop the flow of border-jumpers into this country, and have defamed those who think they should.

Posted by: Greg at 05:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 770 words, total size 5 kb.

War On Foie Gras?

You can abort a baby until birth. You can starve a family member to death. But if legislators in Oregon, New York, Illinois and Massachusetts get their way, it will be illegal to possess foie gras. Laws on the books will already ban the food in 2012 if the industry cannot prove its practices humane.


At issue: the force feeding technique used to produce fattened duck liver.

For the final two weeks of their lives, a stainless steel tube is inserted into the throat of waterfowl twice a day and a measured amount of partially cooked corn is pumped down the esophagus. The technique packs on the pounds quickly, creating a fatty liver.

Some say the protesters -- and now legislators -- are clueless, and scoff at the idea that birds whose livers alone are worth $75 a pound are mistreated.


Now I don't eat the stuff -- it is too expensive and sounds nauseating. Maybe it is just a matter of my having a pedestrian palate. I mean, I have no interest in sushi, either. And my consumptionof veal is rare because of the price tag, not because of any concern about the conditions in which the calves are raised. We are, after all, talking about animals. But others disagree with me.

But Gene Bauston, co-founder of the animal rights group Farm Sanctuary, says the pictures and videos of foie gras farms show force-feeding is a "cruel and unnecessary practice" that should not be legal.

"There are certain things that are beyond the bounds of acceptable," Bauston said.


Yeah, there are, Mr. Bauston, and the force feeding of ducks doesn't even cause a blip on the moral radear-screen for me. How can your moral compass be so out of whack that you would spend one minute on this misguided crusade of yours?

Genocide in the Sudan.

The horrors of abortion.

The starvation of Terry Schiavo.

Those are things that are beyond the bounds of acceptable.

So while I don't like how the ducks are treated and would never consume foie gras myself, I won't be joining your campaign.

But don't call me pro-cruelty-to-animals.

Call me pro-choice.

Posted by: Greg at 04:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 365 words, total size 2 kb.

The Silencing Of A Blogger

I didn't agree with GayPatriot on many things, and only wandered on to his website from time to time as a way of seeing what a different type of Republican thought about current issues. Last week, he made a post that may have been ill-advised, referring to two prominent homosexual activists as terrorists due to their outing campaign against Republican homosexuals and their staffers (both are partisan Democrats who conspicuously protect homosexual Democrats and their staffers).

Within hours, the post was gone and GayPatriot disassociated himself from his own site, which he turned over to heis blog-partner, GayPatriotWest.

For the full story, which I will not recount here (because Christian Grantham does a better job than I would), go to this link at Outlet Radio Network. Suffice it to say that one of those he criticized began harrassing GayPatriot, his secretary, and his boss, threatening a national boycott of GayPatriot's corporate employer.

And these people claim they are all about freedom -- I guess that is only the freedom to agree with them.

(Hat Tip: The Central Front)

Posted by: Greg at 03:59 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.

You Can't Argue With Some People

I had a conversation recently about the Schiavo case. It went something like this.

"I can't believe how disgusting all you conservatives are! How can you people believe that this is right? The stuff that you and that woman's family are puttingher and her poor husband through! You should all be ashamed. It's just wrong."

"Well,y--"

"Stop it! Don't say another word! You people are just sick!"

Needless to say, it was over at that point. No place for discussion, debate, or rational presentation of views in any of it. Just a set of exclamations and declarative sentences, and a command that I not even attempt to speak a word on behalf of those who might oppose Michael Shciavo's decision.

Sadly, that is reflective of the state of public dialogue today. Pat Sajak comments on that phenomenon in a column in Human Events.

Recently, for example, I was discussing the United Sates Supreme Court with one of my many Liberal friends out in Los Angeles when she said, without any discernable embarrassment, that Justice Anton Scalia was “worse than Hitler.” Realizing she wasn’t alive during World War II and perhaps she may have been absent on those days when her schoolmates were studying Nazism, I reminded her of some of Hitler’s more egregious crimes against humanity, suggesting she may have overstated the case. She had not; Scalia was worse. As I often did when my parents threatened to send me to my room, I let the conversation die.

Aside from being rhetorically hysterical -- and demeaning to the memory of those who suffered so terribly as a result of Hitler and the Nazis -- it served to remind me of how difficult it is to have serious discussions about politics or social issues with committed members of the Left. They tend to do things like accusing members of the Right of sowing the seeds of hatred while, at the same time, comparing them to mass murderers. And they do this while completely missing the irony.

The moral superiority they bring to the table allows them to alter the playing field and the rules in their favor. They can say and do things the other side can’t because, after all, they have the greater good on their side. If a Conservative -- one of the bad guys -- complains about the content of music, films or television shows aimed at children, he is being a prude who wants to tell other people what to read or listen to or watch; he is a censor determined to legislate morality. If, however, a Liberal complains about speech and, in fact, supports laws against certain kinds of speech, it is right and good because we must be protected from this “hate speech” or “politically incorrect” speech. (Of course, they -- being the good guys -- will decide exactly what that is.)


Now I will grant that there is plenty of self-righteous superiority on the Right as well as teh Left. I know certain folks on my side of the political fence with whom one cannot have a discussion without being presumend to be morally and mentally defective for disagreeing with them on some point or other. But this characteristic, dating back to the 1960s, seems particularly common among the radical Left -- and it is that segment of the Left that often seems to develop the political memes that dominate debate on the Left. The result is an impoverished public discussion.

The rhetoric has become so super-heated that, sadly, I find myself having fewer and fewer political discussions these days. And while I miss the spirited give-and-take, when Supreme Court Justices become worse than Hitler and when those who vote a certain way do so because theyÂ’re idiots, itÂ’s time to talk about the weather.


I miss that spirited give-and-take as well. Not just because I love a good argument, but because I think it ultimately harms the country as a whole.

Posted by: Greg at 03:56 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 670 words, total size 4 kb.

March 27, 2005

Outcry Essays

For over half of my teaching career, I taught English. Even now, when I get a summer school assignment I usually end up teaching an English class. That means grading a lot of student writing. It also means learning a lot about your students that you never do in another subject. That is what they are finding as they grade this year's TAKS essay.

Each year, hundreds of students use the essay portion of the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills test to write about being abused, neglected or raped, education officials say.

Others write about being depressed, or wanting to die or hurt themselves or others.

Such essays fall under the state's definition of an outcry, and school officials have a legal and ethical obligation to report the revelations to law-enforcement officials.


You get those in the classroom, too. One term each year I had students writing about "an event that changed your life." Over the years I was flabbergasted by what I got from my students. I was also heartbroken.

One sweet young lady wrote about being molested by her youth pastor several years before, and I had to report it to the school and CPS. I never did hear what happened to the guy. I lost track of her after she graduated.

Another girl wrote about the death of her father and how she blamed herself for it. She had her best friend over one night for a sleep-over, and her father offered to wait for them to ride along to KFC for a bucket of chicken. They preferred to stay swimming in the pool, and her father was killed by a speeding truck on the way home with dinner. Last I heard, she should finish college this spring, majoring in elementary education. I hope she comes back to the district.

One of my boys told the tale of going straight while being robbed of his drug money. When I challenged him on the veracity, he lifted up his shirt and showed me two entry and two exit wounds. He later became the first kid I wrote a college letter of recommendation for, and the first in his family to attend and graduate.

One guy wrote a chilling paper entitled "The Night I Killed A Man." His father had heard a sound in the living room and had gone to check it out. When the student heard a fight between his dad and a robber, he ran into the kitchen, grabbed a knife from the butcher block, and plunged it through the robbers back, killing him before they could even call the police. He was 16-years old. I know he talked about joining the Marines, to get away from the folks who were threatening revenge.

I read papers about drug rehab, crushing personal losses, and becoming a parent-too-soon in the ninth grade. I learned about the thrill of victory, first kisses, and getting saved one Sunday at church. I exulted in the glories that these kids experienced, and bled over the many hurts they had experienced. It was the assignment I dreaded most, and which took the most out of me. Mandated by my district, it was one of the things that was steadily pushing me to the point of burnout and reinforced my desire to teach in my major field, history. And yet, I sometimes miss that chance to really know my students, something that I don't always get to do now.

That a child or teen would write about something so personal or traumatic on a state test "isn't logical at all when you look at it from the outside," said Catherine Ayoub, an associate professor at Harvard University's Medical School and Graduate School of Education.

But "this is the most anonymous way that you can tell," so it's "absolutely what you would expect," Ayoub said.


And it is also because they know that the essays are going to be read. It is unfortunately way too easy to tell a kid you don't have time for them, even if you want to talk to them about a situation -- the bell just rang and you've got 28 other kids in class to attend to, you've got duty in the cafeteria, or there is a faculty meeting after school that you can't miss. The counselors at my school are nothing more than glorified (at best semi-competent) schedule-makers, each with a case-load of 400 students who they might never meet. The administrative team is made up of some really great people, but their one of their major issues is discipline and so some of the kids who most need them tend to avoid them. But that essay is a chance for them to say their piece and be heard -- they hope -- and so they spill their hearts out on those lines and hope that what is there will be taken seriously. It is true in the classroom, and true on the TAKS test.

You might wonder, how old are the kids who give these "outcry" responses on the tests? How common are they? What are the prompts that give them such freedom?

Texas labeled 688 essays as "outcry" last year and 592 in 2003, a fraction of the pool of more than a million essays.

The writing section of the 3-year-old TAKS is designed to give students flexibility — opening the door for personal essays.

"There are so many things that children are bringing to school" nowadays, said Chuck Hoffman, executive director of student and social services for the Fort Worth school district.

Students in Texas must write an essay for the TAKS in grades 4, 7, 10 and 11. Although the TEA flags outcry essays at all grade levels, most appear at the seventh-grade level.

Students are free to express themselves on the TAKS because the writing instructions are less formulaic than on past achievement tests, including the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills.

The essay instructions are broad: "Write an essay explaining the importance of accepting others as they are" or "Write a composition about an adventure you had."

Students can use any writing approach, such as cause and effect, or problem and solution. Essays can be narrative or philosophical.

The TAKS gives students more latitude in their essay writing than other state tests. For example, last year's test included this instruction for 10th-graders: Write an essay about the impact another person can have on your life.


Frankly, I don't know whether to be shocked by how many such essays the state gets, or how few. In a classroom setting, there is at least a relationship that exists and a level of trust between student and teacher. That doesn't exist on the test, which might be a good thing for some kids or inhibit others.

Do we, as teachers, listen closely enough to what our kids say? Do we take their writing seriously enough? They need us to do so. They have a lot to say. There's so much that they need to have heard. We need to give them a chance to get their message through.

Posted by: Greg at 06:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1187 words, total size 7 kb.

Welcome To The Conservativehome.com Blog

The Conservative Party in the UK is starting to get into blogging. One new entry is conservativehome.com, which has a very good blog.


The website — conservativehome.com — is being started today by Tim Montgomerie, who was political secretary to Iain Duncan Smith when he was Tory leader and was head of the Conservative Renewing One Nation unit under William Hague.

It is independent of the Tory party, though supportive of it, but the website will inevitably be seen as the start of a fresh debate about where the party should move in the event of a third successive election defeat.

The website combines the concepts of a think-tank and online newspaper and its aim is to provide a forum for the revival of Conservative thinking and policies. Mr Montgomerie is an expert on American politics and the way that the Right has used websites to bypass the mainstream media, which is felt to be broadly hostile to conservative ideas. It is funded by donations from private individuals.


I've been, I like, and I'm linking.

Take this entry, for example, just from the first day of operation. It is a tranlation guide from Leftish to English.

As an occasional feature, this blog will bring extracts from the Leftish Phrasebook. Leftish is a confusing and complex language with many variants. It is widely used amongst the political and media classes in Britain and other countries. In recent years Modern Leftish has emerged as the dominant dialect and is the main language of administration, however Old Leftish still lingers on -- especially among the cultural elites. Of course, many terms are common to both forms of the language.

Leftish -- English

Foetus -- Baby

Let Terri Schiavo die -- Starve Terri Schiavo to death

The right to die -- The right of someone else to kill you

A woman's right to choose -- I'm not listening anymore

This shouldn't be an election issue -- This might lose us votes

Investment -- Spending

Tory cuts -- A marginally slower rate of growth in government expenditure

Society -- The state

The community -- The state

Our so-called democracy -- Democracy

You can't impose democracy -- We wish you wouldn't remove dictators by force

International law -- Whatever's fine by Russia, China and France

Secular -- Atheist

Multifaith -- Everything/nothing is true

Rational -- The stuff we believe.


Conservative brothers and sisters in the UK, we welcome you! If this is a sample of what we can expect (along with the much more serious pieces that I just loved), you are a welcome addition to the blogosphere.

Posted by: Greg at 12:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 442 words, total size 3 kb.

What Next -- The Return Of Pogroms?

Anti-Semitism has a long, unsavory history in Russia. Sadly, it looks like it may be back.

About 5,000 people, including former world chess champion Boris Spassky, have signed a letter asking prosecutors to ban Jewish organizations because they believe one of the basic Judaic books professes religious hatred, said a center that monitors religious freedom.

The group sent the letter to the Prosecutor General's Office last Monday, the Sova center said last week.

The signatories claim that "Kizur Shulkhan Arukh," an abbreviated version of a 16th-century book that lays out daily rules for Jews, teaches hatred toward non-Jews, Sova said.

Moscow sculptor and head of the obscure nationalist All-Russian Cathedral Movement Vyacheslav Klykov, a signatory of the petition, confirmed the report, Interfax said.

A Prosecutor General's Office spokeswoman could not immediately confirm Friday that the petition had been received.


You can find what you want in various books about faith and spirituality in any religion. I somehow doubt that these folks are interested in considering things from their own Russian Orthodox religious heritage.

Would they dare to be consistent and support banning the Russian Orthodox Church? I didn't think so.

Posted by: Greg at 12:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 204 words, total size 2 kb.

Sex-Offenders In The Classroom

And no, I'm not talking about the teachers. I'm talking about the students.

Police across the state often fail to inform schools officials about young sex offenders in their classrooms because of confusion about Illinois law - confusion that could put students at risk, according to a published report.

An Illinois registry with the names of about 1,100 juvenile sex offenders is largely kept secret, unlike lists of adult offenders that are readily accessible via the Internet, the Chicago Tribune reported in its Sunday editions.

A law adopted in the 1990s requires sheriff's police to inform schools when a juvenile sex offender enrolls. However, with some police interpreting the law differently, that doesn't always happen.

Even when school principals ask some police departments for the names of juvenile offenders who might be attending their schools, the information is not given.


Fortunately we don't face that problem down here in Texas. Juvenile sex-offenders end up on the statewide list that you can access from the Internet. Sadly, I've found former students there. And when a student is charged with such an offense (as with violent felonies), the kid is immediately removed from the classroom pending adjudication and placed in a highly-structured alternative setting where they are under constant supervision.

Sounds like the Illinois situation is absolutely out of control. Take this case.

One East Peoria woman, who was not identified by the Tribune, saw first hand how the notification law on juveniles does not seem to be working as intended. She learned that a boy who was found guilty of molesting her 7-year-old son ended up in a class with her older teenage son.

The 16-year-old was registered as a sex offender. Because of the disarray surrounding the notification rules, however, that information never got to the school.

East Peoria Community High School officials said later that they were thankful the student's mother brought the matter to their attention. They say they are now more vigilant.


Scary, isn't it, that we now have to watch the kids, not just the adults, for convicted sex-offenders.

Posted by: Greg at 11:46 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 351 words, total size 2 kb.

Dangerous Voters

Well, conservative Christians of various stripes are organizing in Ohio. The movement is non-denominational, grass-roots, and based on social issues. GOP leaders are keeping close tabs, and activists in other states are waiting to see if the model is successful. So reports The New York Times.

But my favorite quote comes from one of the most conspicuous voices for "religious liberty" in the country.

Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the Restoration Project might have greater impact because it was more homegrown and had ties to a wider array of denominations than previous groups like the Moral Majority.

"This represents a new wave in organizing on the part of conservative evangelicals," Mr. Lynn said. "From my standpoint, as someone who doesn't agree with their conclusions, this is a more dangerous model."


So, citizens getting organized, active and voting is dangerous if you don't agree with where they stand on the issues? Would your preferred model be that of Cuba or the people's Republic of China, where such people know their place is in the catacombs?

Posted by: Greg at 11:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.

Widow And Children Soldier On

In time of war, we often see the name of a soldier, dead too soon, in the local paper. Perhaps we get funeral coverage if it is a local hero. But rarely to we hear more, about the struggles of those left behind. Today's Houston Chronicle shares one such story.


Karren Warren / Chronicle
Patty Mora Guereca, whose husband, Jose Guereca Jr.,
was killed in Iraq in November, is left with four children,
from left, 5-year-old twins Angel and Nathan, Jose, 2
months, and Rolando, 7.


MISSOURI CITY - Her daily dreams are vivid and always include her husband, Sgt. Jose Guereca. The dreams always end with Guereca not coming home.

The 24-year-old Army sergeant died Nov. 30 in Iraq during his second tour of duty to the war-torn nation. He was the 25th Houston-area service member to die in the war.

"I miss him so much. The kids miss him, too," said Patty Mora Guereca, 23, who was left a widow with four boys younger than 7. When her husband died, Patty Guereca was seven months pregnant with the couple's fourth child.

The past few months for Guereca have been trying, to say the least. The young mother had to bury her husband, move herself and her then three children from Fort Hood to her mother's Missouri City home. She gave birth to her fourth child — Jose Alejandro Guereca III — on Jan. 11.

A month after the baby was born, Guereca headed to Fort Hood to tend to moving issues while her mother-in-law kept the newborn. Guereca ended up rushing back to Houston when the baby's congestion turned into a respiratory infection and pneumonia, and landed him at Texas Children's Hospital for four days.

For now, Guereca and the four children are living with her mother and a younger sister,although she intends to purchase a home in nearby Stafford soon. Life-insurance benefits, aid from the Veterans Administration and generous donations from the public have allowed her to stay home with her children and not have to work.


Even with the generosity of strangers, it won't be easy for Mrs. Guereca. Widowed at 23 with four young children. But she has an outlook that can only be admired -- an outlook she learned from her husband.

Normalcy for Guereca means getting up at 6 a.m. to get 7-year-old Rolando ready for first grade and at his bus stop by 7:10 a.m. She has a little down time in the afternoon after she drops off her 5-year-old twins, Nathan and Angel, for afternoon kindergarten.

"It's been hard," Guereca told the Chronicle. "But I just keep thinking of my husband. He was so positive. He'd say, 'For every problem, there's a solution.'


We have lost over 1500 soldiers in Iraq. I've not been able to locate a figure for those who have died in Afghanistan. I won't even pretend to be able to tabulate the number of those seriously wounded and left disabled in those theaters of war. We owe them and their families a debt of gratitude. And we owe it to them to do what we can to help their families.

Posted by: Greg at 11:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 533 words, total size 4 kb.

No "Reporter's Privilege" For Bloggers -- Or Reporters

David Shaw takes up one of the more vexing questions facing the blogosphere today – “Are bloggers entitled to the same constitutional protection as traditional print and broadcast journalists?”

His response? As one might expect from a card carrying member of old media, the answer is an emphatic NO!

BLOGGERS require no journalistic experience. All they need is computer access and the desire to blog. There are other, even important differences between bloggers and mainstream journalists, perhaps the most significant being that bloggers pride themselves on being part of an unmediated medium, giving their readers unfiltered information. And therein lies the problem.


Shaw then goes on to explain how the various and sundry levels of filtration his writing is required to pass through before percolating into print entitles him to protections that others, members of an unmediated medium, don’t deserve. Yes, he argues, folks like him in the mainstream media make mistakes, but there are consequences to those errors. We are members of a “solipsistic, self-aggrandizing journalist-wannabe genre” that doesn’t deserve the same sort of protections and deference that Shaw and his fellows believe is theirs by virtue of their special status as journalists.

And therein lies the problem with Shaw’s analysis. He believes that he and his fellow “journalists” are some sort of anointed high-priesthood, granted special exemption from the rules that apply to we mere mortals due to a single clause in the First Amendment. The problem is that he is fundamentally wrong. The Constitution confers upon journalists NO SPECIAL RIGHTS OR PRIVILEGES.

Consider the words of the First Amendment

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


Do you see some special status for journalists there? I donÂ’t. I see no greater deference given to a reporter or an author that is not there for every person who engages in speech. It isnÂ’t there, unless one wishes to engage in penumbra hunting among the emanations of shadows of the text of the Amendment. But a special status for the press is simply not there in the plain meaning of the text. Thus, any special status exists by statute, not by right. And if this special status exists by statute, it strikes me that it is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, in that it creates an inequality in the protection of the laws. Thus, any special status conferred by law is constitutionally suspect.

So I will take my stand right here and right now – no, bloggers are not entitled to any special status reserved for journalists, or any exemptions carved out for them under the law.

But then again, neither are the journalists themselves.

Either the First Amendment provides a right to speak and publish freely to all of us, or it does not. Any other view is at odds with the spirit of the Constitution itself.

Posted by: Greg at 10:54 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 498 words, total size 3 kb.

An Abortion Outrage

I've hesitated to comment on the this story, but I think it may be time to say something. I've seen it several different places, so I guess I'll add my voice to it.


GRANITE CITY - A southern Illinois woman was arrested last week (March 17) after trying to intervene on behalf of her 14-year old daughter's effort to have an abortion. The girl was allegedly taken to an abortion clinic by the mother of the man allegedly to have impregnated the 14-year old.

According to the girl's mother, her 14-year old daughter was called off from school in Madison County by a woman posing as the girl's “grandmother.” The woman took the girl from her home only minutes before the girl’s mother returned home from work.

It was later determined that the woman who had posed as the "grandmother" to the school authorities was the mother of the male who had fathered the unborn child the 14-year old girl was carrying. The age of the male has not been released.

When the parents were notified their pregnant daughter was not at school, they suspected she had been taken to the Hope Abortion Clinic in Granite City. The parents and grandfather were the only persons authorized to request school absence for the fourteen year old female.


So what we have here is an outrage. Mom and dad were denied the right to even speak to their daughter, despite the fact that the daughter heard her mother AND ASKED TO SPEAK TO HER while waiting for the "procedure".

This is in keeping with stories I have heard from folks who have dealt with Hopeless "Clinic" in the past. The individuals involved in these stories have become active in the prolife movement, and have told them at public events, so I am not violating any confidences in telling them. You see, Hopeless "Clinic" was the facility that "served" the diocese I studied for and the school I taught at when I lived in the area.

One of my friends, whose pro-life activism came after her underage daughter was "treated" at the facility, told me the story of her family. It seems the daughter went to prom, and she agreed to allow her daughter to spend the night at her boyfriend's house because (she assumed) that the kids would sleep in separate rooms. Wrong -- mom and did let the kids share a bedroom, with the not terribly surprising result. The daughter missed two periods, and didn't tell mom because she was afraid and ashamed (sin does that to a person -- read Genesis). Also, boyfriend and his mother were "encouraging" and abortion -- and on what was supposed to be an outing to St. Louis took her instead to the clinic while browbeating her to abort. She was 30 miles from home, sitting in the cab of a pickup between mom and boyfriend, and was driven to the "clinic" for the "procedure." She was coerced into signing and going through with the abortion, and then dumped home when it was all over.

Mom and Dad found out that after noon what happened. They (mom, dad, and daughter) requested the medical records, and Hopeless "Clinic" refused to produce them, then claimed they could not be found. It took a court order to get the records -- and it turned out that the daughter was never pregnant in the first place! That was why Hopeless had fought to hard to "protect a woman's right to privacy" from her own attempts to gain information about her own medical treatment!

And then there was one of my own students. She was pregnant, and wanted to talk to her boyfriend, another one of my students. She wanted to keep the baby, but the boyfriend didn't want the responsibility, and was afraid of losing the chance to go play baseball at a major midwestern university (I hear he is still in the minor leagues). He persuaded her that an abortion was the best thing, though she still wanted the baby. He got her as far as the Hopeless "Clinic" parking lot before she said no. He parked against the fence around the lot, told her she wasn't getting out of the car or going home until she was no longer pregnant. Hopeless "Clinic" staff came out and supported the boyfriend, telling her it was normal to be nervous and doubtful. She went in and was aborted -- even though before the procedure started she told the abortionist that she didn't want the procedure. She tells me the abortionist simply sedated her said "Just you hush, now, you'll feel much better about this when it is all over."

Several months later, during the Senior Class retreat, I mentioned something in passing about the pain of losing a wanted child (my wife and I had our first miscarriage two weeks before). She came to me a while later to talk -- and we talked for a very long time as she poured out her heart. I helped her get counseling, and put her in touch with someone who helped her get legal aid. But it seems that Hopeless "Clinic" and other facilities are immune from liability for performing a surgical procedure once you sign the consent form, because they do not record oral revocations of consent to protect themselves.

So as you might imagine, I am not surprised to read about the case in the story. Hopeless "Clinic" is in it for the money, not to help girls and women. They don't care is consent is real or coerced, so long as they get paid.

Posted by: Greg at 10:49 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 941 words, total size 6 kb.

March 26, 2005

The Easter Proclamation

EXSULTET
(RealAudio)

Rejoice, heavenly powers! Sing choirs of angels!
Exult, all creation around God's throne!
Jesus Christ, our King is risen!
Sound the trumpet of salvation!

Rejoice, O earth, in shining splendor,
radiant in the brightness of your King!
Christ has conquered! Glory fills you!
Darkness vanishes for ever!

Rejoice, O Mother Church! Exult in glory!
The risen Savior shines upon you!
Let this place resound with joy,
echoing the mighty song of all God's people!

My dearest friends,
standing with me in this holy light,
join me in asking God for mercy,
that he may give his unworthy minister
grace to sing his Easter praises.

The Lord be with you.
And also with you.
Lift up your hearts.
We lift them up to the Lord.
Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
It is right to give him thanks and praise.

It is truly right that with full hearts and minds and voices
we should praise the unseen God, the all-powerful Father,
and his only Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

For Christ has ransomed us with his blood,
and paid for us the price of Adam's sin to our eternal Father!

This is our passover feast,
When Christ, the true Lamb, is slain,
whose blood consecrates the homes of all believers.

This is the night,
when first you saved our fathers:
you freed the people of Israel from their slav'ry,
and led them dry-shod through the sea.

This is the night,
when the pillar of fire destroyed the darkness of sin.

This is night,
when Christians ev'rywhere,
washed clean of sin and freed from all defilement,
are restored to grace and grow together in holiness.

This is the night,
when Jesus broke the chains of death
and rose triumphant from the grave.

What good would life have been to us,
had Christ not come as our Redeemer?

Father, how wonderful your care for us!
How boundless your merciful love!
To ransom a slave you gave away your Son.

O happy fault, O necessary sin of Adam,
which gained for us so great a Redeemer!

Most blessed of all nights,
chosen by God to see Christ rising from the dead!

Of this night scripture says:
"The night will be as clear as day:
it will become my light, my joy."

The power of this holy night dispels all evil,
washes guilt away, restores lost innocence,
brings mourners joy;
it casts out hatred, brings us peace,
and humbles earthly pride.

Night truly blessed,
when heaven is wedded to earth
and we are reconciled to God!

Therefore, heavenly Father, in the joy of this night,
receive our evening sacrifice of praise,
your Church's solemn offering.

Accept this Easter candle,
a flame divided but undimmed,
a pillar of fire that glows to the honor of God.

Let it mingle with the lights of heaven
and continue bravely burning
to dispel the darkness of this night!

May the Morning Star which never sets
find this flame still burning:
Christ, that Morning Star,
who came back from the dead,
and shed his peaceful light on all mankind,
your Son, who lives and reigns for ever and ever. Amen.

Posted by: Greg at 10:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 531 words, total size 3 kb.

Stuff The Starbucks Cup

I don't drink Starbuck's coffee. Heck, if I drink a half-dozen cups of coffee in a year, my consumption is way up. Not that I'm not a caffeine-freak -- my blood is carbonated and if I'm ever hospitalized they'll need to hang a two-liter bottle of Coke Classic from the IV stand.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't necessarily have a dog in this fight.

But it seems that some folks are bothered by Starbuck's "The Way I See It" campaign. They've taken quotes from several dozen scholars, athletes, activists, and other "celebrities" and placed them on their coffee cups. Personally, I think it is a really neat idea. Anyway, the issue that has been raised is that the selectees and quotes, where they have an ideological bent, skew Left.

The quotes aren't all that inflammatory, though several mirror Starbucks' hallmark tall-grande-venti pretentiousness. Take this one from film critic Roger Ebert: "A movie is not about what it is about. It is about how it is about it."

The problem, critics say, is the company's list of overwhelmingly liberal contributors, including Al Franken, Melissa Etheridge, Quincy Jones, Chuck D. Of the 31 contributors listed on Starbucks' Web site, only one, National Review editor Jonah Goldberg, offers a conservative viewpoint.

Considering Starbucks sells millions of cups of coffee each day - some specialty drinks at $4 and up - it's no surprise some customers have complained to Starbucks' Web site, labeling the campaign "offensive" and the company a proponent of "the destruction of family values and virtues."

"I want to enjoy your product without having Earth Day Network propaganda thrust at me," wrote Malachi Salcido of East Wenatchee, Wash.

Yvette Nunez, a 27-year-old Republican from Tampa, said she hadn't noticed the quotes on her weekly caramel machiattos. On "tall" cups, the text is obscured by a cardboard sleeve.

"There are a lot of great conservative quotes, but oh well," she said. "I'm not surprised. I'm used to being under-represented."


Now Starbucks claims it is not out to be ideological.

Company spokeswoman Valerie Hwang said the goal is not to stir up controversy. She said the company has lined up 60 contributors with "varying points of view, experiences and priorities" in an effort to promote "open, respectful conversation among a wide variety of individuals."

Each cup also bears a caveat letting customers know that the quote is "the author's opinion, not necessarily that of Starbucks."

"The program is such that we're not requiring our customers to read," Hwang said, "but rather the quotes are there for our customers to discover and enjoy."


Now the company claims it is open to suggestions from the public for future quotes. Let's take them at their word. My challenge to you is to find your favorite quote from a living individual, preferably conservative, and submit it to Starbucks. Don't be radical or outrageous -- give them something thoughtful. After all, these are liberals who have never encountered a thoughtful conservative other than Jonah Goldberg. I've got at least two individuals in mind (one conservative, one libertarian) who I think merit inclusion. And yes, liberals, you can play along as well. After all, a good quote that makes one think is always a good thing, no matter what the source. I mean, one of my favorites in the program comes from Al Franken.

"Mistakes are a part of being human. Appreciate your mistakes for what they are: precious life lessons that can only be learned the hard way. Unless itÂ’s a fatal mistake, which, at least, others can learn from."

-- Al Franken


It will probably end up being used in my classroom. And why not? We conservatives don't have the monopoly on good ideas.

Posted by: Greg at 07:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 631 words, total size 4 kb.

Tainted Honor

Being AWOL is a serious charge for a Marine. So why did Harpers place a group of Marine recruits reporting for basic training on the cover of their magazine for a story about military deserters?


The cover photo, taken at Parris Island, S.C., shows seven Marines lined up in their T-shirts, shorts and socks. They are not identified in photo credits or in the article. In fact, Harper's says the Marines are not meant to depict people in the article.

"We are decorating pages," said Giulia Melucci, the magazine's vice president for public relations. "We are not saying the soldiers are AWOL. Our covers are not necessarily representative."

A media observer said using real people as "decorations" for a story about deserters might go too far.

"Going AWOL is not a favorable or positive thing," said Kenny Irby, visual journalism group leader at the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, which owns the St. Petersburg Times.

Another issue is that the photograph was altered. One recruit's image appears lighter than the others, as if he were disappearing.


Gee, would you "decorate pages" with random photos for a story about sexual predators? Come on, people, think about what you are doing. You are implicitly charging them with a crime on the cover of your magazine. You are accusing them of cowardice in time of war and the betrayal of their oath "to uphold protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic."

And consider how one Marine in particular feels about being depicted as "fading away" from his comrades in arms.

Lance Cpl. Britian Kinder, an active Marine who asked that his base not be identified, is upset.

"It does make me pretty angry that they would do something like this. I'm pretty much upset that they would do this without my consent."

Kinder's father believes the magazine should correct the impression it has made of his son.

"People recognize this picture," said Mickey Kinder of Pinch, W.Va. "Put another picture of him in the magazine and do a retraction. He's not AWOL."


It is bad enough that the magazine decided to publish an article painting cowards and malcontents as sympathetic, even heroic, figures. What is worse is that they decided to tar smear the honorable in the process -- for not one Marine on the cover of that magazine is a deserter.

UPDATE (3/29/05): It appears that Harper's has been stung by the criticism their way. They plan on running a "clarification"
about the cover.

"We're going to print a clarification in our next issue," said Giulia Melucci, a vice president at New York-based Harper's. "We feel it needs to be clarified that these are respectable soldiers defending our country honorably. We regret any confusion it may have caused."


Note, of course, that this isn't quite an apology for defaming those pictured. Nor does it deal with the blatantly anti-military (some would say anti-American) article that the cover promoted. Maybe Harper's would consider doing an article about what is right witht he American military, along with an actual apology for their maligning the good names of "a few good men."

Posted by: Greg at 07:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 529 words, total size 4 kb.

Conflict Of Interest

Ward Churchill is now to be investigated for academic dishonesty. But will it be a fair investigation? That is open to question, since three of the twelve panel members have already publicly defended Churchill, and refuse to recuse themselves in the investigation.

Records and news stories show at least three of the 12 members of the committee have come out publicly supporting Churchill's rights or questioning the university's ability to discipline him after he made statements likening 9/11 victims to a top Nazi and calling for other attacks on the United States.

Steven Guberman, associate professor in education, was one of nearly 200 Boulder faculty members who signed a petition last month defending Churchill's right to speak and protesting the preliminary investigation that ended Thursday. The faculty then took out an ad in a local newspaper with the faculty names.

Guberman said he will not recuse himself because he believes he can be independent in judging Churchill's work.

"They are two separate issues," said Guberman, who was appointed two weeks ago to the misconduct committee. "One is about freedom of speech. The other is about research misconduct."

Two other committee members, law professor Richard Collins and physics professor Uriel Nauenberg, were quoted in articles about Churchill.


How biased are the committee members? Collins has already made it clear that only the most outrageous incompetence will do.

Collins recently told the CU faculty newspaper that the university would have to prove that Churchill was unfit for his job. For comparison, Collins said it would take evidence comparable to the hypothetical case of a math professor who repeatedly declared two plus two equals five.

"It's tough to sack him," Collins said.


Not, of course, that it is likely that action will be taken. No one at the university can recall a case in the last 20 years in which the standing committee has disciplined a professor. Given the statements of the members, it is unlikely that there will be any action taken now, despite the overwhelming evidence of academic misconduct that has emerged.

Posted by: Greg at 07:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 347 words, total size 2 kb.

March 25, 2005

First The Verdict, Then The Testimony

Remember the whole Wilson/Plame affair? Remember how we were ASURED that there was a crime there somewhere in the administration -- talk of Karl Rove being frog-marched out of the White House and Robert Novak rotting in prison?

Looks like the media has changed its mind on the matter. Funny what holding a couple of reporters in contempt for withholding evidence from a grand jury will do.

A federal court should first determine whether a crime has been committed in the disclosure of an undercover CIA operative's name before prosecutors are allowed to continue seeking testimony from journalists about their confidential sources, the nation's largest news organizations and journalism groups asserted in a court filing yesterday.

The 40-page brief, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, argues that there is "ample evidence . . . to doubt that a crime has been committed" in the case, which centers on the question of whether Bush administration officials knowingly revealed the identity of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame in the summer of 2003. Plame's name was published first by syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak and later by other publications.

The friend-of-the-court brief was filed by 36 news organizations, including The Washington Post and major broadcast and cable television news networks, in support of reporters at the New York Times and Time magazine who face possible jail time for refusing to cooperate with a grand jury investigating the allegations. Those two organizations filed a petition Tuesday asking the full appeals court to review the case.


Let's get this straight -- now they are not sure whether or not there is a crime even though they told us there was? And they want the court to determine whether or not there was a crime BEFORE they will give the evidence necessary to indict someone? Seems to me they have the whole process ass-backwards. The testimony in question is necessary to possibly secure an indictment so that a trial can be held to determine if anyone is guilty of anything in the release of Ms. Plame's name.

Posted by: Greg at 10:04 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 2 kb.

Quid Pro Quo Leads To School Board Member's Arrest

Leigh Heavin's husband needed a lawyer to represent him in his criminal trial. She called Steven C. Copenhaver, a Round Rock ISD school board member, and told him she didn't have much money but needed someone to represent her husband.

Most lawyers will reduce fees, do pro bono work, or otherwise help a client out. Copenhaver offered Heavin a deal.

Copenhaver told Heavin that they could work something out and asked her if she had any good-looking friends, according to the warrant. He told her that he had fantasized about two women having sex together, according to the warrant.

The next day, Copenhaver came to Heavin's apartment shortly after her sister-in-law, Malinda Tilley, had dropped in, the warrant said. Unknown to Copenhaver, it said, Heavin's mental health caseworker, her mother and her husband were in a back bedroom.

Copenhaver asked Tilley and Heavin to perform sexual favors for him, according to the warrant. When the women asked "what they would get out of this," Copenhaver said he would represent Heavin's husband, the warrant said.


Uhhhhh -- yeeee-ah. Words just fail me. As I'm sure words failed Copenhaver when Heavin's husband, mental heath caseworker and other relatives came out of the back bedroom and called the police.

And you've gotta love the wahoo who is the head of the school board. I imagine he was stunned, but surely he could have come up with something more than a statement that he didn't know how the arrest would impact Copenhaver's service on the school board. Isn't there a zero tolerance policy out there somewhere that might cover this situation?

And then there is this from the state bar association.

Dawn Miller, chief disciplinary counsel for the State Bar of Texas, said exchanging legal services for sexual favors could constitute a violation of rules barring "illegal or unconscionable" fees. Punishment could range from a reprimand to disbarment, Miller said.


Could constitute a violation of the rules barring "illegal or unconscionable" fees? COULD? Ya think?

Copenhaver has been charged with prostitution, and released on $750 bail.

Posted by: Greg at 09:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 2 kb.

Anybody Else Troubled By This?

I loved chocolate-bunnies when I was a kid. And when i was in seminary, I raised a few eyebrows by giving some of my buddies a humorous product called "Just the Ears" -- a set of molded bunny-ears -- since they are usually eaten first while much of the rest goes to waste (the ears go to waste). I was accused of being disturbed by several of my humor-impaired classmates.

This product, on the other hand, is a bit more disturbing to me.

A symbol of Christianity that sits atop church steeples, dangles from necks and hangs on walls is now ending up in the mouths of the faithful, over the objections of some religious officials.

A mass-produced chocolate cross is being sold this Easter by Russell Stover Candies Inc. in about 5,000 stores nationwide, which experts say is apparently a first for a major American company.

"Obviously they've seen that there's a market for chocolate crosses at Easter," said Lisbeth Echeandia, a consultant for Candy Information Service, which monitors candy industry trends. "I don't see it growing tremendously but I think there would be growth in the Christian market."

However, not all Christians are happy about it. Chomping on a chocolate cross can be offensive to some, said Joseph McAleer, a spokesman for the Roman Catholic diocese in Bridgeport, Conn.

"The cross should be venerated, not eaten, nor tossed casually in an Easter basket beside the jelly beans and marshmallow Peeps," he said. "It's insulting."


They claim to be targetting the Hispanic market. The crosses are decorated with a floral bouquet and are filled with caramel made from goat's milk, a popular Latin America treat.

My initial reaction was "what's next -- a chocolate Jesus?" Not to worry, though.

Ward said Russell Stover considered making other traditional images out of chocolate but eventually opted not to.

"A molded Jesus, for example, would not be a good call and a cross with Jesus on it wouldn't be a good idea either," Ward said.


Am I being overly sensitive on this? Or is there really something "not quite right" about this product?

Posted by: Greg at 06:18 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 361 words, total size 2 kb.

Felons Purged -- After Their Votes Elect Democrat

More proof of vote fraud and election irregularities in the Washington gubernatorial election. It further raises the question of the legitimacy of the Gregoire administration, after Christine Gregoire won in November (on the third count of the ballots) by 129 votes statewide.

King County election officials purged 99 felons from the voter rolls yesterday as prosecutors announced they would challenge an additional 93 felons they claim are illegally registered to vote.

Officials said they will continue to scour the voter rolls for felons. They're acting in light of a Republican lawsuit challenging the validity of the razor-thin election of Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire and in response to a Seattle Times investigation that found at least 129 felons in King and Pierce counties had voted in the 2004 general election.

Earlier this month, Republicans released a list of 1,135 registered voters statewide who they said were felons who had not had their right to vote restored by a judge. Hundreds of those felons, however, appear to have been juveniles who did not lose their right to vote once they turned 18. Republicans said they are modifying their list.

Dan Donohoe, a spokesman for the county prosecutor's office, said his office is investigating nearly 800 alleged felon voters named by the Republicans.

The 93 challenges announced yesterday came from that list, and additional challenges are likely, Donohoe said.

Prosecutors mailed certified letters to the last known address of each of the 93 yesterday, alerting them to an administrative hearing March 31.

"This represents phase two of our ongoing efforts to remove the names of ineligible voters from the list that was referred to my office," King County Prosecuting Attorney Norm Maleng said in a news release. "We will continue this effort until all unqualified voters are removed from the list."


Democrats, of course, don't have anything to say about this clearly fraudulent election, while raising false claims and baseless allegation about the reelection of President George W. Bush. I've not seen Jesse Jackass Jackson out there talking about the disenfranchisement of legitimate voters and stolen elections. But then again, his girl (who worked to keep blacks out of her sorority as a college student during the 1960s civil rights movement) won -- and that's all that counts.

Count every vote -- but only count the legal ones.

Posted by: Greg at 06:00 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 401 words, total size 3 kb.

Kay Bailey Hutchison -- Break The Term-Limit Pledge


Let me say it -- I think term limits are a bad idea. While some argue that the current system deprives us of new blood and new ideas in government, I see term limit as depriving us of experienced leaders. I find voluntary term limits to be an even worse idea -- they force a politician to either break his or her word and appear hypocritical, or to abide by it even if that is detrimental to the best interests of their constituents. And that is the situation faced by the senior Senator from Texas, the Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison.

Hutchison, back in 1994, promised not to run for a third full term in the Senate.

Hutchison made her promise in television ads and personal statements in 1994, and on election night she said:

"I've always said that I would serve no more than two full terms. This may be my last term, or I could run for one more. But no more after that. I firmly believe in term limitations and I plan to adhere to that."


Seems pretty unambiguous to me. I suspect that she may now recognize the problem of that simplistic scheme. She is now in the best position to benefit her Texas constituents and the nation as a whole with her relatively senior position in the Senate, but her own commitment will deprive the state of her services in the Senate, an institution in which seniority is critical. It's not that she is indispensable (no politician is), but rather than unless the term-limits apply across the board they are an act of unilateral disarmament.

The result is that she may run for governor. That means an ugly primary fight against the incumbent, Rick Perry, and comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, a GOP maverick (and mother of White House spokesman Scott McClellan). The winner will face an undetermined Democrat (possibly former Houston Congressman Chris Bell) and an independent, singer and author Kinky Friedman. A difficult GOP primary could mean trouble for the winner. And that would also leave open the possibility of a Democrat winning a Senate seat that would be secure if Hutchison seeks reelection. Currently only San Antonio Republican Congressman Henry Bonilla has publicly indicated interest in running in the event that the incumbent steps down, while no Democrat has stepped forward. That will change by the January 2006 filing deadline.

How ugly might the primary be?

Perry's campaign has been skirmishing with Hutchison and Strayhorn in recent weeks, releasing lists of endorsements and supporters around Texas.

Perry's campaign this week also admitted to having video taped Hutchison with U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton at a Washington speaking engagement in which the Democrat called Hutchison "my partner on so many important fronts."

"Any potential opponent, we're going to research, we're going to follow. Any good campaign would do the same," said Perry campaign manager Luis Saenz. "Any potential opponent should not expect a free ride."

Saenz declined to comment on Hutchison's term limit pledge, saying that was for "her to decide."


Perry is a scrapper, and I don't doubt that he would pull out all the stops to win. He doesn't seem interested in a "seat-swap' with Hutchison, either, running for her current job while she seeks his, in part because Bonilla would be a difficult candidate for him to beat in the primary. Besides, he knows that if he does not seek reelection, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst will file for the gubernatorial nomination, leaving that very powerful position (the Lieutenant Governor makes all appointments to committees in the state senate, including designating the committee chairperson) open for a Democrat challenger.

My preference is to see the Senator stay right where she is. I'd like to see the Governor and Lt. Governor stay right where they are. Jerry Patterson has already said he is staying put as Land Commissioner (a pretty powerful job in Texas, and one elected statewide), and I think the incumbent Railroad Commissioners (again, statewide elected positions with a fair amount of clout) are all staying put. The only person looking to move is Strayhorn, who would likely face a primary challenge after angering most everyone in the GOP the last couple years with her public criticism of budgets and fellow Republicans.

And so I'll say it right now -- Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison should break the two-term pledge. I believe that Texans will ratify that decision if she does by overwhelmingly reelecting her to the US Senate. I know this Harris County Precinct Chairman would do so even without the political disarray a decision to step down would engender. Kay Bailey Hutchison is good for Texas and good for America. She deserves another term.

Posted by: Greg at 05:14 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 799 words, total size 5 kb.

Left's Tainted Money

We hear all the time about the big businesss money that allegedly bankrolls the Right in this country. Now it is true that many entrepreneurs support the side that favors capitalism over the side that favors socialism. It's in their best interest. And it is folks on the Left (who favor socialism) who constantly decry the sins of those evil capitalists.

Unless the money is coming, for whatever reason, into the coffers of the Left.

Which brings me to the major funding source for last year's attacks on George W. Bush -- George Soros. Soros bankrolls Media matters, MoveOn.org, and a host of other leftwing groups. That's his right. But what happened to the principles of the left? Why are they not condemning Soros for his illegal and/or immoral financial dealings? Why are they still taking his money, when they insist that the Right forego any such "tainted" money?


The conviction of George Soros, the billionaire investor and former fund manager, on insider trading charges was upheld on Thursday by a French appeals court, which rejected his argument that his investment in a French bank in 1988 was not based on confidential information.

Soros, 74, now retired from money management but active as a management but active as a philanthropist and author, was ordered to pay a fine of €2.2 million, or $2.9 million, representing the money made by funds he managed from an investment in Société Générale. He said the purchase had been part of a strategy to invest in a group of companies that had been privatized by the French government.


Soros, of course, expresses no remorse over his crimes, and plans on keeping it different levels of the French and European court systems until well after his death. But the Leftis financier immediately went into political spin mode.

The ruling upheld a conviction in 2002 and followed an appeals court hearing last month at which the financier testified, saying he wanted the sentence overturned because "my reputation is at stake." While the fine is small relative to his assets, Soros testified then, the conviction is "a gift to my enemies."


See, its all about the politics. He'd gladly pay the money (equal to several times more than most of us will make in our lifetimes) if it were not for the impact on his reputation giving ammunition to his critics.

But this isn't the only time he's been involved in shady dealings.

In 1992, he became known as the man who broke the Bank of England, when his funds were said to have made a billion dollars betting that the British government would be forced to devalue its currency. By contrast, the investment in Société Générale was a very small one for him, a fact his lawyers argued indicated he did not think he had inside information.

This is the first criminal charge he has faced, but not his first run-in with regulators. In 1979, Soros signed a consent decree with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which had claimed he manipulated a company's stock by selling shares in advance of a planned public offering.


But as long as the money keeps flowing to the right Left activist groups, all is forgiven and covered up by the left-wing watchdogs of political donations.

UPDATE: This appeared in The Hill the other day.


House Republicans are taking the offensive in the burgeoning ethics war on Capitol Hill by circulating research that details links among Democrats, George Soros and government watchdog groups that have criticized Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and the House ethics process.

The research shows that members of these groupsÂ’ boards have contributed tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates and political organizations and several of their staff members have previously worked for Democrats. The groups have also accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Open Society Institute, an organization founded by Soros, who spent millions trying to defeat President Bush in last yearÂ’s election.


How independent are all these watcher taking tainted cash from a partisan criminal like Soros?

Posted by: Greg at 04:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 681 words, total size 5 kb.

March 24, 2005

Why A National AIDS Memorial?

I probably sound insensitive by asking the above question. It isn't meant to discount the tragedy and horror brought about by the disease, nor is it a slam at those who have been its victims or who have triumphed over it. But I have to ask why we have a memorial to a disease?

A design by two New York architects was declared the winner Wednesday in a competition to create a centerpiece for a 7-acre garden in Golden Gate Park, the only federally recognized AIDS memorial in the country.

"Living Memorial," by Janette Kim and Chloe Town, features a stand of black carbon fiber trees, a charred wood deck and a burned, bark-like walkway that in time will sprout greenery - elements borrowed from a fire-scarred forest to evoke a sense of loss and renewal.

"While the design is at first frightening, it is also rich with the eventual triumph of life," said Ken Ruebush, who co-chaired the international contest that drew 201 submissions from 24 countries.

Conceived in 1989 by a group of residents, the National AIDS Memorial Grove originally was designed as a living memorial that relied more on its natural setting than man-made features to send a message.

Its board of directors started talking about installing a more imposing structure once Congress gave the grove national memorial status in 1996, a designation shared by American icons ranging from the USS Arizona in Pearl Harbor to Mt. Rushmore, according to Ruebush.


Why not a National Polio Park next? Or a Malaria Monument? Why AIDS? Why ANY disease?

Posted by: Greg at 01:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.

<< Page 1 of 4 >>
198kb generated in CPU 0.1946, elapsed 0.7189 seconds.
59 queries taking 0.6381 seconds, 243 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.