Apparently, the liberals tell us, it is a bad thing to compare a politician to a monkey from a childrenÂ’s book.

Marietta tavern owner Mike Norman says the T-shirts he's peddling, featuring cartoon chimp Curious George peeling a banana, with "Obama in '08" scrolled underneath, are "cute." But to a coalition of critics, the shirts are an insulting exploitation of racial stereotypes from generations past.

"It's time to put an end to this," said Rich Pellegrino, a Mableton resident and director of the Cobb-Cherokee Immigrant Alliance. It was among the organizations planning to gather outside Mulligan's Bar and Grill Tuesday afternoon to protest the "racist and highly offensive" shirts.

"There's no place for these views, not in this day and age," he said.

"No place for these views in this day and age?" I wonder where they were when these images were produced by various and sundry liberals -- images I find a whole hell of a lot more offensive than the t-shirt design above.

Oh, I get it now – it is only a bad thing to compare the Obamessiah to a monkey. I keep forgetting the double standard that applies to the Anointed One.

UPDATE: I guess some liberals don't have a problem with Curious George commentary -- but only if it is directed at the President. Hypocrites! H/T Protein Wisdom

Posted by: Greg at 09:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 231 words, total size 2 kb.

Today is the day that Hillary Clinton may be able to crush Obama and salvage her campaign.

The outcome of West Virginia's primary Tuesday may best be foretold by where Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama plan to spend the day.

Clinton is expected to be in Charleston, West Virginia, to celebrate what should be her large victory.

Obama has no plans Tuesday night, but he is spending the late afternoon at a campaign event in Missouri. That state has already voted this primary season but is considered a swing state that Democrats and Republicans have in their sights this November.

Clinton, it seems, is concentrating on the present; Obama is looking to the future.

Polling places in West Virginia opened at 6:30 a.m. Tuesday.

Clinton, from New York, is ahead in West Virginia by an average of 40 points in the most recent public opinion polls.

Now let's be honest here -- a challenger's 40 point spread over a near-certain nominee is telling of that nominee's weakness. But some Clintonoids are suggesting an even a bigger gap.

Political campaigns usually look to lower expectations – but one of Hillary Clinton’s supporters took the opposite tack Monday, setting the bar for a West Virginia primary win at an unprecedented high at an enthusiastic campaign event.

“You think this crowd’s noisy?” said West Virginia Senate Majority Leader Harry Truman Chafin. “Just wait ‘til we win like 80-20.”

“We’ve got to give her a vote tomorrow of 80-20 or 90-10,” he added moments later.

A campaign spokesman quickly tried to downplay Chafin’s remaks, saying “We appreciate his exuberance, but we're pretty sure this race is going to be much closer than that.”

Yeah, that's a case of campaign train hyperbole. But what if Clinton can pull out a win of greater than 40 points -- perhaps as many as 50? Does that change the calculus of who the Dem nominee ought to be? Does it change the VP calculus?

We'll know later tonight if those are just idle questions, or if they are issues that the Demccrats need to deal with for real.

Posted by: Greg at 10:42 PM | Comments (27) | Add Comment
Post contains 357 words, total size 2 kb.

I recently came across a really good site about the Internet, Web Design, Programming and other related technical stuff. It is really great for someone like me who struggles with the technical end of blogging, because it offers custom designed web sites for individuals and small business owners.

StylishWebDesign is a great site that is rich in information regarding web design. It presents its material in detail, but in a way that is accessible for the layman. You will find many fantastic articles that teach you how to design blog templates and other useful information. It also contains information about areas such as finance, programming technology, internet tools and the use of video on your site. Best of all, it is organized into clear categories that provide useful information to the reader.

For example, if you want to learn about user accounts, you can find plenty of information about the topic.. You can also find out about the spyware community and what the latest tricks are. There is, as IÂ’ve said, a great deal of useful information on these and other categories. So visit http://www.stylishwebdesign.us/directory. YouÂ’ll find it quite educational, whether you are new to the world of web design or already familiar with the field.

Posted by: Greg at 10:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 208 words, total size 2 kb.

I most certainly hope not!

Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas and defeated contender for the GOP presidential nomination, is currently at the top of John McCain's short list for a running mate. At least that's the word from a top McCain fundraiser and longtime Republican moneyman who has spoken to McCain's inner circle. The fundraiser is less than thrilled with the idea of Huckabee as the vice presidential nominee, and many economic conservatives—turned off by the populist tone of Huckabee's campaign and his tax record as governor—are likely to share that marked lack of enthusiasm.

I am definitely among the naysayers, for some of the same reasons as the economic conservatives. But beyond that, I don't want to play into the stereotype of the GOP as beholden to conservative religious voters -- and selecting pastor Huckabee would do precisely that.

Indeed, i don't think that either Huckabee or Romney is the best choice at this point -- McCain needs to pick someone other than those two former rivals to vill the VP slot on the ticket. A governor, yes -- but one that will help him carry a state in play, something that neither of these two men do.

Posted by: Greg at 10:32 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 213 words, total size 1 kb.

And the Marines beat theirs to a bloody pulp!

The Marine Corps far surpassed its recruiting goal last month and could eventually be more than a year ahead of schedule in its plan to grow the force to 202,000 members.

All military services met or exceeded their monthly recruiting goals in April, with the Marine Corps signing 142 percent of the number it was looking for, the Pentagon said.

The Army signed 101 percent of its goal, recruiting 5,681 against a goal of 5,650. The Navy and Air Force met their goals — 2,905 sailors and 2,435 airmen.

The Marine Corps enlisted 2,233 recruits against a goal of 1,577.

"The Marine Corps, if they continue to achieve the kind of success they have had, could meet their growth figures more than a year early," Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman told Pentagon reporters. That would mean by around the end of 2009.

This should chap the behinds of your average anti-war leftist. Patriotic Americans in service to their country acting. Maybe they can try blockading a few more recruiting stations -- or try to blow some more up.

Posted by: Greg at 10:24 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 195 words, total size 1 kb.

If you are in the market for a new car, you are probably looking for some sort of financing. After all, few of us have sufficient liquid cash reserves to simply plunk down the entire amount of a new car in cash. That means you need to get a New Car Loan to pay for the thing. Obviously, you'll want the best terms available, because you don't want to pay any more than you have to for that vehicle. But where can you find a Car Loan that fits your needs? Why not try CompleteLoanSource.com? After all, they offer loans to fit the needs of folks in all sorts of situation -- even those with bad credit.

Posted by: Greg at 08:19 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

I am not, on the most basic level, anti-union. I believe that any worker who wants to join a union has that right under the First Amendment. WhatÂ’s more, IÂ’m even tolerant of the notion that a majority vote by secret ballot can make a union the sole bargaining agent for employees in a particular business.

That said, IÂ’m opposed to any law that will take away that secret ballot.

What’s the Employee Free Choice Act? If you aren’t a lobbyist in Washington, a union worker, or an employer nervously trying to prevent your staff from organizing, you might not have followed the twisty history of the latest attempt to increase private-sector unionization. “Card check,” as it is usually known, would allow employees at a company to bypass secret-ballot elections and declare their intent to unionize by simply signing cards. If adopted, it could portend the most revolutionary change to labor law since the 1940s.

Unfortunately, as anyone who has followed the union movement for any length of time knows, the card check is subject to serious abuse. Indeed, there is plenty of evidence of union thugs (I won’t dignify them with the title of “organizers”) harassing employees until they give up their resistance – sometimes using implicit (or explicit) threats against the employees and their families. Only the secret ballot has enabled such workers to truly vote their conscience free from fear – and now Democrats in Congress are prepared to take that protection away in order to curry favor with union bosses who direct large sums of money to aid Democrats seeking election and reelection to office.

But as bad as that is, there is the possibility that certain public sector employees will have even less freedom when Congress gets done.

Unions keep losing membership as a share of the national workforce, which explains why organized labor's main political focus is changing the rules to force more workers into unions. Witness a bill that Senate Democrats are pushing this week to require that hundreds of thousands of local police and firemen submit to collective bargaining.

Under current law, every state has the ability to set policies that govern its public workforce. In some states, police, firefighters and paramedics belong to unions that collectively bargain for their contracts. In others, unions representing public-security workers can bargain over pay, but not over benefits or work rules. And in some others, these workers can choose not to belong to a union.

Democrats want to change this for the entire country. A bill that passed the House last year would make the top officials at local unions the exclusive bargaining agents for public safety officers in every town or city with more than 5,000 people. They would also have the authority to bargain for everything -- pay, benefits and work rules. The goal is to give labor the whip hand with local governments, and further coerce nonunion members to join the dues-paying ranks.

Set aside the fact that 16 states have voted down such legislation in the last 12 years. Set aside the fact that the legislation would effectively strip these public safety employees – those doing the most dangerous jobs outside the military – of the protection of right-to-work laws on the books in many states. This legislation would deny them the right to reject such representation as not in their best interest, giving them fewer rights than private sector employees. While many raise the 10th Amendment question of Congress exceeding its authority by trampling the rights of the state, I want to raise the First Amendment question that exists in forcing public employees into association with these corrupt organizations!

There is, of course, only one legitimate position for Americans to take on unions, especially those that purport to represent the interests of public employees. That position is that they must be voluntary – not only in terms of membership, but also in terms of paying union “bargaining fees” for services that employees do not want. After all, unions are private organizations, and government has no more legitimate interest in forcing employees into the union fold than it does in requiring all public school students to join the Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts.

But then again, does government have any legitimate interest in making it easier for unions to coerce the membership of any employee – public or private sector?

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT McCain Blogs, Right Truth, DragonLady's World, The World According to Carl, Kodera's Korner, Pirate's Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, Big Dog's Weblog, Cao's Blog, , Conservative Cat, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 09:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 781 words, total size 6 kb.

Does it seem to you that Bill and Hillary are the gift that keeps on giving?

Hillary Rodham Clinton's Rose Law Firm billing records, found in the White House residence in January 1996 two years after they had been subpoenaed by government regulators, disappeared shortly after the first lady was warned that the firm's billing problems were "very serious" and the then-ongoing Whitewater investigation could result in criminal charges, newly obtained records show.

More than 1,100 pages of grand jury testimony, investigative reports, memos, charging documents, chronologies, narratives and draft indictments, previously undisclosed but now being "processed" at the Library of Congress, say Mrs. Clinton knew considerably more about the firm's billing problems and their potential ramifications than she publicly acknowledged at the time.

According to the documents, given to the Library of Congress by the estate of Sam Dash, former ethics adviser to Whitewater Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr, Mrs. Clinton also knew that her former Rose partner Webster L. Hubbell was both the focus of the firm's billing concerns and a federal conflict-of-interest investigation, in which he was suspected of lying in a sworn statement to regulators about the firm's representation of a failed Arkansas savings and loan.

While Mrs. Clinton told the public at the time that Mr. Hubbell's March 14, 1994, resignation as associate attorney general involved an "internal billing dispute" with his Rose partners that "likely would be resolved," three months earlier she had been advised by another Rose partner, Allen Bird, that the "billing problems were very serious," according to the newly disclosed records.

A Clinton spokescritter calls it “a baseless accusation which was looked into over a decade ago in an investigation that took $71.5 million and eight years to determine there was no case” – but do the contemporaneous documents of what went on within the Special Prosecutor’s office lie? Could it be that the deal that kept Bill Clinton from facing criminal charges also shielded Hillary from charges – and set up this year’s bruising nomination fight?

Posted by: Greg at 09:22 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 348 words, total size 2 kb.

If I were to tweak this quote by the Democrat governor of Kentucky, Steve Beshear and use it in some other post?

"When I mention that Democrats are problem solvers, I can think of only one Republican who can be a problem solver -- that is Vice President Dick Cheney if he would just take George on a hunting trip," Beshear said. Cheney accidentally shot fellow quail hunter Harry Whittington in Texas in 2006.

Mind you, this is one of the much-vaunted Democrat superdelegates, so he has a big influence on the outcome of the nomination battle.

But suppose I had written something similar in some other context – you know, like this:

I can think of one Republican who can be a problem solver -- that is Vice President Dick Cheney if he would just take Barack on a hunting trip.

Or this:

I can think of one Republican who can be a problem solver -- that is Vice President Dick Cheney if he would just take Hillary on a hunting trip.

The local Democrats would rev up into high gear and restart their effort to get my school district to fire me for being a Republican. They’d demand that I be dumped or resign from my position as a precinct chair, and insist that the Harris County GOP censure me at their next available opportunity. They would also likely be insisting that I should be arrested – or at least brought in for questioning by the Secret Service.

But then again, I guess the quote and the relative lack of outrage would be par for the course – after all, it is just another liberal fantasizing about the killing of a Republican president.

H/T Malkin

Posted by: Greg at 09:16 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 297 words, total size 2 kb.

IÂ’ve already got fire ants, and they tell us every year that killer bees are headed our way in Texas. But do I really have to contend with the possibility of these?

As if killer bees and kudzu weren't enough, the southern United States may soon have another invasive species to contend with — giant Burmese pythons capable of swallowing deer and alligators whole.

Approximately 30,000 of the big snakes, which can reach 30 feet and 200 pounds, already live wild in Florida's Everglades, thanks to thick-headed pet owners who've released them into the swamps when they've grown too large to keep at home.

But now the U.S. Geological Survey says Florida is not the only place the Burmese python can thrive.

In fact, the big beasts, which are not poisonous and rarely attack humans, could live happily in the entire southern third of the country, from Southern California to Texas and the Lower Mississippi Valley and up the Eastern Seaboard to Chesapeake Bay.

They say that a mere 50 snakes released in an area can create a viable breeding population. And since gators show up in our area on a regular basis (we are 5 or 6 miles from a nature preserve), I would imagine that the climate would support the big snakes.

Which would certainly discourage me from letting the dog run loose in the yard for any length of time.

Posted by: Greg at 09:08 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 253 words, total size 2 kb.

I was initially hesitant to comment on this story. After all, I presumed that the University of Toledo was a private school, and therefore entitled to impose any sort of fascistic speech code it chose on its students and employees. Indeed, such a school might even legitimately subordinate notions of academic freedom to a greater mission of promulgating a world-view, however wrong-headed a notion that might be.

But then I found out that the University of Toledo is a taxpayer-supported public university – and that makes all the difference in the Crystal Dixon case

The University of Toledo has suspended with pay one of its administrators for writing a newspaper op-ed that questions whether homosexuality is a civil rights issue. The school said the administrator was suspended precisely because her views on homosexuality do not comport with those of the university, a state institution.

Crystal Dixon, associate vice president of human resources at the Ohio-based university, sparked controversy Apr. 18 when she wrote in the Toledo Free Press that she did not agree with comments by the newspaper's editor that portrayed homosexuals as civil rights victims.

In the column, "Gay rights and wrongs: another perspective," Dixon said she was not speaking on behalf of the university, but was writing privately as "a Black woman who happens to be an alumnus of the University of Toledo's Graduate School, an employee and a business owner."

Please note that Dixon took great pains in her commentary to indicate that her stance on homosexuality is a personal one, not the official position of her employer. And note as well that her column was in response to a column that appeared in two weeks earlier by its editor-in-chief of the paper. As such, Dixon was acting as an American citizen, participating in the general dialogue on important matters of public concern.

However, the exercise of such freedom seems to scare the top level officials at this public university – and they will not tolerate it. Not only did the school’s president see fit to officially denounce Dixon, he has instituted personnel action against Dixon in retaliation for her exercise of her constitutional rights – action that now appears to include her termination. Apparently in the great scheme of things, the rights of gay people to go about unoffended trump the civil rights of an African-American Christian woman to be free violation of her First Amendment rights by politiKally Korrect Kluxers acting under color of law. Any outcome short of the full reinstatement of Crystal Dixon to her position – and the termination of those university officials involved in this civil rights violation – is unacceptable.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT McCain Blogs, Right Truth, DragonLady's World, The World According to Carl, Kodera's Korner, Pirate's Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, Big Dog's Weblog, Cao's Blog, , Conservative Cat, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 09:03 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 494 words, total size 5 kb.

Bravo to the guys over at GayPatriot.

And I’d like to remind you folks that if he wins, I immediately become unquestionably more patriotic than you at 12:01 PM EST on January 20, 2009 – because I will be dissenting constantly.

Posted by: Greg at 08:56 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.

Granted, over half of that is to herself -- but that is a staggering sum, nearly double what most Americans realized.

With her campaign falling ever deeper into debt, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton spent a rainy Mother's Day seeking votes ahead of Tuesday's primary here, turning a deaf ear to calls for her to leave a Democratic presidential contest she has little hope of winning.

Clinton aides continued to insist that she will remain in the race even while confirming that she is $20 million in debt. "The voters are going to decide this," senior adviser Howard Wolfson said on "Fox News Sunday," acknowledging the $20 million figure. "There is no reason for her not to continue this process." Wolfson said he has seen "no evidence of her interest" in pursuing the second-place spot on the Democratic ticket, contrary to rumors that she is staying in the race to leverage a bid for the vice presidential nomination.

That much debt does raise some serious issues for her -- and does almost require her to stay in until the end, hoping to get the vice presidential nod. After all, that might make it easier to pay off the other creditors, and see some of the money she loaned the campaign make its way back into her bank account.

Posted by: Greg at 10:43 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 1 kb.

Well over a year ago, I condemned those who insisted that Barack Obama was a Muslim and that should disqualify him for office. I stated then, and I state now, that by the words of his own mouth he is a Christian, and that absent some indication to the contrary we must take him at his word. Even if the theology of Obama's church is dubious, I stand by that position.

However, I also pointed out that there is reason to wonder about the Illinois Senator's upbringing and whether or not he was, in his childhood and youth, at least nominally a Muslim -- and the impact upon US relations with Muslim countries. After all, given his father's faith and that upbringing, he might well be seen as a apostate Muslim.

Today, the New York Times offers up a column that raises that issue -- including some implications that I didn't consider when I wrote those earlier posts.

As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his motherÂ’s Christian background is irrelevant.

Of course, as most Americans understand it, Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him.

His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).

With few exceptions, the jurists of all Sunni and Shiite schools prescribe execution for all adults who leave the faith not under duress; the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric, although in recent years there have been both stonings and hangings. (Some may point to cases in which lesser punishments were ordered — as with some Egyptian intellectuals who have been punished for writings that were construed as apostasy — but those were really instances of supposed heresy, not explicitly declared apostasy as in Senator Obama’s case.)

* * *

Because no government is likely to allow the prosecution of a President Obama — not even those of Iran and Saudi Arabia, the only two countries where Islamic religious courts dominate over secular law — another provision of Muslim law is perhaps more relevant: it prohibits punishment for any Muslim who kills any apostate, and effectively prohibits interference with such a killing.

At the very least, that would complicate the security planning of state visits by President Obama to Muslim countries, because the very act of protecting him would be sinful for Islamic security guards. More broadly, most citizens of the Islamic world would be horrified by the fact of Senator Obama’s conversion to Christianity once it became widely known — as it would, no doubt, should he win the White House. This would compromise the ability of governments in Muslim nations to cooperate with the United States in the fight against terrorism, as well as American efforts to export democracy and human rights abroad.

Thus, we have an entirely different question from that of whether Barack Obama is a crypto-Muslim who will betray America to his supposed co-religionists. Rather, as i have said before, we are facing serious questions of whether Obama's religious conversion will have a deleterious impact on our relations with the Muslim world. And while I agree with Luttwack that it should not be the end-all and be-all of the campaign, I think it is a factor worth considering.

More At Hot Air, Because I'm Right, OTB, Gina Cobb

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT McCain Blogs, Right Truth, DragonLady's World, The World According to Carl, Kodera's Korner, Pirate's Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, Big Dog's Weblog, Cao's Blog, , Conservative Cat, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 10:40 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 708 words, total size 6 kb.

Somehow, despite the close personal financial dealings between Barack Obama and Tony Rezko, the presidential candidate has avoided any significant political damage from the connection.

Not so another Democrat rising star.

As the corruption trial of the political fund-raiser Antoin Rezko winds to a close here, testimony about power-brokering at the highest levels of state government has battered the career of an Illinois politician who once had his sights set on the White House.

When the trial began two months ago, national attention focused on how Senator Barack Obama of Illinois might suffer because of his connection to Mr. Rezko, a former patron who made a fortune on fast food and real estate.

But it is Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich, an ambitious chief executive who has not been charged and denies any wrongdoing, who is left flailing in the wake of weeks of testimony. His name and administration have surfaced repeatedly, described as a participant in the kickback schemes of which Mr. Rezko is accused.

While Mr. ObamaÂ’s campaign for the presidency has been dogged by questions about Mr. Rezko, the fallout for him has so far been slight. Mr. Obama, who has not been accused of any crime, donated money that was raised for him by Mr. Rezko to charity and said he regretted what he called his bad judgment on a property sale between their families.

Granted, the accusations against Blagojevich are pretty damning, and ought to damage any politician. But when you consider that when Barack Obama goes home he does so to a place that he owns because of a sweetheart deal with a corrupt insider, I remain amazed at the lack of damage that has been done to him by the financial connections between the two. Maybe Geraldine Ferraro was on to something a couple of months back.

But there is another question Americans should be asking -- given the throughly corrupt nature of Illinois politics over the last decade (and Chicago politics over the last century), does the election of an Illinois Senator from Chicago make any sense?

Posted by: Greg at 10:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 2 kb.

The winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are Who Cares About Israel, Anyway? by Joshuapundit, and Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks by The Huffington Post.  Here are the full results of the vote):

Congratulations and well-done to all participants.

Posted by: Greg at 09:47 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 175 words, total size 4 kb.

Well, let's see if this thing works!

Posted by: Greg at 08:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 9 words, total size 1 kb.

Admiral James Bond Stockdale made a lifetime of serving his country honorably -- first int he military and then in academia. Following his passing, the decision was made to honor him by naming one of our nation's warships after him -- and yesterday the USS Stockdale was christened by his widow.

The Navy's newest guided missile destroyer was christened Saturday with the name of a fighter pilot who spent 7 1/2 years in captivity in North Vietnam, received the Medal of Honor and served as presidential candidate Ross Perot's running mate.

Four Medal of Honor recipients and seven former prisoners of war attended the ceremony at Bath Iron Works that marked a milestone in construction of the 9,200-ton ship named for Vice Adm. James Stockdale.

Stockdale's widow, Sybil, who suffers from Parkinson's disease and uses a wheelchair, let loose a champagne bottle propelled by rope that swung across the Stockdale's bow. On the second try, the bottle exploded, the band broke into "Anchors Aweigh" and red, white and blue streamers filled the air.

Stockdale, who died nearly three years ago at age 81, flew 201 carrier-based missions before being shot down in 1965, becoming the highest-ranking naval officer captured during the war.

His endurance under torture and years of solitary confinement during his captivity in Hanoi became the stuff of legend. After his release in 1973, he received 26 combat decorations, including the Medal of Honor.

Sybil Stockdale, who founded an organization to draw the public's attention to the plight of American POWs in Southeast Asia, was accompanied at the ceremony by the couple's four sons.

He was, by all accounts, an exemplary human being. And while he is so often remembered for one of the great lines of political debate history, it is his service to this nation for which he ought to be remembered.

And on a side note, I cannot help but note that USS Stockdale is an Arleigh Burke class destroyer, named for Admiral Arleigh Burke, one of America's greatest naval officers of the twentieth century. It was my great privilege to meet the admiral when I was a boy, when he walked over to talk to a young Navy wife and her two sons while they were all waiting to be seen at Bethesda Naval Hospital in the during the Vietnam War. As I look back, remain struck by the man's kindness and gentleness -- and the strength of personality in a man already into his 70s. He told my brother and I to be proud of our father who was, like him, a destroyer officer, because our father was doing some of the most important work there was -- defending our country. I am therefore touched to see two men who I have always held in high esteem connected through this ship.

UPDATE: I missed this story of another Arleigh Burke class destroyer being named for another American hero -- the USS Michael Murphy.

Posted by: Greg at 02:55 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 496 words, total size 3 kb.

Yeah, that Texas Two-Step process that was so incompetently implemented by the Democrats (who proved that since they can't run their own party they surely aren't competent to run the state), has been deemed by Hispanic groups to be so fatally flawed as to illegally and unconstitutionally deny proper representation to Hispanic voters.

The Texas Democratic Party was sued Friday by Latino advocacy groups that say the primary and caucus system used in the state's March 4 presidential contest unfairly diluted Latino votes.

The League of United Latin American Citizens of Texas and the Mexican-American Bar Association of Houston sued in federal court, arguing that the party failed to seek clearance required by the U.S. Justice Department for the process, the so-called Texas Two Step. The groups also say the system effectively discriminates against Latino voters by giving them fewer delegates.

Texas Democrats distribute the state's 193 delegates using both a primary and a caucus, but the distribution favors state Senate districts that had high voter turnout in the most recent presidential and gubernatorial elections. That meant that on March 4, predominantly Hispanic districts, in which turnout was low in 2004 and 2006, got fewer delegates than others, particularly urban, predominantly black districts. Latino districts generally favored Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton; black districts favored her rival, Barack Obama.

"The manner used to allocate the delegates ... undervalues Latino Democratic voters and does not provide Latino voters with an equal opportunity to participate in the nominating process and to elect candidates of their choice," the lawsuit says.

My question is why anyone is surprised by this outcome. After all, Democrats in Texas undervalued Hispanic voters from the day Texas was admitted to the United States back in the 1840s right up until it found that the only way to hold on to power was to throw Hispanics a bone -- but only one that the meat had been gnawed off of first.

On the other hand, the GOP has always been open to Hispanic voters, and remains so right into the present day. And for all the efforts of liberal partisan hacks to portray opposition to illegal immigration as anti-Hispanic racism, anyone with a lick of sense knows better -- including a great many immigrants to this country who played by the rules to get here legally. After all, the GOP has never has a "Whites Only" sign at its primary polling places -- that was the Democrats for most of their history.

Maybe the time has come for Hispanic voters to say "hasta la vista, baby" to the Democrats.

Posted by: Greg at 02:39 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 438 words, total size 3 kb.

Not that it makes a bit of difference, of course -- there is that little deal about double jeopardy that appears in the US and California constitutions that makes another trial for the murders out of the question.

A memorabilia dealer who profited from O.J. Simpson for many years is the latest former crony to write a tell-all book, this one alleging a groggy Simpson, high on marijuana, confessed to killing his ex-wife after he was acquitted.

Mike Gilbert also claims he helped his former friend wiggle out of the murder charges by suggesting how to bloat his hands so they wouldn't fit the notorious bloody gloves.

Gilbert's book, "How I Helped O.J. Get Away With Murder: The Shocking Inside Story of Violence, Loyalty, Regret and Remorse" (Regnery Publishing, 232 pages, $27.95), is due in stores Monday. It was released to The Associated Press in advance.

He said Simpson had smoked pot, took a sleeping pill and was drinking beer when he confided at his Brentwood home weeks after his trial what happened the night of June 12, 1994. Simpson said he went to his ex-wife's condominium, but did not bring a knife with him. Simpson told him Nicole Brown Simpson had one in her hand when she opened the door.

In a soft mumble, Simpson told him: "If she hadn't opened that door with a knife in her hand ... she'd still be alive."

"Nothing more needed to be said," Gilbert writes. "O.J. had confessed to me. There's no doubt in my mind."

Blaming the victim? Well, that would be in keeping with the sociopathic tendencies that Simpson has demonstrated over the years.

My question is this -- even though we cannot imprison this murdering scumbag, why should we not engage in something much quite painful for this narcissistic man. You know, shunning.

Stop buying the books about him, his career, and his crimes. Stop the news coverage of his latest criminal trial, and ignore his well-deserved entry into prison after his conviction. And until then, sports shows should quit inviting him for autograph signings and businesses should quit doing business with him -- to the point that the staff of an empty restaurant would tell him "there doesn't seem to be a table available for you, Mr. Simpson." I'd argue that it would be a fate worse than death for him.

Posted by: Greg at 02:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 397 words, total size 2 kb.

National polls get big play in the media, but really don't matter.

After all, the Constitution doesn't count the national totals for anything. It is the Electoral College totals that determine the outcome of the election -- and polls show something very interesting there, according to the analysis by this blogger.

Click the map to get the supporting data that this is based upon the latest polling data. McCain leads Obama in a whole lot of states -- mirroring the red state/blue state dichotomy we have seen over the two elections. Even where there is not enough polling data, we can infer which way certain states are trending -- some for McCain, some for Obama.

The result of these projections rather strikingly place McCain ahead 249-237 electoral votes, with the states of Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and New Mexico being toss-ups. Victories in any two of the Midwestern states would give John McCain the electoral victory, while Obama would have to win do one of the following:

• win Michigan, and Ohio.
  
• win Wisconsin, Ohio, and New Mexico.

That's it. Nothing else does it if the other states remain static, which is unlikely to happen over the next 25 ½ weeks.

Questions that need to be asked at this point are as follows:

• Will Obama pick Bill Richardson as VP in order to secure those five electoral votes in New Mexico -- and if he doesn't will the perceived slight swing the state towards the Republican nominee from Arizona, since he is regarded as friendly by the large Hispanic voting bloc there.
  
• Does Obama hurt himself by picking a running mate from one of the three Midwestern states, given that his home state is Illinois? Can McCain help himself by doing so -- especially an Ohioan?

There is a lot of calculus that needs to go on between now and the conventions -- and the conventions and election day. My guess is that it will likely swirl around how to win in Ohio -- the critical prize this fall.

There also remains one other possibility. All other things remaining equal, we could end up with an electoral vote tie if McCain wins Ohio and Obama wins the other three states. Quite frankly, I don't dare predict what would happen in that case without knowing the exact composition of the House of Representatives at the start of the new Congress in January -- and the political implications of the election going to the House of Representatives so soon after the craziness of the 2000 election absolutely boggles the mind.

I know I'm going to check back at Brian's Electoral Projection website regularly to see how the numbers crunch. I suggest that you do, too, since this election will probably be a squeaker!

UPDATE: Allahpundit discusses the same topic at Hot Air, looking at Marc Ambinder's projections at The Atlantic. They've got it pegged at 245-221, with 72 electoral votes in play. And they do raise the 269-269 scenario.

Posted by: Greg at 11:28 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 506 words, total size 4 kb.

Because after all, anything related to terrorism depicting a woman in a burqa must be a hate crime, right.

Even -- perhaps especially -- if it is a devastating likeness of a particular woman and includes a direct quote from her.

Police in Halifax are investigating a complaint about a political cartoon that some members of a local Islamic group claim is a hate crime.

The cartoon, published April 18 in the Chronicle Herald newspaper, depicts a woman in a burka holding a sign that reads, “I want millions,” and she says, “I can put it towards my husband’s next training camp.”

The cartoon by Bruce MacKinnon is a reference to Cheryfa MacAulay Jamal, a woman from Nova Scotia whose husband was arrested in 2006 in an anti-terrorism raid. Qayyum Abdul Jamal was released from jail after charges against him were stayed on April 15.

* * *

Under the Criminal Code of Canada, a hate crime is committed to intimidate, harm or terrify an entire group of people to which the victim belongs. The victims are targeted for who they are, not because of anything they have done. Dan Leger, the HeraldÂ’s director of news content, said the cartoon does not take aim at all Muslims.

“The whole purpose of that cartoon was to comment on the outrageous demands of this individual for compensation long before any hearing into her case had ever been held,” he said.

In an interview with the Herald before the cartoon ran, Jamal said she wanted to sue the federal government for what her family has gone through and told the reporter, “I want millions,” Leger noted. “[MacKinnon] depicted her exactly the way she looks and used her own words, and that’s the genius of cartooning that you’re able to do that,” he said.

Let's consider the issue.

You've read the quote above.

Here's her picture.

Here's the offending cartoon/alleged hate crime.

OK, folks, you decide -- hate crime, or fair comment on the demand that this particular jihadi wife has made following the arrest of her jihadi husband.

UPDATE: The Seattle Times offers this interesting commentary on the danger of such laws against so-called "hate" and the tribunals that enforce them.

H/T Malkin, Dust My Broom

Posted by: Greg at 03:24 AM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 383 words, total size 3 kb.

No remains of our honored military dead were mishandled, but there is an issue of respect and appearances that needs to be considered. As such, the decision in this particular situation is correct.

The U.S. military has, since 2001, cremated some of the remains of American service members killed in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere at a Delaware facility that also cremates pets, a practice that ended yesterday when the Pentagon banned the arrangement.

The facility, located in an industrial park near Dover Air Force Base, has cremated about 200 service members, manager David A. Bose estimated last night. It uses separate crematories a few feet apart to cremate humans and animals, he added, insisting that there had "not been any people gone through the pet crematory."

Pentagon officials said they do not think that human remains and animal remains were ever commingled at the facility. "We have absolutely no evidence whatsoever at this point that any human remains were at all ever mistreated," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said at a news conference hastily convened last night.

Regardless, the Pentagon will no longer permit crematories not located with funeral homes to handle the remains of U.S. troops, defense officials said.

According to the report, the facility at the heart of the dispute has crematories for both pets and humans, and the former are not of a proper size to cremate human beings. But the two types of crematories are physically located in the same room, and the facility itself has signage identifying itself as Friends Forever Pet Cremation Service. I'd therefore have to agree that the decision in this case is an appropriate one.

But there is a problem with the promulgated regulation that requires that all military cremations take place in funeral homes. After all, not every funeral home has a cremation facility, and so this could have the impact of limiting the funeral options available to the families of military personnel -- especially in situations where a crematorium might be located separately and operated independently from the funeral home, such as at a cemetery. In addition, the change could cause delays in cremations.

Posted by: Greg at 02:53 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 369 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, at least for one wealthy individual -- himself.

Big corporations give him money. Presidential candidates seek his endorsement. He has influential friends in Congress and the governor's mansion. The Rev. Al Sharpton has emerged over the past decade as perhaps the nation's most prominent civil rights leader, a status that was demonstrated again this week when he led protests against police brutality that briefly shut down six of Manhattan's major bridges and tunnels.

But he still carries baggage from his early days as a fire-breathing agitator: Government records obtained by The Associated Press indicate that Sharpton and his business entities owe nearly $1.5 million in overdue taxes and associated penalties.

Now the U.S. attorney is investigating his nonprofit group, a probe that an undeterred Sharpton brushes off as the kind of annoyance that civil rights figures have come to expect from the government.

"Whatever retaliation they do on me, we never stop," he told the AP. "I think that that is why they try to intimidate us."

Gee -- it is somehow "retaliation" to try to enforce the laws of the United States against a tax cheat who owes $1.5 million dollars? If any of us ordinary folks -- especially those of us who are white, vote Republican, and don't make our livings off of race-based hustling and lying -- were to owe that much money to the government, we wouldn't have a pot to piss in and would probably be in jail. Why is Sharpton still walking the streets? And will a Democrat president simply issue him a pardon to make this little tax problem all go away?

Posted by: Greg at 02:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 284 words, total size 2 kb.

What is it with Hillary Clinton donors and the law?

Federal prosecutors have opened a criminal investigation into a Washington-area donor to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, investigating whether he illegally reimbursed other contributors.

The case is similar to one brought last year against Norman Hsu, a New York businessman who was indicted in November on charges of paying associates for donations to the New York senator. The Clinton campaign ultimately returned more than $800,000 raised by Mr. Hsu, who was also accused of cheating investors out of millions of dollars.

The new investigation centers around contributions last year by William Danielczyk, chairman of Galen Capital Corp., a northern Virginia private-equity firm, and by the executive's family, employees and investors, according to lawyers and others close to the case.

Investigators are seeking to determine whether the contributions Mr. Danielczyk solicited for Sen. Clinton were then repaid by his company. It is a federal crime to reimburse political contributions, punishable by fines and sometimes imprisonment.

And here I thought that it was the GOP that was the party of big-money financiers who are out to buy elections. Interesting, isn't it, that such folks keep turning up in the campaigns of Democrats -- at least those of Democrats named Clinton, and have for the last 15 years or so.

After all, honesty is such a lonely word.

Cue the music!

Posted by: Greg at 02:24 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 233 words, total size 2 kb.

Candidate A loans her campaign $11 million. Candidate B offers to pay off that debt to herself if she drops out of the race and gives him a clear shot at their party's presidential nomination. That is the latest rumor.

The latest rumor making the rounds is that maybe Barack Obama will pay off Hillary's $11 million loan to her campaign if she quits the race. I suppose that makes some kind of sense — and it would be a gracious and unifying gesture from Obama — but I'm not sure why Hillary would really be moved by this. She and Bill have earned over $100 million in the past few years and Bill obviously has tremendous earning capacity in the future. $11 million just isn't a big deal to them.

Now I know that failed candidates work to pay off their campaign debts, and that other candidates are allowed to help them. But what if that debt is all to the candidate herself, and there is a quid pro quo deal on that. Doesn't it have the appearance of impropriety, even if it is perfectly legal and above board?

Warren over at Coyote Blog certainly thinks it does -- and wonders how the Democrats would have reacted to newt Gingrich offering such a pile of cash to buy off challengers for Speaker of the House.

Posted by: Greg at 12:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.

Gee -- market forces might just kick in to start lowering oil prices.

After all, if the price gets so high as to cut demand for a product, the price begins to drop -- often due to increased production designed to maximize profits.

As prices jumped to another record, a member of OPEC signaled on Friday for the first time in months that the oil cartel might increase its output to prick the price bubble.

The comments, from LibyaÂ’s senior oil official, Shokri Ghanem, suggested a possible shift in OPECÂ’s position. Since the cartelÂ’s last meeting in March, OPEC has argued that the market was not lacking in oil supplies and blamed speculators for driving up prices.

But in recent weeks, prices have come under renewed pressure because of a string of export disruptions from Nigeria. Prices have been above $100 since early February. Crude oil for June delivery closed up $2.27, at $125.96 a barrel in New York on Friday, after rising as high as $126.25 during the day.

Gee, and here I heard it was all greedy oil companies driving up gas prices -- too bad that folks have ignored the supply-side issues at work to rais the cost of a gallon of gas.

Let's follow this one closely -- it may again prove that Adam Smith was right about how markets work, and the Left's idol Karl Marx was wrong.

Posted by: Greg at 11:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 241 words, total size 1 kb.

If you are going to have success in business, you will need to build and maintain relationships with your clients and suppliers. That is true regardless of the sort of business you are in – it is absolutely critical that you make sure that those with whom you do business feel that you are working to build and maintain a relationship for the long term. That is why you need to buy and send personalized corporate greeting cards.

Such greeting cards can be sent out on any number of occasions. We all know that sending greeting cards is a custom associated with certain holidays – Christmas being the most obvious example. However, birthday cards are in some ways even more important, because the card tells the person that receives it that you have made an effort to learn about them as an individual and express your warm wishes for them on that special day. If you select the appropriate card, duly personalized with your business name, you will invariably earn some good will for your business.

I don’t know about you, but I rather like this card. Why? Because I’ve never met anyone who can resist smiling when they see balloons. And besides, unless you are sending a package along it just seems to be wrong o have one with packages all over it – but balloons communicate the joy of the celebration, and bring back positive memories of our childhood years.

Posted by: Greg at 11:50 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 250 words, total size 2 kb.

1 On Saturday you had your birthday, so happy birthday to you. I hope you had fun, and that your wishes come true. Congratulations to you,from Global team!!

Posted by: Juergen at Sun May 11 20:59:26 2008 (HSEVl)

2 wishing a nice birthday

Posted by: Nnnn at Tue Sep 2 20:50:49 2008 (IrEmk)

3 ; london airline tickets vigf; cheap plane ticket >:-DDD; discount flight 833842; cheap flight tickets 65408;

Posted by: volks at Wed May 6 13:54:33 2009 (hXRfl)

4 ; las vegas airfare %-OOO; flights discount 015; cheap air flights )); plane tickets PP;

Posted by: wolf at Thu May 7 21:49:00 2009 (+79JS)

5 Very nice site!

Posted by: John798 at Fri May 22 04:37:32 2009 (RvuwQ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Andrew Sullivan, referencing TNR's The Plank, raises a good question on his blog.

The trouble is: the Clintons will create mischief wherever they are. If Obama becomes president without them they will do all they can to undermine, destroy, and polarize him. The question is how one deals with sociopaths like them. It's not easy.

I disagree.

There is a very simple way of avoiding the entire problem.

It involves casting a ballot for John McCain and your GOP candidates for House and Senate, and urging every other person who loves America to do likewise.

OTB comments on Sullivan's "sociopath" label.

Posted by: Greg at 11:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.

Good grief -- even my worst student knows how many states there are!

He's visited 57 states? What has he been smoking/snorting? Or maybe he's added the state of denial, the state of ineptitude, the state of delerium, the state of inexperience, the state of intoxication....

Let's be honest, too -- if John McCain had said this we would be duly informed by the acolytes of Obama that John McCain is too old and mentally unfit to serve as President of the United States.

H/T Marc Ambinder, Hot Air

Posted by: Greg at 12:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 107 words, total size 1 kb.

Beth over at MVRWC points readers at the GOP’s new “Can We Ask” website, where interested citizens can post questions that they would like Barack Obama to answer. I dropped by a short time ago and posed this one for the candidate – one which I suspect the news media will avoid asking him at all costs.

You support education policies that mean that most children in Washington will remain trapped in failing public schools. Will you commit to sending your daughters to those same schools rather than hypocritically sending them to private schools that your education policies place beyond the reach of every other child living in government housing in Washington?

I’m sure we all know the answer to that one. He’ll most likely emulate Bill and Hillary Clinton and Al and Tipper Gore, rather than Jimmy Carter – or George Bush, for that matter, whose daughters attended public school in Austin, Texas while he was governor.

But it would be interesting to know how he can support sentencing the children of Washington, DC to some of the worst schools in the nation – especially if they aren’t good enough for his own children.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Stop the ACLU, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, InvestorBlogger, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, McCain Blogs, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, CORSARI D'ITALIA, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 11:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 263 words, total size 3 kb.

One of the obligations of the courts in the United States is to guarantee that the US Constitution is followed. If New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has his way, though, one court will ban any mention of portions of the framework of American government during the trial of a lawsuit seeking to enforce New York City gun laws against gun shop owners in other states – even though their procedures conform to federal law and the laws of their respective states.

Lawyers for Mayor Bloomberg are asking a judge to ban any reference to the Second Amendment during the upcoming trial of a gun shop owner who was sued by the city. While trials are often tightly choreographed, with lawyers routinely instructed to not tell certain facts to a jury, a gag order on a section of the Constitution would be an oddity.

* * *

City lawyers, in a motion filed Tuesday, asked the judge, Jack Weinstein of U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, to preclude the store’s lawyers from arguing that the suit infringed on any Second Amendment rights belonging to the gun store or its customers. In the motion, the lawyer for the city, Eric Proshansky, is also seeking a ban on “any references” to the amendment.

“Any references by counsel to the Second Amendment or analogous state constitutional provisions are likewise irrelevant,” the brief states.

In other words, the city is taking the position that a federal court should not allow a little thing like the Constitution to interfere with efforts to infringe upon legal activities that are protected by the Constitution – and that similar state constitutional provisions should not be allowed to interfere with the city’s attempt to interfere with legal activities in other states.

Frankly, the court ought to slap this frivolous motion down with extreme prejudice – and fine Mayor Bloomberg and the lawyers involved in filing it with penalties to be paid from their own pockets. After all, every last period, comma, and semicolon of the US Constitution is always a legitimate matter for lawyers to bring up in a courtroom.

Posted by: Greg at 11:02 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 368 words, total size 2 kb.

More questions have been raised about the judgment of Barack Obama and his decision to remain associated with Trinity UCC. After all, how can we trust the judgment of any man who would stay a part of an organization propagating these ideas?

en. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) recently said his relationship with his long-time pastor and friend Rev. Jeremiah Wright "changed" after what Obama called the clergyman's "divisive and destructive" remarks at the National Press Club. Later, however, Obama stressed his loyalty to the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, where he has been a member for many years.

Articles published in the Trinity United Church of Christ bulletin in 2007 carried controversial comments written by people other than Jeremiah Wright. Those comments included the claim that Israel worked with South Africa to build an "ethnic bomb" that would kill blacks and Arabs, that the Pentagon was training Latin Americans to be terrorists, and that the TV networks are run by right-wing racists.

On Sunday, May 4, Obama told NBC's Tim Russert, on "Meet the Press," that he was still a member of Trinity United Church of Christ and said of the Wright controversy, "I think that the American people understand that when I joined Trinity United Church of Christ, I was committing not to Pastor Wright. I was committing to a church and I was committing to Christ. And it is a wonderful church."

Yeah, this wonderful church – at which leaders spew forth racist venom from the pulpit and bigoted bile in the church bulletin.

Examples include the publication of the following:

• Rev. Reginald Williams, the associate pastor for social justice at Trinity United, published a piece in the bulletin stating that the words of Don Imus were indicative of the fact that "the major networks are run by right-winged conservatives who still see black people as subhuman and portray black people as such."
  
• Williams, in another piece, argued that the training of Latin American soldiers by the United States constituted the training of terrorists.
  
• Published apiece by an advisor to leaders of the anti-white, anti-Semitic Nation of Islam, Elijah Muhammad and Louis Farrakhan, which accused Israel of working on an “ethnic bomb” that would kill only blacks and Arabs.

So, in light of these published statements of hate-filled racism, anti-Americanism, and anti-Semitism, does the claim that Wright’s outrageous statements constituted something new and unusual really ring true? Does the claim that his statements were unrepresentative of Trinity UCC as a whole seem plausible any more? And does the argument that he was “committing to a church” and “committing to Christ” really hold up to scrutiny when his “wonderful church” consistently supported the most outrageous of ideologies from the pulpit and in official publications?

At a minimum, these latest revelations ought to raise questions about Barack ObamaÂ’s truthfulness and his judgment, as well as the sort of beliefs he would carry with him into the White House. Can America really afford to take a chance on such a man?

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Stop the ACLU, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, InvestorBlogger, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, McCain Blogs, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, CORSARI D'ITALIA, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 11:00 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 569 words, total size 5 kb.

When is telling the truth not OK?

When Barack Obama says its not, thatÂ’s when.

At the root of the dispute is McCain's decision to call attention to a Hamas adviser's apparent affinity for Obama. The adviser, Ahmed Yousef, said in a recent interview: "We like Obama and hope that he will win the election."

McCain used those comments in a fundraising appeal and has cited them in interviews.

Asked about the matter Wednesday during a taping of "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," McCain said: "It's indicative of how some of our enemies view America. And I guarantee you, they're not going to endorse me."

In an interview Thursday with CNN, Obama accused McCain of trying to smear him by repeating the comments.

"This is offensive, and I think it's disappointing, because John McCain always says, 'Well, I'm not going to run that kind of politics,'" Obama said. "And then to engage in that kind of smear, I think, is unfortunate, particularly since my policy toward Hamas has been no different than his."

Now excuse me for one moment – I think it is highly relevant that one of America’s terrorist enemies has come out and declared that it wants to see a particular candidate elected. It leads one to wonder why that would be the case – and leads to the unavoidable conclusion that the preferred candidate is viewed as relatively weak and the opponent is viewed as stronger by our nation’s enemies.

Strangely enough, Democrats like to tout how foreign governments and opinion polls prefer a break from the policies of the Bush years. Why shouldn’t it be fair game to note that Hamas and other terrorist organizations do as well? After all, it is just as relevant – even if it is an inconvenient truth for Barack Obama..

Posted by: Greg at 10:54 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 316 words, total size 2 kb.

Classify this story under “funky science news”.

Earth may once have had more than one moon, most probably two more, NASA scientists think.

Prevailing scientific consensus holds that the existing Moon was formed when a Mars-sized planet collided with the Earth 4.5 billion years ago, when the solar system was very young.

So much matter would have been thrown up into space that it recollected under its own gravity to form the Moon, which for millions of years would have glowed red-hot as the molten rock from the planetary collision cooled.

However, researchers Jack J. Lissauer of NASA's Ames Research Center near Mountain View, Calif., and John E. Chambers of the Carnegie Institution of Washington figure quite a bit of that ejected matter would have recollected into two other small moons at the so-called "Lagrangian points" or "Trojan points."
Those are fixed places in the Moon's orbit around the Earth where the gravity of both large bodies would keep smaller objects in stable positions.

Odds are that such moons would have lasted at least 100 million years, and possibly as long as a billion years, depending upon their size.

But before you have some image of three large lunar bodies in the sky, please understand that their size and distance from the planet would have left them appearing as nothing more than bright stars or planets in the sky – nothing like our single remaining moon.

Posted by: Greg at 10:53 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.

Her stance here is a principled one, especially since releasing the returns would disclose a great deal of financial information about not only her finances, but those of her adult and minor children.

Cindy McCain says she will never make her tax returns public even if her husband wins the White House and she becomes the first lady.

"You know, my husband and I have been married 28 years and we have filed separate tax returns for 28 years. This is a privacy issue. My husband is the candidate," Cindy McCain, wife of Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting John McCain, said in an interview aired on NBC's "Today" on Thursday.

Asked if she would release her tax returns if she was first lady, Cindy McCain said: "No."

The Arizona senator released his tax return last month, reporting he had a total income of $405,409 in 2007 and paid $84,460 in federal income taxes. He files his return separately from his wife, an heiress to a Phoenix-based beer distributing company whose fortune is in the $100 million range.

Sen. McCain is routinely is ranked among the richest lawmakers in Congress, but he and his wife have kept their finances separate throughout their marriage. A prenuptial agreement left much of the family's assets in Cindy McCain's name.

In other words, for nearly three decades it has been the practice of the couple to keep their finances separate -- and demands that these assets be treated as joint property is simply wrong.

Howard Dean is, of course screaming about this decision.

Of course, there is a historical precedent for the much wealthier wife of a presidential nominee refusing to release her complete tax returns for precisely these reasons -- and I believe Cindy McCain should follow that practice precisely.

Teresa Heinz Kerry reported income of just over $5 million last year, slightly more than half of it from investments in tax-exempt municipal and state bonds, her 2003 income tax return shows, confirming her status as the wealthiest spouse of any major party nominee in United States history.

Ms. Heinz Kerry on Friday released a small part of her 2003 income tax return, unlike her husband, Senator John Kerry, and President Bush and his wife, Laura, who have made their full tax returns available for public inspection. The Kerrys file separate tax returns, a common arrangement when one spouse is wealthy.

The two-page document, posted at johnkerry.com, showed total income of $5,073,554 last year. Her primary source of income was the tax-exempt bonds, investments that generally produce a lower interest rate, but those in the highest tax brackets can often pocket more cash if they choose municipals.

* * *

Nothing about the trusts that benefit Ms. Heinz Kerry herself and her three sons was disclosed. These trusts, set up after the 1991 death in an airplane crash of her first husband, Senator John Heinz, the heir to the H. J. Heinz Company fortune, are believed to be worth about a billion dollars.

* * *

Tax documents that would indicate if Ms. Heinz Kerry has offshore accounts were withheld, as were the schedules detailing her charitable deductions, interest expenses and the nature of the $14,412 in capital gains she reported. But Paul Bschorr, a lawyer for Ms. Heinz Kerry, said Friday that none of her personal investment accounts or accounts controlled by her family trust are deposited outside the United States, a step some wealthy American use to defer or escape taxes.

No information was provided about how much income was earned by trusts of which she is the beneficiary. If the trusts are as large as reported - and the Kerry campaign has not challenged the billion dollar estimate - then even a modest 5 percent return would have generated $50 million of income, 10 times what was on the two pages released by Ms. Heinz Kerry. A statement released by the Kerry campaign noted that income taxes are paid directly by the Heinz family trust, in addition to taxes that Ms. Heinz Kerry pays.

Howard Dean certainly didn't raise a fuss about this practice in 2004 -- it should satisfy him in 2008, unless he wants to engage in a little bit of Michelle Obama-style bar raising. After all, if it was good enough for a seditious gigolo like John Kerry and his wife, it should be good enough for a true American hero like John McCain and his wife.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Stop the ACLU, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, InvestorBlogger, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, McCain Blogs, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, CORSARI D'ITALIA, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 10:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 805 words, total size 7 kb.

After the Lina Joy case, I have little hope for that. But this ruling may indicate some movement.

A Malaysian Islamic court allowed a Muslim convert Thursday to return to her original faith of Buddhism, setting a precedent that could ease religious minorities' worries about their legal rights.

Lawyers said the Shariah High Court's verdict in the northern state of Penang was the first time in recent memory that a convert has been permitted to legally renounce Islam in this Muslim-majority nation.

A rising number of disputes about religious conversions has sparked anxiety among minorities _ predominantly Buddhist, Christian and Hindu _ because in the past courts virtually always ruled against people seeking to leave Islam.

Penang's Shariah court, however, granted Siti Fatimah Tan Abdullah's request to be declared a non-Muslim. She embraced Islam in 1998 because she wanted to marry an Iranian, but claimed she never truly practiced the religion.

"I am very happy," Siti, a 39-year-old ethnic Chinese cake seller, told The Associated Press by telephone. "I want to go to the temple to pray and give thanks."

The Shariah court, which governs Muslims' personal conduct and religious lives, ruled that Siti's husband and Islamic authorities failed to give her proper religious advice.

"So you can't blame her for her ignorance of the teachings and wanting to convert out," said Ahmad Munawir Abdul Aziz, a lawyer for the Islamic Affairs Council in Penang.

So this means that some members of the Muslim community -- but only those who began their lives in another faith -- will have a right enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Unfortunately, those born and raised as Muslims who recognize the truth of Christianity and therefore reject the false teachings of Muhammad will still be subject to arrest, imprisonment, and death at the hands of sharia courts that operate with government sanction -- meaning that for the majority of Malaysians, true religious freedom is still denied.

Posted by: Greg at 10:20 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 347 words, total size 2 kb.

As you know, I teach social studies, which means I end up dealing a lot with issues of economics, including consumer economics type issues like wages, taxes, and getting credit. One of the things I often tell my students is that they should be smart when dealing with credit issues -- after all, failure to do so can cause serious personal problems for years to come. And i tell them that they particularly need to make sure they pick a credit card responsibly, finding one that suits their needs and ability to pay.

One great site that can help consumers with that can be found at CreditCardsClub.com, where they offer great credit card reviews regarding different cards and offers that are available to consumers. Seriously, if you are in teh market for a first card or a new card, they are a good place to check out for information.

Posted by: Greg at 10:07 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 155 words, total size 1 kb.

That is when one candidate for the Democrat nomination plans to declare himself the winner. On the other hand, the other candidate plans on staying in all the way to the convention, seeking to convince the party she is more electable.

Not long after the polls close in the May 20 Kentucky and Oregon primaries, Barack Obama plans to declare victory in his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.

And, until at least May 31 and perhaps longer, Hillary ClintonÂ’s campaign plans to dispute it.

ItÂ’s a train wreck waiting to happen, with one candidate claiming to be the nominee while the other vigorously denies it, all predicated on an argument over what exactly constitutes the finish line of the primary race.

The Obama campaign agrees with the Democratic National Committee, which pegs a winning majority at 2,025 pledged delegates and superdelegates—a figure that excludes the penalized Florida and Michigan delegations. The Clinton campaign, on the other hand, insists the winner will need 2,209 to cinch the nomination—a tally that includes Florida and Michigan.

“We don’t accept 2,025. It is not the real number because that does not include Florida and Michigan,” said Howard Wolfson, one of Clinton’s two chief strategists. “It’s a phony number.”

Wolfson said they intend to contest the DNC’s 2,025 number “every day,” as well as any declaration of victory made by Obama based upon that number, because it does not include Florida and Michigan.

Pass the popcorn, please. This one will be quite entertaining.

Personally, I urge Hillary to contest the race all the way until the convention, just like this guy did in 1980 even though he was much further behind.

Posted by: Greg at 09:50 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.

Are you one of those folks who feels like your home is in need of a home makeover? Do you have at least one room that needs to be done over – and maybe an entire house? You may be, because most Americans can point to some part of their house that isn’t quite up to par in their eyes, either because is stylistically out of date or in need of serious fixing up. Of course, some are definitely in greater need than others. I know that we still have linoleum in our kitchene that dates back to the Carter administration, and could certainly stand to replace some of the appliances, get a new countertop and reface the cabinets in an effort to move into the twenty-first century. Minor stuff, to be sure, compared with what some other folks need to have done, but major to my wife and I. After all, there are some folks whose homes are in much more serious need of work because of problems that are really safety hazards.

Now I have talked a couple of times about the Renuzit TriScents “Transform Your Home with Tanya Memme” contest Well, they have picked their semi-finalists, and you can vote on who you think deserves the $20,000 home makeover. Visit the semi-finalist gallery to vote for your choice between now and June 7, 2008.

My vote went to this home. It isnÂ’t just the picture, but the story that goes along with it that moved me to do so. Winning the contest would go a long way to helping improve the lives of a family that is clearly down on their luck.

Posted by: Greg at 09:26 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 289 words, total size 2 kb.