After all, it would be an even bigger financial crisis to expect his close aides and appointees to take the same pay cut as all the little guys and gals who actually make the state of New York run.

Gov. Paterson has secretly granted raises of as much as 46 percent to more than a dozen staffers at a time when he has asked 130,000 state workers to give up 3 percent pay hikes because of the state's fiscal crisis, The Post has learned.

The startling pay hikes, costing about $250,000 annually, were granted after the governor's "emergency" declaration in August of a looming fiscal crisis that required the state to cut spending and impose a "hard" hiring freeze.

One raise was approved as recently as last month - when Paterson claimed the budget deficit had reached an unprecedented $15.5 billion.

Is it time to remove yet another corrupt Democrat from the Governor’s mansion in New York – this time for feathering the nest of his closest staff after taking back the raises of every other state worker?

Posted by: Greg at 11:51 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 202 words, total size 2 kb.

And these are all promises that, in and of themselves, would cost the government nothing and would likely lead to the savings of millions of dollars. But they would have meant changing the “business as usual” culture that exists inside the Beltway, so they have been thrown under the bus by Barry Hussein and his administration

7 Broken Promises in Record Time

1. Make government open and transparent.

2. Make it “impossible” for Congressmen to slip in pork barrel projects.

3. Meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public. (Even Congressional Republicans shut out.)

4. No more secrecy.

5. Public will have 5 days to look at a bill.

6. YouÂ’ll know whatÂ’s in it.

7. We will put every pork barrel project online.

And to think that these were all supposed to be things that would result in more open, honest government that would “restore” the confidence of the American people in their institutions. But now that he has the power, such things matter less than the wielding of that power.

H/T Sweetness & Light

Posted by: Greg at 11:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 196 words, total size 1 kb.

Just a reminder that the government has no money of its own – only the money it takes from the people.

The Seattle City Council is expected Tuesday to approve a surcharge on city water customers to help cover the cost of a $22 million court-ordered rebate to water customers.

In other words, the city of Seattle ripped-off the customers of its city-owned water system and was ordered to repay them for things which should have been covered by the cityÂ’s general fund. So rather than rebate the cash from the general fund (from which the initial expenditures should have been funded rather than by increasing water bills), the city will raise the cash by increasing the water bills!

I donÂ’t know about you, but this sure seems to me to be a deliberate thumbing of the nose at the court that ordered the rebates.

Posted by: Greg at 11:30 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.

No, kitty, you can't.

After all -- beef and dairy farming are inefficient and produce a great deal of greenhouse gas.

When it comes to global warming, hamburgers are the Hummers of food, scientists say.

Simply switching from steak to salad could cut as much carbon as leaving the car at home a couple days a week.

That's because beef is such an incredibly inefficient food to produce and cows release so much harmful methane into the atmosphere, said Nathan Pelletier of Dalhousie University in Canada.

Pelletier is one of a growing number of scientists studying the environmental costs of food from field to plate.

By looking at everything from how much grain a cow eats before it is ready for slaughter to the emissions released by manure, they are getting a clearer idea of the true costs of food.

The livestock sector is estimated to account for 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and beef is the biggest culprit.

Even though beef only accounts for 30 percent of meat consumption in the developed world it's responsible for 78 percent of the emissions, Pelletier said Sunday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

The next “logical” steps for the acolytes of the religion of global warming? A beef ban (or at least a tax) and some sort of sanction upon dairy products as well. And when they tell you that you cannot have that cheeseburger, you will be reassured that “it is for your own good – and that of the whole world.” After all, the planet has a fever.

Hey, left-wing busybodies – keep your hands out of my fridge and off my plate!

Posted by: Greg at 11:23 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.

There have been honor killings by Muslims in this country in the past. They have been few and far between -- and generally involved unassimilated Muslim immigrant parents who have murdered their Americanized daughters for thinking that they had the freedom to live like Americans here in America -- especially daughters born here in the US with US citizenship.

This case is different -- and all the more disturbing because of the differences.

Orchard Park police are investigating a particularly gruesome killing, the beheading of a woman, after her husband — an influential member of the local Muslim community — reported her death to police Thursday.

Police identified the victim as Aasiya Z. Hassan, 37. Detectives have charged her husband, Muzzammil Hassan, 44, with second-degree murder.

"He came to the police station at 6:20 p.m. [Thursday] and told us that she was dead," Orchard Park Police Chief Andrew Benz said late this morning.

Muzzammil Hassan told police that his wife was at his business, Bridges TV, on Thorn Avenue in the village. Officers went to that location and discovered her body.

Muzzammil Hassan is the founder and chief executive officer of Bridges TV, which he launched in 2004, amid hopes that it would help portray Muslims in a more positive light.

Well, I don't know that I would say that Muzzammil Hassan has managed to portray Muslims in a more positive light -- but I do believe he has managed to portray Islamic culture in a more accurate light. Mrs. Hassan was seeking a divorce, and had already received an order of protection to protect her from further violence by her husband. And so, as happens so often in Muslim communities worldwide, Hassan murdered his wife in an attempt to restore his honor -- something which is sanctioned by sharia law and Muslim religious leaders around the world.

Newsbusters notes this article about the sort of programming common on "moderate" BridgesTV.

BridgesTV might have had the aim of trying to improve the image of Muslims, but over two years ago, Steve Stalinsky of MEMRI outlined in the now-defunct New York Sun that the network featured Wahhabi anti-Christian and anti-Jewish sermons from Saudi TV broadcasts, including English subtitles. Stalinsky also noted that Donald Conover, one of the main hosts on the network, discussed “the power of the ‘Jewish lobby’” and urged Muslims to vote for Democrats during an interview with a Saudi newspaper in 2006.

Sounds like the same old Islamic hatemongering offered up in prettier packaging. Interestingly enough, though, such programming did win BridgesTV and Hassan an award from one "civil rights" organization -- the terrorist-linked Council on American-Islamic relations (CAIR).

Muzzammil Hassan receives award from CAIR-PA Chairman Iftekhar Hussain and CAIR National Chairman Parvez Ahmed (H/T LGF)

Daniel Pipes offers more information about BridgesTV.

I wonder -- will the MSM cover this story as it deserves? Or will we of the blogosphere have to do it for them?

More at Ace of Spades, Jawa Report, Power Line, LGF, Gateway Pundit, Debbie Schlussel, Jihad Watch, Malkin

Posted by: Greg at 06:56 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 519 words, total size 5 kb.

Before Pearl Harbor, my mom's father worked in a shipyard as a skilled worker building ships. After Pearl Harbor, my grandfather was one of those recruited to help repair and/or salvage the vessels damaged and destroyed by the Japanese on December 7, 1941. One alcohol-fueled evening in Hawaii, he got a tattoo -- and he always urged us grandkids not to get one.

I'm not sure how many of the rest have adhered to his words, but I know I have. Indeed, my high school students (many of them already tatted up at 14 and 15) are rather surprised when I tell them I don't have a tattoo -- though they are quite respectful when I tell them why.

That may change, though, if these the inks in this article are ever approved for use, and if I can get the tattoo place in a sufficiently unobtrusive spot.

A tattoo for diabetics that changes colour depending on their glucose levels has been unveiled by scientists.

It is hoped the breakthrough could mean the end of painful daily blood tests for millions with the condition.

The tattoo contains tiny particles of "nano ink" that change colour depending on whether they come into contact with glucose molecules.

If levels are high, the ink appears yellow. If levels of the sugar are low, it turns purple. A healthy level shows up as orange.

There are currently more than 2.5million people with diabetes in Britain and more than half a million people who don't know they have it.

Diabetics need to test their glucose levels regularly and for most this means pricking their finger to draw blood.

The tattoo only has to be a few millimetres across.

The Massachusetts-based Draper Laboratories team accidentally discovered the ink while researching hydration in athletes.

While I can't see these tattoos completely eliminating the need for glucometers, I know that they would possibly cut down on the frequency of the finger sticks that go along with the use of a glucose meter. And I can't help but think that my grandfather would approve of such a tattoo, given the small size and the importance for maintaining good health.

It may, however, be two or more years before human testing trials would lead to approval by the government -- and who knows how long before insurance starts covering them.

Posted by: Greg at 06:13 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 404 words, total size 3 kb.

As most folks know, Boston College is a Catholic college founded by and run by Jesuits. It shouldn't come as a surprise, then, that the school might have something of a Catholic ethos, right? Well, a decision by college officials to publicly express the school's Catholic nature has aroused howls of outrage by those who consider such expressions of the Catholic faith by a Catholic institution to be insensitive to non-Catholics.

Some Boston College professors and students are raising a holy ruckus over the Catholic school’s return to its religious roots by hanging crucifixes in all its classrooms, calling the move “offensive” and a break from the Jesuit tradition of tolerance.

“There is no choice if you don’t think it’s appropriate. You can’t turn it around,” said biology professor Dan Kirschner, faculty adviser for BC’s chapter of Hillel, a Jewish student group. “I think it is being insensitive to the people of other faith traditions here.”

Amir Hoveyda, head of BC’s chemistry department, blasted the school in an e-mail to the Herald for “not being interested in an exchange with its faculty members.”

In an interview with the college newspaper, The Observer, which broke the story, Hoveyda described the crucifixes as “offensive” and the university’s actions as “anti-intellectual.”

“I can hardly imagine a more effective way to denigrate the faculty of an educational institution,” he is quoted as saying. “The insult is particularly scathing, since such symbols were installed without discussion . . . in a disturbingly surreptitious manner.”

Now wait just one minute. This is, at the end of the day, a Catholic institution run by a Catholic religious order. It is not unreasonable for the school to therefore make some expression of its Catholic identity -- and a crucifix in the classroom is really a pretty minimal intrusion of Catholicism into daily life on campus.

To those who have an objection to crucifixes in classrooms at a Catholic college, I have a suggestion -- try a non-Catholic school instead.

Posted by: Greg at 08:15 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 345 words, total size 2 kb.

Texas Rainmaker offers us a look at how a debate between the great Communicator and the second-rate neophyte currently in the Oval Office might sound.

I began blogging a bit over four years ago to find an outlet for my grief at the death of the greatest president of my lifetime. This just reminds me how far the country has descended away from its founding principles in the two decades since Ronald Reagan left office.

Posted by: Greg at 07:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.

As a percentage of GDP, this pork-laden exercise in mono-partisanship will bring the US Deficit to at least 13.5% of the nation's GDP -- more than doubling the size of the deficit as a percentage of GDP at any point in living memory!

Congratulations, Democrats, for bringing the Era of Fiscal Irresponsibility to an entirely new level heretofore unseen in our nation's history -- and after less than one month of controlling the legislative and executive branches!

H/T Ace, Gateway Pundit Power Line

Posted by: Greg at 07:28 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.

Let's see.

One out because he's corrupt (Richardson).

One out because he's a tax cheat (Daschle).

One disgraced and discredited because he's a tax cheat (Geithner).

One disgraced and discredited because he supported the Marc Rich pardon and pardons for terrorists (Holder).

Yeah, Obama and his crew sure can vet those Cabinet picks.

And once they found one with some actual principles, he withdraws because he can't go along with the bad policies and corruption of the Obama Administration.

Republican Sen. Judd Gregg withdrew his nomination to be President Obama's commerce secretary on Thursday, citing "irresolvable conflicts" over issues like the economic stimulus package and the census.

"It has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the census there are irresolvable conflicts for me," Gregg of New Hampshire said in a written statement.

Republicans have been largely unified in their opposition to an economic stimulus bill that now totals $789 billion. They say it is full of government waste and won't create enough jobs to turn the economy around.

And in the past week, the GOP has stoked controversy over Obama's plan to share oversight of next year's census, which is carried out by the Census Bureau, part of the Commerce Department -- though Gregg said that was only a "slight" factor in his decision to withdraw.

I applaud Judd Gregg, who I don't always agree with when he goes maverick but who I certainly respect. He recognizes that his independence would be gone the minute he was confirmed.

Barry Hussein claims he is surprised by Gregg's move. Could it be due to the fact that the Senator has shown that there is, indeed, honest politicians out there -- something that an Illinois Democrat like will have never encountered in the course of his meteoric rise from obscurity to mediocrity in the highest office in the land.

Posted by: Greg at 02:16 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 335 words, total size 2 kb.

And so the light of freedom continues to dim around the world lest the followers of the decidedly no-peaceful “Religion of Peace” become outraged.

The editor and publisher of a top English-language Indian daily have been arrested on charges of "hurting the religious feelings" of Muslims.
The Statesman's editor Ravindra Kumar and publisher Anand Sinha were detained in Calcutta after complaints.

Muslims said they were upset with the Statesman for reproducing an article from the UK's Independent daily in its 5 February edition.

The article was entitled: "Why should I respect these oppressive religions?"
It concerns the erosion of the right to criticise religions.

In it, the author, Johann Hari, writes: "I don't respect the idea that we should follow a 'Prophet' who at the age of 53 had sex with a nine-year old girl, and ordered the murder of whole villages of Jews because they wouldn't follow him."

Now those are historical facts, attested to by Muslim sources. Why is it that stating that one is unwilling to follow the teachings of such a depraved individual constitutes a criminal offense? I personally think it constitutes common sense, as well as evidence that one adheres to superior system of moral values.

Interestingly enough, there have been no attempts to prosecute those who claim that Jesus was not the Son of God but merely a prophet, that he is inferior to Muhammad, and that he was a follower of the teachings of Muhammad even before the coming of that false prophet. As a Christian I am outraged by such statements, which are part and parcel of Islam and which hurt my religious feelings those of many other followers of Christ around the world. Could it be because we don’t find it necessary to riot and murder when we hear such offensive views expressed, but that we instead respect the basic human right to speak and believe free of government oppression or coercion – or the threat of violence by the followers of a barbaric faith that demands respect that it neither earns nor deserves.

Posted by: Greg at 01:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 357 words, total size 2 kb.

After all, Barry Hussein is in the (White) House, so anyone in opposition to his plans and programs is engaged in acts of treason and domestic terrorism, according to “liberal” radio host Mike Malloy.

"They're worse than useless. These are terrorists. These are domestic terrorists. They want the country to fail, for GodÂ’s sake. They want exactly what anyone who attacked this country on September 11, 2001 wanted. The real internal terrorists are the Republicans, I mean, isn't that clear? Rush Limbaugh is a bigger threat to this country than Osama bin Laden. He's a bigger threat than anybody that the CIA can invent. He's a bigger threat than any terrorist that ever leveled its sights against the United States, Limbaugh is, so why isn't he arrested and sentenced for treason?"

Get that, folks – dissent is now domestic terrorism and treason. Seeking to undermine the unwise and irresponsible policies of a president with a D after his name makes one worse than Osama bin Laden. And to think that for the last eight years I heard that speaking ill of our nation’s leaders and trying to thwart their policies – up to and including publishing classified information that materially aided the enemy in the field – was more patriotic than giving support to the nation in time of war.

So get ready, folks. The day is coming when the First Amendment will be excised from the Bill of Rights as incompatible with Obamism – and speaking words which oppose the plans of the libtelligentsia for the United States will constitute “levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” Odd, isn’t it, that this is directly contrary to the views of the men who wrote Article III, Section 3 in such a manner as to preclude making the holding and expression of dissenting opinions on policy matters the cause of a prosecution for treason.

Posted by: Greg at 12:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 329 words, total size 3 kb.

Over the years there have been questions about the connection between US internet providers and terrorist organizations.

Sketching the international profile of the attackersÂ’ communications, he said cellphone SIM cards were bought in Austria while voice calls over the Internet, using a server in Houston, Texas, were paid for in Barcelona, Spain.

Anyone else curious which Houston-based ISP is enabling terrorists?

Over at Jawa Report, Rusty and company have been documenting some of the uses of US ISPs by terrorists and terrorist fronts. Is there anything we can do about it – especially if the Obama Maladministration is determined to stop monitoring the communications of non-Americans from outside the US? Or will we miss out on the next terrorist attack on US soil because folks on the Left are bound and determined to apply the search-and-seizure restrictions the Bill of Rights places upon US government operations within the US to the monitoring of such communications by non-citizens outside the US?

Posted by: Greg at 12:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 174 words, total size 1 kb.

Looks like Obama was not really serious about ending American dependence on foreign sources of oil.

A day after his Interior secretary signaled plans for a cautious approach to oil and natural gas exploration on the Outer Continental Shelf, President Barack Obama said Wednesday that he's "holding out for a more comprehensive strategy" for U.S. energy development before approving offshore drilling along the East Coast.

In a meeting with reporters for The Virginian-Pilot and 15 other newspapers, Obama touched on a wide range of topics, from drilling to military strategy and efforts to revive the economy.

On drilling, he said it would be short-sighted to rely on offshore oil and gas development to solve the nation's energy problems or stimulate the flagging U.S. economy. Offshore resources are "not going to come online quickly enough," he asserted.

I know no one who argues that the only thing to do is drill offshore – or that we should rely on drilling for oil alone. But there is no legitimate reason for not tapping those reserves if we are to end the dependence on foreign oil that has caused such problems. Unless, of course, one is sold out to the far left of the Democrat Party.

Posted by: Greg at 12:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 213 words, total size 1 kb.

Looks like an attempt at “extortion by lawsuit” by a race-based grievance ho in California.

Miley Cyrus has said she meant no offense by a gesture that some have construed as insensitive to Asians — but one woman isn't buying the pop star's story, and she thinks Cyrus should pay.

TMZ reports that the Los Angeles woman, Lucie J. Kim, has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all Asian Pacific Islanders living in Los Angeles County. And she's seeking quite a payout: $4 billion.

In the controversial photo, Cyrus, 16, is shown sitting on her boyfriend Justin GastonÂ’s lap surrounded by a group of friends all making a stereotypical gesture by pulling their eyes into a slanted position. The gesture is commonly thought to be offensive to Asian Pacific Americans.

Now here’s the problem with this lawsuit – there is absolutely no actionable harm alleged in this suit. Being offended is not an actionable in civil court. Neither is the expression of an (arguably) racist sentiment. This suit ought to be thrown out with extreme prejudice – and Ms. Kim and her legal team ought to be subjected to serious legal sanctions for filing this frivolous suit.

Posted by: Greg at 12:55 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 1 kb.

WouldnÂ’t it be nice if the Left applied this logic to Islamo-fascist terrorism?

Nicely done, Messrs. Hannity, Goldberg, Limbaugh, Savage and O'Reilly -- and all your lesser brethren who keep the hate speech spewing 24/7/365 across every field and into every shop in the country. There is no more debate to be had, no more doubt about it: What you did in the name of "entertainment," and for the sake of the almighty ratings, raised and animated a monster like Jim Adkisson, gave him a list of targets ("the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg's book"), and was directly responsible for the deaths of two brave and decent people. Adkisson was clearly angry and crazy -- but his "manifesto" draws the clearest, brightest line possible between the media he consumed and his actions that terrible Sunday morning.

Progressives should take three lessons away from Knoxville:

One: we are no longer safe, not even in our own houses of worship. It's ironic that progressives -- the subgroup of Americans who were most determined not to abandon reason and succumb to overblown fears of Islamic terrorism in the wake of 9/11 -- now have good, serious reasons to fear real domestic terrorism against themselves.

Two: A significant part of this country's media infrastructure is thoroughly devoted to inciting people to commit horrific acts of violence against us -- and now, we know for a fact that people are acting on those incitements. It's time to start taking this far more seriously. What goes out across our airwaves these days isn't all that different from what went out over Radio Rwanda a decade ago, spurring that country to genocide. At this point, it's only a difference of degree.

Three: The right wing has, as usual, grossly underestimated our courage and our commitment. The members of Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist quickly and effectively disarmed and captured this man within seconds after he opened fire. Adkisson expected fear; what we got was determined resistance. It's why he's still alive today, and why more UUs aren't dead by his hand. The TVUUA congregation should be our enduring example of liberal grace under fire.

One whacko shoots up a church and claims inspiration by conservative talkers and writers (who universally condemned his evil deeds) and the Left insists that it is proof of the corruption of the ideology and the medium and proof of the need for media censorship. On the other hand, massive acts of organized terrorism over a period of decades explicitly linked to Islam by its perpetrators (and cheered by much of the rest of the Muslim world) are insufficient to provoke such condemnations of Islam by these same Leftists – who often make common cause with the terrorists and argue that America and Israel truly deserve to be the victims of the terrorists.

I’m not sure which amuses me more – that a regressive like Sara Robinson (and given her implicit call for censorship, she clearly seeks to regress to a time when Americans had less liberty than they do today) is provoked to such hysteria by a lone mentally ill slimeball like James Adkisson, or that she at the same time she so completely abandons all sense of reason and proportion Robinson insists that she and her fellow regressives were “the subgroup of Americans who were most determined not to abandon reason and succumb to overblown fears of Islamic terrorism in the wake of 9/11” and “now have good, serious reasons to fear real domestic terrorism against themselves.”

I wonder if Robinson thinks that conservative Christians – whose sanctuaries have been the targets of violence in a number of incidents in recent years, including vandalism, arson, “white powder” attacks and shootings – have just as much right to fear real domestic terrorism? I wonder if she thinks that Mormons, who have been a specific target of threats and attacks by anti-Prop 8 activists, have the right to fear real domestic terrorism? Or does she, good regressive that she is, think that these groups need to instead meditate upon their own faults that provoke such attacks upon themselves and change, just as so many on the Left argued the US needed to do after 9/11?

By the way, Sara -- you claim that conservatives are going to celebrate Adkisson's statement. Would you care to actually provide evidence that this is the case, perhaps a link to some mainstream conservative site that actually does so (not some isolated whacko pounding keys in a corner)?

Posted by: Greg at 02:02 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 755 words, total size 5 kb.

Because if a woman is brutally forced to have sex against her will, she is guilty of a crime under Islamic law. After all – she should never have gotten in a vehicle alone with a man who was not a relative, so the whole thing is really her fault.

A Saudi judge has ordered a woman should be jailed for a year and receive 100 lashes after she was gang-raped, it was claimed last night.

The 23-year-old woman, who became pregnant after her ordeal, was reportedly assaulted after accepting a lift from a man.

He took her to a house to the east of the city of Jeddah where she was attacked by him and four of his friends throughout the night.

Of course, this will not make the American media, which is much too cowardly to result on the sort of stuff that constitutes Islamic “civilization”. After all, learning about this atrocity might cause some folks to have lower respect for Islam, and that just won’t do.

Posted by: Greg at 01:43 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.

Too close to call, given that this is a parliamentary system and the two top parties each have less than 50% of the number of seats needed to form a government.

Inconclusive election results sent Israel into political limbo Wednesday with both Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and hard-line leader Benjamin Netanyahu claiming victory and leaving the kingmaker role to a rising political hawk with an anti-Arab platform.

Livni's Kadima Party won 28 seats, just one more than Netanyahu's Likud, in Tuesday's election for the 120-member parliament, according to nearly complete results. With neither party winning a clear majority, neither can govern alone. Gains by right-wing parties give Netanyahu a better chance of forming a coalition with his natural allies.

"Political Tangle," read the headline on the front page of the daily Yediot Ahronot, alongside photos of the two smiling candidates.

The results set the stage for what could be weeks of coalition negotiations, with Israeli media reporting the first meetings already scheduled for Wednesday.

Given that the third place Yisrael Beiteinu party, which took 15 seats, has indicated it will not form a coalition with Kadima but would with Likud, that effectively gives Netanyahu 42 seats to Livni’s 28 (41, if one presumes that Labor would only join with Kadima) That puts Netanyahu in the lead – and with a host of other right-wing and religious parties holding an additional 23 seats, it would appear that the next Prime Minister of Israel is more likely to be Netanyahu. That is especially true in light of the fact that any Kadima-led coalition would have to include Arab parties that would be rejected as partners by conservative and religious parties.

My speculation on the matter is that we are likely to see whatever government emerges here serve for only a short time, with elections coming whenever the first serious crisis confronts the government. It could be Passover before the government is formed – and I don’t know that it will live to see next Passover.

Posted by: Greg at 01:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 341 words, total size 2 kb.

If this precedent in Iowa is allowed to stand and expand, it might be.

An Iowa State trooper who was investigated after it was shown that he forwarded an e-mail showing mug shots of people wearing Obama t-shirts has been suspended for 30 days.

Sgt. Rodney Hicok was at home and off-duty when he forwarded the e-mails, said an official with the Iowa Department of Public Safety Bureau and Professional Standards.

The e-mail made disparaging remarks about 15 people in the photos and referred to Obama as having "quite a fan base."

Hicok was not making a racial statement, the official said, but, rather, a political statement.

Hicock was also forced to make an apology for what the state acknowledges was his private, off-duty political speech regarding the President of the United States and his supporters.

Now I initially was not disturbed by this decision. After all, I wondered if he might have obtained the mug shots using his official position. Had that been the case, some punishment might have been appropriate.

But I did a little further digging (actually, I clicked the link at the end of the story that took me to the original story about the investigation). Look where he obtained the mug shots in question, and then tell me that this email was in any way a legitimate basis for any sort of punishment.

The e-mail has a photo that was originally posted on TheSmokingGun.com, according to the ISP, and it was forwarded by Hicok to colleagues inside and outside the department.

No misconduct there – the images in question came from a website that posts documents in the public domain. On what basis, therefore, is punishment being meted out against this trooper? Political speech is, by any standard, fully protected by the First Amendment – even if you are a police officer and even if the target you lampoon is the President and his supporters.

Unless, of course, the “Era of Hope’N’Change” includes the contraction and retraction of our civil liberties...

H/T Gateway Pundit, Malkin

Posted by: Greg at 12:08 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 352 words, total size 3 kb.

Congratulations, Stump!

At 10 years old, Stump the Sussex spaniel should be well into his dotage. Instead, the dog who technically retired four years ago took home Best in Show on Tuesday at the 133rd Annual Westminster Kennel Club show at Madison Square Garden, becoming the oldest to win the award.

Stump, a Houston dog, nearly died a couple of years back when he fell seriously ill. To see him recovered – and now the top dog in the US – is a wonderful thing.

Good dog!

Posted by: Greg at 11:49 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 95 words, total size 1 kb.

Barack Obama has had his "killer rabbit" moment. He hit his head on the door of marine One because he forgot to duck.

Could you imagine the sort of response that this thing would have gotten if it had been George W. Bush? But as we know from another recent Obama gaffe, the press will ignore or minimize the event, as wil the Leftosphere. However, let me offer this in the same spirit of bipartisanship that was displayed by liberals during the eight years of the Bush Administration.

Posted by: Greg at 03:09 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

Apparently the criticism of Islam and the terrorism it inspires will be grounds for banning traveling to the UK under the regime of PM Gordon Brown.

Geert Wilders had been refused entry to the United Kingdom to broadcast his controversial anti-Muslim film Fitna in the House of Lords.

Mr Wilders said he had been told that in the interests of public order he will not be allowed to come to Britain.

He responded to the decision in fighting mood, telling reporters that he still intended to travel to London.

He said: "I shall probably go to Britain anyway on Thursday. Let us see if they put me in chains on arrival. It is an unbelievable decision made by a group of cowards."

Mr Wilders is under 24-hour police protection because of his anti-Muslim stance.
He has been receiving death threats from Muslim groups outside Holland since the anti-Koran film appeared on the internet earlier this year.

In other words, vocal opposition to the Koran-inspired terrorism engaged in by Islamists like those who bombed the London subways in 2005 will get you banned by the UK, while Muslim preachers of hate continue to espouse the same ideology in British mosques. I guess the next step will be to get Queen Elizabeth into a burqa for public occasions, lest the Mohammadan horde become outraged.

My colleagues and I have been planning a trip to the UK for our students for next spring. I will now be recommending another destination -- after all, I would no more take kids to the UK than I would to North Korea or Iran given the sad state of human rights that now exists in formerly-Great Britain.

More at Hot Air, JoshuaPundit, Founding Bloggers, Jawa Report

UPDATE: Columnist and author Melanie Phillips offers this insight from the UK:

So letÂ’s get this straight. The British government allows people to march through British streets screaming support for Hamas, it allows Hizb ut Tahrir to recruit on campus for the jihad against Britain and the west, it takes no action against a Muslim peer who threatens mass intimidation of Parliament, but it bans from the country a member of parliament of a European democracy who wishes to address the British Parliament on the threat to life and liberty in the west from religious fascism.

It is he, not them, who is considered a ‘serious threat to one of the fundamental interests of society’. Why? Because the result of this stand for life and liberty against those who would destroy them might be an attack by violent thugs. The response is not to face down such a threat of violence but to capitulate to it instead.

The author of Londonistan offers a great description of the decision in the closing paragraph -- "spinelessness".

Posted by: Greg at 01:30 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 4 kb.

1 comment2, Whole Life Insurance Photos
, 58528, Christian Debt Consolidation Great
, )), Real debt consolidation non profit
, ffes, Automobile Insurance Rules All Kinds
, pfxqxr, Good budget car insurance
, 0457,

Posted by: gunzone at Thu Apr 30 09:05:54 2009 (zZ6t1)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Soldiers are not cops. Marines are not cops. Sailors are not cops. Airmen are not cops.

Hopefully no one is surprised by those statements. After all, we know that they are fighting men and women.

But the decision by our inept new president to treat terrorists as criminals rather than enemies may mean that all of those incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay may need to be released – because if they are going to get civilian trials with all the protections accorded the Americans arrested for crimes in this country, then all evidence and confessions obtained heretofore will have to be thrown out. Why? Because the terrorists taken on the field of battle were not read their Miranda rights by the fighting men who captured them and were not accorded rights given criminal suspects under the Bill of Rights and relevant Supreme Court interpretations thereof.

Accused in a 2002 grenade blast that wounded two U.S. soldiers near an Afghan market, Mohammed Jawad was sent as a youth to Guantanamo Bay. Now, under orders by President Obama, he could one day be among detainees whose fate is finally decided by a U.S. court.

But in a potential problem, Pentagon officials note that most of the evidence against Jawad comes from his own admissions. And neither he nor any other detainee at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was ever told about their rights against self-incrimination under U.S. law.

The Miranda warning, a fixture of American jurisprudence and staple of television cop shows, may also be one of a series of constructional hurdles standing between Obama's order to close the island prison and court trials on the mainland.

A procession of similar challenges -- secret evidence, information from foreign spy services and coerced statements -- also could spell trouble for prosecutors.

All of these problems illustrate the larger difficulty that lies ahead as the nation moves from the "law of war" orientation used by the Bush administration in dealing with detainees to the civilian legal approach preferred by Obama.

Yep, Barry Hussein has really screwed the pooch on this one. By muddying the distinction between war and criminal justice, he has virtually guaranteed that the enemy will be released to return to the field of battle where he can kill more American soldiers – and civilians.

Are there aspects of the Bush policies on the detainees that reasonable people can quibble over? Yeah, I suppose there are. But the one thing that sensible folks cannot dispute is that he – like FDR during WWII – recognized that fighting a war is very different from fighting crime, and that dealing with the enemy is very different from dealing with lawbreakers. Barack Obama does not understand that – and having campaigned on a promise to undo the Bush policies and treat terrorism as an exercise in criminal justice rather than national defense, he will be hard pressed to step back from his absurd plans. Even if that means that America will be objectively less safe from terrorism than it was during the Bush years.

Andrew McCarthy offers a fantastic analysis of the other flaws of ObamaÂ’s proposed solution to the problem of Gitmo in a fine article in National Review.

UPDATE: Allahpundit points to this little gem from Sarah Palin back during the campaign.

Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America, and he's worried that someone won't read them their rights.

Turns out she hit it right on the head. And it only took the LA Times five months to show that her concerns were dead on.

Posted by: Greg at 01:16 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 607 words, total size 4 kb.

I donÂ’t see any other way to interpret the fact that widespread physical abuse of students by faculty and staff went unreported to police and led to termination in only under 5% of documented cases while Arne Duncan ran the Chicago Public Schools.

Hundreds of students have allegedly been beaten by teachers, coaches and staff at Chicago Public Schools. 2 Investigator Dave Savini continues his ongoing investigation involving the illegal use corporal punishment.

* * *

The 2 Investigators found reports of students beaten with broomsticks, whipped with belts, yard sticks, struck with staplers, choked, stomped on and pushed down stairs. One substitute teacher even fractured a student's neck.

But even more alarming, in the vast majority of cases, teachers found guilty were only given a slap on the wrist.

CBS 2 informed former Chicago Public School CEO Arne Duncan of our investigative findings shortly before he was promoted to U.S. Secretary of Education.

"If someone hits a student, they are going to be fired. It's very, very simple," Duncan said.

Before heading to Washington, he vowed to take action.

"Any founded allegation where an adult is hitting a child, hitting a student - they're going to be gone," Duncan said.

But that's not what happened under Duncan's watch. Of the 568 verified cases, only 24 led to termination. Records show one teacher who quote "battered students for several years" was simply given a "warning" by the Board of Education.

And another student was given "100 licks with a belt." The abuse was substantiated, but the records show the teacher was not terminated.

Now I don’t have a problem with corporal punishment in schools – but it has to have proper limits and oversight. That clearly did not happen in Chicago under Arne Duncan – the man whose management and reform model is seen by Barack Obama as being just what is needed in nationwide. Most of the cases in which abuse was documented led to nothing more than a metaphorical slap on the wrist after teachers assaulted students. Not only that, but it appears that the district was remiss in failing to report these cases of child abuse (much less the mere accusations that the district decided were not credible) to the proper authorities for investigation and criminal prosecution

Now I cannot help but note that the Chicago media was all over reports that priests in the Archdiocese of Chicago sexually abused children and that they were allowed to continue serving in active ministry, usually after some sort of rehabilitation program rather than reporting them to Child Protective Services and the local police. There was lots of deeply concerned hand-wringing in the press over the “betrayal of the children by those who had a responsibility to protect them.” Will we get the same sort of rhetoric from the media over these incidents and the failure of the district to safeguard kids? Will there be the same outrage over the failure to call CPS and/or the police when a child has been abused – something that is mandated of school district employees under Illinois law? And what of Arne Duncan? Will he be the next Obama appointee – and first confirmee – to fall victim to their own scandalous illegal conduct that was not fully vetted by the Obama team?

Posted by: Greg at 12:56 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 572 words, total size 4 kb.

Looks like there's been another large tomb discovered at the necropolis of Saqqara.

A storehouse of 30 Egyptians mummies has been unearthed inside a 2,600-year-old tomb, in a new round of excavations at the vast necropolis of Saqqara outside Cairo, archeologists said Monday.

The tomb was located at the bottom of a 36 foot (11-meter) deep shaft, announced Egypt's top archaeologist Zahi Hawass and eight of the mummies were in sarcophagi, while the rest had been placed in niches along the wall.

Hawass described the discovery as a "storeroom for mummies," dating to 640 B.C. and the 26th Dynasty, which was Egypt's last independent kingdom before it were overthrown by a succession of foreign conquerors beginning with the Persians.

The tomb was discovered at an even more ancient site dating back to 4,300-year-old 6th Dynasty.

Most of the mummies are poorly preserved and archeologists have yet to determine their identity or why so many are in a single room. One of the sarcophagi is made of wood and bears the name Badi N Huri, but no title.

"This one might have been an important figure, but I can't tell because there was no title," Hawass' assistant Abdel Hakim Karar told The Associated Press.

He added that the rest of the sarcophagi — including four which are tightly sealed — have yet to be opened yet.

This find is unusual, given that the use of such rocky niches were common in much earlier periods, rather than in late periods like the 26th Dynasty. It is unclear which sarcophagus is pictured above.

Posted by: Greg at 06:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.

Once again, dissent is not patriotic in the Era of Hope'N'Change.

After all, Alec Baldwin has done so much more on behalf of America than John McCain.

To John McCain. You need to keep quiet, John McCain. You lost. . . . You gotta shut up, John McCain.

Yep, that's right -- a bona fide war hero who has spent his entire adult life in service to the United States had better shut up because some punk actor tells him to -- simply because the war hero doesn't support the policies of the current administration.

Of course, maybe John McCain should be grateful that Baldwin didn't call for a lynch mob to drag him out of his home as Baldwin did in the case of Congressman Henry Hyde.

Posted by: Greg at 05:27 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 142 words, total size 1 kb.

Because after all, dissent is no longer patriotic in the Era of Hope'N'Change.

Now that America has a liberal President, it is apparently no longer acceptable for a private citizen to express disagreement with the White House in Keith OlbermannÂ’s world. On ThursdayÂ’s Countdown show, MSNBC host Olbermann delivered his latest "Special Comment" rant, this time calling for former Vice President Cheney to "leave this country," and made a suggestion that Cheney, who recently criticized President ObamaÂ’s plans for handling counterterrorism, should somehow be "made to desist" from such criticism. Olbermann: "You, Mr. Cheney, you terrified more Americans than did any terrorist in the last seven years, and now it is time for you to desist, or to be made to desist."

The Countdown host, who never showed any concern that his tirades against the Bush administration would "undermine" the war on terrorism, accused Cheney of "trying to sabotage" Obama’s "efforts against terrorism," and made a number of vulgar implications in attacking Cheney – including twice pronouncing the former Vice President’s first name with emphasis as if to call him by a vulgar word; saying that he would tell Cheney to "shove it"; and asking which "orifice" Cheney was pulling numbers from about the recidivism rate of former Guantanamo detainees.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

After several plugs, during which he claimed that "his [CheneyÂ’s] policies contributed to the worst attack ever on American soil," and said he would tell Cheney to "shove it," Olbermann began his "Special Comment":

Flatly, it may be time for Mr. Cheney to leave this country. The partisanship, divisiveness, and naiviete to which he ascribed every single criticism of his and President BushÂ’s delusional policies of the last eight years have now roared forth in a destructive and uninformed diatribe from Mr. Cheney that can only serve to undermine the nationÂ’s new President, undermine the nationÂ’s effort to thwart terrorism and undermine the nation itself.

The MSNBC host soon read a quote from CheneyÂ’s interview remarking that "When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an al-Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry." Olbermann shot back: "More concern, Mr. Cheney? What delusion of grandeur makes you think you have the right to say anything like that?"

Where shall we begin dealing with the words of this loud-mouth buffoon who claimed to be a patriot while actively seeking to tear down the previous occupant of the Oval Office in language significantly less respectful that those used by the former vice president?

1) What "delusion of grandeur" makes Cheney think he has the right to say what he said? Well, aside from having some three decades more experience in the field of national security than Mr. Obama does (which certainly qualifies Dick Cheney as more of an expert on such matters than either Obama or Olbermann), I suppose it might be this:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

That settles the question of what Dick Cheney thinks gives him the right to speak his mind freely in this country, wouldn't you agree? And furthermore, the notion that Dick Cheney should be "made to desist" from making such comments is advocacy of the wholesale violation of his civil liberties, you friggin' brownshirt. Clearly YOU are more concerned about the rights of terrorists than you are about the rights of Americans -- making you objectively pro-terrorist, Keith.

2) "Flatly, it may be time for Mr. Cheney to leave this country." What's that, Keith? Good God! That isn't even "America: Love it or leave it." It is "America: Support Obama or get out." What next, Ubermoron? Forced deportation? Or internment in reeducation camps like those found in Red China during the Cultural Revolution for those of us who fail to support Dear Leader Hope'N'Change?

3) Weren't you one of the folks who argued throughout the last administration that "dissent is the highest form of patriotism"? Why, then, do you seek to suppress speech that said standard shows to be objectively more patriotic than your felating of the current regime? Could it be that you rally believe that "dissent is the highest form of patriotism only when the president has an R after his name"?

You know, we hear a lot about the "Fairness Doctrine" and "hate speech in media". Seems to me that any hearings on talk radio should be expanded to include the cable propaganda outlets like MSNBC -- with Keith Olbermann as the prime example of what hte speech in media really looks like.

Posted by: Greg at 02:59 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 875 words, total size 6 kb.

One of the chief exporters of radical fundamentalist Islam has made it quite clear that religious freedom is not an option in within its borders.

A Saudi Arabian official says mosques can be the only places of worship in his country, rejecting pressure to change heavy restrictions on religious besides Islam.

Saudi Arabia, home to Islam's holiest sites, implements a strict version of Islamic law.

It told a United Nations meeting that the kingdom allows other religions in private.

But the vice president of the Saudi human rights commission said Friday that establishing houses of worship for non-Islamic religions was too sensitive an issue.

Zaid Al-Hussain tells the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva that there could be no debate. Other countries have urged Saudi Arabia to abolish laws that breach basic human rights such as freedom from discrimination on the basis of religion or belief.

I guess we should not be too surprised. After all, Saudi Arabia has a piss-poor record on human rights in general – why should anyone expect it to suddenly go against one of the fundamental tenets of the faith that is at the root of that hostility to human rights? After all, Saudi Arabia is also one of those nations seeking to use the UN to curtail freedom of speech internationally when it is used to speak negatively about Islam, seeking to move the world forward into the seventh-century Hijaz.

Posted by: Greg at 12:31 PM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.

If advocates of “reproductive choice” would argue against “a woman’s right to choose” when that choice involved having kids like the mother of the recently born octuplets.

Look at this from Ellen Goodman.

Does anyone have a right to tell anyone else how many kids to have? Can only people who can afford them bear children? Do you need a husband to have a baby? These are questions that make us feel queasy when we are talking about old-fashioned families. But they take on a new flavor in the unregulated wild west of fertility technology.

* * *

This is more than an individual decision. Suleman's babies weighed between 1 pound 8 ounces and 3 pounds 4 ounces. They will cost at least $1 million in neonatal care and more if they have the typical range of disabilities for premature babies. The meter is running at the neonatal unit.

“More than an individual decision”? What about the “my body, my choice” rhetoric of the feminist movement over the last four decade? Is Goodman really advocating that childbearing is not a decision best left between a woman and her doctor? Does she now advocate that some government bureaucrat be able to step in and determine who can have children through in vitro methods, and how many? And when she defines the decision by Nadya Suleman to have eight embryos implanted as “mal-mothering” because of her unwillingness to abort, does she not recognize the implicit slippery slope that leads to China’s one child policy with its regime of forced abortions (or its functional equivalent)? For that matter, does this advocate of nationalizing medicine not see that her complaints about the cost of saving these babies presages eventual government decisions to limit and deny care that is “too expensive”, even if it leads to the deaths of some to whom government has magnanimously given “free healthcare”?

Odd, isnÂ’t it, how a liberal like Goodman becomes shockingly illiberal when she does not approve of how some exercise the freedom which she advocates. And amazing, too, that she does not appear to see (or care about) the Big Brother-esque implications of her own arguments. More proof that within every well-intentioned liberal there is a moralistic dictator trying to claw his/her way out.

H/T Don Surber

Posted by: Greg at 12:28 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 386 words, total size 3 kb.

Once again, a rich liberal insists that the government should force him to pay more taxes.

IÂ’m the chief executive of a publicly traded company and, like my peers, IÂ’m very highly paid. The difference between salaries like mine and those of average Americans creates a lot of tension, and IÂ’d like to offer a suggestion. President Obama should celebrate our success, rather than trying to shame us or cap our pay. But he should also take half of our huge earnings in taxes, instead of the current one-third.

Then, the next time a chief executive earns an eye-popping amount of money, we can cheer that half of it is going to pay for our soldiers, schools and security. Higher taxes on huge pay days can finance opportunity for the next generation of Americans.

Of course, there is a flaw in Reed HastingsÂ’ logic. As we well know, increased taxes lower the amount of revenue received. Also, experience shows us that changing the way in which such compensation packages are taxed simply results in changes in how that compensation is received to legally avoid the taxes.

But if Hastings really feels that he isnÂ’t paying enough, there is an option available to him. Since 1843 there has been a fund established under the US Treasury department for individuals to patriotically give more to the US government. All Hastings really needs to do is write a check for the money he believes he is undertaxed, payable to the United States Treasury, and mail it to the following address:

In effect, Hastings will be raising his own taxes. That way he can celebrate his success by paying what he believes he owes this country – without, of course, imposing his own sense of guilt and/or moral superiority on the rest of America.

Anyone want to speculate upon the odds of his actually writing that check?

Posted by: Greg at 12:26 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 344 words, total size 2 kb.

Otherwise the world as we know it will come to an end!

President Barack Obama says the time for talk on an economic recovery package is over and "the time for action is now."

Speaking at the Energy Department, Obama made a fresh plea for the stimulus plan that the Senate is debating. He cited the latest bad economic news of jobless claims as another reason for quick action.

He said: "The time for talk is over, the time for action is now."

Republicans and some Democrats have expressed reservations about the growing price tag of the package—more than $900 billion. Senate Democratic leaders hope to have a bill completed by Friday.

Earlier today, Obama warned that failure to pass an economic recovery package could plunge the nation into an even longer, perhaps irreversible recession, as senators searched for compromises to whittle down the enormous bill.

Of course, it could be that the real reason is that Congress and the American people might become more aware of this information from the no-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

In other words, the “stimulus” plan is a long-term drag on the economy. But that doesn’t matter to Obama, Pelosi and Reid – they have left-wing constituencies that need rewarding right now!

Posted by: Greg at 12:16 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 304 words, total size 2 kb.

Folks in Kentucky have been freezing and dying for a week since ice storms devastated the state, but Barack Obama only got around to making a disaster declaration on February 5.

President Barack Obama on Thursday issued a major disaster declaration for Kentucky in the wake of a deadly ice storm, ordering federal aid to supplement local recovery efforts.

Gov. Steve Beshear sought the major disaster status earlier this week. The storm has been blamed for 27 Kentucky deaths.

My guess is that Barry Hussein was too busy scarfing down the leftover waygu beef from his Super Bowl shindig do be bothered to act on behalf of those impacted by the storm. After all – Kentucky voted Republican, and the media hasn’t bothered giving the human suffering there much coverage, so there was no political up side to immediate action.

More at Gay Patriot.

Posted by: Greg at 12:15 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 160 words, total size 1 kb.

I remember how hard it was sometimes to meet others with common interests back in my single days. The internet, though, makes it easier, given the ability to find chat sites. For example, those interested in interracial relationships can find those with similar interests in the Interracial Chat Rooms at InterracialChatCity.com. Is the person you want to meet there, waiting for you?

Posted by: Greg at 12:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 68 words, total size 1 kb.

After all, it is only the publicÂ’s money, so why should government officials actually disclose how they are planning on spending it?

"Yes, we do, we have our list, we've been talking to people. We did not put that out publicly because once you start putting it out publicly, you know, the newspapers, the media is going to be ripping it apart," Daley said.

"It's very controversial. Yes, we have ready projects from the Board of Education to the City Colleges to the Park District to the CTA and the city of Chicago. Oh yes. Us and New York decided not to do that. We thought we could go directly into the federal bureaucracies and the different departments," the mayor added.

Besides, with all Daley’s dirtbag cronies in the current administration (up to and including the one in the Oval Office), he probably figure he can go back to operating like his father did – with no accountability whatsoever. Transparency in government be damned.

Posted by: Greg at 12:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 186 words, total size 1 kb.

Let's be honest -- recessionary times suck. We've all seen the problems being faced by the world around us -- lost jobs, weakening currencies, low consumer spending. And it is quite true that in such times what is bad for business is bad for the country.

But if you have a business you want to keep afloat in these lean economic times, you have to persevere even though the times are especially tough. In this weakening economy, it apepars that everyone is struggling financially. Many folks, for better or for worse, are therefore making use of credit cards to tide themselves over through the bad times -- but that means that business owners must therefore be able to accept those credit cards in order to keep their businesses going. That means, of course, that you have to put out a little money in order to make more, since there are certainly costs involved in setting yourself up to take those payments.

In such situation, you might even find yourself taking out a Business Loan in order to continue to be able to invest in your business through the hard times. But where do you get yourself a business lifeline? Consider, if you will, OnlineCheck.com and their fast business loans. It could be the difference between sinking and swimming for your business.

Posted by: Greg at 12:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 1 kb.

You know, wait for the kid to be born alive and then leave it to die. What in a more civilized time was called INFANTICIDE.

Eighteen and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion clinic outside Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to terminate her 23-week pregnancy.

Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure.

Only Renelique didn't arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby girl.

* * *

One of the clinic's owners, who has no medical license, cut the infant's umbilical cord. Williams says the woman placed the baby in a plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.

Police recovered the decomposing remains in a cardboard box a week later after getting anonymous tips.

Remember, Barack Obama voted against making this illegal back when he was in the Illinois Legislature. He firmly believed then, and believes now, that a woman who pays for a dead baby is entitled to a dead baby, even if the “product of conception” is so inconsiderate as to survive the attempt to exterminate it in the womb.

Now there are several issues here that need consideration.

1) If this incident took place in 2006, why have no charges been brought for 2 ½ years?

2) Why havenÂ’t Florida authorities shut this abortuary down, instead of just yanking the abortionist's medical license?

3) Isn’t this just one more indication that only the lowest quality “medical professionals” are involved in the abortion industry?

4) Is anyone troubled by the fact that Ms. Williams has filed suit against the clinic that killed her baby after she had already paid them to kill the child?

Barry Hussein holds a primetime press conference on Monday night. Will any of his fan club the reporters have the courage to ask him about this incident and his prior actions in opposing the punishment of those who leave babies to die so as to prevent women from being “punished with a baby”?

Posted by: Greg at 12:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 364 words, total size 3 kb.

Well, we've not had much to celebrate around here since Hurricane Ike, but i suspect that will be changing in the next month or so. We are going to be getting back into the house sometime relatively soon, and you can bet there will be a celebration to go with that big event. But my wife and I have already been looking forward to having more folks in once we have settled in. I'm already pretty sure that we will be holding a big Pre-Season Pigskin Party in August. After all, we are Texans fans -- so we will round up all sorts of football-themed decor from Celebrations.com. They are a great source for theme party ideas and all the related party goods. We'll make it an indoor/outdoor tailgate party for ourselves and a few friends during the first away game of the pre-season.

Then there will be the holiday parties -- and there are also great planning tips at Celebrations.com. Check them out!

Posted by: Greg at 12:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.

I don’t know about you, but I find it intriguing that an Islamic group would host an event on “peace” featuring a pair of unrepentant terrorists.

Bill Ayers spent his brief 20 minutes in front of attendees at Cahn Auditorium charging the audience of students to "do something."

"If you ask, you might learn, and if you learn, you might have to," Ayers said during Muslim-cultural Students Association's highly anticipated event nearly three months in the making.

Although the former Weather Underground leader was not encouraging the 350 in attendance to take to the sort of violence he engaged in during the 1960s, he repeatedly challenged them to question the conventional wisdom.

The event, entitled "Peaceful Progress: A Discourse on Effecting Change,"

What qualifications does Ayers have to speak on “Peaceful Progress”? He and his fellow Weatehrmen were terrorists. That includes his wife, Bernardine Dohrn. They are therefore uniquely UNQUALIFIED to on the subject.

And why would members of the “religion of peace” choose terrorists to speak on that topic? What does it tell us about their faith?

Posted by: Greg at 01:56 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 182 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, down here in Houston we are in the run-up to that grand celebration of cowboys, cowgirls, and livestock known as the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo. This year I'm looking forward to wearing one of the things I survived from Hurricane Ike last fall -- a brand new pair of Justin boots that I had just gotten a few days before the arrival of the storm. Of course, there was only one place in Houston to gt them -- Cavender's Boot City, which I've always found to be the top outfitter of western clothes and accessories from companies like Ariat, Lucchese, Justin, and Wrangler. In fact, I expect to be making a trip their direction in the next couple of weeks, shopping for the final item of rodeo wear -- a cowboy hat. What do you folks think -- black, white, gray or silver? And who knows, we might just get my darling wife a pair of ladies' cowboy boots to match mine as well. Best of all, they have a great web presence as well, for all you folks not blessed to be here in Texas.

Posted by: Greg at 01:50 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.

He performed horrendous medical experiments upon Jews and other prisoners as a concentration camp doctor, so why is it no surprise that he found some sort of comfort in a faith that despises Jews in his later years.

One of the most wanted Nazi war criminals, Aribert Heim or "Doctor Death," lived for years as a quiet, pious Muslim in a small hotel on the edge of Islamic Cairo, where he was known as Doctor Tarek.

Concealed in the labyrinthine streets of the largest city in Africa and the Middle East, the man wanted for killing hundreds of concentration camp victims with horrific medical experiments found refuge until his death in 1992.

"He was like a giant, not very chatty but he never missed a prayer at the mosque," remembers Gamal Abu Ahmed, who today lives in Dr Death's former room on the sixth floor of the Qasr el-Medina hotel.

May he and his ilk burn in Hell for all eternity.

Posted by: Greg at 01:42 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.