Just a little over twelve hours ago, I wrote this.

There is also, of course, speculation on a possible replacement. I think any number of things could happen, from elevating a sitting justice to the center chair, making Roberts the nominee for Chief Justice, recess appointing O'Connor to the Chief Justiceship (unlikely), or the selection of a candidate from off the Court. I'm genuinely not sure what the President will do, but there are any number of combinations of scenarios. Let's give the matter some time to clarify itself.

I had no way of knowing it, but John Roberts was already meting with George W. Bush in the residence of the White House. First thing this morning, the President made and announced a change of plans -- John Roberts is the nominee to replace his friend and mentor, Chief Justice William Rehnquist (whose death is still difficult to wrap my mind and heart around).

I think this is a good choice, designed to ensure a bit of stability at the Supreme Court.

First, there is absolutely no reason that John Roberts cannot be confirmed by the start of October -- it may sound mundane, but the paperwork and investigations are complete for this nomination. The White House says, and I cannot doubt, that this possibility was already in mind at the time of Judge Roberts' appointment to be the Associate Justice seat held by Sandra Day O'Connor.

Second, this move avoids the problems that exist with an eight member Court. Given that Justice O'Connor made her resignation conditional upon the confirmation of a successor, this "upgrade" of the Roberts nomination will result in a full Supreme Court on the first Monday in October. O'Connor will therefore stay on until a replacement is found and confirmed, and there will be no 4-4 decisions (case affirmed, but no precedent value) or reargument of cases after the new member joins the Court.

Third, it allows the casting of a wider net for nominees. The president now has some breathing room to look at potential nominees. A successor to Justice O'Connor need not be selected before Thanksgiving -- or even before Easter. While she was ready to move on, I suspect that Sandra Day O'Connor will have no objection to staying on the Supreme Court for the entire first term of the Roberts Court, in large part out of consideration for the man who was such a key part of her own confirmation process during the Reagan Administration. In the interim, certain recently confirmed appellate judges (Judge Janice Rogers Brown, for example) will have had time to prove themselves as ready to "step-up" to the Supeme Court.

The article from teh AP contains two items I want to comment upon. The first regards the role of the Chief Justice, and the desire to keep its power and authority out of the hands of Justice John Paul Stevens.

Getting a new chief justice of Bush's choosing in place quickly also avoids the scenario of having liberal Justice John Paul Stevens making the decisions about whom to assign cases to and making other decisions that could influence court deliberations. As the court's senior justice, Stevens would take over Rehnquist's administrative duties until a new chief is confirmed.

I've got to disagree there. While a Chief Justice can assign opinions where he is in the majority, any justice can write and circulate an opinion. The chambers of Justice Scalia, for example, churn out a great many dissenting and concurring opinions. But as students of the Supreme Court know, the mere fact that the initial assignment goes to a particular justice does not prevent another justice (even one in the original minority) from garnering enough votes to become the author of the eventual majority opinion. Add to that the process of negotiation that goes into securing a majority, and the influence of the Chief Justice in making assignments is less a factor than it might appear. Also, the bulk of the Chief Justice's extra duties are administrative -- overseeing the day-to-day functioning of the Court. Those tasks don't significantly change, regardless of the judicial philosophy of the chief justice.

Also, there is an error in the article.

The last time a president chose a chief justice outside the court was half a century ago, when Earl Warren was selected by President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Wrong! Richard Nixon nominated Warren Burger to sit in the center chair in 1969. He was not a Supreme Court Justice, but a federal appellate judge.

But while we are on the subject of Earl Warren, his tenure as Chief Justice should slam the door on critics who say Roberts lacks the judicial experience to succeed Rehnquist. Warren, after all, had never been a judge prior to becoming chief justice -- but is generally counted as a great or near-great justice by court historians.

As usual, great stuff may be found by Michelle Malkin. The crew at Southen Appeal is also checking in this morning. So is ConfirmThem.com, with several good posts. The Supreme Court Nomination Blog also posts several pieces, as does SCOTUSBlog.

Posted by: Greg at 02:17 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 858 words, total size 6 kb.

When Richard Nixon appointed William Rehnquist to the US Supreme Court, he was something of a non-entity. The big name was Lewis Powell, nominated with him for the court's other opening. Little did anyone suspect that Rehnquist would turn into one of the giants of the Court, not only in terms of his leadership if the Court away from the liberalism of the Warren Court, but also in terms of his role as a historian of the Court.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist passed away last night after a battle with thyroid cancer that moved a nation.

A Republican appointed by President Nixon and elevated to chief justice by President Reagan, Rehnquist began as an outspoken conservative and a lone dissenter on the high court. But through the years, as more conservatives joined him on the bench, he found himself shaping the majority of a court that often split 5-4.

A strong defender of states' rights, he viewed the powers of the federal government as clearly defined and extremely limited. In his opinion, liberal justices too often crossed the line between interpreting the law and forming public policy.

He voted consistently against affirmative action, dissenting in cases upholding the use of busing to integrate public schools, and in 1983 was the sole dissenter in a case that upheld the federal government's policy of denying a tax deduction for Bob Jones University because of its racist policies.

He voted against the right to an abortion in the landmark 1973 case of Roe v. Wade, arguing states' rights, and pushed to overturn the decision the rest of his career.

He also argued against the notion that the Constitution demands separation between church and state, writing that the idea "should be frankly and explicitly abandoned."

He voted consistently to give police more powers and to limit the rights of criminal defendants. In his court opinions and in public speeches, he endorsed speeding up the criminal appeals process, especially in death penalty cases.

He presided over the impeachment trial of President Clinton, and after the 2000 presidential election, he sided with the majority in a controversial 5-4 decision that sent George W. Bush to the White House.

I first learned about the Chief Justice when I was a kid reading Woodward and Armstrong's classic study of the Supreme Court, The Brethren. Rehnquist struck me as the most human of the bunch, whetehr it was because he would join the clerks on the roof of the Supreme Court building to blay basketball on "The Highest Court In The Land" or because, when other justices didn't understand a National Lampoon cartoon about SCOTUS decisions about pornorgraphy, he sent his cleks out to get copies for his college-age children. Even his eventual affectation of gold stripes on his judicial robe (which I hope becomes a part of Supreme Court tradition) made Rehnquist seem to be something of a whimsical character. The dignity with which he endured his recent health issues is to be admired.

With heaings on the nomination of Judge John Roberts to succeed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor prepared to begin on Tuesday, there is speculation on a possible postponement. Given that Rehnquist will lie in repose in the Supeme Court Building on Tuesday and Wednesday prior to his funeral at the National Cathedral and burial at Arlington Cemetary, I would not be surprised to see a postponement until Thursday.

Sadly, the partisan buzzards are already circling. Alan Dershowitz insulted the Chief Justice's memory on FoxNews before the body was even cold, redefining terms and airing long-refuted charges about Rehnquist without even a hint of shame. The intellectial lightweights at places like Democratic Underground are not even cloaking their hatred in a veneer of scholarship like that pathetic excuse for a Harvard don did. Both forms of distespect for the dead are equally repulsive.

There is also, of course, speculation on a possible replacement. I think any number of things could happen, from elevating a sitting justice to the center chair, making Roberts the nominee for Chief Justice, recess appointing O'Connor to the Chief Justiceship (unlikely), or the selection of a candidate from off the Court. I'm genuinely not sure what the President will do, but there are any number of combinations of scenarios. Let's give the matter some time to clarify itself.

ADDENDUM: Here is a link to a number of quotes about the Chief Justice. Also, Michelle Malkin has a good post on her blog. Additional info at Blogs for Bush and GOPBloggers. Many links about Chief Justice Rehnquist from ConfirmThem.com

UPDATE: Just when I thought Dershowitz couldn't sink any lower, he resorts to slandering the dead using anonymous sources.

Posted by: Greg at 01:16 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 785 words, total size 7 kb.

This babbling buffoon has already shown he is in way over his head -- witness the obscene meltdown the other day, not to mention his failure to use available buses to get New Orleans residents out of the city before Hurricane Katrina hit the city. Now his mental breakdown appears to have gone a step further, as Nagin claims he is targetted for a CIA hit, based upon comments made on Friday night.

"Today was a turning point, I think," he said. "My philosophy is never get too high, never get too low. ... I always try to keep my emotions in check and yesterday I kind of went off a little bit. I was worried about that, but it maybe worked out. I don't know. If the CIA slips me something and next week you don't see me, you'll all know what happened."

Is there any way for this man to be relieved of all authority? He seems to have gone over the edge mentally, and to be suffering from the effects of some sort of psychological breakdown.

And lest anyone think this is a joke, Nagin even repeated the claim on Saturday.

Today he told interviewers for CNN on a live broadcast he feared the "CIA might take me out.".

So he screwed up the evacuation, and now he is melting down during the recovery. I've got a Bad feeling about this.

Posted by: Greg at 12:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 238 words, total size 1 kb.

I hadn't planned on writing any more today, but I had to click on one last link, sent by a friend. What I read is disquieting in more ways than one. I may not agree with Ana Menendez of the Miami Herald on everything, but she does raise one proper point.

It seems that some hotels in Talahassee are telling folks displaced by Hurricane Katrina that they are to be displaced by Miami Hurricanes and FSU Seminoles arriving for the big game between the two schools on Monday night. They have reservations, you see, some paid in advance no doubt, and these folks from Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana didn't plan ahead for their homes to be destroyed by the biggest natural disaster in the United States in at least a century.

Cancel the stupid game.

Let the Hurricanes, the Seminoles and their hollow mascots play another day. I don't care how long the fans have been waiting for the FSU-Miami showdown in Tallahassee Monday night. I don't care about Devin Hester's kick return.

What kind of country amuses itself with choreographed violence while the world burns? How low have we sunk on the moral scale when hotels in Tallahassee are kicking out victims from the real hurricane to make way for a bunch of football fans?

New Orleans is burning. Its people are waiting in lines that stretch for half a mile. Tens of thousands have lost not just homes, but an entire way of life. A city is gone. We are facing one of the biggest displacements in the country's history. And the few evacuees who have managed to find shelter in hotels around Tallahassee have to pick up and go because of football?

''We have to let them know what's going on in town and they're going to have to leave,'' a hotel manager told The Herald's Mary Ellen Klas.

The manager added: ``Many of them are trying to get closer to home anyway.''

I guess that would be those who still have a home.

Yeah, I find Menendez a bit shrill, but I agree with her on her larger point -- no person displaced by this disaster should be displaced by a mere football game. Yeah, Iknow that is near blasphemous coming from someone from Texas, but it is also the simple truth.

But I have to disagree with menendez when she proposes that all revenue from the game -- tickt sales, concessions, and salaries -- ought to be turned over to charity. She may be offended when University of Miami atheletic department spokesman Mark Pray rejected the idea out of hand and noted that she wasn't giving up her salary for the duration, but Pray had it right. Afte all, how many of those concession workers and ticket takers are working those jobs for the money they need for necessities, not for a little extra spending money? Would Ana and her press pass care to explain why these folks should get stiffed while she continues to draw her pay and her expense-account money? Probably not, but as a member of the MSM she feels she is semi-divine royalty entitled to be treated with a different standard that the commoners whose work does not involve the First Amendment.

But while I think that most of what Menendez has written is simply shrill socialism, she does strike a note with me. Because of a pair of seats in the back of Section 541.

Most folks know that we've got some 15,000 people displaced by Hurricane Katrina living in the Astrodome (more properly the Reliant Astrodome, thanks to a naming rights deal). Two other buildings in Reliant Park -- the Reliant Arena and Reliant Center -- have also been taken for emergency shelter. There are folks downtown at the George R. Brown Convention Center, too, some miles from the the other three locations. The mayor has rightly challenged groups or businesses with cancelled events to sue, and then explain in court why their event was more important than disaster relief.

But one facility at Reliant Park is not in use for temporary shelter, despite being literally only a Hail Mary pass or kickoff return from the Astrodome. That is the crown jewel of Reliant Park -- Reliant Stadium, home of the Houston Texans, where those two seats are located.

I'm left with some uncomfortable questions because of that. Questions that, being asked, are likely to bring some outraged fans looking for me on September 18, the first regular season home game for the Texans.

There is only one event booked into Relaint Stadium between now and the start of October -- the Septembr 18 game against the Pittsburgh Steelers. Does that game need to be moved to provide more shelter for the victims of this disaster? I'm not sure -- but I have an answer gnawing in the pit of my stomach that might not be too popular with my fellow Texans fans.

And beyond the shelter question is the reality that many of the folks sleeping on cots in the other three buildings are still going to be there in two weeks. Is it responsible, is it proper, to surround them with game day crowds and the orgy of tailgating that we find in the parking lots surrounding their place of refuge? It somehow seems. . . less than ideal. But one has to wonder if the game does not belong somewhere else for that reason alone.

Please, no one hear me as taking a shot at the Houston Texans. Team owner Bob McNair made a $1,000,000 donation to disaster relief on Thursday night, matching the donations called in by Texan fans during the teams final pre-season game in Tampa Bay. I'm sure players and coaches, as well as fans, have shown generosity in this time of crisis. And there will no doubt be the obligatory Red Cross collection at the gates on September 18.

But I think there is a question that still needs to be asked by the state, county, and city, the fans and ticketholders, and the Houston Texans.

Is the biggest gift that the we can give to the victims of Hurricane Katrina the gift of our home opener?

Posted by: Greg at 02:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1045 words, total size 6 kb.

Noted race 'ho' Al Sharpton (I refuse to dignify him with the title of Reverend) was in Houston to call on local black congregations to help with huricane relief.

One problem -- this slick poverty pimp came to a community where churches of all denominations and ethnicities are already engaged in the process of helping those in need.

While government's emergency planning may have failed the survivors of Hurricane Katrina, the Rev. Al Sharpton called on Houston's black houses of worship today to feed, shelter and comfort the evacuees.

Speaking to about 50 of the city's faith leaders and a handful of politicians gathered inside North Houston's Community of Faith Church, the civil rights activist and former presidential candidate from New York said religious congregations must play a leading role in the relief effort.

"The black church community has always been the anchor in the storm when we have a problem," Sharpton said. "If our people, or any people that come to this city can't depend on the church to open its doors and open its hearts, then we ought to take down the crosses and quit claiming to serve God."

Harris County Judge Robert Eckels and Andrea White, the wife of Mayor Bill White, also attended the meeting, which was arranged by U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee and the Rev. James Dixon II. Dallas Mavericks basketball coach Avery Johnson was there to announce a charity basketball game scheduled for next Sunday at Toyota Center.

Most agreed to take time during their sermons this morning to call on their members to open their homes to displaced families and volunteer to help those who have lost everything.

The Rev. I.V. Hilliard, pastor of New Light Christian Center Church, opened telephone hot lines for evacuees to reconnect with their pastors in Houston.

It's a service that's needed, said the Rev. Charles Southall III, pastor of First Emanuel Baptist Church in New Orleans. He attended today's meeting seeking help for members.

"I have a 1,200-member church and we're just trying to get stabilized," said Southall, who carries a folder full of Omni Hotel stationery filled with handwritten names and numbers of members he's reached so far. "I hear useful planning here today and I'm optimistic."

If Sharpton wants to really engage the Christian community, he will quit distinguishing between the "black church" and the "white church", for God knows no white or black or brown. And he will notice that the churches of Houston have opened their hearts and their doors to people of all races in this time of need.

Al, speaking as a Christian, let me say that we don't need a lying race-baiter (who still won't apologize for his lies in the Tawana Brawley case or for getting people killed because they were "white interlopers" doing business in the black community) to come into town to sow division between black and white. We don't need some charlatan to draw lines and create divisions between members of the body of Christ..

Posted by: Greg at 11:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 512 words, total size 3 kb.

My darling wife and I haven't had a good vacation in years -- the last was a trip to Boston via Logan airport about a month before 9/11. We've been talking about taking a cruise this Christmas, and had recently decided one.

Well, I guess the ship will be otherwise engaged this year.

Some Katrina evacuees will be housed aboard three Carnival Cruise Line ships, including two initially slated to be docked in Galveston.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency is chartering the vessels, which will be crewed by Carnival employees, for six months, Carnival spokesman Vance Gulliksen said today.

The Ecstasy, normally stationed in Galveston, and Sensation, normally stationed in New Orleans, are planned for Galveston, Gulliksen said. Both can hold 2,600 people, he said. The ships will be pulled from regular service Monday.

A third, the Holiday, which normally sails out of Mobile, Ala., will be docked there. It can hold up to 1,800 people, Gulliksen said.

I was looking forward to a getaway on the high seas -- but maybe next year. These folks are more than welcome to our cabin.

Posted by: Greg at 11:02 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 195 words, total size 1 kb.

Found on Americablog:

How do we get all the bush people out of this country's government ? I can not believe there is anyone in this country that still supports him. Anyone in government who does should be voted out of office. Until then any more harm he has in mind to do to this country, the congress should not allow to happen. There have to be some republicans that still are honest enough to help stop his policys, and tax cuts. They are so busy getting the spin and talking points going. These were, and are citizens of this country, we can not let those who have brought this mis-handling of help, to now start spinning out of it. I used to be so proud of America, I want to be again.

snobird | 09.03.05 - 2:38 pm | #

Do you believe this guy was ever proud of America?

Posted by: Greg at 07:45 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 159 words, total size 1 kb.

It seems that Paul Krugman just can't admit that George W. Bush won the 2000 election fair and square.

None of this has any bearing on my original point, which was not that the outcome would have been different if the U.S. Supreme Court had not intervened - the Florida Supreme Court had not, in fact, called for a full statewide manual recount - but that the recorded vote was so close that, when you combine that fact with the effects of vote suppression and ballot design, it becomes reasonably clear that the voters of Florida, as well as those of the United States as a whole, tried to choose Mr. Gore.

1) The only vote suppression in Florida in 2000 was by the Gore camp, making sure that members of the military could not get their absentee ballots counted.

2) The problem with "ballot design" seems never to have been a problemin Illinois, where the butterfly layout used in Palm Beach was used for the last several decades -- and which subsequent studies showed could be accurately voted by a four year old.

But we don;t want mere facts to get in the way of Paul writing his column, do we?

Posted by: Greg at 07:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 212 words, total size 1 kb.

Now the last time I checked, sir, the President of the United States lacked the authority to do anything with these school buses that might have facilitated an evacuation. On the other hand, the Governor of Louisiana could have ordered a mandatory evacuation sooner (she did so only after the President urged her to do so), and the Mayor of New Orleans could have directd that the school buses be used for such an evacuation.

As is pointed out by one of Jonah Goldberg's readers, a significant number of folks could have been evacuated if the above officials hac been competent in their pre-hurricane planning and ordered that these buses be put to use rather than be abandined to the storm.

Jonah:

I count 205 busses. When I was a kid, I remember that school busses could carry 66 people. If that is still the case, 13,530 people could be carried to safety in ONE trip using only the busses shown in that picture.

One trip.

Joe

Let's presume that the buses only seat 55 (66 strikes me as sort of high) and they don't over-pack them -- that is still over 11,000 people per trip. In other words, even one run would have evacuated half of those who took shelter at the Superdome -- had the state and local authorities been competent in their disaster preparations. These vehicles might have been able to make multiple runs, and would certainly be available now for evacuation duty. Too bad that nobody order them used

Now explain to me precisely who it was who failed to "get off of their goddamn asses" to make sure that these people were evacuated using available resources? Was it the President? Or was it the Mayor of New Orleans and the Governor of Louisiana?

(Hat Tip -- RedState.Org and Junkyard Blog)

Posted by: Greg at 03:33 AM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 311 words, total size 2 kb.

It looks like our friends from Louisiana and other areas devastated by Hurricane Katrina may be staying here in Texas for a while. Fortuantely, there are long-term solutions to the housing problem, since the Astrodome and other shelter facilities are not designed to be permanent housing.

An estimated 18,000 vacant apartment units statewide opened for hurricane victims Friday when the federal government waived special income requirements, Gov. Rick Perry announced Friday.

Families eligible for Federal Emergency Management Agency financial aid can receive vouchers to move into the apartments.

The governor sought the Internal Revenue Service waiver as the state mobilized aid for those fleeing Hurricane Katrina.

"We will do all we can as a state and a people to help our neighbors to the east who have lost so much," Perry said.

The effort to move as many hurricane evacuees out of shelters and into more permanent housing coincided with more than 15,000 beds opening up in shelters stretching from Austin to Corpus Christi to El Paso, the governor's office said.

"We're just trying to cut through the red tape for them and get them permanent housing. Obviously the Astrodome is not a permanent home," said Perry spokesman Robert Black.

About 7,000 units are in the eastern, more populated parts of Texas.

I suspect that the Red Cross and FEMA would be the folks to contact about getting into these units around the state.

Posted by: Greg at 02:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 242 words, total size 2 kb.

The Cindy Sheehan "It's All About Me" Tour made an appearance in Houston on Thursday, as the city was ramping up its efforts to help our fellow citizens whose lives were disrupted by Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath.

She and her fellow-travellers showed up at the offices of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay to demand (not request -- demand) an immediate meeting while the Delay and his staff were working to secure the resources necessary to care for the many people in need of shelter, food, and medical care.

I wouldn't usually include a politician's press release or campaign mailing in my blog -- certainly not a whole one, at any rate. And I've had my own disagrements with DeLay, who is my congressman, and I've expressed those on this blog and its predecessor, as well as in letters and calls to DeLay's office. But i think this statement needs to stand on its own, for it sums up Sheehan's narcissistic arrogance quite well.

So I offer for your consideration this statement from the Tom DeLay Congressional Committee.

WeÂ’ve all heard about Cindy Sheehan, the anti-war mother who camped out in Crawford demanding to meet with the President.

Yesterday Ms. Sheehan crossed the line. While our community worked tirelessly to care and prepare for thousands of evacuees from the hurricane Katrina disaster, Ms. Sheehan renewed her attacks on the President and specifically targeted Congressman Tom DeLay.

As Congressman DeLay was working to rally federal resources to help with disaster recovery efforts, Ms. Sheehan and her media-seeking crew “made an appearance?” at the Congressman’s Stafford office demanding a meeting.

Without the slightest bit of concern for the refugees, the disaster efforts that are underway, and the sheer scope of the task in front of our community, Sheehan and her group stated, “We’ve come a long way, and we want a meeting before we leave tonight.”

Right now, there is a critical need for water, food and basic necessities across the entire Gulf Coast, including in the Greater Houston Area where more than 25,000 refugees are receiving aid and shelter.

Congressman DeLayÂ’s offices are working day and night to help lend support to the relief effort. Thousands of volunteers have pitched in and Houstonians are opening their hearts and wallets to care for the masses leaving Louisiana.

Ms. Sheehan and MoveOn.orgÂ’s media stunts show a complete lack of respect for our community, the tragedy we are coping with, and it serve as further evidence of how little they care for anything but their own agenda.

We felt a little background information was in order as a reminder of what this agenda is really about and how bizarre their message is:

•Sheehan says America is “not worth dying for.”

“George Bush and his neo-conservatives killed my son,” [Sheehan] said tearing up a bit. “America has been killing people on this continent since it was started. This country is not worth dying for.” (SFSU Hosts A Terrorist, www.frontpagemag.com, 5/2/05)

•Cindy Sheehan attacks moms who support the War on Terror.

Sheehan calls mothers who have lost children in Iraq and still support President Bush “the continue ‘the murder and mayhem’ moms”. (Cindy Sheehan’s blog, 8/27/05)

Sheehan blames America for the problems in Iraq “We caused these problems. America caused these problems.”

•Sheehan alleges the War on Terror is one big Israeli conspiracy.

“. . . my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel.” (Letter to ABC’s Nightline, 3/15/05)

Sheehan is backed by - and has become the tool of - MoveOn.org, professional protestors, and radical PR gurus.

* In the 2004 Presidential campaign, she appeared in MoveOn.org ads attacking President Bush. (www.moveonpac.org)

* Sheehan has developed media savvy with assistance from the national public relations firm Fenton Communications, which has also worked with Moveon.org... (Houston Chronicle, 8/11/05)

* And Lisa Fithian, “a veteran of the Seattle WTO riots and scores of other protests [has] been with Sheehan from the start” helping her coordinate her protest in Crawford and upcoming bus tour. (National Review, 8/29/05) http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200508290901.asp

Cindy Sheehan and the MoveOn.org road show is focused on attacking the President, undermining the gallant efforts of our troops overseas, and taking back Congress for the Democrats. This has been their agenda since the 2004 Presidential election and no hurricane disaster effort is going to cause them to let up.

I've only clipped a link to an NPR clip and the final few sentences at the end that discuss DeLay's probable Democrat opponent. But I do think that her actions here in houston make quite clear that her actions are more about Cindy Sheehan than they are about what is good for the United States, otherwise she would have cancelled the multiple Houston stops of her "Honk If You {heart} al-Zarqawi" caravan.

UPDATE: CINDY CUTS AND RUNS -- I guess her 'personal business is more important than either helpin with the hurricane relief in the region where she is travelling or the anti-American goals of her travelling snake-oil show.

Posted by: Greg at 02:24 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 853 words, total size 6 kb.

Eddie Corral joined the Houston Fire Department in 1955., only the fourth Hispanic to serve as a firefighter in the city's history.

His career was marked by a drive for excellence and dedication to serving and protecting the people of Houston.

He retired from active service to the people of Houston yesterday.

Corral worked his way up the department ladder, rung by rung, taking competitive exams for the next highest post, including the fire marshal job he returned to after being chief.

When he came on board as chief, the fire academy was closed. Twenty-two fire stations had leaking roofs.

"The men had to arrange buckets all over the floors when it rained," he said. There were only two women in the entire department.

When he left, the academy was up and running, the roofs were fixed, there were 80 female firefighters and hundreds of ethnic minorities had been recruited.

Corral jokes that his biggest accomplishment was the annual calendar featuring firefighters. But, as chief and fire marshal, Corral launched several innovative programs that were imitated nationwide, including the Juvenile Firesetters Prevention Program; the Cease-Fire Club, a civilian fire prevention program; and the Triad, a cooperative high-rise safety program with owners of tall buildings.

The fire chief runs the department. The fire marshal, who reports to the chief, is in charge of fire prevention.

Both jobs brought different challenges, Corral said, but he is most passionate about prevention.

"There have been 400,000 people killed in fires across the country since I began my career. But 90 percent of all fires can be prevented. As fire marshal, I took that on as a challenge," he said.

You know, I don't care about Eddie Corral's heritage so much as I do about his accomplishments. He wasn't merely one of the best Hispanic fire chiefs and fire marshals in the country -- he was one of the best, period. Ethnicity didn't enter into the equation. That he is also a fine role model for the Hispanic community is simply a bonus, in my opinion.

There are two quotes that I think sum up Corral's career, both taken from interviews he gave yesterday.

The first talks about how the job of a firefighter has changed over the decades, and how it has become more professional.

"When I started at the fire department, we used have a motto. It was, 'You light them, we fight them.' Now the motto is, 'Seeking opportunities to serve.' That kind of tells you the different thinking that prevails now."

The second tells you of his love for the job, the profession, that has been his passion for half a century.

"I'll miss the excitement of helping people and the sense of duty but, after 50 years, it's time to go. It's been great," Corral said.

"Some wise man said, 'If you find something you like to do, you never have to work a day in your life.' I haven't worked a day in 50 years."

Don't you wish you could express that sort of love for what you do?

And then there is his observation on the men and women of the Houston Fire Department while visiting a number of fire sttions and fires around the city on his final day as fire marshal.

"You can't find a better group of people to work with," Corral said proudly.

Thank you and God bless you, Eddie Corral. May you have a happy retirement.

Posted by: Greg at 01:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 583 words, total size 4 kb.

You people know I almost never blog about school, and when I do I am very circumspect.

I will be general in this post, too , but I have to say that I'm going to be a bit more specific in what I say here.

I teach on the east side of Houston, at a 9-10 grade high school campus. We have about 2300 students, 80% minority, well-over half qualifying for free/reduced lunch. We are blessed by an industrial base, as we straddle I-10, and we are also a growing residential community because of new home construction on the north side of the district. I won't name the school or district.

We are being touched by Hurricane Katrina in a small way. My campus had four students fom Louisiana enrolled as of the start of school today. Our sister campus (grades 11-12) had 10. I would speculate the district probably had received 30-40 as of this morning. Who knows how many came in to the district today? I won't even begin to speculate about what will happen next week, though I will note that we already have a lot of students with Louisiana roots whose cousins are likely to turn up.

We got word from the district today -- we will take all comers without question. What's more, the word out of the district offices is that none of these students is expected to lay out a penny for anything -- not pens and pencils, not paper, not notebooks. To quote my principal, "If they don't have clothes, we will take them clothes shopping." I applaud my district for taking that stand, which I suspect goes even furhter than TEA requires of us.

But the commitment goes further than that. There aren't any openings in the district now (we pay well for the area, and have a reputation as a good place to work), but the district is planning to hire on some of the displaced teachers from Louisiana as long-term or permanent substitutes, so that they have money coming in. It won't be anywhere near their regular salaries as teachers, unfortuantely, but it will be something. After all, a lot of schools are closed for the foreseeable future over in Louisiana, and teachers have been told that they are on their own.

The district has asked employees to help. At our faculty meeting today, we were challenged to donate at a certain level (varying depending on whether the employee is uncertified, a teacher, or an administrator). We approved that by acclamation. Proceeds will be going to the school district in Pascagoula, Mississippi, with which there is a pre-existing relationship.

Our kids are in on this, too. One of our service organizations is running a clothing/bedding/canned goods/toiletries/everything-but-the-kitchen-sink drive. Students at the New Arrival Center (for recent immigrants needing to learn English) on one of our other campuses will be sponsoring a car wash tomorrow.

And then there was the fundraising drive by student council. I'm not sure how much they raised, but I suspect that it was in excess of $5000 just from sending someone around to each classroom during third period. I suspect my class ponied up about $50-60. A colleague tells me of one boy who, before going to lunch, pulled out his wallet and emptied the contents into the can -- at least $20.00. I've got this kid in one of my history classes, and know he comes from one of the worst neighborhoods in the district and from a family that doesn't have much. I know he wors after school and on weekends to contribute to the family budget, and doesn't keep much for himself -- so it was probably all or most of what he has for a week or two. He's the type of kid that I refer to when I tell folks that I teach the best kids in the world -- he may not be the best student, but he is an outstanding human being.

I don't doubt that the other schools in the district are responding in exactly the same way.

I'll update you folks about how Katrina impacts my school and my district as time goes on. One thing I can tell you, based on what has happened so far -- we WILL step up. And so will every other Texas school and district.

(Michelle Malkin has a round-up of relief efforts here in Texas -- and Lone Star Times is covering the action at the Astrodome)

UPDATE: As of mid-morning on Friday, at least 6100 students displaced by katrina have enrolled in schools around the state of Texas, according to the Texas Education Agency (TEA).

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin talks about the situation in Pascagoula

Posted by: Greg at 01:04 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 801 words, total size 5 kb.

The ACLU is objecting to a town logo that includes a rosary as a reflection of the history and heritage of the community.

The New Mexico chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union is objecting to the new logo for the Village of Tijeras. Some village residents are objecting to the ACLU.

At issue is the village seal, an image containing depictions of a conquistadorÂ’s helmet, a sword and a Catholic rosary. ItÂ’s the last item that has the ACLU concerned.

I'm curious -- why do they not object to the native American religious symbol also depicted on the logo? Could it be an anti-Catholic -- indeed, an anti-Christian -- bias on the part of the Anti-Christian Liberals Union.

Posted by: Greg at 12:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.

After all, these guys are opposing Judge Roberts based solely upon ideology, not competence or qualifications.

In a letter to Sens. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Republican chairman and ranking Democrat, respectively, on the Senate Judiciary Committee, 160 teachers of law from 63 institutions stated their opposition. They said it was based on Roberts' memos as a Reagan administration lawyer, the briefs that he signed as deputy solicitor general in the George H.W. Bush administration and his rulings on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

That record, the letter said, suggests that Roberts "holds a limited view of Congress' authority to enact key worker, civil rights and environmental protections and a similarly narrow view of the vital role our courts and our government play in safeguarding individual rights, especially civil and women's rights."

At a news conference, Duke University Law School professor Erwin Chemerinsky said Roberts was "likely to be much more conservative than O'Connor" and could overturn narrow decisions upholding affirmative action, the right to privacy and separation of church and state.

In other words, there is no question of fitness for the Supreme Court, simply an objection based upon philosophy. Since the ABA has given the judge its highest rating, this letter is simply a disgrace.

And i love the justification these folks use to justify the rejection of Judge Roberts -- the rejection of Robert Bork, generally considered to be the nadir of confirmation politics and the classic example of the destruction of a highly qualified judge based upon ideological considerations.

Chemerinsky compared O'Connor's departure from the court with the 1987 retirement of moderate Justice Lewis Powell. The Senate rejected Judge Robert H. Bork, then-President Ronald Reagan's first nominee to replace Powell, and the seat eventually went to the moderate conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Fine -- just wait for us to Bork any future liberal nominee -- as should have been done to Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Posted by: Greg at 12:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 333 words, total size 2 kb.

Michelle Malkin provides a great post reminding us all that the city of New Orleans is not the only place touched by Hurricane Katrina.

Her post discusses the death and destruction in towns outside of new Orleans (indeed,outside Louisiana) that have been severely effected by the storm.

Cities and towns included are:
CHALMETTE, LA.
SLIDELL, LA.
METAIRIE, LA.
PASS CHRISTIAN, GULFPORT, AND LONG BEACH, MISS.
GRETNA, TERRYTOWN, HARVEY, AND MARRERO, LA.
MANDEVILLE AND COVINGTON, LA.
BILOXI, MISS.
MOBILE, BALDWIN, WASHINGTON, CLARKE CHOCTAW ANDSUMPTER COUNTIES, AL.

Posted by: Greg at 11:35 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

Sometimes an article makes one lament that there is no way to round up some members of a community and "vote them off the island".

This is one such case.

Amid the overwhelmingly compassionate response to hurricane evacuees in Houston, a less-welcoming undercurrent is developing among people worried about the impact of thousands of needy, desperate people.

E-mails, blogs and callers to the Chronicle wonder why refugees draw such immediate assistance while Houston's poor continue to suffer. Others fear an increase of crime.

Some are blunt. "Yes, let's rush to bring over the looters and destroyers of public and private property," wrote a blogger.

Some are thoughtful. "I have grave concerns about a city that can't help the people here now that are going hungry and cannot pay the high cost of utilities," e-mailed a Houston woman.

Others feel a burden has been foisted on Houstonians. "I am not a Christian, but I am charitable. That being said, there's a difference between me making a personal choice to give $50 to the Red Cross and my elected officials inviting 25,000 homeless into the middle of my city," a resident wrote the Chronicle's SciGuy blog.

Laurence Simon, a tech support employee for a local company, has mixed feelings.

"I'm glad that we're putting out a welcome mat. These people have to go somewhere. But I don't know if officials are appreciating the extent of what it's going to take," said Simon.

"You can hold the door open on the elevator for more and more people but, at some point, the elevator gets too full and the cable snaps."

About two-thirds of the population of New Orleans and many of the evacuees are black. Some of the e-mails and calls have a racist bent.

But the unease cuts across racial lines. Michelle Louring, an African-American resident of the Greenspoint area, said her neighborhood already has experienced an increase in petty crimes and nuisances she blames on refugees.

Those to object to public and private efforts to provide relief to people effected by Hurricane Katrina would do well to shut up and help o improve the Houston area -- by finding somewhere else tolive. Your sort are not welcome in this town..

Posted by: Greg at 11:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 383 words, total size 2 kb.

I've seen prices jump 40 cents at the station behind my school in 24 hours. I'm not sure if it is a shortage causing it, speculation, or just plain greed. And I'm not sure where the prices will go from here. I do know that I saw prices at $3.00 in Pasadena Texas -- you know, the town where all those refineries from Urban Cowboy are located.

We hear, of course, about the damage to and closure of energy-related facilities. That is bad.

But we may not be in for rising prices for long, if this information is correct.

Gasoline futures fell for the first day in five as some fuel pipelines shut by Hurricane Katrina were reopened and as refiners prepared to restart plants along the Gulf coast.

Colonial Pipeline Co. expected yesterday to raise gasoline and distillate shipments to 61 percent of their normal rate. Royal Dutch Shell Plc said it may next week re-start the Motiva refinery at Convent, Louisiana. At least eight U.S. refineries, more than 10 percent of the nation's capacity, remained shut for a sixth day because of flooding and blackouts from Katrina.

``It's certainly going to take a while to get everything back up,'' said Bob Frye, a commodity broker at Access Futures & Options Trading Inc. in Woodlake, California.

Gasoline for October delivery fell as much as 4.9 cents, or 2 percent, to $2.36 a gallon in after-hours electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. It was at $2.365 at 9:41 a.m. Sydney time.

Yesterday, the contract surged as much as 9.3 percent to $2.4650, before closing at $2.409 a gallon, marking a 30 percent gain this week. Prices today have almost doubled from a year ago.

The Gulf of Mexico receives more than half of U.S. oil imports and is home to about 50 percent of the nation's refining capacity. Power cuts, flooding and a lack of workers are hampering refiners' efforts to inspect plants and restore output.

So it looks like many of the facilities may have come through the storms in better shape than we feared -- but getting to them and getting folks to work at them may be a bigger challenge.

And we are being advised by the administration to expect $3.00 gas through Halloween.

But look at the bright side -- only through Halloween. We may have a restoration of supply to near normal before winter sets in.

Posted by: Greg at 03:09 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 413 words, total size 3 kb.

I had no intention of writing about the sad story from Hattiesburg, Mississippi, of a woman shot and killed by her brother over a bag of ice. Then I saw this at the end of the story.

The shooting is being treated like a homicide, [Police Chief David] Wynn said.

Why wouldnÂ’t it be treated as a homicide?

After all, the killing of another human being by another IS homicide, by definition.

Posted by: Greg at 12:26 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 75 words, total size 1 kb.

What would you do if your wife cheated on you and became pregnant by another man? What if they conspired to keep the secret from you for decades? This is the interesting question raised by a New Jersey case.

A man who found out 30 years after his youngest child's birth that he was not the father had the right to sue the biological father for nearly $110,000, the cost of raising the child, an appeals court ruled yesterday.

In the first ruling to extend a statutory deadline in a paternity case, the appellate panel said the man could collect the money even though he missed the deadline under New Jersey's Parentage Act by eight years. The court said it made sense because the biological father, along with the duped man's wife, never told him he was not the boy's father.

The attorney for the biological father said his client had not decided whether to appeal to the state Supreme Court.

"The court has finally shed light on the parameters of the Parentage Act and what it covers and how far it can go," said the attorney, Scott Bocker. "Unfortunately, I don't necessarily agree with everything they said, but ... they have the say in how the statute is interpreted."

Family court expert John Paone Jr. called it "a groundbreaking case."

"There is no precedent in New Jersey where a parent has been compelled to pay child support more than 15 years after the emancipation of a child," said Paone, who has been practicing family law for more than 20 years.

Paone said he does not expect the ruling to be applied widely.

"I still think it's going to be the rare case that the biological father knows he's the father and participates in the fraud," Paone said. "The facts of this case call out for a remedy you don't normally see in the court."

In a 30-page opinion that does not reveal the identities of either man, the mother or the son, the appeals court upheld a nearly $110,000 award granted by a Morris County judge in 2003.

Under the state's Parentage Act, an action to determine paternity could be filed up until the child in question turns 23. But the man who raised the boy did not find out until 1999 -- when the child was 30 -- that his ex-wife had had an affair with his friend in the late 1960s and had gotten pregnant. She gave birth to a son in 1969, and as a friend of the family, the biological father, identified in the ruling as P.J.S. Jr., agreed to be the boy's godfather, the decision said.

Ten years after the child was born, the couple divorced, but the plaintiff, R.A.C., paid child support and kept a relationship with all three of his children.

Now ordinarily I would be troubled by the statute of limitations question. But there is a long-standing legal doctrine – one which I believe dates back to common law -- which the courts have applied to this situation.

The biological father, however, appealed on the grounds the Paternity Act does not allow lawsuits to be filed after the child turns 23.
But the appeals court said just as murderers who avoid detection for years before they are caught can be sued for wrongful death long after the statute of limitation, so too can a duped man sue for child support from a biological father.

The doctrine of equitable tolling, as it is called, "applies to prevent a statute of limitations from being used as a sword by a defendant whose conduct contributed to the expiration of the statutory period," the decision said.

"Here, not only defendant but also B.E.C., the mother of the child, concealed the true facts of D.C.'s parentage from plaintiff. The duplicity was enhanced by defendant's agreement to serve as godfather for the child," the judges said.

In all honesty, I do not know if I would ever have sued in a case like this, but I respect the plaintiff’s right to do so.

I wonder, though, if the ultimate solution to the problem of paternity fraud might be to require paternity tests at birth. What do you folks think?

Posted by: Greg at 12:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 716 words, total size 4 kb.

What would you do if your wife cheated on you and became pregnant by another man? What if they conspired to keep the secret from you for decades? This is the interesting question raised by a New Jersey case.

A man who found out 30 years after his youngest child's birth that he was not the father had the right to sue the biological father for nearly $110,000, the cost of raising the child, an appeals court ruled yesterday.

In the first ruling to extend a statutory deadline in a paternity case, the appellate panel said the man could collect the money even though he missed the deadline under New Jersey's Parentage Act by eight years. The court said it made sense because the biological father, along with the duped man's wife, never told him he was not the boy's father.

The attorney for the biological father said his client had not decided whether to appeal to the state Supreme Court.

"The court has finally shed light on the parameters of the Parentage Act and what it covers and how far it can go," said the attorney, Scott Bocker. "Unfortunately, I don't necessarily agree with everything they said, but ... they have the say in how the statute is interpreted."

Family court expert John Paone Jr. called it "a groundbreaking case."

"There is no precedent in New Jersey where a parent has been compelled to pay child support more than 15 years after the emancipation of a child," said Paone, who has been practicing family law for more than 20 years.

Paone said he does not expect the ruling to be applied widely.

"I still think it's going to be the rare case that the biological father knows he's the father and participates in the fraud," Paone said. "The facts of this case call out for a remedy you don't normally see in the court."

In a 30-page opinion that does not reveal the identities of either man, the mother or the son, the appeals court upheld a nearly $110,000 award granted by a Morris County judge in 2003.

Under the state's Parentage Act, an action to determine paternity could be filed up until the child in question turns 23. But the man who raised the boy did not find out until 1999 -- when the child was 30 -- that his ex-wife had had an affair with his friend in the late 1960s and had gotten pregnant. She gave birth to a son in 1969, and as a friend of the family, the biological father, identified in the ruling as P.J.S. Jr., agreed to be the boy's godfather, the decision said.

Ten years after the child was born, the couple divorced, but the plaintiff, R.A.C., paid child support and kept a relationship with all three of his children.

Now ordinarily I would be troubled by the statute of limitations question. But there is a long-standing legal doctrine – one which I believe dates back to common law -- which the courts have applied to this situation.

The biological father, however, appealed on the grounds the Paternity Act does not allow lawsuits to be filed after the child turns 23.
But the appeals court said just as murderers who avoid detection for years before they are caught can be sued for wrongful death long after the statute of limitation, so too can a duped man sue for child support from a biological father.

The doctrine of equitable tolling, as it is called, "applies to prevent a statute of limitations from being used as a sword by a defendant whose conduct contributed to the expiration of the statutory period," the decision said.

"Here, not only defendant but also B.E.C., the mother of the child, concealed the true facts of D.C.'s parentage from plaintiff. The duplicity was enhanced by defendant's agreement to serve as godfather for the child," the judges said.

In all honesty, I do not know if I would ever have sued in a case like this, but I respect the plaintiffÂ’s right to do so.

I wonder, though, if the ultimate solution to the problem of paternity fraud might be to require paternity tests at birth. What do you folks think?

Posted by: Greg at 12:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 730 words, total size 4 kb.

I’ve heard the charge of “chickenhawk” thrown around frequently by left-wingers who think that it has some sort of meaning. I’ve even heard it used against veterans who did not serve in combat -- in one case against the head of the Ameican Legion, who spent his time in the Army in Germany rather than Vietnam.

The irony is that those using it seek to undermine the moral authority of those who have not served or are not currently serving, while at the same time arguing that those who serve are either evil killers and terrorists or incompetent victims too dim to understand their exploitation. Ultimately, they believe only in the moral authority of themselves and those who are “enlightened” enough to agree with them.

Lately I’ve been asking these folks if they have taken their turn shielding Iraqi civilians from the folks who are setting off car bombs among them. Andrew Cline offers a few more questions for them in a piece in the American Spectator.

Conservatives need to start flipping that coin to its other side by asking the following questions of anyone who levels the "chickenhawk" charge:

* Why are you not in Darfur feeding starving children?

* Why are you not on the Gulf Coast rescuing hurricane survivors?

* Why are you not in China protesting the political detention of dissidents?

* Why are you not in Swaziland teaching people how to prevent the spread of AIDS?

* Why are you not in Latin America training revolutionaries to overthrow corrupt regimes?

* Why are you not providing abortions to teenage girls?

Unfortunately, these sorts of questions don’t do much to shut up the average hardcore Leftist, but it might get through to those who haven’t consumed too much Kool-Aid yet.

Posted by: Greg at 12:14 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.

I’ve heard the charge of “chickenhawk” thrown around frequently by left-wingers who think that it has some sort of meaning. I’ve even heard it used against veterans who did not serve in combat -- in one case against the head of the Ameican Legion, who spent his time in the Army in Germany rather than Vietnam.

The irony is that those using it seek to undermine the moral authority of those who have not served or are not currently serving, while at the same time arguing that those who serve are either evil killers and terrorists or incompetent victims too dim to understand their exploitation. Ultimately, they believe only in the moral authority of themselves and those who are “enlightened” enough to agree with them.

Lately IÂ’ve been asking these folks if they have taken their turn shielding Iraqi civilians from the folks who are setting off car bombs among them. Andrew Cline offers a few more questions for them in a piece in the American Spectator.

Conservatives need to start flipping that coin to its other side by asking the following questions of anyone who levels the "chickenhawk" charge:

* Why are you not in Darfur feeding starving children?

* Why are you not on the Gulf Coast rescuing hurricane survivors?

* Why are you not in China protesting the political detention of dissidents?

* Why are you not in Swaziland teaching people how to prevent the spread of AIDS?

* Why are you not in Latin America training revolutionaries to overthrow corrupt regimes?

* Why are you not providing abortions to teenage girls?

Unfortunately, these sorts of questions donÂ’t do much to shut up the average hardcore Leftist, but it might get through to those who havenÂ’t consumed too much Kool-Aid yet.

Posted by: Greg at 12:14 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 310 words, total size 2 kb.

Get this bit from has-been sex-symbol and Rolling Stone-castoff Bianca Jagger.

A SURVIVOR of a suicide bombing cursed out Bianca Jagger Monday night during a dinner party after the self-styled "human-rights activist" and her friends told him, "American soldiers are raping and killing women and children around the globe."

Jack Baxter, a New York filmmaker who was partially paralyzed in a suicide bombing in an Israeli café two years ago, was in Los Angeles promoting his documentary about Israel, "Blues by the Beach," and decided to stop by a friend's birthday dinner at the Chateau Marmont.

Baxter says there were six people at the table including himself and his friend Cindy Lou Adkins.

"Bianca was there with two guys from Palm Springs," Baxter told PAGE SIX. "She starts talking about Iraq and saying how disgusting it was what the Americans are doing over there, and one of the Palm Springs boys says: 'Americans are knuckle-dragging barbarians.' "

Baxter claims Nicaraguan citizen Jagger, in the middle of an anti-President Bush rant, said: "I despise this country. I would never be an American citizen. The United States should leave Iraq immediately. Saddam Hussein was better for Iraq."

Baxter, shocked, then said: "Well, what about Saddam giving the families of suicide bombers $25,000 as reward for killing people?" — to which he claims Jagger replied, "So what?"

Baxter continued: "Then [Jagger and pals] start talking about Abu Ghraib and how American soldiers are raping and killing women and children around the globe and that's when I said, '[Bleep] you. Cindy, let's get out of here.' We were just about to leave when I went back to the table and said, 'Bianca, you know what? You're talking this anti-American horse[bleep] here while we got guys dying in Iraq — [Bleep] you! [Bleep] all of you!' Then I did leave.

"I used to be a part-time bouncer at Studio 54 and I remember her from those days. This chick used to flash anyone who cared to look and now she's trying to pass herself off as some kind of pseudo-activist? C'mon!"

Hey, this woman is entitled to believe whatever she wants – but since she despises this country so much, I think it is only appropriate that the borders be closed to her. I’m curious – does Prada have a shop in Havana?

As for the Palm Springs boys, they provide proof that there are, indeed some knuckle-dragging Americans out there – and that they are found on the Left. Not only that, but they don’t even have the cojones to stand by their anti-American comments when confronted.

But Jacob Hopkins, one of Jagger's Palm Springs pals who was at the dinner, said he could not "recall" Jagger saying those things, and added: "We were having a political discussion where she may have said that certain countries invaded Iraq because perhaps of natural resources . . . I don't recall her saying anything anti-American. [Baxter] was outraged and very rude to us. We were simply having a private conversation."

Well, buddy, IÂ’ll show you rude if you make those comments around me. As it is, the fact that you were willing to make them in the presence in the victim of terrorists shows exactly what sort of moral cripple you, your friends, and the used-up floozy you were dining with really are.

Posted by: Greg at 12:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 567 words, total size 4 kb.

Thurgood Marshall was one of the greatest Supreme Court litigators of all time – certainly the greatest of his generation. His place would have been secure in history even if he had not become the first African-American elevated to the US Supreme Court, where he was, in my opinion, a mediocre justice because his ability to use his extraordinary talents as an advocate was constrained by his role as a judge.

On the basis of principle, Marshall refused to accept honors from his home state of Maryland or the city of Baltimore. Yet the name of Baltimore’s airport will be changed to Baltimore-Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport. Only one member of the state’s Board of Public Works objected. But I think it is important to note WHY he objected – and that his objection was rooted in respect for Marshall’s principles.

All that was left yesterday was approval from the state's Board of Public Works. But state Comptroller William Donald Schaefer (D), as usual, had something to say about it.

"This is wrong, and it shouldn't be done," Schaefer told the original sponsor of the proposal, Del. Emmett C. Burns Jr. (D-Baltimore), during a lengthy and at times tense public exchange.

Although the name change won broad support this year in the General Assembly, the comptroller suggested that those who objected were forced to remain silent rather than face accusations of racial insensitivity.

"Nobody who is politically wise votes against this, and you know why, and so do I," Schaefer (D) told Burns at a meeting of the three-member panel, which eventually passed the measure, with Schaefer abstaining.

Schaefer said Marshall had in the past resisted being honored in Maryland, a state that denied him admission to law school because of his race. Schaefer, 83, a former governor whose position is up for reelection next year, said he was annoyed by Marshall's reluctance to attend the 1980 dedication of a statue in his likeness erected in downtown Baltimore, the city where the justice was born in 1908.

"He just didn't like Baltimore, and he so expressed it," said Schaefer, who was mayor at the time.

Justice Marshall is a man whose legacy deserves respect. I may have fundamental problems with his jurisprudence, but I would never allow that to undermine my respect for his civil rights work and the legacy of equality that goes with that work. But I find it fundamentally wrong to bestow honors upon him in death that he would have rejected in life.

Their response of the so-called civil rights leaders is exactly what one would have expected.

Civil rights leaders hailed the result, calling it fitting recognition for Marshall's contributions as a lawyer, activist and judge. When the governor signed the bill in May, Burns called it "the second-happiest day of my life," behind his wedding day. "Our purpose is to honor a great man," he told the crowd that day. "Generations yet unborn will ask the meaning of this -- and will be told that this governor, this lieutenant governor, this legislature chose to honor one of its own, a son of Maryland who changed the nation for all of America."

Yesterday, Burns tried mightily to contain his outrage at Schaefer's remarks. Burns attempted to tell Schaefer that many other cities, including Jackson, Miss., New Orleans and Atlanta, had named airports for prominent black innovators.
"You're doing it because others have done it?" Schaefer snapped.

"We did it because it's the right thing to do," Burns replied curtly.

So the forces of political correctness and the politicians who pander to them rammed through the proposal to rename the airport, despite the fact that rejecting it would have really been the right thing to do.

After all, how does one honor a hero by going against the principles he practiced during his life?

Posted by: Greg at 12:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 652 words, total size 4 kb.

Search-and-rescue operations halted to stop looting and protect property?

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin also ordered virtually the entire police force to abandon search-and-rescue efforts and stop thieves who were becoming increasingly hostile.

First, the priority is wrong. Search-and-rescue needs to be the primary mission, not property protection. What needs to happen is that those caught looting – especially those armed thugs we have all been hearing about – simply need to be shot on sight.

Yes, I have sympathy for those who have been getting food, diapers, and other necessities. However, the situation is so out of control that order needs to be restored ruthlessly. I donÂ’t believe there are many recipes that call for a boom-box, a 32-inch flat-screen television or ten pairs of designer jeans.

Posted by: Greg at 12:09 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 146 words, total size 1 kb.