What the Hell.. Complete VA database in some guy's HOUSE?


In the biggest idiocy of many involving federal bureaucracy, some VA 'data analyst' took home a full copy of a Veteran database to work on a project. His house was burgled.. and, yep, one of the things burglars go for first is the computer.

This means ALL of some 26 million veterans are now in risk of identity theft.

This guy should not only be fired, he and his supervisor should be brought up on charges of criminal negligence.

For some of you who dont understand the seriousness of this, this is the largest personal information security breach.. EVER!! At least that we know of.

If the burglars were pro's and not just opportunists... then they will know what they have is worth close to a million bucks in value. And there will be few traces of their comings and goings... unlike a hacking-into situation.

If the burglars are stupid, they WONT ditch all the loot, they'll try to sell it and may be caught... but if the other stuff all lands in a river after they copy the info onto a DVD, lots of folks are in for a rough time with their finances for YEARS.

I worked with test databases that were lot less valuable, but I ALWAYS did something that made them inert, such as scrambling the related data... and that is relatively easy to do.

Sometimes I wish I had gone through a pre-frontal lobotomy and worked as a Guvmint Emplodee!

While Illegals take a dump on our porch..

..meantime, back home, Mexican police are shooting striking miners who occupied company offices to protest inaction to remedy unsafe mine conditions.
- link is to Boing Boing

Please bear in mind that many of the Mexicans marching today want to 'take back' the US southwest. That would be interesting... in little more than a few decades under Mexican 'rule' it would probably turn into the just the same kind of shithole they came here to ecscape from.

I admire the courage of the Mexicans who come here to work, but wouldnt it be better if they challenged their own corrupt third world government to improve conditions at home instead of begging and stealing from their neighbors?

New political semantics...

Given Bush clueless recent Dubai Ports fiasco... and the fact that the Dem's are still trying to work out a 'slogan' and cant get it right, let alone what it is they actually believe in...

Let's think about the fact that, if our local and state politicos are our 'elected officials'... then our national figures must be out Elected Super-ficials!

If Progressives like Darwinism as social theory..

.. Then why dont they believe it applies to humans?

Answer: They do, they just pretend it doesn't so as not to offend.

Just yer average 'Thought of the Day'.

Bush Lied, Bush Lied, Bush Lied, Bush Lied!!!!

Yet more 'Bash-bush' from the media, this time by releasing incomplete transcripts and video's on the Katrina response.. now that enough time has gone by, the left is even casting Michael Brown as the 'scapegoat'.
That they parse it down to the fine edge by using Bush's rather lame: "No one could have predicted the levees would be breached." statement shows how desperate the left is to gain some purchase and show themselves in a relatively good light.

And in the Lefty blogs, the shouting for "Impeach Bush" will continue from now till 2008... it doesnt matter what the issue is, "He lied! Impeach him!" will be shouted over and over.

But it wont happen.. not unless Bush does something incredibly more stupid than even the ports deal.

And we know why. Because any impeachment on any of the issues they have whined about to this day will backfire on them and open testimony, under oath, will show the Democrats and Left for what they are... and they will finally have cut their own throats.

If I HAVE to point it out for you, you wouldnt understand anyway.

As the Lights go out, slowly, in Europe...

We see that some there are beginning to wake up to the chaos they have created, by dint of their social activism, over the last generation.
We should fear Holland’s silence

Holland — with its disproportionately high Muslim population — is the canary in the mine. Its once open society is closing, and Europe is closing slowly behind it. It looks, from Holland, like the twilight of liberalism — not the “liberalism” that is actually libertarianism, but the liberalism that is freedom. Not least freedom of expression.

All across Europe, debate on Islam is being stopped. Italy’s greatest living writer, Oriana Fallaci, soon comes up for trial in her home country, and in Britain the government seems intent on pushing through laws that would make truths about Islam and the conduct of its followers impossible to voice.
....
Europe is shuffling into darkness. It is proving incapable of standing up to its enemies, and in an effort to accommodate the peripheral rights of a minority is failing to protect the most basic rights of its own people.

The governments of Europe have been tricked into believing that criticism of a belief is the same thing as criticism of a race. And so it is becoming increasingly difficult and dangerous to criticise a growing and powerful ideology within our midst. It may soon, in addition, be made illegal.
...
As I left the Netherlands I once again felt terrible sorrow for a country that is slowly being lost. A society which should be carefree and inspiring has become dark and worried. The jihad in Europe is winning. And Holland, and our continent, takes one step further into a dark and menacing future.

It is the Liberals who have done this... and the Liberals who will cave in to self-muting, by way of fear. Sure, there are many in the 'progressive' camps who will finally stand up and fight the fascism of the Imams. But they will arrive at the party, late. Probably because they want to get all the use they can out of their "Hate-Speech" picket signs directed at their own governments.

How much blood will flow from their naive puristic idealism? We dont know.. but it definitely will be of 'biblical proportions'. And all we have to do is steel ourselves and read Revelations to see it coming.

Jeff Foxworthy, Larry the Cable Guy, Gore, Kerry and Dean..

Quick... what do they all have in common?

They all want the ear of Billy Joe Bob, the 'bubba'... Difference being the political ones only want him come election time. At which time they will talk down to him and think they're getting somewhere.

As in Kerry's "Kin I git me a huntin' License, here?" when he went photo-op hunting in Ohio in 2004.

They think the gum chewing, pick'em'up drivin', gun totin' yahoo's of the heartland dont understand nuance.
Well, they do... and the nuance they understand is "Someone wants to kill us..". And they ALSO understand when they are being made fun of.

Which they consider okay... if it's Larry or Jeff doing it... because they do it as one of them. But the hysterical Gore and Kerry and Kennedy bashing the guy they see as 'sorta one of us.. cuz he dont speak so good.." leaves 'em cold. And they might not even remember it until election time.

But then, when they try to figure out who to vote for and what matters most, that old common sense nuance is going to come back to them.

The latest histrionics on Cheney's hunting hilarity is gonna leave 'em cold, too. They'll laugh at Cheney and make fun of the incident but when it comes down to it, they've all been there, or close to it. And the more the beltway idjits harp on it, the better for Cheney.

And they'd vote for Larry or Foxworthy for Pres before they'd vote for those pitiful Eastern Dem elitists.

It would be even funnier if the Libs weren't so pathetic.

Steelers take it all!

I am so good! All the joy of the NFL season, as a Bengals fan, turned to dust for me on the second play of the first Cincinnati possession in the first playoff game they'd had in 15 miserable years.

For those of you who don't know the particulars... a Steeler defender was blocked down as he went for Carson Palmer, and Palmer went out with ACL and MCL tears. Our season was done.

Oh, Kitna is a good backup... perhaps, the best in the NFL.. but Carson is our GUY! And Kitna was rusty. Maybe, in looking back, it would have been better if the coaches had pretended it was nothing serious and that Carson might be able to come back in.. but, in reality, all the air went out of the Bengals' balloon in the second half. Well, we can't have a do-over on that. Life as a fan sux sometimes.

But after the Steelers took out the Colts, surely the best team in the AFC, and Denver beat the Pats, the second best team in the AFC, I began to think there was more afoot than just a team peaking at just the right time; there was a finger of fate in this.

Just as certain as I was that, with Carson at QB, the Bengals would have won that day.

So I picked Steelers to win the SB against Seattle... and posted the same on a fan forum on January 15. A lucky guess? Nope, no doubt in my mind they'd do it, it's just one of those things you KNOW! Now, on that same forum, there's a lot of Browns' fans... and I took stick...they hate the Steelers with a white-hot passion. But I'm a Bengals fan, I have had to be objective or I'd have off'd myself over it... well, not really.

Anyway, as the day of the game came around, I realized the Steelers would win by 10. I didnt know that before but it was clear to me the 4 point spread was at least 4 off.

Heh! So, if I was so certain, why didnt I lay some cash on it? Well, that part is the kicker..I found out some time ago that if I actually stood to gain anything by these 'hunches', they didnt work out. I could only bet my ego on it.

Oh, well.... I had a minister once, who was dead certain God was a football fan. Bet it was mainly so's he'd have an excuse to watch NFL on Sunday instead of doing calls except in emergency. But maybe there's something to it.. maybe Jerome Bettis really HAS been smiled on!

Never mind.. it'll be all that much sweeter next year, when Carson and the Cats eat the Steelers' lunch, both home and away!

You're on notice, OSHA and EPA, that 'new-car smell' is a deadly Plot!

Environmental group contends drivers, passengers are breathing dangerous chemicals found in car interiors; calls for new regs.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - A Michigan environmental group is charging that at least part of the so-called "new car smell" is toxic, and that the interior of an automobile has dangerous levels of various chemicals.

The report, "Toxic at any speed," comes from The Ecology Center, an Ann Arbor, Mich.-based group. It reports that PBDEs, used as fire retardants, and phthalates, used primarily to soften PVC plastics, are found in dangerous amounts in dust and windshield film samples.
It called for tougher regulations to phase out the use of the chemicals as well as voluntary moves by the auto manufacturers to stop using the products inside of new vehicles.
. .. .
The report was released Jan. 11 during the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, but it received little attention outside of Michigan.

Ah... I love this stuff... I want a job as one of these reporters! In fact I want it so much I'm gonna write up the NEXT, follow-up article on it!

Here goes:

Next up....

A Michigan environmental group has issued a study report that claims up to 500,000 people, mostly middle class elderly, die from side-effects of "New Car Smell' each year.

"We have previously reported on the serious effects of chemical outgassing in these new cars... but these unfortunates were set in their ways of buying new if they could afford it." said Dudley Flora-Smith of the Michigan Anti-Plasticizerer and Tea Group society.

"But now they are dead, having paid the price for their materialistic profligacy. We are thinking of asking the ACLU to inquire into the possibility of filing a class-action suit on their estates' behalf"

"But it's not only the elderly that suffer," Flora-Smith continued "Exposing infants and newborn to the acrid atmosphere has its price, as well."

Citing the obvious increase in childhood asthma, he adds that "increased addiction to "foolers" - vinyl or latex nipple substitutes- on the part of infants, and the attraction of teens to 'huffing canned chemicals' also are related.

"The odor of the noxious gasses has its effects on the brain's pleasure centers and sets up susceptibility to various life-long addictions!"

Rumored to be considering joining the effort is the UAW, and the 'National Association of car detailers and dealer wash-boys'. Both on OSHA workplace safety grounds.

However the associated study into whether the inclusion of the odor is an intentional plot by automakers to create an addiction to buying new cars, may result in the former dropping out of the effort.

If that should happen, the Michigan Group intends to appeal to George Soros or MoveOn.org, as they imply it might be related, somehow, to a Bush Administration plot to kill off seniors, thus allowing reduction in funding for the recently passed Medicaid Prescription Bill.

Asked for comment on this, Howard Dean, DNC party chair said; "It wouldnt surprise me a bit... we've already uncovered the corrupt GOP plot to victimize poor Indians just trying to scrape up enough money from bingo parlours to fund their own schools, why not MORE tax cuts by killing off the elderly?"

Sen Ted Kennedy concurred in a separate statement: "Not only that, I can tell you that the smell itself clouds judgement, especially when combined with a glass or two of wine at dinner and might result in unforeseen romantic attraction and subsequent driving off a bridge, somewhere."

Sen John Kerry's office said he was awaiting the results of a poll on the subject prior to making a statement.

Neither Jack Abramoff or any of several K Street lobbyist groups returned our calls.

Researchers for this news desk have found that Fidel Castro anticipated this problem years ago, when he instituted his policy of recycling older cars rather than importing newer ones. His mention of that noxious new-car odor in one of his famous 4 hour speeches was previously thought to be 'just filler'!

There doesnt seem to be much in the way of international reaction, otherwise.
Though a UN source, who declined to be identified, said from Secretary General Kofi Annan's office, that "...it might explain what happened to that luxury car" bought by Annan's son Kojo and billed to the UN.
"Perhaps he was offended by that odor and had it buried somewhere so it wouldnt affect anyone else" the staffer speculated.

Lined up against the suit:
"National Association of Undertakers and Embalmers", who themselves have fallen under the scrutiny of that Michigan group for use of potentially hazardous chemicals in the workplace.

- This just in..the UK Liberal Party, who are writing up laws on how owners must treat and care for their pets are thinking of including a clause that classifies an owner who transport a pet in any auto less than two years old, might be subject to investigation by council 'pet police'.

-30-


Pretty good, huh? Huh?

Conspiracy? Rove's useful idiots!

My dad is getting on... he had a lot of ideas and views, when I was young, that started me thinking beyond the box.

But, a few days ago, a side comment about politics and the world situation led him to ask me if I believed in "that theory about 'three guys running the whole world'".

I knew, of course he meant the "Trilateral Commission theory" but I wasnt sure HOW to respond, but some events surely lead you to believe in SOMETHING like that.

The Alito and Roberts' hearings and the decision of John Kerry to try to mount a filibuster 'just on principle' make me wonder.
Appointing Dean as DNC chair, for him to promptly run the finances into near red-ink makes me wonder.

Hell, just letting Kerry open his mouth makes me wonder... never mind he has almost a clean slate of doing nothing in 20 years in the Senate.

Karl Rove couldn't orchestrate it to make Democrats look any more stupid. Or could he?

Hmmm.. have any of YOU ever seen Soros and Rove in the same place, together?

The Murtha Method: "Projecting strength through Strategic Retreat!"

The boards of several war colleges are rumored to be lining up Rep Murtha as a guest lecturer.

Already, though, the Rep has seen his strategic views employed yet again by the UN Peacekeeping Force in CongoU.N. Removes Peacekeepers After Slayings.

By ANJAN SUNDARAM, Associated Press Writer Tue Jan 24, 10:30 PM ET

KINSHASA, Congo - The
United Nations pulled its remaining peacekeepers out of the national park where eight Guatemalan peacekeepers were killed in an apparent gunbattle with Ugandan rebels, a U.N. spokesman said Tuesday.

Hans-Jakob Reichen, U.N. military spokesman for eastern Congo, said the peacekeepers were withdrawn because they had completed a two-week mission to clear Garamba National Park of rebel forces. "It was decided to pull peacekeepers out of the park since any suspected rebels had melted into the jungle," Reichen said.

It's expected that a Headquarters session of the council will ask Murtha how to expand on recent recent UN successes, such as that above.
And these...

Of note is the amazing effect UN had in Liberia's recent unrest...

In Liberia, the UN peacekeeping mission, UNMIL, was dispatched in record time to assist in the implementation of a comprehensive peace agreement. Even before UNMIL’s full authorized strength of 15,000 uniformed personnel was reached, the security situation in the country improved dramatically.Violence and ceasefire violations decreased, and UN peacekeepers paved the way for the provision of humanitarian assistance and for the demobilization, disarmament and reintegration of ex-combatants.

Of course the stationing of several US Navy ships with contingents of Marines aboard, outside Monrovia's harbor, had nothing to do with it.

Cronkite at Pearly Gates Court


Cronkite: Time for U.S. to Leave Iraq

From yer intrepid judgement day reporter on the scene:

Magistrate: "Ah, yes, the famous Mr Cronkhite! We've been waiting for you."

"Lessee what we have here... hmmm.. Personal life, not too bad, for a casual believer, a little excess here and there.. swearing, etc... lust , oh my! You had an active off camera life. Ah, well ... now, influence on others: Oh-oh, Oh my goodness LOOK at the BODY COUNT racked up against YOU!"

Walter: "But.. but.. I never killed ANYONE!"

Magistrate, peering over nose perched reading glasses: "My boy, you're no Hitler or Stalin, for sure... but you are right up there with Attila the Hun in the numbers."

Magistrate reading: "Deaths directly caused by influence of word or event: unnecessary battles - 78,925; Drownings or deaths at sea, civilians escaping oppression - 168,768; Executions or deaths in internment - 56,127....."

Walter, interrupting: "But I'm just a NEWS GUY!"

Magistrate: "Hey...I'm just a judge, here! That's what the book says and it's always proved out."

"Sez here in the border notes, you're the most trusted man in America... didnt you think of that?"

Walter: "Well, sure, but i just offer my opinion.."

Magistrate: "Opinions, like cross words spoken in heat of anger, have consequences, old boy!"

Walter: "But my intentions were good, I meant to save lives..."

Magistrate: "Well, you know what they say about the road to Hell... looks like you're gonna find out, first-hand."

Walter: "Wait.. wait.. don't tell me that Bush actually..."

Magistrate: "Bush.. what's he got to do with it? That's only about your Tet statement."

"Fortunately for you, the only one who's gonna get black marks for cuttin' and runnin' in Iraq, is Bush's daddy. Most people knew you were full of it when you blathered on about Iraq, so you get a pass on that"

Magistrate, to bailiff: "Take this one to the down-elevator waiting room. Next!"

Alito, lookback and summary..

Well, It's another case of the Dem's grabbing at straws instead of looking for lifeboats.

Kennedy's carping on CAP made him look even more stupid that he came across in 'Roberts' and now, all the Dems seem to want is to delay the vote until after Dubya's State of the Union.

Maybe they hope for an earthquake jarring open a 'closet' somewhere. The sole criticism remaining is that Alito seems to 'defer to the Executive too much'.

MAybe the key to that is the actual NAMES of the Government branches?!!! It's called the 'Executive' for a reason, dummies! As in "to execute!" or "put into action"!

While the framers put in safeguards against a 'monarchistic' system, they realized that ONE branch had to have the latitude to actually DO SOMETHING, rather than debate about it.
Of course such an idea has become foreign to the Dem concepts of governance. To them, talking about something IS 'action taken'!
All you have to do is read Madam Albright's comments on the Clinton Administration's foreign policy to understand that.

Maurice and LeBron... just one small step apart.


They came from the same places, they knew each other. But what a difference in how they ended up.

Both extremely gifted physically, and athletically. Both smart, to go along with it.

Both received extreme national attention. And advice from all quarters in how to deal with their gifts and talents.

Both accused of relatively small transgressions as they progressed into the national spotlight.

Whoever advised LeBron.. more importantly, the advice he TOOK... made the difference!

Note that Jim Brown advised Maurice..... or rather the sum of that advice ENABLED Maurice. Because he ONLY took the part of the Legend's advice that suited him.

Which is: Maurice had to deal with 'the MAN!' And the MAN was out to get him!

LeBron no doubt got the same advice. But hasnt he dealt with it differently?

Now we have Maurice wanted on a warrant for armed robbery, instead of looking forward to a breakout season as a Broncos running back.

And LeBron practically owning the Cav's franchise.
We can't know whether LeBron will finally succumb to the entitlement mentality that humbled the previous HS to Pro phenom, Kobi Bryant... who also started out well, but was brought down by 'the MAN'.

But now we know that Maurice isnt even going to get the chance... because he started out worrying about 'the MAN' rather than getting his own ducks lined up.

Which is a difference of just 'one small step or decision'.

And defines the meaning of the word 'entitlement', to say nothing of the exact identity of 'the MAN'!

Best Blogger, EVER, in my whole mind!

.. to put things in perspective, is this retired LA Cop blogger:

Brutality was what {Democratic} Mayor Tom Bradley encouraged from LA cops throughout the 1980s. At the time, we couldn?t understand why Bradley?s Police Commission required us to use metal pipes on psychotic arrestees; nor did we know why Bradley forced the LAPD to welcome incompetent applicants, gang members, and drug dealers into our ranks as police officers in the name of diversity. After a while, I found that the more LA cops were viewed as thugs and criminals, the wider the chasm grew between the LAPD and the community we served, and the stronger LA liberals became politically.

Hmmm... not that I REALLY believe in that whole conspiracy thing... oh, wait, that's what I've been saying for years!
- read the whole thing for other significant background

Then, there is This, On War...

Some years ago, my partner and I responded to a domestic violence call. When we met the battered and shaken woman, she described how she was beaten and choked as her adult son stole her money and jewelry. After stripping the wedding ring from her finger, he left her bloody, bruised, and crying on the kitchen floor.

As we completed our report, the son returned. When we tried to arrest him he began to struggle against us. Fueled by PCP and cocaine, the man was almost impossible to control. When my partner and I pulled him onto the living room floor the fight was ON with no rules, no help, and no recourse. We were alone with a deranged man who wanted to kill us.

We were at war.

Don?t hurt my son!

As we grappled and fought with the desperate man, his mother closed in and began to kick, pull, and tug at our arms. She was a nice lady who meant well. She didn?t like violence and didn?t want anyone to get hurt. But by interfering with our attempts to control her son, she endangered herself, her son, and those who had come to protect her.

As the woman screamed and fought, she emboldened her son to resist further. By interfering with those who had come to defend her, our victim had become our enemy. Had Democrats conducted a poll, 100% of the residents would have viewed us as occupiers.

Which brings us to this letter to Senator Pelosi on the GOP 'Bird-Flu Scheme'.

All the corporate greed and avarice, lamentable and outrageous as it is, cannot equal the harm done by the cynical manipulation and exploitation of the disadvantaged in order to gain and retain political power.

Because there are non-political checks on the abuse of corporate power.... there seem to be few on the Jesse Jacksons and Chuck Schumers of the world.

On rejoining the Flock..

After 25 years of non-attendance at any church, save for funerals or weddings, I am starting to look for a church to attend.

I thought I had found the perfect fit, years, ago when my family joined a fairly large Southern Baptist congregation in the larger town down the road. It had everything we were looking for.

It was basically made up of young families, was centered on the Gospel, the officers and pastors non-judgemental in matters of dress or lifestyle or income and emphasized the triumph of faith over the foibles of humanity.

Little or NO time was spent on the politics of the Bible, whether they be literal reading of events or prophecy or taking of chapter and verse meanings.
I think I had better illuminate that:
The ONE topic of continual discussion was submission of the wife to the husband, as the church submits to Jesus as the messenger of God. e.g; NOT equal partners.. but that is itself open to interpretation, as the wife may indeed be the bulwark of the relationship. I saw no reason to use that to deny deacon-ship to a woman member of the Church, for instance.

But here's where it fell down:

Meetings, beside Sunday School and Church on Sunday, on Sunday night, Wednesday night, then some set for Monday night, something else Tuesday evening.. Bible Study or group education in other forms of ministry. Then something specific for Thurday evening.

And often some activity set for Saturdays, be it door to door testimony, or some public service project.

Nothing wrong with all that, surely, yet it ultimately soured me. Why? Because of the constant 'encouragement' of other members and church lay-officers to participate in all these.
One surely can politely beg off.. yet the niggling little hook remains in the conscience. "Am I a good believer and practitioner?".

The good folks down the street and those in the meeting rooms didnt MEAN to do it, but the effect, in my mind, persisted as 'judgement'.

And finally, it became to much to bear and I, sadly, drifted away from all of it. First the midweek activities, then Sunday School.. and, finally, going to Services.

All of this NOT helped by the well-meaning greetings I got when I DID attend.

"We've missed you." is indeed a loaded statement under those conditions. Yeah, yeah.. I can analyse out of the motivation of those words, but still..

And something ELSE! It was at this time that the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention was taken over by the conservative wing.

Though the best spin was put on intent, I could read between the lines; more literal interpretation of the Bible, emphasis on acts as testimony to faith, less tolerance of non-compliance within the community.

In other words, the newly joined member of my own Church who ran a bar which had been in her family for decades (imagine!) would be prodded to divest of it. Not left to do so of her own volition.
Now, the pastor HAD publicly rebuked her for serving another member who was an alcoholic, and I agreed with that, but it became clear that if you wanted to be a Southern Baptist, at all, you certainly would not drink or smoke.

Caffeine addiction, however, was still tolerated. {Those of you who've been to SBC churches will appreciate that: coffee = 'Baptist Beer')
:)
And the position on school prayer shifted.. the SBC had previously been notable for opposing teacher-led prayer in public schools, and had biblical grounds to do so.

At any rate; now I am looking, again.

And this is what I'm gonna be looking for:

Emphasis on the Gospel and WHY God sent his Son to us.

Proper interpretation of Jesus' sayings; e.g; "I tell you if any man looks at a woman with lust, he has committed adultery..."
- That cannot be used in one Sermon to emphasize the "Good News" over the 'Law', then in the next to cast guilt on fallen believers.

Acknowledge that we do not understand HOW God created us and the Earth. And that it doesnt MATTER, only matters that He DID. i.e.; God created Darwin, too.
Likewise it makes not a hill of beans difference how OLD the Earth is.. maybe God ALSO created carbon isotope decay.

I shouldnt even include this as it's obvious to any bible reader or one raised Protestant; but, anyway, Rome or Pilate did not kill Jesus, Jews didnt kill Jesus, it was WE, in the form of the POLITICAL 'CHURCH', that killed Jesus.

Why can't we recognize we are doing it, AGAIN!

And MOST important, Jesus was NOT a Socialist and DID NOT advocate for taking from the rich and giving to the poor.. I cannot find ONE reference of him preaching to his flock to lobby Rome for more social programs. He preached good works for the INDIVIDUAL and congregations.

Finally, the Church I select will have some form of Confession..Baptists use the method "Going up". Many mainline churches dropped this LONG ago.. but it is good for the soul to renounce your slips.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -
I suppose I will refine all the above and send it out in form of a letter to local churches, asking the pastor to have the ELDERS respond to it.

We'll see and I am looking forward to it.

And, while I've been thinking along these lines a long time, here's the guy that incented me to do this.

Peace in your heart, first.. at least try!

Murtha: When is it dared to compare?....

Jack Murtha has come out of nowhere in the last months as a spokesman for capitulation in Iraq.

He is given credence, and some respite from outright criticism, because of his record as a decorated Marine Officer. Yet his solution to Iraq is hardly in keeping with any military tactic taught anywhere, unless the strategy is to retreat to "Fortress America"
See 'Powerline' posting

I would like to remind everyone that Benedict Arnold was ALSO a higly regarded and decorated war veteran..

He just didnt think he'd gotten his proper rewards and recognition; and he thought the British would win out, in the end.

So I... this humble Joe-Blow in flyover country... will add Murtha's name to the list that is compared to Benedict Arnold and 'Quisling' in the ranks of those who submit for personal gain and politics.... oh, wait, they ARE the same, arent they!

Situation Planning in the White Flag fortress

"Yep, Jack.. we got them right where we want them. Running our sound bites, and the dumb schmucks in flyover are gonna think they're mean."

" Heh... we can always fall back on context and nuance!"

"Now, it's coming out that after the Iraqi elections, they're going to pull out about 20,000 troops."

"I know, the timing couldnt be better. Either the voter thinks we forced their hand.. or that Dubya's gotta limit his casualties.. either way, win-win."

"But Howard, didnt that General Casey announce that back in July?"

"Sure he did, Nancy.. please try to concentrate, dear... but our boys at the Times and Post and CNN downplayed that, the yokels will never remember it."

"Brilliant!"

"Uh-huh. Even if I do say so, myself. Another Guiness?"

"Brilliant!"

Bush lied, hundreds of thousands died...is, indeed,
true. I must admit it!

But it wasnt THIS Bush.. it was the elder who has to
bear that stigma.

For the history is fresh enough that we know the
withdrawal from boots on ground in Iraq was coupled with
incentives for southern Shia and Northeastern Kurds to
rise in rebellion against Saddam. With the implication
that the US would be supportive of that effort.

Just WHO it was made that promise is unclear, but it
doesnt matter, in the end. Because it was made, and
Saddam killed tens of thousands as a result.

Would the result have been any different if Saddam had
waited for Clinton to take office before invading
Kuwait? We cant know that either... but what we DO know
is that the US in forgoing the chance to take Baghdad,
then, was mindful of our 'allies' opinions' on the
matter. It was certainly Powell doctrine, after all.

We had air cover for those areas, yet Saddam was free to
go in and massacre whole villages. One would think the
CIA or NSA would have people on the ground in there..
certainly we had gained the local Iraqi trust.


But we cut and ran.

And today, there are voices howling for us to do exactly
the same.

The only debate among most of the center/left is:

1. Cut and Run now

2. Cut and run after we make and publish a timetable for
cutting and running.

We hear that Bush 'has no plan'. And evidently that is
so because there are no clearly established 'deliverable
dates'.

That's of note.. suppose our progress in Europe had been
predicate on meeting deadlines in the advance into
Germany?

We would have pulled back from the "Bulge" and,
possibly, we would have been forced to reload troops on
the beaches of Normandy and scuttle back to English
bases.

Plans cannot always be used in war, and certainly not
this war. Seems to me a good plan here would be to base
success on ability of the Iraqi's to defend themselves
against terrorist/insurgents.

Wait, isnt that what we are trying to do? Isnt that the
greatest FEAR of the insurgents?

Else why would they be bombing Police training
academies?

The ONLY thing the Dems are right about is that "WE"
cannot win this war.
But the Iraqi's can... and we can do everything in our
power to help them do it.

By 'staying the course'... which, to me, sounds like a
'plan'!

Hypocritonia II

Along with the previous notes, I am often amused by the ease in which the 'civilian' Liberal will slip into gay-bashing.

If the gay community is one of the staunchest supporter groups of Liberal causes, then why is it "That's just GAY!" is used so much?

Why is the suspicion that a politician of the right is 'gay' is so often pronounced by a lib commenter?

Because there's still a stigma in being gay... or because he's in the closet? I dont think so.. I think the key is in the use of expletives in particular the 'F' bomb.. while we ALL tend to use that too much, the word itself should only be used in tender moments when you really think about it.

Come to that.. I'm thinking there's too much sexual reference in all political discourse.. maybe hetero's should stay in the closet, as well.

Malkin and the "informed Left"...

One of the striking features of leftist blogs like DailyKos and Democratic Underground is, that the more passionate you are, the more expletives, insults and slurs are thrown into your opinion.

Enough "F-bombs" and SURELY world opinion will be swayed. The second is to cast personal slurs on those who have diametrically opposite views. And, never mind debating the issue, better to attack the messenger... especially if she is a representative of a minority who, by rights, should be on "the side of reason".

Michelle Malkin's had more than her share of these.. after all she should be the poster child of women's Lib, she's the main breadwinner in her household, her husband supports and assists in everything she undertakes; and she's intelligent and witty with a good camera presence. Unfortunately, she's also a Conservative and makes NO pretense of being anything else. And she has kids.

So.. she must be a "yellow whore" who, like a puppet, only parrots her fascist hubby's views... after all she's a woman so it must be hubby that writes all that.
Finally Michelle has had enough: JUST A YELLOW WOMAN DOING A WHITE MAN'S JOB

Good for her.. but it will only inflame the moonbats more... they absolutely HATE being called on their hypocrisy.

Malkin and the "informed Left"...

One of the striking features of leftist blogs like DailyKos and Democratic Underground is, that the more passionate you are, the more expletives and slurs are thrown into your opinion.

Enough "F-bombs" and SURELY world opinion will be swayed. The second is to cast slurs on those who have diametrically opposite views. And, never mind debating the issue, better to attack the messenger... especially if she is a representative of a minority who by rights should be on "the side of reason". Michelle Malkin's had more than her share of these.. after all she would be the poster child of women's Lib, she's the main breadwinner in her household, her husband support everything she undertakes and she's intelligent and witty with a good camera presence... unfortunately, she's also a Conservative and makes NO pretense of being anything else.

So.. she must be a "yellow whore" who, like a puppet, only parrots her fascist hubby's views... after all she's a woman so it must be hubby that writes all that.
Finally Michelle has had enough. JUST A YELLOW WOMAN DOING A WHITE MAN'S JOB

Good for her.. but it will only inflame the moonbats more... they absolutely HATE being called on their hypocrisy.

ICANN! not EUCANN, not UNCANN

Wednesday the UN holds a meeting in Tunis where it seeks to create a platform to wrest control of the Internet Domain system from a small non-profit in Southern California.

While granting that ICANN has been and currently does not, in any way shape or form, base its decisions on world politics or economics, the UN is uneasy at the thought of one country hosting and sanctioning the organization that, in effect, doles out the addresses for the world.

The core issue is, of course, freedom of information and speech.

But the prime mover of the effort to get control away from the US is, interestingly, China. Which, by the way, exerts the greatest effort to LIMIT its own citizens in what they can post and read on the net. Others are Iran and various smaller Asian and middle eastern countries, none of which can be said to exactly encourage unlimited net access for their own.

Naturally, this has become political. And a way to bash Bush.

UN fights US over internet's future
10.11.05
By Rupert Cornwell

At least until very recently, the hand of its host Government in ICANN's workings has been undetectable. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," is the mantra in Washington, and it is hard to disagree.

A UN solution, moreover, contains further dangers, American backers of the status quo argue. The internet has been a tool for free expression and democracy the world over. Ominously, among the countries pressing most strongly for a more internationalised and governmentalised structure are such beacons of liberty as China, Iran and Saudi Arabia, all concerned to limit the flow of information to their restless citizens.

Then there is the instinctive dislike of America's Republican establishment for the UN and all its works. On the arch-conservative editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal this week, Norm Coleman, the Republican senator for Minnesota, wrote of a possible "digital Munich" in Tunis.

"The internet faces a grave threat," warned Coleman, who has built his political career in Washington on UN-bashing. "We must defend it ... we cannot allow the UN to control the internet."

- Roger Cornwell, originally in the UK Independent which is certainly 'progressive' (currently same as 'anti-US') in its world view.

What he sees as UN bashing, some might see as simply trying to eliminate the demostrated pervasive corruption within. But that doesnt matter in the Progressive view... it's the thought that counts!

Here's another article on it

"I am torn about this, as I suspect many Internet law experts are. On the one hand, basic principles of international law suggest that a common carrier essential to commerce in all nations should be internationally controlled," said Frank Pasquale, a professor at Seton Hall Law School in Newark, New Jersey.

"On the other hand," Pasquale added, "many of the countries most eager to impose international control also have bad records on free speech issues, political prisoners."

The so-called World Summit on the Information Society was originally conceived to address the digital divide - the gap between information haves and have-nots - by raising both consciousness and funds for projects. {italics mine}

Instead, it has centered largely around Internet governance: oversight of the main computers that control traffic on the Internet by acting as its master directories so Web browsers and email programs can find other computers.

And there we have the nut of the issue! The original agenda was, in itself, over a REALLY tough problem to solve. But the NEW agenda is pretty damn straightforward... all these tinpots can agree that the US is the bad guy. So let's haggle over ways to get some of his power neutered.

And, once that is done, the UN can put fees and kickback mechanisms in place that will help fund the former.

Here's a test on who should run the DNS...
* Which of those countries trying to get/retain control would have allowed the Internet to proceed as it has?
* Which of those countries has more people trying to get INTO it, than trying to get OUT?

Not to mention which country invented it in the first place.

Revisiting Global Warming, Junk Science and 'nattering nabobs of negativism'..
The Liberal Left environmentalists say, 'Let them eat Cake'!

Since the beginning of the 'Industrial Revolution' and probably back to the dawn of recorded time, we have had those chicken-little doom and gloomers who trumpet the warning that mankind is on the brink of self-destruction.

Now enter "Global Warming". And the fascinating conundrum that we are destroying ourselves with burning of fossil fuels.
While the jury is still out on our ability to influence natural forces, let's just assume that we are having some small effect on the increase in atmospheric CO2.

So.. What to do about it?!!!

The common concensus in the eco-religion is "Use less, Buy Less, Produce Less."

Well, if you do all those, then the world economy takes a hit.. a BIG hit! And when the economy takes a hit, the employment rate goes down, if you have nothing to produce, you certainly dont need people to produce it. Of COURSE, though, consumption and usage WOULD automatically go down.. because without wages, there's no buying and a lot less usage.

Of course that won't be a problem if all governments adopt economic central planning and production.. and isnt THAT convenient! Because then you have adopted the Marxist model despite its long, and without exception, track record of failure.

When you attempt such by governmental fiat, political concerns inevitably rear their ugly heads.

When I was a kid, the USSR periodically released 'new' evidence that Russian Scientists had actually invented everything from the telephone to the auto to radio to the airplane. Which was treated derisively by the west. But let's look at the background facts, suspending disbelief... They MIGHT have been telling the truth.

So let's ASSUME that is so..certainly there IS a lot of brain-power in Russian society.

Why weren't these marvelous Russian inventions put into common usage? Because it wasnt in the interest of the Czar and, later, the Commissariat to let the 'masses' have them. If I have to explain WHY that is so, you wont believe me anyway.

Which gets us back to the aforementioned non-productivity model - to wit: what we have now is "good enough".

Another buzz-issue is the development of new technologies.. sounds good, but the USUAL proposal is that we be taxed to develop those technologies, for their own sake.

Never mind that all definitive advances in any field have been by means of private effort and endeavor... and yes, that EVEN includes most of NASA's space program by-products. Teflon wasnt invented in NASA labs... I dont recall if 'Tang' was or not.

If I recall correctly they were invented by private concerns to meet NASA specs.

And to this day, most 'new' environment friendly technology work is being done in the private sector... yes, there are a multitude of academic grants but they tend to produce only the proven concept, it's up to industry to make them feasible and affordable.

So let's say that there is promise there... but it's not enough. How about stepping back and looking at the BIG PICTURE?!!!

First let's address 'population control'... the liberal-eco-wacko promotes this as key.

Well, it's indisputable proven fact that the wealthiest, developed societies produce the fewest offspring and the poorer 'subsistance' societies produce the most offspring. We neednt go into 'why', it's a fact and needs no provenance.
- EXCEPTION BEING: the rich in feudal societies, but that's another issue.

Second, every kid that has ever read Science Fiction knows that all life on this planet is 'carbon-based'. Since CO2 is the current issue, shouldnt we then look at how to fix MORE carbon from CO2?
If plants take in CO2 and exude O2, then lets grow more plants! This, of course is where the environmentalists have a point.. to wit: the reduction in rain-forest area.

THIS is where the global effort needs to focus. Stop demolishing the Amazon and other tropical areas. How hard can that be!
Uh, except for populist politics, of course. The poor Brazilian peasant doesnt want to hear that he has to give up his subsistant slash-and-burn living... how's he going to support his 12 kids?!! Get my drift, here?

But the BIG PICTURE bottom line is this:
The warmer it gets, the longer the growing season, the more green leaves there are, the more CO2 is converted.
And the warmer it gets the higher the evaporation rate in the oceans, the more water vapor suspended in the atmosphere, the more rainfall, the more water for plants to grow. The more plants grow, the more carbon is fixed.

And you will note that those plants release the same water they take in; once they use it to fix the carbon and produce O2, they release it back into the atmosphere.

So, while the main worry of global warming is an excess of seawater, might the ANSWER ALSO be in that?

Picture a genetically modified edible plant that thrives in saline.. like, say, kelp does.. and picture 'sea-farms' on the coast of Saharan Africa.

More O2, less CO2, more food, more water vapor released, more rain, more tillable land, more plant-crops, more ... well I'm sure you have some imagination.

Stealing childhood.. further regimentation of kids at play!

Is it any wonder that more and more kids are having weight problems... and rebelling at authority once they get into their teen years? Not when you think about incidents such as this article in the London Telegraph



Nursery children must stay inside to protect neighbour's rights

A nursery has been forced to keep youngsters indoors after a council threatened it with legal action following a complaint about the noise its children made.....
For 50 years children have gathered at the Memorial Hall in Locks Heath, Hants. But the future of the Jigsaw Nursery is in doubt after a nearby resident, Jim Habens, objected to the noise coming from a new outside play area built with donations from parents.

Mr Habens, 60, who runs a bed and breakfast from his bungalow, said: "I have complained because I have human rights as well as anyone else."

Sally Pratt, the co-supervisor at the nursery, which opens four days a week and caters for 70 children aged between two and five, said the reduction in facilities caused by the threat of enforcement could lead to it receiving a poor Ofsted report.

She said: "We have had ongoing problems with the gentleman in the bungalow for some time, saying the children are being a nuisance. The chairman of the hall and myself went to see him in the summer and we complied with everything he asked for.

"But within a couple of weeks we received a letter telling us the environmental health had been called in."

Her colleague Amanda Adams said: "Mr Habens has plagued us with complaints about the children, but it is just them laughing."
..
Brian Bayford, the borough councillor with responsibility for environmental issues, said: "It is unfortunate when it's just one neighbour. But if anyone is causing a noise nuisance, and it is unacceptable or above a certain limit, this is the process.

"Laws get made and it is the responsibility of the council to take action on that."

Exactly! "Laws get made" and selfish people become "Mr
Grinch" and take advantage of them, never mind how many are the losers!

War History: We saved them, but they might not think it's worth it...
Hitler, Saddam; Germany, Iraq; Europe and Middle East MSM coverage..

"We have swept away {the Dictator}, but a great many {in the occupied areas} feel that the cure has been worse than the disease."
({} = my edits)

How often have we heard this out of the MSM? Well, way back in 1946, to be precise... PLEASE read the links in that post for the whole article!

Add to that, if you want to note something telling... and estimated 'more than 1000' US servicemen and civilian contractors die in Germany, most from fragmented hold-outs, in year immediately following end of war.

- - - -- -
Further thinking points:

10,000 allied casualties, about 2500 killed on D-Day, alone... what if CNN were covering it 'live'.... Or Fox, for that matter?

Imagine Geraldo standing in the shelter of the cliffs, ducking and bleating about the carnage.

Remember how GREAT his coverage in New Orleans? His talk of 'stacked bodies' and rapes and murders in the Superdome?

Sheep, Sheepdogs, tribes etc...


{Pettyfogger note: I have read this entry several times and it increasingly comes across as a blather of mind-ramble. Thus I saved it and will edit and post it later when I achieve a readable form}

Libby Must go to Trial!

An unattributed opinion piece in USAToday,
Bush, Cheney can't let Libby go to trial
claims that the Bush Administration “can’t afford to let Libby got to trial” because all the ‘machinations of pushing to invade will come to light’.

Testimony in a trial likely would show that Bush, Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld were hell bent to invade Iraq, reasons be damned. When their phony cover that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction was blown, they hunkered down against anyone who told the truth about their trickery.
Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador, did that. So, possibly coached by his boss Cheney, Libby told reporters that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, worked for the CIA.

It's evident from reading this bilge WHY it's not signed, because it's based on fact NOT proven or in evidence... just on DailyKos and DU talking points.

And that's why it needs to go to trial.

point: It will explain why Libby testified to one set of facts on how he learned Plame's involvement while his notes show otherwise; see my "Telephone" post, below.

point: it will explain how the investigation started in the first place. This may prove embarassing to the anti-Bush cadre in the CIA

point: It may settle the contention that Cheney PUSHED CIA into justifying the WMD existence. Could it be that Cheney merely went to Langley to find out WHY there was disagreement on the issue?

point: It may settle the issues on why Wilson was selected, when he had little experience in that field; and why he didnt have to sign a non-disclosure agreement, which would have prevented him from publishing without CIA approval; and why he didnt have to file a written report.
All those being normal practice under the circumstances.

point: Wilson would be called to testify and would have to explain why his own verbal debriefing shows that Saddam's agents tried to meet with the Niger Minister of Interior.. and he would have to testify on his understanding of the Minister's cryptic "I didnt respond because I knew what it was about"

It's time for the Administration to 'go nuclear' on all these unsupported 'attack points'; just as Delay going to trial will expose the Texas Dem's hypocrisy and dirty tricks, so will a Libby trial.

And good lawyers would get all these issues admitted into testimony, as they point to motivation and lead to the charges at hand.

Delay going Nuclear?

When rape is inevitable.... goes the old saying.

So far Tom Delay and DeGuerin are doing exactly what I had hoped for: Setting up for a trial in which the Dems find they have a sabre-tooth tiger by the tail.

So far he has refused to plea-bargain down to a misdemeanor and gotten the trial judge (A move-on.org contributor) recused. Which will leave Ronnie Earle no choice but to either ask for the charges to be dropped or proceed with a really weak case.
I predict Earle's next move will be to attempt to put off going to trial, and Delay wont want that either. It will be refused.
Then Earle will actually cite 'possible new evidence' needing depositions, once the trial is started.

Of course, ol' Ronnie MIGHT just retire and dump the case off to a subordinate. Damage control, as it were.

Then he will ask for the charges to be dropped; 'in the interest of public confidence in their elected officials'
I cross my fingers that Delay will refuse to allow the case to be dropped... and I think there's precedent for him to force it through.

While there is no doubt that the INTENDED SPIRIT of the law has been broken, it will come out that the statute was intentionally designed that way. For the benefit of Democrats, and not Republicans.
And to salve what the Dems see as their idiot electorate.

There's ample evidence on file that the Texas DSC has done exactly what Delay is accused of... thus, if the trial proceeds to verdict, the grounds for a civil case against Earle will be laid, if not actual criminal charges of malfeasance.

Before libs protest this projection; they should answer this question. If this is indeed the bright shiny jewel in Earle's career crown, WHY would he offer the plea-down?

Hmmmmm? Thought so.

One more case in a long line of GOP Rope-a-Dopes! We can always hope so, anyway.

The common ground: Wingnut Right and Moonbat Left; Hypocrisy and us chickens....

Jonah Goldberg at NRO has written the ultimate thinkpiece on political hypocrisy: The Secret Files of the Anti-Hypocrite Squad

Michael Moore, the biggest mouthpiece of the anti-hypocrite Left, constantly denounces Republicans as racists for opposing affirmative action. Schweizer reports that Moore almost never hires black people. Moore insists, "I don't own a single share of stock." He denounces clever Enron style schemes to conceal wealth and rails against Haliburton as the Mother of All Evils. He told C-Span's Brian Lamb in his best prolier-than-thou voice that he wanted nothing to do with the stock market. "That's the rich man's game."

Well, it turns out Moore's got another game going. As Schweizer reports, Moore told the IRS his home is the headquarters of his tax-free foundation, to which he contributes some of his millions for the write-off. The foundation, in turn, not only bought stock — its holdings are a Who's Who of "greedy" corporations, including Halliburton.

Some of us Republicans marveled at Nixon opening the doors to China...but the press was beside itself. Thinly veiled hints of Nixon hypocrisy permeated the pages of NY Times and other bastions of progressive thought. Which, of course, was the point. It took Nixon to do that... otherwise imagine if Hubert Humphrey had been elected and sought to do the same!
Currently, one only has to look at the recent days' events to see more examples... Fitzgerald lionized; seen as the "Anti-Starr" by all the Moonbats. While attacked by shallow-thinkers like Hannity.
Well, Starr just did his job... get into a debate with a moonbat, get past the point of impeached for sex, which is difficult.. and the argument from the left comes up empty. But that doesnt matter, they'll continue to howl at the moon about the famous 16 words being a lie while Clinton's foibles were a 'misunderstanding'.

As Ann Landers once replied to a writer who said she doesnt go to church "because of all the Hypocrites, there"... where else would you have them?

Well, I'd rather NOT have them in politics.. but those beltway idiots are people too, so I guess there's no helping it.

Libby indicted for losing at 'Telephone'?

The report isnt in yet, but most sources say Libby will be indicted for giving false statements in testimony during Fitzgerald's investigation.
{No links because that's everywhere}

Which causes one to think about how often we can recall exactly what went on in a conversation occuring months or years before.
While we must assume that there's evidence pointing to Libby KNOWINGLY making those statements, that won't be totally clear until trial, if there is one.

But there's a bigger issue at play... the Bush Administration has taken heat from the left, since day one, about it's 'secrecy and gamesmanship'.. and where will the charges come from? From Bush Administration talking to the press.

How much easier to just adopt a strict 'no comment' rule. On ANYTHING... cause you never know what's gonna come back and bite yer ass.

Summary: You can't look silly playing 'Telephone' if you refuse to play in the first place.

Miers withdraws; Neocons "give Left a sword"

I cant put it better than Hugh Hewitt

"I gave them a sword.": The consequences of the anti-Miers movement.

In his interviews with David Frost, Richard Nixon declared:

"I brought myself down. I gave them a sword and they stuck it in and they twisted it with relish."

I was on the fence on Miers... she might have been alright.. or she might have been another 'Souter'... influenced by her 'Senior Partners'' sense of compassion and purpose.
I sincerely hope that the repair for this fiasco will be the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown.
When the left on the judiciary panel brings up her supposed 'anti-minority' decisions, anyone with half a brain will be able to trump that with another of her decisions which are irrefutable as to 'minority rights'.

Condi strikes fear into the hearts of mortals...

Evidently 2008 is just around the corner.

The subtleties of media and SIG spin, are starting to hit home like a ton of bricks:

As seen in USAToday

From ThePen has an interesting finding on just how easy it is for a file photo to accidently fall into the Photoshop tank at USA Today.
Before the 'slip-up'


This is a good followup to a Wash Post article taking Condi to task for not being militant and bitter about her childhood in Birmingham... almost stating, flatly, that MS Rice was in denial.. nevermind she has publicly spoken of her father guarding his church with a rifle and of the loss of her playmate in the bombing.What Rice Can't See

By Eugene Robinson

Tuesday, October 25, 2005; Page A21

Rice's parents tried their best to shelter their only daughter from Jim Crow racism, and they succeeded. Forty years later, Rice shows no bitterness when she recalls her childhood in a town whose streets were ruled by the segregationist police chief Bull Connor. "I've always said about Birmingham that because race was everything, race was nothing," she said in an interview on the flight home.

When she reminisces, she talks of piano lessons and her brief attempt at ballet -- not of Connor setting his dogs loose on brave men, women and children marching for freedom, which is the Birmingham that other residents I met still remember. A friend of Rice's, Denise McNair, was one of the four girls killed in the bombing of the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church. That would have left a deep scar on me, but Rice can speak of that atrocity without visible emotion.

Perhaps Ms Rice has let the examples of her childhood motivate... rather than define.. her life? Don't we ALL wish we could do that?

One MIGHT suspect that the writer REALLY feels that Rice is corrupt... else how could she possibly be a conservative. And part of this administration.

What do we call someone, on the other hand, who constantly brings up the torturous events of childhood as the modus agendi for their current beliefs and actions?

What do we call someone who uses a platform of striving for "equal rights" and acceptance... yet constantly points out that their constituency has special needs and deserves special recognition?

In benign cases, we might call them neurotic...

Omen Update:

USAToday installed the original phot, with an apology.

Editor's note: The photo of Condoleezza Rice that originally accompanied this story was altered in a manner that did not meet USA TODAY's editorial standards. The photo has been replaced by a properly adjusted copy. Photos published online are routinely cropped for size and adjusted for brightness and sharpness to optimize their appearance. In this case, after sharpening the photo for clarity, the editor brightened a portion of Rice's face, giving her eyes an unnatural appearance. This resulted in a distortion of the original not in keeping with our editorial standards.

Uh..okay. Now lets look at those two again... I'm sorry but I dont see how it could have been anything but intentional.
Anyone who's messed with image altering software knows it can be tricky, BUT that's why you look at it after the edit... to make sure it didnt do something unintended.

Birmingham Church bombings, Iraq 'insurgency' and the media.

A Powerline post reminds us of the Church bombings of 42 years ago, and points to:
NT TImes: Rice Pays Homage to Victims of Church Bombing

"As God would have it, they were at Sunday school when America experienced homegrown terrorists of the worst sort," Ms. Rice said in an emotional ceremony at a park across the street from the church, which was bombed in 1963. In her speech, she sought to connect her childhood in the segregated South to her work as the first African-American woman to be the nation's top diplomat.

"It was meant to shatter our spirit," she said of the bombing. "It was meant to say that we shouldn't rise up. Just a few weeks after Dr. Martin Luther King said, 'I have a dream,' it was meant to tell us that, no, we didn't have a dream, and that dream was going to be denied."

Then as now in Iraq, the atrocities of killing innocents are meant to dispirit and bring fear. Now as then, these will fail.

But there is a vast difference.

Then, there were no excuses made for the bombers in the media. There was no attempt to blame the government for 'inspiring' these bombings by means of the Civil Rights Act of 64. No calls to roll back forced integration as in Little Rock... Or for nationalizing the Guard....no Hollywood and Entertainmment apologists for Maddox, Faubus and George Wallace.

Imagine our outrage were it so.

And imagine if just a few papers and magazines and public figures were have to come out in support of the Klan and Segregationists... can you imagine that they might be emboldened to repeat such cowardly acts? I can.

Naturally these media and celebrities would couch their outrageous views in terms of "cultural" and "religious" differences from the rest of America. Would, at the least, view with sympathy these acts in relation to the old south seeing the end of a "way of Life".
Of course, if some did that, they would have to overlook the various lynchings and assassinations that came before and were yet to come.

But in the end reason and freedom won... as it will in Iraq. But this time, for Iraqi's, it will come at a much higher price.

And the irony of just who it was that made it so difficult and bloody by encouraging the terror killers will not be lost in the lessons of history.

Miers hearing: Roe v Wade opinion troubling

Powerline links to OpinionJounal: Did Christian conservatives receive assurances that Miers would oppose Roe v. Wade?

This is a problem.

The hard stand taken by the Dems that Roe v Wade is inviolate is only buttressed by the context of this 'conference call'.

Roe v Wade was bad law, based on a non-existant Constitutional right, only available through a stretch of the imagination as to what the Framers might do when confronted with need for "Privacy of Action".

But there comes a time when we must move on. Revisiting this, over and over, serves no good purpose and puts Conservatives in the ridiculous position of advocating legislation through the courts.

On the Conservative side, we have to recognize that the insistance on abortion rights is only the bell-sheep of the Privacy tenet which serves MORE purposes than just the right to abort. It implies that other private actions are bound by the tenet. "Right to marry whoever and however many you please" being the next obvious application.

But it's possible to take a stand and be firm without overturning Roe. And without the fallout that would result.

Miers had better frame the best argument she's ever done to avoid the trap.

Bush to Blair: Going 'beyond Iraq', "Secret conversations" Revealed!!!!

Much ado about nothing, as usual.

The October 16 UK Independent has an editorial about 'secret conversations in which;

The US President told Tony Blair, in a secret telephone conversation in January 2003 that he "wanted to go beyond Iraq".

He implied that the military action against Saddam Hussein was only a first step in the battle against WMD proliferation in a series of countries.

Mr Bush said he "wanted to go beyond Iraq in dealing with WMD proliferation", says the letter on Downing Street paper, marked secret and personal.

It goes on to name Pakistan and Saudi Arabia as examples..

This is germane to ANYTHING, how?

Could it be that the Independent staff had this waiting in the wings in case the Iraqi constitutional referendum went off with minimal troubles to report?

When you READ it, there is no new news there, though I assume that the readership of the Galloway-apologist rag will claim otherwise.
When the left trumpeted far and wide, on the event of the Iraqi invasion, that Bush was a 'hypocrite' as he had close ties with the Saud's who in turn funded Wahabism and, thus indirectly -if not DIRECTLY-, the education and suppport of Al Quaida 'volunteers', I dont think any of us dismissed that fact.. most of us had read of and known that for years, and I'm pretty sure that Bush knew that too.
And Pakistan being a hotbed of world-order-anarchists isnt news, to anyone who pays attention, either.

And are we to believe that this was a revelation to Tony Blair? So what was the intent of the conversation? We don't know for sure. I would assume under linear thought processes that Bush thought a regime change in Iraq and Afghanistan would pressure changes within Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

But the published ARTICLE seems to IMPLY that Bush might have considered military options against the two. Though the paper is clever enough to not come out and say it.

They leave the reader to make the connection. And, of course, anyone sho might read the Independent to find out what's really going on in the world, and who the bad actors are, will drink the kool-aid.

Miers, McCain, Buckley, Limbaugh, Kerry, LBJ and Frum

and NE Corridor Elitism = Bad News, all around!

Yeah, I know... all that makes little sense in the point of the current discussion. And yet it does.

I dont know WHAT Bush and Rove were thinking in this nomination but it SURE HAS BROADENED The political discourse.

No longer can Conservatives point to Liberals' Harvard Yard populism with disdain and derision. We have that in our own!
Our own National Review elitists have weighed in and found this 'common girl' wanting! Beltway 'high-church Conservatives' want her withdrawn! The nerve of that Texas oaf who was on their fringes, by dint of "Skull&Bones" and Harvard Attendance to bring in a commoner to the most prestigious stage of governance!
Note what
Beldar's blog has to say about it!
The view that Harriet Miers lacks the proper 'Credentials' because of her law school and/or lack of bench experience seems credible on the face of it, but when you get DOWN to the goal of putting an associate on the panel who will consider more than primae facie legal precedent as applied to modern society, does it REALLY matter all that much?

The idea that Bush nominates yet another 'crony' in the aftermath of Katrina where Michael Brown performed dismally is at the root of a lot of this carping. But there's a difference. Brown excelled at bureaucracy, and his credentials in that arena, to say nothing of his acting the bureaucrat to the bitter end is also his failing.

The difference is Bush KNOWS Miers. and Dubya may be dyslexic and inarticulate but he aint stupid.
And what is WRONG with a justice who KNOWS what it takes to run a law firm.. and what it takes to manage a state bar. And what, therefore, is BEHIND a lot of the legal wranglings that go on backstage in any litigation.

If Miers had come out of Harvard, Yale or Stanford.. I suspect we wouldnt be having this discussion, never mind she never sat bench.

Even Rush Limbaugh is torn, and an example, as well... his hero was William F Buckley, but anyone would have to admit that Limbaugh's presentation of the same points as Buckley would make is like night and day
While Buckley was often the subject of parody for his learned demeanor and dry ivy-league cynical wit, Limbaugh takes it to the level of the common guy. Both can poke holes in the Liberal stream of thought, both employ a cynical approach but, in Rush's case, to 'get it', you dont have to be upperclass educated elite.

Suppose you had to have 'credentials' to be a political satirist/pundit.. and the model was Buckley? Rush would still be doing PR for Sports teams.

Hell... for that matter, Randi Rhodes would be doing "Homemaker's Corner" for some local radio station. While I would prefer the latter case, look at what we'd have missed in the former example.

And then there's McCain... he is relatively silent on this. The problem with McCain is that he is between a rock and a hard place. Harry Reid already stole his thunder with his advocacy, so McCain cant be the 'building bridges' leader. PLUS he knows that he'll be left high and dry when Reid invokes the "I was for her before I voted against her" parlor trick.
Let's face it, McCain KNOWS he screwed the pooch with Campaign Finance Reform, which ended up making things worse rather than better. And McCain knows that his 'cred' stems from elitism, in his case back through his Dad, plus his POW experience, never mind his work on the Senate floor; suspect at the least.

So I suspect that McCain is waiting to see how the hearings go... and I am for that. In fact, I wish everyone would have waited.

Because, nerve-racking as this is, I suspect that Rove and Bush have dreamed up yet another "Rope-a-Dope" and will prove - yet again - just how incompetent our elected officials become once they're marinated in the beltway sauce.

And, as enjoyable as that is, it isnt good for the American Voter's opinion of our system.

****

The other names? Ah, I just threw those in there ....
UPDATE:
Someone sent an EMAIL to Hugh Hewitt, wherein he coined the term for this beltway elitism "EVIAN Flu"

A Little on the Side

A little common sense, that is.

If you dont like wading through a huge stack of 'favorites' or 'bookmarks' depending on what your browser calls them, you tend to discover 'GEM' sites over and over again.
Such a one is The Post Chronicle

And one of my favorite political commenter/observers, Thomas Sowell, writes for it.

Here's excerpts of two of his latest:
Spoiled Brat Politics

An editorial in a recent issue of the National Geographic's "Traveler" magazine complained that kayakers in Maine found "residential development" near national parks and urged its readers to use their "influence" to prevent such things.

"You are the stakeholders in our national parks," it said.

Really? What stake do kayakers and others of like mind have that is not also a stake held by people who build the vacation homes whose presence offends the kayak set? Homeowners are just as much citizens and taxpayers as kayakers are, and they are even entitled to equal treatment under the 14th Amendment.

The essence of bigotry is denying others the same rights you claim for yourself. Green bigots are a classic example.

And Spoiled Brat Politics: Part II

The idea that what I want overrides what you want has increasingly become part of our thinking, our policies and even our laws. There is literally a federal case before the Supreme Court over the fact that many colleges and universities refuse to allow military recruiters on campus.

Why? Because, as the academics will tell you, they are opposed to the military, either in general or because they think the military are discriminating against homosexuals or for whatever other reasons they have.

These academics have every right to be against the military, for any reason or for no reason.

If they don't like the military, they can stay away from the military, since there is no draft. But what they want is to keep other people away from the military, by preventing students from hearing what the military recruiters have to say, as students hear what recruiters from all sorts of other institutions and movements have to say on campus.

The reason there is a legal issue is that a federal law has been passed, saying that colleges and universities that forbid military recruiters from coming on campus are no longer eligible to receive federal money.

Academics are outraged. They see this law as a violation of their freedom -- including their right to violate their students' freedom. It is classic spoiled brat politics, based on the idea that what I want overrides what you want.

See the connection?
It's nothing more than common sense... you cant reasonably expect, in a free society, to be excepted from the rules governing the use of commonly held resources or commonly provided protections and services.
In the one case, you have no more say, as a visitor, than one who invests in the locale. .. and to say there should be no private investment in the locale makes the whole determination of what IS an investment quite subjective.

In the case of the kayaker, should he succeed in blocking housing along the pristine riverway, will he THEN turn his attention to eliminating walking trails?
After THAT how about invoking rules that one cant set foot on the banks for fear of disturbing flora and fauna?

And we must note that there are those who advocate closing certain wilderness areas against ALL human encroachment.. no matter the reason or motive for being there.

In the case of Academia vs Military, it simply boggles the mind. They have the right to shun the military all they want.
But they should have to go the extra mile and disturb their little comfort zone to do that.
They DONT have the right to disallow freedom of speech and movement to an arm of the same government that feeds them.. at the same time as they are celebrating their OWN freedom of dissent.

But, as Sowell points out.. there's an underlying factor at work, too. That is the litigation industry. If it wasnt for all this foo-foo, what would all the lawyers do?

And note the line ads for class action suits on that site!
Ironic, wot? Ah,well...

The Delphi Automotive Parts Crisis - why did it happen?
Delphi is the amalgamation of former GM parts disions: Delco, Harrison, Inland and quite a few others, including the former Frigidaire Automotive line.
It recently filed for reorganization under bankruptcy... leading many to fear tens of thousands of high wage jobs lost.

This may seem to some a little bit of a surprise but, to those of us with close ties, it's been forewarned a long time.

* If GM hadnt started the benefits package to attract scarce labor after WWII, in order to meet pent-up consuner demand we wouldnt be having a lot of these problems


* If GM and Ford hadnt been shortsighted and knuckled under too easily to easily to the unions, they wouldnt be going slowly bankrupt... it's not a matter of 'if' but 'when'

* if Unions had tended to their knitting and acted more like a guild than a labor agent, we wouldnt have a lot of this mess.
The charter of any union should be to protect their interests, thus the membership, by providing a quality product at a reasonable price. Doing so involves weeding out rejects.

My whole family is GM/Harrison/Delphi... my dad and brothers retired from Dayton plants; fortunately they saw this coming and, having a choice during the spin-off, opted for GM retirement over Delphi.
- A no-brainer, you say? Uh, no... strangely some likened the spin-off to the forced divestiture of ATT. They thought that, freed of the GM shackles, like the Baby Bells - Delphi would take off and fly. Not EVEN close!

EVERY family dinner involved a 'preaching to the choir' litany about the waste and corruption in the assembly lines. The unions were self-centered and corrupt when I worked there in the sixties and it only got worse.
Just from MY experience:
- Had two grievances filed on me when I was on the line for attempting to streamline my job, incidently increasing quality
- On overtime assignments, I was repeatedly bumped into the worst job on the line by a union committeeman, who had a total on 1.5 years on the job, 1 less than me. That stopped when my foreman suggested I file a grievance against the committeeman.

My Father in Law, OTOH, was ALSO a retired 30 year GM employee, but he was notorious for complaining that auto prices were too high for him to afford a new car (he'd have had to cut down on his VFW bar tab) and, in the same breath, brag about how he didnt do anything the whole shift.

The locals in Dayton were, and presumably are, more concerned with appealing the cases of their members caught dealing drugs than helping Delphi find a way to keep the plants open.

And NO, my family WASNT management they were line workers.. and my brothers both were foremen at one time then gave it up because upper plant management didnt care about trying to eliminate waste and low productivity, only about 'making the shift quota'... much of which ended up in the rework bin, because it couldnt pass the final quality check.

Now all that doesnt seem remarkable on the face of it... but do we remember WHY Japanese cars got their market in the US?

Bottom Line for Unions: They would rather have permanent layoffs, and protect the high wages and benefits of the remaining workers

Bottom Line for automotive middle management: "Dont rock the boat, all that matters is short term numbers"

Bottom line for US corporations? "Pay it now AND pay it later."

Summary for ALL of us: The shift from corporate pension to independent retirement funds, IRA and 401K, came 30 years too late.

Al Gore on 'freedom' of Press

TPMCafe:Gore on the Threat to American Democracy

on the face of it, seems to be reasoned speech on the value of the free press.

But there are subtle hints, here, that he thinks it is TOO free.

It would appear to the dispassionate reader that he lauds the 'net as allowing the citizen discourse on the issues of the moment... but then:

The present executive branch has made it a practice to try and control and intimidate news organizations: from PBS to CBS to Newsweek. They placed a former male escort in the White House press pool to pose as a reporter - and then called upon him to give the president a hand at crucial moments. They paid actors to make make phony video press releases and paid cash to some reporters who were willing to take it in return for positive stories. And every day they unleash squadrons of digital brownshirts to harass and hector any journalist who is critical of the President.

For these and other reasons, The US Press was recently found in a comprehensive international study to be only the 27th freest press in the world. And that too seems strange to me.

Among the other factors damaging our public discourse in the media, the imposition by management of entertainment values on the journalism profession has resulted in scandals, fabricated sources, fictional events and the tabloidization of mainstream news. As recently stated by Dan Rather - who was, of course, forced out of his anchor job after angering the White House - television news has been "dumbed down and tarted up."

The coverage of political campaigns focuses on the "horse race" and little else. And the well-known axiom that guides most local television news is "if it bleeds, it leads." (To which some disheartened journalists add, "If it thinks, it stinks.")

In fact, one of the few things that Red state and Blue state America agree on is that they don't trust the news media anymore.

Noted: Gore's reference to 'fabricated' sources, is what got Rather busted.

So in context, while we cant dispute the paid actors or paid columnists... though we might differ on how really EFFECTIVE they were, it seems to be the thought that counts.

And, Schizo Al ignores the fact that the 'digital brownshirts' (hows THAT for cloaked invective!) seem to be, on the whole, nipping at Dubya's heels or outright biting at him for some of his current policy decisions!

- Cronyism for appointments to SCOTUS and FEMA

- Immigration Policy (or lack of it)

- Spending and National Debt

What rankles here is that Gore implies that criticism by either the press or citizen journalist/bloggers is dangerous... he lauds Tom Paine, now, but neglects to note that Paine was regarded by the elite establishment, THEN, as seditious and fear-mongering.

So which is it, Al? Is the 'net - which you godfathered {that part IS TRUE, BTW}- a force for good or evil?

And you lament the 'scandalization' of the news.. are you saying that started lately... like say, ummmm, with Fox News?

I dont think it did... I think you are blowing smoke.

Yellow Journalism got it's moniker LONG before TV or even radio... and for that matter, existed before Tom Paine.
Of course, that's inconvenient for the point you are trying to make.

What I THINK is, that you are distressed that YOUR informed message isnt being accepted without quam by the idiots in the "Red States"

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, there was - at least for a short time - a quality of vividness and clarity of focus in our public discourse that reminded some Americans - including some journalists - that vividness and clarity used to be more common in the way we talk with one another about the problems and choices that we face. But then, like a passing summer storm, the moment faded.

The clarity and focus, he neglects to mention, were clarity and focus on "reporting facts" later found to be NOT TRUE! So.... tell me again how that emotional disparagement of the supposed actions of a minority 'our finest hour'?!!!!

The final point I want to make is this: We must ensure that the Internet remains open and accessible to all citizens without any limitation on the ability of individuals to choose the content they wish regardless of the Internet service provider they use to connect to the Worldwide Web. We cannot take this future for granted. We must be prepared to fight for it because some of the same forces of corporate consolidation and control that have distorted the television marketplace have an interest in controlling the Internet marketplace as well. Far too much is at stake to ever allow that to happen.

Are you SURE, AL?!!!!

And who WOULD those forces be... Google? Umm...look AGAIN, Al! They are bona fide "enlightened Liberals"! Or maybe you're concerned that they'll turn to the dark side.

Or are you pointing to advocacy of the UN taking control of Domain Name Services?
Fighting over America's control of the Internet

Since the UN already arbitrates rights to URL names.. such as "fatalbert" {which it awarded to Bill Cosby, against a squatter's claim} ... one has to wonder WHY it's important for the UN to have control over DNS.

Could it be that it needs control over access to sites which dont follow "informed" speech or ideas?

So anyone who reads this, just MIGHT want to read that speech again.. and figure out for themselves just WHAT Gore advocates as a remedy.

To help you out, questionaires for journalism students and current journalists point to 85% identifying themselves as Democrat or Liberal.. and taking up journalism so as "to make a difference".

So I guess you'd have to wonder if Gore REALLY wants the press to be objective.. and report facts without bias.
Isn't it REALLY that he longs for the press that was extant during the Carter Administration, for example... where the only conservative viewpoints might be found in High-Literacy magazines like "National Review"?

Or do we have reason to rejoice in the fact that, even given Dubya's mistakes and inability to articulate, that THIS man is NOT President!

For Service, speak English

...stuck in a window of your bar or customer service establishment is likely to get you hauled up before your state civil rights commission.

That's what happened to a bar owner in a Cincinnati suburb, whose hispanic population has grown to 5000.

No.. he didnt refuse service to anyone. No, he didnt refuse to hire a hispanic.. at least that's not noted by any evidence collected by the Ohio commission.

Someone saw the poster, decided it was bigoted in content and complained to big brother.

Presumably, it made the passer-by feel "uncomfortable".

Bar's 'Speak English' Sign Discriminatory, Commission Rules

"I thought, 'Oh my God, It's 2005 and people are still living in the past," neighbor Loraine Robertson said. "It's really embarrassing where I live. I've got kids and they ask me all the time how somebody can put up a sign that's so racist toward other people."

"Racist?" - I wonder.

I wonder if a Parisian who came to town to sample Cincinnati culture would ALSO be asked to order in English.

I wonder if someone from Bavaria who was seeking out long-lost emigre family in the heavily German populated region would ALSO be asked to order in English?

I wonder that a suburban mom doesnt teach her kids the difference between 'racism' and bigotry, or maybe just 'bias'. Or maybe I know already. Racism has a connotation of 'hate'. I wonder if that neighbor would admit to any of her OWN biases?

Because the basis of the complaint is that it made the reader feel 'uncomfortable'. Thus anyone who feels 'uncomfortable' is obviously biased against those whose words or actions.. or even presence.. makes them feel 'uncomfortable'.

I suggest that Loraine Robertson pack her kids into her car at 10PM and cruise Vine Street in Cincy and see how 'uncomfortable' REALLY feels.

I doubt that will happen... as it's well known that Vine street at night is pimp and pusher territory.

The Cincy paper has an opinion, of course, and it sure doesnt come down on the side of free speech or 'right to refuse service to anyone': 'Speak English' a sign of bigotry

People should denounce bigotry - or the perception of bigotry - as soon as it raises its head because of the ugly stain it leaves on a community.

We expect no less from the progressive citizens of Mason and elsewhere concerning Tom Ullum's sign in the front window of the Pleasure Inn on U.S. 42. In block letters, it reads: "FOR SERVICE SPEAK ENGLISH." Can non-English-speaking people even understand what they're reading?

"or the perception of bigotry" - Oh my! Seems to me that's mighty subjective. How do you QUALIFY bigotry, then? If the perceiver has a degree in social sciences? Or just if they understand the difference between bigotry and racism? Or maybe if some panel finds they dont have a "biased" thought, themselves?

I wonder if it occurs to that writer that every human being has his biases.

I wonder if he'd admit it in writing. Presumably not... if he knows what's good for him, anyway. He might be hauled up on a count of fomenting 'hate-speech'.

You who come down on the side of PC'ness will be happy to note that Al Gore and a host of other progressive minded folks plan on doing something about that!

...more on that to come.