Robble-Robble

Oh wait, that's the other burglar.

According to the Associated Press, Former Clinton national security advisor Sandy Burglar, uh, Berger, will take a misdemeanor plea deal for taking top secret documents from the national archives.

It's nice to know one can steal top secret documents, plead it was an "accident," and get away with a slap on the wrist instead of significant jail time.

Chinese spies in Los Alamos will assuredly sleep better tonight.

Note: This could have alternately been titled, "Stuffing Berger, Hidden Sentence."

Update: Added pre-sentencing pic.

Rest in Peace

Terri Shiavo's torturous starvation is over. She passed within the past hour. If you are a religious person, please say a prayer for Mrs. Shiavo and her surviving family members.

Update: According to David Gibbs, the Shindler attorney, Terri Shiavo died at 9:05 AM. Bob Shindler, her father, will make a statement this afternoon. Members of her family were with her until ten minutes before her death, when they were asked to leave for an assessment of her condition prior to Michael Shiavo's entrance to her room.

At this time, it is not known who was with her at her time of death.

I'll update this thread (live-blogging, as I originally thoughtlessly mentioned, is just the wrong word) as information becomes available.

Update: Fox News television is reporting that President Bush will make a statement sometime around noon regarding Mrs. Shiavo's death... 11:40 AM Eastern.

Update: I'm flipping back and forth between CNN and Fox News, and perhaps not surprisingly, each seems to be taking highly partisan viewpoints. CNN is using recent pictures of a hospice-bound Shiavo and reiterating that they want to get out the Shiavo viewpoint when it becomes available (Neither Michael Schiavo or his lawyer have released a statement).

Fox is showing old pictures of a healthy, active, much younger Terri Shiavo, and focusing their attention on the viewpoints of the Shindler family and pro-life clergy and medical experts, making much of the fact that Michael Shiavo did not want the Shindler family in the room at the time of death.

Update: Florida Governor Jeb Bush is making a statement on CNN saying that the issue transcends politics, and that he wishes he could have done more. He also said that we need to examine these issues and come up with solutions so that we don't have to go through situations like this again. Jesse Jackson was on next, pushing healthcare reform...

A white van with a police motorcycle escort has pulled away from the hospice, presumably with Terri Shiavo inside. Media helicopters (shown on CNN, Fox) are following it like O.J. Simpson's infamous Bronco chase. I'm nauseated with the tastelessness of the pursuit.

Update: Bush: (roughly) on Shiavo, "the essense of civilization is that the strong have a duty to protect the weak." He also said we need to promote a culture of life. The bulk of Bush's press conference was on the U.S. intelligence report.

Update: Michael Shiavo was with his wife when she died. CNN is interviewing the brother of Michael Shiavo's girlfriend, and he says Michael is taking this very hard. He (the girlfriend's brother) offers up some perspectives I haven't heard about Michael's side of the story. Terri was his wife, and if Michael honestly thinks he was doing what Terri would have wanted, he deserves sympathy as well, doesn't he?

Update: Terri Shiavo's body has been delivered to the medical examiner's office for autopsy. According to experts, her autopsy will likely start today and be completed tomorrow.

Update: George Felos, attorney for Michael Shiavo, is supposed to make an announcement this afternoon, 2:30 Eastern.

Update: Randall Terry is on Fox News saying their will be a memorial services in local churchs this afternoon, and the Shindler family will make a statement at 4:30 Eastern.

Despite the wishes of the Shiavo family for a Florida burial, Terri will be cremated and her remains interred in a Shiavo family plot in Pennsylvania. Thankfully, this disagreement is fairly clear-cut legally, and should not mean another 15 years of lawsuits.

Update: County coroner to speak at 3:30 PM Eastern.

Barring any major announcements, I am done with this topic for the day.

Update: I thought I was done, but I just saw George Felos speak of how "cruel" this process was for Michael Shiavo, and how it was "disquieting" it was for a pro-life priest to speak against his client's position. He came back to this several times. He then complimented the hospice staff for their compassion and professionalism, calling them "angels of mercy." Felos said that Michael Shiavo was cradling Terri as she died.

When questioned by an obviously partisan (pro-life) reporter as to how this could have been "a death with dignity" when she was starved to death, Felos denied that she starved to death. Please tell me I heard that wrong. He then went on to say that they were only carrying out Terri's wishes.

Theresa Shiavo, Rest in Peace.

American Journalist Kidnapped? Don't ask CNN

Two independent foreign media services have reported that three Romanian journalists and a naturalized American journalist have been kidnapped in Iraq. But don't try to find the story in the major media. The Jawa Report the leading American authority on this one. Also previously covered by Jawa here and here.

No wonder Google News dropped The Jawa Report.

They're competent.

Update: CNN has now caught on.

From Hero to Whore

I'm getting more than a little confused.

When black senator Barack Obama endorses former Klansman Robert Byrd, a man who denounced the Rev. Martin Luther King as a "self-seeking rabble rouser," Democrats trumpet this as an example of their diversity and inclusiveness.

When Rev. Jesse Jackson (surely another "self-seeking rabble rouser") reaches out to conservative Christians over the Shiavo case in Florida, on just one issue on a near spotless record as a Democrat, he is immediately denounced as an Uncle Tom and a whore.

I don't think you can still refer to Democrats as the "big tent" party, but at least they are resourceful enough to find other uses for their sheets.

Strange Bedfellows

More than a few people are reveling in the fact that Rev. Jerry Falwell is in a Lynchburg, VA hospital in critical condition with his second case of viral pneumonia in just over a month.

Falwell, the outspoken, often boorish founder of the Moral Majority, is blamed for claiming AIDS is God's punishment for homosexuality and societies who tolerate them, and was the butt of many jokes (look, there goes one now!) for his odd crusade against Tinky Winky, a children's show character that Falwell blasted for being a gay role model. Among his most controversial statements was this one assigning blame just days after 9/11:

"The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the finger in their face and say: you helped this happen."

Not surprisingly, Falwell has made plenty of enemies who would like to see him out of the picture. What is surprising is that liberal gay activists who have long been his greatest enemies are now using oppressive tactics the Rev. Falwell would doubtlessly approve of to silence their own critics.

Despite his laundry list of homophobic comments over the years, Falwell was apparently unable to turn the other cheek (hey, another one!) himself when someone else made comments at his expense, leading to charges of libel, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress against Hustler magazine publisher Larry Flynt in what led to a First Amendment Supreme Court case immortalized in the movie, The People vs. Larry Flynt.

Now, a prominent politically liberal gay activist named Michael Rogers is using Falwellesque claims of defamation and intimidation to stifle free speech on conservative blogs GayPatriot and LimeShurbert because these blogs claimed that Rogers and fellow liberal activist John Aravosis were "gay terrorists" for their practice of "outing" campaigns targeting closeted gay Republicans. LimeShurburt went so far as to create a poster from GayPatriot's comments, which is being picked up and promoted by free speech advocates around the web.

Jerry Falwell and Michael Rogers both use their political influence to attack gays, and both have tried to stifle the First Amendment rights of those who disagree with their radical views.

Blind fanatical hate makes strange bedfellows indeed.

Notes: I first heard of this issue from this Instapundit post, and also found this followup on Instapundit as well. An impressive list of bloggers right and left is developing that are supporting AlphaPatriot and LimeShurburt, including: Classical Values, Gay Orbit, Haight Speech, The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler, Yippe-Ki-Yay!, The Jawa Report, and many more.

Shiavo Thought of the Day

Every time I hear how Terri Shiavo's death by starvation and dehydration is "what she would have wanted," the more I wonder how those sentiments would have sounded in the original German.

Right Up There With Pickle Stem Research

They're LIBERAL? You don't say...

College faculties, long assumed to be a liberal bastion, lean further to the left than even the most conspiratorial conservatives might have imagined, a new study says.

By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.

The disparity is even more pronounced at the most elite schools, where, according to the study, 87 percent of faculty are liberal and 13 percent are conservative.

Robert Lichter, a professor at George Mason University and a co-author of the study, will next author a study determining the political leanings of radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

Diplomats to Bolton: I Said I Loved You But I Lied

Fifty-nine former American diplomats have sent a letter to the Senate challenging President Bush's nomination of John Bolton to become the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

After considering the resumes of these esteemed diplomats and their expansive foreign service records, I can only come to the conclusion that the condemnation of retired bureaucrats from stagnant posts decades old should largely be ignored.

With the possible exception of Arthur A. Hartman, the four other minor luminaries cited by CNN's coverage held assignments that seem more like purgatory than public service, and some of these assignments happens so far in the past as to have little relevance in today's rapidly-evolving political climate.

Quite frankly, does the former deputy ambassador to the United Nations under Ford and Carter have an opinion relevant in today's global political environment? Do we really need the opinion of an Arms Control Agency leftover from the Carter Administration, or Clinton's ambassador to Nigeria?

Bolton's nomination is controversial, to put it mildly, but it would be a refreshing change to have someone in the United Nations who would freely speak his mind without first needing to secure immunity from investigators.

Yet Another Reason to Close the Mexican Border

Tom Elia at The New Editor brings us this delightful news.

An Angry God, a Stupid Liberal

One day after Easter, Sumatra has experienced another major earthquake today, a shallow (19 miles deep) 8.2 (update: 8.7) magnitude event roughly in the same area hit by the December 26 9.0 magnitude earthquake and tsunami that killed 150,000 and left another 100,000 missing.

Perhaps not surprisingly, liberals at the Democratic Underground have wasted no time blaming President Bush.

Note: Hello to all my visitors from Ace of Spades HQ, Michelle Malkin, Outside the Beltway, Say Anything, and Grapevine's Ramblings. Please be sure to visit the main page.

Update: Democratic Underground change the link, and so it is now updated. In case they decide to disable or remove the post at a later time, I have a screen capture.

The Record Skips Again

Once again, I find myself in the situation of having to illuminate a Times Herald-Record article, though at least this time the subject was at least a wayward opinion article instead of biased hard news.

Without any further adieu, let's look at yesterday's Record editorial, "Faking the News."

Sen. Daniel Inouye, a Democrat from Hawaii, has asked the Federal Communications Commission to do what some TV stations are apparently unable or unwilling to do for themselves. That is, be upfront with viewers about the source of government-produced videos masquerading as "news."

Nice use of scare quotes. The Record fails to disclose that this practice was perfected while Bill Clinton was president, and is not a new development. I guess that tiny detail didn't qualify as "news" to the Record, or rather, it got in the way.

The more disturbing element of this equation is not the attempt by the Bush administration to plant "stories" with positive spins in local TV news reports.

Actually, that would be a story… if it were true. But as the Justice Department holds that as there is "no advocacy of a particular viewpoint, and therefore it does not apply to the legitimate provision of information concerning the programs administered by an agency." In other words, as long as these federal agencies are producing video containing nonpartisan facts, there is no violation. Could it be that non-partisan factual reporting from federal agencies threatens existing media bias?

The truth is that this administration has been shameless in its efforts to convince Americans that black is white, or vice versa.

You know, that explains some laundry problems I've been having lately. Nice ad hominem.

This ranges from its varying stories about why war with Iraq was necessary and, later, why it was going so well to the hiring of syndicated columnists to write pro-administration opinions.

I must admit I am unfamiliar with government attempts to provide justifications for why the war is necessary. I must have missed it under the deluge of Record articles explaining why the war liberating 25 million Iraqis was wrong, and why we don't care about our soldiers anymore.

So when the White House instructed various government departments to ignore a report from the Government Accountability Office that declares some of these reports to be "covert propaganda," it was just doing its thing.

Just as the Record editorial ignored memos from Joshua B. Bolton, director of the Office of Management and Budget, and Steven G. Bradbury, principal deputy assistant attorney general at the Justice Department, saying that the GAO was not only wrong, but that it was overstepping its bounds in issuing their opinion.

It is frustrating and annoying and the practice may be illegal, but Americans by now have come to expect this kind of disregard for their intelligence by Bush and Co. Lowered expectations.

Actually, thanks to the CBS News fake documents scandal, the thwarted NY Times "October Surprise," the near-treason of CNN's Eason Jordan, the lies of Guiliana Sgrena and the developing fake talking points memo scandal, along with some reality-challenged episodes at the Record itself, I'd suggest that most Americans have come to expect lowered expectations from an increasingly exposed news media.

What especially troubles us with this phony news caper is that some TV stations have actually gone along with it. They have simply taken the government-produced reports, which cost taxpayers millions but TV stations nothing, and aired them as news items. This, even though the reports use government employees or actors to portray reporters and sometimes contain political messages inside the straight "news" report.

What troubles them is that some television stations, which became used to broadcasting these apparently factual reports during the Clinton years, still have the audacity to continue to do so while Bush is in office, even when some of these facts threaten to prove that some of President Bush's policy ideas were correct. The charge that the Record makes here that some of these reports contain political messages is not supported by facts from the Record's editorial board, perhaps because the lack of facts proving their contention didn't qualify as "news." I can use scare quotes, too.

There is no identification of the source of the reports and, to be sure, no hint of critical analysis, contrary opinion or questioning of the information presented, as with legitimate news stories.

Identification of the source, of course, does not apply to "anonymous government officials" or simply "congressional staffers" or other non-visible sources that the media uses to support its opinion under the guise of reporting. As we are increasingly aware, "legitimate" news stories, very often are not.

That's the rub here. If viewers know that the report they are watching was produced by the Agriculture Department or the State Department or the Pentagon, they can at least insert their own questions where a legitimate reporter might. But without such critical reporting, these items unfailingly come across as positive for the government, which is, of course, the administration's goal in producing and distributing them.

There isno barrier in place that prevents viewers from asking questions, and indeed, these government broadcasts would appear to be great leads, or springboards to deeper investigation of a topic by intrepid truth-seeking reporters. Perhaps the real problem here is that the factual presentation of information that these broadcasts provide acutely conflicts with the "critical reporting" of the existing news media.

That's propagandizing, and for TV stations to be part of it, either for political reasons (to support President Bush) or because they do not have the resources to fill out a daily news report, is plain wrong.

However, to do it for political reasons (to undermine President Bush) is apparently acceptable.

In fact, the Radio-Television News Directors Association's code of ethics urges members to "clearly disclose the origin of information and label all material provided by outsiders." This allows viewers some perspective.

This is sound advice. A broken clock...

But there is no requirement that TV stations follow this basic code of conduct, and some have unfortunately chosen not to do so, some for less than noble reasons.

Nor apparently is there any requirement that for the dead-tree media, or I am certain that the Record would use it to show its unblemished impartiality.

That's why Inouye wants the FCC to find a remedy. The obvious one would be to require radio and TV news directors to abide by their own code of ethics. That means telling viewers the source of the story.

Don't look for this idea to find too much traction among Congressional Democrats, the three broadcast networks, or CNN. Accountability would certainly shut down their steady flow of anonymous sources. Fox News, however, would probably prove an unlikely ally for a lonely Inouye in this effort.

As for the White House, with the president's credibility already in question with millions of Americans and his job rating falling, it might consider the (for it) unusual step of leveling with Americans.

This would of course be the same president who the rest of the world, including a begrudging European press, is being forced to admit, may have been correct all along. It would be interesting for the American media, however, to admit that they were wrong, but I won't wait for that to occur.

If it won't, members of Congress who don't appreciate Americans being fed propaganda paid for by their own taxes should insist that the government properly label all its news releases.

I would assume that this also would apply to rambling missives from those same members of Congress (Boxer, Kennedy, and our own beloved Hinchey, Shumer, and Clinton) that always seem to garner so much acclaim without much scrutiny.

And it should insist the FCC discipline any radio or TV stations that intentionally participate in these sham news reports.

Funny how quickly the Record editors dropped their earlier objection to the use of syndicated columnists from the second paragraph of this editorial. One would almost think they want print journalist to exist under their own special set of rules.

But that couldn't be true... could it?

Perhaps Dr. Jack was Right

I think reading some of the comments attacking Rev. Donald Sensing finally woke me up from my holier-than-thou, Shiavo-based stupor. Sadly, we've reached a point where Terri Shiavo the symbol has far overshadowed Terri Shiavo the person.

I'm backing away, and hopefully recapturing some perspective in the process.

One thing I'm taking away from this sad affair is that Dr. Jack Kevorkian was likely correct in some of his theories regarding the right to die, a stance that has led to his incarceration in a Michigan prison. He was sentenced on March 26, 1999 for second-degree murder by administering a video-taped lethal injection of ALS sufferer Thomas Youk and will not be eligible for parole until 2007.

I'm not going to try to guess what Terri Shiavo would have wanted--far too many people are involved in that already--but if we take away something from her over week-long death process it should be that we must, as a society, revisit end of life issues head-on and acknowledge that their must be far more palatable ways to die than by slow starvation.

To borrow from Rev. Sensing, who has far more experience with such issues than I shall ever want:

...the idea that the only truly Christian position is to keep someone alive by artificial means against his/her will when every medical opinion is that there is no hope for recovery is repugnant...

...At bottom, all these cases in all their sorrows come to be matters of faith - faith that the doctors are skilled and truthful, faith that there is a hope for the stricken even if death comes, and faith that for those who love the dying that life will continue worthwhile come what may.

We should find a more palatable way to transition between this world and what lies beyond. I hope we can at least find some agreement on that.

Ka-Blooey!

The small consulting firm I worked for just broke the bad news that they aren't doing too well financially, so I'm one of the recipients of the dreaded "last on, first off" Friday afternoon speech.

I figure it's God's way of telling me I need to branch out with my writing skills, so if you know of anyone looking for a technical writer, columnist, or pro blogging gig, let me know, will you?

That's "confederateyankee-at-hotmail-dot-com"

I'm currently in the NY Metro area, but I'd willing to consider a relocation back to the Old North State.

The Camp Bucca Redemption

CAMP BUCCA, IRAQ -- U.S. military police Friday thwarted a massive escape attempt by suspected insurgents and terrorists from this southern Iraq Army base that houses more than 6,000 detainees when they uncovered a 600-foot tunnel the detainees had dug under their compound.

"We were very close to a very bad thing," Major Gen. William Brandenburg said Friday after troops under his command discovered the tunnel that prisoners had painstakingly dug with the help of makeshift tools.

Within hours of the discovery on the first tunnel, a second tunnel of about 300 feet was detected under an adjoining compound in the camp, which holds 6,049 detainees. The elaborate escape is reminiscent of the 1994 movie, "The Shawshank Redemption," where a prisoner burrows his way out of prison.

See what happens when you don't keep an eye on Tim Robbins?

(hat tip Drudge)

Update: Added the quote from the article for context.

Update 2: Added to the Beltway Traffic Jam.

Right to Carry Trumps Right to Life

If I have made one observation in my life worth passing along, it is that the owner of a gun store is the last person you should ever be stupid enough to ever try to rob.

I guess we can add to the cliches, "Never bring a knife to a gun show."

(hat tip Drudge)

In the Shiavo Case, Even the Doctors Are Having Cerebral Issues

Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan states:

"While we at American Council on Science and Health have been determined to remain on the sidelines of the raging national debate about the fate of Terri Schiavo (this is largely a legal and ethical issue, not a scientific one), we cannot remain silent about the outrageous misrepresentation of scientific facts about this case that has been occurring in the past ten days.

"The medical reality of Ms. Schiavo's case is this: She has been in what is medically referred to as a "permanent vegetative state" for the past 15 years, ever since her heart temporarily stopped (probably due to the severe effects of an eating disorder), depriving her brain of oxygen. Brain scans indicate that her cerebral cortex ceased functioning -- probably just after she experienced cardiac arrest in 1990. Ms. Schiavo's CAT scan shows massive shrinking of the brain, and her EEG is flat. Physicians confirm that there is no electrical activity coming from her brain. While the family video repeatedly shown on television suggests otherwise, her non-functioning cortex precludes cognition, including any ability to interact or communicate with people or show any signs of awareness. Dozens of experts over the years who have examined Ms. Schiavo agree that there is no hope of her recovering -- even though her body, face and eyes (if she is given food and hydration) might continue to move for decades to come.

"Those are the harsh facts."

Some more "harsh facts" seem to indicate that Dr. Whelan might need a refresher course at the closest available medical school. The part of Dr. Whelan's statement above in bold(my bold, not the author's) simply isn't true.

EEGs--electroencephalograms--measure electrical activity on the surface of the brain only. She cannot categorically state there is no deeper brain function because of EEG results, as EEGs do not measure such.

In addition, without any electrical activity coming from any part of her brain, Terri Shaivo's body would not have a heartbeat, or know to breathe. In layman's terms, she'd be brain dead. The very fact that Terri Shaivo has been breathing without the aid of a ventilator for the past 15 years proves that she has some electrical activity in her brain, even if the amount or quality of activity is debatable.

If Dr. Whelan is going to throw around charges of misrepresentations, perhaps she should start by correcting her own.

Update: As Ed noted in the comments, Dr. Whelan is a Sc.D... a Doctor of Science. She isn't a medical doctor. he Evangelical Outpost adds that Dr. Whelan is quite a dubious character in her own right.

Note: Posted at the Blogger News Network

Eviscerated: The Betrayal of Our Southern Border

In general, I've been a strong supporter of the current administration's foreign policy initiatives, particularly the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, as I understood and accepted the arguments of the threats each of these counties posed.

Afghanistan was the unabashed and de facto home of al Qaeda and its Taliban supporters, and Iraq, though a harder sell to the American people, made sense on a number of levels for our national security.

And so I'm stunned that President Bush has taken the extraordinary step of weakening our nation's security by advocating a loosening of immigration restrictions, a move that makes sense neither from the perspectives of commerce or security.

Our porous borders are this nation's single greatest national security threat, particularly our southern border with Mexico. 2 million of the estimated 3 million people that cross the border illegally each year do so without getting caught. We're not talking just a handful of illegals, but the equivalent of 160 12,500-man military divisions, larger than Saddam's Army at the height of full mobilization. Red Dawn, anyone?

Even when peaceful in intent, these huge numbers are over-burdening parts of our country's infrastructure, particularly our social services. In California alone the cost of treating illegals has shut down 60 emergency rooms, and in New Jersey, the state estimates it hemorrhages $200 million each year treating illegals. With astronomical health costs and the re-importation of previously vanquished and newly emerging diseases, the cost of supporting 10-25 million illegal aliens far outweighs any "cheap labor" arguments.

In addition to illegal aliens, terrorist groups are thought to be using the poorly guarded southern border as an entry point, and Central and South American street gangs are using the border to smuggle in gang members for violent drug operations, such as MS13, which has rapidly expanded to 31 states.

I've supported President Bush and much of the Republican Party platform, but by enabling and even encouraging the exposure of our southern border, he is preparing the United States to be eviscerated by forces both accidental and intentional.

Note: Cross-posted to the Blogger News Network.

Home

Agreed

Rusty sums it up perfectly for me:

"...federalism is an abstraction. Life is not."

Home

Screwtape Revisited

I've always heard of The Screwtape Letters from C.S. Lewis and so far have never gotten the proverbial "round tuit." Amazon's editorial review describes the book as:

"... the instructional correspondence between a senior demon, Screwtape, and his wannabe diabolical nephew Wormwood. As mentor, Screwtape coaches Wormwood in the finer points, tempting his "patient" away from God.

"Each letter is a masterpiece of reverse theology, giving the reader an inside look at the thinking and means of temptation. Tempters, according to Lewis, have two motives: the first is fear of punishment, the second a hunger to consume or dominate other beings."

Meghan Cox Gurdon has an excellent adaptation of this story in National Review Online called Screwtape Revisited that reminds us that the powerful aren't always right.

Payback

When did Greenpeace form an alliance with the Dutch? I guess this evens the score.

Crossing the Divide with No One Watching

I wrote in early February that the U.S. had won a psychological battle of sorts against terrorism by being able to laugh at its increasing desperation.

Today, Iraqis took a major step towards winning their own psychological battle against terrorism with a very real military victory against a terrorist training base, killing 85 terrorists with the loss of seven Iraqi police commandos killed and six wounded.

This event is a concrete step forward for Iraqi self-determination, proving they are becoming ever more capable of their own security, even if they are a long way from a U.S. withdrawal. You would think that the media, highly critical of the U.S.-led war, would welcome the news and be very excited about this development. You would think that, but you'd be wrong.

CNN chose to report the angle that the battle showed terrorist forces were weakening, but chose not to make much of the mention that this was the first offensive fought primarily by Iraqi government forces, with the U.S. forces in a supporting role.

The AP story on Yahoo! said that "U.S. and Iraqi forces" carried out the raid, but again, made no special mention that the Iraqis were the primary forces involved military involvement. MSNBC mirrored that approach, as did Fox News.

ABC News put the story of the successful raid well below the fold, instead focusing on the "news" that Osama bin Laden had evaded capture (thanks for the late-breaking news, ABC).

Perhaps not surprisingly, CBS News buried the story completely, not having a single apparent link to the story on their front page, but chose instead to answer such burning questions as "Do bad teeth make bad babies?" and "Why Marry Scott Peterson?"

Of all the major news organizations it was the BBC that recognized the importance of today's raid, with the headline "Iraqi Troops Blitz Insurgent Camp," and a story focusing on the Iraqi commando involvement.

This a big day for Iraq. Too bad the rest of the world didn't notice.

Update: Apparently some of the world did notice, and one of the better bloggers out there noticed it. Tigerhawk has a good article up about how Stratfor has more or less reversed its position from three months ago on the ability of Iraqi security forces to combat the insurgency. The Stratfor revision cites the successful March 22 raid specifically as a validation of an emerging Iraqi army.

Home

Not Selling Well in the 'Burbs, Heartland

I don't get it. When the new marketing campaign was pitched to Howard Dean, he seemed so crazy about it (MP3)...

Update: The Country Store has similar thoughts.

Solomon Lacking

In many cultures, the wisdom of King Solomon was legendary. One case in particular stands out as the most famous example of his brilliance as a judge.

Two women came to his court with a baby whom both women claimed as their own. Solomon threatened to split the baby in half. One woman was prepared to accept the decision, but the other begged the King to give the live baby to the other woman. Solomon then knew the second woman was the mother because of her concern for the life of the child.

The wisdom of Solomon is sorely lacking today.

Update: John Hawkins of Right Wing News seized upon this same idea, and ran it to its not-so-logical conclusion.

An Inability to Speak the Truth

One thing I have noticed about the Terri Shiavo case so far is the apparent inability from either side to speak honestly about Mrs. Shiavo's case, specifically in regards to her health.

Typical misinformation is readily apparent in this sample quote:

"In its crazed campaign to keep a brain-dead woman alive against the will of her husband, Congress has now passed a law..."

The author, an apparent libertarian, has his facts wrong. Shiavo is brain-damaged, not brain dead. It's the difference between Barbara Boxer and Mary Jo Kopechne. Many liberals make the same or similar misstatements.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, some conservatives make it sound like Terri could almost get up and dance a jig, if only she had rehabilitation.

The facts of Terri Shiavo's mental state lie somewhere in between these two extremes. Let's try to keep that in mind.

Update: An MD I know who posts on this site forwarded this to me, a description of extreme water deprivation as experienced by a man who barely survived seven days without it. As I write this, Terri Shiavo is on day six.

WTF...

No, you did not go to the wrong blog by mistake.

Me brudder was nice enough to design a new Blogger template for Confederate Yankee, which gives me much wider margins for my typically text-heavy posts. Hopefully this will make things a bit easier to read, if not easier to always swallow.

Do Liberals "Own" Gay Voters?

The Democratic Underground and other unsavory corners of the Web are all atwitter about the unconfirmed rumor that Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlmann might be gay.

In all seriousness; does it matter?

To most conservatives and libertarians I know, it doesn't. While it may bother some of the very old or very far right members of our side of tehpolitical spectrum, most conservatives don't care all that much about someone's sexuality, and many of us have gay friends.

Despite that, liberals, particularly in the blogosphere, have consistently pounced upon (figuratively) suspected gays within the Republican party, demonizing as traitors to their community. What gives them the right to make that determination? What gives liberals the arrogance to determine which community someone belongs to merely on the basis of sexual orientation?

Should a lesbian businesswoman be ideologically bound to vote for higher corporate taxes because she loves another woman? Of course not. Should a gay gun nut have to give up his love of shooting sports because Republicans are more gun-friendly? No.

Liberals, gay liberals, in particular, are guilty in this instance of pigeonholing and stereotyping and entire group of people based one aspect of their personality. Militantly liberal gays like John Aravosis at Americablog seem to imply that if an American is gay, he or she is obligated to vote for liberal candidates.

I'd like to know why liberals seem to think they own homosexual voters, and almost uniformly consider gay conservatives, as one long-time Democratic Underground poster put it, "Destructive, treasonous, hypocritical, cynical opportunists," that "deserve no mercy."

Sounds mighty arrogant to me.

Update: Shamelessly added to the Beltway Traffic Jam.

Dropping Google

I just sent the following letter to Google Adsense Support via their "Send us your question" form:

This is not a question, but a statement.

Google News has now added neo-Nazis (National Vanguard) to their index of approved news sources. I, and hopefully other bloggers have tired of an arcane and apparently senseless news source approval process from Google News, that refuses to carry nationally-recognized columnists such as Michelle Malkin, or top bloggers like Instapundit, but that appears more than willing to carry a hotbed of conspiracy theories such as the Democratic Underground.

Quite simply, it doesn't make sense, and verges on the intellectually dishonest.

I am behind Jeff Jarvis' call for transparency, and therefore, I am dropping Google Ads from my blog until this much-needed transparency is provided. I know the few hits I provide will not be missed by your advertisers, but that really isn't the point, is it?

Good day.

The point, of course, is journalistic integrity. I understand perfectly that the Adsense and News divisions of Google probably have very little to do with one another, but I also understand the basics of business. News departments don't make money, but advertising departments do.

In the end, who do you think gets heard?

Posted by Confederate Yankee at 01:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

A Note on State-Assisted Homicide

I don't care what the doctor thinks.

Just becuase she's been in a "persistant vegatative state" for 13 years does not mean we should allow her to starve.

Even animals are afforded a merciful, quick and relatively painless death. People, even those we don't like, deserve the same protections.

Update: The Jawa Report is in a similar mood... and apparently, so is Liberal Larry.

Home

Ouch

Gather around kids, and learn: Tigerhawk shows us what a good fisking really is, at the expense of a fluff piece by James C. Goodale in the New York Review of Books.

I'll warn you in advance that it isn't pretty.

Home

Bias: A Quick Study in Why Newspapers Lose Readership

It is hardly a secret that newspapers are in decline.

They've been losing readership by population percentage since the post-WWII years, and since 1990, they've been declining in hard numbers as well. The newspapers themselves have all sorts of theories as to why they are losing readership, as do newspaper bloggers.

They first blamed the rise of network and then cable television news, and now the Internet. They've responded by trying radical new layouts, page sizes, and diversified staffs.

But they still fail and decline in readership, due in part to the apparent refusal to take into account political bias in the media and in the communities they serve.

Strong liberal media bias exists, and we know this because the media tells us so, and respected academic research confirms it.

This liberal bias may not be as much of a problem for the New York Times, as the New York metropolitan area is highly Democratic and the Times has global reach. Still the Times is only breaking about even. Move up the Hudson River an hour's drive, though, and you face a different set of circumstances.

A quick look at the 2004 Presidential Election Map shows why.

While New York City slants heavily left, outside of the metropolitan areas, readerships tend toward political moderation or even slight conservativism. Papers in this arc outside of NYC still often reveal a strong liberal bias, as is readily evident to anyone who has ever read the Times Herald-Record or the Poughkeepsie Journal.

The readership of the Record draws from Orange, Sullivan, and parts of Ulster County. The Journal draws from Dutchess, Putnam, and parts of Orange and Ulster counties.

Of these five counties, only Ulster went for Kerry in the 2004 election, while Dutchess, Orange, and Putnam went to Bush by margins of 5%-15%. Sullivan was a near dead heat, with Bush beating Kerry by 75 votes.

So when you present moderate to conservative readerships with strongly liberal newspapers, what are the potential subscribes going to say? I'll let two of my readers tell you. I just wrote an article critical of apparent liberal bias in yesterday's Record.

Reader "Marc from Monroe" responded:

"I live in Monroe, NY, and this newspaper[ed. the Record] is our local piece of CRAP...

...When I moved to the region in 2000 I got the paper to learn about the place. As soon as I could, I cancelled the subscription, hard."

Reader "Peg C." chimes in:

"I live in Newburgh and my Bush-hating in-laws read nothing but the Record. That explains all you need to know about it. I won't have it in the house and have read their subscription sellers the riot act over the phone numerous times for trying to get me to subscribe. Said their lefty bias made them anathema to me. What a piece of tripe!"

While two people does not majority make, they do seem to reflect at least in spirit the comments of many people I know in the area. I can only imagine, as NY political maps indicate, that a much more politically balanced news staff might help these papers at least slow their hemmorhaging of subscribers. Unfortunately, diversity means melanin content, not ideology, to far too many people on editorial boards.

While I'm certainly operating on far less than scientific data here, I'd be willing to bet that scientifically valid research would show that newspapers who editorial biases are out of touch with their readership's political viewpoints are loosing readers faster than papers that best mirror the views of their readerships.

I don't think it takes a government research grant to figure that newspapers who alienate their readers, won't have readers very long.

Update: Added to the Beltway Traffic Jam.

Home

Wrong Again

The headline on the Times Herald-Record Sunday was "Two Years in Iraq and... THE SILENCE IS DEAFENING." It is accompanied by a photo of a worn plastic yellow ribbon tied around the base of a telephone pole, presumably to show flagging support at home for our troops, which the paper promotes on page 9 with a heavily-biased tabloid-quality story showing how the lack of yellow ribbons in the area shows flagging support for the war and our troops.

The problem is, the ribbon they show is a lie.

I know, I placed it there.

Or perhaps not that ribbon in particular, but hundreds like it. These ribbons are on telephone poles across the region and perhaps around the country, used by electric company subcontractors to mark poles for a multitude of reasons. They are not there for the reasons the newspaper implies.

These particular yellow ribbons are used to mark poles that need to be relocated due to their close proximity to the road. If the photographer went back to this location, he would likely note a stake driven into the ground with an orange ribbon tacked or tied to the top to mark when the new pole should be located. At the time the pole and stake were placed, a white letter "P" was painted on the road with an arrow, so that the electric company would know which poles needed to be moved, but salt, rain and snowplows have long since removed the water-based paint from the road surface.

To me, the photo goes along with the rest of the reporting of this weekend's second anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, that is to say, "false, but accurate," misleading, and half-told.

It seems fitting that the media misrepresents the war at home the way they've misrepresented it overseas for two years. If nothing else, you can't fault them for inconsistency.

Update: The Record got back in touch with me, and says that this photo was taken in Livingstone Manor, and this ribbon was placed as part of a community vigil nine or 10 months ago on behalf of the troops safe return, and that they will continue to investigate this. If they hold with this story, I would be very interested to find out why the people at the vigil would place this around the base of the pole (instead of eye level,and no, this stuff does not easily slide down over creosote, a preservative tar), and why they used cheap marking tape instead of readily available pre-made ribbons.

I can now categorically say it wasn't a marker ribbon I personally put up, though it wasn't very far from other projects I worked on in that general area.

Home

A Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Understandably, a lot of folks are extremely distraught over Terri Shiavo's feeding tube being removed on Friday.

Starving a person to death does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment as outlined in the Constitution? It is so terribly obvious. Just because she cannot cry out doesn't mean that she is not suffering a horrible, lingering death.

I've been asked to link to a story asking Jeb Bush to step in and be a hero, and so I shall, even though my heart isn't in it. Quite frankly, I don't think it would do much more than delay the inevitable.

The Florida legislature, disgracefully, refused to pass a law that may have saved the life of Mrs. Schiavo, and I'm not hopeful that Congress will come through.

Michael Schiavo has gone to extraordinary lengths to see his wife killed, and found a willing judge to pass sentence. If no one will step forward to stop this execution, I sincerely hope someone, perferably a physician, will at least have the courage to end Terry Shiavo's life before her suffering becomes too great.

Florida has already shown it contains little compassion. One can only hope it can salvage mercy.

Update: Late Saturday evening Congress worked out a compromise that will allow Federal courts to decide Terri Schiavo's fate.

Home

The End Begins for Shiavo

Someone please explain to me how we can live in a country where a man can get a court order to legally starve his wife to death, when there are people literally begging for chance to help her.

And we have the nerve to call these people savages...

Home

Hate has a Home in New Paltz

Driving through, you'd never expect this tiny upstate New York college town was all that different from dozens of other college towns across this country, but something about New Paltz attracts hate.

In June of 2001, it took place in the form of an hours-long shooting rampage by Jared Bozydaj in the name of Timothy McVeigh.

Last year in early April, vicious radicals from the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas met there to scream:

"God hates fags!"
"God hates America!"

This was in protest to New Paltz Mayor Jason West's decision to perform illegal gay marriages.

Tomorrow, hate rears its head again.

International A.N.S.W.E.R., an anti-Semitic blanket organization including radical Marxists that support convicted terrorist supporter Lynne Stewart, and the national Muslim Student Association, a Saudi Wahhabi-funded, rabidly anti-Semitic group that has been identified as a pro-terror organization that has raised money for Hamas and Hezbollah terrorist groups, is conducting a so-called anti-war protest tomorrow, March 19 in New Paltz.

But what is it, really? It is a rally of hate against our involvement in toppling a bloodthirsty dictator. Another rally of hate against soldiers trying to bring peace to a war-torn land.

Even after successful Iraqi elections and the establishment of a fledgling democracy in the Middle East, they protest. Even though the Iraqi war is the catalyst for other democracy movements in the region which can free of tens of millions more people, they protest.

They do not protest for freedom. The do not protest for the millions oppressed under Middle Eastern tyrants. They protest against President Bush. They protest against emerging calls for freedom.

These people hate our president, one man, so much that they would sell tens of millions down the river hoping to cause him to fail.

That is a lot of hate contained in a town of barely six thousand.

What a terrible, terrible shame.

Note: Sadly, the New Paltz protest is just one of many against Arab democracy this weekend. Pathetically, my conspiracy theorist congressman, Maurice Hinchey, will be a featured speaker.

Note 2: The pictures above were taken at previous protests in different cities, and have appeared on so many web sites, I'm not sure who can claim credit for them.

Update: Welcome, Little Green Footballers!

I'm often there ( A daily read), but it's nice to have you guys over here to visit once in a while. As you well know, our good friend Congressman Hinchey will be the guest of dishonor at this event. I know if was an LGFer who taped his audio last time, so anyone can get a transcript of his comments, or an MP3, I'd appreciate a copy (confederateyankee-at-hotmail-dot-com) very much.

Be sure to click the "Home" link below and look around. There's plenty of stuff here that you'll like, and consider bookmarking the site as content is updated daily.

Update 2: Carpe Bonum has a nice angle covered from the college town where Hinchey will be speaking.

Home

Boxer Blows the Charade

We've suspected for a long time now that liberals felt that a different set of rules applied to them as opposed to the rest of us, but we never had proof. Now we do.

Radioblogger caught liberal California Senator Barbara Boxer in the truth as she spoke of the Democratic attempt to change the Senate's advise and consent role in judicial nominations:

...California's very own Barbara Boxer, took to the podium next, and did something remarkable. She forgot to keep up the lie. She told the truth about the strategy of the Democrats. She let what their view of the Constitution truly is. If Rose Woods, Richard Nixon's legendary secretary, worked at either MoveOn or C-span, the following part of the tape would be missing...

Click to Listen (MP3) or read the transcript.

...The truth of the matter is it is the Democrats who indeed are changing the Constitutional requirement, because Democrats like Barbara Boxer don't think the current political makeup is fair. Not only should there be a supermajority, which is clearly unconstitutional, but appointed judges should stand for elections. I wonder if that weathered, pocket-sized edition of the Constitution did backflips in Robert Byrd's shirt pocket when she said that.

Boxer let slip the simple truth that Senate Democrats don't like playing by the rules this country was founded upon, if the Constitution don't directly and immediately benefit them.

Is anyone really surprised?

Home

Back in the Game?

Thanks to Bill at INDC Journal, I just found out that the White House Press Corps will not change credentialing as a result of "Gannongate."

In other words, all Jeff Gannon needs to get back into the White House Press Corps is an news service for his employer. I'd love to see Talon News make a resurgence and be responsible for placing Gannon back in the Press Corps, primarily for the delightful howling from the left side of the blogosphere, but I doubt that will come to pass.

What we need is a visionary media mogul who would be willing to take a chance on Mr. Gannon, and who has a history of brilliant media decisions. Rupert Murdoch, are you listening?

Apart from visionaries, we could also consider the truly desperate. Hey, it isn't like this show has anything to lose by getting a new host, and Gannon is already being credited with half the ratings. It doesn't seem Gannon could do any worse.

Why are the Italians on the Defensive?

The Guiliana Sgrena case just keeps getting stranger.

First of all, few of Sgrena's stories about her kidnapping or the shooting during her rescue matched one another. One would almost think she was a bitter old communist with an axe to grind who was making up things on the fly to try to damage a country she dislikes.

Then, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi called for a full investigation into a Baghdad checkpoint shooting by U.S. soldiers that took the life of agent Nicola Calipari, but now doesn't actually want to cooperate.

Why are the Italians stonewalling the investigation of Sgrena's kidnapping?

Call it just a hunch, but perhaps after the Italians had a chance to debrief Sgrena, they discovered that they may have lost a good man over a terrorist sympathizer, and don't want the kidnappers caught, fearing they might corroborate that under interrogation. It was tragic to lose Nicola Calapari to a horrible mistake in communications and planning.

It would be even worse if they lost him trying to save someone who had sided with the enemy.

(Hat tip: The New Editor)

Capital Punishment, Up Close and Personal

I spent a long time lying awake last night thinking about the latest missive from Eugene Volokh. It is fairly rare in my experience to find people who are not only pro-death penalty, but who feel that the families of the victims should be allowed to participate in the execution.

It is strange in these times to hear such comments from learned men, and upon reflection, refreshing.

The condemned subject of the Volokh article was an Iranian who lured at least twenty children into the desert, sexually assaulted them, and then murdered them. they method of execution was brutal. The condemned was tied to a post flogged 100 times with a whip, stabbed once, and them slowly throttled by tying a cord around his neck and lifting him from the ground with a crane to strangle.

It was truly a horrible way to die, and not something to be easily dismissed from the mind once you really understand how it was done, and how the condemned murderer suffered.

As horrible as his death was, I find it hard to argue that the punishment did not fit the crime. Considering what this man did, I feel no pity for him, nor his manner of execution.

I know that this kind of execution would never be sanctioned in the United States, and I'm not going to argue that it should. It is an untenable position. Volokh says in an update that this kind of execution would most likely violate the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause. I'm pretty sure that is the case as well. He suggests a constitutional amendment to make an exception to the clause for some sorts of mass murder. Not that it matters, but if you are going to go that route, I think certain violent sex crimes should be added as well.

What I did find thought-provoking was the idea of letting victim's family participate in some (if not all) government-sanctioned executions.

It violates no constitutional rights to allow a family member to participate in current forms of legally recognized execution. It would be just and fitting to have them push the button, or through the switch.

Volokh is right, I think, and the more I think about it, the more I support the idea of an exception to the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause.

I find that a firing squad made up of members of victim's family members would be a quite appropriate and a very fitting, if somewhat still unsatisfying, act of justice.

Update: Upon doing a little more research, an amendment to the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause would be difficult to add, but it may not be as difficult as you think, and may not even be necessary.

While some states feel it is cruel and unusual, firing squads are still legal in Utah, Idaho, and Oklahoma, and hanging is still legal in Washington, Delaware, and New Hampshire, according to this 2002 CNN article:

I don't think it unreasonable, considering that these forms of execution are still practiced, to allow members of victim's families to participate in either one.

Granted, it may not be a punishment to fit the crime, but it might be a step closer to both justice and closure for the surviving families. The tough part would be expanding this to a national scale, but if a few states could be pursuaded to allow victim's families to participate, victim's rights groups would probably push for a nationwide law, wouldn't they?

I Told You He Was A Real Journalist.

Shocking information at a White House press conference yesterday has proven that Jeff Gannon is every bit as competent and credible as other White House correspondents.

No, Gannon didn't say anything new, but Bush's press conference yesterday not only showed the existence of harsh bias in the White House Press Corps, but that it is far deeper and wider among liberal reporters, prompting Powerline to ask, "Where is Jeff Gannon When We Need Him?"

Hot, Nasty, Dirty Blog Tricks

I'll have to cross post this over at Blog Netiquette as what not do as a blogger...

Bill at INDC Journal, has come across a couple of disturbing way that bloggers are building up their traffic. One discovered by Dean was to mention Mario Vasquez.

"Who is Mario Vasquez?" I thought, and so I did a search on Mario Vasquez. Apparently, Mario Vasquez is some huge star on, and now off American Idol. He looks kind of like another Justin Timberlake wannabe, with quite a few people apparently hoping to see Mario Vasquez nude. I find that kind of pandering sad and pathetic... as I did this example from Wizbang of Debbie Gibson Nude (not work safe).

Frankly, I'm stunned.

These are bloggers I respect, and I can't fathom why they would want to clutter up their sites with false references to naked pictures of Gwen Stefani or Ernest Borgnine, and more than I could guess why they'd want to draw traffic to see non-existant nude photos of Chrstina Aguilera, Brad Pitt, or free explicit videos of Paris Hilton with Helen Thomas. I would never stoop to such a level.

That would just be wrong.

Update 3/20: For some odd reason, this article shows up third on a Yahoo! search for "Mario Vasquez Naked." Isn't that just wrong?

Beating Your PETA In Public

Brings a whole new meaning to the song "We've got the Beat." Jeff is having way too much fun with this over at Beautiful Atrocities.

By the way, the chicken I had for lunch on this International Eat an Animal for PETA Day was excellent, and I look forward to the veal I'll be dining on tonight.

Corrie's Parents, Seeking Profit, Sue Wrong Foe For Her Death

Rachel Corrie's parents are suing the IDF, the State of Israel, and Caterpillar, Inc. because Corrie, a pro-Palestinian activist, stood in front of a bulldozer where the operator has severely restricted line-of-sight and decided to play "chicken." Guess who won?

LGF has all the relevant links and so I won't repost them here, but I'm surprised that Rachel Corrie's parents aren't suing Evergreen State College, a fourth-tier, radically liberal college in Olympia, Washington. This is where Corrie developed the radically liberal ideology that led her to join up with and be used by terrorists, and this ideology she acquired at ESC appears to be the most culpable suspect in swaying Rachel Corrie's impressionable young mind to the point that she would put her life in such danger.

As Dennis Prager said in March 23, 2003:

Anyone with a heart must extend the deepest condolences to Rachel Corrie's parents. But anyone with a conscience must regard Rachel Corrie's activities with contempt. One hopes that it is not asking too much of people to entertain simultaneously two conflicting emotions -- grief for the parents and contempt for the daughter.

Rachel Corrie chose to side with a society that breeds some of the cruelest murderers of innocent people in the world. Rachel Corrie gave her life trying to protect people whose declared aim is to annihilate another country. In the name of saving children's lives, Rachel Corrie chose to defend a society that teaches its young children to blow themselves up and which deliberately targets children for death. And Rachel Corrie went to America's enemies to burn her country's flag.

She was one of the many fools our colleges annually produce. Evergreen State College is reputed to excel in such production. Is anyone aware of a single student or faculty member who repudiated her activities?

Rachel Corrie's death was a needless one, based upon blindnesses ideological and practical. If Corrie's parent are going to sue Caterpillar for building bulldozers that protect their operators from terrorists, they should also sue the college that indoctrinated their child to side with murderers.

Update: Apparently the illogical, rabid moonbattery of the far, far left isn't isolated to obscure colleges in Washington state; it also trickles down to the high school level. Pathetic.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at 10:25 AM | Comments (0)

Scalia Shows His Mettle

If there was any doubt Justice Antonin Scalia is qualified to be Chief Justice, that doubt was erased yesterday in a 35-minute speech where he blasted the recent 5-4 Supreme Court decision to overturn the juvenile death penalty based on "evolving notions of decency."

Scalia noted that since the Warren Court, Justices have been all too willing to interpret new rights not included in the Constitution, at the expense of our democracy.

Constitutional law expert Mark R. Levin appears to agree in his current New York Times best-seller, Men In Black: How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America. Levin goes further back than the Warren Court to the Marshall Court citing Marbury v. Madison as the tipping point where the court granted itself the power to declare acts of the other branches of government unconstitutional, which had the immediate effect of upsetting the balance between the executive, legislative and judicial branches.

David Price has an excellent explanation of the current living Constitution theory, and why you should care.

If you are pro-choice, you need to understand that you do not have an inherent Constitutional right to abortion, that was a decision granted by activist jurists, just as was the recent juvenile death penalty case. While Rehnquist's impending retirement is almost assured and not necessarily going to change the overall tenor of the court, John Paul Stevens is 80, and both Ginsburg and O'Conner (a liberal and a "swing" justice) are into their 70s.

All it takes if for a moderate or liberal justice to retire, and a strong conservative to replace them, something that is growing not only possible but probable as Democrats continue to grow weaker in Congress. If that conservative justice is also a believer in the living Constitution theory, you can expect decision such as Roe v. Wade, the juvenile death penalty case, and literally dozens of other standing examples of Court decisions to be retried and overturned based upon new "evolving notions of decency."

While this would no doubt thrill conservatives in the short-term, it shows the weaknesses of the living Constitution theory, providing us with a shaky foundation for our nation which could again tilt the other way when another justice or two retires.

The Constitution is not a document created on a whim to be changed lightly, but an effort of brilliant men who struck a delicate balance between judicial, legislative and executive branches. That balance has been steadily eroded by a self-important judiciary, and it is important, no vital, that our next Chief Justice understands that wrong and redresses it.

It appears Antonin Scalia may be that man.

Note: More about the current and future makeup of the court via History.net.

Update: More commentary can be found at Outside the Beltway, Penraker rips WaPo's Dana Milbank in his coverage of the speech, Ankle-Biting Pundits focuses on the Roe v. Wade implications, Patterico agrees strongly with Scalia's comments, and QandO weighs in on activist jurists.

More updates as they develop..

Susan Sarandon, Your Ride Is Here

Why do I have a feeling this thing is here just to pick up our favorite P.E.S.T.-suffering celebrities and take them back where they belong?

Happy trails, little liberals.

Wanted: A Little Truth in Protesting

As I've mentioned before here and more recently and in more detail here, Congressman Maurice Hinchey, a conspiracy theorist from New York's 22nd Congressional District, will be the featured speaker for International A.N.S.W.E.R.'s March 19 rally in New Paltz, New York.

International A.N.S.W.E.R. is a anti-Iraqi freedom umbrella organization made up of alledged Islamic terrorist-supporters, Marxists, Communists, and those who love cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal.

In short, Hinchey will be speaking to his base.

What I'd really like to see at this rally is some truth in protesting; signs that actually portray what is going on in the protestor's mind as an individual, instead of the empty-headed slogans brought back by Vetnam-era burnouts.

I'd love to see the typical dyed-hair teen angst-filled Green Day-loving New Paltz "rebels" hold up honest signs like this:

No to War In Iraq!
Stop America's imperialist aggression against peace-loving dictators who only kill, rape and murder their own people.

Bring Our Troops Home Now!
Well, not our troops, your troops, but... whatever.

Stop American Imperialism!
If you don't, freedom stands a chance.

No Blood For Oil!
Dude, you got enough gas to get to Starbucks?

Make Love, Not War!
Or at least that's what my English professor told me last night over a bottle of wine.

Granted, I'm not expecting that from a bunch of stoned teen-agers with zero-life experience, nor the Woodstock burnouts that never went home, nor SUNY-New Paltz's closet Churchillesque faculty, but a man can dream.

Update: Think you'll see these guys at the anti-Iraqi freedom protest? My guess is "yes."

Posted by Confederate Yankee at 10:57 AM | Comments (0)

I'm Not Dead Yet

Today marks my fifth-annual 30th birthday.

Send money for these.

The Jeff Gannon Challenge

A little friendly challenge to the tolerant left:

• Please provide a link to any law, security policy, or rule Jeff Gannon broke in applying for a White House press pass.

• Please provide a link to any law, security policy, or rule broken by providing Gannon a White House press pass.

• Please a link to any law or policy citing how much experience you must have to be a member of the White House Press corps.

• Please show why why the Secret Service should have singled out Jeff Gannon's personal life for extra scrutinty over all other White House reporters, and tell me why that isn't discrimination.

I await your intelligent, well-reasoned, and validly-sourced responses.

NY Times: All the News That's Fit to Hide

Confederate Yankee Reader Rich White sent a letter to the New York Times Public Editor February 25, asking why the Times had refused to cover NY Congressman Maurice Hinchey's unsubstantiated and outrageous claims that Karl Rove was behind the CBS News fake document scandal.

The Times Public Editor Office response on March 10 was this:

Dear Mr. White,

Thanks for writing. I apologize for the delayed response. I noted your concern to Mr. Okrent who noted that it would only make sense to do a story if the charges turn out to be true; otherwise, it's simply scandal-mongering. For all we know, reporters are looking into it, but there's no way for us to know that. We will, however, bring Hinchey's speech to the attention of the editors.

Sincerely,
Arthur Bovino
Office of the Public Editor

It is quite interesting that the NY Times, which is so quick to run a story at the hint of a scandal regarding Republicans (later proven false), patently refuses to address Congressman Hinchey's ourburst becuase they don't want to get into "scandal-mongering."

What, exactly, would qualify as truth for the New York Times?

Obviously, the internet-accessible audio and transcript of the actual event, verified by Hinchey himself doesn't qualify. How about the hour-long radio interview heard by millions on Sean Hannity's nationally syndicated radio show, or the prime-time broadcast on Hannity and Colmes, where Hinchey reiterated his unsubstantiated claims and admitted he had no evidence?

Literally millions of people heard these claims from Hinchey at separate times, but the New York Times doesn't want to get into "rumor-mongering."

No, there is no liberal media bias at the New York Times.

"Bias" isn't nearly a strong enough word.

Loan Shark Protection Act Passes

I am not amused.

The new bankruptcy bill passed the Senate yesterday, ensuring hugely-profitable predatory lenders can continue their gluttonous ways with even higher profit margins. I usually support Republicans, but to be quite frank, the companies helped by this bill are often little more than legalized loan sharks.

I am very disappointed.

Update: Yes, I do note the irony of pimping Amazon's Visa while slamming credit card companies. Isn't irony wonderful?

A Larger Loss, Revisited: Our Christian Nation

Earlier in the week I corrected Michele at ASV for not understanding that Judge Roy Moore was correct in his comments made to Christianity Today that:

"The acknowledgement of God is basic to our society, to our law, and to our morality. Christianity is in a prime position to wake them up. I can't do it alone, and Christians need to be awakened to what's going on in our country. If we continue to let this happen, what will happen is a complete departure from our constitutional form of government. The basis of our morality is being destroyed. We have no morality without an acknowledgment of God."

While she is entitled to her own opinions about faith and is free to practice (or not practice) her freedom of religion as she chooses, she isn't entitled to get the facts of American History wrong.

Needless to say, this became a bit of a hot topic in the comments, and Alex Knapp of Heretical Ideas came over and thought we were entitled to his logical fallacies on the subject, including the whopper that the Bible was against the American Revolution. He didn't get any better, or any more coherent.

Finally he says:

"Alright then, enlighten me.

How is the Constitution of the United States a Christian document?"

The sad fact of the matter is that Mr. Knapp, like Michele and many othere secularists, don't know their American History. I answered thusly in the comments:

The Constitution came well after the founding and creation of our country.

Written in 1789, the Constitution came 12 years after the American Revolution started, and indeed 7 years after we became an independent, God-fearing nation.

The Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, was our Founding Document, and it is decidedly Judeo-Christian in nature, invoking the Judeo-Christian conception of God five times.

As the Supreme Court ruled in 1897, the Constitution can only be understood in the context of the Declaration of Independence, and indeed, dates itself from the Declaration of Independence, and therefore, you cannot read the Constitution with regarding the Declaration as the thought and spirit of the Constitution.

All governmental acts of our founders are dated from the Declaration, and in the Declaration of Independence, the Founders established the foundation and the core values on which the Constitution was to operate.

As the Declaration is Christian document, the United States of America is a Christian nation.

This fact was not lost on Chief Justice Moore, who, after all, was a Constitutional Scholar and an excellent jurist, not something we can claim about at least five members of our current federal Supreme Court, which as recently as last week used laws from other countries as the basis for deciding an American Constitutional case.

I predict that we will soon see an end to judicial tyranny, Alex, and you and other poorly-educated secularists will not like what that holds in store for your recent and curiously convoluted interpretations of the Constitution.

As it has been almost 48 hours since Mr. Knapp found out that we were founded a Christian nation, and he has not responded, I can only assume that he has little remaining logical reason to dispute American History.

Journalist as Rube: A New Editor Article

I missed this column from Tom Elia of The New Editor when it first went up, but if you've been following the Guiliana Sgrena story, it's a must read.

Jeff Gannon, Real Journalist

As Jeff Jarvis noted just over a month ago, there are two stories that may be of interest regarding Jeff Gannon, the former White House press corps reporter for the fledgling (and apparently restructuring) Talon News.

The first potential story is that if Gannon was a ringer, a fake reporter put into the White House by a fake news service. The second story was the series of personal attacks against Gannon, wrapped in a very thin guise of legitimacy.

Quite frankly, I could care less about Gannon's personal life, but I was very interested to keep hearing from liberal pundits that Gannon "wasn't a real journalist."

So, what, exactly, is a "real" journalist?

The best way to answer that question would be to talk to the people who hire journalists. I was lucky enough to have access to such a person, and so I posed the following questions to a regional newspaper's executive editor here in New York:

• In your experience, can you give me a rough percentage of journalists you've hired over the years that had journalism degrees, versus non-journalism degrees?
• Have you hired reporters without college degrees?
• In your opinion, what are the most important qualities that make up a good journalist?

The answers were hardly surprising.

For this particular executive editor, the vast majority of his hires had to have at least some journalism experience before he would consider hiring them. Most picked up their experience writing for weeklies or small daily papers. He only rarely hired people straight out of school, but a college background was very important. Ninety-percent of the people he has hired have a four-year degree, and about half of those held journalism degrees (or about 45% overall).

This particular executive editor specifically said that he "liked to take a chance" on people who didn't come from journalism schools, and that he liked to hire people, "with different life experiences, who come from different backgrounds and can offer varied perspectives."

Does that sound like anyone in the title of this article?

I thought so, too, and I'd estimate those sentiments are fairly common across the breath of most hiring editors at most print publications, and they are in line with the kind of comments I vaguely remember hearing during my interview to be a real live, newspaper editor at a small-town daily many years ago.

So, would Jeff Gannon be hired as a "real" reporter by a real news organization on merit alone? Let's look at the facts.

Gannon obtained a bachelor's degree from West Chester University, which would have qualified him among the 90% of hires that hold four year degrees, and among the roughly half of non-journalism degree holders that work as journalists.

Another fact many also choose to omit, either by ignorance or design, is that Gannon didn't just jump into a career as a paid journalist. In college he was the school newspaper's sports editor for a year and occasional opinion columnist as well. He first wrote for Talon News as a voluntary contributor, and wrote many articles for them before he was hired full-time. This is consistent with what many hiring editors would appear to deem as an adequate display of ability and experience. At the time Gannon joined the news service, Talon News was staffed almost entirely by volunteer writers, just as the fledgling Blogger News Network is today.

It was only after establishing a track record of articles for Talon that he was hired as a full-time correspondent. To date, Gannon has written hundreds of articles, which would satisfy the amount of experience apparently desired by even the most discerning executive editors.

Jeff Gannon has a four-year college education. He has writing experience first as a voluntary contributor, and later as a paid correspondent. Whether or not you like his attitude, his past, or his unabashed conservative bias, Jeff Gannon does indeed have solid journalistic credentials.

Whether liberal pundits like it or not, Jeff Gannon is a real journalist, and perhaps not surprisingly, may have a more legitimate claim to that title than many of his critics.

Oliver's Credibility Problem

A few weeks ago, Oliver Willis went on C-Span with Patrick Ruffini. Glenn Reynolds caught the same comment from O-Dub that several of us did, that, "I'm just not willing to launch a headhunting campaign against someone based on secondhand reports."

Ollie went on to email Glenn: "Now, am I willing to launch a campaign based on firsthand knowledge? You bet."

So now, I am terribly confused.

By quick review of O-Dub's site, I counted at least a dozen posts about Jeff Gannon, including one where he called Gannon a male hooker.

But based upon Oliver's insistence that he wouldn't launch a headhunting campaign on secondhand reports, we are left to assume Oliver has firsthand, personal knowledge to corroborate this claim, correct?

And so I asked Jeff Gannon the following question as an afterthought to several more serious questions in an email interview (which will be mentioned in a CY article on what constitutes a "real" journalist later in the week):

"...how long have you known Mr. Willis, and what can you tell us about your relationship with him?"

Gannon responded:

"I have never met, spoken to or otherwise has any communication with Oliver Willis. I think he stays with the story because he likes to look at all that pictures that are supposed to be me."

That leaves me in a quandary, as only these possible explanations for this apparent contradiction come to mind:

• Oliver Willis, last bastion of journalistic integrity and Media Matters employee who picks up a paycheck courtesy of George Soros' deep pockets, doesn't know the difference between firsthand and secondhand information;
• Oliver is willing to report secondhand, thirdhand or even further removed gossip as fact;
• Oliver really thinks he has firsthand knowledge of Gannon, from hours of staring at pictures on the web, as Mr. Gannon opines.

I for one, am more than a little creeped-out by any of these possibilities, but have to ask:

Which answer is it, Ollie?

Update: Oliver responds in the comments.

Update 2: Phin's Blog notices a striking similarity between an orge and a troll.

Breaking: Torture Report May Exonerate DoD, Rumsfeld

Kevin McCullough has a contact at the Pentagon that says that report expected from Admiral Church in Congress this morning will find that:

1. There was no policy that condoned torture.
2. There was no policy that encouraged abuse.
3. There was a lot of inconsistency across interrogation techniques. Many of those techniques were developed in the combat theater and migrated to other areas.
4. There was a general lack of military command guidance in dealing with the CIA. He found 30 ghost detainees. One such detainee was in that status for 45 days.
5. There were missed interrogation opportunities in part because the military failed to take account of lessons from prior conflicts.
6. There was no guidance to CENTCOM or by CENTCOM on interrogations.

This takes the wind out of the proverbial sails of many on the left, decimating their primary argument against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

Winds of Change has more on this story, as does Captain's Quarters, and GOP Bloggers, while left-leaning veteran Blue Collar Blog seems to think the report is a whitewash, while The Common Ills, which claims the L.A. Times broke this story yesterday, blasts the NY Times coverage of the story unmercifully.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at 09:23 AM | Comments (0)

CSI Baghdad: Guiliana Sgrena is Lying

According to Guiliana Sgrena, America forces fired "300-400" bullets at the vehicle she was in as it sped towards the Baghdad International Airport.

Pictures say thousands words, and every one of these says that Guiliana Sgrena is wrong. I know a bit about firearms, and I know a bit about shooting sheet metal objects (old real estate signs, acquired legally, are great target holders). The five pictures of Sgrena's escape vehicle on the Jawa Report doesn't appear to match up with her story of 300-400 rounds, for several reasons.

There aren't enough holes in the windshield and other passenger compartment glass. As a matter of fact, only one is readily apparent in the windshield, which should have been perforated by slightly off-target shots at the car's engine block, and ricochets from shots that did hit the engine block, frame, and other heavy metal elements in the car. The rear glass and backseat passenger's window on the driver's side also show no damage.

There are no holes in the sheet metal around the engine block, one apparent hit to the driver's headrest and only one apparent tire puncture. I say apparent, because the pictures are too blurry to be sure what is going on here, but that the arrows are pointing at bullet holes are the obvious assumption we have to work with.

These photos immediately establish several points with solid evidence proving Sgrena wrong for anyone with a minimal knowledge of military weapons.

M2 heavy machine guns, M240 medium machine guns and M249 light machine guns are the only belt-fed weapons in wide deployment by U.S. ground forces in Iraq to the best of my knowledge (Rambo's famous and fragile M60 is largely phased out). These are the only weapons that could lay down the amount of fire claimed by Sgrena in the amount of time she claimed. M-4 carbines, M-16 rifles and even the experimental XM-8 rifle all use 30-round box magazines, and would have had to make multiple reloads in that time period, even if several rifles were firing. The physics of her claim simply doesn't add up.

However, all of these rifles have single-shot capability, which is the preferred method of operation when placing precision shots, which most closely matches the few bullet holes in the vehicle.

If the rate of fire Sgrena claims was true, by definition it would have required automatic fire to occur in the few seconds she claims it did. As anyone who has ever watched an action movies knows, weapons firing in automatic mode "walk" their fire across the target area. This did not happen here, or the sheet metal and glass around the three apparent holes would contain many, many more bullet impacts.

Furthermore, M2, M240, and M240 machine guns would have left very dramatic high-velocity exit wounds on the passenger side of the vehicle, made all the more dramatic (and "holey") by shrapnel. And yet, these pictures do not exist.

We are left to draw only one logical conclusion for this, and that is that Guiliana Sgrena dramatically inflated the number of shots fired at her speeding car. That she is alive to make the claim only confirms it.

Disclaimer: Confederate Yankee is not now, nor has ever been, a crime scene investigator at home or abroad... but I can tell what a bullet hole looks like, and they aren't here.

Somebody Else Can Pay the Piper: CU's Hoffman Runs from Responsibility

The Denver Post is reporting that University of Colorado President Betsey Hoffman has resigned under pressure. Two major scandals have erupted at CU under Hoffman's leadership, and apparently, a third is on the way.

The first is an on-going battle over the use of sex, drugs and alcohol in recruiting high school prospects for CU's Division I football program rife with allegations of rape and sexual assault. The second scandal revolves around Ward Churchill, an ethnic studies professor who wrote an essay comparing 9/11 victims to Nazi Karl Adolf Eichmann, who sent three million Jews to concentration camps between 1941-45.

Hoffman had no problem standing up for Churchill, ignoring his false academic credentials, or his fraudulent artwork in support of his terrorist supporting comments, but apparently couldn't stomach real diversity from Professor Phil Mitchell, who had the temerity to quote from a respected black conservative, and in another instance, used a book on 19th century text on liberal Protestantism in his history class.

Because of these outrageous practices of including actual versus imagined diversity (far worse than calling victims of the Trade Center attacks "little Eichmann's wouldn't you agree?) Mitchell, one of the top-ranked instructors in the history of his department at CU and 1998 SOAR teacher of the Year, is being fired, or as the radical liberals at CU prefer to call it, "not having his contract renewed."

Hoffman spoke in her in her letter of her "view of principled leadership." Hoffman's principles, if she indeed had any, do not included leadership, only a subservience to radical leftist ideologies. She is grossly incompetent, proving once again that so-called "progressives" are nothing of the sort. It is hardly surprising that Hoffman is running from her mistakes, leaving others to clean it up.

She is, after all, a liberal.

Note: Dr. Mitchell, the fired Teacher of the Year from Colorado, will be on Kevin McCullough's radio show at 3:20 EST(links to audio stream).

Update: The blogosphere seems to be heating up to this one. Wizbang is on this, as is Outside the Beltway, Villainous Company, the Blue State Conservatives, and a whole host of smaller blogs. The "tail"--the vast majority of smaller blogs that make up the bulk of the blogosphere-- seems to be ahead of the larger blogs on this one.

Vietnam: The Next Iraq?

What Glenn Reynolds asks for, Glenn Reynolds receives.

The excellent and informative WSJ article that created Glenn's longing is here.

Sgrena on the Job

Phin's Blog has an exclusive picture of Italian journalist Guiliana Sgrena participating in "Take Your Kid to Work" day. Heh.

Terry Kerry with Today's Dumb Thought

Via Drudge:

Teresa Heinz Kerry is openly skeptical about results from November's election, the Seattle Post Intelligencer reports, particularly in sections of the country where optical scanners were used to record votes.

"Two brothers own 80 percent of the machines used in the United States," Heinz Kerry said. She identified both as "hard-right" Republicans. She argued that it is "very easy to hack into the mother machines."

Heinz Kerry did not offer any specific evidence that votes on the machines were altered.

"We in the United States are not a banana republic," added Heinz Kerry during a fundraiser in Seattle.

"I fear for '06," she said.

Kerry does not acknowledge, and probably didn't have enough information to know, that these voting machines were never networked, making hacking a near impossibility. A hack could only be accomplished, by requiring each and every machine to be individually hacked, in person.

As Bugs would say, "What a maroon."

A Small Victory, A Larger Loss

Michele at A Small Victory is all fired up over this article in Christianity Today from former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore.

She selects this quote from Moore as particularly offensive to her sensibilities:

"The acknowledgement of God is basic to our society, to our law, and to our morality. Christianity is in a prime position to wake them up. I can't do it alone, and Christians need to be awakened to what's going on in our country. If we continue to let this happen, what will happen is a complete departure from our constitutional form of government. The basis of our morality is being destroyed. We have no morality without an acknowledgment of God."

Michele responds:

"To say I strongly disagree is a vast understatement."

She then gets bogged down in pitting one religion against another in the wonderful world of moral relativism:

"Who is judging the validity of this source? There are some "higher powers" that promote death to non believers. So if someone says they get their sense of absolute right or wrong from that higher power, who are you to argue with it? That's their morality, as much as "turn the other cheek" may be yours. With more than one God hanging around, there is more than one absolute morality. Who's to say that yours is right and theirs is wrong? Using a higher power as the grounds for determining what's moral or not is sometimes a cop out, sometimes an excuse."

First, Michele is horribly skewing the argument. Let's hook the red herring above before proceeding.

Moore is explicitly talking about the United States (he says "in our country"), not the rest of the world as Michele seems to imply by her comments. She seems to be trying to place this argument into a global context, which is explicitly wrong if this is her intent.

Moore is speaking about the United States, and he isn't saying that other religions, or the absense of all religion, cannot occur here. He is simply stating that we were founded as a nation by those who overwhelmingly believed in a Judeo-Christian God, and that belief system is the cornerstone of our nation.

Once again, Moore said:

The acknowledgement of God is basic to our society, to our law, and to our morality.

That statement is true in a historical sense. True in a cultural sense. True in a legal sense as far as the evolution of where our laws came from. True in a moral sense.

I'm not sure Christianity can or should be singled out as the only "right" religion as Moore seems to imply here, but our morality, laws and societal norms in America all do derive their basis from Judeo/Christian beliefs. That is incontrovertable fact.

Our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, acknowledges the existence of God no less than five times: God as supreme Lawmaker and Judge, God as Creator of all men, God as the Source of all rights, God as the world's supreme Judge, and God as our Protector on whom we can rely.

Michele can disagree with Judge Moore all she wants on a personal level, but it won't make her any less wrong on the larger cultural level.

"The acknowledgement of God is basic to our society, to our law, and to our morality."

Correct on all counts, Judge.

The (Botched) Italian Job

I don't particularly like placing blame on what was most likely a tragic accident, but I'm not going to let a terrorist-sympathizing communist nor her weak-willed supporters in the Italian government get the only digs in, either.

Guiliana Sgrena was the Italian communist journalist who went to Iraq with the sole apparent goal of making the war look bad as possible, in hopes of pressuring her government to pull out of Iraq. She was conveniently taken hostage, and appeared in a tearful video the very day the Italian senate was to vote on continued involvement in Iraq, pleading for her life and an Italian withdrawal.

On March 4, Sgrena was released by her captors when the Italian government paid them off with a ransom of millions of dollars, thus supplying the terrorists funds to by more weapons to kill more coalition soldiers and Iraqi policemen, judges, women, and children.

Because they were supplying money to the terrorists, the Italians apparently kept American forces in the dark. The Italian government felt we wouldn't appreciate them financing terrorism.

I wonder where they might get that idea.

In any event, SISMI (Italian intelligence) did not bother to let their American counterparts know all the details of this bribery, err, rescue mission. As a result, American military forces at the checkpoint did not expect the Italians, and responded within their rules of engagement when the car carrying Sgrena refused to stop.

Becuase of their willingness to capitulate to terrorism and conceal the truth, an Italian security officer, Nicola Calipari, is dead.

There should be a full investigation not only of this event, but of Sgrena's alleged kidnapping and full month of so-called captivity. If she is found to have willingly helped the terrorists as her own words seem to imply, then Guilian Sgrena should face manslaughter charges for helping to create a situation that led to Mr. Calipari's death.

For more information about Sgrena's "abduction," check out The Jawa Report which has covered this story extensively.

Cox & Forkum show what could have happened if U.S. forces did not handle the situation the way they did.

Update: So, Matt Drudge, what did you really think of Sgrena's claims?

Thanks, Matt.

IMAO: The Dark Cloud of Glorious Reality

Sometimes, you simply have to admit that the best comments are sometimes made by others.

Sometimes, satire slams head-on into reality.

This is one of those times.

"Like Crystal Meth to Stupid"

SortaPundit has a petition drive any sane blogger will want to sign. Be sure to read the comments, where Lagomorphic Tendencies utters the gem of a prospective tagline for O-dub "Like Crystal Meth to Stupid".

Six Degrees: Bacon to Hinchey to Osama

As promised, Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon connecting activist/actor/musician Kevin Bacon, to conspiracy theory-spouting liberal congressman Maurice Hinchey, to terrorist mastermind and head of al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden.

It goes something like this:

1. Kevin Bacon is a co-founder of moveon.org.
2. Hinchey signed a letter supporting moveon.org's attempt to run an anti-Bush commerical.
3. Hinchey is the featured speaker for an International ANSWER rally on March 19, 2005.
4. A key member of the steering commitee of International ANSWER is the national Muslim Student Association, which has had at least one chapter raise money for recognized terrorist groups.
5. The MSA is a front group of the the radical Wabbabist sect of Saudi Arabia most closely associated with al Qaeda.
6. al Qaeda's Wahhabi leader? Osama bin Laden.

Hinchey Proves Media Interference By Example

Hinchey staffer Daniel Ahouse admits to purposefully spiking a poll in Hinchey's favor by lobbying liberal Web sites to vote in the congressman's favor about Hinchey's theory that Karl Rove was behind the CBS News fake documents scandal.

Blogs on both the left and right were apparently responsible for greatly increasing the sample size of the poll, but only Hinchey's staff was caught trying to manipulate the data.

The normal sample size for online polls at the Kingston NY Daily Freeman is normally 500-2,000 responses over the course of a week. This manipulated Hinchey poll tallied 41,281 total responses.

Now that his staffers admit culpability, will Hinchey launch an investigation upon himself?

Left-Wing Italian Journalist Released

The Jawa Report called it from the start. I guess one can only engage in making just so much anti-American propoganda for the enemy before burning out and needing to come home and rest.

Update: Sgrena was apparently shot and wounded and a bodyguard killed by U.S. Forces at a checkpoint roadblock somewhere in Iraq. Notoriously aggressive Italian drivers barreling down on soldiers primed to repel vehicular suicide bombers is a recipe for disaster. As you would expect, the Democratic Underground thinks Eason Jordan should be reinstated at CNN.

Update: Speaking of CNN:

According to a multinational forces statement, the car approached the checkpoint at high speed about 9 p.m. (1 p.m. ET)

U.S. troops "attempted to warn the driver to stop by hand and arm signals, flashing white lights, and firing warning shots in front of the car," the statement said. "When the driver didn't stop, the soldiers shot into the engine block, which stopped the vehicle, killing one and wounding two others."

I am very disappointed at the U.S. soldiers that fired on this vehicle.

If a vehicle is approaching your checkpoint at a high rate of speed and refuses to slow down or veer away despite the hand signals, flashing lights, and warning shots, you blow it away. Completely.

There should have been no survivors.

That there were survivors means that an appropriate force may not have been used. Our soldiers have one primary overriding goal, and that is their own personal safety, followed by the safety of the civilians around them that they are there to protect. If they suspected this vehicle was carrying a suicide bomber they should have put enough firepower on it to not only stop it, but to destroy any suspected explosive ordinance it could have been carrying.

That may sound callous to some, but it is a far more preferable outcome than this one last week where a suicide car bomber murdered 115 and wounded 132 Iraqi civilians. That Giuliana Sgrena is alive is the result an apparent inadequate use of force.

I would like this story to be covered in more detail so we can discover why the soldiers stopped firing upon what they had every reason to believe was a suicide bomber.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at 02:56 PM | Comments (0)

Hinchey Featured Speaker For Pro-Terrorist Group

It has been almost two weeks and Maurice Hinchey still apparently feels that he doesn't owe any explanations to this constituent for his rash of conspiracy theories in the past weeks. Throughout this series of events, the real scandal has been Hinchey's willingness to irresponsibly spread conspiracy theories without the support of so much as a single concrete piece of evidence. Now, he intends to embarrass his constituents even more.

On March 19, Maurice Hinchey will be the featured speaker at an antiwar rally held by International A.N.S.W.E.R. in New Paltz, New York.

International A.N.S.W.E.R. is a blanket organization including radical Marxists that support convicted terrorist supporter Lynne Stewart, and their national steering committee includes the national Muslim Student Association, a Saudi Wahhabi-funded, rabidly anti-Semitic group that has been identified as a pro-terror organization that has raised money for Hamas and Hezbollah terrorist groups.

Are we clear on this?

Maurice Hinchey is speaking on behalf of terrorists and terrorist supporters, in a rally against our troops. I can think of few actions more disgusting or disturbing that this obvious swipe at our soldiers on the second anniversary of their invasion of Iraq, only weeks after Iraq's first free elections.

There are congressmen who serve their constituents with class and distinction... and then there is the abomination that is Maurice Hinchey.

Update: Credit where credit is due. Scott Sala of Slant Point first alerted me to the fact International ANSWER was holding a protest, which he picked up from Free Will. LGF also ran with the story.

Update 2: Thanks to Lawhawk, I corrected the convicted terrorist supporter's name from Lynn Stewart to Lynne Stewart. Lawhawk also said,

"Oh, and you ought to include mention of Ramsey Clark, who is one of Saddam's defense lawyers and Stewart's icon. He was one of the founders of ANSWER and his other activities include defending cop killers, the PLO in the Leon Klinghoffer case, and called for George Bush to be impeached."

What a lovely group of people Congressman Hinchey considers like-minded souls.

Home

Attn: Mid-Hudson Bloggers

If you are a blogger living in the Mid-Hudson Valley area (particularly Orange, Sullivan, and Ulster Counties) then be sure to check in with the Times Herald-Record. They are trying to find out about local blogs in the region, and may be interested in getting in touch with you for a future story.

If you are a mid-Hudson blogger in one of these counties or know someone who is, write to egliedman@th-record.com and give them your URL and blog name.

Home

Coming to a Blog Near You

Sorry for the light posting, but I'm tied up in research all day.

I'm busy working on a potential blockbuster of an article that could tie a prominent congressional Democrat to Osama bin Laden in Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon.

And no, you shouldn't take this too seriously.

Unless it's true...

Now, what was that old Styx tune again?

Home

Something Amusing Finally Happens at "The Rat"

I loathe Chuck E. Cheese the way liberals hate objectivity in the White House Press Room, so I'm slightly amused over this incident (Hat tip: Drudge).

A few things we should all take away from this story:

• Stay in school and you probably won't end up as a Chuck E. Cheese manager
• Abstinence is the only way to ensure you will never have to go to Chuck E. Cheese
• Even if it is Chuck E. Cheese, if they have guns and Tasers, they are probably real cops
• The preceeding point should be confirmed after the first Taser shock drops you to the ground

An upside of this story is that if Mr. Gale likes the Chuck E. Cheese salad bar, he'll love prison food.

Home

Tire Blogging Comes to New York

Glenn Reynolds is right, tire blogging is the next big thing, but oddly enough, not all tire places (or bloggers) are equipped for "live" tire blogging. I will however, blog it after the fact.

I did learn some interesting things, such as that plugging tires is no longer practiced in New York (the plugs tend to work loose, and the sudden deflatation can lead to blowouts), and that internal patching is the only acceptable way to make repairs, acording to the experts I talked too.

Regular, non-tire blogging resumes this afternoon...

Home

For Better or Worse

I've been avoiding commenting on the Terri Schiavo case, but since Phins says exactly what I want to say, I'll let him do that talking for me on this one.

Note: Fox News is reporting that Terri's parents have filed for divorce against Michael Schiavo on the grounds of adultery and not acting in his wife's best interests. As Michael Schiavo has had two children with another woman since he has been married to Terri the adultery charge is solid beyond doubt, and there would seem to be strong grounds that Mr. Schiavo is not acting in Terri's best interests by wanting her dead (trying to kill someone is usually considered against their best interests).

Quite frankly, I'm surprised this approach hasn't been tried before, though I don't know the legal rights of parents to conduct a divorce on behalf of an adult child under these circumstances.

The divorce proceedings, if allowed to continue, would cast a most critical light on Michael Schiavo.

If he only wants out of Terri's life so he can continue with his new family, a divorce gives him that option. If, however, he is after the remaining money from the 1992 malpractice case, then he will be revealed as the calculating killer many suspect that he may be.

Home

Play it again, George

In the wake of these events in Lebanon and this development in Egypt, President Bush should consider the possibility of seeing another note like this one in the future.

Home