That is certainly how it appears at this point, as actor and former Senator Fred Thompson begins assembling a campaign staff and making public disclosures of potentially embarrassing information prior to a potential summer announcement.

Advisers to Fred Thompson have begun exploring a range of staffing options -- including talking to potential campaign managers -- as the actor and former Tennessee senator firms up his plans to enter the Republican presidential contest, according to people involved in the conversations.

Thompson has not made a final decision but is on track to be ready to announce his candidacy in June or July, his advisers say. Thompson has already been polling better than some of the announced GOP candidates, and his entry would shake up a field that has left many Republican faithful dissatisfied.

Thompson also has begun inoculating himself against potential attacks from rivals. During a question-and-answer session with House members on April 18, Thompson was asked about his colorful dating history from 1985 to 2002, while he was divorced.

And let's be honest here -- most of us are not going to be troubled by Thompson's colorful love life during his single years, especially in light of the noted fidelity problems of Gingrich and Giuliani.

What I find most interesting, though, is this possible new dynamic -- one which is not really new.

On the day Thompson revealed he has cancer, he hinted at an unorthodox blueprint when he said that he thinks it's possible to join the field without abandoning his family.

"Going on the road for months at a time, and for all practical purposes, just checking [in] every once in a while, I wouldn't do that," he told Fox's Neil Cavuto. "I don't think it has to be done that way. I know people will expect that of everyone -- to run frenetically around for years. And I don't do frenetic very well."

In the old days, candidates did not run for president. It was sen as undignified for a potential president to be out on the hustings, pressing the flesh and behaving like a mere politician. Lincoln did not campaign actively, and neither did any other candidate up until the early twentieth century. Instead, they stayed home and went about their business, with surrogates campaigning on the r behalf while they made speeches and issued statements from their home or Washington. Given our media age, and the immediacy of the internet and cable news, this might be a preferable -- and cheaper -- model for us to follow. And if fred Thompson can pull it off, it might be a healthy development for America.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Random Yak, guerrilla radio, Adam's Blog, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Conservative Thoughts, Rightlinx, Faultline USA, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, Planck's Constant, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 10:18 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 502 words, total size 5 kb.

But I'll be honest -- he goes a little bit too far for me when he supports concealed carry in bars, and requiring churches to permit guns on their premises.

Gov. Rick Perry said Monday that Texans who are legally licensed should be able to carry their concealed handguns anywhere, including churches, bars, courthouses and college campuses.

"I think it makes sense for Texans to be able to protect themselves from deranged individuals, whether they're in church, or whether on a college campus or wherever they are," he said.

"The idea that you're going to exempt them from a particular place is nonsense to me."

Perry commented to reporters after he and U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt had met privately with educators, mental health experts and law enforcement officials to discuss the recent shootings at Virginia Tech University. Leavitt and other Cabinet officials are traveling around the country to discuss school and community safety practices in preparation for a report to President Bush.

The governor's remarks aren't likely to result in widespread changes in Texas gun laws, particularly this late in a legislative session that must adjourn by May 28.

The reality is that the current law allows so many entities to ban guns that the state becomes a crazy-quilt patchwork of of where one can and cannot carry a gun with a permit. Perry's proposal would fix that -- including permitting guns to be carried by teachers in schools, which I view as a good thing. It would also prevent any Texas college or university from becoming a gun-free hunting ground for a future shooter. And saying that governmental sub-entities can ban what the state explicitly has permitted an individual to do is absurd.

But I draw the line at bars an churches. I'm uncomfortable with that mix of guns and firearms -- it just seems a step too far, and even in the old West there was often a requirement that guns be checked at the saloon door. And as for churches, I see a religious freedom issue that troubles me deeply, as it should any lover of the First Amendment.

Posted by: Greg at 10:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 366 words, total size 2 kb.

Nick Lampson is at the top of the GOP hit-list here in CD22 without any urging from Karl Rove. After all, this is a GOP district and the only way he got in was a betrayal by Delay and a court case to keep him from having a opponent on the ballot.

The political slide shows that landed President Bush's adviser Karl Rove in the middle of an investigation named the congressman who replaced former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay as the White House's No. 1 target.

Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Texas, tops the list of the "2008 House Targets: Top 20", part of a presentation made to executive branch employees, possibly illegally.

Critics have alleged the presentation was political and violated laws restricting executive branch employees from using their jobs for political activity.

The White House has defended the presentations as informational briefings for appointees and acknowledged last week there have been briefings at several agencies.

Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, D-Texas, also was on the list at No. 12.

Now if Rove screwed up and engaged in illegal political activity, lock him up -- I could care less. But that does nothing to minimize the misrepresentation of CD22 by the Neo-Copperhead carpetbagger from Beaumont -- or the need to rid ourselves of the candidate of MoveOn.org.

Posted by: Greg at 03:14 PM | Comments (57) | Add Comment
Post contains 227 words, total size 1 kb.

Posted by: Greg at 10:31 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

It will be so nice to have a little sunshine poured forth on the Hildebeast by one of the Left's most beloved journalistic icons -- Carl Bernstein. I may have to shell out for that particular book.

Drawing on a trove of private papers from Hillary Clinton’s best friend, the legendary Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein is to publish a hard-hitting and intimate portrait of the 2008 presidential candidate, which will reveal a number of “discrepancies” in her official story.

Bernstein, who was played by Dustin Hoffman in the film All the PresidentÂ’s Men, has spent eight years researching the unauthorised 640-page biography, A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

“Bernstein reaches conclusions that stand in opposition to what Senator Clinton has said in the past and has written in the past,” said Paul Bogaards, a spokesman for Knopf, which publishes the book on June 19.

With the thoroughness for which he is famous, Bernstein spoke to more than 200 of Clinton’s friends, colleagues and adversaries. He stops short of accusing the New York senator of blatantly lying about her past, but has unearthed examples of where she has played fast and loose with the facts about her “personal and political life”, according to Knopf.

The book could revive the explosive charge, made earlier this year by David Geffen, a former Clinton donor and Hollywood mogul, that “the Clintons lie with such ease, it’s troubling”.

I can't wait to see if Bernstein's reputation is impugned by the Clinton spin machine -- or if he ends up having an "unfortunate accident". If I were you, Carl, I'd stay away from Fort Marcy Park.

Posted by: Greg at 02:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 284 words, total size 2 kb.

Indeed, this is nothing short of a call for a coup if the President does not capitulate to Congress.

Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) said Sunday that Democrats in Congress could consider impeachment as a way to pressure President Bush on his handling of the war in Iraq.

“What I’m saying, there’s four ways to influence a president. And one of them’s impeachment,” Murtha, chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

Excuse me, but "Jihad Jack" Murtha seems to be ignoring a minor detail -- impeachment in our system is reserved for removing an individual from office for "high crimes and misdemeanors". Exercise of the powers delegated to the President by Article II of the Constitution -- such as use of the veto power and the power as Commander in Chief -- is not grounds for impeachment. Indeed, the possibility of such a flagrant abuse of power by the legislative branch is why Article I so sharply circumscribes the power of that branch in this regard.

But then again, since when does a corrupt old fart like Murtha give a damn about the Constitution?

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Pet's Garden Blog, Stageleft, stikNstein... has no mercy, Maggie's Notebook, Big Dog's Weblog, basil's blog, Walls of the City, The World According to Carl, The Pet Haven Blog, The Pink Flamingo, Cao's Blog, Dumb Ox Daily News, CORSARI D'ITALIA, and OTB Sports, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 02:13 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 255 words, total size 3 kb.

He says he has no right to interfere in Canadian politics -- and then does so anyway.

The Conservatives' new environmental platform is a "complete and total fraud" that is "designed to mislead the Canadian people," former U.S. vice-president Al Gore said Saturday.

* * *

Gore acknowledged he is not a Canadian citizen and said he has "no right to interfere in your decisions."

However, he said, the rest of the world looks to Canada for moral leadership and that's why this week's announcement was so "shocking."

But the Tories proceeded to bitch-slap the former vice president and noted hypocrite (who still has done nothing to make an actual reduction in his "carbon footprint").

Baird released a statement later in the day Saturday in which he refuted Gore's criticisms.

"The fact is our plan is vastly tougher than any measures introduced by the administration of which the former vice president was a member," Baird said in the statement.

After all, the Clinton/Gore Administration never submitted the Kyoto Protocol for ratification.

Oh, and by the way -- Gore says "intensity reduction" is nothing but a focus-group tested deception by "Big Oil". I suppose that would make it the equivalent of "carbon off-sets", a phrase test-marketed by those who sell them to make a profit off of the failure of Left-wing trendoids to reduce pollution -- by folks like Al Gore, who profits from selling these latter-day indulgences.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Stop the ACLU, Outside the Beltway, A Blog For All, 123beta, Maggie's Notebook, basil's blog, The Pet Haven Blog, Shadowscope, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, , The World According to Carl, The Right Nation, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, and Dumb Ox Daily News, Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:20 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 314 words, total size 4 kb.

Kucinich /Gravel in 2008

Posted by: Greg at 11:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.

Words you never thought you would see on this blog – but which are true in this case.

Legislation that would lift an online gambling ban imposed by Congress last year was introduced on Thursday by the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

Calling the Internet gambling prohibition "imprudently adopted," Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts outlined a bill to make it legal again for banks and credit card companies to make payments to online gambling sites.
"The fundamental issue here is a matter of individual freedom," Frank told a news conference, adding his committee would hold a hearing on the matter in June.

The bill includes provisions for licensing and regulating online gambling companies to protect against underage gambling, compulsive gambling, money-laundering and fraud.

I said it was a stupid law when it passed, and I still believe that to be the case. Repeal the online gambling ban NOW!

Posted by: Greg at 10:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.

I’m shocked by the lack of respect for the US Constitution shown by Dan Simpson, a retired diplomat and member of the editorial boards of both the Toledo Blade and the Pittsburgh Gazette. After all, he proposes nothing less than gun confiscation – and warrantless searches of any person or place without suspicion of any crime.

Now, how would one disarm the American population? First of all, federal or state laws would need to make it a crime punishable by a $1,000 fine and one year in prison per weapon to possess a firearm. The population would then be given three months to turn in their guns, without penalty.

* * *

The disarmament process would begin after the initial three-month amnesty. Special squads of police would be formed and trained to carry out the work. Then, on a random basis to permit no advance warning, city blocks and stretches of suburban and rural areas would be cordoned off and searches carried out in every business, dwelling, and empty building. All firearms would be seized. The owners of weapons found in the searches would be prosecuted: $1,000 and one year in prison for each firearm.

Clearly, since such sweeps could not take place all across the country at the same time. But fairly quickly there would begin to be gun-swept, gun-free areas where there should be no firearms. If there were, those carrying them would be subject to quick confiscation and prosecution. On the streets it would be a question of stop-and-search of anyone, even grandma with her walker, with the same penalties for "carrying."

WhatÂ’s more, he even notes positively that the slowness of the courts would enable many jurisdictions to disarm the citizenry before their rights under the Constitution could be vindicated.

LetÂ’s see, besides the obvious violation of the Second Amendment contemplated under this proposal, there are a number of other abrogations of the Bill of Rights that should trouble even the most ardent gun-grabber. I see violations of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments as well.

But what is more disturbing is that Simpson has apparently forgotten the history of this country that led to the American Revolution. Indeed, his search proposal is nothing less than the “Writ of Assistance” issued by the British government – one of the abuses of the rights of colonists that helped precipitate the American Revolution.

Indeed, I’m not sure what disturbs me more – Simpson’s un-American proposals, or the fact that a man so disconnected from the fundamental values contained in our Constitution was ever permitted to serve as in any capacity in the Foreign Service, much less at the ambassadorial level.

H/T CaptainÂ’s Quarters, Q and O, No Runny Eggs, The Liberty Papers

Posted by: Greg at 10:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 473 words, total size 3 kb.

I’ve made no secret of the fact that I am not a backer of Rudy Giuliani for the presidency – and I’ve acknowledged my concerns over his personal life.

But when Howard Dean raises such issues, IÂ’m stunned by the hypocrisy.

Democratic party chairman Howard Dean said on Thursday that Rudy Giuliani "personal life is a serious problem."

Dean sent the warning on CNN's SITUATION ROOM with host Wolf Blitzer.

Chariman Dean said the former New York City Mayor "has a lot of character issues that he has to answer for. And overwhelmingly, Americans are going to vote on honesty and integrity.... We've begun to reach out to evangelical Christians, and that's a real problem for him. His personal life is a serious problem for him."

BLITZER: Well, describe those character issues...

DEAN: No, I'm not going to get into that stuff. I don't like attacking people on their personal lives, but I can assure you that in the Republican primary, given what went on in the 2000 Republican primary in South Carolina between George Bush and John McCain, those attacks will be made in the Republican Party.

For this to come from the leader of the party of Barney Frank, Gerry Studds, Ted Kennedy, and Bill Clinton is rather shocking. After all, Giuliani has never let a prostitution service run out of his home, had sex with a teenage page, left a woman to drown in his car after diving drunk, or committed perjury about his sex life. After all, the familial sins of Rudy Giuliani don't hold a candle to theirs.

Posted by: Greg at 10:39 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

That is the only conclusion possible, if the claims of the Illinois Senator are accurate.

The Senate's No. 2 Democrat says he knew that the American public was being misled into the Iraq war but remained silent because he was sworn to secrecy as a member of the intelligence committee.

"The information we had in the intelligence committee was not the same information being given to the American people. I couldn't believe it," Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, said Wednesday when talking on the Senate floor about the run-up to the Iraq war in 2002.

"I was angry about it. [But] frankly, I couldn't do much about it because, in the intelligence committee, we are sworn to secrecy. We can't walk outside the door and say the statement made yesterday by the White House is in direct contradiction to classified information that is being given to this Congress."

If, as Durbin claims, he knew of falsehoods being given to the American people, he had a moral and Constitutional responsibility to speak out. But he didnÂ’t. And his claims are contradicted by his fellow Democrats on the Intelligence Committee.

That leads me to two possibilities.

1) Dick Durbin failed to do his duty to the American people by not exposing these so-called misleading statements – especially given his statements that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the United States.

2) Dick Durbin lied to the American people in making this claim of that the administration lied to the American people.

Only one conclusion can be drawn at this point – Dick Durbin is a liar, and unfit to serve in the United States Senate. He should resign immediately.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Stop the ACLU, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Big Dog's Weblog, The Pet Haven Blog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, , Pirate's Cove, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, A Blog For All, 123beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao's Blog, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 10:36 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 365 words, total size 4 kb.

Remember – these are the folks who believe in global warming. You would think they might actually practice what they preach by reducing their carbon emissions and fossil fuel usage. You would be wrong.

A flock of small jets took flight from Washington Thursday, each carrying a Democratic presidential candidate to South Carolina for the first debate of the political season.

For Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, it was wheels up shortly after they voted in favor of legislation requiring that U.S. troops begin returning home from Iraq in the fall.

No one jet pooled, no one took commercial flights to save money, fuel or emissions.

Lifestyle changes to combat global warming? ThatÂ’s for the little people.

Because the politically powerful are different from you and me.

Posted by: Greg at 10:35 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.

IÂ’m not a big Oliver North fan, and never have been. I donÂ’t watch his television work, and rarely read his column. However, he does ask a question that we should demand the Neo-Copperhead Democrats be forced to answer.

Reid and his cohorts in Congress who believe "this war is lost" have acted to ensure that it will be. No one asked them: "If we lost, who won?" The answer should be obvious.

So come on, my Democrat friends – if we follow your plan for defeat in Iraq, who is the winner?

Posted by: Greg at 10:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 107 words, total size 1 kb.

Because after all, heeding the two constituencies closest to the events in Iraq would force them to reconsider their pre-conceived cut-&-run-&-surrender strategy.

The Senate approved a $124 billion Iraq war spending bill yesterday that would force troop withdrawals to begin as early as July 1, inviting President Bush's veto even as party leaders and the White House launch talks to resolve their differences.

The 51 to 46 vote was a triumph for Democrats, who just weeks ago worried about the political wisdom of a veto showdown with the commander in chief as troops fight on the battlefield. But Democrats are hesitant no more. And now that withdrawal language has passed both houses of Congress, even Republicans acknowledge that Bush won't get the spending bill that he has demanded, one with no strings attached.

Sad, isn't it, that the Democrats need to bring about the defeat of the United States military in the central front of the war on terror in order to achieve political "triumph".

Of course, a veto looms.

Which is appropriate, given the words of General Petraeus and the Iraqi government.

The top military commander in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus, warned Thursday that an American troop pullback this fall would lead to an escalation in sectarian killings and worsening violence.

“My sense is that there would be an increase in sectarian violence, a resumption of sectarian violence, were the presence of our forces and Iraqi forces at that time to be reduced,” General Petraeus said at a Pentagon news conference.

And

An Iraqi government spokesman criticized the U.S. Senate vote to begin withdrawing U.S. troops by Oct. 1.

"We see some negative signs in the decision because it sends wrong signals to some sides that might think of alternatives to the political process," Ali al-Dabbagh told The Associated Press.

I'm sure glad that this crop of Democrats wasn't around on the worst days of WWII. We'd all be speaking German and Japanese.

Posted by: Greg at 10:08 PM | Comments (46) | Add Comment
Post contains 343 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Your post seem a little cynical, how come ? ambien cr pharmacy http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?u=23746 more than where can i buy ambien online Nice to meet you!

Posted by: where can i buy ambien online at Wed Feb 4 09:37:03 2009 (rKXlf)

2 I have no idea about this. ambien on line http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?u=23746 buy ambien online Too bad with all the spam on this site

Posted by: buy ambien online at Wed Feb 4 09:39:02 2009 (bsfU4)

3 http://www.fammed.usouthal.edu/forums/member.php?u=4633 http://www.vfxtalk.com/forum/member.php?u=21950 http://www.vfxtalk.com/forum/member.php?u=21956 http://www.carroll.edu/boards/member.php?u=24143 http://soldner.jowood.com/forum/member.php?u=23402

Posted by: Main at Fri Feb 6 20:49:09 2009 (7ax+Q)

4 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/115576 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/115435 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/116194 https://imaginary.hpcc.nd.edu/forums/member.php?u=27 http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?u=23915

Posted by: Go at Tue Feb 10 10:47:56 2009 (FT372)

5 https://imaginary.hpcc.nd.edu/forums/member.php?u=25 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/116175 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/115425 http://www.animeforum.com/member.php?u=192133 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/116190

Posted by: Homepage at Tue Feb 10 20:13:48 2009 (PVhOQ)

6 http://www.hitlabnz.org/forum/member.php?u=1875 https://imaginary.hpcc.nd.edu/forums/member.php?u=26 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5714 http://www.hitlabnz.org/forum/member.php?u=1872 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/115569

Posted by: URL at Fri Feb 13 17:17:08 2009 (vPnxm)

7 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5723 https://imaginary.hpcc.nd.edu/forums/member.php?u=26 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5722 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/115425 https://imaginary.hpcc.nd.edu/forums/member.php?u=25

Posted by: URL at Fri Feb 13 21:03:12 2009 (V4GU+)

8 https://imaginary.hpcc.nd.edu/forums/member.php?u=25 http://www.hitlabnz.org/forum/member.php?u=1872 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/115619 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/116196 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5715

Posted by: Homepage at Sat Feb 14 00:49:25 2009 (B4H8l)

9

Posted by: Link at Sun Feb 15 05:47:21 2009 (Bm8zi)

10

Posted by: Homepage at Mon Feb 16 22:37:52 2009 (vMg7Y)

11 https://imaginary.hpcc.nd.edu/forums/member.php?u=25 http://www.hitlabnz.org/forum/member.php?u=1877http://www.hitlabnz.org/forum/member.php?u=1874 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5715 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5716

Posted by: Home at Wed Feb 18 19:34:10 2009 (OORSG)

12 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5718 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5721 http://www.livescribe.com/forums/member.php?u=3475 http://www.livescribe.com/forums/member.php?u=3474 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5717

Posted by: My page at Fri Feb 20 08:28:20 2009 (U0S0A)

13 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5718 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5721 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5719 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5716 http://www.livescribe.com/forums/member.php?u=3475

Posted by: My page at Fri Feb 20 08:29:19 2009 (QloQs)

14 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5721 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5719 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5720 http://www.livescribe.com/forums/member.php?u=3474 http://www.open-xchange.com/forum/member.php?u=5718

Posted by: Go at Fri Feb 20 17:22:40 2009 (jgFrc)

15

Posted by: Go at Sat Feb 21 11:39:52 2009 (Xz82x)

16 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/4fatboy http://www.dcresource.com/forums/member.php?u=32601 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/120FIORICET http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/122752 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/axyet

Posted by: Go at Sat Feb 28 14:10:02 2009 (ERbYE)

17 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/122692 http://www.livescribe.com/forums/member.php?u=3466 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/122685 http://www.livescribe.com/forums/member.php?u=3469 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/122752

Posted by: Visit at Sun Mar 1 16:11:23 2009 (0yxsk)

18 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/TRAMADOL375 http://www.gamesville.com/profiles/jasuperman http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/rlewis http://www.livescribe.com/forums/member.php?u=3466 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/SOMA350

Posted by: Homepage at Sun Mar 1 20:40:30 2009 (h4Kyy)

19 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/tdol http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/122752 http://www.gamesville.com/profiles/pezdata http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/VALIUM10 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/122747

Posted by: Site at Mon Mar 2 11:27:43 2009 (s4y0q)

20 http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/122747 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/ACOMPLIA2009 http://www.dcresource.com/forums/member.php?u=32601 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/BUY_FIORICET http://chicago.metromix.com/user/profile/122741

Posted by: Site at Mon Mar 2 23:35:10 2009 (bsfU4)

21 male enhancement http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?u=25869

Posted by: male enhancement at Fri Mar 6 08:17:35 2009 (ZOiid)

22 Many a man's reputation would not know his character if they met on the street.

Posted by: Viagra at Mon Oct 5 02:33:26 2009 (5OTIi)

23 The man who goes alone can start today; but he who travels with another must wait till that other is ready.

Posted by: Carisoprodol at Wed Oct 7 06:50:33 2009 (ZZOsb)

24 If you try and take a cat apart to see how it works, the first thing you have in your hands is a non-working cat.

Posted by: Levitra at Wed Oct 7 08:09:57 2009 (t5zcS)

25 All are lunatics, but he who can analyze his delusion is called a philosopher.

Posted by: Viagra at Wed Oct 7 10:48:45 2009 (76mhB)

26 There are some experiences in life which should not be demanded twice from any man, and one of them is listening to the Brahms Requiem.

Posted by: Tramadol at Wed Oct 7 11:41:19 2009 (japUx)

27 One morning I shot a bear in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas I'll never know.

Posted by: Tramadol at Wed Oct 7 12:06:49 2009 (JeqvM)

28 The shepherd always tries to persuade the sheep that their interests and his own are the same.

Posted by: Viagra at Thu Oct 8 13:59:04 2009 (XCPvK)

29 My occupation now, I suppose, is jail inmate.

Posted by: Ultracet at Fri Oct 9 13:26:04 2009 (s1+sK)

30 I've just learned about his illness. Let's hope it's nothing trivial.

Posted by: Ultracet at Sat Oct 10 00:19:42 2009 (rbxvD)

31 I never miss a chance to have sex or appear on television.

Posted by: Carisoprodol at Sat Oct 10 05:54:00 2009 (l3WW4)

32 We are Dyslexia of Borg. Fusistance is retile. Your ass will be laminated.

Posted by: Levitra at Sat Oct 10 08:22:53 2009 (5d8Ya)

33 Real Programmers always confuse Christmas and Halloween because Oct31 == Dec25 !

Posted by: Ultracet at Sat Oct 10 11:42:36 2009 (FCmAw)

34 Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing.

Posted by: Tramadol at Sat Oct 10 13:39:49 2009 (s1+sK)

35 A scholar who cherishes the love of comfort is not fit to be deemed a scholar.

Posted by: Levitra at Sat Oct 10 22:25:04 2009 (LEQUB)

36 If you give a man a fish, he will eat for today. If you teach him to fish, he'll understand why some people think golf is exciting.

Posted by: Carisoprodol at Sun Oct 11 04:36:03 2009 (myI5e)

37 I begin by taking. I shall find scholars later to demonstrate my perfect right.

Posted by: ialis at Sun Oct 11 16:45:59 2009 (ACGiG)

38 Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do.

Posted by: BBW at Mon Oct 12 00:13:23 2009 (STl+X)

39 Be nice to people on your way up because you meet them on your way down.

Posted by: Levitra at Mon Oct 12 00:40:03 2009 (4fw9W)

40 The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side

Posted by: Cheapest viagra at Wed Oct 14 09:25:17 2009 (g0S0B)

41 The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?

Posted by: Buy Levitra at Wed Oct 14 13:57:30 2009 (VO33g)

42 A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.

Posted by: Generic Cialis at Wed Oct 14 15:08:48 2009 (4sPlc)

43 Fill what's empty, empty what's full, and scratch where it itches.

Posted by: Viagra at Wed Oct 14 19:30:00 2009 (xZMVt)

44 The world is a tragedy to those who feel, but a comedy to those who think.

Posted by: Warnings at Sat Oct 17 17:38:39 2009 (Iy/Yg)

45 The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of an expanding bureaucracy.

Posted by: Tube at Sun Oct 18 04:29:17 2009 (yopLN)

46 The covers of this book are too far apart.

Posted by: Big ass pictures at Tue Oct 20 08:51:08 2009 (/uvi7)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Than Harry Reid. So says liberal columnist David Broder.

Given the way the Constitution divides warmaking power between the president, as commander in chief, and Congress, as sole source of funds to support the armed services, it is essential that at some point Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi be able to negotiate with the White House to determine the course America will follow until a new president takes office.

To say that Reid has sent conflicting signals about his readiness for such discussions is an understatement. It has been impossible for his own members, let alone the White House, to sort out for more than 24 hours at a time what ground Reid is prepared to defend.

Instead of reinforcing the important proposition -- defined by the Iraq Study Group-- that a military strategy for Iraq is necessary but not sufficient to solve the myriad political problems of that country, Reid has mistakenly argued that the military effort is lost but a diplomatic-political strategy can still succeed.

The Democrats deserve better, and the country needs more, than Harry Reid has offered as Senate majority leader.

The only question is, would Schumer or Durbin be any better?

Posted by: Greg at 11:16 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 205 words, total size 1 kb.

A law to ban guns from college and university campuses failed in the Arizona legislature. That should come as no surprise.

The surprise should be over this ignorant comment from its sponsor, Rep. Steve Gallardo (D-Phoenix)

"My amendment was not taking away gun rights; it was protecting students," he said.

Yep, just like being on a gun-free campus protected students at Virginia Tech last week.

Posted by: Greg at 11:06 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 75 words, total size 1 kb.

If the Times says there is something improper about the firing, then there must be. After all, they are the New York Times!

Congressman Rick Renzi, an Arizona Republican, was locked in a close re-election battle last fall when the local United States attorney, Paul Charlton, was investigating him for corruption. The investigation appears to have been slowed before Election Day, Mr. Renzi retained his seat, and Mr. Charlton ended up out of a job — one of eight prosecutors purged by the White House and the Justice Department.

The Arizona case adds a disturbing new chapter to that scandal. Congress needs to determine whether Mr. Charlton was fired for any reason other than threatening the Republican PartyÂ’s hold on a Congressional seat.

* * *

There is reason to be suspicious about these events. Last week, all Attorney General Alberto Gonzales could offer was weak excuses for the firing — that Mr. Charlton had asked Mr. Gonzales to reconsider a decision to seek the death penalty in a murder case and that he’d started recording interviews with targets of investigations without asking permission from Justice Department bureaucrats.

Now wait -- you've got a US attorney bucking Justice Department policy and rebelling against top-level decisions coming out of Washington. That isn't a weak excuse -- that is a pretty good one, in my book. The guy was out of step with the priorities of the department. Indeed, that would be sufficient to get you or I fired from our jobs, and is legitimate reason for firing this US Attorney.

Now, if there is ANY ACTUAL EVIDENCE that the firing was improper, bring it on and present it -- I'll gladly support the resignation and prosecution of anyone involved in obstruction of justice. But until there is actual evidence of such activities, the only thing dubious is this NY Times editorial -- and the claims of partisan Democrats looking for a scandal.

Posted by: Greg at 10:24 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 335 words, total size 2 kb.

Looks like Rick Perry may not get to play doctor with the eleven-year-old girls of Texas after all.

A revolt by lawmakers has blocked Gov. Rick PerryÂ’s effort to make Texas the first state to require sixth-grade girls to be vaccinated against a sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.

In a 135-to-2 vote that appeared veto-proof, the Texas House gave final passage on Wednesday to a Senate bill that bars the state from ordering the shots until at least 2011. Even many supporters of the governor resented Mr. PerryÂ’s proposal as an abuse of executive authority.

Indeed, it is the latter issue that is the problem for a great many of us here in Texas. It isn't that we are "pro-cancer" or "anti-woman", but rather that we insist upon the proper constitutional limits on the governor's power be abided by -- adnd Rick Perry blew right through those. We also have some concerns about the vaccine itself, the question of parental rights, and the possible quid-pro-quo that got the governor to issue this executive order.

More to the point, many of us are all for making the vaccine more widely available -- just not mandatory. After all, Merck's ads for Gardasil tell women to ask their doctor IF the vaccine is right for them.

Posted by: Greg at 10:15 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 227 words, total size 2 kb.

If the First Amendment and the questions asked in yesterday's oral arguments before the Supreme Court are any indication, quite possibly.

The Supreme Court put defenders of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law on the defensive on Wednesday in a spirited argument that suggested the court could soon open a significant loophole in the measure.

At issue is a major provision of the five-year-old law that bars corporations and labor unions from paying for advertisements that mention the name of a candidate for federal office and that are broadcast 60 days before an election or 30 days before a primary. By a 5-to-4 vote in December 2003, the court held that the provision, on its face, passed First Amendment muster.

But a new majority may view more expansively the ConstitutionÂ’s protection of political messages as free speech, and invite a flood of advertising paid for by corporations and unions as the 2008 elections move into high gear.

The argument on Wednesday was over whether, despite the 2003 blanket endorsement, the law would be constitutional if applied to three specific ads that an anti-abortion group sought to broadcast before the 2004 Senate election in Wisconsin.

The ads, sponsored by Wisconsin Right to Life Inc., mentioned the state’s two senators, both Democrats: Russell D. Feingold, a co-sponsor of the McCain-Feingold law, who was up for re-election, and Herb Kohl, who was not. The advertisements’ focus was a Democratic-led filibuster of some of President Bush’s judicial nominees. Viewers were urged to “contact Senators Feingold and Kohl and tell them to oppose the filibuster.” The ads provided no contact information, instead directing viewers to a Web site that contained explicit criticism of Mr. Feingold.

A special three-judge Federal District Court here ruled that because the text and images of the ads did not show that they were “intended to influence the voters’ decisions,” they were “genuine issue ads” that the government could not keep off the air.

McCain-Feingold is bad law all the way around -- but this particular provision may be among its worst, effectively stifling the ability of the people to engage in political speech and to petition the government for a redress of grievances -- a two-fer of First Amendment violations. While I'd love to see the entire law declared unconstitutional, I'd settle for this provision. But then again, I've always been one who sees more political speech as better than less.

Posted by: Greg at 10:06 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 410 words, total size 3 kb.

I love this line from a letter in today's Houston Chronicle.

After responding to more than 70 questions with some variation on the words, "I don't recall," [Gonzales] demonstrated he is either a gross incompetent, a party hack or a liar.

Now let's see, if that makes the attorney general "either a gross incompetent, a party hack or a liar", what would answering "I don't recall" or some variation 50 times during testimony before a House committee make a Democrat? Oh that's right -- First Lady, Senator from New York, and the leading candidate for her party's presidential nomination!

Posted by: Greg at 09:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.

Lawmakers in Pennsylvania are all in an uproar over a pro-gun sign held by Second Amendment rights activists at the state capitol.

Members of the Legislative Black Caucus called yesterday for a state police investigation into the display of what they called a racist banner in the Capitol that said a Latino lawmaker should be "hung from the tree of liberty for his acts of treason against the Constitution."

The outcry came hours after several gun-rights proponents unfurled a banner saying that State Rep. Angel Cruz (D., Phila.) should be hanged for introducing legislation that would require people to register their guns and pay a $10 fee to the state police.

"People want to hang me for doing my job," Cruz said, adding that his bill was aimed at trying to reduce gun violence in his district.

"I am appalled by the actions by a group of demonstrators," State Rep. Jewell Williams (D., Phila.) said. "We will not tolerate people making threats against members."

Williams was one of 10 Philadelphia-area lawmakers who appeared at a news conference yesterday afternoon to denounce the banner's language as a "terroristic threat" that raised the ugly specter of mob violence against African Americans.

Cruz, who is of Puerto Rican ancestry, is a member of the Black Caucus.

Now hereÂ’s the sign that so offended folks.

Now the language is provocative, but clearly not a threat – especially if one has any notion of the quote referenced by the phrase “the tree of liberty”.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Who was the hate-mongering terrorist who is responsible for such an evil sentiment being expressed?

Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence an third President of the United States – generally credited as being one of the greatest Americans who ever lived. It refers to the reason why the right to keep and bear arms was and must be viewed as fundamental to a free society – that a free people must be armed to preserve their liberty in the face of tyranny.

So cool your jets, folks, and recognize that these demonstrators are simply more historically literate than you are. And to the demonstrators, might I suggest that you recognize your average lawmaker is not terribly bright, so it is probably best to assume that they won’t understand an appeal to the words of any president that predate “I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.”

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson's Website, The Random Yak, Adam's Blog, Maggie's Notebook, Big Dog's Weblog, The Pet Haven Blog, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Pursuing Holiness, Conservative Thoughts, The Magical Rose Garden, Faultline USA, stikNstein... has no mercy, , Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Renaissance Blogger, Planck's Constant, CORSARI D'ITALIA, Gone Hollywood, The Yankee Sailor, and OTB Sports, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 12:08 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 515 words, total size 6 kb.

This case could have a big impact upon the legal accountability of members of Congress – including, perhaps, the issues surrounding last year’s search of William Jefferson’s office. The issue is simple – how far does the “speech and debate” clause of the Constitution extend in immunizing Senators and Representatives, and to what degree do statutes (and, one presumes, warrants) have upon Congressional offices.

To ensure robust debate, the U.S. Constitution protects members of Congress from lawsuits rising out of their legislative duties. But does that provide immunity from an aide's claims of discrimination?

The U.S. Supreme Court took up a Minnesota case Tuesday that could answer that question.

The case involves former Minnesota Sen. Mark Dayton, who was sued by staffer Brad Hanson for discrimination after he was fired in 2002.

Dayton said he dismissed Hanson, who directed his Minnesota office, for poor performance; Hanson claimed it was because he had a heart condition and needed time off.

A lower court allowed the lawsuit to proceed, but the case has never been tried, pending higher court rulings on whether it should be.

The issue at hand is whether the staffing of one’s congressional office is an administrative act or a part of the legislative process. If the court holds that it is the latter, it seems to me that one could then infer that any activity or material in the office could be deemed a part of the “legislative process”, rendering those offices “safe zones” for stashing evidence of criminal conduct. On the other hand, a ruling for the plaintiff in this case would apply the laws of the land to members of both houses by upholding the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995, which gave congressional employees the same legal rights as other American workers (holding for Dayton would effectively strike down this law as unconstitutional).

DaytonÂ’s team is now arguing that the case should be deemed moot because he was able to stall the matter until he left office. That argument should not fly, because for four years Brad Hanson may have suffered the consequences of illegal employment discrimination, and he is therefore entitled to his day in court.

Posted by: Greg at 11:58 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 369 words, total size 2 kb.

Ten years ago, Democrats called impeachment an attempt to “overturn the results of an election”. Today, at least one of those same Democrats calls it a fulfillment of the Declaration of Independence.

"I do not stand alone," Dennis Kucinich said as he stood, alone, in front of a cluster of microphones yesterday evening.
The Ohio congressman, a Democratic presidential candidate, was holding a news conference outside the Capitol to announce that he had just filed articles of impeachment against Vice President Cheney. But subsequent questioning quickly revealed that Kucinich had not yet persuaded any of his 434 colleagues to be a cosponsor, that he had not even discussed the matter with House Democratic leaders, and that he had not raised the subject with the Judiciary Committee.
Kucinich did have one thing: a copy of the Declaration of Independence. And he was not afraid to read it. "We hold these truths to be self-evident," the aspiring impeachment manager read at the start of his news conference. He continued all the way through the bit about the right of the people to abolish the government.
"These words from the Declaration of Independence are instructive at this moment," he said.

I looked at the resolution, and Kucinich wants to declare disagreements over policy and good-faith reliance upon the best available intelligence into a high crime or misdemeanor. On the other hand, he and his party couldn’t support impeachment of a president over perjury – an actual felony (AKA "high crime"). That tells you everything you need to know about the Democrats – they seek power at any cost, even the integrity of the US Constitution.

Posted by: Greg at 11:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 284 words, total size 2 kb.

After all, it might get in the way of cutting, running, and surrendering. So one simply chose not to hear what General Petraeus has to say – and the other declares anything that contradicts the assertions that the war is lost is a lie. At least one Republican has had the guts to speak out on this disgraceful situation.

On the other hand, the (relatively) moderate Arab states in region don’t want the US to withdraw from Iraq because of the very real, very negative consequences of such a course of action.

The so-called axis of moderate Arab states - comprising Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan - dreads an early US withdrawal. First, because it would be widely interpreted as an American defeat, which would weaken these pro-American regimes while both energising and radicalising their populations.

Second, if the US leaves, the emergence of a Shia regime in Iraq - in itself an offensive prospect to them - would only be a matter of time. Facing Arab antipathy, this regime would be likely to look eastward and forge close ties with its Iranian co-religionists. In the view of most Arabs, this would present a formidable challenge, setting in motion a series of dangerous events - an Iranian-Iraqi alliance; political and material support from Arab countries being offered to disgruntled Iraqi Sunni groups; retaliation by Iraqi forces; and the threat of broader regional involvement.

Third, a US departure risks triggering Iraq's partition. As some Arabs see it, the occupation is what holds the country together. So long as coalition forces are deployed, a full-blown breakup can be avoided.

But the no-faith (in our troops) based Democrats don’t care about the consequences of their strategy – except the hoped-for electoral success a perceived military defeat brings to their party. It must such, having to root against your country to get power for yourself. A patriot couldn’t do it.

Posted by: Greg at 11:56 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 326 words, total size 3 kb.

After all, it might get in the way of cutting, running, and surrendering. So one simply chose not to hear what General Petraeus has to say – and the other declares anything that contradicts the assertions that the war is lost is a lie. At least one Republican has had the guts to speak out on this disgraceful situation.

On the other hand, the (relatively) moderate Arab states in region donÂ’t want the US to withdraw from Iraq because of the very real, very negative consequences of such a course of action.

The so-called axis of moderate Arab states - comprising Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan - dreads an early US withdrawal. First, because it would be widely interpreted as an American defeat, which would weaken these pro-American regimes while both energising and radicalising their populations.

Second, if the US leaves, the emergence of a Shia regime in Iraq - in itself an offensive prospect to them - would only be a matter of time. Facing Arab antipathy, this regime would be likely to look eastward and forge close ties with its Iranian co-religionists. In the view of most Arabs, this would present a formidable challenge, setting in motion a series of dangerous events - an Iranian-Iraqi alliance; political and material support from Arab countries being offered to disgruntled Iraqi Sunni groups; retaliation by Iraqi forces; and the threat of broader regional involvement.

Third, a US departure risks triggering Iraq's partition. As some Arabs see it, the occupation is what holds the country together. So long as coalition forces are deployed, a full-blown breakup can be avoided.

But the no-faith (in our troops) based Democrats don’t care about the consequences of their strategy – except the hoped-for electoral success a perceived military defeat brings to their party. It must such, having to root against your country to get power for yourself. A patriot couldn’t do it.

Posted by: Greg at 11:56 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 336 words, total size 3 kb.

After all, they are the media and have special rights -- the rest of America has no right on under the Constitution to comment on political matters if the government incumbents order them to shut up.

Corporations have been prohibited since the early 1900’s from contributing to political campaigns. This ban and a similar one imposed later on unions prevents these wealthy entities from buying elections and elected officials. The Supreme Court, in upholding these bans, has recognized that Congress has a compelling interest in preventing the “corrosive and distorting effects” of corporate and union contributions.

Corporations and unions have, not surprisingly, tried to get around the ban. One tactic they have used is bankrolling phony “issue ads”: commercials that purport to educate the public about a policy issue, but are actually intended to elect or defeat a particular candidate. Today’s case involves phony issue ads run on radio and television by a group called Wisconsin Right to Life, which accepted major contributions from corporations against Senator Russell Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin.

The ads attacked Mr. Feingold and WisconsinÂ’s other senator, Herb Kohl, for blocking President BushÂ’s judicial nominees, and urged the public to contact the two men to complain. Clearly the adsÂ’ purpose was to try to prevent Mr. FeingoldÂ’s re-election. Wisconsin Right to Life had made it clear that it was targeting him for defeat. Mr. FeingoldÂ’s opponents were using the issue of judicial nominees against him. The ads ran shortly before the election, while the Senate was in recess and no votes on judges were being held. And they did not provide contact information for Mr. Feingold and Mr. Kohl.

Let's be quite honest here -- these ads were really no different in content from the sort of things that regularly appear on the editorial pages of the New York Times (a corporation, don't you know) on a daily basis, urging a position and implicitly seeking to influence the behavior of politicians and the actions of voters. In fact, the corporation known as the New York Times offers endorsements -- specific directions to voters on who to vote for. But this corporate entity, the New York Times, is unrestricted, while issue-related groups like Wisconsin Right To life (which receives money from both individuals and corporations) is banned from speaking. Hardly seems reasonable -- especially since Wisconsin Right To Life is engaged in speech, the freedom of which is as firmly guaranteed by the First Amendment as is freedom of speech.

But I'm particularly disturbed by this closing line.

It would be disturbing if the court now changed the rules to make it easier for special interests to corrupt American democracy.

Actually, no it wouldn't be -- what would be disturbing is for the Supreme Court to turn the First Amendment on its head and decree that pornography, a crucifix dipped in urine and flag burning have more protection under the Constitution than measured and responsible speech on political matters and politicians.

Posted by: Greg at 10:32 PM | Comments (196) | Add Comment
Post contains 518 words, total size 3 kb.

Lord knows that I am a big advocate for a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment, but I have to support this move by Virginia's governor.

Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine said yesterday that he is considering an executive order to make sure that gun sellers have more information about the mental health of potential buyers, a move that would have kept Seung Hui Cho from purchasing the handguns he used to kill 32 people at Virginia Tech last week.

A court had found Cho to be dangerously mentally ill, but that information was not available in the computer systems used by the outlets that sold Cho the guns. Kaine's proposal would ensure that such mental health information be in the database.

"I think there's a way to tighten this and to get more data onto the system," Kaine (D) said. If that data had been available at the gun stores, Cho, who killed himself after the rampage April 16, would have been barred by federal law from buying the weapons.

Even lawmakers who have traditionally been reluctant to restrict gun ownership said that providing additional information would help keep guns out of the hands of the dangerously mentally ill.

"The murderer down at Virginia Tech never should have been able to purchase a gun," said Del. Mark L. Cole (R-Fredericksburg). "Someone who's declared a threat to themselves or others should not be able to purchase a firearm."

Since Cho was adjudicated an imminent threat to himself or others in 2005, he was ineligible to make that gun purchase under federal law -- but only actual involuntary commitments got entered in the gun database, not cases in which the individual voluntarily went to into a mental health facility. This change corrects bad practice on the part of Virginia -- and I do not know a singe gun owner who would question the propriety of this move by Gov. Kaine.

Posted by: Greg at 09:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 333 words, total size 2 kb.

Not that I think it goes quite far enough.

Maybe a congressional race was so nasty that a large number of voters simply didn't want to check the box next to either candidate.

That's what state Sen. Mike Bennett said he believes happened in the now-infamous District 13 congressional race.

Hoping to prevent a repeat, he persuaded the Senate Ethics and Elections committee to approve a bill, SB-494, on Monday that would require ballots to have the additional option of "I choose not to vote."

That option could not win a race, and the actual candidate with the highest number of votes would win the election.

Bennett, R-Bradenton, said the no-choice option would enable uninformed or disgusted voters to opt out in a way that clearly displays their intention to abstain for elections officials.

I’ve got a better idea – one freely stolen from L. Neil Smith’s classic libertarian science fiction novel, The Probability Broach.

Give us the option of “None Of The Above Is Acceptable”. And let that choice be a possible winner. Then either leave the office vacant for the course of the term, or mandate a special election which excludes any of the defeated candidates.

That might raise the caliber of elected official in this country.

Posted by: Greg at 10:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 221 words, total size 2 kb.

You have to love a man who insists that the “beautiful people” live up to the standards they want to see imposed upon the rest of us.

A leading skeptic of global-warming science is challenging celebrity activists such as Al Gore and Sheryl Crow to lower their "carbon footprint" to the same level as the average American by Earth Day in April 2008.

"I simply believe that former Vice President Al Gore and his Hollywood friends who demand we change the way we live to avert this over-hyped 'crisis' not only talk the talk, but walk the walk," said Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican.

"How hard is it for these elitists to become as frugal in their energy consumption as the average American? I think the American public has a right to know they are being had."

* * *

Yesterday, the Web site thesmokinggun.com revealed that Miss Crow's tour caravan includes three tractor-trailer rigs, four buses and six cars.

Come on, Sheryl – if it is really An Inconvenient Truth that global warming is all about Earth In The Balance, then you need to do your part. Even if that means scaling back your tour and entourage.

Posted by: Greg at 09:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 1 kb.

Deepest condolences to her loved ones.

Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, a seven-term congresswoman from southern California, died early Sunday of cancer. She was 68.

Millender-McDonald died at her home in Carson, said her chief of staff, Bandele McQueen.

The congresswoman had asked for a four- to six-week leave of absence from the House last week to deal with her illness. McQueen couldn't immediately provide details on what form of cancer Millender-McDonald had, but said she had been receiving hospice care.

Posted by: Greg at 12:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.

NOTE TO LEFTISTS AND OTHER INTELLECTUALLY DEFICIENT FOLKS: SATIRE

Of course, some things never change.

* "I believe . . . that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week."--Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, April 19, 2007

* "Resolved, that this convention does explicitly declare, as the sense of the American people, that after four years of failure to restore the Union by the experiment of war, during which, under the pretence of military necessity, or war power higher than the Constitution, the Constitution itself has been disregarded in every part, and public liberty and private right alike trodden down, and the material prosperity of the country essentially impaired, justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand that immediate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities, with a view to an ultimate convention of the States or other peaceable means, to the end that at the earliest practicable moment peace may be restored on the basis of the federal Union of the States."--1864 Democratic platform

H/T Lundesigns & Michelle Malkin

UPDATE: Even Harry Reid's hometown paper thinks he is out of line.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson's Website, The Pet Haven Blog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Pursuing Holiness, Pet's Garden Blog, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, , stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Right Pundits, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, 123beta, Maggie's Notebook, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, MONICA, Cao's Blog, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, , Jo's Cafe, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Sujet- Celebrities, Allie Is Wired, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, CORSARI D'ITALIA, The Yankee Sailor, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 03:07 AM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 323 words, total size 6 kb.

Well, not really. A big part of her effort will come in the form of participation in the carbon-offset scam.

To observe Earth Day on Sunday, Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign said it would become "carbon neutral" to help fight global warming.

"We all must act — and that includes our campaign," the Democratic front-runner said in a statement Friday.

The campaign said it would take several steps to conserve energy, such as buying 100 percent recycled paper products, installing motion-controlled lights and purchasing carbon offsets through Native Energy, a Vermont-based company that produces renewable energy.

I'll be much more impressed when Hillary gives up her private airplane and flies commercial. Or better yet, when she stops breathing and speaking -- thereby ending her personal expulsion of so-called greenhouse gases into the environment.

Posted by: Greg at 02:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 137 words, total size 1 kb.

From James Q. Wilson, one of AmericaÂ’s greatest living political scientists.

AS FOR THE European disdain for our criminal culture, many of those countries should not spend too much time congratulating themselves. In 2000, the rate at which people were robbed or assaulted was higher in England, Scotland, Finland, Poland, Denmark and Sweden than it was in the United States. The assault rate in England was twice that in the United States. In the decade since England banned all private possession of handguns, the BBC reported that the number of gun crimes has gone up sharply.

Some of the worst examples of mass gun violence have also occurred in Europe. In recent years, 17 students and teachers were killed by a shooter in one incident at a German public school; 14 legislators were shot to death in Switzerland, and eight city council members were shot to death near Paris.

The rest of the article is a masterpiece as well, coming from the pen of a distinguished scholar, not a polemicist. I encourage you to read it.

Posted by: Greg at 02:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.

She not only seems intent upon bashing Catholics, but also upon imposing a religious test for holding public office.

On today’s edition of the ABC show, “The View,” the discussion turned to the Supreme Court’s ruling yesterday affirming the partial-birth abortion ban. In an angry tone, Rosie O’Donnell asked, “You know what concerns me? How many of the Supreme Court judges are Catholic, Barbara?” Walters responded, “Five.” O’Donnell: “Five. Five are Catholic. Separation of church and state, America.” Walters then said that when the Catholic justices were vetted, they said they would not vote in a particular way because of their religion. But she then said, “It is interesting they’re Catholic.” After others spoke, Walters said she thought the justices were able to separate their faith from everyday life. To which O’Donnell replied, “From your everyday life but not hopefully from the foundation of our government. Separation of church and state.”

So, Rosie, do you want to placed a quota on the number of Catholics that can hold public office – despite the fact that such a quota would clearly run afoul of the Constitution? For that matter, have you read the various opinions in the case to find out what the legal and constitutional reasoning was behind the decision – or did you simply let your bigotry run rampant as you look at the religion of the justices?

Oh, and as far as the issue of “separation of church and state” – which is a phrase that appears nowhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights – maybe it is time that we have a little separation of fat, ugly, obnoxious, bigoted lesbian and talk-show. Disney-ABC Television Group needs to give Rosie O’Donnell the Don Imus treatment.

Oh, and on a side note, it looks like Rosie isn't alone in stoking the fires of America's oldest and most persistent prejudice.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Church and State, Stop the ACLU, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson's Website, The Pet Haven Blog, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, , Pirate's Cove, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, 123beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, MONICA, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao's Blog, , Jo's Cafe, Allie Is Wired, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, CORSARI D'ITALIA, Gone Hollywood, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 02:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 418 words, total size 6 kb.

She not only seems intent upon bashing Catholics, but also upon imposing a religious test for holding public office.

On today’s edition of the ABC show, “The View,” the discussion turned to the Supreme Court’s ruling yesterday affirming the partial-birth abortion ban. In an angry tone, Rosie O’Donnell asked, “You know what concerns me? How many of the Supreme Court judges are Catholic, Barbara?” Walters responded, “Five.” O’Donnell: “Five. Five are Catholic. Separation of church and state, America.” Walters then said that when the Catholic justices were vetted, they said they would not vote in a particular way because of their religion. But she then said, “It is interesting they’re Catholic.” After others spoke, Walters said she thought the justices were able to separate their faith from everyday life. To which O’Donnell replied, “From your everyday life but not hopefully from the foundation of our government. Separation of church and state.”

So, Rosie, do you want to placed a quota on the number of Catholics that can hold public office – despite the fact that such a quota would clearly run afoul of the Constitution? For that matter, have you read the various opinions in the case to find out what the legal and constitutional reasoning was behind the decision – or did you simply let your bigotry run rampant as you look at the religion of the justices?

Oh, and as far as the issue of “separation of church and state” – which is a phrase that appears nowhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights – maybe it is time that we have a little separation of fat, ugly, obnoxious, bigoted lesbian and talk-show. Disney-ABC Television Group needs to give Rosie O’Donnell the Don Imus treatment.

Oh, and on a side note, it looks like Rosie isn't alone in stoking the fires of America's oldest and most persistent prejudice.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Church and State, Stop the ACLU, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson's Website, The Pet Haven Blog, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, , Pirate's Cove, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, 123beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, MONICA, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao's Blog, , Jo's Cafe, Allie Is Wired, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, CORSARI D'ITALIA, Gone Hollywood, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 02:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 424 words, total size 6 kb.

As I read this description of yesterdayÂ’s Senate testimony by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, I couldnÂ’t help but be put in mind of the trial of Charles Darnay in DickensÂ’ A Tale of Two Cities.

Democrats turned the Senate Judiciary Committee into a circus-like political rally Thursday, complete with chants from costumed demonstrators. Alberto Gonzales was the most sober man in the room.
How does "The World's Greatest Deliberative Body" treat the nation's chief law enforcement officer?

With his panel breaking for lunch, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy was seen giggling as a departing Attorney General Gonzales was subjected to crowds holding up signs and bellowing "Resign!" in the hearing room. After Gonzales returned for the afternoon session, noisy demonstrators were allowed to roam freely around the room with their placards. At the hearing's final gavel they sang and shouted taunts.

Why didn't Leahy have the Capitol Police clear the room? Why didn't the ranking Republican, the liberal Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, call on Leahy to do so? Or someone on the committee concerned with the Senate's highfalutin reputation?

They didn't because that mob demanding Gonzales' scalp is what the hearing was all about. The senators may have worn suits and ties and spoken in softer tones (though not always), but their blood lust for the White House is just as fervent as the extremists who wore orange garb and pink police costumes and had "Arrest Gonzales" duct-taped on their backs.

Leahy’s actions and inaction were a disgrace to the Senate virtually unrivaled since the founding of the Republic (perhaps exceeded only by the failure of Democrats to come to the aid of Charles Sumner as he was brutally beaten at his desk by a fellow-Democrat from the House of Representatives) – and the grandstanding by members of the committee indicates the proceeding had even less concern with justice than the proceedings at Salem in 1692.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Church and State, Stop the ACLU, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson's Website, The Pet Haven Blog, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, , Pirate's Cove, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, 123beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, MONICA, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao's Blog, , Jo's Cafe, Allie Is Wired, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, CORSARI D'ITALIA, Gone Hollywood, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 426 words, total size 6 kb.

As many Americans begin questioning the rationale of denying legal adults the right to drink, now the state of Texas wants to infantilize legal adults in the area of smoking, too.

You're old enough to vote and serve your country at 18, but you'd have to wait a year to buy cigarettes under a bill approved Thursday by the Texas Senate.

"The further you can put this (legal age) off, there's a much better chance that people will not start to smoke," said Sen. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio.

His Senate Bill 448, approved 26-4, moves to an uncertain future in the House, where it doesn't yet have a sponsor. Rep. Garnet Coleman, a Houston Democrat on the House Public Health Committee, said he doesn't have a position on the bill but would like to see it aired.

"I'm in favor of restricting who can buy cigarettes," Coleman said, "but I think there are a lot of people who are going to say, 'Enough is enough. You've taxed me to death, now you're saying that someone (age 1 can't buy cigarettes.' "

You can get married at 18. You can vote at 18. You can join the military and fight and die for your country at 18. Precisely why the hell shouldnÂ’t you be able to smoke (or drink) at 18?

Posted by: Greg at 01:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 228 words, total size 1 kb.

But then again, his long litany of hate-filled and racist comments already told us that – and since he was addressing a group run by arch-racist Al Sharpton, we shouldn’t be surprised by this.

Speaking at Al Sharpton’s National Action Network event in New York, Biden said President Bush, Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove are responsible for what he called “the politics of polarization.”

Biden said Republicans have created an environment that brings bad things to the United States.

“I would argue, since 1994 with the Gingrich revolution, just take a look at Iraq, Venezuela, Katrina, what’s gone down at Virginia Tech, Darfur, Imus. Take a look. This didn’t happen accidentally, all these things,” he said.

I wish I was stunned – but this is typical of the Party of Hatred, Imbecility, and Surrender.

UPDATE: One newspaper has the courage to speak out.

So if we have this straight - partisan Republicans are now responsible for ImusÂ’ show (on which Biden was a frequent guest) and the massacre at Virginia Tech? And this man thinks he should be president?

Posted by: Greg at 01:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.

I've said in the past that I'll vote for a Nazi or a Communist -- or worse yet, Hillary Clinton -- before I vote for John McCain for President because of his role in imposing campaign spending regulations that fly in the face of the clear language of the US Constitution.

Today, Bradley Smith lays out the constitutional problems with such regulations.

In his most recent Townhall column, Armstrong Williams has laid out a plan that he claims will "divorce" money from politics. In the process, Williams employs every tired canard of the campaign finance "reform" community.

But a few words were noticeably absent from Williams' column. There was no mention, for example, of "the First Amendment." Nor was there any mention of "free speech." And while I looked for "freedom" and "liberty," alas, these too were absent. This comes as no surprise. Advocates of political speech regulation have for so long felt unconstrained by the First Amendment's seemingly clear command, that "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech," that they now ignore it as a matter of course.

The closest Williams comes to addressing the constitutional problems with campaign finance regulation is the bare assertion that "giving money is not giving voice." But it most certainly is. In modern society, money facilitates speech. It costs money to publish a newspaper or operate a broadcast station. It is not possible to run a political campaign or effectively criticize officeholders without spending money for signs, advertisements, rallies, mailers, and more.

In his column, Williams had gone so far as to quote a misguided senior citizen who wants political speech limitation and regulation.

But I (and millions of Americans, a few of which are even lawmakers) disagree. First, giving money is not giving voice. Second, privately donated money is not necessary for a campaign if "clean" or public money is given equally to each candidate. I agree with the political activist Doris Haddock who literally walked across the country at the age of 88 in hopes of bringing about true campaign finance reform. She said, "If money is speech, then those with more money have more speech, and that idea is antithetical to a democracy that cherishes political fairness. It makes us no longer equal citizens."

Haddock, of course, is wrong -- unless one wishes to argue that the existence of large corporate media like the television networks, New York Times, and Time Magazine are also "antithetical to a democracy that cherishes political fairness" and "makes us no longer equal citizens." After all, the vast spending of these news organizations ALSO give them an unequal voice that can drown out the voices of the less well-heeled among us (such as this blogger) and get them access that the common man cannot obtain. Would Haddock (and Williams) accept the argument that "money is not speech" and therefore allow Congress to limit the budgets of news organizations and the amount that Americans spend to access the same? Or how about regulations, similar to those imposed upon advocacy groups, that ban reporting upon or editorializing about candidates and officeholders for 25% of an election year? Of course not!

Smith then points out the fundamental understanding of the Founders about the nature of men and the nature of our constitutional republic -- and Williams' fundamental misunderstanding of the First Amendment.

When the Founders drafted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they were not naïve. They knew that men weren't angels, and that factions would sometimes try to harness the power of government for their own benefit. They wrote the First Amendment with full knowledge of this threat. Indeed, they wrote the First Amendment because they also knew that one of the surest checks against government corruption was the unfettered ability to criticize those in government. Williams' scheme abandons these cherished First Amendment principles. The likely result is more and harder to detect corruption. The long term effects could be even worse. As the Founders knew, prohibiting ordinary citizens from effectively discussing politics is no prescription for clean government. It is a prescription for tyranny.

Money may or may not be speech, depending upon how you look at it -- but cutting off private money is a sure way of strangling the speech of citizens, an action which the Founders would have rightly labeled tyranny and which they would have understood merited the exercise the rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment to dislodge the tyrants.

Posted by: Greg at 11:02 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 757 words, total size 5 kb.