Houston's own wonder of the world will be getting a new life in the not too distant future.

Commissioners Court unanimously gave the go-ahead to a private firm's plan to spend $450 million reinventing the mostly dormant, county-owned Astrodome as a convention hotel.

The hotel is planned as a four-star facility with at least 1,000 rooms, a 2,100-space garage around two-thirds of the Dome's exterior, and restaurants, nightclubs and retail stores.

The entrepreneurs behind the project envision the facility as a destination attraction, with winding waterways and gondola rides.

With its vote, the court gave the Harris County Sports & Convention Corp. permission to sign a letter of intent with Astrodome Redevelopment Corp. No public money will be put into the project.

The letter of intent states that by March 2007, Astrodome Redevelopment must obtain financing and the approval of Reliant Park's tenants, the Houston Texans and the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo.

Hotel construction would begin late next year at the earliest.

The county would lease the Dome to Astrodome Redevelopment for 50 years and give it an option to extend the lease another 20 years.

Astrodome Redevelopment would pay the county $2.5 million in rent annually and 2 percent to 3 percent of gross revenues.

Unfortunately, the approval forbids the operation of a casino in the dome -- and also bans sexually oriented busineses (I guess to avoid unfair competition with the adult bookstore across Loop 610 and all the local stripper bars).

But that also means that the world's largest emergency shelter will be out of commission.

As the county moved a step closer Tuesday to redevelopment of the Astrodome as a convention hotel, officials said it no longer will figure in emergency shelter plans as it did when thousands of hurricane evacuees arrived last year.

During future emergencies, other facilities, including the George R. Brown Convention Center and Reliant Center, will be the region's primary shelters, Harris County Judge Robert Eckels said.

Posted by: Greg at 10:30 PM | Comments (29) | Add Comment
Post contains 332 words, total size 2 kb.

Seems to me like we will see fewer car chases on television -- but will have more fleeing traffic violators due to this new policy change.

A new policy rolled out late Tuesday by the Houston Police Department will prohibit officers from chasing minor traffic offenders who refuse to stop.

The new policy- read at roll call Tuesday night-was signed into immediate effect by Houston police Chief Harold Hurtt.

* * *

Houston Police Officers' Association President Hans Marticiuc said the new policy will make officers less effective on the streets.

``Personally, I think it is an asinine policy at this point in the city's history,'' Marticiuc said. ``First of all, we've already got crime going up, and now let's tie the officers' hands a little bit more.

``This is a clear message to the criminal element (to) 'go ahead and run from the police,''' Marticiuc said.

Several HPD officers said late Tuesday that they were not happy with the change in policy. But they declined to comment on the record about why traffic offenders might not stop for police officers.

Marticiuc said that people run from police officers for several reasons.

``Sometimes, they run out of fear. Sometimes, it's other outstanding warrants for minor offenses,'' Marticiuc said. ``And sometimes, they run because they have committed a more serious crime. Why give those people the right to take off from us?``

So if you want to avoid that ticket, fine, and the consequences of your misdeed, just put the pedal to the metal and leave HPD in the dust -- you get a freebie.

But don't bother shooting a bird at the cops as you go -- Chief Hurtt has done that for you.

Posted by: Greg at 10:24 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 304 words, total size 2 kb.

For shame, Senator Clinton!

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is holding up renewal of the primary federal law that battles HIV/AIDS, the 1990 Ryan White Act, causing a rift among activists on the subject and threatening approval of the legislation this year.

Clinton (D-N.Y.) said she opposes the measure because it would lower funding for her home state. But some AIDS groups also see broader political motives at work. Other states that would lose out include California, Florida and Illinois -- all places Clinton would need to win if she seeks the presidency. Her critics also note that many of the states that would receive higher funding under the new formula are rural and Southern, which tend to vote Republican.

Clinton was the sole vote against the Ryan White Act reauthorization bill that passed the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions in May. Ever since, she and other senators have been negotiating to find a consensus that would allow the measure to pass by acclamation before Congress's scheduled adjournment at the end of September. But a compromise has not been found.

"With a bipartisan bill like this, and with time limited, we want to have something that would go through without objection," said Michael Mahaffey, spokesman for the health committee. But, he added, Clinton "objects to the bill in the form passed out of committee."

Observers note that her objection is to a new funding formula which will give more funding to Southern and rural states, areas where AIDS is increasing at a faster rate than in other parts of the country. Interestingly enough, she is seeking to preserve extra funding for states that she needs to win the Democrat nomination and the presidency in 2008.

Even AIDS activists are critical.

Asked why Clinton might countenance lower funding for Southern and rural states, Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the nation's largest community-based HIV/AIDS medical provider, said, "I don't think she expects to carry the South."

Looks like Lady MacClinton is prepared to have the blood of AIDS patients on her hands if that's what it takes to win the White House.

Posted by: Greg at 10:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 365 words, total size 2 kb.

It appears we have an unintentional leak of the name of the new crew exploration vehicle which will take us back to the moon and blaze the trail to Mars – Orion.

The name of the new vehicle that NASA hopes will take astronauts back to the moon was supposed to be hush-hush until next week.

But apparently U.S. astronaut Jeff Williams, floating 220 miles above Earth at the international space station, didn't get the memo.

Williams let it slip Tuesday that the new vehicle's name is Orion.

"We've been calling it the crew exploration vehicle for several years, but today it has a name Orion," Williams said, taping a message in advance for the space agency that was transmitted accidentally over space-to-ground radio.

NASA planned to reveal the new name Aug. 31, when the space agency also announces which contractor will build the vehicle. Competing for the award are Lockheed Martin and a team made up of Northrop Grumman and Boeing.

The crew exploration vehicle will replace the space shuttle program after it ends in 2010. Earlier this summer, NASA announced the names of the rockets that will propel the crew exploration vehicle and a cargo vehicle, respectively Ares I and Ares V.

Nine days until we know more about the next generation of space vehicle.

Posted by: Greg at 12:15 PM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 1 kb.

Just as they acted to limit voter choices here in CD22, now the Democrats are trying to prevent the people of Connecticut from voting for the candidate of their choice.

Critics of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman's independent run to keep his job attacked on two fronts Monday, with one group asking an elections official to throw him out of the Democratic Party and a former rival calling on state officials to keep his name off the November ballot.

Staffers for the senator from Connecticut, who lost the Aug. 8 Democratic primary to Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, called both efforts dirty politics. The senator filed as an independent candidate a day after the loss, running under the new Connecticut for Lieberman Party.

A group whose members describe themselves as peace activists asked Sharon Ferrucci, Democratic registrar of voters in New Haven, to remove Lieberman from the party, arguing that he cannot be a Democrat while running under another party's banner.

* * *

John Orman, a Democrat who gave up a challenge to Lieberman last year, argued in complaints filed with the state Monday that the senator should be kept off the Nov. 7 ballot.

Orman, a Fairfield University professor of political science, accused Lieberman of creating "a fake political party" and added: "He's doing anything he can to get his name on the ballot."

In other words, anything to keep the people from having a choice – law or no law to the contrary. I guess voters are only disenfranchised if the result goes against the DNC-favored candidate.

Posted by: Greg at 12:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

I’m a teacher, and I teach a course that includes a component on the Constitution. We talk about the Bill of Rights extensively, including freedom of speech. I often try something outrageous to provoke my students into thinking. But there are limits – and I believe this teacher crossed the line.

A Stuart Middle School teacher has been removed from the classroom after he burned two American flags in class during a lesson on freedom of speech, Jefferson County Public Schools officials said.
Dan Holden, who teaches seventh-grade social studies, burned small flags in two different classes Friday and asked students to write an opinion paper about it, district spokeswoman Lauren Roberts said.

Let’s look at the purpose of the assignment. The goal was to offer a provocative example of free speech to discuss the extent and the limits of the First Amendment. That is perfectly appropriate. The associated assignment is also perfectly appropriate.

But burning a flag – or anything else – in a classroom without proper precautions is reckless because of the possibility of fire. And engaging in such an inflammatory action risks causing a fire of a different sort, one which causes the point of the lesson to be lost.

And that is what happened.

Pat Summers, whose daughter was in Holden's class, said more than 20 parents showed up at the school Monday, upset over the incident.

I don’t blame them. This is the sort of lesson that you prepare for by contacting the parents in advance in order to have them aware for what you are going to do. Maybe the parents won’t buy-in to your lesson plan, but they will at least be aware of what is happening in the classroom. You also need to have administration support for such a lesson. It appears that olden failed to do either of these things. And one must ask whether a certain course of action will serve the intended purpose and reach the appropriate educational goal.

And that is where I feel that Holden failed. He chose an action which offends most Americans as an instructional tool in a middle school classroom. The kids are not (quite) old enough to deal with the issue in the way he wanted them to. And the parents are rightly offended that an action of this sort took place in their children’s classroom without their being made ready to deal with the fallout.

So what we have here is a critical-thinking assignment that went awry because a teacher failed to think through the implications of his lesson plan. This does not appear to have been an attempt to inspire anti-Americanism. I do not believe that disrespect was intended. And I do no believe that Holden should be fired – just cautioned to use better judgment – and not to play with fire in the future.

And as for the flag-burning issue itself, I’ve long stated my opposition to amending the Constitution to deal with that action. If it is your flag, feel free to burn it, trample it, or wipe your butt with it. But if you are a teacher, I would urge you to keep such actions out of the classroom.

Posted by: Greg at 12:06 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 539 words, total size 3 kb.

I’m a teacher, and I teach a course that includes a component on the Constitution. We talk about the Bill of Rights extensively, including freedom of speech. I often try something outrageous to provoke my students into thinking. But there are limits – and I believe this teacher crossed the line.

A Stuart Middle School teacher has been removed from the classroom after he burned two American flags in class during a lesson on freedom of speech, Jefferson County Public Schools officials said.
Dan Holden, who teaches seventh-grade social studies, burned small flags in two different classes Friday and asked students to write an opinion paper about it, district spokeswoman Lauren Roberts said.

LetÂ’s look at the purpose of the assignment. The goal was to offer a provocative example of free speech to discuss the extent and the limits of the First Amendment. That is perfectly appropriate. The associated assignment is also perfectly appropriate.

But burning a flag – or anything else – in a classroom without proper precautions is reckless because of the possibility of fire. And engaging in such an inflammatory action risks causing a fire of a different sort, one which causes the point of the lesson to be lost.

And that is what happened.

Pat Summers, whose daughter was in Holden's class, said more than 20 parents showed up at the school Monday, upset over the incident.

I donÂ’t blame them. This is the sort of lesson that you prepare for by contacting the parents in advance in order to have them aware for what you are going to do. Maybe the parents wonÂ’t buy-in to your lesson plan, but they will at least be aware of what is happening in the classroom. You also need to have administration support for such a lesson. It appears that olden failed to do either of these things. And one must ask whether a certain course of action will serve the intended purpose and reach the appropriate educational goal.

And that is where I feel that Holden failed. He chose an action which offends most Americans as an instructional tool in a middle school classroom. The kids are not (quite) old enough to deal with the issue in the way he wanted them to. And the parents are rightly offended that an action of this sort took place in their childrenÂ’s classroom without their being made ready to deal with the fallout.

So what we have here is a critical-thinking assignment that went awry because a teacher failed to think through the implications of his lesson plan. This does not appear to have been an attempt to inspire anti-Americanism. I do not believe that disrespect was intended. And I do no believe that Holden should be fired – just cautioned to use better judgment – and not to play with fire in the future.

And as for the flag-burning issue itself, IÂ’ve long stated my opposition to amending the Constitution to deal with that action. If it is your flag, feel free to burn it, trample it, or wipe your butt with it. But if you are a teacher, I would urge you to keep such actions out of the classroom.

Posted by: Greg at 12:06 PM | Comments (31) | Add Comment
Post contains 546 words, total size 4 kb.

Ultimately, Steve McCarthy is guilty of arguing his position based upon the same basis that he declares illegitimate when it is used by his opponents -- theology.

I see marriage as a civil right, and no group's religious beliefs should be allowed to deny the rights of others. And because blacks have suffered from bigotry and injustice that were cloaked by religion and morality, we should avoid doing the same thing to others.

In other words, policy positions based upon religious belief are anathema -- unless they are policy positions that Mr. McCarthy supports. And this is an argument we hear again and again from the allegedly-religious Left, which declares their liberal position infalible based upon their own religious beliefs, while declaring heretical any divergent views.

Posted by: Greg at 10:17 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 140 words, total size 1 kb.

I don't do that very often, but this time I need to. After all, Dionne puts forward a thesis that explains why liberalism became the effete, elite, irrelevancy that it is today.

And it all traces back to an idea propounded by Richard Hofstadter.

But reading Brown is also a reminder of where Hofstadter may have misled the very liberal movement to which he was devoted. There was, first, his emphasis on American populists as embodying a "deeply ingrained provincialism" (Brown's term) whose revolt was as much a reaction to the rise of the cosmopolitan big city as to economic injustices.

Many progressives and reformers, he argued, represented an old Anglo-Saxon middle class who suffered from "status anxiety" in reaction to the rise of a vulgar new business elite. Hofstadter analyzed the right wing of the 1950s and early 1960s in similar terms. Psychological disorientation and social displacement became more important than ideas or interests.

Now, Hofstadter was exciting precisely because he brilliantly revised accepted and sometimes pious views of what the populists and progressives were about. But there was something dismissive about Hofstadter's analysis that blinded liberals to the legitimate grievances of the populists, the progressives and, yes, the right wing.

The late Christopher Lasch, one of Hofstadter's students and an admiring critic, noted that by conducting "political criticism in psychiatric categories," Hofstadter and his intellectual allies excused themselves "from the difficult work of judgment and argumentation."

Lasch added archly: "Instead of arguing with opponents, they simply dismissed them on psychiatric grounds."

But that is still precisely the problem today.

Disagree with a liberal on race? One is a racist, afflicted with a deep psychological disease that renders one's opinions irrelevant. And we won't even get into the Stalinist diagnosis of "homophobia" that gets trotted out when someone dares to question the concept of homosexual marriage or the morality of homosexual activity.And rather than deal with the policies they oppose, liberals went after Reagan and the current President Bush based upon questions of intelligence and supposed psychological defests.

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

Oh happy day! David Wallace is OUT of the CD22 race, leaving the field clear for a single GOP-backed write-in candidate, Dr. Shelley Sekula-Gibbs.

Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace withdrew Monday as a Republican write-in candidate for the seat vacated by the resignation of former House Majority leader Tom DeLay.

His action left the Texas GOP united behind one write-in candidate, Houston City Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, who had won the party's endorsement last week.

Wallace had previously indicated he would stay in the race despite the party's snub.

"What I am choosing to do at this time is unite with the Republican Party behind one candidate," Wallace said at a news conference. "There is no way that two write-in candidates could win. It would be very difficult and divisive to the Republican Party."

Wallace said the party did not pressure him to withdraw.

I don't know about that last statement -- a lot of the grasroots activists (including me) have been putting pressure on him to get out of the race. I don't doubt that Wallace heard from some elected officials telling him to get out of the race if he wants to have any sort of future in the GOP.

And it does come down to a question of campaign finance.

The national GOP says it's willing to commit $3 million for the race, but only if there was one Republican write-in candidate.

Actually, I've heard a figure of $4 million -- but only in the event there was a single viable GOP with the backing of the party. Continuing to stay in the race would have resulted in the national party writing off CD22 -- and left David Wallace holding the bag for the loss of the seat. The other GOP write-in, Don Richardson, is a non-entity who promised to drop out last week. I can only presume that he is a man of his word.

That is not to say that Wallace exited the race with either class or grace -- that is not in his nature.

Wallace took a swipe at that process Monday. “In a session closed to the public, an alternative candidate received the endorsement of the Texas Republican Party by winning a straw poll of 83 precinct chairs that were allowed to vote for what was labeled ‘the Republican choice’ for the write-in candidate to replace Tom DeLay,” he said.

Since that night, “I have received hundreds and hundreds of emails and phone calls” by “people who were not allowed to vote” at the Thursday meeting, and who “strongly encouraged me to continue to run,” Wallace said.

“Without exception, these callers and supporters questioned this made-up process and asked why 83 individuals could determine the ‘Republican choice’ candidate for over 33,000 Republican primary voters across the district,” he said. “Rather than unifying our party, it has only caused further fragmentation.”

In other words, Wallace claims that any process that involved the selection of a candidate by the elected grass-roots leaders of the GOP in CD22 is illegitimate unless it were to result in his selection as the candidate. Too the very last, he is seeking to sow division.

Democrats, of course, are now trying to create a scandal since they have a strong conservative woman from CD22 running against their liberal carpetbagger candidate. Seems obvious that there is a reason that Democrat and Desperation both start with a D!

Posted by: Greg at 12:03 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 584 words, total size 4 kb.

The first day of school is always interesting -- especially when you are a first year teacher. Philip Rucker catches some of th anxiety of the new teacher in this article in the Washington Post.

Munachiso Onuoha anxiously awaited her first day of fifth grade in Prince George's County yesterday afternoon.

"I am so nervous, just thinking of all the things that could not go right," she said. "I've been sleeping well. Tonight might be another story, though."

And trust me, there is always something "that could not go right" that you will not think of. Be prepared to role with it, whetehr it is being challenged by a kid over discipline matters or having a girl go into labor in your class (it actually happened to me on my first day at my current school). And yes, you can pretty well guarantee that your principal or department chair will walk in on something or other that does not constitute your finest moment.

But really, don't worry, even if they have this expectation of you.

Glenn Dale Principal Lia Thompson predicted that the two would energize returning faculty.

"They bring excitement and energy -- their enthusiasm, their love for the profession they've chosen, their eagerness to do the best that they can for the students they're working with," Thompson said.

Hopefully your colleagues still have that same drive -- even those of us who are a little bit cynical. I can guarantee you that we will do evrything we can for you new teachers, because we still remember that trrifying first day and agonizing first year -- the year when we went home utterly drained each day. We want you to make it, and we want you to stay.

And rest assured that the principal hasn't forgotten what it was like his or her first year -- and will probably be willing to concede, if pushed, that you are not making any more of a hash of it than they did during that first year.

Good luck, rookies!

Posted by: Greg at 10:12 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 348 words, total size 2 kb.

1 waffle, ehbldxbt, > , kjptufgz, 2536, oqdwenzh, %DDD,

Posted by: Mvohdsdv at Wed Oct 7 14:49:33 2009 (glRo5)

2 Fu-gee-la, ocleqpyx, %[[[, lvyjqcvz, >:O, subirhak, fqwoj,

Posted by: Akbchnah at Mon Oct 12 17:56:22 2009 (ianfZ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Book Meme from Anna Venger.

And just for the record, I will not use the Bible as an answer because, for me, it would feel like trivializing Scripture.

1. One book that changed your life: I'd have to say the first one, whatever that was, back when I was 50 years old. I've not been far from a book since then -- but if I have to select a particular title, it would be The Brethren by Woodward and Armstrong, because it awakened in me a scholarly interest in law and the Constitution that lay dormant just beneath the surface back during my junior year of high school.

2. One book that you've read more than once: Gee, that could cover a lot of territory -- but let's go with something a little off-beat. When I was a high school junior, I bought a paperback during my lunch break one Saturday while working at the base PX. It was L. Neil Smith's The Probability Broach, and I have probably read it at least once every other year since then -- and I still have the original copy I bought in 1979. It awakened me to libertarian political philosophy in a way that my earlier encounters with Heinlein had not, and also opened up the world of alternate history science fiction to me.

3. One book youÂ’d want on a desert island: Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, another favorite that I first encountered as a high school junior (curious, isn't it, that my first three selections would all come from one very specific formative year -- what do you make of that?). If I had a chance to toss a few more books in the lifeboat, I'd want Forester's Hornblower Saga and O'Brian's Aubrey/Maturin novels.

4. One book that made you laugh: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Don't panic! And, uh, it seems to be another one I read at age 16!

5. One book that made you cry: The Robe -- it is every bit as melodramatic as the epic movie based upon it. When I was 12, my mom and I found her copy (given to her as a gift for her First Communion) in a trunk. I still have it tucked away safely, three decades later.

6. One book that you wish had been written: Well, maybe I should say the one book I wish the author had finished writing. That would be 21: The Final Unfinished Voyage of Jack Aubrey by Patrick O'Brian. The author passed away while working on this, the 21st volume of his epic series of the British Navy in the Age of Nelson. The published version is raw, incomplete, and much of it consists of the author's semi-legible scrawl. There is enough there to make any fan wish that the old man had lived to complete it.

7. One book that you wish had never been written: The Deputy, by Rolf Hochhuth. This blood libel against Pope Pius XII ignores teh historical record and the assessments of his contemporaries (including no less than Golda Meir) to falsely accuse the pontiff of complicity in the Holocaust. Similarly, I would add The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the most pernicious work of anti-Semitism ever published.

8. One book youÂ’re currently reading: Gee, I've read a great deal in the four weeks since this post. I've read all three books in Naomi Novick's Temeraire series, Sarah Vowell's Assassination Vacation, and am currently working on Harry Turtledove's latest "Settling Account's novel, The Grapple.

9. One book youÂ’ve been meaning to read: You may be surprised by this, given my tagline above. I've repeatedly promised myself that I would read David McCullough's biography of John Adams, but have never gotten around to it.

10. Tag five others. This is hard, given that I wanted to tag Dan from Gone Mild, only to find that he has this same meme up. So I'll start with three fellow teachers -- Hube from Colossus of Rhodey, Darren from Right on the Left Coast and EdWonk from The Education Wonks. Then I'll tap my felow CD22 political blogger, Chris from Texas Safety Forum, because despite to all the jokes we make about them, Aggies do know how to read. And to give the list an international flavor, I'll add an Israeli friend, Avi from Tel-Chai Nation. Don't let me down, boys!

Posted by: Greg at 05:28 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 741 words, total size 6 kb.

The winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are A Questionable Assumption by ShrinkWrapped, and Muslim Musings on British Muslims by Eteraz. 

Here is where you can find the full results of the vote.

Posted by: Greg at 04:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.

Word is that she will be picking up the endorsement of Tim Turner, former SREC member and former opponent for the CD22 nomination, sometime tomorrow. I'll post more when I know more.

UPDATE: As usual, the Ron Burgundy of Fort Bend County, Chris Elam, gets the story first and posts the press release.

Tim Turner, Republican activist and finalist among the candidates seeking to represent the Republican Party in the Congressional District 22 position, today announced that he is supporting Shelley Sekula-Gibbs as the Republican candidate in an effort to encourage unity from all Republicans and to preserve the district as a Republican stronghold.

Turner, who finished second to Sekula-Gibbs in the final selection by party leadership in a district wide meeting of precinct chairs last week, said he was honored to have received a significant number of votes in that proceeding but, once the party choice had been made, especially under the unique circumstances surrounding this election, all differences and personal agendas need to be set aside in the interest of unifying Republican efforts.

Turner says, “As someone who has been a Republican activist and a team player for over 26 years, I have supported many solid conservatives and have no problem in supporting the candidate chosen by the Republican leadership in District 22. I would enjoy the opportunity to serve the voters in the future if the opportunity to run presents itself, but the race for CD 22 is a race we must work together to win. I would hope that all Republicans will realize how important it is to put differences and agendas aside for a common good in this situation.”

We are now waiting on Mayor Dave's Big Announcement.

Posted by: Greg at 02:27 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 293 words, total size 2 kb.

Is it to be "Never Again"?

Or "Here We Go Again"?

Put differently, are Jewish lives less valuable than Arab lives?

Rabbi Jonathan Pearl looks at the issue, and does not like what he sees.

As we witnessed the incessant calls and declarations for “an immediate cease-fire" from Israel's detractors – whether politicians, journalists, religious and community leaders, or the United Nations with its resolution mandating a “cessation of hostilities” – I couldn't help but conclude that for all of these addressing the Middle East “conflict” boils down to this guiding principle: Jewish/Israeli lives are simply worth less than Muslim/Arab lives.

When missiles are blasted into Israel by Muslim/Arab terrorists living in their non-disputed Muslim/Arab territory, resulting in the murder of innocent Israelis/Jews, the world tells Israel to show restraint and refrain from retaliating with targeted responses against the origins of the rocket launches. Why? Because some Muslim/Arab civilians might inadvertently be killed.

And when Muslim/Arab suicide-bombing murderers steal into Israel and blow to smithereens innocent Jewish/Israeli civilians in pizza parlors and discotheques, Israel is admonished to show restraint and refrain from targeting the planners, facilitators, and future perpetrators of suicide-murder actions. Why? Because some Muslim/Arab civilians might inadvertently be killed.

Read the entire piece, for it shows pretty clearly that the international comunity clearly has not renounced the genocidal anti-Semitism that was pursued by the Third Reich. After all, if the jihadi terrorists stop shooting at and bombing Israel, Israel will have no need to respond with force in self-defense.

Posted by: Greg at 09:28 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 259 words, total size 2 kb.

Lock this terrorist-supporting homicide-bomber wannabe away forever. His threat in this speech makes him too dangerous to remain free to do harm to the innocent.

The audience at a Muslim rally today were told that dying for your beliefs was "just" and the "greatest act of martyrdom".

Dr Azzam Tamimi, a firebrand Islamic academic and self-styled Hamas sympathiser, claimed he is prepared to become a suicide bomber.

Religion of Peace my ass!

UPDATE: Get this litle tidbit.

Dr Tamimi, a prominent member of the Stop The War coalition, is married with three children and lives in Willesden, North West London. After coming to Britain from the Middle East more than 30 years ago, he and his family have become British citizens and live in a council block.

This friggin' savage wants to "Stop the War" -- and is willing to blow up innocents to do it. Not one member of the so-called "peace movement" has denounced this jihadi swine, which makes it quite clear that "Peace" equals "Surrender" in their eyes.

Like I said -- Religion of Peace my ass!

Posted by: Greg at 09:17 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 182 words, total size 1 kb.

Listen to this load of crap from the terrorist shill who ostensibly runs Lebanon.

Prime Minister Fuad Saniora, meanwhile, toured the devastated Hezbollah stronghold in south Beirut and decried the destruction by Israeli bombs as a "crime against humanity." Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a Shiite and Hezbollah backer, stood at the Sunni premier's side and said they spoke with one voice.

Of cours the Hezbollah-supporting Parliament Speaker stood beside Prime Minister Saniora -- someone had to operate the puppet strings. My only question is if Berri's lips moved as he put words in the mouth of the ventriloquist dummy who nominally heads the Lebanese government.

And I'll notie that we have yet to hear a single world leader condemn the intentional attacks carried out against Israel's civilian population as "crimes against humanity" -- but every single civilian casualty caused by israel qualifies as one. That is perhaps the clearest indictment of the UN and its leadership that I can think of -- that the victim of the attack is defined as a the aggressor for daring to act in self-defense against an organization that was supposed to have been disarmed years ago under the terms of UN Resolution 1559.

Posted by: Greg at 09:00 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 205 words, total size 1 kb.

The ever-alert Chris Elam of Texas Safety Forum has two items up that show why he's the man among local political bloggers.

First, Tom DeLay's main primary challenger, Tom Campbell, has issued a statement supporting Shelley Sekula-Gibbs in November.

Tom Campbell, who finished second in the Republican Congressional Primary in March, announced his endorsement today of Dr. Shelley Sekula-Gibbs as the Republican write-in candidate for the November general election. Campbell also called upon all other past and present District 22 candidates to join him in endorsing Dr. Sekula-Gibbs.

“This is no longer about personal goals. It is about principle,” Campbell said.

Speaking about Dr. Sekula-Gibbs’ selection, Campbell said, “Supporting Shelley is the right thing. Uniting behind a single candidate grounded in Republican values and principles will result in victory. She is worthy of our support and worthy to carry our Republican standard into this election. Even as a write-in, a conservative Sekula-Gibbs can beat liberal Nick Lampson in District 22.”

Campbell attended the meeting of Republican precinct leaders from Harris, Fort Bend, Brazoria and Galveston Counties on Thursday and observed the process. “These are the people that Republicans across the district elected to represent our party,” Campbell said. “These are good men and women working to find a way to unite the Republican Party at a time when unity is essential. They decided to select one candidate that would carry our party’s banner in the November election. Dr. Sekula-Gibbs emerged as the clear winner. The process was fair – everyone had an opportunity to speak.”

About Tom DeLay's role in the meeting, Campbell added, "The Tom DeLay era is over. Dr. Sekula-Gibbs was not hand picked by our former congressman. She was the clear choice of representatives from all four counties in District 22. The cloud of scandal no longer hangs over this race. Now the election can be about the important issues facing our country. I challenge Nick Lampson to stop the muckraking - stop the litigation and let the people decide.”

Tom Campbell made an attempt to get the nomination before the Democrats stopped the process, but got very little traction among the GOP precinct chairs. He is prohibitted by law from running as a write-in candidate. He did, however, get an invite to attend our meeting last week as an observer, and so his statement in the final paragraph that Shelley Sekula-Gibbs is not Tom Delay's Hand-picked successor ought to carry weight with anyone who cares about the truth.

And to add one observation, Campbell's statement proves what i have always believed about him -- he is a good and decent man whose actions wee based upon what he believed was best for CD22. He was simply over his head in a race that no opponent of the incumbent could have won.

And it appears that David Wallace may be making a move of some significance on Monday.

Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace is speaking for the first time since finding out his party won't support him. Wallace wants to be a write-in candidate to replace Republican Tom DeLay in Congress.

The first person to file as a Republican write-in candidate, Mayor Wallace had not commented publicly ever since Republican precinct chairs chose someone else to throw their support behind. But now, he's opening up to Eyewitness News about the unusual selection process and his future plans.

While it's no secret that Wallace wants the job DeLay left behind, it's also quite obvious that on Thursday, Republican precinct chairs picked someone else -- Houston Councilmember Shelly Sekula-Gibbs to support. And Wallace admits he's not a fan of the closed door selection process.

"We've got a large voter base in Congressional District 22 and having the voice of 83 individuals coming together, is that representative of the entire district?" he asked.

* * *

Mayor Wallace says he'll be announcing his decision on whether to stay in the race on Monday. And a lot of people will be waiting for an answer.

"With all of the different changes that took place this week, obviously I am doing a lot of soul searching, meeting with a number of representatives to talk about the next step and that'll be announced on Monday," he said.

My guess is that he is OUT -- and if he isn't, I point back to my earlier comment on his candidacy.

Posted by: Greg at 06:05 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 730 words, total size 5 kb.

Since the terms of the cease-fire agreement have not been fulfilled by Hezbollah, Lebanon, the UN, or any of the other parties involved, why should Israel not take steps to protect its own security?

Helicopter-borne Israeli commandos raided a Hezbollah stronghold in the Bekaa Valley early Saturday, setting off a fierce gun battle. Lebanon called the attack a "flagrant violation" of a fragile six-day-old cease-fire and threatened to halt troop deployments in protest.

Hezbollah, which battled the Israeli military for 33 days until the truce took hold Monday, said its fighters encountered the Israeli commandos in a field near the town of Boudai, about 20 miles from the Syrian border.

The Israeli military, confirming the raid, said its commandos carried out the operation to interdict shipments of weapons and munitions to Hezbollah from Syria and Iran. The military said one Israeli officer was killed and two soldiers were wounded, one seriously.

Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora told reporters in Beirut that the attack was a "flagrant violation" of the U.N. cease-fire and that he planned to lodge a complaint with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan.

Later Saturday, Annan said that he agreed the raid violated the cease-fire agreement and that he was "deeply concerned."

Hezbollah issued no immediate reaction. But many Lebanese worried that the militant Shiite Muslim movement would retaliate, risking a chain of cease-fire violations that could rekindle the devastating war that drove nearly a fourth of Lebanon's inhabitants from their homes and inflicted an estimated $3.6 billion in damage to bridges, roads and other infrastructure.

In accepting the cease-fire, the Hezbollah leader, Hasan Nasrallah, warned that his militia reserved the right to attack Israelis as long as they remain on Lebanese soil. At the same time, the Israeli military declared that it reserved the right to respond to attacks and prevent weapons shipments to Hezbollah guerrillas in the southern border hills until an international force was in place.

Hezbollah has not been disarmed -- and was being resupplied. The Lebanese government has continued to allow Hezbollah to operate in violation of multiple UN resolutions to the contrary. The UN has acted like the UN -- justifying Arab terror agains thte Israelis. France has shown its usual cowardice.

In short, screw the cease-fire -- Israel should declare its provisions to be a joke and resume its planned destruction of Hezbollah. Let the attacks continue

Posted by: Greg at 04:27 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 402 words, total size 3 kb.

Some on the Left call it a "backdoor draft" -- but it isn't. Then again, their mischaracterization of the truth is one more demonstration that the Left cannot be trusted with the security of our nation.

Spc. Chris Carlson had been out of the U.S. Army for two years and was working at Costco in California when he received notice that he was being called back into service.

The 24-year-old is one of thousands of soldiers and Marines who have been deployed to Iraq under a policy that allows military leaders to recall troops who have left the service but still have time left on their contract.

"I thought it was crazy," said Carlson, who has found himself protecting convoys on Iraq's dangerous roads as part of a New Jersey National Guard unit. "Never in a million years did I think they would call me back."

Although troops are allowed to leave active duty after a few years of service, they generally still have time left on their contract with the military that is known as "inactive ready reserve" status, or IRR. During that time, they have to let their service know their current address, but they don't train, draw a paycheck or associate in any other way with the military.

But with active duty units already completing multiple tours in Iraq, the
Pentagon has employed the rarely used tactic of calling people back from IRR status, a policy sometimes referred to as a "backdoor draft."

But it isn't any sort of draft -- as noted above, it is holding individuals who volunteered for service to the terms of their contract. It is something which they are told about up front, and which they know to expect.

Take this soldier, for example.

Anthony Breaux, 24, from La Place, La., said he had a feeling that eventually he would be recalled to service after hearing of so many other soldiers who were pulled from IRR status. Breaux, who left active duty in September 2002, said he knew it was part of the bargain when he joined the army.

"Well, I signed up. I signed the papers. So you know what? I got to do what I got to do," Breaux said, before getting ready for a reconnaissance patrol around Camp Anaconda.

Got that -- they knew what they were signing up for when they signed their contracts. They are not draftees being plucked from the streets -- they are members of our nations military reserves being called to fulfill the duty they volunteered for.

And anyone who claims differently is simply a liar, and more concerned with trashing the Bush Administration than protecting the United States from its enemies.

Posted by: Greg at 04:17 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 456 words, total size 3 kb.

Hey, I'll admit that I took AP English when I was in high school -- though I opted out of the Calculus and Physics classes tht my school offered because I simply lacked the interest in the subjects to apply myself to them at age 17. At a Catholic school in the Chicago suburbs, we had around 55 students in the AP English program -- about 20% of the class of 1981. And we had a fair amount of success in the program, with about 10 students scoring a 4 or 5 on the test, and around 25 scoring at least a 3. In short, about 2/3 of us were in a position where we might be eligible for college credit.

Fast forward to the present. The class of 2006 saw 126 students take the AP English test -- roughly 40% of the class. Of those students, 19 scored a 4 or 5, and 43 scored a 3. That means only about 50% potentially received college credit.

Now does this mean that the program has declined in quality, and that today's teachers do not teach the material as well as my teacher did? Hardly -- it is indicative of the reality that explanding AP programs result in lower average scores because less able students are placed in the classes. That does not mean that these students are ill-served by being in the program -- indeed, the experience of being in the AP program may raise the level of their learning in a dramatic fashion. But the expansion will hurt the overall "snapshot" that most folks focus on -- the overal test scores.

Which leads me to an article in today's Washington Post.

Prince George's County schools chief John E. Deasy this week is rolling out a $33 million proposal to improve the school system's uneven academic performance, an initiative that includes a partnership with the College Board to expand Advanced Placement course offerings countywide.

* * *

Deasy proposed that by the 2007-08 school year each of the county's 22 major high schools should offer at least eight AP courses, which are meant to introduce students to college-level study. Currently, AP offerings in the county vary widely. Many high schools have only a few.

The College Board, which oversees the AP program, will help the school system train a new corps of 200 AP teachers over the next year. In addition, the school system plans to expand subsidies for AP test fees to help ensure that needy students take the tests.

"It's a monumental culture shift," Deasy said. "AP will be on the tongue of every kid around here before too long."

Michael Marchionda, a College Board official working on the project, called it "a multiyear effort" to widen student access to AP. "It's very comprehensive," he said.

The county school board will consider the plan Thursday and is expected to support it.

"People asked for rigor," said Chairman Beatrice P. Tignor (Upper Marlboro). "We've got rigor."

And i hope the district does have a rigorous program, one which holds to the very strict standards of teh College Board. But I hope tha the district recognizes that test scores -- on average -- will drop if there is an increase in the size and scope of the program.

I also hope that parents realize what they are getting themselves and their children into when thy sign up for the AP program. Such classes are -- and are supposed to be -- at or near the college level. In my own district, we struggled for years with parents who insisted upon putting their child into AP classes -- and then insisted upon taking them out when the student didn't continue to receive the same A he or she had gotten in regular level classes. But most importantly, I hope that teh Prince George District sticks to its guns -- because we have found that the presence of AP classes raises the level of instruction in all classes in the school as regular level teachers collaborate with and adopt strategies used by the AP teachers.

Posted by: Greg at 03:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 693 words, total size 4 kb.

Under no circumstances should any alien not yet legally admitted to the United States be held to have any rights beyond the right to continue breathing.

The case of a Juárez woman who said she was physically abused in 2001 by an immigration officer at the Paso del Norte Bridge prompted a decision by the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals this month that non-U.S. citizens have constitutional rights at ports of entry.

"It doesn't matter whether you are a U.S. citizen or not, you have rights. It may seem obvious but nobody had said it before," said El Paso lawyer Lynn Coyle, who represents the woman, Maria Antonieta Martinez-Aguero.

The decision sets a precedent and could lead to more lawsuits on the border, legal experts said.

The decision came in response to a preliminary motion by the immigration officer seeking to dismiss the case on grounds that his alleged victim did not have constitutional rights to be free from false imprisonment and the excessive use of force by law enforcement officers because she had not made official entry into the United States, among other reasons.

The officer, Humberto Gonzalez, now a Border Patrol agent, denies the abuse.

"By no means did he do the things she said he did," said his lawyer, Jeanne "Cezy" Collins.

What this decision means, in effect, is that the US Constitution applies to foreigners before they are even in the United States as defined by the laws of the United States and relevant court precedents dating back decades. Stupid decision -- even more stupid than holding that illegal aliens have rights under the Constitution and laws of the United States.

Posted by: Greg at 02:45 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 282 words, total size 2 kb.

After all, these are OLD chemical weapons -- weapons dating back to the Cold War and therefore clearly old enough that they must be degraded beyond use and not a threat to anyone.

The Army has begun draining and incinerating thousands of containers of mustard gas held in storage at a facility in the Utah desert.

The project at the Deseret Chemical Depot, begun Friday, will last six to 10 years. It involves burning about 6,200 tons of liquid blister agent and is complicated by the presence of an estimated 800 pounds of toxic mercury.

At one time, the depot housed more chemical weapons than any other U.S. storage site. To comply with the international Chemical Weapons Convention, the U.S. government began weapons destruction there in 1996.

The destruction of the mustard gas is the final phase in the project.

Mustard gas, which is a liquid at room temperature, causes severe blisters, internal and external bleeding, and strips mucous membranes from airways.

Workers will first drain and incinerate the 1-ton mustard gas containers, depot spokeswoman Alaine Southworth said. They will also design and install filters to scrub mercury from the exhaust, she said.

So would someone explain to me why American chemical weapons must be disposed of so carefully? Are these some sort of super-weapons that contain speacial chemicals not bound by the same laws of physics that operate in Iraq? Is this program simply a government boodoggle, putting an expensive piece of pork in someone's home state?

Or is it perhaps teh case that these weapons are still dangerous WMDs -- and that the ones found in Iraq are ALSO live, dangerous WMDs that prove that Saddam Hussein was not in compliance with his UN obligations?

Posted by: Greg at 12:45 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.

If this were a story about black youth or Hispanic women or quadraplegic Muslim lesbians of Asian descent, there would be calls for massive government intervention to deal with the "crisis". Want to bet the response to this story is silence, thoug -- because the suicide epidemic is among older white men.

Older white males have the highest suicide rate in the United States, said the Population Reference Bureau in Washington.

Suicide is the 11th leading cause of death in the United States with 11 suicide deaths per 100,000 Americans.

For white males over the age of 65, the rate is almost triple that figure.

White males are more than eight times as likely to kill themselves as women of the same age and the risk increases as they get older, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.

Suicide experts are unable to pinpoint an exact cause for the higher rate but some believe white males lack the resilience and coping mechanisms that women and other ethnic groups have.

They also point to the fact that males are socialized to be in control and are less apt to seek help for depression which leads to suicide.

I think it probably comes from a lifetime of being told that every social problem is the fault of white males. If you internalize the notion that every single problem in the world is ultimately your responsibility, wouldn't you feel a moral obligation to check out as soon as possible?

Posted by: Greg at 11:58 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 261 words, total size 2 kb.

When you can't break the 10% level in polling data, and then sink below 5%, why shouldn't the party look elsewhere?

While some Republicans are quietly rooting for his Democratic opponent, Ned Lamont, because they feel he would be such a polarizing liberal target, many leading Republicans say it would serve the party better to have a centrist like Mr. Lieberman remain in office, particularly after being spurned by his own party.

But one thing is clear: there is little to no talk of bolstering Mr. Schlesinger, 48, the Republican nominee, a little-known former mayor of Derby who has registered polling numbers so low they are breaking records. Little known throughout the state, Mr. Schlesinger received attention this summer following reports in The Hartford Courant that he had gambled under a fake name and once had gambling debts. He has dismissed the accounts as irrelevant.

Mr. Schlesinger has reacted bitterly to the rejection by his own party, dismissing calls for him to leave the race. He maintains he can win by conveying his conservative platform to voters.

* * *

As Mr. SchlesingerÂ’s popularity has waned from a minuscule 9 percent in July to an almost invisible 4 percent in a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday, the question for Republicans has shifted to whether to embrace Mr. Lieberman.

GOP leaders have had to decide -- remain loyal to the party and hope for a win by the extreme liberal lamont, or act to support what is best for America by supporting Lieberman. I'm pleased that so many have put America first.

Posted by: Greg at 10:30 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

Imagine that -- a cop who catches lawbreakers acting to see that the law is enforced. Who could oppose that? Besides the ACLU and groups that support border-jumping immigration criminals, of course.

The Rhode Island State Police will review a trooper's actions during a July 11 traffic stop on Route 95 in Richmond, when he detained 14 people who he suspected were in the country illegally, a state police spokesman said.

The internal investigation stems from a complaint the Rhode Island Affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union filed this week, on behalf of 11 of the 14 people involved, said Maj. Steven O'Donnell.

The ACLU took the case after the driver and several passengers alleged during a Providence news conference last month that Trooper Thomas Chabot overstepped his authority by taking immigration enforcement into his own hands.

They also alleged that Chabot threatened to shoot anyone who tried to escape the van that morning as it was escorted to the Bureau of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement office in Providence.

The traffic stop occurred at 6:30 a.m. near Exit 4 south, where Chabot was posted at a speed checkpoint. Chabot's report states that he pulled the van's driver over for failing to signal a lane change.

After the driver provided a license and ID, Chabot asked the passengers for identification, his report states. When only a few could do so, he then "asked if any of them had immigration credentials proving their U.S. citizenship."

None did. Chabot contacted ICE authorities, and he and another trooper escorted the van to the ICE office on Dyer Avenue in Providence. The 14 were found to be in the country illegally, and they now face deportation.

Who came up with the goofy idea that illegal aliens have any rights beyond breathing?

Round 'em up! Ship 'em back! Rawhide!

Posted by: Greg at 10:24 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 314 words, total size 2 kb.

If the current NSA program is unlawful, let us consider other eavesdropping programs when America fought foreign enemies.

Her outrageous ruling means that our past activities in Magic, in Ultra, at the Coral Sea, at Midway, at Bletchley Park, in Venona, were illegal also. Imagine the cheek we used in defeating the Nazis and Imperial Japan. Oh, let the wailing and gnashing of teeth begin and the crying towels appear. Let’s revisit the unfair treatment afforded the Axis at Normandy, the Marianas, the Philippines, and the Battle of Britain — where radar and radio intercepts were unfairly used to outwit and outfox the wily Germans and the cunning Japanese.

That mean old Mr. Roosevelt didn't have the decency to respect the First and Fourth Amendment rights of the Axis powers and their supporters here in America. Just because they were our enemies didn't mean that Roosevelt could act like a hereditary king, did it judge? Surely such spying programs were indisputibly illegal -- just like the current NSA program.

Posted by: Greg at 10:17 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, more support for the pro-terrorist position from Western "intellectuals" writing for Arab sources.

Perhaps it is time, if not to rewrite, at least to redirect the Balfour declaration back to Europe from whence most Jewish settlers in Israel have come.

The animosity that is making the clash of civilisations a current reality is driven first and foremost by the unsettled issue of the division of Palestine. If this could be solved, Al QaedaÂ’s influence would sharply diminish. So would HamasÂ’ and HizbollahÂ’s. But left to stew as it is now, it is spilling over into Lebanon and perhaps in a few years into a nuclear confrontation between Israel and Iran, or even, if President Pervez Musharraf is assassinated and a more Islamic-minded president comes to power, between Israel and Pakistan.

As relations between Jew and Muslim deteriorate, not only Israel is becoming unliveable for ordinary people (read Israeli novelist Shifra Horn’s new book, “Ode to Joy”, if you want to smell the cordite and sense the everyday fear of being blown up deep in the soul), but also are parts of Europe and North America gradually becoming so. Just as Israel has “terrorists” in its midst so now do the UK, Spain, France, Russia, the US and Canada.

Power's solution? Get the Jews out of Israel and back to Europe. This disgusting piece of anti-Semitism is cloaked in feigned concern for the Israeli people, but not really.

But i have a better idea -- one which I am sure Mr. Power will support with his whole heart. If the Jews of Israel are to be uprooted, then let us settle them someplace where we know they will be safe -- the United States. We can put them in Dearborn and other areas currently occupied by Arab Muslims who support jihadi terrorism around the world. In return, we will ship the Arab Muslims in the United States -- regardless of their citizenship -- back to Middle East.

Now some may object that such a proposal is inhumane and racist -- "What about the rights of America's Arab Muslims?" some may ask. Well, if Jews who have settled in the Middle East over the last century and who have fought and died to create, maintain and protect a tiny homeland for themselves have no place in a Middle East dominated by Arab Muslims, then clearly Arab Muslims have no place in the West, and in particular not in the United States. After all, they and their relatives back in their homelands have shown their utter inablility to live at peace with neighbors who are different from themselves.

Outrageous? Sure. but then again, consider this justification for Power's exclusion of the jews from their own homeland.

Without such “out of the box” thinking we are all going to be sucked under by the maelstrom being unleashed by what is dangerously becoming a true “clash of civilisations”.

So why not consider my "outside the box" solution as a way of avoiding the "clash of civilizations" by separating the parties completely. After all, why should the Jews alone bear the cost of the capitulating to the jihadi terrorists? After all, if the Jews are not a good fit in the Middle East, why should the unassimilable Muslims be welcome in America?

And if my proposed solution -- excluding people from America based upon religion and ethnicity -- is unacceptable, upon what basis can anyone support the expulsion of Israel's Jews from the land given them by the international community in the 1940s and which they have defended time and again over the last six decades? The only possible answer is a rank, festering anti-Semitism which abides in the blackened souls of the opponents of Israel.

Posted by: Greg at 10:00 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 639 words, total size 4 kb.

Let's remember -- the only folks who censored the Dixie Chicks were tehir former fans, who decided that they would prefer not to direct their dollars to entertainers who clearly despised them and their values. In doing so, they exercised teh same First Amendment rights as the Dixie Chicks, to speak out vocally, in writing, and with their hard-earned dollars to make a political statement of their own. That this has effecively killed the Chicks' career is too bad -- they are a talented group of girls ane I will admit that I like much of their early music.

But the censorship the girls met up with is of the sort that the Founders clearly recognized as legitimate, for the Constitution only forbids GOVERNMENT censorship. No where does the Constitution require that I buy their music or listen to it on the radio -- nor does it require that any radio station play it or any music store stock it. What's more, nothing in the Constitution requires them a recording contract after their album sales trail off and much of their concert tour gets cancelled because of sparse ticket sales.

Which leads us to today's New York Times.

Sitting at a table in early August, Bobby Braddock, the longtime songwriter, lamented the conservatism of the country music industry that was demonstrated when the lead singer of the Dixie Chicks became a target of fury three years ago after saying she was ashamed that her band and President Bush shared the same home state.

Asked whether his recent song “Thou Shalt Not Kill” would have airplay, Mr. Braddock said, “Oh, never.”

“Something political will not get played on country radio unless it’s on the conservative side,” he added. “If you show both sides, it’s not good enough. It’s got to be just on the right.”

Country music, the genre of lonely hearts and highways, lost jobs and blue-collar woes, has become a cultural battleground. Conservatism is widely seen as having the upper hand, a red-state answer to left-leaning Hollywood.

Democrats on Music Row, the country music capital here, have grown frustrated with that reputation. A group of record-company executives, talent managers and artists has released an online compilation of 20 songs, several directly critical of Mr. Bush and the Iraq war.

The price for the set is $20, with most of the proceeds going to the group, which calls itself Music Row Democrats and is using the money to support local and national candidates who share its values.

In other words, this is a political fundraiser, not merely a statement of principle.

So while I admire the folks involved in this project for speaking their mind, please understand that I won't be buying their album or calling my local stations to play the music.

Indeed, I will use the information about the writers and performers to determine my future music purchases -- because as an American, I am free to do so, just as they are free to make asses out of themselves and alienate much of the country music fan base.

Because contrary to the views of these music Row liberals, "Dixie Chicking" an artist is a patriotic act, not an unAmerican one.

And if you disagree, consider this -- how many pro-Bush songs and pro-Bush artists make it on to rap and urban stations?

Posted by: Greg at 09:39 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 565 words, total size 3 kb.

Still feeling sort of cruddy, but thought I'd check my email.

Someone sent me a link to a post on another blog attacking me for things I've written regarding CD22 over the last week or so. Since the poster is offended, I figure I owe him some apologies.

Here is what I left him in his comment section.

1) If stating matters that are on the public record constitutes "trashing" someone, then I gladly plead guilty. On the other hand, if being a loyal member of the party means hiding corruption and dishonesty on the part of elected officials, I want nothing of it. I continue to find it interesting that you criticize me for "trashing" David Wallace but fail to point to a single spot where my posts have been inaccurate -- much less flse. But if you think I need to apologize for what I posted, I will "I'm sorry I have spoken the truth about David Wallace."

2) I think Smither is a good man, and I believe that it would have been a legitimate course of action for the GOP to support him. I struggled, -- publicly, as you note -- with the question of whether the best course of ction might be to put the support of the GOP behind him as a way of keeping CD22 out of the hands of a liberal like Nick Lampson. As I said in a number of places "Maybe we should make Bob Smither the first Libertarian party congressman in 2006 -- and the first Libertarian party ex-Congressman in 2008." But since you seem to feel I was wrong to think and say what I did, let me offer this apology -- I am sorry that I had the audacity to think unauthorized thoughts, and to think outside the box (or think at all) with regard to the best course of action to prevent the seat from falling into Democrat hands."

3) Of the entire lot of GOP candidates who emerged after The Virginian decided to "screw, blue and tattoo" CD22 this spring, I believe Shelley was and is the best of the bunch. I worked long and hard this spring and summer to persuade my fellow chairs of that. I am not, however, a member of her campaign staff and hold no official position with her organization -- and my words represent me and my opinions only. I was even prepared to give Wallace a chance -- but he has displayed a sense of arrogance and entitlement from the very moment The Virginian announced his resignation. He has refused to meet wtih any group which is not dominated by his supporters or at any forum not organized by them. Whether it is the Harris COunty GOP candidate forum in May or the CD22 Executive Committee meeting on Thursday, David Wallace has shown he is unable to face the unconverted and is only willing to preach to the choir -- not a good trait in a candidate for such a highly contested seat. But since you are offended, I'll offer another apology -- "I'm sorry that I have come to expect better of Republican candidates over the course of my quarter century of political activism within the GOP."

As I remind my students when I teach American Government, politics is the art and science of trying to ensure the election of candidates who will do the most to implement policies which most closely put conform with one's beliefs and desires -- and I have openly discussed how to do that in the current situation. Any other course of action would have been counter-productive.

Posted by: Greg at 08:30 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 615 words, total size 3 kb.

So much to write, so little energy.

Temperature started to rise about 11:00, and is just shy of 100.

Just popped my third dose of pepto in the last six hours.

I think I'm going to bed -- or maybe I'll just fall asleep in my computer chair.

But the cold medicine just makes... me... so.........

Posted by: Greg at 12:02 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.

After all, this "civil rights advocate" has spewed bigotted garbage against ethnic minorities and Jews -- while stone-cold sober. Will Andrew Young get the Mel Gibson treatment?

The civil rights leader Andrew Young, who was hired by Wal-Mart to improve its public image, resigned from that post last night after telling an African-American newspaper that Jewish, Arab and Korean shop owners had “ripped off” urban communities for years, “selling us stale bread, and bad meat and wilted vegetables.”

In the interview, published yesterday in The Los Angeles Sentinel, a weekly, Mr. Young said that Wal-Mart “should” displace mom-and-pop stores in urban neighborhoods.

“You see those are the people who have been overcharging us,” he said of the owners of the small stores, “and they sold out and moved to Florida. I think they’ve ripped off our communities enough. First it was Jews, then it was Koreans and now it’s Arabs.”

Mr. Young, 74, a former mayor of Atlanta and a former United States representative to the United Nations, apologized for the comments and retracted them in an interview last night. Less than an hour later, he resigned as chairman of Working Families for Wal-Mart, a group created and financed by the company to trumpet its accomplishments.

“It’s against everything I ever thought in my life,” Mr. Young said. “It never should have been said. I was speaking in the context of Atlanta, and that does not work in New York or Los Angeles.”

His remarks drew forceful condemnation from Arab, Jewish and Asian leaders.

Mel Gibson is an alcoholic actor who spoke while three (or more ) sheets to the wind. Young is an influential political figure who spoke while under the influence of his own hatred. Wil he receive the same sort of high-tech lynching that Gibson did -- or will his liberal credentials be sufficient to earn him a pass from those who have sought the personal destruction of a sick conservative?

Posted by: Greg at 10:37 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, they finally found a judge to do what no other judge in the country has been willing to do -- rule that the NSA program to make connections between terrorists at home and abroad is unconstitutional.

A federal judge in Detroit ruled yesterday that the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program is unconstitutional, delivering the first decision that the Bush administration's effort to monitor communications without court oversight runs afoul of the Bill of Rights and federal law.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ordered a halt to the wiretap program, secretly authorized by President Bush in 2001, but both sides in the lawsuit agreed to delay that action until a Sept. 7 hearing. Legal scholars said Taylor's decision is likely to receive heavy scrutiny from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit when the Justice Department appeals, and some criticized her ruling as poorly reasoned.

This puts her at odds with every other judge who has ruled on the matter -- so much for res judicata.

Not that this decision is ikely to stand.

Several dozen lawsuits have been filed around the country challenging the program's legality, but yesterday's ruling marked the first time that a judge had declared it unconstitutional. Experts in national security law argued, however, that Taylor offered meager support for her findings on separation of powers and other key issues.

"Regardless of what your position is on the merits of the issue, there's no question that it's a poorly reasoned decision," said Bobby Chesney, a national security law specialist at Wake Forest University who takes a moderate stance on the legal debate over the NSA program. "The opinion kind of reads like an outline of possible grounds to strike down the program, without analysis to fill it in."

And all she had to do to get it was ignore or dismiss as irrelevant every single case that has dealt with national security surveilance -- including those of the FISA court that provide precedent for sustaining the NSA program.

The NY Times, of course, is ecstatic that the safety of the United States has been given the backseat to the privacy rights of those who would kill America and eliminate all rights. And while legal scholars are pointing to the flaws of the case, the NY Times sees the matter differently.

But for now, with a careful, thoroughly grounded opinion, one judge in Michigan has done what 535 members of Congress have so abysmally failed to do. She has reasserted the rule of law over a lawless administration and shown why issues of this kind belong within the constitutional process created more than two centuries ago to handle them.

More proof that the editorial staff of this once-proud institution of our nation's most significant city has relocated to Fantasy Island.

UPDATE: As noted in the comments below, I didn't get the chance to read or comment upon the editorial of that other traditional bastion of Democrat Party liberalism -- the Washington Post. Interestingly enough, their editorial sees matters a bit different, and more in line with the legal experts -- Taylor blew it. While not at all conceding the legality of the NSA program, the editorialist makes it very clear that Taylor failed in her task of impartially and fairly assessing the evidence and rendering a decision based upon the law and the merits of the case.

THE NATION would benefit from a serious, scholarly and hard-hitting judicial examination of the National Security Agency's program of warrantless surveillance. The program exists on ever-more uncertain legal ground; it is at least in considerable tension with federal law and the Bill of Rights. Careful judicial scrutiny could serve both to hold the administration accountable and to provide firmer legal footing for such surveillance as may be necessary for national security.

Unfortunately, the decision yesterday by a federal district court in Detroit, striking down the NSA's program, is neither careful nor scholarly, and it is hard-hitting only in the sense that a bludgeon is hard-hitting. The angry rhetoric of U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor will no doubt grab headlines. But as a piece of judicial work -- that is, as a guide to what the law requires and how it either restrains or permits the NSA's program -- her opinion will not be helpful.

Judge Taylor's opinion is certainly long on throat-clearing sound bites. "There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution," she thunders. She declares that "the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution." And she insists that Mr. Bush has "undisputedly" violated the First and Fourth Amendments, the constitutional separation of powers, and federal surveillance law.

But the administration does, in fact, vigorously dispute these conclusions. Nor is its dispute frivolous. The NSA's program, about which many facts are still undisclosed, exists at the nexus of inherent presidential powers, laws purporting to constrict those powers, the constitutional right of the people to be free from unreasonable surveillance, and a broad congressional authorization to use force against al-Qaeda. That authorization, the administration argues, permits the wiretapping notwithstanding existing federal surveillance law; inherent presidential powers, it suggests, allow it to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance on its own authority. You don't have to accept either contention to acknowledge that these are complicated, difficult issues. Judge Taylor devotes a scant few pages to dismissing them, without even discussing key precedents.

The judge may well be correct in her bottom line that the program exceeds presidential authority, even during wartime. We harbor grave doubt both that Congress authorized warrantless surveillance as part of the war and that Mr. Bush has the constitutional power to act outside of normal surveillance statutes that purport to be the exclusive legal authorities for domestic spying. But her opinion, which as the first court venture into this territory will garner much attention, is unhelpful either in evaluating or in ensuring the program's legality. Fortunately, as this case moves forward on appeal and as other cases progress in other courts, it won't be the last word.

Ultimately, the conclusion here is correct -- this is not the last word on the NSA program, and we as a nation are fortunate this is true. And if I come down upon the side of recognizing this program is acceptable under the law, the COnstitution, and the historical practices of previous United States presidents during time of war, I accept that there can be good-faith disagreement on this matter.

Posted by: Greg at 10:32 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 1098 words, total size 7 kb.

Imagine that -- bucking the trend and condemning terrorists for engaging in terrorism.

NICOLE Kidman has made a public stand against terrorism.

The actress, joined by 84 other high-profile Hollywood stars, directors, studio bosses and media moguls, has taken out a powerfully-worded full page advertisement in today's Los Angeles Times newspaper.

It specifically targets "terrorist organisations" such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine.

"We the undersigned are pained and devastated by the civilian casualties in Israel and Lebanon caused by terrorist actions initiated by terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas," the ad reads.

"If we do not succeed in stopping terrorism around the world, chaos will rule and innocent people will continue to die.

"We need to support democratic societies and stop terrorism at all costs."

A who's who of Hollywood heavyweights joined Kidman on the ad.

The actors listed included: Michael Douglas, Dennis Hopper, Sylvester Stallone, Bruce Willis, Danny De Vito, Don Johnson, James Woods, Kelly Preston, Patricia Heaton and William Hurt.

Directors Ridley Scott, Tony Scott, Michael Mann, Dick Donner and Sam Raimi also signed their names.

Other Hollywood powerplayers supporting the ad included Sumner Redstone, the chairman and majority owner of Paramount Pictures, and billionaire mogul, Haim Saban.

Is it just me, but are the big donors to Democrats missing from this list? Could it be that there is a connection between support for liberals and support for terrorists?

Posted by: Greg at 10:20 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 251 words, total size 2 kb.

No more tax-free freebies just for showing up at awards shows!

Movie stars appearing at the Academy Awards will no longer receive the lavish goody baskets they have come to expect -- worth as much as $100,000 each and including freebies such as iPods, resort vacations, coupons for laser eye surgery, jewelry and high-priced lingerie -- because of a crackdown by the federal tax collector.

The Internal Revenue Service and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences yesterday announced they have reached a settlement on undisclosed taxes owed to the government on the "gifts" received at the Oscars in the last several years, through 2005.

The academy also announced it will no longer give out the bags, saying the board quietly voted last April to end the practice. In recent years, the academy has given the bags -- also known as gift bags or swag -- to as many as 200 hosts, performers and winners on Oscar night. "There's no special red-carpet tax loophole for the stars," IRS Commissioner Mark W. Everson said in a prepared statement. "Whether you're popping the popcorn, sitting in the audience or starring on the big screen, you need to respect the law and pay your taxes."

Typically, if the IRS finds someone has failed to pay taxes but no fraud is involved, it assesses back taxes, interest and penalties for only the preceding three years. In this instance, if 200 people received $100,000 baskets in each of the three years through 2005, the taxable non-cash income would be $60 million.

All of which means that these over-privileged buffoons might have to buy their own rhinestone encrusted cellphones and Tempur-Pedic mattresses.

Posted by: Greg at 10:17 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 283 words, total size 2 kb.

In this evenings meeting of GOP precinct chairs from CD22, the decision was made to endorse Houston City Councilwoman Dr. Shelley Sekula-Gibbs to replace Tom Delay in Congress.

I have been working with the Sekula-Gibbs campaign since spring, as I believe her to be the best of the candidates who stepped forward following The Virginian's resignation. A solid pragmatic conservaitive, I believe she matches up well with this district.

I'll write more tomorrow.

Posted by: Greg at 03:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.

Frankly, I'm getting really tired of the games played by members of the GOP leadership. Or state party leaders have handled the entire Delay situation incorrectly, and now you have this idiot seeking to undermine the process -- because his candidate cannot win.

The chairman of the Fort Bend County Republican Party is calling for a boycott of a state party meeting about Tom DeLayÂ’s former district scheduled for tonight.

“Holding a closed meeting with very few participants, ostensibly to determine what we as Republicans should do, makes a mockery of our party, the democratic process and should be avoided at all cost,” Gary Gillen, chairman of the Fort Bend County GOP, wrote.

At the request of state party Chairwoman Tina Benkiser, the Republican Party chairmen in Galveston, Harris, Fort Bend and Brazoria counties were to call for a meeting of precinct chairs in Congressional District 22.

The text of Gillen's letter is found here. Chris Elam analyzes it here.

I have to agree with Chris on this point.

It is difficult to rectify Gary's tone in his letter, with regards to the small number of participants in the write-in selection process, against his tone in the comments he made to Bob Dunn of Fort Bend Now, on the night of the precinct chair straw poll at the Fort Bend CD 22 meeting.

At the time, Gary was ostensibly pleased with the idea of letting the precinct chairs voices known, when he publicly announced the results of that straw poll. He went a step further in expressing his pleasure with their discernment and unique position of authority in selecting a replacement, when he issued this statement.

No GOP donors, nor Pachyderm Club members, nor Republican Women's club members, nor Young Republicans, or even headquarter volunteers - had a voice in Mr. Gillen's straw poll. Yet at the time, he announced that he was struck how “these informal polls continue to show strong support for David Wallace.”

Of course, this poll was fresh off the heels of another poll that Mr. Gillen was responsible for, where only 1100 replies were received, and where multiple candidates names were left off of the reply form. Even though the return rate on this poll was a mere 6.38% on the number originally mailed out... the party chairman felt as though the results were important enough to issue a press release with the results. This mail-in survey had been derided for its inaccuracy, its potential for fraud, and many people, including yours truly, pointed out that “while this sounds like a noble idea, in reality it is a terrible one.”

Gillen wants David Wallace -- warts, corruption and all -- and will do whatever he can to facilitate that end.

Posted by: Greg at 10:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 467 words, total size 3 kb.

I applaud those who have made progress in this area, trying to make homes for children who need them without regard to race.

When Martina Brockway and Mike Timble, a white couple in Chicago, decided to adopt a child, Ms. Brockway went to an adoption agency presentation at a black church to make it clear they wanted an African-American baby.

Their biological daughter, Rumeur, 3, is accumulating black dolls in preparation for her new brother or sister. Black-themed children’s books like “Please, Baby, Please” by the filmmaker Spike Lee and his wife, Tonya Lewis Lee, share shelf space with Elmo and Dr. Seuss.

But the couple’s decision provoked some uneasy responses. One of Mr. Timble’s white friends asked, “Aren’t there any white kids available?”

Ms. Brockway’s black friends were supportive. “But,” she said, “I also sensed that there was maybe something they weren’t saying.”

Mr. Timble cut in. “Like maybe they were thinking, ‘What do these people think they are doing?’ ”

This all really rings a bell for me.

Posted by: Greg at 10:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.

He was one of the many iron-fisted dictators -- both of the lright and left -- who ruled in Latin America in the latter part of the 20th century. Here's hoping there is a particularly wam corner of hell with his name on it.

Alfredo Stroessner, the canny anti-communist general who ruled Paraguay for decades with a blend of force, guile and patronage before his ouster in 1989, died in exile on Wednesday. He was 93.

Stroessner contracted pneumonia after a hernia operation in Brazil's capital, where he had lived in near total isolation since he was forced from power.

He died of a stroke with his family gathered around him in the Hospital Santa Luzia, his grandson Alfredo Dominguez Stroessner said in a radio interview. Dominguez Stroessner said his grandfather left no instructions on his funeral but the family was considering burial in Encarnacion, the Paraguayan city where the former dictator was born.

Stroessner seized power in a 1954 coup and through fraud and repression, held it for 35 years to become one of Latin America's longest-ruling strongmen.

Finally ousted by his own generals, Stroessner remains hated by many in Paraguay, where he was accused of repression and human rights violations, even though some stalwarts credit him for big public works projects that modernized the country.

A staunch U.S. ally, Stroessner made Paraguay a refuge for some Nazi war criminals among 200,000 Germans he sheltered after World War II. He twice denied extradition requests for Dr. Josef Mengele, the infamous "Angel of Death" at Auschwitz. Mengele later fled Nazi hunters to Brazil, where he died under an assumed name.

Stroessner also sheltered fellow right-wing dictators, including Anastasio Somoza of Nicaragua.

"Stroessner didn't have any problem giving refuge to people with blood on their hands," said Aaron Breitbart, a senior researcher with the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles. "His death is no loss to democratic values in Paraguay."

Hopefully he'll be joined soon by Castro.

Posted by: Greg at 10:06 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.

Almost a decade later, police have cracked one of the great crime mysteries of the 1990s -- the case that led to the current trend of covering crimes against pretty white girls more heavily than anyone else.

An American man was arrested in Bangkok as a suspect in the 1996 death of JonBenet Ramsey, the 6-year-old girl from Boulder, Colo., whose unsolved killing became a media obsession, prosecutors said Wednesday.

[The man, John Mark Karr, 41, said publicly Thursday he was with the 6-year-old when she died and called her death "an accident," the Associated Press reported from Bangkok. "I was with JonBenet when she died," Karr, a former schoolteacher, told reporters in Bangkok, visibly nervous and stuttering as he spoke. "Her death was an accident." Police said Karr admitted to the killing after he was arrested Wednesday at his downtown Bangkok apartment by Thai and American authorities.

Karr will be taken to Colorado within the next week where he will face charges of murder, kidnapping and child sexual assault, Ann Hurst, Department of Homeland Security attache at the American Embassy in Bangkok, said at a news conference in Bangkok.

Karr, speaking to reporters after the news conference, declined to say what his connection was to the Ramsey family or how long he had known JonBenet. Wearing a blue, short-sleeved shirt, he appeared ashen with an expressionless look on his face.]

Karr was arrested on sex charges unrelated to JonBenet's slaying after several months of investigation, officials said. Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy said investigators from her office were heading to Thailand to question the suspect and bring him to Colorado.

Officials said that John and Patsy Ramsey, who were at one point suspected in their daughter's death, had been consulted during the investigation. Patsy Ramsey died of cancer in June but was told before her death that an arrest might be imminent, her husband said.

I never believed that this little girl died at the hands of her parents, no matter who odd their actions were. That this man, who killed her in the course of sexually abusing her, dares to call it an accident is paticulalrly galling.

I'm glad that her mother knew that the authorities were closing in on this guy. May that knowledge help her rest in peace.

Posted by: Greg at 10:02 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 230 words, total size 3 kb.