There is absolutely no other way to interpret this garbage by the Washington Post's William M. Arkin.

So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?

I can imagine some post-9/11 moment, when the American people say enough already with the wars against terrorism and those in the national security establishment feel these same frustrations. In my little parable, those in leadership positions shake their heads that the people don't get it, that they don't understand that the threat from terrorism, while difficult to defeat, demands commitment and sacrifice and is very real because it is so shadowy, that the very survival of the United States is at stake. Those Hoover's and Nixon's will use these kids in uniform as their soldiers. If I weren't the United States, I'd say the story end with a military coup where those in the know, and those with fire in their bellies, save the nation from the people.

But it is the United States and instead this NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.

Gee -- it was the left-wing liberals who demanded that we end the draft at the end of the Vietnam War, on the basis that no American should be forced to serve int he military against their will. The result was an all-volunteer military that is undeniably the best trained, highest quality force in the history of America, if notht eh world as a whole. While faux-patriots on the Left have suggested that the best way of "spreading the sacrifice around" (read that "undercutting any US military action anywhere in the world"), there has been no serious proposal to that end.

So now we get this piece of garbage from a piece of garbage reporter.

Our troops are mercenaries. They are over-privileged. They don't think like the rest of us (read that "we smarter-than-the-masses liberals") do. And in a fit of paranoia -- the right-wing fascists of the GOP are plotting a military coup using these pampered storm-trooper mercenaries to end our liberties.

Not one more word, Mr. Arkin, about your support for the troops. Not one more word, Washington Post, about your support for the troops. And not one more word, any politician or media outlet who does not condemn the sort of rhetoric used by Arkin, about your support for the troops. Your contempt for the troops is obvious.

Oh, and by the way, Billy-boy -- you lied when you made this statement.

We just don't see very many "baby killer" epithets being thrown around these days, no one in uniform is being spit upon."

That sir is a lie. We hear it all the time from the anti-war Left -- including members of Congress -- in th form of comparisons to Nazis, statements of moral equivalency between the terrorists and the soldiers, and bullshit like your column. And as far as spitting on the troops, might I direct you to this report?

In Washington, counterprotesters also converged on the mall in smaller numbers, but the antiwar demonstration was largely peaceful.

There were a few tense moments, however, including an encounter involving Joshua Sparling, 25, who was on crutches and who said he was a corporal with the 82nd Airborne Division and lost his right leg below the knee in Ramadi, Iraq. Mr. Sparling spoke at a smaller rally held earlier in the day at the United States Navy Memorial, and voiced his support for the administrationÂ’s policies in Iraq.

Later, as antiwar protesters passed where he and his group were standing, words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back.

This incident took place just a short distance from your comfy office where you work as a mercenary for the Washington Post, undercutting American and the troops.

More At Michelle Malkin, Captain's Quarters, Blackfive, Hugh Hewitt, Hot Air, Riehl World News, OpFor, Blue Crab Boulevard, Jammie Wearing Fool, Bill's Bites, Leaning Straight Up, NW Bloggers, Hennessey's Views, Alphabet City, Flopping Aces, TacJammer, Gun Toting Liberal

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, A Blog For All, Right Truth, Big Dog's Weblog, Stuck On Stupid, Common Folk Using Common Sense, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Jo's Cafe, Maggie's Notebook | Conservative Blog, Faultline USA, third world county, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Pink Flamingo, Right Voices, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 11:49 PM | Comments (82) | Add Comment
Post contains 846 words, total size 8 kb.

This could set off a real feeding frenzy, should County Judge Robert Eckels resign from his position leading the Commissioners Court. For those not from Texas, that is not a judicial body, but the governing body for the state's largest county.

Harris County Judge Robert Eckels said Wednesday he is mulling offers from the private sector and can't rule out walking away from the four-year term he just won in November.

An early resignation would create a political whirlwind in county government, where officials serve without term limits and open seats are rare.

"In the last 90 days I've had conversations with a New York firm and international investment banking firms," Eckels said, saying he often has been approached by lobbying and law firms interested in hiring him.

"I have had more serious discussions than in the past. They are more concrete."

He is contemplating those offers, he said, but it is premature to talk about who he is "visiting with."

"I don't have to decide today. But I don't rule out anything," said Eckels, who was in Los Angeles on business. "I wouldn't do anything until I knew the county was in good shape and I had a chance to visit with my colleagues. I'm not looking for something else to do."

Either way, Eckels said he will make a decision sooner rather than later. He has been county judge since 1995.

The article notes that Eckels has engaged in a number of conversations on the issue with Tax Collector/Assessor Paul Bettencourt. No doubt one of the major goals is getting Bettencourt into Eckels' job in the event he does decide to leave. That is a rather complicated task, given that without Eckels the Commissioners Court is divided 2-2 between the two major parties.

But wait -- the Chronicle has this little tidbit later in the article.

If Eckels stepped down, it could create a political standoff, since the commissioners, who would be charged with appointing someone to serve until the next general election, are split 2-2 along party lines.

"The constitution doesn't allow offices to be vacant. Eckels will still serve until his successor is appointed and qualified," County Attorney Mike Stafford said. That also means that Eckels, a Republican, potentially could break a partisan tie in appointing his successor.

Possible successors mentioned in political circles include Bettencourt, District Clerk Charles Bacarisse, Commissioner Jerry Eversole and businessman Ned Holmes, all Republicans.

That could be interesting -- permitting Eckels to essentially choose his successor before departing the position as County Judge.

Now I know all the potential successors from my activities as GOP precinct chair here in my part of the county. As a personal choice, I'd prefer Bettencourt or Bacarisse just in order to avoid another opening on the Commissioners Court and to have the senior position in the county filled by a candidate who has stood before all the voters of the county and won election to office. Both men are well-respected, though Bettencourt definitely has a higher profile and would be less vulnerable to a challenge in either the primary or general election (not that I think that Bacarisse would be a weak candidate). On the other hand, Bettencourt has been touted as a likely candidate for the CD22 seat in 2008 -- his selection as County Judge would undoubtedly remove him from consideration for that office.

I'll be keeping my ear tot he ground on this one, and probably be writing more on the matter in the very near future.

Posted by: Greg at 11:23 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 605 words, total size 4 kb.

I feared that I would soon be writing that headline when I posted about her battle with cancer this past weekend. I just didn't expect it to be quite this soon.

Molly Ivins, the liberal newspaper columnist who delighted in skewering politicians and interpreting, and mocking, her Texas culture, died yesterday in Austin. She was 62.

Ms. Ivins waged a public battle against breast cancer after her diagnosis in 1999. Betsy Moon, her personal assistant, confirmed her death last night. Ms. Ivins died at her home surrounded by family and friends.

In her syndicated column, which appeared in about 350 newspapers, Ms. Ivins cultivated the voice of a folksy populist who derided those who she thought acted too big for their britches. She was rowdy and profane, but she could filet her opponents with droll precision.

I'll let my comments from the weekend stand as my tribute to her.

I find her positions wrong-headed and hateful, and her prose lacking in elegance. I don't even like her accent. But I would hate to see her voiced silenced at what is a relatively young age.

* * *

Get well, Molly -- I don't agree with you, but I don't want to lose you.

Sadly, the Lord did not choose to honor that parting sentiment, and so today I close with a different one -- may she rest in peace, in the presence of the Lord.

Posted by: Greg at 11:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I’m simply stunned. After all, even Robert “The Kleagle” Byrd wouldn’t say something this stupidly bigoted. But Joe Biden did.

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy ... I mean, that's a storybook, man."

I

Suppose

He

May

Have

Missed

These

Folks.

Posted by: Greg at 02:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.

I’m simply stunned. After all, even Robert “The Kleagle” Byrd wouldn’t say something this stupidly bigoted. But Joe Biden did.

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy ... I mean, that's a storybook, man."

I

Suppose

He

May

Have

Missed

These

Folks.

Posted by: Greg at 02:56 PM | Comments (440) | Add Comment
Post contains 66 words, total size 1 kb.

And this one was particularly vile, even by the incredibly low standard already set by the jihadi pigs who infect much of the world.

EVIL Muslim terrorists were to kidnap a British soldier on UK streets and force him to plead with Tony Blair for his life in return for a pull-out of troops from Iraq, The Sun can reveal.

The soldier would have been filmed begging the PM to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan in a sick propaganda stunt.
Army sources said the target was a British Muslim soldier in his 20s.

He would eventually be beheaded on film in a sick mirror of the torture and savage killing of British hostage Ken Bigley if Mr Blair refused.

Senior security sources say the plot would have put the most unbearable blackmail pressure on the Premier to act.

It would also have sent shockwaves through the entire British Armed Forces - putting the fear of God into every man and woman in uniform on or off duty.

The fact that the arrests were made in Birmingham could suggest that soldiers recovering from wounds in military hospitals there might have been targeted.

Posted by: Greg at 02:19 PM | Comments (137) | Add Comment
Post contains 241 words, total size 1 kb.

This is simply one more area in which the government need not and ought not be involved in making the decision for consumers.

A California lawmaker wants to make his state the first to ban incandescent lightbulbs as part of California's groundbreaking initiatives to reduce energy use and greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.

The "How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act" would ban incandescent lightbulbs by 2012 in favor of energy-saving compact fluorescent lightbulbs.

"Incandescent lightbulbs were first developed almost 125 years ago, and since that time they have undergone no major modifications," California Assemblyman Lloyd Levine said on Tuesday.

"Meanwhile, they remain incredibly inefficient, converting only about 5 percent of the energy they receive into light."

Levine is expected to introduce the legislation this week, his office said.
If passed, it would be another pioneering environmental effort in California, the most populous U.S. state. It became the first state to mandate cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, targeting a 25 percent reduction in emissions by 2020.

Compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs) use about 25 percent of the energy of conventional lightbulbs.

Personally, I’m of the belief that a better name for the bill is the “”How Many Legislators Does It Take To Strip You Of Your Freedom Act”. And I say this as someone who made the choice to convert most of the lights in my home to the CFL bulbs that this act would mandate. I simply do not believe it is the place of the government to be making such choices on our behalf.
What next? The “Shut Off The Lights When You Leave The Room Act”?

Posted by: Greg at 02:16 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 283 words, total size 2 kb.

What do you think of these numbers?

In a poll conducted five months ago, and broadcast on Britain's Channel 4 TV, nearly 25% of British Muslims said the July 7, 2005, terror bombings in London, which killed 52 innocent commuters, were justified. Another 30% said they would prefer to live under strict Islamic Sharia law rather than England's democratic system.

Now, one in four justifying terror may not be a majority, but it certainly isn't a "small fringe" either.

In other countries, the figures are no less unsettling. A survey published in December found that 44% of Nigerian Muslims believe suicide bombing attacks are "often" or "sometimes" acceptable. Only 28% said they were never justified.
According to the annual Pew Global Attitudes Survey, released in July 2006, "roughly one-in-seven Muslims in France, Spain and Great Britain feel that suicide bombings against civilian targets can at least sometimes be justified to defend Islam." The report also found that less than half of Jordan's Muslims believe terror attacks are never justified. In Egypt, only 45% of Muslims say terror is never justified.

Now you may argue that these views are not representative of Islam – but they are not the views of a tiny minority, either. Rather, such views are clearly those of a large minority of the Muslims in the world, and must therefore be grappled with as a part of a larger reality – one in which appeals to the more “high minded” views of Islam are likely to be ineffective given the more radical views of the jihadi pigs and their supporters.

Posted by: Greg at 02:15 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 269 words, total size 2 kb.

Not gossiping about the day at work, not bitching about conditions, not even engaging in great debates about educational philosophy and policy -- a blogger/podcaster who is actually about TEACHING with his online work!

Fourth period on a midwinter Thursday, Christmas vacation a fading memory by now, and Lars Brownworth took his accustomed place in front of an American history class at the Stony Brook School here. He had been guiding these seniors through the Gilded Age lately, and for this session he planned to personify the era in the form of the oil tycoon John D. Rockefeller.

For 45 minutes, Mr. Brownworth deftly orchestrated lecture, discussion and archival photographs to evoke Rockefeller in both his rapacious capitalism and social conscience. When the bell rang, out shuffled the audience, a dozen teenagers who might or might not remember any of this material beyond the next exam. In its satisfactions and its limits, such was the life Mr. Brownworth, the son of teachers, had gladly chosen.

That night, though, Mr. Brownworth, 31, set to work in his own apartment, writing an essay about Alexius I Comnenus, the Byzantine emperor from 1081 to 1118. After revision and rehearsal, the text would become the script for the latest installment of Mr. BrownworthÂ’s podcast. And if form held, something like 140,000 listeners from Afghanistan to White Plains would hear it.

In barely 18 months, Mr. Brownworth’s podcast, “12 Byzantine Rulers” (at http://www.anders.com/lectures/lars_brownworth/12_byzantine_rulers/), has become one of the phenomena of the podcasting world. A survey of 1,200 years of rather abstruse history, starting with Diocletian in 284 and finishing with Constantine XI Palaeologus in 1453, “12 Byzantine Rulers” routinely ranks in the top five educational podcasts on iTunes, and in the top 50 of all podcasts.

Now I particularly like Brownworth's humble reaction to all the attention -- and to his fan base. He never imagined that anyone else would listen when he started this little project, which was much more for himself and his own edification than for attaining a wide-scale audience. I'm hoping that there is eventually a book in the works, and that it has the sort of wild success that his efforts deserve. But perhaps most importantly in my book, I hope his work sparks a few young people to actually consider history as an avocation, as a field of study, and as a passion in life. For as I've said more than once -- if I can turn on even one student a year to the glories of the past (or, n my government classes, to the beauty of the US Constitution), my teaching those students who just want a grade and a credit has been worth it.

Posted by: Greg at 11:06 PM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 468 words, total size 3 kb.

I really struggle over this situation from Tampa, which I can see as raising a whole host of issues. After all, what do you do when a crime victim -- especially the victim of a sexual assault -- is discovered to have an outstanding warrant when they report the crime?

A 21-year-old woman told police Saturday that a man grabbed her off Howard Avenue and raped her behind a building during the Gasparilla festivities.

But officers investigating the case arrested her after learning she had an outstanding warrant from her teenage years for failure to pay restitution.

She spent the next two nights in jail.

Police are reviewing their policies after the arrest, which one victim's advocate said could have "a chilling effect" on the rape investigation, the woman's well-being and the desire of future victims to contact police.

The woman's family is outraged.

The family is, of course, incensed over the arrest and jailing of the young woman, a feeling I can understand given the horrendous nature of the event she has just been through. At the same time, I can understand the argument that it is the duty of the police to enforce arrest warrants that have been issued when possible, without playing favorites.

But in this case, I tend to side with the family and the victim. The police knew where this woman lived, and how to contact her in the future. At some future point, after a suitable interval, the arrest could have been made. Indeed, this is one of those instances in which the matter probably should have been kicked to the prosecutor's office to see how they wanted the matter handled. No doubt a suitable arrangement could have been made for the young woman to deal with those warrants at a more appropriate time.

Yes, justice is important -- but mercy is at times the higher value.

Posted by: Greg at 12:58 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 321 words, total size 2 kb.

That is the implicit position he takes in this little snippet of debate over tying the minimum wage increase to a tax cut for small businesses which will be adversely hit by this unfunded mandate by the federal government.

"How many more billions of dollars do we have to give you, Mr. Republican?" the Massachusetts Democrat shouted. "How many more dollars do we have to give you to get an increase in the minimum wage? It is shocking. It is disgraceful."

Let’s look real close at this statement about the proposed tax cut. It speaks volumes about how Jabba the Drunk (D-Chappaquidick) understands tax policy and the federal role in the economy.

“How much money do we have to give you?”

Implicit in this is that the money made by a business – or an individual, for that matter – does not really belong to them. Rather, in Kennedy’s eyes every red cent of that money rightfully belongs to the government, and the portion that remains in the hands of the taxpayer is nothing less than a gift from the all-powerful government to the serfs that work to feed its insatiable appetite for tax dollars. Under this view, a tax cut is nothing less than a gift of government money to a private interest. Indeed, Kennedy doesn’t seem to understand that, as a government mandate, the minimum wage is no less a tax on business that a straight tax on profits, and so the proposed “tax cut” is nothing less than a trade-of of one tax for another.

Kennedy’s view is antithetical to American thought. Government is supposed to be limited, a servant of the people. Indeed, when Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence that we are endowed with the rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, he was cribbing from John Locke, who argued that we had a right to life, liberty and property. Those who signed that document understood that the pursuit of happiness was, in fact, the pursuit of money and property. The Constitution of the United States concerns itself with limiting government power, and the Bill of Rights concerns itself with protecting the property rights of the people. Federal taxing and spending power were to be strictly limited, with the people entitled to the fruits of their labor with only a limited governmental claim upon their earnings.

Kennedy’s question is therefore grounded in a fundamental inversion of the founding principles of American government. There is therefore only one appropriate response in rebuttal to Kennedy’s cry of “How much money do we have to give you, Mr. Republican?” It is “No, Mr. Democrat – How much money must you take from the American people to feed the ravenous beasts of government spending and federal mandates?”

Will there be a Republican courageous enough to utter those words?

Oh, and as a side note, the tax breaks for small business (tax swaps, if you recognize the minimum wage as nothing less than a tax upon business) did pass.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Random Yak, Adam's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Right Truth, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Common Folk Using Common Sense, Conservative Cat, Faultline USA, third world county, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, Planck's Constant, Renaissance Blogger, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 11:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 571 words, total size 5 kb.

That is the implicit position he takes in this little snippet of debate over tying the minimum wage increase to a tax cut for small businesses which will be adversely hit by this unfunded mandate by the federal government.

"How many more billions of dollars do we have to give you, Mr. Republican?" the Massachusetts Democrat shouted. "How many more dollars do we have to give you to get an increase in the minimum wage? It is shocking. It is disgraceful."

LetÂ’s look real close at this statement about the proposed tax cut. It speaks volumes about how Jabba the Drunk (D-Chappaquidick) understands tax policy and the federal role in the economy.

“How much money do we have to give you?”

Implicit in this is that the money made by a business – or an individual, for that matter – does not really belong to them. Rather, in Kennedy’s eyes every red cent of that money rightfully belongs to the government, and the portion that remains in the hands of the taxpayer is nothing less than a gift from the all-powerful government to the serfs that work to feed its insatiable appetite for tax dollars. Under this view, a tax cut is nothing less than a gift of government money to a private interest. Indeed, Kennedy doesn’t seem to understand that, as a government mandate, the minimum wage is no less a tax on business that a straight tax on profits, and so the proposed “tax cut” is nothing less than a trade-of of one tax for another.

Kennedy’s view is antithetical to American thought. Government is supposed to be limited, a servant of the people. Indeed, when Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence that we are endowed with the rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, he was cribbing from John Locke, who argued that we had a right to life, liberty and property. Those who signed that document understood that the pursuit of happiness was, in fact, the pursuit of money and property. The Constitution of the United States concerns itself with limiting government power, and the Bill of Rights concerns itself with protecting the property rights of the people. Federal taxing and spending power were to be strictly limited, with the people entitled to the fruits of their labor with only a limited governmental claim upon their earnings.

Kennedy’s question is therefore grounded in a fundamental inversion of the founding principles of American government. There is therefore only one appropriate response in rebuttal to Kennedy’s cry of “How much money do we have to give you, Mr. Republican?” It is “No, Mr. Democrat – How much money must you take from the American people to feed the ravenous beasts of government spending and federal mandates?”

Will there be a Republican courageous enough to utter those words?

Oh, and as a side note, the tax breaks for small business (tax swaps, if you recognize the minimum wage as nothing less than a tax upon business) did pass.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Random Yak, Adam's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Right Truth, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Common Folk Using Common Sense, Conservative Cat, Faultline USA, third world county, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, Planck's Constant, Renaissance Blogger, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 11:57 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 579 words, total size 5 kb.

I’ve often railed against restrictions on political speech that masquerade as “campaign finance reform”. Personally, I don’t believe in ANY restrictions on political speech, save for bona fide application of laws on libel and slander.

Today the LA Times takes a half a step in the direction of supporting the ideal enshrined in the First Amendment by urging that the Supreme Court take the opportunity of a pending case to make speech a little more free than McCain-Feingold allows. It ultimately comes down to a case of how certain forms of speech are classified.

The speech-curtailing measure at issue is part of the broader McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. The centerpiece of that law banned "soft money" contributions to political parties that were used to circumvent limits on how much donors could contribute to candidates for federal office. What is glaringly offensive to the 1st Amendment is an accompanying ban on "electioneering communications" paid for out of the treasuries of independent organizations.

As defined by the law, electioneering communications are advertisements that mention a candidate for federal office and are broadcast within 30 days of a primary election or within 60 days of a general election. They need not (and usually do not) tell viewers to vote for or against a candidate.

Unfortunately, this means that there are vast chunks of the year when advocating grassroots action is illegal. After all, suggesting that a key senator or representative be contacted qualifies as “electioneering”, despite the fact that it clearly is not.

There are a lot of phoney "issue ads" out there ("Tell Sen. Smith you disagree with him about Iraq" can sound a lot like an endorsement for challenger Jones), but the court has to err on the side of preserving political speech. When it comes to speaking out about a candidate, opponents (and news outlets like ours) should not have a monopoly in the closing days of a campaign, especially if the outside organization weighing in is genuinely acting on its own.

The particular facts of the Wisconsin Right to Life ads are a compelling indictment of the law's overreach and should prod the high court to reconsider whether the law could be constitutional under any set of facts. The addition of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. may dictate a different outcome — retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor cast the deciding vote upholding the limits in 2003.

But if the court isn't willing to go back to the drawing board, Congress should. An advertisement praising or criticizing a politician — even one seeking reelection — has more in common with the endorsement editorials that appear on this page than it does with the campaign contributions (in hard or soft dollars) that have received only minimal 1st Amendment protection from the courts.

The "bright line" that needs to be drawn is the one between financing someone else's message and articulating your own.

But more to the point, so what if it is, in fact, electioneering? Is it not the right of American citizens to speak freely on the election of our political leaders? DonÂ’t Americans have the right to associate together for precisely that purpose? Such speech is precisely what the First Amendment is meant to protect!

But then again, I also believe in unlimited, unrestricted campaign donation – a system that worked for most of the history of the Republic, and which generated less corruption than the “reforms” designed to “clean up politics”.

Posted by: Greg at 11:51 AM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 581 words, total size 4 kb.

Just a quick view of the family values of a typical Terrorstinian family following the murder of three Israeli civilians by a jihadi pig in Eilat.

The mother of Muhammad Faisal Saksak, the 21-year-old suicide bomber who carried out Monday's attack in Eilat, said she was aware of her son's plan to blow himself up and that she had wished him "good luck."

Dozens of Palestinians, chanting slogans against Israel and the US, converged on the family's home to "congratulate" them on the success of the attack.

A celebration over the intentional, planned, premeditated murder of random innocents – clearly these people are neither civilized nor desirous of peace.

Posted by: Greg at 11:49 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.

I guess I donÂ’t see a problem with this executive order which has driven the NY Times insane.

President Bush has signed a directive that gives the White House much greater control over the rules and policy statements that the government develops to protect public health, safety, the environment, civil rights and privacy.

In an executive order published last week in the Federal Register, Mr. Bush said that each agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents providing guidance to regulated industries. The White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the presidentÂ’s priorities.

This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover of Congress by the Democrats.

Of course, this sort of goes along with such unreasonable power grabs as the one contained in this earlier document.

The President. . . may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices. . . [and] shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. . . .”

In other words, the executive power of the United States is vested in the President of the United States. Sounds rather like the role that the executive order envisions, doesnÂ’t it?

Posted by: Greg at 11:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 279 words, total size 2 kb.

Involving, of course, our friends the Islamists.

Toilets in one London prison are getting a face-lift — or rather, a change in direction — to accommodate Muslim inmates who can't use them while facing Mecca, a British newspaper reported.

Government officials ackowledged using tax dollars for the changes to the facilities, but maintained that moving the toilets was part of "on-going refurbishment," according to an article in The Sun.

Islamic code prohibits Muslims from facing or turning their backs on the direction of prayer when they use the bathroom. Muslim prisoners complained of having to sit sideways on toilets so as to not break code.

Personally, I’m for turning them all towards Mecca. If the inmates don’t like it, they can hold it until their release – or consider not engaging in criminal conduct so that they don’t come back again.

Posted by: Greg at 11:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.

Radio host turned State Senator Dan Patrick has introduced a bill related to his biggest issue -- rising property taxes. The bill would set a vote on an amendment to the Texas Constitution setting the annual growth in residential appraisals a 3%, ending the current 10% cap that can effectively result in a tax bill that doubles every seven to eight years.

It will be an uphill fight, but Houston Sen. Dan Patrick on Monday filed one of his longtime priorities, a constitutional amendment lowering the annual cap on homestead reappraisals from 10 percent to 3 percent.

He also filed a related proposal to limit appraisal increases on vacation homes and other nonhomestead residential properties to 10 percent a year. At present, there aren't any limits on how much those properties can be reappraised from year to year.

As a conservative talk show radio host, the Republican freshman senator has long advocated lower limits on appraisals, a key ingredient in rising property taxes.

But a lower statewide appraisal limit wasn't recommended by a task force appointed by Gov. Rick Perry to study the issue because the chairman, Dallas businessman Tom Pauken, didn't believe the amendment can muster the necessary two-thirds votes in the House and the Senate.

Now I agree with Pauken -- this bill is unlikely to get the 2/3 vote necessary for the amendment to go to the people. However, it is important that this bill be filed and voted upon by the legislature. There has been a growing discontent over property taxes the last several years, and legislative stonewalling on the issue has been the obstacle to meaningful reform that will allow Texans to keep their homes. We deserve to know which legislators are for the taxpayer, and which ones are for the right of local governments to take an ever-increasing portion of our paychecks.

And for those of you who wonder why this is a big issue down here, consider this example. My property taxes for my very modest home run around $2500. With the 10% annual appraisal cap, they could double to $5000 by 2014. Each year the increase eats up every penny of my annual pay raise under my school district's current salary schedule -- and by 2022 would outstrip the raises on the current salary schedule by a rate of $2 for every $1 in pay raise. And if you stop to think about it, for Texans on a fixed income such increases can drive them right out of the houses they have owned for decades and in which they have raised families.

We need this appraisal cap now -- and if we don't get it, we need to know which legislators to vote out in 2008, regardless of party label.

Posted by: Greg at 11:21 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 472 words, total size 3 kb.

I've got a confession to make.

As a college student, I was a serious General Hospital fan.

I'm not kidding -- I really was. In fact, I was part of a group of guys from my all male college who purposely arranged our class schedules so that we could watch the show. If I did have to miss my daily fix for some reason, I was lost.

I wish I had something like this site for keeping up with the Soaps to allow me to get a daily update on what I had missed. And to be honest, I would have loved to get all those inside tidbits about comings and goings on the show -- like when Laura mysteriously appeared following Luke's election as mayor of Port Charles. And while I have let that addiction fall by the wayside, I still remember the show fondly, and think this site has a great potential for fans of the Soaps.

By the way, the big inside scoop today is about the cancellation of Passions and the reaction of the show's fans. Drop by and take a look!

Paid Endorsement.

Posted by: Greg at 06:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 189 words, total size 1 kb.

This column goes to prove that some folks may have book smarts but no common sense -- or moral compass. Professor David Bell effectively argues that the terrorists didn't kill enough Americans on 9/11 to justify our response.

IMAGINE THAT on 9/11, six hours after the assault on the twin towers and the Pentagon, terrorists had carried out a second wave of attacks on the United States, taking an additional 3,000 lives. Imagine that six hours after that, there had been yet another wave. Now imagine that the attacks had continued, every six hours, for another four years, until nearly 20 million Americans were dead. This is roughly what the Soviet Union suffered during World War II, and contemplating these numbers may help put in perspective what the United States has so far experienced during the war against terrorism.

It also raises several questions. Has the American reaction to the attacks in fact been a massive overreaction? Is the widespread belief that 9/11 plunged us into one of the deadliest struggles of our time simply wrong? If we did overreact, why did we do so? Does history provide any insight?

Certainly, if we look at nothing but our enemies' objectives, it is hard to see any indication of an overreaction. The people who attacked us in 2001 are indeed hate-filled fanatics who would like nothing better than to destroy this country. But desire is not the same thing as capacity, and although Islamist extremists can certainly do huge amounts of harm around the world, it is quite different to suggest that they can threaten the existence of the United States.

Yet a great many Americans, particularly on the right, have failed to make this distinction. For them, the "Islamo-fascist" enemy has inherited not just Adolf Hitler's implacable hatreds but his capacity to destroy. The conservative author Norman Podhoretz has gone so far as to say that we are fighting World War IV (No. III being the Cold War).

I'm utterly speechless that an educated many would write this, or that an American publication would print this.

But then again, Bell is a college professor.

And the newspaper is the LA Times.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised at all.

Posted by: Greg at 12:54 PM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 383 words, total size 2 kb.

Does this atrocity remind Jimmy Cater of the difference between Israel and the Terrorstinians?

A suicide bomber has blown himself up in a bakery in IsraelÂ’s Red Sea resort of Eilat, killing three people in the first such attack inside the Jewish state in nine months.

Notice that the target was a bakery, not a military installation, and it is clear that the bomb was intended to hit civilians – though there is an indication that a larger civilian target may have been intended.

It had been nine months since such an attack had been carried out – a record of safety that can be attributed to the success of Israel in fencing out the terrorists. You know, the fence Carter decries in his book as oppressive.

No doubt the anti-Semitic former president will agree with this statement from the Terrorstinian AnarchyÂ’s ruling Hamas movement, which is couched in language similar to his book.

"The Eilat operation is a natural response to the occupier's crimes against our people amid continued blockades, incursions, assassinations and arrests in the West Bank and Gaza Strip," said Hamas spokesman Ismail Radwan.

"It is the Zionist enemy who is responsible for the deteriorating situation among the Palestinians. The resistance is entitled to defend the Palestinian people.”

Israel has made further steps towards peace with the Terrorstinians in recent weeks – which have obviously been seen as a sign of weakness and resulted in this deadly assault.

Posted by: Greg at 12:48 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 251 words, total size 2 kb.

If anyone wonders how folks got the idea that Barack Obama went to a madrassa, they might want to consider this little bit of information.

“In Indonesia, I had spent two years at a Muslim school,” [Obama] wrote in his first memoir, “Dreams from my Father.” “The teacher wrote to tell my mother that I made faces during Koranic studies.”

So just a quick point – while the school may not have been a madrassa, it was not a secular school in the fashion that we understand it. And given other evidence showing that Obama was enrolled in a Catholic school as a Muslim student, it is not unreasonable to suggest that he was raised, at least nominally, a Muslim – especially given Islamic law defining the children of male Muslims as Muslims. Saying that is not a smear, is not an attack, and is not a lie – it is a fair analysis of the facts as they exist, including the words of the Senator himself.

And frankly, I don’t really care about that upbringing – although I again note that it does raise interesting questions about his status under Islamic law and the effect of that status on his ability to conduct normal diplomatic relations with Muslim nations.

Posted by: Greg at 12:42 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 217 words, total size 2 kb.

If anyone wonders how folks got the idea that Barack Obama went to a madrassa, they might want to consider this little bit of information.

“In Indonesia, I had spent two years at a Muslim school,” [Obama] wrote in his first memoir, “Dreams from my Father.” “The teacher wrote to tell my mother that I made faces during Koranic studies.”

So just a quick point – while the school may not have been a madrassa, it was not a secular school in the fashion that we understand it. And given other evidence showing that Obama was enrolled in a Catholic school as a Muslim student, it is not unreasonable to suggest that he was raised, at least nominally, a Muslim – especially given Islamic law defining the children of male Muslims as Muslims. Saying that is not a smear, is not an attack, and is not a lie – it is a fair analysis of the facts as they exist, including the words of the Senator himself.

And frankly, I don’t really care about that upbringing – although I again note that it does raise interesting questions about his status under Islamic law and the effect of that status on his ability to conduct normal diplomatic relations with Muslim nations.

Posted by: Greg at 12:42 PM | Comments (214) | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 2 kb.

We can see what good ethics rules do for Democrats.

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and two other prominent Democrats have failed to disclose they are officers of family charities, in violation of a law requiring members of Congress to report non-profit leadership roles.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the fourth-ranking House Democrat, and Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana also did not report they serve as family foundation directors, according to financial disclosure reports examined by USA TODAY.

I’ll take their commitment to ethics reform seriously after they start following the old rules that they considered too lax.

Posted by: Greg at 12:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 107 words, total size 1 kb.

We can see what good ethics rules do for Democrats.

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and two other prominent Democrats have failed to disclose they are officers of family charities, in violation of a law requiring members of Congress to report non-profit leadership roles.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the fourth-ranking House Democrat, and Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana also did not report they serve as family foundation directors, according to financial disclosure reports examined by USA TODAY.

IÂ’ll take their commitment to ethics reform seriously after they start following the old rules that they considered too lax.

Posted by: Greg at 12:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 116 words, total size 1 kb.

How else can you explain this trend?

Salaries of top New Orleans administrators have nearly doubled in the past eight years, and paychecks for some positions have almost tripled, thanks to aggressive pay increases pushed through by Mayor Ray Nagin. But whether the city is getting a big bang for the big bucks is an open question.

The pay packages for top Nagin aides are well above those in Memphis and Nashville, Tenn., cities that were already substantially larger than New Orleans even before Katrina scattered the city's population across the country.

And the executive pay scale doesn't lag far behind Atlanta and Austin, Texas, bigger cities that also own and must pay top-flight managers to run some extremely valuable assets: an electric utility in Austin, and Atlanta's airport, the busiest in the country.

Yep – that place is corrupt to the core.

Posted by: Greg at 12:32 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 155 words, total size 1 kb.

He was a priest and a liberal Democrat politician -- until the Vatican enforced canonical restrictions on clergy in politics. Father Robert Drinan served his nation in one of the most interesting periods of American history, and left his mark as a scholar in the quarter century since leaving public office.

The Rev. Robert F. Drinan, a Jesuit who served in Congress for 10 years until stepping down in response to a papal order, died Sunday. He was 86 and lived here in housing for the Georgetown University Jesuit community.

A university statement Sunday night said Father Drinan had recently been ill with pneumonia and congestive heart failure.

An internationally known human rights advocate, Father Drinan represented Massachusetts in the House of Representatives for 10 years in the 1970s, stepping down only after a worldwide directive from Pope John Paul II barring priests from holding public office.

Interestingly enough, secularist groups had no objection to this clergyman serving in public office or commenting on political matters. Indeed, many of the same voices that today decry the participation of conservative Christians in politics were angry at the Vatican for interfering in the American political system by insisting that Drinan and other priests not hold elected office.

I didn't agree with all the conclusions reached by Robert Drinan, or the theological basis for them. Still, I admired him as a many who saw the importance of the intersection of faith and politics, and who was unashamed of allowing his political stands to be informed by the moral foundation of the Christian faith.

Posted by: Greg at 11:32 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.

The Houston Chronicle has a great piece on blogging teachers -- ones that are much more education-oriented in their blogging than I am. It was interesting to see what some of the folks I read regularly have to say.

After long days of grading papers and disciplining rowdy children, a growing number of tech-savvy teachers are creating online journals to vent about the stresses of the profession.

Educators who have already embraced the technology — called blogs (short for web logs) — find themselves walking a fine, virtual line of conduct. They strive to entertain and inform, but can't violate their school districts' ethics policies or federal laws designed to protect students' confidentiality.

Most teachers who blog have opted to do so underground — refusing to cite their names, workplaces or other identifying details — to avoid potential professional pitfalls.

"School administrators tend to be pretty vindictive and they don't like people with different ideas from them. People who speak out are not regarded very highly," said Mike in Texas, an elementary school science teacher from East Texas, who started an online diary two years ago as a way of defending public education.

Though he often waxes about the value of the system, Mike in Texas has been known to rant about the "Mother of All Idiot Parents" or his boss, the "Clueless Principal."

"Some days I think I would like to have her job because I know how I would do things, and some days I wouldn't want that job for anything," he wrote in a recent entry. "Or as we say, some days you're the pigeon, some days you're the statue."

I don't blog about school very often, and I follow the trend above of not identifying anything about students. Indeed, other than talking about how I really do teach the best kids in the world, I say very little about them or my colleagues (about half-a-dozen of whom read my blog from time to time). I have had a couple of posts which indirectly identify my school and/or district (one noting the shooting death of one of our students, another commenting on a former student making good in professional sports, and a couple when the district has been in the news), but I agree with the comment about ethics -- I cannot be releasing confidential information, so I avoid the temptation of doing so by NUT writing about that part of my life.

Posted by: Greg at 11:21 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 410 words, total size 2 kb.

Yes, it is a first -- but I'm curious how welcome a Jew would be in the government of most Arab nations. Oh, that's right -- many of those nations expelled all or most of their Jews following the birth of Israel!

Israel's cabinet on Sunday approved the first Arab Muslim minister of the Jewish state, a milestone marked here mostly by bitter criticism of what many lawmakers viewed as a politically motivated selection.

Raleb Majadele, a Labor Party legislator, was approved by a wide margin as minister without portfolio in Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's cabinet. Only Avigdor Lieberman, minister of strategic affairs from the Israel Is Our Home party, voted against the nomination.

Majadele's appointment is "a significant, historic step toward equality and peace in the region," said Amir Peretz, the Labor leader, who chose Majadele for a cabinet post several weeks ago during an ongoing fight for the party leadership.

An Israeli Druze, Saleh Tarif, was appointed minister without portfolio in 2001. But many of Israel's roughly 100,000 Druze, members of a sect that broke with Islam centuries ago, do not identify themselves as Arabs and serve in Israel's army.

The move is controversial among Arabs, with some seeing it as a betrayal. Still, it is significant to note that Israeli Arabs have significantly better living conditions and more freedom than Arabs living in most of Arab countries -- and certainly better than the small numbers of Jews in those countries.

Posted by: Greg at 11:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 251 words, total size 2 kb.

Consider the Second Amendment.

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It is, of course, axiomatic that this amendment confers an individual right, for in every other instance in the Bill of Rights where the phrase "the people" is used it denotes a right which devolves upon the individual.

Which leads me to a simple question -- if the right to keep and bear arms allows us access to weapons with serious potential for lethality, should it not also be interpreted to include the right to carry non-lethal weaponry for the purpose of self-defense, such as a TASER, a stun gun, or mace pepper spray?

After all, I'm not really interested in killing a potential assailant or robber -- I'd just like to disable them long enough to secure my person and property. Yet current law in many parts of the country places restrictions upon my ability to do so, especially with regards to something like a stun gun. Consider the device pictured below.

This device packs a measly 65,000 volts of power -- a far cry from the 500,000 volt jolt that one receives from its bigger brothers used by law enforcement. It is a deterrent with some stopping power -- and quite frankly, I'd rather shock an assailant's butt across the room than leave them pumping their life-blood on the carpet. Maybe I'm just a bleeding heart in that regard, but I would prefer a weapon which makes it less likely that I will violate the injunction "Thou Shalt Not Kill."

So what do you think -- should We, the People of the United States, be free to carry non-lethal weapons for self-defense purposes? Is such a right consistent with the underlying intent of the Second Amendment? Or is that right only properly exercised by carrying the means of dealing out lethal force? Join in and share in the discussion.

Sponsored Post.

Posted by: Greg at 06:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 349 words, total size 3 kb.

I think we can see one way that "regime change" in favor of the cut-and-run Democrats on Capitol Hill has made a difference -- anti-war vandals were allowed to spray-paint the Capitol while police stood by and did nothing.

Anti-war protesters were allowed to spray paint on part of the west front steps of the United States Capitol building after police were ordered to break their security line by their leadership, two sources told The Hill.

According to the sources, police officers were livid when they were told to fall back by U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) Chief Phillip Morse and Deputy Chief Daniel Nichols. "They were the commanders on the scene," one source said,who requested anonymity. "It was disgusting."

After police ceded the stairs, located on the lower west front of the Capitol, the building was locked down, the source added.

A second source who witnessed the incident said that the police had the crowd stopped at Third Street, but were told to bring the police line in front of the Capitol.

In other words, standard police procedures were violated in order to permit a mass of protesters within the security perimeter around the Capitol

What is the explanation for this unprofessional conduct that allowed for the desecration of the Capitol?

Approximately 300 protesters were allowed to take the steps and began to spray paint "anarchist symbols" and phrase such as "Our capitol building" and "you canÂ’t stop us" around the area, the source said.

Morse responded to these claims in an e-mail Sunday afternoon,explaining that the protesters were seeking confrontation with the police.

"While there were minor instances of spray painting of pavement by a splinter group of Anarchists who were seeking a confrontation with the police, their attempts to breach into secure areas and rush the doors of the Capitol were thwarted," Morse said. "The graffiti was easily removed by the dedicated [Architect of the Capitol] staff, some of whom responded on their day off to quickly clean the area."

He added, "It is the USCP's duty and responsibility to protect the Capitol complex, staff and public while allowing the public to exercise their First Amendment rights Â… at the end of the day, both occurred without injury to protestors or officers."

Now there is a fundamental problem with this statement -- vandalism of public buildings is NOT a First Amendment right. Neither is breaking a police line, which was the goal of the anti-war hooligans. Lawlessness, not the First Amendment, was allowed to prevail. I'm curious what Morse would have done had this group insisted upon taking their protest further, perhaps into the Capitol proper? This statement makes it sound like he would have again ordered his men to cut-and-run while additional damage was done to the Capitol. After all, orders had been given that no arrests were to be made.

Sounds to me like Chief Phillip Morse and Deputy Chief Daniel Nichols need to be removed from their position immediately -- and steps taken to ensure that such an event never happens again.

OTHERS BLOGGING THIS STORY: Bookworm Room, Hard Starboard, Hang Right Politics, Return of the Conservatives, Scott's Morning Brew, Moonbattery, Lifelike Pundits, Bearing Drift, That Political Blog, Michelle Malkin

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Right Pundits, Is It Just Me?, Perri Nelson's Website, Experimental Wordpress Blog, The Random Yak, Adam's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, The Bullwinkle Blog, Phastidio.net, The Amboy Times, Cao's Blog, Conservative Cat, 123 Beta, The HILL Chronicles, Woman Honor Thyself, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, stikNstein... has no mercy, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:31 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 646 words, total size 7 kb.

I love this quote from Democrat Party press secretary Stacey Paxton.

"Mitt Romney should be held accountable for his contradictory record, as should all the Republican presidential candidates," Paxton says.

Translation: "Mitt Romney should be held accountable for learning and admitting his mistakes. Democrats are better for America because once they take a position on an issue they stick with it, no matter how demonstrably wrong or stupid that position is."

Posted by: Greg at 09:06 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.

At least not with regards to abortion. That is what he had to say addressing the NRO conservative summit yesterday.

"On abortion, I wasn't always a Ronald Reagan conservative," Romney told a gathering of conservatives. "Neither was Ronald Reagan, by the way. But like him, I learned from experience."

During his 2002 campaign for Massachusetts governor, Romney said that while he personally opposed abortion, he would leave the state's abortion laws intact.

In his speech Saturday, he said he had had a change of heart after a discussion with a stem cell researcher.

And Romney is exactly correct on this matter --it was Reagan who loosened California's abortion laws.

And for those of you who are concerned about the gay rights issue, you would do well to remember how this issue has changed. In 1994, the issue was one of non-discrimination in housing and employment, as well as laws criminalizing homosexual relationships. It has since metastasized into gay marriage. One can easily support the earlier agenda on conservative principles while being unconditionally opposed to the latter. Indeed, his 1994 position was very close to that of Barry Goldwater -- the grandfather of the contemporary conservative movement.

If you want to hear the entire speech, you can listen here, via MyManMitt.com.

Posted by: Greg at 08:49 AM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 2 kb.

1 tdegwja

Posted by: 25 reasons nivea lyrics at Wed Nov 5 01:12:29 2008 (XzLxh)

2 uqjhlfw niwjz sdhymri whtdqj

Posted by: mcquay air conditioning at Sat Nov 8 00:55:29 2008 (vjWt9)

3 qxkwz pvyfr jqfkzs vmzxd

Posted by: proheart heartworm at Sat Nov 8 11:39:43 2008 (1o4Xq)

4 zgtmbne

Posted by: home morgans photos.com at Mon Nov 10 01:33:18 2008 (YgjKA)

5 nmlj dzuayvp

Posted by: baby clothes rancho cucamonga at Tue Nov 11 00:38:24 2008 (+pEg9)

6 Nice site. Thanks:-)

Posted by: rhinestone earring brooch at Sun Nov 16 08:26:17 2008 (gBqO3)

7 apsdvn blkhayw jhlufbv

Posted by: free cryptogram puzzle at Mon Nov 17 07:37:37 2008 (BDpZa)

8 kyexr xkthnfl lpktn romkp

Posted by: mandibular tori at Wed Nov 19 18:40:07 2008 (1W8AA)

9 bxaqm

Posted by: pgh steelers at Thu Nov 27 08:57:53 2008 (dMj09)

10 Very nice site!

Posted by: John472 at Sat May 16 11:45:19 2009 (DAfDN)

11 Very nice site!

Posted by: John472 at Sat May 16 13:51:49 2009 (w2j5m)

12 Very nice site!

Posted by: John1195 at Sat May 16 17:19:50 2009 (gyEo5)

13 pa department of education, paris hilton naked, dozq, free kim kardashian sex tape, 8OOO, free kim kardashian sex tape, 9681, paris hilton sex, 25796, lucy pinder, =-DD, nude megan fox, >:-)),

Posted by: paris hilton sex tape at Mon Oct 5 14:26:22 2009 (LIrmO)

14 comment3, pictures of miley cyrus, > , lucy pinder, > , megan fox pictures, =], miley cyrus naked, %((, lucy pinder, cnjity,

Posted by: megan fox fhm at Thu Oct 8 12:28:07 2009 (TOAAe)

15 comment5, megan fox wallpaper, 8000, jennifer love hewitt barenaked, 040819, emma watson fake, cyfkn, carmen electra fucking, 7831, kim kardashian naked, :-[, miley cyrus pics, myec,

Posted by: adrienne bailon nude pics at Mon Oct 12 20:57:03 2009 (UxnNG)

16 adult education, miley cyrus pics, %OO, carmen electra gallery, 0675, carmen electra fucking, pse, adrienne bailon nude pics, 95652, kim kardashian ray j, =-[,

Posted by: miley cyrus pics at Tue Oct 13 06:51:49 2009 (Es74V)

17 box tops for education, lucy pinder, rzsb, shay johnson nude, 8], tila tequila nude, =D, megan fox naked, 2460, lindsay lohan nude, bukvm,

Posted by: megan fox wallpaper at Sun Oct 18 09:25:19 2009 (Qz++l)

18 texas department of education, jessica alba butt, 70341, gia angelina jolie, 70298, halle berry topless, 168112, jessica biel nude, %OO, lindsay lohan nude, uzz,

Posted by: britney spears nude at Sat Oct 24 06:44:50 2009 (kSTu2)

19 comment2, megan fox nude, ynbq, jessica simpson naked, 792111, jessica alba butt, nnx, paris hilton sex tape, >:-[, megan fox fhm, trmopn, lindsay lohan hot, %-(,

Posted by: ashley tisdale sex at Sun Oct 25 13:02:50 2009 (uL1Pu)

20 technology in education, emma watson sex, 4111, kim kardashian nude pics, 8-O, carmen electra gallery, , kim kardashian nude pics, hugxy, carmen electra fucking, rzvlg,

Posted by: jessica alba at Fri Nov 6 10:55:30 2009 (aQMmk)

21 comment5, ashley tisdale sex, 05320, emma watson fakes, >:-)), carmen electra gallery, ehllej, pictures of miley cyrus, =O, kim kardashian ass, =],

Posted by: megan fox fhm at Mon Nov 9 16:57:09 2009 (KLnMR)

22 continuing education for dentists, paris hilton sex, lmwdf, lindsay lohan hot, 54342, kim kardashian ray j, bysjfa, megan fox nude, cgdkz, katy perry sexy, nph,

Posted by: paris hilton video at Mon Nov 9 23:20:11 2009 (5bfny)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

This may surprise some of you, but my wife and I are both fans of India's Bollywood films. Really.

Back when my wife taught at a school with a 20% Asian student body, she had many Indian students. They introduced her to a number of aspects of Indian culture, including this one. And while we do not speak the language, many of the films are available with subtitles so we can enjoy.

That is how I became familiar with the work of O.P. Nayyar, who died today in India.

Indian music director O.P. Nayyar, who composed some of Bollywood's most memorable tunes of the 1950s and 60s, died on Sunday after a heart attack at his home outside Mumbai, a news agency reported.

Nayyar, 81, was famous for the use of Punjabi rhythms in his music and is credited with making stars of several leading singers, including Asha Bhosle, Press Trust of India said.

Indian film director Mahesh Bhatt described Nayyar as ``an audacious man who was a king in his time.''

Nayyar, who always dressed in white and was never seen without his distinctive black felt hat, was born in Lahore in what is now Pakistan in 1926.

He got his first break in 1949 when he was appointed music director on ``Kaneez'' (Junior), but recognition came with 1950s movies like ``Mr and Mrs 55'' and ``CID.''

Nayyar may have died, but his influence lives on today in much of Bollywood cinema.

Posted by: Greg at 03:07 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 251 words, total size 2 kb.

1 The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. http://ucsawo.faimpazzireiragazzi.it/arhiv5051/drug-tests-and-azo.html - drug tests and azo http://ucsawo.faimpazzireiragazzi.it/arhiv/online-drug-tests.html - online drug tests http://ucsawo.faimpazzireiragazzi.it/arhiv65087/detox-drink-recipe.html - detox drink recipe http://ucsawo.faimpazzireiragazzi.it/arhiv65087/drug-testing-and-questions-and-drug-longevity.html - drug testing and questions and drug longevity http://ucsawo.faimpazzireiragazzi.it/drug-niacin-testing.html - drug niacin testing

Posted by: WallTaZar at Fri Jan 9 07:44:24 2009 (LAlM4)

2 comment3, No Credit Check Car Loans Pictures
, pgm, No Credit Check Loans For Everybody
, 318, 1000 loan payday
, ehssp, guaranteed online personal loans
, 164561, Personal Loan For Poor Credit Photos
, ctufv,

Posted by: eowoiow at Thu Apr 30 14:53:05 2009 (//c1m)

3 Very nice site!

Posted by: John1642 at Sat May 16 13:49:18 2009 (BoEpV)

4 Gutentak!, solidworks 2009 x64, %-], SolidWorks 2009, 378814, Autodesk 3ds Max, dulywf, Adobe Dreamweaver CS4, hajx, Conceptdraw Office, 8-[[[,

Posted by: HuiTebeVNos at Thu May 21 22:15:15 2009 (nbclR)

5 Privet!, microsoft windows server 2008, 290, microsoft windows vista business, 0179, solidworks 2009 x64, yzgrdy, adobe acrobat 8 professional, 8-[[[, autodesk navisworks simulate 2010, cgfedb,

Posted by: VBarakenOgama at Thu May 21 22:42:15 2009 (Bf0rm)

6 Zdarova!, solidworks 2009 x64, lhc, parallels desktop 3 for Mac, =-OO, g data internet security 2008, =-O, Conceptdraw Office, > , autodesk navisworks simulate 2010, 820,

Posted by: Chtosmotrish at Fri May 22 14:49:07 2009 (0P5Dv)

7 Zdarova!, Autodesk 3ds Max, yldmp, solidworks 2009 x64, =D, Zoner PhotoStudio Enterprise, 31435, Conceptdraw Office, >:-]], microsoft windows vista sp2 x64, uikkb, Autodesk AutoCAD, ibsgu,

Posted by: BrakaObama at Fri May 22 15:52:00 2009 (BmkpN)

8 Good moning!, adobe photoshop cs3 extended, , microsoft windows server 2008, 8446, parallels desktop 3 for Mac, 292, Zoner PhotoStudio Enterprise, 8970, Conceptdraw Office, qbcl,

Posted by: BmarakakOkama at Fri May 22 16:35:00 2009 (wgqHB)

9 Privet!, Autodesk 3ds Max, 9654, solidworks 2009 x64, ynyyd, Adobe Dreamweaver CS4, gdlw, g data internet security 2008, 515820, microsoft office xp profession, %-(((, Autodesk AutoCAD, 761,

Posted by: VBarakenOgama at Fri May 22 18:01:52 2009 (QKgnZ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment