Austin Bay points out that Ted Kennedy's performance during the Alito hearings was more harmful than the recent words of Pat Robertson.

However, hot rhetoric untethered by fact or untempered by reflection undermines debate.

Fortunately, these hot words often burn the unfettered and ill-tempered tongue that utters them.

Take the Rev. Pat Robertson as a recent example of "failure to reflect." When Robertson said that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's tragic stroke might be a divine rebuke for "dividing God's land," a wave of deserved scorn and ridicule swamped the silly man. The White House and The New York Times blasted Robertson, a right-left political condemnation of a right-wing ayatollah.

Idiocy isn't illegal, nor is lying — at least, not if one lies in U.S. Senate hearings. Ted Kennedy provides the recent example of hot, emotion-stoking rhetoric untethered by truth.

On the opening day of Judge Samuel Alito's Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Kennedy opened up with a faith-based fire Robertson might envy: "Judge Alito has not written one single opinion on the merits in favor of a person of color alleging racial discrimination on the job. In 15 years, not one."

Kennedy's statement is completely false. Alito found for plaintiffs alleging racial discrimination on the job in several cases (for example, Zubi v. AT&T Corp. and Goosby v. Johnson & Johnson Medical).

Kennedy has avoided Robertson's mass condemnation. His snake dance and sanctimony is as poisonous as the Rev. Robertson's, however, and perhaps more venomous, since his fib slanders Judge Alito.

Ultimately, Kennedy's words are much more harmful to America than Robertson's. Kennedy's lies are a malignant slander that undermines the health of the body-politic, not merely an ill-considered and wrong-headed theological reflection.

Yet while Robertson's buffoonish attempt to explain Ariel Sharon's illness was shouted down, Kennedy's intentional falsehood -- a rhetorical attempt to do to Alito what Oswald and Sirhan did to the senator's brothers -- have barely been noted by the media or his ideological allies. Kennedy certainly have not been condemned for his misdeeds. That indicates that Kennedy and his allies are more concerned about petty partisan advantage than about the well-being of America.

Posted by: Greg at 03:44 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 371 words, total size 2 kb.

Why should we be surprised that a murderous terrorist like this would disappear into the woodwork rather than registering at a police station?

The Turkish gunman who shot Pope John Paul II failed to report to a police station Friday — the day after his release from prison — and authorities said the military could ask for his arrest for draft-dodging.

Mehmet Ali Agca was required to report daily to a police station to allow authorities to keep tabs on him until at least officials decide on whether he should serve his military service.

Istanbul Gov. Muammer Guler said Agca — whose whereabouts were unknown — had not reported to any police station by Friday evening. Guler said Agca was also required to report to a military hospital on Monday.

"If he doesn't show up, he will be listed as a draft-dodger" and his arrest could be sought, Guler said.

Let's see -- he murdered a journalist and tried to kill the pope. Do you really think he gives a rat's ass about being considered a draft-dodger?

This little tidbit is also interesting.

Agca, 48, received a hero's welcome by his ultranationalist admirers, who tossed flowers at the car whisking him through the gates of the high-security Kartal Prison outside Istanbul.

Does anyone know how strong this "ultranationailist" movement is, and what its platform consists of?

Posted by: Greg at 03:22 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 230 words, total size 2 kb.

I've always believed that it should be easier, not harder, to get on the ballot. That even means that someone like this should be able to run for office.

One gubernatorial candidate in Minnesota is giving a whole new meaning to the "dark side" of politics. A man who calls himself a satanic priest plans to run for governor on a 13-point platform that includes the public impaling of terrorists at the state Capitol building.

Jonathon Sharkey, also known as "The Impaler", plans to launch his gubernatorial campaign on - when else? - Friday the 13th. He'll make the announcement in Princeton.

"I'm going to be totally open and honest," said the 41-year-old leader of the "Vampyres, Witches and Pagans Party."

"Unlike other candidates, I'm not going to hide my evil side," he said.

In Minnesota, anyone who pays the $300 filing fee can get on the gubernatorial ballot and it seems that every year a few eccentric candidates make the rounds.

Sharkey raises the bar. For one thing, he told the Star Tribune in an e-mail that he drinks blood.

Including the impaling of terrorists, rapists, drug dealers and other criminals, Sharkey's platform includes emphasis on education, tax breaks for farmers and better benefits for veterans.

You know, I think I could go for most of those "points" (I hesitate to use that word around a guy called "the Impaler"). After all, he's clearly tough on crime, pro-education, and pro-veteran. And I've always supported helping family farmers stay in the business -- they are the origingal small businessmen.

On the other hand, he is also the perfect candicate for your average Leftist -- especially the ACLU and separation of church and state crowd.

Sharkey said he worships Lucifer and, while he says he has nothing against Christians, he calls the "Christian God the Father" his "mortal enemy."

You know, maybe this explains Jesse Ventura.

Posted by: Greg at 03:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 323 words, total size 2 kb.

(Bumped to top)

I've been thinking, friends -- there are lots of good carnivals out there.

But one seems missing to me.

A Carnival as big as Texas.

More to the point, a Carnival featuring bloggers from Texas.

So here is my idea -- a weekly round up of the best Lone Star Blogosphere.

What do you folks think? Any interest?

Answer me in the comments section -- and be so kind as to pass the word about the proposal.

Posted by: Greg at 05:59 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

Like matter which encounters a black hole, some news stories are simply sucked in to where no light escapes, quickly slipping ove the event horizon into nothingness.

Such is this story of political corruption in Congress.

A former aide to Rep. William Jefferson, D-New Orleans, pleaded guilty Wednesday in federal court and has agreed to cooperate with an investigation into an alleged conspiracy to funnel money to the eight-term congressman and members of his family.

Brett Pfeffer, 37, told U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III that a congressman, identified in court only as "Representative A," lobbied high-ranking officials in Nigeria and Ghana to use technology developed by a small U.S.-based telecommunication company and pressed the Export-Import Bank of the United States to approve loan guarantees. In exchange, Pfeffer said, the congressman demanded a share of the new company created to facilitate the deal.

Unless I've gone deaf, I've missed the uproar over this case. I mean, after all, we have a sitting lawmaker, indictments and guilty pleas, spectacular accusations of criminality. This should be a lead story and be producing claims about a culture of corruption within the lawmaker's party -- expecially given other actions taken by the guy to cover his tracks.

Oh.

That's right.

That is a "D" in the party slot.

He's a Democrat.

Nothing to see here.

Move along.

It just isn't news to the MSM.

Posted by: Greg at 11:20 PM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.

From The Plot to Shush Rush and OÂ’Reilly by Brian C. Anderson

The Right—joined by free-speech defenders from across the political spectrum—needs to defeat the liberal regulatory threat before it does real damage to Americans’ rights to express their political views. President Bush should strongly back Hensarling’s Online Freedom of Speech Act, whose sponsors may reintroduce it soon in the House under regular rules, which require only a simple majority to pass it. Showing that he gets it, the president has just nominated three reportedly liberty-minded lawyers to fill FEC vacancies, including Robert Lenhard, part of the legal team that challenged McCain-Feingold’s constitutionality. One campaign-finance reform group described the Lenhard pick as “beyond disappointing”: excellent news for free-speech fans.

In deciding two campaign-finance reform cases in the months ahead, the Roberts Court, one hopes, will show greater enthusiasm for First Amendment protection of political speech than did its predecessor, which should have shot down McCain-Feingold. If neither Congress nor the Supreme Court repeals this unconstitutional, un-American travesty, we can expect election regulations, in the grim words of Justice Antonin Scalia’s McConnell dissent, “to grow more voluminous, more detailed, and more complex in the years to come—and always, always, with the objective of reducing the excessive amount of speech.” Thus will our most effective real protection against “the actuality and appearance of corruption”—the First Amendment itself—be nullified.

Lovers of liberty should expose calls to restore the Fairness Doctrine for the fraudulent power-grab that they plainly are. And the Right, in particular, needs to understand how much it has benefited from a deregulated media universe. It should be confident that it has the right ideas, and that when it gets the chance to present them directly to the American people—as the new media have allowed it to do—it will win the debate.

Probably the most important article I've read in months -- READ IT!

Posted by: Greg at 02:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 328 words, total size 2 kb.

The Washington Post does a very sympathetic piece of abortion advocate Kate Michelman. Just in time for the Alito hearings, no less.

Kate Michelman, The Public Face Of a Woman's Right to Privacy

They even include a nicely posed picture.

But so concerned are they about the "right to privacy" that they forget the real face of "reproductive choice".

I guess the focus on privacy makes it possible to ignore the consequences of choice.

No jury will ever convict Michelman for her crimes against the lives of the innocent -- but there is a Judge waiting to give sentence. And there will be no appeal to the Supreme COurt or reliance on Roe v. Wade as precedent.

Posted by: Greg at 12:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 125 words, total size 1 kb.

Good grief! Chris Elam has been contacted by the Lawyer for Dummies.

Say Goodbye to Safety For Dummies

Yes, its true. It looks like Safety For Dummies is going the way of the dodo bird.

The name, that is.

Earlier this afternoon, I received a “cease and desist” e-mail from some lawyer from Hoboken, NJ representing the company that publishes all those goofy “______ for Dummies” books, telling me that I have 10 days to change the name of this blog... or.... something. She didn't exactly say what the risk would be if I don't.

Of all the absurdities I've encountered of late, this takes the cake! I guess they've copyrighted the two-word "for Dummies" combination?

Posted by: Greg at 12:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.

but down here in CD22, our reaction was "who is Tom Campbell?"

But then what do I know? I'm only a GOP precinct chair in the district.

U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, who lost his leadership post because of his ties to a disgraced lobbyist and faces felony charges in his home state, now has another worry: an unprecedented four-way primary for the seat he's held comfortably for 22 years.

While two of DeLay's challengers aren't considered to have much credibility _ one is making his fourth attempt to unseat DeLay and the other has lived overseas much of her adult life _ lawyer Tom Campbell of Sugar Land holds an impressive Republican resume.

Campbell worked on the presidential campaigns of Bob Dole and the elder George Bush, whose administration appointed him general counsel to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. A former Harris County Republican Party official runs Campbell's campaign.

Well, that depends upon how you define "former Harris County Republican party Official" and how seriously you take that designation. Besides, that "former official" is better known for being the wife of former DeLay business partner who has been a thorn in Delay's side for years.

I think Fort Bend County GOP Chair puts it best.

"Tom Campbell at least has Republican credentials," Fort Bend County GOP chairman Eric Thode said. "Having said that, it doesn't translate into one iota of support or money. He is 100 percent absolutely unknown in this county."

And not well-known in Harris County circles, either.

What we have here, my friends, is nothing but a puff piece on a minor candidate with a slightly ,ore impressive than usual resume.

EARLIER COVERAGE

Posted by: Greg at 12:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 291 words, total size 2 kb.

From Michelle Malkin.

An aside: If only these Dems were 1/100th as interested in digging into Sen. Bobby Byrd's proud membership and leadership position in the real KKK as they were into Alito's membership in CAP...

Or Ted Kennedy's driving record.

Posted by: Greg at 11:56 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 51 words, total size 1 kb.

The Democrat campaign of slander and calumny against Judge Samuel Alito in confirmation hearings. Of particular note, though, was a discussion of the notion that certain cases constitute "settled law" and that their holdings should never be reexamined or overturn by future courts.

The drama of the hearings' third day nearly overshadowed the significance of the position Alito staked out on the landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade . Senators also branched into new territory: Alito's record from 15 years on the Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit on cases involving religion, immigrants seeking to prevent deportation, and criminals' rights.

Alito edged closer to suggesting that he might be willing to reconsider Roe if he is confirmed to the high court, refusing, under persistent questioning by Democrats, to say that he regards the 1973 decision as "settled law" that "can't be reexamined." In this way, his answers departed notably from those that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. gave when asked similar questions during his confirmation hearings four months ago.

Yesterday, Alito said that Roe must be treated with respect because it has been reaffirmed by the high court several times in the past three decades.

But when Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) peppered Alito with questions about whether the ruling is "the settled law of the land," the nominee responded: "If 'settled' means that it can't be reexamined, then that's one thing. If 'settled' means that it is a precedent that is entitled to respect . . . then it is a precedent that is protected, entitled to respect under the doctrine of stare decisis." Stare decisis is a legal principle that, in Latin, means "to stand by that which is decided."

Alito's position is one which seems disingenuous to some, but is probably among the most intellectually honest and rational positions that one could stake out on the issue. It is that no decision is beyond reexamination, though precedent is entitled to respect.

It is, after all, the role of the courts to apply the law and the Constitution in the particular cases before them. That process involves, among other things, looking at prior precedents and holdings and engaging in analogy, either likening one case to another or disinguishing them from one another. Old decisions are looked at in a new light cast by new facts. And sometimes an older principle is seen as not being workable in light of other principles or developments in law and society. At such times, it is necessary and proper to overturn a prior precedent, even if it is a venerable one.

In 1954, for example, Brown v. Board of Education was handed down by a unanimous Supreme Court. It overruled the holding in Plessy v. Ferguson, which held that government-imposed regimes of "separate but equal" treatment of individuals based upon race were acceptable and constitutional. For six decades, courts had struggled with the application of the Plessy precedent, analogizing and distinguishing in cases decided afterwards. Doing so showed that the Plessy decision was essentially unworkable and ithat the results were inconsistent with the Constitution, and so the Supreme Court struck down the older decision in the seminal civil rights decision of the twentieth century. As we look back, it is clear that this was a wise and courageous decision on the part of the Warren Court.

Which brings me back to Roe. Spme thirty years ago, the Burger Court expanded the notion of privacy to include the right of a woman to take the life of her unborn child with no restrictions in the first trimester and with gradually increasing restrictions later on in pregnancy. The reasoning was so fractured that no one opinion could garner five votes. Indeed, later cases have both expanded that right to limit permissible restrictions and limited that right by upholding others. Subsequent decisions have relied on Roe, while others have shown its flaws and weaknesses. One decison even argues that the correctness of the decision is irrelevant simply because the precedent is precedent and has been relied upon in subsequent cases.

But that begs teh question. What if the facts of a case and an examination of outcomes lead a justice to conclude that Roe is, in whole or in part, unworkable or wrong? Must that justice ignore that conclusion because of precedent. Or should that justice attempt to forge a new consensus around the conclusion he has reached? I would argue the latter, just as was done in the Brown.

And I ould argue that is true in the case of any precedent, inot just Roe. Even teh grandaddy of them all -- Marbury v. Madison. Precedent should not be jettisoned lightly or for transient political reasons. But it is proper.

After all, the reexamination of principles and opinions is a healthy process for an individual. It is no less so for society as a whole. And sometimes such reexamination leads to bright shining moments in the lives of individuals and or nations.

Interesting comments on the hearings at Jawa Report. Related reflections at Blogs for Bush.

Posted by: Greg at 11:45 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 856 words, total size 5 kb.

I may be a conservative Republican, but I've yet to see a merit pay system that I think would work. That includes the one adopted in the big district that borders mine, HISD.

Houston is about to become the biggest school district in the nation to tie teachers' pay to their students' test scores.

School Superintendent Abe Saavedra wants to offer teachers as much as $3,000 more per school year if their students improve on state and national tests. The program could eventually grow to as much as $10,000 in merit pay.

The school board is set to vote on the plan Thursday. Five of the nine board members have said they support it.

"School systems traditionally have been paying the best teacher the same amount as we pay the worst teacher, based on the number of years they have been teaching," Saavedra said. "It doesn't make sense that we would pay the best what we're paying the worst. That's why it's going to change."

Opponents argue that the plan focuses too much on test scores and would be unfair to teachers outside core subjects.

Count me as one of the opponents. I've never seen a merit system that cannot be manipulated by administrators to play favorites or screw teachers out of favor. Basing the pay on test scores unintentionally encourages cheating, and does have the effect of leaving elective teachers (and even some teachers of required classes) ineligible.

The plan is divided into three sections, with as much as $1,000 in bonus pay each.

The first would award bonuses to all teachers in schools rated acceptable or higher, based on scores on the state's main standardized test. The second ties pay to student improvement on a standardized test that compares performance to nationwide norms.

In the third section, reading and math teachers whose students fare well compared with others in the district would be eligible for bonuses.

Bonuses for all sections will be given only if students show improvement in the top half of scores.

Fallon said the plan is unfair to teachers in such subjects as art and music.

Now there is a bonus for all teachers. I think that is good. But it is also the smallest part of the bonus program, and so really undervalues the work done by teachers outside of the core subjects.

The second component introduces an additional test into the school year. That's right, students will lose more instructional time so that the bonus test will be given. That is because the TAKS test mandated by state law is not given nationally, and so provides no basis for comparison between states.

The third element offers a special bonus to reading and math teachers, but ignores the other two TAKS components -- science and social studies. Which test has the best performance statewide? Social studies. And the worst? Science. Reading is has room to improve, but math scores have been bad statewide. It just seems somewhat illogical to me to reward one section of the test but not another.

I'm also curious if there will be a reward by individual teacher. If there is, there is a simp;e way to play favorites. A principal has complete discretion over what classes a teacher has. Give the favorite the AP classes, and the teacher who is a thorn in the side a bunch of rmedial classes. I've been there -- one year I had four sections of kids 11th graders who had failed 10th grade English. I had one class that was usually 50% empty because of skippers and discipline cases. Want to guess what my test scores looked like? They were good, all things considered -- but a 76% passing rate was pretty anemic when the district-wide passing rate for the 10th grade test was 93%. Never mind that my three classes of regular 11th grade English passed at a 95% rate. Overall I was at an 82%, making me -- by the numbers -- one of the worst teachers in the district.

Oh, and while we are at it, I want to point out something in this article, for those who go on about union ifluence on education.

Traditionally, Houston teachers' experience and education levels have determined their pay scale. Starting teachers make about $36,000 a year. Salaries can rise to about $45,000 with advanced degrees and more experience.

Texas has no collective bargaining, meaning the teachers union can lobby the district for raises but cannot strike.

Houston area districts also pay quite well -- in other parts of the state, the numbers can be about $10K lower on the salary front. Statewide, we average nearly $7K below the national average salary for teachers. And as far as lobbying goes, many districts don't even decide on the next year's pay scale until mid-summer -- months after contracts must be signed, and sometimes after the state deadline for resignation. While salaries rarely go down, you can never be sure if there will be a salary increase for the following year -- or how much of one. Also, there is no tenure in any school district I am aware of. So you will understand why I look askance at this plan that is being imposed without significant teacher input.

I'm hoping my district gets no ideas from HISD.

Posted by: Greg at 03:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 895 words, total size 5 kb.

That's really the more important question here.

A western Colombian city councilman wants to require everyone in town 14 or older to carry a condom to prevent pregnancy and disease, outraging local priests.

William Pena, a councilman in Tulua, said Wednesday he will present a formal proposal to force all men and women — even those just visiting — to always carry at least one condom. Those caught empty-pocketed could pay a fine of $180 or take a safe sex course, he said.

"Sexual relations are going on constantly," Pena told The Associated Press by telephone. "If you carry a condom, chances are you'll use it during the day. It's not going to be there forever."

Tulua has one of the highest rates of AIDS in Colombia, he said. The proposal will be debated by other town leaders and could go into effect by March, he said.

There are a couple of problems, of course.

First, this is an incredibly unreasonable way to deal with the issue of AIDS and pregnancy. Talk about your expansions of government power.

Secondly, though, heat and friction degrade teh latex, so carrying the thing around in the pocket will result in pinholes and breakage over time. That means that folks who think they are "safe" won't be -- but might be more inclined to engage in sex because of their misperception.

Posted by: Greg at 03:01 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 237 words, total size 1 kb.

There is no question that the Abramoff scandal is important. But is it as important as the press would make it? And what about other scandals that should be on the radar but are not?

This scandal is big -- no questions about that. But by what measure is this story so huge and historic? How does it compare to the House Bank scandal of 1992, which resulted in a number of congressional careers ended? How does Abramoff compare to the related mess at the House Post Office, which led to the eventual conviction of House Ways and Means chairman Dan Rostenkowski?

There was no glee in the newsrooms then, when it was Democrats.

When Speaker Jim Wright was forced out in 1989 for dozens upon dozens of ethical violations? "Mindless cannibalism," Wright called it, and they agreed. When Majority Whip Tony Coelho scooted away behind Wright, the media mourned America's loss.

How does Casino-gate, or whatever we're going to call this one, compare to the Asian fundraising scandal of 1996? No one mentioned that, either. Investor's Business Daily published a very informative graphic showing that 22 foreign figures and Democrat activists plugging away for Clinton-Gore and Democratic candidates were convicted by the federal probe of that scandal. (And that figure does not include the people that fled the country rather than testify.) How is the Abramoff plea already bigger than that?

As expected, Democrats and their gaggle of supportive bloggers are claiming it's outrageous for anyone to suggest that Jack Abramoff could be connected to Democrats. They argue that because Abramoff was Republican and the majority of his funding went to Republicans, the discussion should end there. After all, the GOP is the Party of Corruption, is it not?

But the coverage of another fundraising scandal has been much more subdued -- indeed, the press has been absolutely comatose. That is the Hillary Clinton fundraising scandal, which resulted in an FEC fine.

How was Hillary's Hollywood-party fine covered? On Jan. 6, The Washington Post just carried the 325-word AP dispatch inside the paper. The New York Times gave it little more than 100 words on page B-4 in a "Metro Briefs" section. It was buried even further still as story number six in that column. Nothing emerged on ABC. Or CBS. Or NBC. Or NPR. (CNN mentioned it briefly on "American Morning," right before its brief item on the "Bubble Gum Bandit.") USA Today, Time, Newsweek, U.S. News? Nothing.

Dave Pierre at Newsbusters.org had some fun exploring the bias by omission at the Los Angeles Times. This paper had no Hillary story, but on Jan. 6, it did carry 2,315 words in two articles on NBC's liberal "Book of Daniel" premiere, 1,431 words on liberal Jon Stewart hosting the Oscars, 182 words on Pat Robertson's bizarre Ariel Sharon remarks, and another 1,477 words (starting on Page One) on the decline in the popularity of tennis. Pierre was especially wincing over this factoid: The offending Hillary fundraiser was held in Hollywood, smack-dab on the paper's stomping grounds.

But let it not be said that the Los Angeles Times doesn't cover corruption. The day before, the front page carried a big, long Abramoff story with a tiny mention of Hillary Clinton's Abramoff connection.

So it seems that the MSM does not want to gve this important story any coverage -- even when it happens in their own backyard.

But then again, it is just one more corrupt Democrat. In other words, nothing out of the ordinary.

Posted by: Greg at 02:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 589 words, total size 4 kb.

Sometimes there needs to be a little common sense exercised when it comes to free exercise of religion. After all, that right is guaranteed under the First Amendment -- and is a basic human right.

That's why I am glad to see that Wayne State University is going to change its policies to protect the religious rights of Sikhs.

Wayne State University is reviewing its public safety policies after a Detroit judge ruled a Sikh student shouldn't have been arrested on campus for carrying a 10-inch knife, known as a kirpan.

Sukhpreet Singh Garcha, a 23-year-old senior and a baptized Sikh, was arrested in August by campus police for carrying the knife on his hip and another 5-inch knife concealed in his waistband. Garcha was charged with violating the city's knife ordinance, which prohibits carrying knives with blades longer than 3 inches.

Garcha said carrying the knife was necessary under Sikhism, a monotheistic religion founded in India. The smaller knife was worn in case the other had to be removed.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the religious group United Sikhs protested Garcha's arrest, saying the kirpan isn't a weapon, but rather an ornamental article of faith that baptized Sikhs must wear at all times.

Bravo to the ACLU for taking this case, and to Judge Rudy Serra of the 36th District Court for making the ruling that the city ordinance cannot restrict the wearing of this item of great religious significance.

Posted by: Greg at 02:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, a young Israeli Arab man has been denied entry into the IAF.

He has instead been offered something almost as prestigious.

he IDF's Personnel Directorate has decided to reject the request of an18-year-old Arab Muslim from northern Israel who sought to join the army's prestigious pilot training course, Israel's leading newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth reported Tuesday.

Instead of becoming a pilot, the army offered the teen to volunteer to the paratroopers.

The disappointed youth, who graduated from high school with honors and already holds a civilian pilot's license, is expected to undergo initial tests on Thursday for the IDF's paratroopers unit.

However, the teen's father said the youth plans to appeal the decision to IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz, and if needed even take the matter to court, in order to open the pilot course for Arab Muslims as well.

Muslims are not obligated to join the army, and only a few dozens volunteer to the IDF every year. Hence, the Arab teen's unusual request managed to surprise the defense establishment.

He will fight the decision, even as he fulfills what he views as an important obligation as an Israeli citizen -- one that few Muslims in that country take up, despite the fact that service is mandatory for Jews.

The teen's father said Monday that "in the past few days I spoke with a senior official at the IDF's Personnel Directorate who explained to me that the course is closed to the Arab sector for the moment."

"The official made it clear that if the course opens in the next year or two, my son would be able to try and join the course. In the meantime, he will get an opportunity somewhere else," the father added.

The reason for the rejection is shrouded in mystery.

The IDF's Personnel Directorate refused to issue an official statement to explain why the teen would not be summoned to the pilot course. However, IDF officials said that apart from the youth's matriculation exam results and his flight abilities, other criteria were also being examined, and it is not certain the teen met all of them.

I hope there is a Knesset inquiry into the matter. If Muslim and Jew are to live together in harmony, discrimination cannot happen.

(Previous post here)

Posted by: Greg at 02:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 396 words, total size 3 kb.

I'm about to highlight something positive about Bill Clinton.

It seems that he found himself stuck at the airport in Bangor, Maine, as a pair of planes bringing soldiers home from Iraq arrived at the airport for refuelling.

Guess what happened next.

Former President Bill Clinton surprised U.S. troops arriving from Iraq when a refueling stop for his private plane at the Bangor International Airport coincided with the arrival of two flights carrying soldiers.

Clinton was returning Monday night from Paris where he had met with French President Jacques Chirac to discuss plans for his charitable organization, the Clinton Foundation.

Clinton's departure was delayed by a problem with his aircraft, allowing him to join a line of local troop greeters who meet each plane carrying soldiers returning from overseas or leaving for duty.

"Thank you for your service," Clinton said as he shook hands and hugged many of the soldiers. He autographed hats, cards and other items.

And the response of the returning heroes.

The soldiers, about 600 of them, were returning to bases in Oklahoma, Texas and Georgia. Their two chartered aircraft had landed for fuel.

"This is great," Staff Sgt. Anthony Thompson of New York City told the Bangor Daily News.

I agree. Clinton could have simply ignored what was going on, hidden out in a VIP lounge, and no one would have been the wiser. But he didn't do that.

Instead, he did stuff like this.

Clinton had some fun when Army Spc. Joshua Ruschenberg used a cell phone provided by troop greeters to call his sister-in-law, Shancy Garrison, in North Carolina. He handed over the phone to the former commander in chief.

"Hi, Shancy, it's Bill Clinton," the former president said into the phone.

Its something little, but it is sthe type of thing that has always left me with an ambiguous feeling for Bill Clinton, no doubt akin to what many liberals felt about Ronald Reagan.

I think Bill Clinton was a mediocre president, in large part due to his character flaws. But for all the things he did which I found repulsive -- including a certain relationship which needs no discussion here -- I believe there is a core of good in the man. And it is when he does things like this -- or gets involved in charity work, that I find myself developing a grudging respect for him.

Thank you, President Clinton, for having the kindness and decency to greet these soldiers on our behalf. I salute you for it.

Posted by: Greg at 02:18 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 428 words, total size 3 kb.

As I point out on a regular basis, such an attack on the religious symbols or display of another religious faith would bring the harshest response from community activists and the mavens of tolerance. Why do I suspect that there will be no such outcry in this case -- and probably even smug satisfaction on the part of those individuals, who are usually worshippers at the altar of "choice".

About 600 crosses memorializing aborted fetuses were pulled from ground at the Catholic Life Center and thrown into bushes and onto a parking lot overnight Sunday, church officials said.

Twenty of the crosses were broken, said Sgt. Don Kelly, a spokesman for the Baton Rouge Police Department. Kelly said police are investigating the incident.

Volunteers with the Knights of Columbus and Louisiana Right to Life put up about 800 crosses Saturday at the Catholic Life Center at 1800 S. Acadian Thruway in preparation for the BishopÂ’s Life Rally scheduled Jan. 15.

Each year the church puts up the display of crosses, said Julie Orr, Respect for Life coordinator for the Marriage and Family Department of the Catholic Diocese of Baton Rouge.

“We generally leave the crosses up all month as a reminder of the day, Jan. 22, 1973, that Roe v. Wade was enacted,” Orr said.

The BishopÂ’s Life Rally will be from 2 p.m. until 5 p.m. Jan. 15.

Shame on the vandals. And when they are caught, throw the book at them, including maximum enhancement for committing a hate crime.

Posted by: Greg at 02:09 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 263 words, total size 2 kb.

is justice denied.

And the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has decided to delay justice for Congressman Tom DeLay, despite state and federal constitutional guarantees of a right to a speedy trial.

AUSTIN, Texas -- The state's highest criminal court on Monday denied Rep. Tom DeLay's request that the money laundering charges against him be dismissed or sent back to a lower court for an immediate trial.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied the requests with no written order two days after he announced he was stepping down as House majority leader. DeLay had been forced to temporarily relinquish the Republican leadership post after he was indicted on money laundering and conspiracy charges in September.

DeLay, who denies wrongdoing, had been trying to rush to trial in Texas in hopes of clearing his name and regaining the position.

One has to wonder, though, if DeLay's resignation from that leadership position on Saturday might have led the court to find the vindication of the congressman's rights to be less compelling.

DeLay's lead lawyer, Dick DeGuerin, said his client's announcement might have prompted the court's action.

"I'm sure the events of the weekend have something to do with it," DeGuerin said. "There's not the time crunch there was."

Now that DeLay is no longer trying to reclaim the leadership post before Congress convenes Jan. 31, his trial is likely to be postponed for weeks, if not months.

However, DeGuerin said that DeLay, facing re-election opponents in the March primary and, if he wins that, the November general election, would prefer to be tried before the primary.

"We'd like to have it resolved by then," he said.

Dut given the dilatory pace of the Ronnie Earle-led investigation, I doubt that there will be a trial by March. After all, he has been sending out subpoena's to groups that criticize him, as well as to anyone even tangentially connected to the Abramoff case, seeking additional charges against the former majority leader. A short trial date would necessarily force Earle to stop searching for a real crime and start focusing on the charges he grand jury-shopped for last fall.

So for now, no one knows when there will be a trial -- or if it will at all conform to constitutional notions of "speed".

Barring outright dismissal of the charges by that court, however, a trial could be postponed until later this year because of the lawyers' schedules and several outstanding pretrial fights, including whether the defendants would be tried in Travis County or some other Texas community.

Asked when he thought DeLay might actually be tried, DeGuerin said, "I've stopped guessing."

A DeLay spokesman blamed Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle for fighting DeLay's attempt to receive a quick trial.

"Ronnie Earle has gamed the justice system in Texas in a way that has kept Mr. DeLay's eventual exoneration in a holding pattern," Kevin Madden said. "He will eventually be cleared, but it's a terrible thing that Ronnie Earle has sought to deny that full exoneration for as long as possible."

Earle declined to comment.

In the appellate briefs, Earle said DeLay was asking for special treatment by demanding that his trial be in January.

I guess Earle doesn't find the constitutional rights of defendant's to be particularly compelling -- especially when he is granting access to movie crews to document the case, using his case as a partisan fundraising gambit, and restructuring the lcongressional leadership of the other party.

And then there is this.

The state is appealing the dismissal of a related indictment against DeLay accusing him of conspiracy to violate the state's election laws. Earle said the state has a right to have its appeal heard before prosecutors decide upon which charge to try DeLay.

What is this -- was the indictment merely a tactic to avoid the statute of limitations? Is Earle conceding that he does not really have a case against DeLay, merely charges that lack sufficient credibility to go to trial in a timely fashion? Especially since the remaining charges carry heavier sentences than the otiginal charge brought, which was dismissed for not being on the books at the time of the alleged offense. This is beginning to look like another case of Earle's -- the one against Kay Bailey Hutchison over a decade ago, which was dismissed with prejudice because the prosecution could not proceed when the trial was scheduled due to lack of substantive evidence.

PREVIOUS POSTS:
DeLay Withdraws From Leadership Position
More Opportunistic Subpoenas From Ronnie Earle
Ronnie Earle's Strategy -- Delay DeLay! Delay DeLay!
Another Ronnie Earle Fishing Expedition
More Delay In DeLay Case
Latest DeLay Bid For Immediate Trial
No Due Process For DeLay
DeLay Screwed By Judge Priest
Ronnie Earle's Assault On Free Speech
DeLay Team Targets Ronnie Earle's Unethical Prosecutorial Conduct
Ronnie Earle Goes Fishing
So Much For A Right To A Speedy Trial
A Victory For DeLay
DeLay Wants No Delay
Plea Possibility Considered
I Love It!
Earle Offered Plea Bargain
Evidence? Ronnie Doesn't Need No Stinking Evidence!
Unethical Prosecutorial Conduct
Grand Jury Shopping
Liberal Austin Paper Criticizes Earle
A Note On The New DeLay Indictments
"The Law And The Truth On My Side"
Ronnie Earle Whitewash In Washington Post
Prosecutorial Misconduct?

Posted by: Greg at 11:30 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 877 words, total size 7 kb.

I cannot believe that this boy (his behavior shows him to be anything but a man) has messed up again so quickly.

Former Virginia Tech quarterback Marcus Vick turned himself into the Suffolk Magistrate's Office in Suffolk, Va., this afternoon after three warrants were issued for his arrest for waving a firearm at three men in the parking lot of a McDonald's restaurant on Sunday night.

Vick, the younger brother of Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick, was charged with three misdemeanor counts of brandishing a firearm. He was jailed at Western Tidewater Regional Jail around 2 p.m. today and was released on $10,000 bond, according to Magistrate Lisa Noel.

Vick is scheduled to appear Jan. 12 in Suffolk General Court.

Vick, 21, was dismissed from Virginia Tech's football team last Friday "due to a cumulative effect of legal infractions and unsportsmanlike play," according to Virginia Tech President Charles W. Steger. Vick had faced a two-game suspension at the beginning of the 2006 season as discipline for stomping the leg of Louisville defensive end Elvis Dumervil during the Hokies' 35-24 victory over the Cardinals in the Jan. 2 Gator Bowl in Jacksonville, Fla.

But Virginia Tech officials dismissed him from the team after they learned he had been cited Dec. 17 for driving with a suspended or revoked driver's license and speeding in Hampton, Va. -- the eighth and ninth traffic offenses since he enrolled at Virginia Tech in 2002.

Good grief -- it has been just a couple days since he was dumped by Virginia Tech for his thuggish criminality and his subsequent declaration of his intent to turn pro!

I don't see how any team could justify spending an early draft pick on this guy. He is a loose canon, just waiting to commit a crime of violence that puts him behind bars for an extended period.

You'll love the comments over at Every Day Should Be Saturday.

Posted by: Greg at 02:51 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 333 words, total size 2 kb.

Looks like a college couple of faculty members from Florida International University are spies for Cuba.

A college professor and his wife, a college administrator, have been charged with being longtime illegal agents of Cuban President Fidel Castro, according to documents filed Monday.

Carlos Alvarez, a psychology professor at Florida International University, and his wife, Elsa Alvarez, were charged with acting as agents of Cuba without registering with the U.S. government as required, said the documents filed in U.S. District Court.

The two were scheduled to make an initial court appearance Monday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrea Simonton, according to the documents. An indictment further describing the charges was expected to be unsealed after that appearance, court officials said.

U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta and representatives of the FBI and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service scheduled a news conference about the case later Monday.

Alvarez is identified on the Florida International Web site as an associate professor in the Educational Leadership and Policy Studies Department. His wife is described as a coordinator in the social work training program.

Carlos Alvarez didn't return two phone messages left at his office. A university spokesman didn't return several calls seeking comment.

The indictment marks the latest turn in the underworld of espionage between the United States and Cuba, much of which takes place in South Florida where thousands of Cuban exiles live.

Why am I not surprised that these two Red rats were quite at home in higher education? After all, its not like they were Republicans or something else outside the mainstream of contemporary academic thought.

Posted by: Greg at 10:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.

I wonder, after President Bush signed this stupid bit into law.

Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.
It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.

In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.

This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.

"The use of the word 'annoy' is particularly problematic," says Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "What's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else."

Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."

Who is responsible for this little atrocity? Arlen Specter, of course. It may well be that the provision has outlawed anonymous blogging, if taken at face value.

And I may be in danger of prosecution.

After all, I intend to annoy stupid politicians, arrogant journalists, and other buffoons. Never have I fully identified myself (though certain recent posts make discerning my identity quite easy).

Am I now a criminal?

What happened to the First Amendment?

Posted by: Greg at 10:49 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 264 words, total size 2 kb.

I think this one speaks for itself.

An Egyptian cleric's controversial fatwa claiming that nudity during sexual intercourse invalidates a marriage has uncovered a rift among Islamic scholars.

According to the religious edict issued by Rashad Hassan Khalil, a former dean of Al-Azhar University's faculty of Sharia (or Islamic law), "being completely naked during the act of coitus annuls the marriage".

UhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhÂ… yeah. One more reason not to join the Cult of Muhammad.

Not that everyone agrees on this one.

The religious decree sparked a hot debate on the private satellite network Dream's popular religious talk show and on the front page of today's Al-Masri Al-Yom, Egypt's leading independent daily newspaper.

Suad Saleh, who heads the women's department of Al-Azhar's Islamic studies faculty, pleaded for "anything that can bring spouses closer to each other" and rejected the claim that nudity during intercourse could invalidate a union.

During the live televised debate, Islamic scholar Abdel Muti dismissed the fatwa: "Nothing is prohibited during marital sex, except of course sodomy."

That is reserved for little boys, prisoners, goats, and camels.

Posted by: Greg at 10:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.

Senator Teddy Kennedy (D-Oldsmobile) is about to corrupt the youth of America with an inaccurate book about American government. How do I know it is inaccurate? Teddy is the author.

Meet the latest children's author, Sen. Ted Kennedy, and his Portuguese Water Dog, Splash, his co-protagonist in "My Senator and Me: A Dogs-Eye View of Washington, D.C."

Scholastic Inc. will release the book in May.

"I am very excited about the opportunity to create a book for young readers and their families that will deepen their understanding of how our American government works," Kennedy said in a statement Monday issued by Scholastic.

According to Scholastic, Kennedy's book "not only takes readers through a full day in the Senator's life, but also explains how a bill becomes a law." Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, was inspired to write the book from his work with a Washington-based reading program, "Everybody Wins!"
Kennedy's net proceeds will be donated to charity.

No doubt to some charity caring for trust-fund babies with cirrhosis of the liver.

And we wonÂ’t even get into the horribly inappropriate name for the books canine hero. In light of his abandonment of Mary Jo after driving off the Chappaquidick Bridge, I would have hoped that he had more decency than to name his dog Splash.

But then again, he is a Kennedy, so why should we expect decency?

Posted by: Greg at 10:46 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 237 words, total size 2 kb.

This little gem from George Soros.

Billionaire investor George Soros said on Monday he thinks the U.S. Federal Reserve's monetary tightening could tip the economy into recession in 2007 and he expects a sharp dollar decline.

Soros said he expects the federal funds rate, now at 4.25 percent, to peak at 4.75 percent and that the Fed would try to achieve a soft landing for the economy.

Nevertheless, the Fed could overshoot, he told a seminar in Singapore.

"If housing continues to cool while rates are slowing then it could turn into a hard landing," Soros said.

"That's why I expect a recession to happen in 2007, not 2006."

Given his history of market manipulation for personal gain, I would not be surprised to see George Soros try the same thing on a larger scale here.
After all, timing such a recession in the manner Soros suggests would likely aid the Democrats in 2008. And who is a major source of pro-Democrat funds?

Why George Soros, of course.

Posted by: Greg at 10:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 176 words, total size 1 kb.

This little gem from George Soros.

Billionaire investor George Soros said on Monday he thinks the U.S. Federal Reserve's monetary tightening could tip the economy into recession in 2007 and he expects a sharp dollar decline.

Soros said he expects the federal funds rate, now at 4.25 percent, to peak at 4.75 percent and that the Fed would try to achieve a soft landing for the economy.

Nevertheless, the Fed could overshoot, he told a seminar in Singapore.

"If housing continues to cool while rates are slowing then it could turn into a hard landing," Soros said.

"That's why I expect a recession to happen in 2007, not 2006."

Given his history of market manipulation for personal gain, I would not be surprised to see George Soros try the same thing on a larger scale here.
After all, timing such a recession in the manner Soros suggests would likely aid the Democrats in 2008. And who is a major source of pro-Democrat funds?

Why George Soros, of course.

Posted by: Greg at 10:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.

In a move that has set the sports world -- especially here in Houston -- buzzing, University of Texas quarterback Vince Young has announced that he is skipping his senior season and going pro.

Texas junior quarterback Vince Young will enter the NFL draft and forgo his final year of college.

Young made the announcement official this afternoon at a press conference in Austin. A close family friend told the Chronicle of the decision earlier today.

"I wanna thank God for being in the position I'm in today ... I was ready to move on to the next level ... Hard work has paid off a whole lot," Young said this afternoon while thanking his family, his pastor and Texas coach Mack Brown.

Young thanked Brown "for all the things you have done for me ... on and off the field." Young said Brown made him a better man.

"He has the blessing of God, the pastor and his family," said Yolanda Lezine, Young's godmother and the family media's spokeswoman told the Chronicle earlier today. "It's his decision. Everybody is going to support him a 110 percent."

In a statement, Brown said he met with Young and his family this morning and fully supports Young's decision.

``We love Vince and appreciate all the great things he's done for the University of Texas on and off the field,'' Brown said. ``We'll miss him, but want him to do as well in the NFL as he did in college.''

There are a lot of Longhorn fans bemoaning this move right now, because there are questions about who will take over for Young (30-2 during his time at UT) at quarterback.

But here in Houston, there is an even bigger question.

Young's hometown Houston Texans have the first pick. Young said it would be wonderful to play in Houston, but realizes he could wind up somewhere else.

One those possibilities is Tennessee, which has the third pick. Young counts Titans quarterback Steve McNair among his close friends. He said McNair told him "go with your heart" in making his decision.

Let me tell you -- this Houston Texans season ticketholder would love to see Young play here, but I wonder if this would be the best place for Young, who grew up in a tougher part of Houston. One of my former students was drafted in the third round a few years ago, and I was relieved that he went to a team up north. After all, I knew some of the guys he was friends with as a kid, and I didn't want them around him as hangers-on. I feel something similar about Vince, who beat my team school's team in an epic battle a few years ago.

Besides, what Houston really needs is D'Brickashaw Ferguson from UVa, the top offensive lineman in the draft, to shore up a weak offensive line. Vince young's decision makes it possible for us to trade down a little furhter and get a little more between now and draft day.

Still, it would be one hell of a fantasy to have Vince Young scrambling around the way he did at the Rose Bowl.

Posted by: Greg at 02:05 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 537 words, total size 3 kb.

Too bad we can't just revoke their passports and let them stay in a country with a leader they clearly prefer.

The American singer and activist Harry Belafonte called President Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world" on Sunday and said millions of Americans support the socialist revolution of Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez.

Belafonte led a delegation of Americans including the actor Danny Glover and the Princeton University scholar Cornel West that met the Venezuelan president for more than six hours late Saturday and attended his television and radio broadcast on Sunday.

"No matter what the greatest tyrant in the world, the greatest terrorist in the world, George W. Bush says, we're here to tell you: Not hundreds, not thousands, but millions of the American people Â… support your revolution," Belafonte told Chavez during the broadcast.

Yeah, Harry, The US is such an oppressive state that you will be permitted to fly home, take a limo to your mansion, and appear on all the talk shows wearing your Rolex and Gucci clothes to tell us that we live in a dictatorship.

If a dissident from Venezuela (or Cuba, the other left-wing dictatorship you love so dearly) were to go abroad and make such statements, tehy would face arrest if allowed to return to their homeland .

Somight I suggest that you, Danny, and Cornel get your effin' heads out of your effin' @sses and realize that the fact that the government doesn't conform to your socialist policies does not make the President of the United States a terrorist or a dictator.

And by the way -- I hope one of you idiots (or a close loved one) is a victim of the NEXT attack by real terrorists. Maybe then you'll understand what a terrorist really is.

MORE AT: Michelle Malkin, Six24 Blog Aggregator, Wikistan, Sensible Mom, RightWinged, Flynn Files, Independent Sources, FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog, Macmind, Martin's Musings, Preaching Politics, The Violence Worker, The Lunch Counter, 4thelittle guy, Blogs for Bush

Posted by: Greg at 01:42 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 336 words, total size 3 kb.

That was the question asked by Ray Donovan, Reagan's Labor Secretary, after he was found not guilty of corruption charges. It is the question that many folks found not guilty ask. And I suspect that it was the question asked by Virginia teacher who was accused of sexual abuse of a student, found not guilty, but who was fired anyway.

His answer? Back to court.

But things have gone quite wrong for him in the process -- not only has he been denied his day in court, but he and his lawyer have been sanctioned by the judge!

After all the difficulties David Perino encountered as a teacher -- his arrest on charges of sexually abusing a student, his acquittal in court and his firing in spite of that -- he thought he had one last recourse: Sue. Sue them all.

And so he did. Last summer, Perino filed eight lawsuits against the Prince William County school system and several of its employees, including former superintendent Edward L. Kelly, who died Thursday night.

But last week, Perino's quest to win his job back and clear his name was smacked off course when Prince William Circuit Court Judge William D. Hamblen ordered sanctions against him and his attorney. Hamblen declared that the lawsuits constituted harassment, the school system's attorney said. The judge ordered the pair to pay more than $14,000 to cover the school system's legal fees.

Perino and lawyer Pamela Cave have less than 30 days to appeal the sanctions. They say they intend to.

Such sanctions are quite rare, which leaves some observers wndering why the judge took this course of action.

"I don't recall one of our attorneys ever being sanctioned," said Robert Chanin, who has been general counsel for the National Education Association since 1968. "They are ordered if a lawyer truly brings a frivolous case without good faith or a legal basis. Don't harass the other side and waste the court's time."

And let's be honest here -- the damage to this man's good name and the loss of his job are pretty substantial damages, especially when a group of public officials state that they don't care what a jury of his peers had to say on the matter.

The dispute between Perino and the school system began Dec. 12, 2003, when a 20-year-old student with Down syndrome accused the 16-year veteran of sexually abusing her inside his empty classroom during school hours. The woman alleged that Perino tried to sodomize her; Perino said they talked about photographs on his wall before he ordered her to return to her regular classroom.

His first trial, in May 2004, resulted in a hung jury. Months later, a second jury found him not guilty of aggravated sexual battery and attempted forcible sodomy.

Last spring, Perino faced a School Board grievance hearing to keep his job. But School Board members voted to fire him, saying they believed he was guilty of sexual abuse. They also discovered pornographic images on his classroom computer and accused him of downloading the items. Perino denied doing any of it and said other people had access to his computer.

No I will grant that there is a different burden of proof at a criminal trial and an employment hearing. But this just points out the problem of allowing additional hearings and sanctions against an individual found not guilty. It strikes me that the concept of "res judicata" should apply here -- the matter has been decided by a court, and is not to be reexamined in another setting.

And therein lies the problem, especially in this age when there are more and more accusations of sexual misconduct by teachers coming to light -- how do we deal with those falsely accused, and where do they go to get their reputations (not to mention their careers) back?

Posted by: Greg at 01:34 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 659 words, total size 4 kb.

After sympathetically describing the plight of a battered woman who legally owned a gun but who was facing legal charges, San Francisco Chronicle columnist Joan Ryan proves that she just does not understand the real issue of government violation of the individual right to keep and bear arms.

Rebecca knows she made a big mistake in leaving her purse with a loaded gun at a public place. Her lapse was a potentially dangerous one; it should not be minimized. But how do we balance her mistake against the danger she faces every day from a violent man who left her crushed and fearful, whose beatings and threats drove her into hiding?

The law against carrying concealed guns makes good sense. But so many women every year are killed by their abusive boyfriends and husbands. Restraining orders, as we know, can't stop them. The police often can't stop them. I don't know what the solution is. But something's wrong when, in trying to keep herself alive, the terrorized woman becomes the criminal.

Actually, Joan, your entire piece prior to this point proves that laws banning the concealed carrying of firearms are wrong from any moral or ethical perspective -- unless one believes that victims have an obligation to place themselves at the complete mercy of those who seek to commit acts of violence against them.

The solution is obvious to those who are not blinded by anti-gun ideology -- free people should not be prohibitted from possessing the means to defend themselves from predators.

Posted by: Greg at 12:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 261 words, total size 2 kb.

Or is atheism mental illness?

That is my question after reading a synopsis of a program being run by the taxpayer-funded BBC in England, hosted by "scientist" Richard Dawkins.

CONTROVERSIAL scientist Richard Dawkins will assert tomorrow evening that religion is a “virus” that amounts to child abuse.

The new two-part series, to be shown on Channel 4, will compare Moses to Hitler and claim that God is racist. It will also argue that religion is a “backward belief system” responsible for terrorism.

The controversial films, which were produced by IWC creative director Alan Clements and written by Dawkins, are a polemic against faith and a stout defence of science.

Entitled The Root Of All Evil, the series shows Dawkins visiting theological hot-spots in Lourdes, Colorado Springs, the al-Axa mosque and an English faith school. In each case the presenter, who is an atheist, attempts to show that religion is an “elephant in the room” trying to subvert reason.

In the first film, The God Delusion, Dawkins claims that Lourdes, a Catholic pilgrimage destination in France, symbolises a belief system based on “delusion”. “If you want to experience the mediaeval rituals of faith, the candle light, the incense, music, important-sounding dead languages, nobody does it better than the Catholics,” he says.

Dawkins then travels to the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, where he hits out at the influence of “Christian fascism” and “an American Taliban”.

This is followed by an interview with Yousef al-Khattab, an American-born Jew turned fundamentalist Muslim, who clashes with Dawkins after saying he hates atheists.

So what we get here are hate-filled rhetoric, generalization from a handful of examples, and caustic ridicule of people who dare disagree with this so-called scientist who excludes the positive data about religion from his study and conclusion.

And then there is the second half of this atheistic "Mein Kampf".

In the second film, The Virus of Faith, Dawkins turns his attention to the effect he believes religion has on young people. “Innocent children are being saddled with demonstrable falsehoods,” he says.

More controversially, he states “sectarian religious schools” have been “deeply damaging” to generations of children. “It’s time to question the abuse of childhood innocence with superstitious ideas of hellfire and damnation ,” he says. “Isn’t it weird the way we automatically label a tiny child with its parents’ religion?”

Dawkins also questions the fundamental tenets of Christianity. On the idea of a spiritual creator, he says: “The God of the Old Testament has got to be the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous, and proud of it, petty, vindictive, unjust, unforgiving, racist.”

The author of The Selfish Gene then criticises Abraham, compares Moses to Hitler and Saddam Hussein, before calling the New Testament “St Paul’s nasty, sado-masochistic doctrine of atonement for original sin”.

Yeah, that sure sounds like an objective look at religion.

And yet somehow this man is taken seriously in the intelligent design/blind evolution debate. If his work here is any indication, he is clearly incapable of engaging in neutral, objective study of anything -- and is motivated by a blind, unreasoning faith that his ideology is correct.

It seems to me that passing this ideology along to children would be every bit as abusive as raising them a Nazi, Kluxer, or an Islamist. And it seems that Dawkins has a worldview that is pathological -- indeed, that is so xenophobic as to constitute a mental illness.

MORE AT: Boys Wear Pants, All Things Beautiful, The Paragraph Farmer

Posted by: Greg at 12:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 590 words, total size 4 kb.

I'm curious what the the feminists have to say about this one. I mean after all, it is a logical outcome of "a woman's right to choose".

About 10 million female foetuses may have been aborted in India over the past two decades because of ultrasound sex screening and a traditional preference for boys, according to a study published online in The Lancet on Monday.

Researchers based in Canada and India looked through data from a national survey, conducted among 1.1 million households in 1998, and at information about 133 738 births that took place in 1997.

They found that in cases where the preceding child was a girl, the gender ratio for a second birth was just 759 girls to 1 000 boys.

And when the two previous children were girls, this ratio fell even further, to 719 girls to 1 000 boys.

On the other hand, when the preceding child or children were male, the gender ratio among successive births was about the same.

Selective abortion

Based on the natural sex ratio in other countries, about 13.6 - 13.8 million girls should have been born in India in 1997 - but the actual number was 13.1 million.

"We conservatively estimate that prenatal sex determination and selective abortion accounts for 0.5 million missing girls yearly," said one of the authors, Prabhat Jha of St Michael's Hospital at the University of Toronto, Canada.

"If this practice has been common for most of the past two decades since access to ultrasound became widespread, then a figure of 10 million missing female births would not be unreasonable."

The "girl deficit" is far more prominent in educated women, the investigators found.

Social consequences

The number of boys born as second children was twice as high among this group than among illiterate mothers.

However, the deficit did not vary by religion.

The study published by the London-based medical journal comes on the heels of a report last October by the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), which warned that infanticide or abortion was driving India towards a gender imbalance with alarming social consequences.

Afghanistan, China, Nepal, Pakistan and South Korea face similar problems, the UNFPA said.

But hey -- what goes on between a woman and her doctor is nobody else's business, right ladies? And if that means that 25-30 of all girls are aborted, then that is just one more victory for women's rights -- at least for the rights of the one who manage to escape the uterine killing zone that the high priestesses of the sacrament of abortion have created around the world.

Posted by: Greg at 11:39 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 438 words, total size 3 kb.

Am I alone in finding this disturbing?

A court has approved the release from prison the man who shot Pope John Paul II in 1981, saying he completed his sentence for crimes he committed in Turkey, the semiofficial Anatolia news agency reported today.

Mehmet Ali Agca was extradited to Turkey in 2000 after serving almost 20 years in Italy for shooting and wounding the pope in St. Peter's Square in Rome. His motive for the attack remains unclear.

Agca, 46, was expected to be released as early as Monday. Anatolia said he was expected to be immediately enlisted by the military for obligatory service, Anatolia said.

Upon his return to Turkey, Agca immediately was sent to prison to serve a 10-year sentence for murdering Turkish journalist Abdi Ipekci in 1979. He was separately sentenced to seven years and four months for two robberies in Turkey the same year.

An Istanbul court ruled in 2004 that Agca should only serve the longest sentence — his conviction for killing Ipekci. That 10-year sentence was changed twice because of new Turkish laws.

Agca served less than six months in Turkish prison in 1979 for killing Ipekci before he escaped, resurfacing in 1981 in Rome.

Given that earlier time served, the prison asked a court for permission to release Agca. The court ruled that Agca could now be freed this week, Anatolia said.

Agca reportedly identified with the Gray Wolves, a far right-wing militant group that fought street battles against leftists in the 1970s. He first confessed to killing Ipekci, one of the country's most prominent left-wing newspaper columnists, but later retracted his statements.

So what we have here is a murderous terrorist with a string of violent crimes being released from prison and immediately being inducted into the military and given a gun. Seems somewhat outrageous to me.

Posted by: Greg at 06:52 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 323 words, total size 2 kb.

Look at what Stephen F. Hayes has written in the current Weekly Standard. There is credible proof of Iraq as terrorist training ground.

THE FORMER IRAQI REGIME OF Saddam Hussein trained thousands of radical Islamic terrorists from the region at camps in Iraq over the four years immediately preceding the U.S. invasion, according to documents and photographs recovered by the U.S. military in postwar Iraq. The existence and character of these documents has been confirmed to THE WEEKLY STANDARD by eleven U.S. government officials.

The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak--and was directed by elite Iraqi military units. Interviews by U.S. government interrogators with Iraqi regime officials and military leaders corroborate the documentary evidence. Many of the fighters were drawn from terrorist groups in northern Africa with close ties to al Qaeda, chief among them Algeria's GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army. Some 2,000 terrorists were trained at these Iraqi camps each year from 1999 to 2002, putting the total number at or above 8,000. Intelligence officials believe that some of these terrorists returned to Iraq and are responsible for attacks against Americans and Iraqis. According to three officials with knowledge of the intelligence on Iraqi training camps, White House and National Security Council officials were briefed on these findings in May 2005; senior Defense Department officials subsequently received the same briefing.

The photographs and documents on Iraqi training camps come from a collection of some 2 million "exploitable items" captured in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan. They include handwritten notes, typed documents, audiotapes, videotapes, compact discs, floppy discs, and computer hard drives. Taken together, this collection could give U.S. intelligence officials and policymakers an inside look at the activities of the former Iraqi regime in the months and years before the Iraq war.

And what do the documents actually show?

Other officials familiar with the captured documents were less cautious. "As much as we overestimated WMD, it appears we underestimated [Saddam Hussein's] support for transregional terrorists," says one intelligence official.

Speaking of Ansar al Islam, the al Qaeda-linked terrorist group that operated in northern Iraq, the former high-ranking military intelligence officer says: "There is no question about the fact that AI had reach into Baghdad. There was an intelligence connection between that group and the regime, a financial connection between that group and the regime, and there was an equipment connection. It may have been the case that the IIS [Iraqi Intelligence Service] support for AI was meant to operate against the [anti-Saddam] Kurds. But there is no question IIS was supporting AI."

The official continued: "[Saddam] used these groups because he was interested in extending his influence and extending the influence of Iraq. There are definite and absolute ties to terrorism. The evidence is there, especially at the network level. How high up in the government was it sanctioned? I can't tell you. I don't know whether it was run by Qusay [Hussein] or [Izzat Ibrahim] al-Duri or someone else. I'm just not sure. But to say Iraq wasn't involved in terrorism is flat wrong."

Got that -- "to say Iraq wasn't involved in terrorism is flat wrong." So once again we can show that the case for war made by the President was both truthful and accurate, despite the partisan ramblings of members of the disloyal opposition.

Remember this from Teddy Kennedy (D-Chivas Regal)?

"Iraq was not a breeding ground for terrorism. Our invasion has made it one.”

And this from John Kerry (D-Wife's Money)?

"Iraq was not a terrorist haven before the invasion."

Or this from any number of KOSacks, DUmmies MoveOn morons and other sufferers of Bsh Deranngement Syndrome?

"Bush lied; soldiers died!"

It turns out that their statements were frighteningly wrong -- and gave aid, comfort, and support to our nation's enemies during time of war.. So it wis with no hesidtation that I say "Leftists lied; American soldiers died!"

MORE AT: Kokonut Pundits, Powerline Blog, Let Freedom Ring, GeMatt's Place, Protein Wisdom, Austin Bay, Noisy Room, Michelle Malkin, and MANY OTHERS.

Posted by: Greg at 01:07 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 681 words, total size 5 kb.

In response to a growing discontent with the ongoing legal saga in Texas and his alleged connections to the Abramoff scandal, Congressman Tom DeLay has removed himself from the position of House Majority Leader.

Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) today abandoned his bid to remain House majority leader, bowing to pressure from a growing number of fellow House Republicans who wanted a permanent leadership change because of his indictment on campaign finance charges.

DeLay had stepped aside on a temporary basis after his indictment by a politically-motivated partisan hack prosecutor in Texas for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time of the alleged crime.

Congressman DeLay sent the following two letters to explain his decision.

The first went to House Speaker Dennis Hastert.

Dear Mr. Speaker:

I am writing to inform you of my decision to permanently step aside as majority leader, and of my belief that the best interests of the conference would be served by the election of a new leader as soon as possible.

The job of majority leader and the mandate of the Republican majority are too important to be hamstrung, even for a few months, by personal distractions.

I will continue to serve my constituents and seek re-election to a 12th term representing Texas' 22nd district while I work to clear my name of the baseless charges leveled against me. I will also be reclaiming my seat on the Appropriations Committee when the second session of the 109th Congress convenes later this month.

Sincerely,

Tom DeLay

The second was to his fellow Republicans in the House.

Dear Colleague,

Today, I have asked Speaker Hastert to convene our conference for the purpose of electing a new majority leader, the position I have been honored to fill these past three years through the trust and confidence of our colleagues.

During my time in Congress, I have always acted in an ethical manner within the rules of our body and the laws of our land. I am fully confident time will bear this out.

However, we live in serious times and the United States House of Representatives must be focused on the job of protecting our nation and meeting the daily challenges facing the American people. History has proven that when House Republicans are united and focused, success follows.

While we wage these important battles, I cannot allow our adversaries to divide and distract our attention. I will continue to stand up for the issues I care so deeply about and work with you all on these priorities. I am constantly thankful for the support of my constituents in recent days as well as over the years they have allowed me to serve them. I will continue to work every day to fulfill their trust, and yours.

Regards,

Tom DeLay

Please note -- these are not the words of a quitter. Rather, they are the words of a man who is willing to place higher principles above his own ego and self-interest.

The President concurs in the decision -- though I think the cynical tone of the article does not accurately reflect the words of the White House.

After repeatedly maintaining that President Bush continued to support DeLay, the White House pivoted abruptly on Saturday, issuing a statement that endorsed DeLay's move. "We respect Congressman DeLay's decision to put the interests of the American people, the House of Representatives and the Republican Party first," said Erin Healy, a spokeswoman for Bush.

As you might imagine, the moonbats are appropriately batty of er this move.

Personally, I view this as the right move for the the GOP, for the House, and for the country. The leadership questions that existed while Tom DeLay was "on leave" from his leadership position while under indictment (something Democrats do require of their leaders, for all they protested a GOP attempt to change this internal causus rule) hrmed the ability of the president and the GOP majority to move forward on the business of the American people.

Thank you, Congressman DeLay.

GREAT COVERAGE FROM Chris Elam at Safety for Dummies, the foremost political blog of Fort Bend County.

PREVIOUS POSTS:
More Opportunistic Subpoenas From Ronnie Earle
Ronnie Earle's Strategy -- Delay DeLay! Delay DeLay!
Another Ronnie Earle Fishing Expedition
More Delay In DeLay Case
Latest DeLay Bid For Immediate Trial
No Due Process For DeLay
DeLay Screwed By Judge Priest
Ronnie Earle's Assault On Free Speech
DeLay Team Targets Ronnie Earle's Unethical Prosecutorial Conduct
Ronnie Earle Goes Fishing
So Much For A Right To A Speedy Trial
A Victory For DeLay
DeLay Wants No Delay
Plea Possibility Considered
I Love It!
Earle Offered Plea Bargain
Evidence? Ronnie Doesn't Need No Stinking Evidence!
Unethical Prosecutorial Conduct
Grand Jury Shopping
Liberal Austin Paper Criticizes Earle
A Note On The New DeLay Indictments
"The Law And The Truth On My Side"
Ronnie Earle Whitewash In Washington Post
Prosecutorial Misconduct?

Posted by: Greg at 09:07 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 826 words, total size 7 kb.

To read the beginning of this article, we have a serious crime against kids committed by someone in a special position of trust with kids -- don't we?

FBI agents on Friday arrested a former Baldwin County principal on child pornography charges, accusing him of having graphic phone and electronic conversations with a convicted sex offender in which the men discussed abducting and killing two young girls.

Authorities said they have no evidence at this point that Steve Dennis Thomas, who served as an elementary school principal in Stapleton and Bay Minette and later worked in the system's central office, carried out any of those actions.

"The charge is limited at this time to the child pornography. The investigation is continuing," said Special Agent Craig Dahle, a spokesman for the FBI's Mobile field office.

Now I do have a very simple question about the charges -- does any of this involve actual pornographic images, or is it just text/spoken words? I would think that words alone -- absent any action -- might be hard to prosecute for First Amendment reasons. But regardless, we don't want this freak anywhere near kids, and parents should be concerned about his presence at any school.

Not that he is currently employed by the school district.

You see, it has been over three years since he worked for the school district -- possibly five years or more.

The Baldwin County school board voted in 1999 to remove Thomas from his principal position in Bay Minette. Although officials provided no explanation for the move at the time, longtime board member Bob Wills said Friday it was because of deficiencies in Thomas' work.

"He was moved from the position because he was not following board policy in a number of areas," Wills said.

Thomas was moved to the system's administrative office in Loxley, possibly overseeing the distribution of textbooks, Wills said he recalled.

It is unclear exactly when Thomas left the system. Other school officials contacted after 5 p.m. Friday said it has been years since Thomas has worked for the system.

Faron Hollinger said when he returned to the school system as superintendent in 2002, Thomas was no longer employed there.

Thomas is currently employed at a retail store in Spanish Fort, but he was not at work Friday, according to a manager who would not say how long Thomas worked there.

So my big question is this -- how long does someone have to be out of education for them to quit being identified as an educator, especially if their alleged misdeeds happened years later and not in the context of their teaching career?

Posted by: Greg at 04:31 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 459 words, total size 3 kb.

Not one penny of mine will go for any movie featuring George Clooney. Not one george Clooney movie or television show will be watched in my home.

After all, Clooney admires terrorists and has contempt for America.

LET George Clooney explain why the suicide bombers in his "Syriana" are sympathetically depicted as pious heroes while all the Americans in the movie are greedy or homicidal cynics. "They [the terrorists] are, in a way, the most sympathetic, but I think that's important," Clooney said in a videotaped interview shown on Fox News Channel. "Because if you are going to fight a war on terror, which is not a state that you can go and bomb, then you need to understand what it is that creates the people who would do such horrible things, rather then just saying - labeling them as evildoers."

I wonder -- does he really believe that the Cindy Sheehan/MoveOn crowd and the Islamist community are big enough to sustain his career?

Posted by: Greg at 04:14 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 170 words, total size 1 kb.

I frankly do not understand how the Washington, DC public schools can even be taken seriously after reading this story.

D.C. School Superintendent Clifford B. Janey has notified 1,100 uncertified teachers -- about 25 percent of the system's teaching force -- that they will lose their jobs if they do not obtain proper credentials by June 30.

Most of those teachers have expired provisional licenses or have not submitted proof of a valid D.C. teaching license. Janey said yesterday that he took the action because the teachers had been warned repeatedly that they were in danger of being dismissed if they did not comply.

He also cited teacher standards in the federal No Child Left Behind law. But Janey acknowledged that his dismissal plan goes well beyond what that law requires. According to that law, school districts must demonstrate by June that they are making a good-faith effort to put only "highly qualified" teachers in their classrooms, a standard that includes full state certification.

"The question for us is how long can we wait for individuals who have known about the expectation to become fully certified but fail to meet it, irrespective" of the No Child law, Janey said. "We want to send an unambiguous message about the importance of becoming fully certified. This recognizes the kind of impact a good teacher has on the quality of life of children. We are putting a premium on teacher quality."

Now I understand that there are folks on various and sundry temporary certificates in classrooms. When I moved to Texas from Illinois, I was put on such a certificate until I passed the state certification test down here. I have colleagues who are on such certificates as they go through intesively monitored alternative certification programs. But none of us would have ever been allowed to stay in the classroom past the expiration of such a certificate unless we could produce a valid permanent certificate! How is it that so many folks in Washington have been allowed to do so?

It is not clear how many of the 1,100 can meet Janey's deadline. School and teachers union officials said some of the teachers simply need to pass the District's licensing exam, while others need more college credit hours in the subject they are teaching and might have trouble getting them in time. Officials could not say how many teachers are in each of those categories.

Janey said that according to school system records, 545 of the teachers have never had a valid D.C. license. Union officials dispute that figure, saying that the system has a history of poor record-keeping and has likely lost some files.

Half of these teachers have never had a valid certificate in the District of Columbia? How did that happen? I cannot believe the union's explanation, because any teacher in such a situation should be able to easily produc their original certificate or their test scores or other evidence of certification.

But the union goes furhter.

George Parker, president of the Washington Teachers' Union, agreed that the number of uncertified teachers likely will drop by June. But he questioned whether the system will be able to recruit enough certified teachers to fill vacancies.

Parker said that exceeding the federal requirements is "a good objective" but that school officials "have the responsibility to put in place professional development and training to help teachers become certified."

Like many states, the District uses the Praxis teacher licensing exam, which assesses general competency in reading, math and English as well as knowledge in the area of expertise. Some English teachers, for example, might need tutoring to pass the math section, Parker said.

I disagree with you, George. The school district does not have a responsibility to operate such a program. If anything, the union does -- after all, you extort hndreds of dollars out of the paychecks of teachers each year under color of law. Shouldn't you be doing someting to help them maintain their employment?

How bad is teh situation in Washington? This little bit at the end of the article tells a lot of the story. Look at the little detail (I've put it in bold) that doesn't show up until the last line of the article.

Janey also said 58 uncertified teachers were notified yesterday that they will be laid off at the end of this month because enrollment has fallen. Enrollment dropped from about 62,700 last year to 59,600 this year, continuing a steady decline.

The District routinely adjusts staffing levels during the school year when official enrollment figures are released, but individual schools normally decide which positions to cut. Janey said he targeted the uncertified teachers as part of the system's effort to raise teacher standards. All 58 have been working with three-year provisional certifications that expired between 1999 and 2002, he said. To keep working, they must produce a credential by the end of next week.

Excuse me -- certificate between three and six years out of date and they are STILL employed in Washington classrooms? There needs to be some serious housecleaning in that district if sucha situation has been allowed to fester.

Posted by: Greg at 03:12 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 871 words, total size 5 kb.

you can support this guy.

An Arabic language news network has aired a video of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden's top lieutenant, in which he called on U.S. President George W. Bush to admit defeat in Iraq.

Al-Jazeera said the video, which is about a minute long, was made in December.

According to CNN's translation of the video, Ayman al-Zawahiri offers his condolences to Pakistan for the October 8 earthquake before congratulating fellow Muslims for what he says is a victory in Iraq.

***

"Even though I send my condolences to my Islamic nation for the tragedy of the earthquake in Pakistan, today I congratulate everyone for the victory in Iraq. You remember, my dear Muslim brethren, what I told you more than a year ago, that the U.S. troops will pull out of Iraq. It was only a matter of time.

"Here they are now and in the blessing of God begging to pull out, seeking negotiations with the mujahedeen. And here is Bush who was forced to announce at the end of last November that he will be pulling his troops out of Iraq.

"He uses the pretext that the Iraqi forces reached a high level of preparedness. But he doesn't have a timetable for the pullout.

"If all of his troops -- air force, army -- are begging for a way to get out of Iraq, will the liars, traitors and infidels succeed in what the world superpower failed to achieve in Iraq?

"You have set the timetable for the withdrawal a long time ago and Bush, you have to admit that you were defeated in Iraq, you are being defeated in Afghanistan, and you will be defeated in Palestine, God willing."

Which only confirms my reaction to the words of this darling of the Left.

Representative John Murtha, the Pennsylvania Democrat who has come to national prominence since his call for a quick withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, said Thursday night that he worries about "a slow withdrawal which makes it look like there's a victory."

Appearing at a town meeting in Arlington, Virginia, with fellow Democratic Rep. James Moran, Murtha said, "A year ago, I said we can't win this militarily, and I got all kinds of criticism." Now, Murtha told the strongly antiwar audience, "I worry about a slow withdrawal which makes it look like there's a victory when I think it should be a redeployment as quickly as possible and let the Iraqis handle the whole thing."

***

Murtha said he has told some Democrats who are considering a run for president that they are missing an opportunity by declining to call for a rapid withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. "A number of senators who are running for president have called me," Murtha said. "And I told them there's only two policies. That's the policy of redeployment, which I've suggested, and the president's policy — stay the course is not a policy. And you folks, you're in between, you're missing an opportunity to show leadership. If you want to run for president, you can show leadership."

I guess that Murtha is suggesting that such "leadership" will gain the Democrats the all-important terrorist and terrorist-supporter voting-blocs in 2008.

So will Murth's supporters please quit telling us he is a patriot on the side of the soldiers, now that it is clear he is echoing the al-Zawahiri line?

After all -- giving aid and comfort and adhering to the enemy during time of war is treason, not patriotism

SIMILAR THOUGHTS FROM The Paladin Blog

Michelle Malkin comments on and has two videos of vets who confronted Cut & Run advocate John Murtha and his sniveling anti-American colleague Jim Moran at the meeting referenced above.

MORE AT: Mudville Gazette, Six24 Blog Aggregator, Small Town Veteran, Thoughts on Politics, Life, and God, Ed Driscoll, All Things Beautiful, CDR Salamander, JunkYardBlog, Clark Mountain Musings, Democracy Project, Right Mind, A Blog For All, Strata-Sphere, Cao's Blog, The WB42 5:30 Report With Doug Krile, Scipio the Metalcon, The World According To Carl, Macmind, The Anchoress, Byrd Droppings, NIF, Conservative Musings, GeeChee Girl, Mark In Mexico

Posted by: Greg at 04:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 706 words, total size 7 kb.

Want a legitimate reason to hate Microsoft? Try this one on for size.

Microsoft Corp. has shut down the Internet journal of a Chinese blogger that discussed politically sensitive issues including a recent strike at a Beijing newspaper.

The action came amid criticism by free-speech activists of foreign technology companies that help the communist government enforce censorship or silence dissent in order to be allowed into China's market.

Microsoft's China-based Web log-hosting service shut down the blog at the Chinese government's request, said Brooke Richardson, group product manager with Microsoft's MSN online division at the company headquarters in Redmond, Washington.

Though Beijing has supported Internet use for education and business, it fiercely polices content. Filters block objectionable foreign Web sites and regulations ban subversive and pornographic content and require service providers to enforce censorship rules.

"When we operate in markets around the world we have to ensure that our service complies with global laws as well as local laws and norms," Richardson said.

Which means, of course, that the company caters to the oppressive policies of the tyrranical Red Chinese government.

And also that they would have gladly cracked down on any German who dared hint at the evils of the Final Solution.

After all, Microsoft complies with all local laws and norms -- even those which are morally repugnant.

Posted by: Greg at 08:47 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.