The Kreeper's Korner

Announcing the NEW site!

2005-04-26T22:40:00.000-04:00

Hey, I'm moving my site to a new address and getting a face lift thanks to TypePad.

Visit the new Blog site at TypePad and tell me what you think.

I'll be leaving this site up as an archive until I can get all the posts converted over to the new site.

The Domain re-direct will take effect over the next few days...

Conservative Dream-Girl makes Cover of Time!

2005-04-18T02:05:00.000-04:00

Drudge breaks the story!
WMD on the story!
Conservative Dream Girl, Ann Coulter, a fiery and aggressive master of sarcasm and punditry will make the cover of Time Magazine and will be the subject of a 6000 word story that isn't an hit/attack piece!

For those not familiar with the style of Ann Coulter, you do not know what you are missing. Her books, speeches and television appearances are like ticking time bombs packed with humor, honesty, truth and (best of all) a heaping helping of wit and sarcasm capable of reducing even the most polished liberal to quivering puddles of protoplasm.

Here's to you Ann. Keep up the good work and thanks for all the laughs at the expense of liberals everywhere!

UPDATE! Now you can read the full story here!

Having read the story now, I have to say that it does a fairly good job and is definately not a hit piece. There is a LOT of info in this story (some of it I did not know) about Ann Coulter and what it is that she does. Go out and buy the current issue of Time or follow the link above to read the story!

Welcome to America! Learn the Language, Damnit!

2005-04-17T12:04:00.000-04:00

I discovered, just recently, that only about half of this states have laws on the books making English the official language of the state.

Click here to visit the U.S. English Inc.

Even in the face of all the evidence that we have, some states still fill the need to pander to the immigrant voters by embracing their language.

One need only visit a Western Union location in states friendly to illegal immigration to see how the language divide is driving a wedge between those who can interact in OUR society and those who cannot.

Studies have shown that the single greatest thing that an immigrant to this country can do to empower him or herself to succeed in America, it's that simple. So why is it that we're embracing the language of the immigrants? Doing so only further segregates immigrants and holds them back.

Look at the service industry, such as restaurants. Servers at a good restaurant can make hundreds of dollars a week if they are good at what they do. They make pretty much nothing in wages, but can rake in a lot of money in tips. But they have to be able to communicate and comprehend the customer. This is why you see the guys who can't speak English bussing tables, or cleaning bathrooms. If you cannot interact with the VAST MAJORITY of your customers, you're not only not going to make any money, but you're going to drive business away.

One need only go to a Western Union location and watch what happens when immigrants try to send money to Mexico to understand the problem. Hell, Western Union forms are even printed in English and Spanish and simple questions go unanswered, form left incomplete, and angry looks are shared in both directions.

So in a typical Politically Correct response, we've been slowly moved toward accepting Spanish as a second language in America. We're making students learn the language in order to get into the best colleges and we're not making immigrants learn the language before we hire them.

So what we're getting is road signs in Spanish, people who can't take an order properly at fast food restaurants, people who cannot interact with the people behind the counter at financial institutions, and a steadily growing population of immigrants that will not be able to succeed in society.

So what exactly does making English the official language do? Well, really, not much. Tennessee has a law making English the official language, but that's not stemming the flow of non-English speaking immigrants (both legal and illegal) into the state. What it does is ensure that children in schools are taught English, that the goal of bi-lingual education is the eventual integration of students into English speaking classes, and that the children of immigrants are given a chance.

So what about the entire generation of immigrants, illegal or not, that are in this country now, filling low-paying labor intensive jobs? Well, there is always welfare...

Seriously, these people, legal or not, are making no attempts to integrate into society, since there's no incentive anymore. If they are illegal, they aren't going to go to seek out education, and in some cases, even legal immigrants are failing to learn the language and languishing in poverty level jobs or being taken advantage of by those who would hire these people.

As in the recent case where Walmart settled a case for contracting labor out to companies that hired low-paid illegal immigrants, the companies doing this are raking in massive contracts and money. They offer the lowest bid and get the contracts and make more money than the other legitimate contractors because much of their work force is undocumented, pays no taxes, and aren't about to run to the labor board to complain about being ripped off.

We need to not only end the practice of allowing illegal immigration to continue, but we need to make it MANDATORY again for immigrants to this country to learn the language and integrate into society. If we're going to let these people in, we need to make sure they can work and integrate into American society.

We're creating an entirely new welfare state, and unlike the last one, this new state doesn't even speak the language... Time to put Political Correct Multi-culturalism out to pasture in favor of sensible integration. Keep your culture and your language folks, we don't want you to give up who you are, but if you're going to live in the United States of America, you have got to become a participant in our society, or at the very least, learn to speak English.

Over 1 Million Illegal Immigrants Turned Loose

2005-04-17T02:06:00.000-04:00

Authorities free 1 million aliens amid proceedings

One million people facing immigration proceedings have been released into the general population, the government's chief of detention and removal told the Senate yesterday , prompting some Republicans to say the Bush administration is "not serious" about the problem.

"We have a million individuals who are in some phase of immigration proceedings released," said Victor X. Cerda, the acting director of detention and removal operations for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

He said of those people, 465,000 are fugitive aliens who have been ordered deported. About 80,000 of those are criminal aliens who have committed an offense in addition to immigration violations, but he couldn't provide an exact number.

So let me get this straight. Of the 1 million illegal immigrants that the INS or ICE or whatever they are calling themselves these days have turned loose on the American public, over half of them are fugitives that have been ordered deported or criminals that have committed other crimes than just sneaking into the country? Why the hell do you turn them loose? These are the people that are the highest risk for flight and future crimes against the citizens of this country. And you turned them loose? Murderers, thieves, rapists, and illegal immigrants. Why not just deport them while you had them? ARGH!

His comments came as an immigration debate in the Senate blocked most progress on the emergency war-spending bill. Pending amendments include cracking down on illegal immigrants' use of driver's licenses, increasing visas for seasonal nonimmigrant workers and legalizing up to 1 million illegal aliens who work in agriculture and their families.

WHAT?!?!?! You're debating giving these people driver's licenses, extra time on visas and amnesty for 1 million illegals? Why? Why not just stop this invasion of our country and put some of our 7.7 million un-employed American Citizens to work on those agriculture jobs? Holy Mary, mother of Christ! Is everyone's minds so polluted with political correctness that they can't figure out that the term Illegal Immigrant actually means that laws have been broken and thus these individuals are criminals? I mean, come on, the first word in the phrase is ILLEGAL. We have ICE telling us that the most recent 1 million that we've had in custody have been let loose and that half of those are dangerous criminals or people otherwise ordered deported, and all you can do is debate giving them amnesty and licenses?

Yesterday's hearing, before two subcommittees of the Judiciary Committee, is supposed to lay the groundwork for a comprehensive immigration bill, said Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican and chairman of the immigration subcommittee, which held the hearing along with Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, chairman of the terrorism subcommittee.

"No serious discussion of comprehensive immigration reform is possible without a review of our nation's ability to effectively secure its borders and enforce its immigration laws," Mr. Cornyn said.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, and Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, demanded to know why Mr. Cerda was not doing more to have illegal aliens removed.

Mr. Sessions said ICE is far behind in entering the names of the 465,000 alien fugitives into law-enforcement databases, which means that if those people are picked up in another arrest, they would not be turned over to immigration authorities.

Jonathan Cohn, a deputy assistant attorney general, told the panel that court decisions over the years will result in the government having to release dangerous criminal aliens as well.

"The aliens that are being released include murderers, rapists and child molesters," Mr. Cohn said.

If we know this and we have them, why are we not doing what should be done and flying these criminals back to the shit-hole country from which they came? ARGH! This is so Frustrating! I swear, it makes me want to give up all my convictions and run for office so I can kick these people in the ass! Why is there never an answer to the question I, and most other Americans I've ever met, keep asking? Why are these people not deported on the spot?

Members of the subcommittees also ended up taking sides on whether the Minutemen patrolling the Arizona border are "vigilantes," as President Bush called them.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, said he agreed with Mr. Bush's characterization, and told Mr. Cerda to let him know what the Department of Homeland Security's policy was on dealing with vigilantes.

At least you can count on Senator Teddy Kennedy to attack legal citizens of the United States of America after being confronted with the fact that over 500,000 criminals and dangerous criminals have been loosed upon the unsuspecting public. Then again, Teddy Kennedy's core constituency is criminals, lawyers and the Booze lobby... Cheers!

Who is Really to Blame for High Gas Prices?

2005-04-17T01:33:00.000-04:00

A recent political cartoon in the local newspaper got me thinking. The cartoon featured a Gasoline pump, with a mask on, pointing it's nozzle at the reader while saying "stick 'em up" or something to that effect. Just why is it that we have such high gas prices today?

Now, before all you democrats start screaming "Bush did it!" or "Halliburton!" let me set you straight. It's not Bush's fault and Halliburton has nothing to do with it.

The truth is that there are now over 25 different regulated formulations of Gasoline produced in our country. The lack of a federal standard has led to states, counties and regions of the country adopting their own standards. What this does is increase the costs of producing gasoline, and slows production down as well. One quick scan of these "boutique" fuels and the areas where are mandated quickly reveals an interesting fact. They are almost all Liberal communities.

Because fuels from one part of the country may not meet the legal standard of another, supplies are not interchangeable, and thus over stocks in any part of the country cannot be used in places where a shortage might exist.

That brings us to our refineries, which produce these 25 boutique fuels. Since the 1970's the number of refineries in the United States has been declining in the face of environmental and NIMBY legislation, most often brought forth by liberal environmental groups or liberal politicians. While the number of refineries is sliding downhill, the production capacity has been falling at a slower rate. The fact remains that the liberal environmental agenda continues to act to close refineries and refuse to let oil companies open new ones.

And then there is the lack of exploration, and the failure to exploit the resources that we have in our own country. Every time a new source of oil is found, the environmental liberals come out of the woodwork, protesting and claiming that the aim is to destroy the environment. In typical fashion, Liberals in Washington stand in the way of exploration and exploitation of our own oil deposits, but if we can't drill for it here, then we have to get it somewhere else, right? That's when liberals start protesting our dependence of foreign oil suppliers.

Then there is the Gas tax. In Tennessee you pay 24.4 cents (Tennessee) and 18.4 cents (Federal) per gallon of gasoline. Without the taxes, gas would be $1.76 instead of $2.16 a gallon. Again, a liberal policy at work.

While the price of oil from OPEC nations is up, demand in nations like China are growing, war is causing flucuations in price, and we've had one of our refineries blow up, the main reason for the high gas prices we see today remains liberal policies. So next time you fill your tank, remember who it is that really is "sticking you up" at the pump. He may well be someone you voted for.

Are Zombie Movies Making a Comeback?

2005-04-16T22:12:00.000-04:00

First there was the original Resident Evil and 28 Days later. Then came the offbeat and laugh-till-ya-rot Shuan of the Dead. Now we have George A. Romero, the original bad-ass Zombie master, releasing Land of the Dead on June 24th as a wrap-up to his original "zombie trilogy" (Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead and Day of the Dead), two sequels to the awesome recent remake of Dawn of the Dead, and now Lion's Gate releasing Undead which looks pretty creepy and like it's going to be a killer flick. But on top of all of this Zombified goodness comes the poster for a new zombie flick entitled... Get this... Zombies.

Man, this poster just Screams Kreepy!
Man, I can't wait, I've been a fan of the Zombie genre since I was a wee-little horror buff and the last few Zombie Flicks have been awesome!

CAIR leader convicted on terror charges

2005-04-16T21:42:00.000-04:00

Founding board member of Texas chapter funded Hamas

From the "Who didn't see that coming" file comes a tale that demonstrates the very nature of our enemy.

A founder of the Texas chapter of a highly influential U.S. Islamic lobby group was found guilty of supporting terrorism.

Ghassan Elashi, along with two brothers, was convicted in Dallas yesterday of channeling funds to a high-ranking official of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, Mousa Abu Marzook.

Elashi was a board member of the Texas chapter of the Washington, D.C.-based Council on American Islamic Relations -- the third CAIR figure to be convicted on federal terrorism charges since 9-11.

CAIR is a spin-off of the Richardson, Texas-based Islamic Association For Palestine, or IAP, which was founded by Marzook.

Former FBI counterterrorism chief Oliver Revell has called the IAF "a front organization for Hamas that engages in propaganda for Islamic militants."

Who'd-a-thunk-it? Muslims on American soil, funneling cash and support to terror groups while parading around the nation preaching about the rights of Arabs being trampled on because of racial profiling. Man, this makes the case for interment and profiling based on race all that much more appealing to those of us out here with some common sense left in our heads.

Prosecutors said Ghassan Elashi, with brothers Bayan and Basman, tried to hide a $250,000 investment by Marzook in their Richardson, Texas, computer company, then funneled payments to Marzook in return.

Marzook, deputy chief of Hamas' political bureau in Syria, founded the IAP in 1991. At its conferences in the U.S., the IAP hosted leaders of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Marzook was deported in 1997.

Ghassan Elashi, Bayan Elashi and their company were found guilty of all 21 federal counts: conspiracy, money laundering and dealing in property of a terrorist, the Associated Press reported.

The AP did not mention Ghassan Elashi's role with CAIR, however.

Each count carries a maximum 10 years in prison. Sentencing is scheduled Aug. 1.

Facing the same 21 counts, Basman Elashi was convicted of three counts of conspiracy but acquitted of the other charges.

Ghassan Elashi did not comment on the conviction, but lawyer Tim Evans said, according to the AP, "It's hard times for people of Middle Eastern descent."

Especially when they are actively trying to supply the enemies of our nation with funds and support in their "Holy War" against America. Yeah, if you're a treasonous, jihadist Muslim you're bound to be finding it harder and harder to peddle your hate in this country, eh? Don't worry, the ACLU and the Demo-commies will rush to your aid. Lord knows they live a good enemy of the United States of America.

Michael P. Gibson, vowing an appeal, said, "There is no evidence that money ever funded any terrorism. This is not a terrorism case, it's a financial crimes case."

When the Elashis were indicted in 2002, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft called them "terrorist money men."

It's not the first conviction for Ghassan Elashi.

Oh, I can't wait to hear about this one...

As chairman of the Holy Land Foundation charity in Dallas, Elashi was convicted last year of making illegal technology shipments to two countries on the U.S. list of terrorist-sponsoring states, Libya and Syria. Four brothers, including Bayan and Basman, also were convicted.

Other CAIR figures convicted since 9-11 are Randall Todd "Ismail" Royer, a former communications specialist and civil rights coordinator, and Bassem Khafagi, former director of community relations.

Royer was sentenced to 20 years in prison on charges he trained in Virginia for holy war against the United States and sent several members to Pakistan to join Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Kashmiri terrorist group with reported ties to al-Qaida.

In a plea bargain, Royer claimed he never intended to hurt anyone but admitted he organized the holy warriors after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S.

After his arrest, Royer sought legal counsel from Hamas lawyer Stanley Cohen, who said after 9-11 he would consider serving as a defense lawyer for Osama bin Laden if the al-Qaida leader were captured.

Khafagi, was arrested in January 2003 while serving with CAIR and convicted on fraud and terrorism charges.

Current CAIR leaders also have made statements in support of Hamas and the domination of the U.S. by Islam.

As WorldNetDaily reported, CAIR's chairman of the board, Omar Ahmad, was cited by a California newspaper in 1998 declaring the Quran should be America's highest authority.

He also was reported to have said Islam is not in America to be equal to any other religion but to be dominant.

What's wrong with America these days when people like this are all in this country, actively supporting Terrorism and the murder of innocent men, women and children and it's always a "Race Issue" in the media.

These people are knowingly supporting terrorist organizations and committing treason by any stretch of the word. We should institute a policy of public execution of these treasonous bastards. Political Correctness and Race Issues be damned. What, just because someone happens to be of Arab decent he gains the right to actively participate in the cycle of propaganda and murder and terror? Does he or she get a "get out of jail free" card just because they are Arabs?

I'm sick of this crap!

It's time to go back to the way things were done in the 40's when the Democrats oversaw the systematic round up and imprisonment of ALL Japanese citizens in the country for investigation and surveillance.

Only now, we should bring every one of them in and question them and find out who's really "just another citizen of the United States of America" and how many of them would stab as many of us in the back as they could at a moments notice, and kill them.

Why are we wasting our time patting down grandmothers and Congressmen at airports today when all we need to do is search each and every Arab wishing to board an airliner. Since pretty much every act of airline terrorism has been committed by an Arab, how does it make sense to pat Granny down at the terminal or strip search a senator? Last I checked, Ted Kennedy was trying to undermine the security of this nation, but he's not going to blow an airplane up (but he may crash it into the ocean after a "mile high" fling with one of the stewardesses).

It's common sense, people!

Special Ops Paintball Announces the SPPL!

2005-04-16T21:41:00.000-04:00

Special Ops Paintball Announces the SPPL!

About freakin' time! Special Ops Paintball is announcing a full out Scenario Paintball Players League Tournament!

Instead of Rapid fire 3 minute games, the tourney will feature ten man teams in hour long scenario themed battles, with objectives like taking and holding bases, eliminating the commander of the other team, and the like.

The prize package is AWESOME! The grand prize team will win a MASSIVE prize package that includes full sponsorship of the winning team, 8 Special Ops variants of the Tippmann A-5 Marker, a complete A-5 Double trouble duel marker, a complete Longbow AGD Scenario Marker, two complete sets of jerseys and pants, goggles and vests for all members of the team, 60 grenades, 30 cases of paintballs, JCS Law rocket launcher, and more! As a extra kicker, the teams that displays the best sportsmanship with ALSO receive a massive prize package.

Something like this has been a long time coming and let me tell you that this will be the start of something BIG!

If you have a scenario paintball team, turn out your best ten men and make it to one of the regional events and make a name for yourself!

Geek-Out Moment: First Ghost Rider Image!

2005-04-14T09:11:00.000-04:00

Click for the story or Click for the Big image!

So growing up, I was a bit of a twisted little bastard. I didn't much care for Batman or for Superman or even Spiderman. I was a freaky kid and I liked freaky things. I was more into the freakier things when I was into comics. Wolverine and X-Men were always in the collection, but I was more into things like Spawn, Evil Ernie, and a lot of underground stuff that no one else at the time read.

So I was ecstatic about the concept of a Ghost Rider movie. I loved both of Marvel's Ghost Rider series, the old Johnny Blaze and the newer Danny Ketch...

This movie seems to be a mix of both stories, moving Johnny Blaze into modern times and using some story elements of the Danny Ketch series.

None the less, I was as giddy as a catholic school-girl on ecstasy when I saw the first CGI of the Hell-Cycle and i Had to post it here. The movie stars Nicolas Cage, Wes Bentley, Eva Mendes, Matt Long, Sam Elliott, Peter Fonda and Donal Logue and is due to hit the big screen on August 4, 2006. Check it out!

Demo-Commies: Do as I say, not as I do...

2005-04-13T19:12:00.000-04:00

It really is true that you can tell what it is that the Demo-commies are up to by listening to what they accuse the republicans of doing.

The recent attacks against Tom Delay are a sign of exactly what Bernard Sanders has been doing in the way of paying family members for their campaign efforts.

Sanders paid wife, stepdaughter for campaign efforts

Rep. Bernard Sanders used campaign donations to pay his wife and stepdaughter more than $150,000 for campaign-related work since 2000, according to records filed with the Federal Election Commission.

Jane O'Meara Sanders, his wife, received $91,020 between 2002 and 2004 for "consultation" and for negotiating the purchase of television and radio time-slots for Sanders' advertisements, according to records and interviews.

Approximately $61,000 of that was "pass through" money that was used to pay media outlets for advertising time, Jane O'Meara Sanders said in an interview. The rest, about $30,000, she kept as payment for her services, she said.

Carina Driscoll, daughter to Jane O'Meara Sanders and stepdaughter to the lawmaker, earned $65,002 in "wages" between 2000 and 2004, campaign records show.

Driscoll, a former state legislator, served as Rep. Sanders' campaign manager in 2000, his fund-raiser and office manager in 2003 and his database manager in 2004, according to Jeff Weaver, Sanders' chief of staff.

"Both of them are regarded as people who are knowledgeable about Vermont politics," Weaver said Tuesday. "They earned every penny they got."

So if the Demo-commies are doing it, why is it that the media is out there hammering Delay over the same thing? Why are we not hearing about this practice when the leftist loons are hiring their family members to work their campaigns?

That would be because the MSM is a tool of the Loony Liberals and not worth much more.

No laws prohibit candidates from paying family members for campaign work. But the appearance that lawmakers use their position to benefit people close to them concerns watchdog groups.

"Anytime you pay a family member there's going to be questions raised," said Larry Noble, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan research group in Washington.

The real question, he says, is whether family members conducted work commiserate to their pay. If they did, "then it's more difficult to say (lawmakers) are funneling money back to the family."

So there is no law that says you can't hire family members to work in your campaign, but you shouldn't do it because some group somewhere will think that you're "funneling money" into the family purse? If I ever run for an office, I have several people close to me that I would have on to work in and run my campaign. If it's not illegal, then shut the hell up about it.

Mary Bloyer, a spokeswoman for Common Cause, a nonprofit advocacy group, said: "The danger here is that you want members of Congress who are in Washington to serve their constituents and not enrich their families. Something like this makes people look twice and makes them wonder what's going on here."

Jane O'Meara Sanders said she worked for her husband for years with no pay, and started charging him only after opening a consulting company, Progressive Media Strategies, which was changed to Leadership Strategies.

That would probably be because "Progressive Media Strategies" was a front put up so you could funnel money from the campaign into the family bank account... That and changing the name to Leadership Strategies, that's a classic move. We wouldn't want anyone to think that your "group" were politically tilted left. Don't refer to ourselves as Progressive or Liberal since that would reveal who you really are...

Jim Barrett, chairman of the Vermont Republican Party, used Sanders' family payments to highlight what he said is Democratic "hypocrisy" for fiercely attacking DeLay. "It's the standard hypocrisy from the left," Barrett said. "When a Republican does it, it's inappropriate and front page news. But now it turns out, our own Bernie Sanders has been doing it for a long time."

"If it's corruption when Tom DeLay does it, then it's corruption when Bernie Sanders does it."

Jon Copans, executive director of the state Democratic Party, declined to comment.

That's awesome! Hit 'em with it Jim! Let's see the media carry that quote out to the public... Of course, Jon Copans is hiding under his desk somewhere wondering what he can possibly say to dig his party out of that ditch again.

But Democratic groups are targeting DeLay for defeat in his 2006 election.

Vermont-based Democracy for America, started by former Gov. Howard Dean, disseminated a mass e-mail Tuesday asking supporters for witty slogans it can paste on billboards in DeLay's Texas district. The billboards, the e-mail says, will let voters there know "it's time for him to go."

Weaver, Sanders' chief of staff, said it was unfair to compare the Vermont Independent with DeLay, who paid his family much more in a shorter period of time.

Of course not. It's not the same thing at all...

Earth to John Kerry: You lost, give it up.

2005-04-12T12:40:00.000-04:00

Kerry cites voter intimidation examples

Kerry: "Too many people were denied their right to vote."

Someone close to John Kerry should let him know that he lost the election and that there isn't ANY evidence of ANY kind of intimidation or foul play involved, just like there was none in 2000 in the state of Florida.

Many voters in last year's presidential election were denied access to the polls through trickery and intimidation, former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry told a voters' group Sunday.

"Last year too many people were denied their right to vote, too many who tried to vote were intimidated," the Massachusetts senator said at an event sponsored by the state League of Women Voters.

"There is no magic wand. No one person is going to stand up and suddenly say it's going to change tomorrow. You have to do that," he said.

Well, Mr. Kerry, I'm glad you brought this problem to everyone's attention. So could you point out some evidence of voter fraud and illegal activity that doesn't involve democratic lackeys slashing tires, or dead people voting for democratic candidates, or things like that?

Kerry supporters have charged that voting irregularities in largely Democratic areas made it difficult for voters to cast ballots in the November election. A lawsuit in Ohio cited long lines and a shortage of voting machines in predominantly minority neighborhoods, but the Ohio Supreme Court dismissed the suit.

So why would the Ohio Supreme Court dismiss a suit that charges that the right of the people to vote was infringed? Because there is NO evidence of ANY wrong-doing, that's why...

Kerry also cited examples Sunday of how people were duped into not voting.

"Leaflets are handed out saying Democrats vote on Wednesday, Republicans vote on Tuesday. People are told in telephone calls that if you've ever had a parking ticket, you're not allowed to vote," he said.

Never mind the fact that the very same practices are done on the other side of the fence. Liberals like to ignore the things that happen on their side of the fence. So when dead people, illegal immigrants and felons vote for democrats, that's fine, but if someone makes up a charge of being intimidated and presents no evidence of that intimidation, then look out because it's an act of evil.

I gotta get this off my chest. If you are too stupid to know how and when to vote then your vote should not count. I'm sorry, but back in 2000, when Gore was busy attempting to steal the election, the Florida government held an open inquiry into the problems in the election and somehow this ended up on C-Span. SO here I was watching this cavalcade of elderly democrats who were readily admitting that they didn't read the ballot before voting, or that they didn't understand the ballot, or that they were too proud to ask for help when they fouled their own ballot.

There were quotes like "I've been voting for 40 years and #1 is always the democrat and #2 is always the republican. But not this year..." Well, I've been voting since 1996, and I've read EVERY ballot that has ever been put in front of me so that I wouldn't vote for someone I didn't want to vote for.

Polling places are set up with examples of the ballot before you get into the voting booth. You can clearly see how the ballot is laid out and if there are any problems there are people at the polling place who are there to help you. If you're to stupid to read or understand your ballot and too proud to ask for help from the people at the station, then your vote SHOULD be thrown out. You're obviously not intelligent enough to participating in the process that will choose the most powerful leader on this planet.

Furthermore, if you're not interested enough in the process to find out for yourself when and where to vote, then you too should not be participating in the process, but I'll get into that a little bit later.

Kerry has never disputed the outcome of election, saying voting irregularities did not involve enough votes to change the result. Bush won the pivotal state of Ohio by 118,000 votes, giving him enough electoral votes to win re-election.

You're DAMNED right. The problem that John Kerry faced was that it wasn't close enough in any of the states to go about trying to steal the election like Al Gore attempted to do. If Ohio had been decided by 1,000 instead of 100,000 votes, you better believe that Kerry would have been in the courts just like Al Gore was...

Bush supporters have denied using voter intimidation tactics to keep people from going to the polls. A call to the Republican National Committee media office was not immediately returned Sunday.

And I wonder why? Republicans have been accused of stopping people from going to the polls to win elections for almost a decade now. The problem is that, in a round-about way it's true, Republicans want to stop people from voting twice, stop the dead from rising from their graves every year at election time to vote, stop illegals from voting, and stop felons from voting. You know, basically stopping people who not legally allowed to vote are not allowed to vote.

If the conservatives want to stop the dead from voting, then we're intimidating people. If they want to stop felons from voting they are racists since the majority of felons in this country right now are supposedly black. If they try to stop illegals from voting, they are anti-immigrant. It's ridiculous.

Earlier this year, Kerry joined Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a New York Demo-commie, in filing voting reform legislation. The Count Every Vote Act would create a federal holiday for voting, require paper receipts for votes and authorize $500 million to help states upgrade voting systems and equipment.

Congress' investigative agency, the Government Accountability Office, has also begun looking into the handling of provisional ballots and malfunctions of voting machines. The study could lead to changes in the election process.

It all sounds great doesn't it? I mean every vote SHOULD count, right?

The first part of the legislation is interesting. A federal holiday on election day is a great idea. I know a LOT of people who would vote if not for having to work all day. I think that the legislation should make it LAW that NO ONE can work more than 4 hours on election day, and let EVERYONE who desires to vote get out there and vote.

Paper receipts for electronic voting is a good idea as well, since it would also halt any kind of voting fraud on electronic machines, and we all know how important it is to get away from the punch cards and get into the modern era on voting machines.

The problem is that CEVA also states that all felons should be allowed to vote, that poling places cannot ask for proper identification before allowing someone to vote, and that you should be able to vote wherever you wish to go and vote, I.e. the Provisional Ballot.

Now here is the problem with provisional ballots.

The process by which provisional ballots are SUPPOSED to work is that someone shows up to the proper poling location and for some reason their name is not on the voting rolls for the location. They are thus asked for proper identification and if they match up with the location they are given a provisional ballot and they can vote. That vote is then set aside and researched. If the person who cast the ballot is registered and is allowed to vote at that location, then the vote is counted. If not then it is discarded. Sounds logical, right?

Well, CEVA would take away the ability of the election commissions to actually identify the person voting, and then it opens up the flood gates by allowing anyone to vote anywhere. So not only will polling places be inundated with people trying to vote in the wrong places, but you can't ask them to identify themselves... That's great.

We all know that around 40% of registered voters are all that turn out in elections. Lets say that the federal holiday part of CEVA increases that by 10%. That leaves 50% of registered voters not voting.

Now what's to stop someone with a unofficial (or official for that matter) bend to help one candidate or another from going from one polling place to the next, voting dozens times for their candidate using different names to vote at each location?

Without requiring identification or proof of residence, one person could theoretically go from one location to the next claiming to be a different person at each location, casting dozens of votes on election day.

The answer is nothing.

All that provisional ballots do under CEVA is create more work for local election commissions by forcing them to research all provisional ballots without being able to properly identify the voter in question. It also serves the purpose of creating more ballots that can and will be thrown out for one reason or another, giving the demo-commies more ammunition for the "election fraud" battle-cry. Why were so many provisional ballots thrown out? Why? Why? WHY!?!? I'd have won if you just counted all those faulty ballots!

Kerry, using crutches as he recovers from knee surgery, suggested the United States should spend as much time promoting democracy at home as it does abroad in countries like Iraq.

"We need to go about the business of making our own democracy in America work better," he said.

Oh shut up! Go back to Boston and share a few bottles with Ted and wonder why it is that you lost by over 4 Million votes.

Demo-commies on Bolton: "NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!"

2005-04-11T17:53:00.000-04:00

Democrats Seek to Block Bush Nominee as UN Envoy

When Bush announced the appointment of John Bolton as the United States next U.N. Ambassador, conservatives everywhere sent up a sigh of relief. Here, at last, was a man who wasn't interested in Kissing the U.N.'s ass. Here was a guy who was going to the U.N. to kick some ass and take some names. It was only a matter of time until the U.N. lackeys (a.k.a. Demo-commies) began stomping their feet and screaming "No!" like unruly children.

Bolton was appointed because he's been on the forefront of the battle against a corrupt and ineffective United Nations.

We don't need ambassadors to the United Nations who are not there looking to reform the organization. The U.N. has become a "bloated bureaucracy" of corruption and ineffective bickering. The U.N. has come out against the people of Israel in their war against terrorists, against the United States in it's war on terror, as well as coming out on the side of Islamic Terrorists at every turn imaginable.

It's no wonder a straight shooter like Bolton would be appointed by President Bush, since he's had his own bouts against the United Nations on all manner of issues.

Democrats sought to block President Bush's pick for U.N. ambassador at a confirmation hearing on Monday that focused on allegations the nominee tried to have intelligence analysts removed from their posts after disagreeing with him.

Bush's choice of John Bolton, a blunt detractor of the world body, has been a lightning rod for criticism of the president from Democrats who complain he has forged a "go-it-alone" approach to U.S. foreign policy.

Democratic senators zeroed in on Bolton's efforts in that capacity to reassign analysts in 2002 after they differed with him on Cuba's alleged weapons programs and apparently undercut his position. One analyst was a chemical and biological weapons intelligence expert at the State Department; the other worked on the National Intelligence Council.

"There is -- to state this bluntly Mr. Bolton -- a concern that your ideological predisposition relating to some of these issues have clouded your judgment. That is what we're talking about," said Joseph Biden of Delaware, the ranking Democrat on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Bolton, a hard-line favorite with Bush's conservative base, said the same accusations had already been investigated and dismissed by a congressional intelligence committee.

He acknowledged, however, that he had asked that one of the analysts be moved to another post because he objected to the expert going behind his back to oppose his position. He also had one conversation complaining about the other analyst, he said.

Most Republicans backed Bolton, saying they wanted a strong reformer to make the organization more accountable after revelations of corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq.

Bolton, who once said that because of its bloated bureaucracy it would not matter if the U.N. headquarters lost 10 of 39 stories, pledged to work to make the United Nations "more effective."

The reform of the United Nations "demands decisive American leadership," Bolton said.

"And it's very important that ... we are acting to make the United Nations a more efficient and uncorrupt organization."

More on Illegal Immigration...

2005-04-11T17:24:00.000-04:00

I'm doing something a little different with my normal Illegal Immigration update this week since it's a little late and there has been a TON of news on this issue in the last couple weeks.

Instead of brining you a couple stories from the web and pretty much posting them in slightly trimmed from and throwing in a few sarcastic nuggets of wisdom from yours' truly, I've decided to simply write out a bit of an op-ed piece and bring the pieces together and let you, the faithful reader, check out the links and determine if I'm completely twisted or hitting the nail on the head so to speak.

The Case against Illegal Immigration

A recently released study by the Pew Hispanic Center revealed that the known illegal immigrant population of the United States had exploded to approximately 10.3 Million as of March 2004, and of that 10.3 Million, 81% (8.4 Million) of those immigrants either came from Mexico or crossed the Mexican border from a central American country.

This is simply insane. This country is at war, and terrorists are looking for a way to enter this country and strike us on an almost daily basis why are these holes in our border continuing to be ignored?

The Pew Study continues on to note that California, New York, Texas, Illinois, Florida and New Jersey currently account for 61% of the illegal immigrant population in this country and that these criminals are fanning out across the United States into the rest of the states, and they are specifically targeting states that have easy access to ID.

But what is it that is at the heart of this problem and why is it continually being ignored by politicians of both parties?

The Heart of the Problem

At the very center of this problem is the economic situation in Mexico and other central American countries. The lure of the American Dream is simply too great and many of these people coming here are simply doing so to make a living and support their families. That's not evil, in fact it's down-right inspiring. The problem lies with the process that one needs to follow to get to this country legally.

The Border Policy is only part of the problem though. The other part of the problem is that there are jobs readily available in this country that go unfilled. These are jobs that HAVE to be done, but no one wants to do them because it's either a low wage or high-work job. Thus there is a "demand" for work and wages and a "supply" of readily available work and wages.

bureaucratic red tape and border bottlenecks aside, it's only natural that people who want to work and make a living will take a job and do so, especially if they see these jobs from an economy that would normally pay them 25 to 50 cents. A job making $5.15 an hour is like winning the lottery... But why are these jobs available and not filled by citizens in this country?

The answer is simple and obvious and politically incorrect. It's the Welfare State. Federal and State entitlement programs have simply made it too profitable for a citizen of this country to stay home and collect welfare and foodstamps than to take a dirty and low-paying job. Why go out and work to bring home a paycheck for your family when you can stay home and collect a government check? Why get our an make your own way when someone will take money from those who do make their own way and give it to you?

In the past, who was it that worked these jobs? It was the poor. They would travel across the country to take a job like building the pacific railroad or settling the west... They didn't have a massive government entitlement program telling them that they didn't have to take that job, and so they set out to make their own way and make their own lives. They complain about a decent wage and won't take a low wage job or a hard job. They deserve more. They've been conditioned to think that someone owes them a high paying job regardless of training, education, or experience. What these people do not understand is that to get that good paying job, you gotta work for it. No one is going to hire you off the streets for a $35,000+ a year job if you've not been trained, educated or have experience in that field.

All that changed when the "Great Society" was born. Now it's simply easier to be lazy and collect your check.

With THOUSANDS of jobs that need to be done going unfilled by the people who actually live in this country, companies have turned to illegals to fill that gap. Janitorial jobs, farming jobs, construction jobs, service industry jobs, and more are all open to anyone who is willing to do the work, and too many employers are willing to "less than legal" employees. Walmart recently settled a case in which it was contracting work from a company that employed illegal immigrants to clean their stores.

There are currently approximately 7.7 Million Unemployed American Citizens and approximately 10 to 12 million KNOWN undocumented workers in the American workforce. If we were to send these workers back to their home nation, would the unemployed Americans take the jobs that would open up?

"I'm not opposed to bringing people into this country for the 'jobs no American will take,' but you have they have to prove to me that there are really those jobs that exist," said Rep. Tom Tancredo (search), R-Colo.

Unemployed Americans are numbered at 7.7 million; if illegal immigration ended tomorrow, it's questionable whether the unemployed will rush out to pick lettuce and, if they do, what the cost will be at the market.

"I just don't see that and I think using agricultural workers is a pretty good example of an industry or a whole classification of jobs that American workers aren't lining up to take," said Farrell Quinlan of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce.

But Rick Oltman of the Federal American Immigration Reform (search) says there aren't any jobs people won't work for.

Although hiring undocumented workers is illegal, the law is rarely enforced. Three out of four foreigners that enter the United States do so illegally and half are paid under the table, so they don't pay taxes.

Also worthy of note on the American side of the issue is that welfare programs have welcomed illegal immigrants with open arms, providing welfare, healthcare, education and money. In fact, by law, all students in California must be educated, whether legal or not. One group videotaped children crossing the border into the United States to wait at a Bus stop to go to school. There is even talk of allowing illegals to collect Social Security!

The U.S. has similar totalization agreements with 20 other nations, as they're designed to ensure retirement benefits for those who legally work and contribute to another country's retirement fund. The difference in the Mexico proposal is that it would apply to illegal workers in the U.S. who would be eligible for benefits after working only six quarters.

On the Mexican side of the border, widespread poverty and crime are big reasons for the exodus of civilians from Mexico.

Please fill out THIS PETITION to send a message to Washington and to George W. Bush that we want our borders secured and the scourge of illegal immigration halted!

Flight Plans? DHS May Resume Airlifting Mexican Illegals Back Home

2005-04-11T13:12:00.000-04:00

Every once in a while a story comes along that makes one slap his head and exclaim "Well it's about damned time!"

It seems that the Department of Homeland Security is thinking that it might be a good idea to fly captured illegals back to their home towns in Mexico instead of dropping them off at the Arizona border where they are free to turn right around and try to enter the country again.

Even though the original program was left open to "volunteers" to decide is they wanted to go back home or not, it's a great idea to ship these people a little deeper into their hometown and make them work for it all over again...

The main clue that it might renew a program was an unheralded notice from the departments Bureau of Customs and Border Protection that it is looking for a firm to provide charter flights from Tucson to Mexico, posted online April 6.

Last years pilot program, which ran from July 16 through September, allowed detained illegal immigrants from Mexico to volunteer for flights from Tucson to Mexico City and Guadalajara, where buses would return them to their hometowns.

The presolicitation notice posted online last week called for a contractor that could operate the charter flights, provide security and medical services on the plane, and have staff, buses and other facilities to help Mexican authorities unload and transport the passengers.

DHS officials cautioned that the announcement does not mean a formal request will be released. But the announcement itself says it is anticipated that the solicitation for this requirement shall issue on or about April 21, 2005.

So how is it possible that this program hasn't been in place all along? We should be flying these criminals out of the country were ever they are found. Why is it that this is a recent thing?

DHS officials last year touted the pilot program as a way to deter illegal immigration and cut down on the cycle of violence surrounding Southwestern border crossings.

The CYCLE OF VIOLENCE surrounding Southwestern border crossings? Now this is getting interesting. As many of you may not know, because the MSM (mainstream media) won't tell you, there is a cycle of crime and violence surrounding the southern border and the illegal immigrants who are flowing through it. There are robberies, muggings, thefts, rapes, assaults, murder, and drug smuggling all along the Mexican border. Contrary to the MSM's pretty picture of poor, hardworking people who just want to work the real image is one of people smuggling drugs, violating the laws of the land and criminals entering the country because it's a much better target for their trades...

These days, if a Mexican national detained for illegal entry volunteers to return to his home country without going through formal deportation proceedings, he is escorted across the border and left in the immediate border area, which, in Arizona, often means long stretches of desert.

In such cases, the migrant commonly turns again to the smugglers who helped him the first time and tries again, Border Patrol spokesman Salvador Zamora said.

There were 340 deaths in the Tucson sector alone last year.

The charter flight program repatriated more than 14,000 illegal immigrants last year, Zamora said. But it also cost more than $15 million.

Its a very costly project, said Jose Matus, director of the Arizona-based Human Rights Coalition. And if the idea was to deter illegal immigration, it didnt help at all.

We believe theres other, better ways of using that money, he added.

I bet there are, like maybe spending it on welfare, education, and healthcare for illegal immigrants that have already snuck into this country? Illegal immigrants cost California, Arizona and Texas over $20 BILLION (with a B) dollars a year and you're bitching about $15 million? Jesus Christ on Crutches! If we simply found and flew the near 13 Million illegal immigrants out of this country and stopped them from sneaking in in the first place, we would save enough in the hidden costs of illegal immigration to balance the budget in a decade r so...

According to an August report by United Press International, the number of participants in last years pilot program decreased over time.

Well no shit! If you tell these people that you can either stay here, go back or get on a plane and go all the way back home, which option do you think they'll take? We already know that 80% of illegals caught and released and given a court date never show up, so now we're telling them:

"Hey, I know... You have a choice. We'll turn you loose if you promise to come to court in six months for a hearing, or we can take you back to the border and let you cross back into Mexico on your own, and probably come right back later in the day, or you can take a flight back to Mexico City and get a bus ride back to your county. So which will it be?"

Do you honestly thing that many of them are going to opt to be flown back into the heart of their shit-hole of a country?

Of course not.

They'll take the option of going back to the border, getting someone to give them a little help and then cross into America once again, probably even on that same day...

I'm back!

2005-04-11T13:05:00.000-04:00

So it's been a while since my last post on the Blog, So I'm back online and ready to hit the scene again.

Anyway, for anyone interested, I'm going to change up my normal style a little and inject more of my own writings and do a little less commenting on news stories as I see them. Sure, I'm going to continue to post the news stories that I find interesting and making my normal politically incorrect comments about them, but I hope to open the blog up to all things about me, from paintball to politics, from gaming to technology, and all thinks Kreepy.

So, sorry for the lack of recent posts, I hope the time away will allow me to get back to the heart of the things that matter most, to me anyway.

Oh My Gawd!

2005-04-01T23:58:00.000-05:00

OH MY GOD!

SEE IT NOW! GO. What are you waiting for? Get your ass out from behind that computer monitor and find an All-Night theatre and plunk down your hard earned money. NOW, GODDAMNIT!

I've been pretty close to an induced cinematic orgasm before... The Empire Strikes Back and the Slave girl outfit in Return of the Jedi (hey, I was young), Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill, Desperado, Clerks, Dogma, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, Bound, The original Matrix movie...

All of them were great movies and were only limited in their ability to induce cinematic orgasm.

Sin City induces cinematic orgasm!

I won't go into much detail here, but if you saw Attack of the Clones and thought that the CG was kickin... If you saw Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow and thought it broke ground... You ain't seen nothin' yet.

The Movie is a flowing piece of work from top to bottom. Everything is clicking like a well build and fully loaded .44 revolver and delivered with a steady hand which puts the lead right on target.

Sin City is a film like no other I've ever seen. With Attack of the Clones, the CG looked great and it was detailed and beautiful, but the actors... Submerged in a sea of green, seemed uninspired and called the performances in. With Sky Captain, the CG was cheesy and over the top, but the story sucked balls and the acting was less than stellar. The CG is so natural and looks SO good you'll forget it's even there while focusing on the characters.

With Sin City, every single participant is giving 110%, except maybe Jessica Alba who wouldn't shoot the nude scenes... Every character, regardless of the amount of time they spend on screen simply pop. Elijah Woods is creepy as hell as Kevin for the screen time he gets. Then there is the absolutely BRILLIANT performance of Mickey Rourke as Marv. Honestly, Rourke IS Marv. He was the perfect choice and provides the best performance in the film. Laugh out Loud and down right sadistic at the same time. Great stuff. Then there are the girls... Devon Aoki is a killing machine as Miho, Rosario Dawson is stunning as Gail, and Alba makes a great Nancy.

Then there is the Brilliant story telling of Frank Miller. The story translates well to the silver screen, though it can, at times, feel a little rushed. The comic really has come to life in this movie with many shots being almost EXACTLY the same as the comic.

But it's the pace of the thing... It just keeps coming at you. Splashes of color here and there were it's needed. Tons of Blood in Red, white and Yellow... Bright blue eyes, Cherry red caddies, evil yellow bastards. It's a full frontal assault that doesn't relent until the end credits roll.

The CG in this movie caresses you, bringing you in like the arms of a tender lover. The performances grab you passionately and won't let go. The story brings you to the brink and let's you slip over the edge. The Style and grace at which it all flows is like a silenced .45 to the gut, it whispers sweet nothings to you as you slowly slip away...

Cinematic orgasm.

Go see it and bring an extra pair of pants, or at least a wet-nap to clean up afterwards... I was a giddy as a catholic school girl on crack when I left the theatre...

Ten out of Ten. Same league as Kill Bill... Beyond awesome! What are you waiting for. Get up and go see it, NOW!

Time to say Goodbye

2005-04-01T00:05:00.000-05:00

Back in 1995 I was just starting a new job for a major retail outlet as a cashier and while I was learning the ropes I encountered an older gentleman who was buying a LOT of Coca-cola products... I made an off comment along the lines of "That's a lot of coke." or something like that and he told me he was buying the cokes for a new paintball field and that I should come out some weekend. He gave me a free field pass and the I was introduced to the world of paintball.

Over the last 10 years, I have met a lot of people, made a lot of friends, won and lost a lot of games and eventually went on to help form the core of the A5OG with a few friends.

The last few years have been very trying... I've lost my baby sister, suffered a serious leg injury, my mother was diagnosed with cancer, I've lost my Great Grandmother who helped raise me when my father left. But through it all I've been plugging away... Trying to stay in the game and to remain a top-dog and player in the A5OG.

Paintball has been in my blood for over ten years now. It has been my escape from reality, my stress relief, and my home away from home. I've made hundreds of good friends and attended great events with great people and great "after" events as well.

But it's finally time for me to come to grips with reality. My injury has never really healed up properly and as such I've been hitting the field less and less and to this point, I've not played a game since last September when I attended TWC.

When I first came over the A-5 Owners Group in April of 2002, I was one of the first eight people to sign up, and was the most prolific poster that the forum had. One of the few things that have remained a constant on this forum was that I was here. I've seen it through, what is it now, about a dozen changes and I was thrilled when Striker came to me to lead the forum and take it over. Since then I've done everything I could, spend any money I could spare, and dedicated myself to not only growing the community but protecting it from the people that would see it fall into the type of forum that most of us had come here to get away from.

Over the last few years, I've been slowly building a team of trusted, honest and intelligent people to take the forum over. I've always known that I would eventually be taking leave of the forum and returning to reality, and I believe that time has come.

With my Blog, my increased responsibilities at home, the Injury and my health, and all the other things that I have endured, I've reached the decision that it's time for me to turn over the keys to my trusted brothers and ride off into the paintball sunset one last time. I've found myself with less and less time to get online and administer the forum and participating in the discussions and joining the other members on the field...

And so, I am announcing my retirement from the sport of paintball and from the management and oversight of the A-5 Owners Group.

I would like to thank a few people before I log off and begin a new chapter in my life:

Phalanx - Wherever you are... Thanks for putting the original A-5OG together and giving me a place to rant and rave at the people who talked smack, and giving me a home away from home and the foundation of a great community of people with whom I would eventually share a lot of my life with...

Phoenix - For picking up the torch and carrying it forward for the A5OG when it looked like it may be burning out.

Striker - You are the man! Thanks for helping out with the original A-5 OG and for all the hard work and coding that you've put into the forum. We would not be what we are today without your skills and your leadership.

Finsec - We might not always agree, but you're still a great buddy and I know you're going to TWC this year...

Madboy - Man, there's not much I can say in public, since it would ruin your reputation, but you and I are a lot alike... Keep on fighting the good fight man!

ZapcoNJ - Ryan, you've done so much for this forum and are a natural leader. I know I can leave the forum in good hands with you, and not have to worry about everything falling apart.

MOATI - You and VFX did a lot to cement this forum as a sounding board for technical information and place to come to get the truth about the matter. Thanks for being one of the best contributors this forum has ever seen.

Cops911.com - Robert you are a good man and an even better business man. Keep up the good work and keep churning out those awesome vests.

Azoth - You were the first sponsor of the A5OG. You've done a lot for us by giving the membership some great deals and helping fund the forum costs. I hope that we've helped you out as much as you've helped us. Thanks man.

Old Soldier - Most of the stuff I've learned and tried to teach to the newbies around here and when on the field, I learned from you. You're an inspiration to most all of us, except the snipers of course.

Ricebrnr - You da man! Keep taggin' those fools at HS, even if you have to have Van back you up!

Hunter 357 - A sportsman unlike most of the people I've run into on the field. Fight the good fight and don't let those cheaters get you down.

Freshy and A5FF - You guys made the Photochop thread a massive success and a massive draw to the boards... Keep chopping and start up a new thread for god's sake... Oh and Night ops... That was awesome...

Mothergoose - Thanks to you, I've got more than enough "candy" to see me through the "hungry" times... Just gotta watch out for cavities...

DJThunder - Thanks for all the great deals. You're a stand-up guy and I hope that you get where you're wanting to go with Springer Paintball.

All the OMHW and A5OGSF guys - great guys all. Great players, great friends and good party-goers as well!

Peacekeeper - Good luck with the Internal kit and keep Decman in line up there...

I know that I've left a lot of important people out, but I'd like you all to know that each and everyone of you guys have played a significant role in my life and in my time here on the A5OG. Yes, even you Garwin. Thanks guys for forming and maintaining the greatest online paintball community on the net.

I'll check in from time to time to see how things are going and to see if the place burns down without me.

Signing off...

Scott Kozlowski
A.k.a. Kreeper-X

My Final Goodbyes...

2005-04-01T00:01:00.000-05:00

I just wanted to say that I am truly, truly honored by all the posts here. I never thought of myself as having all that much influence on anyone or anything, being the sarcastic and sadistic bastich that I am.

It's always great to discover that people, whomever they may be, really do look to you for guidance and information.

It's also great to know that you're wanted, especially if isn't by the police or the FBI.

When I first wrote this letter, some four months ago, I wasn't sure how it would be received... Would I be crying over spilled milk? Would I be wimping out and letting the things that have happened in the last three years finally beat me? Would I get a bunch of PMs telling me that is was about time my ass got off this forum?

I originally intended to retire from the game and from the forum back in November... I weighed the options after am awesome and successful TWC Campaign, and came to the conclusion that it would be best if I left on my own terms, leaving while I still had a little in me to give rather than hanging around a few years too long...

But I just couldn't bring myself to let it go. I couldn't bring myself to walk away. No matter how much it hurt or how much my pride was bruised, I couldn't give up on the game, my friends, and this forum.

So I closed the file and lost it... But I didn't delete it since I knew that a time would come when I'd have to weigh my sanity and my desire to shoot paint filled projectiles at fools wearing the other color...

Then came the crashes and the need arose for me to put my problems away and help put the old girl back together again. In the last few months we've been through a major crash, a server jump, two major fubars with the new server, and then another server jump and finally a fresh re-boot of the a5og.

I put everything on the back burner, with the exception of taking care of things for my mother while she was undergoing treatment for her cancer. I did what I could for her and for the forum while trying to juggle life, love, bottles of Stoli and jell-o shooters.

Recently, I've found that it's getting harder to make it through a full day of work. I wake up with an ankle that refuses to move until I've been on it for a hour or so, and I go to bed with an ankle that swells up to twice it's normal size, has half the range of motion that it used to, and likes to seize up if I sit down for too long.

I've been dreading this moment from the time I first broke my ankle a few days after TWC2002 in a freak accident on a walk on game at the rec field... But I knew that it would come up, eventually.

I'd really like to say, once again, how touched I am that all of you guys (and gal) really seem to give a rat's ass how this old gimp gets along. I've been inundated with dozens and dozens of PMs, IMs, E-mails, and even a phone call or two and it really means a lot to me that I've made some kind of impact on your lives.

It really does make me feel good about all the time I put in here. I'd like to thank you all for everything you've done for me and said about me here in this forum. It really makes it that much harder to leave, but leave I must.

This journey has ended, another awaits. Time to rest now. This is, of course an April Fools Joke.

To Live and Die in the United States of America

2005-03-21T21:07:00.000-05:00

I had hoped that I wouldn't be forced to take up the story of Terri Schiavo since everyone else is blasting the story from the rooftops and debating the issue at work, in the home, on TV and everywhere else for that matter.

I won't bore you with the details, the accusations, and the emotional context of the story. Instead I want to take this opportunity to talk about the whole circus economy the media has built around this tragic story.

It all comes down to this. These people are not interested in the fate of Terri, nor are they interested in the pain of the family of the afflicted woman. To the media, this is another story that grabs the attention of the public and puts them in front of the TV, standing at the News Stand or sitting in the car listening to Talk Radio hosts give us their opinions on why Bush was right to sign Terri's act or why he was wrong.

It's all about ratings and thus, money.

Terri Schiavo should be allowed to die. Is starving her off the best way to do that? No, but we don't allow anything else. I understand that the family is hurting. I can't imagine ANYTHING harder than seeing a loved one in the state that this young woman has been for the last 15 years. I've lost loved ones in my time on this planet and I've been fortunate to have seen them all go suddenly and not have to live a nightmare like the family of this woman has been subjected to.

I had to make a decision, with my mother, in regards to the life of my Great Grandmother on my birthday last September. She had come down with pneumonia over night and the sickness and her age combined to shut down her kidneys. We were asked, given my great grandmother's age, if we wanted the hospital to employ what they call Heroic efforts to revive her should she pass or take a sudden turn for the worse. We discussed it and we decided that not only would she not have wanted us to put her through the remainder of her life hooked up to machines but that we would leave it to her and her god.

That night, I held my great Grandmother's hand and told her I loved her. I watched her fight with the nurses over the oxygen mask (she refused to let them put it on telling them she didn't need it). I Heard her say her goodbyes and I watched her go to sleep.

Later that night, she passed on. She left this world the way she lived in it, on her terms, and I am glad it happened that way.

There has to come a point where the family stops being selfish about this sort of thing and begins to deal with the fact that someone important in their lives is no longer going to be with them. There has to come a point where what's right for everyone involved, including the stricken, outweigh the wants of the grieved. No matter how hard it hurts, we all have to let go. It's been fifteen years and it's time for Terri's family to let Terri go.

Maybe Terri told Michael that she would rather die than be subjected to just the sort of existence that she's been in for the last 15 years, maybe she didn't. How would the family know? With the absence of a Living Will, there are only two people on this planet that know if Michael and Terri had that conversation and of those two, only one can tell us which way that conversation went.

But, honestly, it's not important whether that conversation went one way or the other.

Michael has moved on, he's had no choice. His wife is gone. And really, who could blame anyone for doing so? He's seen, first hand, that his wife isn't with us anymore. If Terri had simply written out a Living Will, none of this would be happening today.

But after 15 years of court battles and false starts, the end is in sight.

After a Midnight Marathon session, The House and The Senate passed Terri's Law with not a single Democrat showing up to vote. The law basically gives the family a chance to argue their case once again, only in a Federal Court this time. George W. Bush rushed back to Washington to sign the legislation giving Terri one last shot at a continued existence that I would not wish on anyone, friend or foe.

Were the republicans wrong to do what they have done here? I don't think so. I applaud them for standing up for a single life, but the government has more pressing issues to worry about like fixing Social Security, winning the War on Terror, and growing the government to yet another record level. We didn't need an all-nighter on Capitol Hill for this.

I have no doubt that the Federal Judge hearing this argument will side with Michael and allow this woman to finally rest in peace. Is there anything that the family, or their attorney, can come up with that hasn't already be argued over and over again for the last 15 years? Is there anything that changed the report of the medical professionals who testified that Terri's brain had suffered enormous damage and continued to deteriorate over the years to the point where much, if not most, of her cerebral cortex has deteriorated away and been replaced by spinal fluid?

The Doctors that Terri's parents have hired do not dispute the physical damage done to her brain, but they claim there are new therapies that could improve her condition. Twice now, courts have found that such claims are without merit. Nothing that any doctor can do will every bring this woman back. There is no growing a new brain.

Is there anything that's changed since the medical professionals testified that, barring an act of God, Terri would never recover? No, there is nothing new.

The family is so unwilling to let go of Terri that they have personally attacked Michael, accused him at attempting to kill Terri, and accused him of wanting to see Terri dead. So adamant are they to continue this woman's existence that they are willing to do or say anything in the hopes that somehow, some way they can have their sister and daughter back. The problem is that they can never have her back.

In the end, Terri will be allowed to die, Michael will be allowed to move on, The family will grieve and the media will move on to the next "cash cow" story. Someday, Terri's family will realize that everything they have done to "help" Terri and to prolong her life may well have been the exact thing that she never wanted to endure. They may come to realize that it's better to let go out of love, than to desperately hold on out hope and fear of the loss. I grieve for Terri's family, I really do, but it's long past time to let go. You've done everything that could have been asked of you.

I wish that in cases like this, that they allowed something other than just pulling the tube and letting her starve.

There is something good to come of this horrific story, and that is that everyone will have Living Wills in their minds now, I know I plan on writing mine up soon, and I'd ask you to look at this story and see if you would want to go on in this kind of situation, because it could happen to you...

Did the New York Times Discover the Truth?

2005-03-20T13:14:00.000-05:00

The New York Freakin' Times had the gall to post a headline on March 13th after two years of "Bush Lied" and "There are no WMDs!" Enjoy:

Looting at Weapons Plants Was Systematic, Iraqi Says

"In the weeks after Baghdad fell in April 2003, looters systematically dismantled and removed tons of machinery from Saddam Hussein's most important weapons installations, including some with high-precision equipment capable of making parts for nuclear arms, a senior Iraqi official said this week in the government's first extensive comments on the looting."

"The Iraqi official, Sami al-Araji, the deputy minister of industry, said it appeared that a highly organized operation had pinpointed specific plants in search of valuable equipment, some of which could be used for both military and civilian applications, and carted the machinery away."

"They came in with cranes and the lorries and they depleted the whole site. They knew what they were doing, they knew what they wanted, and this was sophisticated looting." The threat posed by these types of facilities was cited by the Bush administration as a reason for invading Iraq, but the installations were left largely unguarded by allied forces in the chaotic months after the invasion."

So the New York Times is reporting that sites existed in Iraq that held equipment that could have been used to build Nuclear weapons and that they were looted? This after almost a two years of attacks on the President and the War in Iraq?

Let it sink in for a minute, because it gets better.

Furthermore, they state that the looting "operation" was "sophisticated" and "organized." What exactly does that mean?

I brought you the reports that Russian Special Forces may have been involved in the "looting" process, though that operation seems to have been in the field before the invasion. But one would wonder just how many terrorist groups would have the equipment and capital to actually pull off a sophisticated operation such as this without government backing?

"As examples of the most important sites that were looted, Dr. Araji cited the Nida Factory, the Badr General Establishment, Al Ameer, Al Radwan, Al Hatteen, Al Qadisiya and Al Qaqaa. Al Radwan, for example, was a manufacturing plant for the uranium enrichment program, with enormous machine tools for making highly specialized parts, according to the Wisconsin Project. The Nida Factory was implicated in both the nuclear program and the manufacture of Scud missiles.

So if there were no WMDs in Iraq, why did they need a Uranium Enrichment Program?

Al Qaqaa, with some 1,100 structures, manufactured powerful explosives that could be used for conventional missile warheads and for setting off a nuclear detonation. Last fall, Iraqi government officials warned the United States and international nuclear inspectors that some 377 tons of those explosives were missing after the invasion. But Al Qaqaa also contained a wide variety of weapons manufacturing machinery, including 800 pieces of chemical equipment. The kinds of machinery at the various sites included equipment that could be used to make missile parts, chemical weapons or centrifuges essential for enriching uranium for atom bombs. All of that 'dual use' equipment also has peaceful applications - for example, a tool to make parts for a nuclear implosion device or for a powerful commercial jet turbine."

The 'Dual Use' equipment problem is easily solved. Let's look at who we're talking about here for a moment. We're talking, of course, about Saddam Hussein.

Given what we know about this man and his murderous regime, is there any doubt which of the two uses of this equipment was being implemented? I would argue not. We all know that He used the weapons before. We know that he wanted the weapons and that he wanted the world to think he had them. What more do you liberals want?

UPDATE!

Wait! There's more!

Saddam's $2m offer to WMD inspector

Saddam Hussein's regime offered a $2 million (£1.4 million) bribe to the United Nations' chief weapons inspector to doctor his reports on the search for weapons of mass destruction.

Rolf Ekeus, the Swede who led the UN's efforts to track down the weapons from 1991 to 1997, said that the offer came from Tariq Aziz, Saddam's foreign minister and deputy.

Mr Ekeus told Reuters news agency that he had passed the information to the Volcker Commission. "I told the Volcker people that Tariq [Aziz] said a couple of million was there if we report right. My answer was, 'That is not the way we do business in Sweden.' "

A clean report from Mr Ekeus's inspectors would have been vital in lifting sanctions against Saddam's regime. But the inspectors never established what had happened to the regime's illicit weapons and never gave Iraq a clean bill of health.

The news that Iraq attempted to bribe a top UN official is a key piece of evidence for investigators into the scandal surrounding the oil-for-food programme. It proves that Iraq was offering huge sums of cash to influential foreigners in return for political favours.

So, if there were no WMDs in Iraq, why were they offering bribes to the chief inspectors? Why is it that the UN was FUNDING these bribes via the corrupt 'Oil for Food' Program? If the Iraqi officials all KNEW that they didn't have any of these WMDs, what's the point of the cat and mouse game with the rest of the world?

Iraqi leaders played the UN like a cheap musical instrument. They offered massive oil contracts to the Germans, French and Russians to bide their time and stave off the efforts of the United States and Great Britain. They used the Oil for Food Program to fund the bribery of inspectors and to fund the 'looting' operations, possibly with the help of Russian Special Forces troops.

You have got to stop asking "Did they ever have these weapons?" The real question is "Where did these weapons go and where are they now?"

Nile Gardiner, of the Heritage Foundation in Washington, who has followed the inquiries, said: "It's the tip of the iceberg of what the Iraqis were offering. For every official like Ekeus who turned down a bribe, there are many more who will have been tempted by it."

Saddam and his henchmen siphoned off an estimated £885 million from the humanitarian scheme, allegedly paying some of that to 270 foreign politicians, officials and journalists.

Most of those alleged to have been involved in the scandal, including the former head of the programme, Benon Sevan, have denied that they did anything wrong.

A United States Senate report said that Mr Sevan had committed criminal acts by soliciting oil contracts, while the Volcker commission said that he had failed to explain $160,000 (£83,000) paid into personal bank accounts while he was the head of the programme.

Mourning a Great Loss

2005-03-20T01:10:00.000-05:00

I can't take credit for this one, but who ever wrote this is wise beyond their years:

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend by the name of Common Sense who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic Red tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such value lessons as knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm and that life isn't always fair.

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not kids, are in charge). His health began to rapidly deteriorate when well intentioned but over bearing gulations were set in place.

Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer aspirin to a student; but could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion

Finally, Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.

Common Sense finally gave up the ghost after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot, she spilled a bit in her lap, and was awarded a huge settlement.

Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust, his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. Also, a brother, Consideration for Other People.

He is survived by two stepbrothers; My Rights and Ima Whiner. Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.

Update! The UAW stands for United Ass Wipes

2005-03-15T17:00:00.000-05:00

As a Union Member (UFCW Local 1995 in Tennessee) I can honestly say that this makes me sick to my stomach. Once again, the Liberals are doing the very things they accuse the Conservatives of. In this case it's an attack on freedom of choice, freedom of expression and political freedom:

The union says Marines in foreign cars, displaying Bush stickers unwelcome.

The United Auto Workers says Marine reservists should show a little more semper fi if they want to use the union's parking lot.

The Marine Corps motto means "always faithful," but the union says some reservists working out of a base on Jefferson Avenue in Detroit have been decidedly unfaithful to their fellow Americans by driving import cars and trucks.

So the UAW International will no longer allow members of the 1st Battalion 24th Marines to park at Solidarity House if they are driving foreign cars or displaying pro-President Bush bumper stickers.

So let me get this right. These young men and women of the Marine Corps aren't American enough for the UAW if they drive the car of their choosing and vote for or support a candidate that the UAW opposes? These Radical Liberal Union leaders have NO CLUE that over 40% of union members vote republican on average.

"While reservists certainly have the right to drive nonunion made vehicles and display bumper stickers touting the most anti-worker, anti-union president since the 1920s, that doesn't mean they have the right to park in a lot owned by the members of the UAW," the union said in a statement released Friday.

Yes, they certainly do have the right to choose to drive a car of any make or model, but do YOU really have the right to establish rules and guidelines for your valued parking lot?

I contend that you don't.

The UAW is a membership Union or club, that is funded by it's members and is closed off to anyone who is not a member of the Union. In most cases, UAW locals operate in closed-shop states which means that if you are going to work for the company that the UAW represents, you have to be a member. Thus, they are a closed private organization. As such, do they have the right to discriminate against other citizens of this nation who have different beliefs, political affiliations or have made different choices?

Nope.

You need only look as far as the Boy Scouts to see that a closed and private group simply cannot make discriminatory rules and regulations in regards to membership or affiliation with their organization or the use of it's facilities.

As you may know, the Boy Scouts have been under attack relentlessly because their organization doesn't want homosexual men out in the woods alone with impressionable young boys and because they mandate a belief in a higher power. The Demo-Commies, Loonie-Liberals and the ACLU were quick to attack the rights of this private and closed organization for it's "discriminatory practices."

So how long until the ACLU steps up for these fine young Marines and take up the fight against the "discriminatory practices" or the UAW? My guess is that you won't see it since the UAW is a major contributor to the Demo-Commie Nationalist committee.

Shocked and disappointed, the Marines are pulling out.

"You either support the Marines or you don't," said Lt. Col. Joe Rutledge, commanding officer of the battalion's active duty instructors. "I'm telling my Marines that they're no longer parking there."

At a time when U.S. armed forces are fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan, quibbling over parking privileges is "silly," Rutledge said.

The pro-Bush bumper stickers are another sore spot after last year's election.

EXACTLY. This is nothing but the UAW being sore losers in the last election.

The UAW has a long history of barring foreign-made cars from its parking lots. The subject is touchier than ever as Detroit's Big Three loses market share, driving down union membership.

The UAW may want to start checking the driver's side door wells on the cars they drive now. In fact, my good old "made in the USA" dodge has a little sticker in the door well that says "Assembled in Canada." Does that count as a foreign Made car? How about all the foreign makes of automobiles that are built right here in the USA? Before the UAW goes and gets all "holier than thou" on the Marines, maybe they should look for that little sticker in their cars as well...

UAW President Ron Gettelfinger opposed President Bush, accusing him of ignoring calls for labor law reform and failing to combat unfair business practices in China -- a growing threat to U.S. manufacturers.

The dispute arises as the UAW, using laid-off workers for labor, is building a $300,000 home for the Veterans of Foreign Wars. The home in Eaton Rapids will operate a residential program for children of veterans who don't have parents, or whose parents can't care for them.

"We do not think it is unreasonable to expect our guests to practice the simple principle of not insulting their host," the UAW statement said.

So it's an insult to have voted for the other guy? It's an insult to choose to drive a different car than you choose for him? No sir, if I knock on your door and call you a bitch in front of your children, that would be an insult.

Rutledge is unmoved.

"I don't see it as a snub against them," he said, adding no conditions were set when the union first began allowing the Marines to park in the lot several years ago. "We're appreciative of what they've done, but you don't come into my office and say, 'OK, we're not going to support some of your Marines.' I don't know what a foreign car is today anyway. BMWs are made in South Carolina now."

Way to stick it to the loonie-liberals!

UPDATE! 3-15-05 Looks like the UAW has come to their senses...

UAW Now Says Marines Can Park In Lot

After telling Marine reservists who drive foreign vehicles or display pro-President Bush bumper stickers they no longer could use a parking lot at the United Auto Workers headquarters, union officials have changed their minds.

The union, which has offices near a Marine Corps Reserve Center in Detroit, reversed its decision after some people said it reflected a lack of support for the Marines and the service of reservists.

"I made the wrong call on the parking issue and I have notified the Marine Corps that all reservists are welcome to park at Solidarity House as they have for the past 10 years," UAW President Ron Gettelfinger said in a statement released by the union.

Gettelfinger noted that he had served in the Marine Corps Reserves.

Officials for the Marine Corps Reserve Center could not immediately be reached for comment.

Here is the statement that Local 4 received Monday by UAW President Gettelfinger on Marine Reservists parking at UAW headquarters.

"I have reconsidered and reversed my decision not to allow Marine reservists to park non-union made vehicles or vehicles displaying Bush stickers at Solidarity House on weekends.

"Some people may have thought my original decision reflected a lack of support for the Marine Corps and the service of Marine reservists."

While it's good to know that you finally came to your senses, Mr. Gettelfinger, it's a bit too late. We already KNOW which direction Labor Unions lean and we know what's in your heart in regards to people with a different opinion than you or who drive different cars than you.

"That certainly was not my intention. Having served in the Marine Corps Reserves myself, I fully appreciate the sacrifices and contributions made by America's reservists, National Guard members and active duty military personnel and their families.

Not enough to allow them to use a parking lot if their cars aren't the kind of cars you want them driving, or they voted for the other guy in 2000 and 2004.

"That said, I made the wrong call on the parking issue, and I have notified the Marine Corps that all reservists are welcome to park at Solidarity House as they have for the past 10 years.

"I regret that the controversy over this decision has overshadowed the many good things the UAW and our members are doing to support and express our appreciation to America's service men and women and veterans."

This is a great example of what I call the (Foolish Liberal Initial Posture / Frightened Liberal Oposite Position) or FLIP/FLOP syndrome.

See, what happens is that the Loonie-Liberals believe that there is nothing more important than what they think of feel about an issue and thus they like to announce what they think and feel BEFORE they have a chance to think it through; Thus they form a Foolish Liberal Initial Posture or a FLIP. Then, once the media or other organizations get word of the FLIP and start making noise about how STUPID the announcement was, the Loonie-Liberal gets scared and must save face. Why, there is nothing worse then letting the American Public know just how stupid it is to act or speak on your feelings without thinking them through, and thus the develop a Frightened Liberal opposite Position or a FLOP.

John Kerry knew a LOT about this, and in some cases he even performed FLOP/FLIPS as well as FLIP/FLOPS.

Faithful reader and like-minded M. Stevenson left me this comment and these links.

"Kudos' to Kreeper for hitting the nail on the head of this issue. It's about nothing more than sour grapes at losing in Nov. As a small update I have a link to UAW president Ron Gettelfinger's response to this issue as interviewed on the Paul W. Smith show on 760 am in Detroit, MI. I would also like to add that many of the Reserve Centers neighbors have stepped up and are allowing the Marines to park on their lots, regardless of politics and choice of vehicle. Many callers to the radio station have indicated that they do not agree with the unions decision and quite a few have indicated that this only pushes them away from a domestic car purchase in the future...if the UAW wont support our fighting men and women then we don't support them."

This is what is really behind all of this. Mr. Gettelfinger made a bold and foolish statement and it's starting to come back to bite him in the ass. Once the public got involved in the situation and the public started to express outrage over the decision, he got scared and he had to FLOP.

Download and listen to Mr. Gettlefinger Flopping in the wind.

The Marines tell the UAW "Take your lot and shove it."
Now typically in classic FLIP/FLOP syndrome cases, the FLIP/FLOPper expects that the other side will accept their olive branch and forget the initial foolish statement. Thankfully, the Marines don't forgive and forget easily...

The United Auto Workers union waved a white flag Monday in its parking skirmish with neighboring reservists, but the 1st Battalion, 24th Marines are not accepting surrender.

Facing intense criticism, UAW President Ron Gettelfinger reversed his decision to ban Marine Corps reservists driving foreign cars or displaying pro-President Bush bumper stickers from parking at the union's Solidarity House headquarters in Detroit.

"I made the wrong call on the parking issue, and I have notified the Marine Corps that all reservists are welcome to park at Solidarity House as they have for the past 10 years," Gettelfinger said in a statement.

Wounded by what they consider an unpatriotic ambush, the Marines rejected the union's olive branch and secured an alternative parking lot.

"I talked to Ron; I let him know that I understand he has rescinded his decision," said Lt. Col. Joe Rutledge, a top-ranking officer at the reserve infantry rifle battalion. "However, I've made my decision -- either you support the Marines or you don't."

While both sides say the dispute has been overblown, it revealed the depths of the UAW's antipathy toward the Bush administration and its concern over the rise of foreign automakers in the U.S. market.

Gettelfinger and other top UAW International officials say Bush is blatantly anti-labor and has opposed measures that could have benefited working men and women.
UAW leaders backed Democratic challenger John Kerry and his running mate John Edwards in last year's election.

The UAW's reversal Monday followed a barrage of criticism from both union members and nonunion members. The dispute became instant fodder for such Web sites as The Drudge Report and various radio programs.

The News received hundreds of e-mails Sunday and Monday about the controversy, the majority criticizing the UAW's decision.

And you can bet that the Union Offices received THOUSANDS more e-mails and calls and you can bet that within three to five days they will be drowning in a sea of angry letters...

"I have never belonged to the unions, but I've always bought (domestic) brand cars," Jenny Pulcerm 74, of Harrison Township. "Right now, I'm driving a Chrysler. But the next car will definitely not be union-made."

Outside the Marine reservists headquarters, it wasn't hard to find signs of hard feelings. A Toyota pickup truck parked in front of a phalanx of military Humvees sported three bumper stickers. One touted Semper Fi, the Marines' motto, the second was a Bush/Cheney campaign sticker and the third an anti-UAW sign.

The UAW decision to ban Marines struck a nerve with many who say U.S. armed forces deserve more respect, especially during a time of war.

And certainly, some said, Marines should be able to support their commander in chief, President Bush, without facing repercussions.

"The Marines who fought at Iwo Jima -- including yours truly -- and those who are now in Iraq, took an oath to defend this country and its citizens," said Russ Paquette, an 87-year-old lawyer from St. Clair Shores and former commanding officer of the 1st Battalion, 24th Marines. "There is nothing in the oath which indicates that we Marines will only fight for citizens who drive certain automobiles, or who voted in the last election for a certain president."

Gettelfinger, himself a former Marine Corps reservist, said his initial decision should not be looked on as a lack of support for the military.

"That certainly was not my intention. ... I fully appreciate the sacrifices and contributions made by America's reservists, National Guard members and active duty military personnel and their families," his statement said.

Gettelfinger also acknowledged the decision reflected poorly on the UAW, which has historically supported the U.S. military.

"The controversy over this decision has overshadowed the many good things the UAW and our members are doing to support and express our appreciation to America's servicemen and -women and veterans," he said.

Some supported Gettelfinger's call.

"It took a lot of guts," said Phil Davis, a 58-year-old realtor in Tampa, Fla. "It was based on principle."

I would disagree. The initial position was the one based on principle to Mr. Gettlefinger. Why stop the practice of allowing those Marine Reservists use the parking lot in the first place? Because, angry over the loss in the last election and facing the very real concept of the continuing Conservative wave sweeping over the nation, he had to "suck it up" and take the hit to try and save face for him and his organization. No, there was no principle in this decision.

Dominic Roti, a 64-year-old Farmington retiree who worked 37 years for Chrysler, credits the UAW with setting the benchmark for America's standard of living.

"They're the ones who are putting bread on the table," Roti said. "We're accustomed to live a certain way. ... You have a car to go from work, to home, to the stores -- not like in a lot of European countries. ... The UAW made it that way for us. We're thankful to them."

But many of those who weighed in said the episode changed their opinion of the UAW. Bill Reiber of Vista, Calif., whose son is serving in Iraq, is trading in his Chevrolet S-10 pickup for a vehicle made by a foreign automaker.

"I'm looking at the Toyota Tacoma," he said. "What (the UAW) did, it just wasn't right. These are Marines and they have a right, like anybody else in America, to express their First Amendment rights."

Lt. Col. Rutledge said he's anxious to get past the dispute and get back to business. Owners of a nearby apartment complex have agreed to allow reservists to park on their premises.

"I know people are incensed by this thing," Rutledge said, "but in the big scheme of things, what I do is train Marines and I'm preparing these guys to go overseas."

Check out what the locals are saying about the UAW's recent actions. And notice the poll... 90% think that the actions of Mr. Gettlefinger has harmed the UAW...

Thanks to M. Stevenson for the links!

Update! AOL Instant Spy Network?

2005-03-15T16:46:00.000-05:00

Unless you want to let AOL/Time Warner in on all of your conversations and intellectual properties, you might want to re-read that AIM User End License.

AOL's Terms of Service Update for AIM Raises Eyebrows

America Online, Inc. has quietly updated the terms of service for its AIM instant messaging application, making several changes that is sure to raise the hackles of Internet privacy advocates.

The revamped terms of service, which apply only to users who downloaded the free AIM software on or after Feb. 5, 2004, gives AOL the right to "reproduce, display, perform, distribute, adapt and promote" all content distributed across the chat network by users.

That's right. ANYTHING you chat about, share, or distribute over the AOL Instant Messenger service is now the property of AOL/Time Warner!

"You waive any right to privacy. You waive any right to inspect or approve uses of the content or to be compensated for any such uses," according to the AIM terms-of-service.

So if you have an idea about a new product or intellectual property and you share it via AIM with fellow members of your team/company/family/friends, AOL/Time Warner can take that information, and use it however they want, including beating you to the patent office.

Although the user will retain ownership of the content passed through the AIM network, the terms give AOL ownership of "all right, title and interest in any compilation, collective work or other derivative work created by AOL using or incorporating this [user] content.

"In addition, by posting content on an AIM Product, you grant AOL, its parent, affiliates, subsidiaries, assigns, agents and licensees the irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide right to reproduce, display, perform, distribute, adapt and promote this content in any medium," it added.

The changes could have serious ramifications for AOL's AIM@Work service which is being marketed to businesses. AIM@Work offers things like Identity Services to allow the use of corporate e-mail address as AOL screen names. It also offers premium services like voice conferencing and Web meetings.

At the time of this reporting, it is not clear if the same terms of service apply to businesses who pay for the AIM@Work features. America Online executives were not available to discuss the terms of service changes.

"They're encouraging businesses to use AIM to discuss details of their business correspondence, even to sync their Outlook contact and calendar files, which, according to their TOS, AOL then has the right to publish in any way they see fit, including, among other things, providing that information to business competitors. I'd be pretty damn leery of using AIM@Work for any kind of business," said Ben Stanfield, executive editor and founder of MacSlash, Inc.

Very interesting... If this new "TOS" applies to the businesses they are targeting with the AOL@Work package, then they are doing nothing but corporate espionage!

Whatever you do, DO NOT post any intellectual properties, hold any confidential chats/meetings, or distribute ANYTHING you don't want being looked at by AOL on AIM. I urge you all to find a new IM service and discontinue AIM use immediately!

Update! AOL shifts into "Cover our asses" mode and a Canadian Tech Lawyer picks the TOS apart! AOL: AIM Conversations Are Safe

America Online Inc. on Sunday moved to quell public criticism of the terms of service for its AIM service, insisting the controversial privacy clause does not pertain to user-to-user instant messaging communication.

A section of the controversial clause, which was first flagged by Weblogs and discussion forums, reads: "Although you or the owner of the Content retain ownership of all right, title and interest in Content that you post to any AIM Product, AOL owns all right, title and interest in any compilation, collective work or other derivative work created by AOL using or incorporating this Content.

"You waive any right to privacy. You waive any right to inspect or approve uses of the content or to be compensated for any such uses," according to the AIM terms of service.

America Online spokesman Andrew Weinstein, however, maintained that AOL does not monitor, read or review any user-to-user communication through the AIM network, except in response to a valid legal process.

Weinstein told eWEEK.com the clause in question falls under the heading "Content You Post," meaning it only relates to content a user posts in a public area of the AIM service. "If a user posts content in a public area of the service, like a chat room, message board or other public forum, that information may be used by AOL for other purposes," he explained.

One example of this, Weinstein said, may be a user who posts a "Hot or Not" photo and thus allows AIM to post it for other AIM users to vote on. "Another might be taking an excerpt from a message board posting on a current news issue and highlighting it in a different area of the service.

"Such language is standard in almost all similar user agreements, including those from Microsoft [Corp.] and most online news publications. That clause simply lets the user know that content they post in a public area can be seen by other users and can be used by the owner of the site for other purposes," Weinstein added.

"AIM user-to-user communication has been and will remain private," the AOL spokesman declared.

However, Weinstein's stance that user-to-user IM communications are exempt from the controversial clause isn't sitting well with legal experts.

Rob Hyndman, a technology lawyer based in Ontario, pointed out that the terms of service covers the entire AIM product and does not explicitly exclude instant messaging.

"I think the AOLs of the world don't take the impact their TOS [terms of service] have on users seriously enough, generally because they have market power and the customer doesn't," Hyndman told eWEEK.com, arguing that the AIM terms of service appears all-encompassing.

"To be fair to them, I think the errors are innocent, and more the result of sloppy drafting and a reflexively heavy-handed approach to drafting TOS," he said.

Hyndman also took issue with Weinstein's explanation that the heading "Content Your Post" and the use of the word "post" automatically exclude IM conversations. "They seem to say that using that verb means their privacy language only applies to contributions to public forums, i.e. where one 'posts.' But if that's true, why do the TOS use the verb 'post' when referring to all AIM products, if not all AIM products can or do 'post'?" he asked.

In addition, he pointed to the very last line in the terms of service, which reads: "The section headings used herein are for convenience only and shall not be given any legal import." That line, Hyndman asserted, renders Weinstein's explanation weak.

"Many lawyers' natural tendency, especially when drafting to the retail market, is to put as much 'oomph' in the TOS as possible from their client's perspective. They make it as broad as possible, essentially. Until quite recently, there really was no way for customers to respond to this," Hyndman added.

Public impugnment of AOL's privacy policies could have serious ramifications for the company's attempts to monetize its instant messaging network. AOL uses the AIM@Work service to hawk business-related tools like Identity Services to allow the use of corporate e-mail addresses as AOL screen names. It also offers premium services like voice conferencing and Web meetings.

The story continues to develop...

And Speaking of Ass Wipes...

2005-03-15T05:11:00.000-05:00

I have nothing to add to this story... They covered all the jokes and all the toilet humor for me...

Pay as you go: Florida lawmaker seeks to tax toilet paper

Florida's Legislature is flush with good ideas.

Sen. Al Lawson's involves a 2 cent-per-roll tax on toilet paper to pay for wastewater treatment and help small towns upgrade their sewer systems.

The Democratic lawmaker's pay-as-you-go bill has been the source of many jokes -- bathroom humor you might say -- but he says the issue is a serious one, especially in some of the fast-growing Panhandle coastal counties in his district.

"They're experiencing a tremendous boom in growth and they're not able to accommodate the growth," Lawson said. "We've got 17 million people in this state and all of them can contribute to protecting our underground water supply."

In a Republican-dominated Legislature that doesn't like new taxes, the idea is likely to pretty quickly end up in the tank.

Senate President Tom Lee, R-Brandon, said he didn't think it would get too far, but didn't rule it out.

"We'll be getting to the bottom of it real soon," Lee said.

The House is skeptical as well.

"We're not wild about tax increases," said House Speaker Allan Bense, R-Panama City. "But we'll certainly let it go through the system."

If it were to pass, the extra two pennies would start being charged in October. Lawson said it could generate $50 million a year.

It would also need approval from Gov. Jeb Bush. He said that if toilet paper is taxed, people might use less of it.

"That's not necessarily a good thing," noted the governor.

And what about consumers? Wouldn't they be squeezed by a tax on the Charmin? No, says Lawson.

"Two cents is not going to hurt families at all," he said. "This is one thing people don't mind paying for."

Is the American Media Anti-American?

2005-03-15T03:50:00.000-05:00

As if we needed any more evidence, now comes this story of American Journalists speaking out against their own country and in support of a Communist regime, again...

Washington Post editor's candid China interview
In an interview certain to confirm many Americans' concerns that the elite media establishment is less than patriotic, the managing editor of the Washington Post told China's official People's Daily Washington correspondent Yong Tang, "I don't think U.S. should be the leader of the world."

Philip Bennett of the Post also criticized the Bush administration's foreign policy saying he did not see much evidence to suggest the U.S. is actually promoting democracy around the world as it claims.

"My job is helping my readers trying to understand what is happening now," said Bennett. "What is happening now is very difficult to understand. The world is very complex. There are various complex forces occurring in it. I don't think you can imagine a world where one country or one group of people could lead everybody else. I can't imagine that could happen. I also think it is unhealthy to have one country as the leader of the world. People in other countries don't want to be led by foreign countries. They may want to have good relations with it or they may want to share with what is good in that country."

Bennett speculated that the world is headed into a period in which it might be dominated by U.S. imperialism.

U.S. imperialism? Have we forgotten the lessons of the Cold War so soon? Under Soviet Communist imperialism, Millions of people were killed or starved out or imprisoned. What is it that we have done? How many nations have we invaded and taken control of? Not one yet. We have invaded some places to take out the terrorists, but in both cases now, we've turned the countries over to the people of those countries... We've not taken them over like the Soviets or the Nazis or the Romans who practiced REAL imperialism.

America was the ONLY nation at the end of World War II with an intact industrial complex. We were the ONLY nation involved in the war with a homeland that was almost completely untouched by the ravages of war. We had the PREMIER military force on the planet at the time. And yet we disarmed. We went home. He established bases to keep an eye out and to prevent something like WWII from happening again, but for the most part, we came home and returned to our lives.

Does this journalist think that the Soviet Union would have done that were it in the same position? Does the world not remember just what happens when someone who wants to dominate the world and the nation who backs him is along for the ride?

We don't want to occupy the world, or dominate the world or rule the world. We want the world to be peaceful for EVERYONE and most of all we want to avoid the mistakes of the past. It's not imperialistic to stop the regimes of mad men, to work to end the Militant Islamic Terror networks, or to free people who are oppressed by despotic regimes. It's called liberation.

Tell that to this anti-American "journalist" who believes that we aim to take over the world.

"That is also a sort of colonial question," he said. "The world has gone through colonialism and imperialism. We have seen the danger and shortcomings of those systems. If we are heading into another period of imperialism where the U.S. thinks itself as the leader of the area and its interest should prevail over all other interests of its neighbors and others, then I think the world will be in an unhappy period."

America IS a leader. Who does the world turn to in times of need? WWI? WWII? Soviet Expansionism? The AIDS crisis? The Tsunami? Yep, the world turns to us with hands out-streched in a unified cry of "Help us!" And we do. But we don't want to be involved in the affairs of other nations unless, of course, the interests of those other nations involves the support of Militant Islamic Terrorism, the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, acts of aggression against it's neighbors or oppression of the people; all of which are the issues at hand with the nations to which this idiot is referring.

The nations with whom we have issues right now are those who are do all of the above or actively participate in the actions of those nations. We will continue to be involved in any way necessary to free the oppressed people, stop the spread of WMDs, halt the attacks of nations against their neighbors or our allies, and halt the spread of Islamic Terrorism. Someone has to lead and since the UN has proven itself impotent.

In explaining the role of the press in America, Bennett told the China daily that newspapers in the U.S. do not have any political point of view they are trying to advance.

"We have a little bit different roles in newspapers compared with our counterparts in Europe and other countries," he said. "We don't have any political point of view that we are trying to advance (bullshit) We don't represent any political parties (Jesus, this guy is good!). We are not tied to any political movement (Man, I gotta get some boots, it's gettin' deep). On the news side of the paper we try not to give opinions (Help, I'm drowning in bullshit!). So I think the role the Washington Post should play is to hold the government accountable for decisions made by it."

As an example, Bennett cited the Washington Post's Iraq coverage.

"One of the jobs of our correspondents in Baghdad is to tell our readers what the Bush administration is trying to hide," Bennett said. "Bush says democracy is advancing in Iraq, but our correspondents say the situation there is much more complex than that. Our job is to put that in the public domain and challenge the government and hold them accountable. We do that by having independent reporting about events, by telling our readers what the actual situation is, with as much independence, fairness and accuracy as we can.

Yeah, that's why the soldiers who come home tell us of the great things going on over in Iraq and the Iraqi people got out and voted in the face of violence and death. The media covers up all the happens that is good and positive and shows us the negative over and over and over again and tells us we're losing.

"Often that is in conflict with the government. That is why we are having a lot of pressure from the government, though not in the materials ways. We receive a lot of criticism from the government for presenting views of events which are in odds with what they are trying to present. This is very important in our system and it is one of the fundamental roles of the press," Bennett said.

Bennett then compared the resistance he has experienced from the U.S. government with the way the totalitarian government of China has stifled the press there.

"We have seen that similar roles of the press are developing in China as media expose corruption," he said. "In any system corrupt officials are trying to cover bad things up. We may look at the press coverage of issues like SARS epidemic. At the very beginning there were efforts to cover things up. But then the news came out everywhere through the press and even the text-messaging. Then the government was forced to admit what happened. This role is quite similar with the role we are trying to play here in the United States.

"Of course, we have a lot of limitations on our ability to do that. The government of the U.S. is becoming much more secretive, much more hostile to the press in terms of giving us access to the information. So a lot of what we do here is to fight for access to the information that we think the public should have. That takes a lot of our energy and resources," he said.

I wonder why an administration would want to keep things like war-plans and dates and tactics used from a press that has shown itself to be very sympathetic to ANYONE who dislikes our nation or it's policies.

Bennett told the paper the influence of the "mainstream media" on shaping the opinions of the people is declining largely because of the Internet.

"Why is the influence of the mainstream media waning?" he asked rhetorically. "It is because there are so many sources of different news and information today. The Internet has made it possible for people to get news from online. Newspapers like the Washington Post have no longer monopoly on news and information. Even our readers spend a lot of time reading Internet, reaching different sites and comparing different news. That has made the influence of newspapers go down."

He also acknowledged that the media are out of touch with the religious values of the American people.

"Today, American people are more conservative, nationalistic and religious and more closed off to foreign influence than the media," he said. "By and large, American mainstream media has been slow to appreciate how important the religion is in America. We don't cover it very deeply and extensively. So I think there are areas we are out of touch."

Or in it's ideals and beliefs, or in it's desire to see the good fight through and it's pride in our own nation. The media pretty much HATES everything American and embraces everything European. At least he got the part about the mainstream media being out of touch with America and that their influence is rapidly dying off.

Bennett acknowledged circulation at the Washington Post and most other large newspapers in the U.S. is falling.

Bennett assured the interviewer that his paper never characterizes China as a dictatorship.

"We don't use these words on the paper anymore," he said. "Now we say China is a Communist country only because it is a fact. China is ruled by the Communist Party."

...And the media never met a communist dictator that it didn't like... To read the whole interview, CLICK THIS!

What Liberal Media you ask?

2005-03-14T19:00:00.000-05:00

Study Shows U.S. Election Coverage Harder on Bush

NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. media coverage of last year's election was three times more likely to be negative toward President Bush than Democratic challenger John Kerry, according to a study released Monday.

Well no shit!

The annual report by a press watchdog that is affiliated with Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism said that 36 percent of stories about Bush were negative compared to 12 percent about Kerry, a Massachusetts senator.

Only 20 percent were positive toward Bush compared to 30 percent of stories about Kerry that were positive, according to the report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism.

Who'd'a Thunk it, huh? I mean, the media is so unbiased or rather right biased that this could never be the case...

We conservative leaning folks have been "in the know" about the Liberal bias of the media for a while. Whether it was the fair and balanced coverage of the Tet Offensive back in the Vietnam era, or the way Reagan was attacked as a stupid cowboy or a dunce, or maybe the constant attacks against our ideals and our traditions... I don't know. Maybe it could be the fact that conservatives are always labeled as such and liberals are always just Senators, Representitives or "Progressives."

The study looked at 16 newspapers of varying size across the country, four nightly newscasts, three network morning news shows, nine cable programs and nine Web sites through the course of 2004.

Examining the public perception that coverage of the war in Iraq was decidedly negative, it found evidence did not support that conclusion. The majority of stories had no decided tone, 25 percent were negative and 20 percent were positive, it said.

I guess that means that the New York Times wasn't included in the study. The NYT has been BLATANTLY anti-America, anti-conservative and anti-common sense for DECADES.

The three network nightly newscasts and public broadcaster PBS tended to be more negative than positive, while Fox News was twice as likely to be positive as negative.

It's no wonder why Fox is attacked as "Right Wing News." With the rest of the media TWICE as likely to be negative toward the president or the war or conservatives in general...

Looking at public perceptions of the media, the report showed that more people thought the media was unfair to both Kerry and Bush than to the candidates four years earlier, but fewer people thought news organizations had too much influence on the outcome of the election.

Well, I guess that means that the cBS network wasn't included in the study, since they (those involved in the story) communicated with the Kerry campaign, rushed to air with a story based on what they knew was forged documents, and refused to take the advice of every expert they consulted on the story.

"It may be that the expectations of the press have sunk enough that they will not sink much further. People are not dismayed by disappointments in the press. They expect them," the authors of the report said.

The study noted a huge rise in audiences for Internet news, particularly for bloggers whose readers jumped by 58 percent in six months to 32 million people.

Despite the growing importance of the Web, the report said investment was not keeping pace and some 62 percent of Internet professionals reported cutbacks in the newsroom in the last three years, even more than the 37 percent of print, radio and TV journalists who cited cutbacks in their newsrooms.

"For all that the number of outlets has grown, the number of people engaged in collecting original information has not," the report said, noting that much of the investment was directed at repackaging and presenting information rather than gathering news.

Just goes to show why us conservatives go to news radio and the internet to get the news as opposed to the Liberal Mainstream Media.

Illegal Immigration update: 3-14-05

2005-03-14T16:55:00.000-05:00

More stories of Illegal Immigration and it's costs to the American People:
Personal information taken in Nevada DMV office break-in

Personal information from more than 8,900 people was stolen when thieves broke into a Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles office, officials said Friday.

A computer taken during the break-in contained names, ages, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, photographs and signatures of southern Nevada residents who obtained driver's licenses between Nov. 25 and March 4 at the North Las Vegas office, state DMV chief Ginny Lewis said.

"The state is extremely sorry that this has happened," Lewis said. "Those motorists whose data was on that computer need to know their personal information has been compromised."

The DMV had previously maintained that the information on the computer stolen in Monday's break-in was encrypted, making it virtually useless to thieves.

But Lewis said Friday that Digimarc Corp., the Beaverton, Ore.,-based company that provides digital driver's licenses in Nevada, told her Thursday the information was not encrypted, and was readily accessible.

Miz Nakajima, Digimarc spokeswoman, said Friday she could not comment on specifics about state DMV customers or the Nevada theft. The publicly traded company provides a service Nakajima called "digital watermarking" to motor vehicle departments in 34 states and the District of Columbia.

All 21 Nevada DMV licensing stations around the state were ordered by the end of the day Friday to remove personal information from computers to prevent a recurrence, Lewis said.

The Nevada DMV planned to send certified letters by next week informing the 8,900 drivers who obtained licenses at the Donovan Way office in North Las Vegas that their personal information was in the hands of thieves.

The licenses of each motorist will be canceled and a new license will be issued with new identification numbers, Lewis said during a news conference outside the office at the end of a remote industrial road wedged between Interstate 15 and the Union Pacific railroad tracks.

Paul Masto, assistant special agent in charge of the U.S. Secret Service office in Las Vegas, said the agency was investigating. He urged those affected to take precautions against identity theft.

"That's the juicy stuff - the dates of birth, the Social Security numbers," Masto said. "They have that information. There's nothing we can do about that."

The Nevada DMV data theft comes after personal information was stolen from a database owned by the information broker LexisNexis and from the giant data broker ChoicePoint Inc. Another data loss affected some 1.2 million federal employees with Bank of America charge cards.

North Las Vegas police were following several leads in the DMV case, department spokesman Officer Tim Bedwell said. He said the initial investigation was hampered by the lack of video surveillance.

Lewis said she was seeking federal and state funds to install cameras at DMV offices throughout Nevada.

Police said thieves smashed a vehicle through a back wall of the office and escaped before police arrived a half-hour later.

In addition to the computer, thieves took a camera, 1,700 license blanks and laminated plastic covers bearing the embossed state seal.

Authorities said the equipment could be used to manufacture licenses virtually indistinguishable from legitimate Nevada driver's licenses.

The state's top homeland security adviser said he notified federal Homeland Security officials about the break-in.

Labor center ban, tuition bill for immigrants move ahead

The state House of Representatives on Thursday endorsed a pair of proposals targeting undocumented immigrants in Arizona.

Amid a debate over illegal border crossers, cheap labor, day-work centers and college education, Republicans easily moved both legislative plans forward.

The measures:

* House Bill 2264 would require undocumented students who live in Arizona but don't graduate from a high school here to pay out of state-of-state tuition to attend any of Arizona's public universities.

* House Bill 2592 would ban government-sponsored day-labor centers, reducing the options available to cities and towns to deal with the increasing number of undocumented immigrants who gather on city streets hoping to find work.

The bills face a final vote in the House before they are sent to the Senate.

Critics of banning publicly funded day centers said the proposal doesn't make financial sense because day laborers do everything from roofing to landscaping.

The bill bans cities, towns and counties from building or maintaining a work center that facilitates the hiring of undocumented immigrants.

Rep. Colette Rosati, R-Scottsdale, who sponsored the day-labor ban, didn't explain the reasoning behind her bill during House floor debate. But she has said day centers encourage illegal immigration.

"Once again, we ignore economic reality," said Rep. Ben Miranda, D-Phoenix, adding that immigrants clean Arizona's yards and help keep meals cheap.

Salvador Reza of Tonatierra, the non-profit group that runs the Macehualli Work Center near 25th Street and Bell Road in Phoenix, called lawmakers who voted for the bill "racists."

"This is the Mississippi of the West," Reza said after the House vote. "The racism of the 1960s is surfacing in Arizona."

The Phoenix center won't be affected because it is privately run. But Reza and others said the bill would put the brakes on efforts by cities to find ways to deal with day laborers.

House Bill 2264, offered by Rep. Chuck Gray, R-Mesa, would require immigrants living here illegally to pay out-of-state tuition at Arizona's public universities. Currently, they can pay in-state tuition, which is thousands of dollars less each year. His bill allows undocumented migrants who graduate from an Arizona high school to pay the lower tuition.

For instance, out-of-state tuition and fees for an undergraduate student during the 2004-05 academic year amounted to $12,917 at Arizona State University. Comparatively, resident undergraduate students paid $4,062

While it is uncertain how many immigrants would be affected, Democratic lawmakers who voted against the measure criticized it as an attempt to further plunge immigrants into the shadows without a formal education to help them out. Republicans backing the measure hailed it as necessary to stop government handouts to undocumented immigrants who they believe should not be here in the first place.

Again, Demo-Commies find themselves on the wrong side of common sense. What's wrong with curbing spending on CRIMINALS? What's wrong with stopping the encouragement of ILLEGAL ACTIVITY?

Why is it that Demo-Commies scream "Racism" and "Hate" when it comes to common sense laws like these? It's not a matter of racism. It's a matter of these people crossing the border illegally, staying here illegally and working here illegally.

Bravo to the Republican Party in Arizona for having the testicular fortitude to start beating back the flow of criminals into this country.

Illegals at power plant prompt call for legislation

Illegal aliens using false Social Security numbers were able to enter and work as contract painters at a power plant in Florida, including work near one nuclear reactor.

Officials at Progress Energy, which runs the Crystal River Energy Complex in Citrus County, say they followed federal regulations and that the contractor should have better vetted its employees.

Now a congresswoman is calling for hearings on how the lapse could have happened and calling for the Senate to pass a bill cracking down on illegal aliens' ability to obtain government identification.

"We certainly don't want to have one illegal alien at a nuclear power plant, let alone several," said Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida Republican. "According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Progress Energy did absolutely nothing wrong. They followed the guidelines. But in today's world, the terrorists are just itching to get at us. We need to have more assurances than just pass to the contractor that's been hired."

She said the incident illustrated the need for the Senate to pass the REAL ID act, which passed the House in February and sets national standards for the use of driver's licenses in federal facilities -- an incentive for states to make sure applicants are in the country legally.

Progress Energy said at least two workers used identification with false Social Security numbers to enter the facility as part of their contract job, and officials at the Florida Gulf Coast Building and Construction Trades Council said the number could be as high as seven.

The individuals worked for Brock Specialty Services, a Texas-based company that was hired to do maintenance at the facility.

Progress Energy spokesman Rick Kimble said the energy company followed the NRC's guidelines. "Point blank, it should not have happened. We obviously should be taking steps in the future to make sure it does not happen," he said. "But we followed the regulations that were required. We also think the contractor had an obligation to do pre-screening as well."

Brock officials couldn't be reached for comment.

Mr. Kimble said the NRC requires that persons admitted to power plants have valid government-issued identification, which these workers had. He said the men provided Social Security numbers to be matched against law-enforcement databases, but the false numbers the workers gave didn't raise any red flags.

He said the plant has four fossil fuel units and one reactor. He said just one person who submitted a false Social Security number had access to the nuclear unit, and he, like any other visitor, had a constant escort.

The building and construction union first raised the issue as part of a complaint about contractors at the power company. Michael J. Jeske, secretary-treasurer for the union, said no matter how the workers managed to gain access, something was broken.

"That doesn't give the local community a very good feeling, if you have a situation where undocumented foreigners can get access to a nuclear power plant and that doesn't violate anything," he said.

Sweet Merciful Jesus! They are letting people who are here illegally to work on Nuclear Power Plants!?!?! These people could be ANYONE, terrorists, criminals, etc...

Illegal aliens threaten U.S. medical system

Cristobal Silverio emigrated illegally from Mexico to Stockton, Calif., in 1997 to work as a fruit picker.

He brought with him his wife, Felipa, and three children, 19, 12 and 8 - all illegals. When Felipa gave birth to her fourth child, daughter Flor, the family had what is referred to as an "anchor baby" - an American citizen by birth who provided the entire Silverio clan a ticket to remain in the U.S. permanently.

But Flor was born premature, spent three months in the neonatal incubator and cost the San Joaquin Hospital more than $300,000. Meanwhile, oldest daughter Lourdes married an illegal alien gave birth to a daughter, too. Her name is Esmeralda. And Felipa had yet another child, Cristian.

The two Silverio anchor babies generate $1,000 per month in public welfare funding for the family. Flor gets $600 a month for asthma. Healthy Cristian gets $400. While the Silverios earned $18,000 last year picking fruit, they picked up another $12,000 for their two "anchor babies."

While President Bush says the U.S. needs more "cheap labor" from south of the border to do jobs Americans aren't willing to do, the case of the Silverios shows there are indeed uncalculated costs involved in the importation of such labor public support and uninsured medical costs.

In fact, the increasing number of illegal aliens coming into the United States is forcing the closure of hospitals, spreading previously vanquished diseases and threatening to destroy America's prized health-care system, says a report in the spring issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.

"The influx of illegal aliens has serious hidden medical consequences," writes Madeleine Pelner Cosman, author of the report. "We judge reality primarily by what we see. But what we do not see can be more dangerous, more expensive, and more deadly than what is seen."

According to her study, 84 California hospitals are closing their doors as a direct result of the rising number of illegal aliens and their non-reimbursed tax on the system.

"Anchor babies," the author writes, "born to illegal aliens instantly qualify as citizens for welfare benefits and have caused enormous rises in Medicaid costs and stipends under Supplemental Security Income and Disability Income."

In addition, the report says, "many illegal aliens harbor fatal diseases that American medicine fought and vanquished long ago, such as drug-resistant tuberculosis, malaria, leprosy, plague, polio, dengue, and Chagas disease."

While politicians often mention there are 43 million without health insurance in this country, the report estimates that at least 25 percent of those are illegal immigrants. The figure could be as high as 50 percent.

Not being insured does not mean they don't get medical care.

Under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1985, hospitals are obligated to treat the uninsured without reimbursement.

"Government imposes viciously stiff fines and penalties on any physician and any hospital refusing to treat any patient that a zealous prosecutor deems an emergency patient, even though the hospital or physician screened and declared the patient's illness or injury non-emergency," says the report. "But government pays neither hospital nor physician for treatments. In addition to the fiscal attack on medical facilities and personnel, EMTALA is a handy truncheon with which to pummel politically unpopular physicians by falsely accusing them of violating EMTALA."

According to the report, between 1993 and 2003, 60 California hospitals closed because half their services became unpaid. Another 24 California hospitals verge on closure, the author writes.

"American hospitals welcome 'anchor babies,'" says the report. "Illegal alien women come to the hospital in labor and drop their little anchors, each of whom pulls its illegal alien mother, father, and siblings into permanent residency simply by being born within our borders. Anchor babies are citizens, and instantly qualify for public welfare aid: Between 300,000 and 350,000 anchor babies annually become citizens because of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside."

Among the organizations directing illegal aliens into America's medical systems, according to the report, are the Ford Foundation-funded Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the National Immigration Law Center, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the American Bar Association's Commission on Immigration Policy, Practice, and Pro Bono, the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, the National Council of La Raza, George Soros's Open Society Institute, the Migration Policy Institute, the National Network for Immigration and Refugee Rights and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Because drug addiction and alcoholism are classified as diseases and disabilities, the fiscal toll on the health-care system rises.

When Linda Torres was arrested in Bakersfield, Calif., with about $8,500 in small bills in a sack, the police originally thought it was stolen money, explained the report. It was her Social Security lump sum for her disability -- heroin addiction.

"Today, legal immigrants must demonstrate that they are free of communicable diseases and drug addiction to qualify for lawful permanent residency green cards," writes Cosman, a medical lawyer, who formerly taught medical students at the City University of New York. "Illegal aliens simply cross our borders medically unexamined, hiding in their bodies any number of communicable diseases."

Many illegals entering this country have tuberculosis, according to the report.

"That disease had largely disappeared from America, thanks to excellent hygiene and powerful modern drugs such as isoniazid and rifampin," says the report. "TB's swift, deadly return now is lethal for about 60 percent of those infected because of new Multi-Drug Resistant Tuberculosis. Until recently MDR-TB was endemic to Mexico. This Mycobacterium tuberculosis is resistant to at least two major anti-tubercular drugs. Ordinary TB usually is cured in six months with four drugs that cost about $2,000. MDR-TB takes 24 months with many expensive drugs that cost around $250,000 with toxic side effects. Each illegal with MDR-TB coughs and infects 10 to 30 people, who will not show symptoms immediately. Latent disease explodes later.

TB was virtually absent in Virginia until in 2002, when it spiked a 17 percent increase, but Prince William County, just south of Washington, D.C., had a much larger rise of 188 percent. Public health officials blamed immigrants. In 2001 the Indiana School of Medicine studied an outbreak of MDR-TB, and traced it to Mexican illegal aliens. The Queens, New York, health department attributed 81 percent of new TB cases in 2001 to immigrants. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ascribed 42 percent of all new TB cases to 'foreign born' people who have up to eight times higher incidences apparently, 66 percent of all TB cases coming to America originate in Mexico, the Philippines and Vietnam."

Other health threats from illegals include, according to the report:

Chagas disease, also called American trypanosomiasis or "kissing bug disease," is transmitted by the reduviid bug, which prefers to bite the lips and face. The protozoan parasite that it carries, Trypanosoma cruzi, infects 18 million people annually in Latin America and causes 50,000 deaths. The disease also infiltrates America's blood supply. Chagas affects blood transfusions and transplanted organs. No cure exists. Hundreds of blood recipients may be silently infected.

Leprosy, also known as Hansen's disease, was so rare in America that in 40 years only 900 people were afflicted. Suddenly, in the past three years America has more than 7,000 cases of leprosy. Leprosy now is endemic to northeastern states because illegal aliens and other immigrants brought leprosy from India, Brazil, the Caribbean and Mexico.

Dengue fever is exceptionally rare in America, though common in Ecuador, Peru, Vietnam, Thailand, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Mexico. Recently, according to the report, there was a virulent outbreak of dengue fever in Webb County, Texas, which borders Mexico. Though dengue is usually not a fatal disease, dengue hemorrhagic fever routinely kills.

Polio was eradicated from America, but now reappears in illegal immigrants as do intestinal parasites, says the report.

Malaria was obliterated, but now is re-emerging in Texas.

The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons report includes a strong prescription for protecting the health of Americans:

Closing America's borders with fences, high-tech security devices and troops.
Rescinding the U.S. citizenship of "anchor babies," punishing the aiding and abetting of illegal aliens as a crime, and an end to amnesty programs.

Easter Bunny Targeted by the PC Movement

2005-03-14T16:06:00.000-05:00

The Culture War gears up after a short break with he passing of Christmas. Now the completely secular Easter Bunny is under assault.

Shopping malls neutralizing secular symbol of Christian holiday

The Easter bunny has hopped into the crosshairs of the PC police.

It's a rite of Spring in most suburban shopping malls for youngsters to participate in Easter egg hunts or pose for photos with the Easter Bunny with the same fervor they had for sitting on Santa's lap during the Christmas holiday season.

But in the name of "multiculturalism," malls are phasing out the secular symbol of the Christian holiday.

Taking stock of malls throughout Palm Beach County, Fla., the Palm Beach Post discovered the Easter festivities held last weekend and scheduled for this weekend are being supervised by Baxter the Bunny, Peter Rabbit, and Garden Bunny.

"The name just complemented The Gardens of the Palm Beaches," mall marketing director Jeannie Roberts told the paper in explanation of the third name.

Mall officials at Town Center in Boca Raton, Fla., admitted to caving in to concern over what could be perceived as religious promotion.

First the Secular-Progressives got their foot in the door by bringing the ACLU and other groups in to target the government and it's observance of two religiously themed holidays, and now they've begun the assault on the private sector.

First, a little background.

Christmas Day is not the day that Jesus Christ was born. Most people who actually study religious history (as opposed to those who just study their preacher's sermons) agree that Jesus was born in the late summer or early fall. Most agree that August is more likely the month due to passages in the bible that tell of the shepherds and what they were doing at the moment of Jesus' birth.

Early Christians adopted the completely pagan celebration of Christmas to celebrate the birth of their savior because celebrating anything but the pagan religion of the Roman Empire was illegal and punishable by death. Thus, they used the Roman/Pagan holiday to celebrate their own god and did so with pagan rituals such as the giving of gifts and such.

Likewise, Easter was a completely Roman/Pagan celebration that was adopted by early Christians.

Ask yourself what a Big pink bunny rabbit and colored eggs has to do with Jesus Christ.

Each of these so called religious holidays PRE-DATE Christianity by hundreds, if not thousands of years. They are celebrated by religions OTHER than Christianity and are called different things in different regions of the world.

"Because we're such a multicultural community, it's good just to remain neutral," mall general manager Sam Hosen said, according to the paper.

Another mall manager expressed apprehension over her decision to stick to tradition, hosting an Easter egg hunt complete with a cotton-tailed Easter bunny.

"I suppose the name Easter Bunny is fairly unusual," Boynton Beach mall manager Andrea Horne said. "I know it's probably not the popular thing to call it."

Although Easter and the Easter Bunny have origins in the Anglo-Saxon pagan celebration of spring, over the centuries they became associated by Christians with the resurrection of Jesus.

So now the march is no. The Secular-Progressives continue to tell us that our traditions and beliefs are dangerous because someone might be offended. This country has been so damaged by the "Policically Correct" movement that we've all become pussies.

We're offended by everything. Someone is offended by this or that and thus we all much give up our rights. Right Wing religious conservatives are offended by Howard Stern so he must be taken off the air, regardless of the fact that MILLIONS of people tune in regularly, of their own free will to hear Howard Stern. Some atheist stands up and says they are offended by Christmas so it must be changed. Before long, we won't celebrate Christmas, but rather the "Non-denominationally capitalistic winter retail holiday." Don't laugh... We're almost there.

Someone, somewhere will be offended by something. You simply cannot keep everyone happy and diminishing the rights of the majority because someone in the minority objects is absolutely insane. I'm an agnostic and I don't sweat someone displaying the cross or a nativity scene. Likewise, I expect that they not sweat my right to watch South Park.

If you don't want to look at a cross, then look away. If you don't like a television program, turn the channel. If you don't like a movie, don't go watch it. If you don't like the content of a song, then don't listen to it. If the radio disk jockey is offensive to you, then change the channel.

You cannot ban everything that someone is offended by, otherwise it won't be long until what you enjoy and hold dear will be found offensive to someone else.

I find Political Correctness offensive, and I hereby begin the movement to have it banned.

Debunking the 9/11 Myths

2005-03-14T15:33:00.000-05:00

Popular Mechanics has placed it's AWESOME article on the TRUTH about the myths of the 9/11 attacks on it's website. I urge everyone to go out and get the edition of Popular Mechanics or visit the ONLINE ARTICLE and look at what really happened and then re-examine the myths and conspiracies that have sprung up in the wake of that horrible day.

Colorado to Dump Christian Professor

2005-03-09T14:56:00.000-05:00

What the HELL is wrong with universities these days? First we're all force fed Ward Churchill and how his beliefs and position are protected by First Amendment, and now we are shown what happens to conservative and religious professors at the same university...

Popular award-winner claims political, religious reasons
While University of Colorado officials defend controversial professor Ward Churchill in the name of free speech, an evangelical Christian professor at the school claims he's about to be dismissed for religious or political reasons.

Professor Phil Mitchell, who has a doctorate in American social history from the university, says he recently was informed his contract would not be renewed after this year because "his teaching was not up to the department standards," according to Denver Post columnist David Harsanyi.

So, tell me; What's wrong with Mr. Mitchell's teaching?

Mitchell, winner in 1998 of the prestigious SOAR Award for teacher of the year, told the columnist he has wondered how long he would last.

"I've had enough. I am clearly being closed out for political or religious reasons," Mitchell says. "I am one of the top-rated professors in the history of the department."

A colleague, William Wei, described by Harsanyi as "hardly a conservative," said, "Phil is a great person, a good teacher and highly regarded by his students."

Harsanyi said Mitchell, who has taught at the Hallett Diversity Program for 24 straight semesters, upset the head of the department by presenting a diverse opinion.

After quoting respected black intellectual Thomas Sowell in a discussion about affirmative action, Mitchell was berated as a racist.

So it seems that if you site a conservative opinion that comes from a conservative black man (Sowell is a VERY intelligent conservative thinker and, GASP, black) then according to the Loony-Liberal Demo-Commies you are a racist.

"That would have come as a surprise to my black children," said Mitchell, who has nine children, two of them adopted African-Americans.

Then, says Harsanyi, the professor used a book on liberal Protestantism in the late 19th century.

Harsanyi writes: "So repulsed by the word 'god' was one student, she complained, and the department chair fired him without a meeting."

The columnist points out that unlike Churchill's case, there was no protest by faculty and students.

So one complaint was enough to warrant his termination from his teaching position? What about the THOUSANDS of complaints lodged against Churchill? Why has he not been fired yet? The difference is that the administration of the university AGREES with Churchill and despise conservative ideas...

Mitchell later was reinstated, Harsanyi said, but never was able to teach in the history department again.

"People say liberals run the university. I wish they did," Mitchell told the Denver columnist. "Most liberals understand the need for intellectual diversity. It's the radical left that kills you."

Mitchell said he has stuck it out this long "to create enthusiasm and love for history. And I am successful at that. I love the classroom, and I love my students."

Controversy erupted around Churchill last month, when one of his essays made it into the national spotlight.

Written shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, it describes the thousands of American victims who died in the World Trade Center inferno as "little Eichmanns" - a reference to notorious Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann - who were perpetuating America's "mighty engine of profit." They were destroyed, he added, thanks to the "gallant sacrifices" of "combat teams" that successfully targeted the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon.

Churchill resigned his position as head of the Colorado University ethnic studies program but kept his $96,000 per year teaching post. He steadfastly has refused to apologize for his comments.

He's also come under fire for claiming an American Indian heritage, training terrorists, and meeting with Libya's Moammar Gadhafi in the 1980s when the U.S. had banned travel there.

In addition, he's accused of writing essays with passages "almost identical" to those of other authors and of copying an original art piece and claiming it as his own.

The University of Colorado Regents is probing whether Churchill has violated tenure and expects to announce a decision this month.

Probing whether or not he violated tenure? What the hell!?!?! You fire a guy for using a book about religion and this guy is propped up and protected because he hates America... I fear for the sanity and common sense of future generations who are attending college today.

Illegal Immigration update: 3-9-05

2005-03-09T04:17:00.000-05:00

More News on the Invasion of America!

Border Tunnel Discovered In Upscale Neighborhood

Federal authorities from San Diego are investigating a border tunnel discovered by Mexican authorities over the weekend, it was reported Monday.

The tunnel connected a luxurious Mexicali residence to neighboring Calexico in Imperial County, officials with the Mexican Federal Attorney General's Office told The San Diego Union-Tribune.

Inside the passageway, investigators discovered lighting and ventilation equipment, a closed-circuit security system, hydraulic machinery and various tools, Mexican authorities told the newspaper.

The finding led agents to believe that the tunnel was presumably used for drug trafficking, Mexican authorities told the Union-Tribune.

A middle section of the tunnel was initially discovered in the United States early Friday by U.S. Border Patrol agents checking for tunnels in a residential area of Calexico, the newspaper reported. It is the third tunnel found in Calexico in the past 15 months.

U.S. investigators searched for the tunnel's other end, Lauren Mack, a spokeswoman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in San Diego told the Union-Tribune.

"This is an ongoing criminal investigation, and we're still trying to locate a possible exit to the U.S.," Mack told the newspaper.

On the Mexican side, the tunnel's entrance was found Saturday by agents from Mexico's Federal Agency of Investigation, the newspaper reported. The entrance led from the bedroom of a house about 100 yards from the border in an upscale neighborhood known as Colonia Nueva.

I wonder how they could afford that nice upscale house?

Driver, 6 entrants arrested after 60-mile high-speed chase

Border Patrol agents arrested six illegal entrants and the driver of a sport utility vehicle Saturday morning after a high-speed chase over 60 miles that started near Arivaca, went through Park Place and ended in a Midtown neighborhood.

Border Patrol spokesman Rob Daniels said agents tried to pull over the vehicle on a stretch of Arivaca Road "traditionally used for drug and aliens smuggling" at about 7:30 a.m. The driver of the vehicle refused to stop.

Daniels said a Border Patrol helicopter followed the fleeing SUV northbound on Interstate 19, allowing the ground units to back off.

The SUV exited Interstate 10 eastbound at Congress Street, at times driving the wrong way on one-way streets, Daniels said.

Sgt. Carlos Valdez, a Tucson Police Department spokesman, said Tucson police units were not directly involved in the pursuit, but said there were reports of the SUV, at times, exceeding 100 mph on city streets.

Daniels said Border Patrol agents arrested the six illegal entrants when they were dropped off at Park Place mall, in the 5800 block of East Broadway.

He said the driver was arrested a short time later in the back yard of a house on East Eastland Street near South Swan Road.

Daniels said there was conflicting information on whether the driver was a U.S. or Mexican citizen, but he said neighbors near the house where the driver was captured were familiar with the man.

But that's not all! Wait there's more!

Showdown at border?
Violent, terror-connected gang threatens to confront civilian immigration patrols

It looks like there is going to be a second "showdown at the OK Corral" in Tombstone, Ariz., April 1.

A leader of the violent, terror-connected Latin American gang Mara Salvatruchas, Ebner Anivel Rivera-Paz, has reportedly issued orders from federal prison to members of his international criminal organization to teach a lesson to a group of Americans taking border control into their own hands.

The American civilians, known as the "Minutemen," say they have some 750 volunteers ready to show up in Tombstone to start policing the border and dealing with illegal immigration.

The Mara Salvatruchas, founded in Los Angeles, has become one of the most violent and widespread gangs throughout South America, the U.S. and even Canada. Many of its members and leaders have been deported from the U.S., but the group is said to be deeply involved in cross-border arms-running and drug-smuggling operations, according to U.S. law enforcement sources.

Lately, the gang has joined forces with former members of the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front, a radical terrorist group, and some U.S. intelligence sources say they may also be cooperating with Islamic terrorist groups – including al-Qaida.

Meanwhile, the Minutemen hope to form a group of civilians from all walks of life to patrol the border day and night – even with the threat of such violence. Their goal is stop the flow of illegal immigration through the Arizona-Mexico border, the biggest entry point into the U.S.

Jim Gilchrist of Orange County, Calif., is leading the project.

"I struck the mother lode of nationalism," he told a local TV station. "I thought I would be lucky to get 12 volunteers. In six months, I've gotten almost 500."

The target is a 230-mile stretch of desert along the Arizona-Mexico border. Some people call the area "America's Open Door." Along this section of the border, more than 43 percent of all illegal entries to the U.S. take place.

Last year, the Tucson Border Patrol apprehended 491,000. But for every person caught, immigration sources say, at least five walk in undetected.

"We're going to set up at least 40 maybe 80 outposts, four to six people per outpost 24/7, looking for people who are infiltrating over that border," said Gilchrist.

To do this, Gilchrist is amassing people from all walks of life to spend a month camped out on the border.

But some say taking the work of border patrol into their own hands could be deadly. While Gilchrist stresses non-violence, he doesn't rule out the possibility that many of his volunteers will be armed.

"Ten percent of our members are retired law enforcement officers who have a right to carry a concealed weapon. They probably will carry and you won't know it," he said.

But Andy Adame with the U.S. Border Patrol in Tucson warned "people are going to get hurt." Adame said many of these volunteers don't know what they're in for.

"When you have untrained civilians, that are armed, that are out in the middle of the desert, in the middle of the night, in the dark, and they meet up with one of these smuggling organizations ... you're going to have a gun fight," said Adame.

Border patrol agents have seen a growing problem with violence in recent years. Agents have been attacked by frustrated smugglers with rocks, bricks, even automatic weapons.

According to authorities, violence along the Tucson sector has climbed to an all-time high.

"Bringing untrained civilians into this border environment is a recipe for disaster," said Adame.

But that has not deterred many of the volunteers.

The Minutemen even have an air force. They plan to use about two dozen aircraft to patrol the skies near the border.

Rivera-Paz was arrested three weeks ago and is accused of murdering more than two dozen people in Honduras. He was wanted in connection with the December bus massacre of 28 people, including six children, in San Pedro Sula, Honduras.

The Mara Salvatruchas identify themselves with tattoos, such as "MS" or the numbers 13 and 18, signifying their relationship to the gang. The gang formed in the United States in the 1980s in a Los Angeles prison. The 13 and 18 signify the city streets in L.A. where they hung out.

U.S. officials are concerned the gang members might help sneak al-Qaida terrorists into America.

Rivera-Paz was charged with illegally entering the United States after being deported, but is expected to be extradited to Honduras to face charges in connection with the bus massacre.

Now what is is called when Armed Militants enter the country without announcing their arrival until they encounter resistance then begin engaging it gun battles? Sounds an awful lot like an invasion, doesn't it?

If the United States government and the United States Military isn't going to stop this invasion, then it is the right of the Militia to do the job.

Wait, it get's better...

FBI chief warns of aliens from al-Qaida-tied nations
Illegals 1st get false identity in Brazil, then enter Mexico, cross U.S. border

Adding information to previous reports about terrorists crossing the southern border, FBI Director Robert Mueller told a congressional panel today that illegal aliens from countries with ties to al-Qaida have crossed into the U.S. from Mexico using false identities.

Mueller says some of the aliens are people with Middle Eastern names who have adopted Hispanic last names before coming into the U.S.

"We are concerned, Homeland Security is concerned about special interest aliens entering the United States," Mueller said.

"Special interest aliens" are those from countries where al-Qaida is known to be active, the Associated Press reported.

Mueller said one route takes Middle Easterners to Brazil, where they assume false identities before entering Mexico and then crossing into the U.S.

Bush administration officials have previously said al-Qaida could try to infiltrate the United States through the Mexican border.

Mueller stopped short of confirming that terrorists had entered illegally via Mexico, but said it's believed people from countries where al-Qaida is active have done so.

AP reported Adm. James Loy, deputy Homeland Security secretary, told Congress recently that al-Qaida operatives believe they can pay to get into the country through Mexico and that entering illegally is "more advantageous than legal entry."

Last year, Pentagon officials confirmed human smuggling rings in Latin America were attempting to sneak al-Qaida operatives into the U.S., information first reported in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin more than a year before.

As WorldNetDaily and G2 Bulletin reported, Arabic-speaking visitors carrying European passports often gather at the triple border region where Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay meet. This region, often described as a lawless area, is nicknamed by some intelligence station agents as "The Muslim Triangle meeting zone." Some of these "Europeans" cannot even speak the language of their so-called motherland.

Also reported by WND, criminal gangsters, revolutionaries and Islamic terrorists are working together to overthrow governments of U.S. neighbors and smuggle operatives into and out of the U.S.

And if that wasn't enough, the Mexican Government continues it's war on America by asking us to uphold the law and protect illegal immigrants trying to sneak into the country while turning our back on the laws making what they are doing a crime.

Mexico seeks protection for illegals

The Mexican government has asked U.S. officials to ensure illegal-immigration protesters patrolling the Arizona border next month do not abuse Mexican nationals caught illegally entering the United States.

In a diplomatic note to U.S. officials, Geronimo Gutierrez, undersecretary for North American affairs at Mexico's Foreign Ministry, suggested it was "very probable" the protesters could violate the rights of illegal aliens, and that they must be monitored.

"What there is concern about is that some of these actions that could be taken could be in violation of federal and state laws to the detriment of Mexican citizens," Mr. Gutierrez said. "Mexico doesn't want the rights of its citizens transgressed, especially if those actions are in violation of federal and state laws."

Earlier this year, Mr. Gutierrez was involved in the distribution of about 1.5 million comic-book guides that warned Mexican nationals about the dangers of crossing illegally into the United States and offered tips on how to stay safe. It was published by Mexico's Foreign Relations Department.

The volunteers will spend 30 days on the Arizona-Mexico border beginning April 1 as part of what has been called the "Minuteman Project." The protest is aimed at highlighting what the volunteers call the United States' failure at immigration enforcement.

James Gilchrist, a project organizer, yesterday said the volunteers would be posted along the border to observe illegal aliens coming into this country and report them to the U.S. Border Patrol. He said none of the volunteers, some of whom will be armed, will attempt to confront the aliens, and those who do will be sent home.

"Currently, about 5,000 'unapprehended' illegal aliens trespass the Arizona-Mexico border daily, and another 5,000 invade the United States from the Texas, California and New Mexico borders. That's 10,000 a day ... over 3 million a year," said Mr. Gilchrist.

The event "will tune the American people into the shameful fact that 21st century minutemen/women have to help secure U.S. borders because the U.S. government refuses to provide our dutiful Border Patrol with the manpower and funding required to do so," said Mr. Gilchrist, a retired certified public accountant in California.

The list of volunteers has more than tripled over the past month and includes representatives from every state, including 10 from Virginia and two from Maryland.

Focusing on a 20-mile stretch of border lowlands in the San Pedro River Valley, near Naco, Ariz., 90 miles southeast of Tucson, the volunteers will be assigned to ground observation posts, aerial surveillance from 16 aircraft and a communications center to report illegal aliens crossing into the country.

The targeted area has become a high-traffic corridor for illegal aliens because it has water, level ground, places to camp and wood to burn.

"Volunteers of the Minuteman Project will assemble under the First Amendment and protest their disappointment with federal, state and local political representatives who have deliberately neglected and avoided the enforcement of immigration laws," Mr. Gilchrist said. "If the United States is to be heralded as a nation ruled by law, then it must actually enforce its laws.

"Anything less would relegate this great nation to dictator or mob rule ... something the Founding Fathers ingeniously sought to prevent," he said.

More than 1.15 million illegal aliens were apprehended last year by the Border Patrol while attempting to enter the United States. Nearly 40 percent of them were detained in southern Arizona along a 260-mile stretch of border known as the Tucson sector.

Federal and state law-enforcement authorities have expressed concern over the safety of the volunteers, many of whom will camp out along the border.

Tucson Sector Border Patrol Chief Michael Nicely has said the agency is "always concerned about civilians who put themselves in danger," adding that alien and drug smugglers who use the area to bring their illicit cargo into the United States have not hesitated to assault his agents.

Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever, whose jurisdiction includes the targeted area, also has warned of violence and has told those participating in the blockade to obey the law.

Heteronormativity - You're Damned Right!

2005-03-09T02:07:00.000-05:00

As you may have heard, Jada Pinkett Smith gave a speech at Harvard last Saturday in which she had the unmitigated gall to say "Women, you can have it all — a loving man, devoted husband, loving children, a fabulous career. They say you gotta choose. Nah, nah, nah. We are a new generation of women. We got to set a new standard of rules around here. You can do whatever it is you want. All you have to do is want it. To my men, open your mind, open your eyes to new ideas. Be open."

Shortly thereafter, the Loony-Leftist Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, and Supporters Alliance (BGLTSA) and the Harvard Foundation for Intercultural and Race Relations came out swinging: "Some of the content was extremely heteronormative, and made BGLTSA members feel uncomfortable," and "Our position is that the comments weren't homophobic, but the content was specific to male-female relationships," and "I think the comments had a very strong focus for an extended period of time on how to effectively be in a relationship - a heterosexual relationship. I don't think she meant to be offensive but I just don't think she was that thoughtful."

Have you ever heard of "heteronormativity?" Well, it's the new "catch phrase" of the Gay and Lesbian movement. So, what does Heteronormativity mean?

Heteronormativity is a term used in the discussion of gender and society, mostly, but not exclusively within the field of critical theory. It is used to describe, and, frequently, to criticize how many social institutions and social policies are seen to reinforce certain beliefs. These include the belief that human beings fall into two distinct and complementary categories, male and female; that sexual and marital relations are normal only when between two people of different genders; and that each gender has certain natural roles in life. Thus, physical sex, gender identity, and gender roles, should in any given person all align to either male or female norms, and heterosexuality is considered to be the only normal sexual orientation. The norms this term describes or criticizes might be overt, covert, or implied. Those who identify and criticize heteronormativity say that it distorts discourse by stigmatizing alternative concepts of both sexuality and gender, and makes certain types of self-expression more difficult.

I'm not shitting you, my loyal readers, this is REAL!

I'm going to break this one as hard and as permanently as I can.

First off. Why is Heteronormativity a negative idea? One need only look as far as their crotches to learn that men and women fall on one side or the other of the Gender fence. Sure there are a few people every so often born with both sexual organs, but most often, you either have a penis and are a man or have a vagina and are a woman.

Nature dictates that you will eventually figure out that stimulation of your sexual organs feels good and thus you will discover sex. What you do with the sexual organs you end up with is your own business, and yes, that includes homosexuals. If you figure out that your attracted to women and can find a woman that is attracted to you then go for it! No one really cares what or who you have sex with so long as they can consent to the activity (except maybe the Religious Right.

Many governments and official agencies have also been criticized as having heteronormative systems that classify people into "male" and "female" genders in problematic ways. Different jurisdictions use different definitions of gender, including by genitalia, DNA, hormone levels (including some official sports bodies), or birth sex (which means one's gender cannot ever be officially changed). Sometimes gender reassignment surgery is a requirement for an official gender change, and often "male" and "female" are the only choices available, even for intersexed or transgendered people. Because most governments only allow heterosexual marriages, official gender changes can have implications for related rights and privileges, such as child custody, inheritance, and medical decision-making.

This is common sense. It's not discrimination. Let me explain:

The species is made up of ONLY two sexes. There are only two options. You either have a penis or a vagina, and the the species procreates by a very specific set of rules; insert the penis into the vagina, remove, repeat, ejaculate and then wait. It's so simple that only an academic over-achiever could find a way to complicate it.

That said, Heteronormativity is defined as the 'belief' in these simple truths.

Here are the facts:

1. You are born with the sexual organs of a man or a woman, with rare exceptions.
2. The species reproduces itself via the sexual interaction of a man and a woman.

There, see how simple? Heteronormativity is the NATURAL ORDER OF LIFE. It's not a belief or an ideology, it's not an opinion or open for discussion. The word itself is the bastard child of the words "Heterosexuality" and "Normal." Not only is Heterosexuality normal, but it's the natural order of life.

If everyone were to wake up tomorrow and find themselves all suddenly homosexual, the Human race would cease to exist within a generation. THAT is a fact. One need not consult the Bible to see this. I'm an agnostic/atheist type and I can see it. One need not search the feelings of their "inner child" to determine the FACTS of the case. It's not open for debate and not dependent on your feelings on the matter.

John Adams once said "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

The Left believes that everything turns on their opinions, their passions and their beliefs. The left is really unable to understand the nature of facts or evidence. To them, facts are things to be spun or to be ignored in favor of feelings or emotions or "feel good" alternatives so that they and their supporters can feel good about their misguided mindset. Thus, it's more important to embrace the FEELINGS of a minority than it is to embrace the FACTS of the matter at hand.

Ask a liberal or a Demo-Commie about an issue and you get a lot of "I feel" and "I think" and "They say." They avoid FACTS at all costs.

Facts are indeed stubborn things. No matter how you feel about the fact, the sky is still blue. No matter how passionate you are about the fact, the sun in the center of our solar system. These things are facts and no opinions or emotions can change them.

Were Jada's comments Heteronormative? You bet your ass they were! And you know what? She was right. Why is that so offensive to the Gay and Lesbian members of Harvard or society in general? Could it be because they know it's true as well?

This concept was formulated for use in the exploration and critique of the traditional norms of sex, gender identity, gender roles and sexuality, and of the social implications of those institutions.
Originally conceived to describe the norms against which non-heterosexuals struggle, it quickly became incorporated into both the gender and the transgender debate. It is also often used in postmodernist and feminist debates. Those who use this concept frequently point to the difficulty posed to those who hold a dichotomous view of sexuality by the presence of clear exceptions -- from freemartins in the bovine world to intersexual human beings with the sexual characteristics of both sexes. These exceptions are taken as direct evidence that neither sex nor gender are concepts that can be reduced to an either/or proposition.

Gay cows? Sexual characteristics of both sexes? Has someone been watching On-The-Farm and Tranny-Porn again? To have the sexual characteristics on both sexes, one would have to have both a vagina and a penis... There are two sexual characteristics for the human race, male and female. That's it. Sexual preference isn't a characteristic of one's sexuality. It is a choice that is made. It's called sexual preference because that's what it is, a preference. Notice how they call it a "struggle against the norms" which translates roughly as the struggle against the normal for those readers who have not attended college.

I'm no Homophobe. I have had many friends and acquaintances that are gay or bisexual. I'm not uncomfortable around gay or lesbian people. I support their rights to live their lives like all the rest of us. I even think that there should be civil unions, but stop short of compromising the Heterosexual Tradition that is Marriage. Come on, take Civil Unions and stop trying to destroy heterosexual tradition... You're just going to bring more people down on you...

Folks, I love ya in a completely friendly and heterosexual way, but that does not change the facts. I don't care what you do with your sexual organs or those of your partner, be they man or woman. As such, I expect that you don't really care what I do with my heterosexual mate. So if we both don't care and we both are getting what we want in the sex department, why don't we just not broadcast to the world who and what we are doing?

If the Gay and Lesbian lobby really wants to end discrimination, why don't they just shut the hell up about who and what they are doing and leave it in the bedroom like the rest of us do?

In a heteronormative society, the binary choice of male and female for one's gender identity is viewed as leading to a lack of possible choice about one's gender role and sexual identity. Also, as part of the norms established by society for both genders, is the requirement that the individuals should feel and/or express desire only for partners of the opposite sex. In other critiques, such as the work of Eve Sedgwick, this heteronormative pairing is viewed as defining sexual orientation exclusively in terms of the sex/gender of the person one chooses to have sex with, ignoring other preferences one might have about sex.

In a heteronormative society, men and women are interpreted to be natural complements, socially as well as biologically, and especially when it comes to reproduction. Woman and men are necessary for procreation, therefore male/female coupling is assumed to be the norm.

The concept of heteronormativity seeks to make visible the underlying norms or "normal" society. It questions the common and often tightly held notion that only what is statistically typical is normal and good. It embraces the notion (in the philosophy of ethics) that "is does not imply ought."

It embraces the "notion" that only that which is "statistically typical" is normal and good? What the HELL is that? Homosexuals and Transgendered people make up less than 1 percent of all people on the planet. It's not a notion to accept that heterosexual sex is normal. It's the way the human race reproduces. It can't be anything BUT the norm. Listen to this Psycho Babble... It's astonishing what they are teaching our kids these days...

So, if ever in your life someone accuses you of being Heteronormative, thank them and remind them that while they may not believe you're right, one need only see how the Human species reproduces to KNOW that you ARE right. Nature herself dictates that sexual interaction between males and females is required to continue the human race. Thus, heterosexuality is both normal and natural and should not be frowned upon because you don't like it or don't feel the same way. It simply is.

So, say it loud and say it proud; I am heteronormative!

It's now a Crime to Write Fiction Involving a School!

2005-03-08T21:09:00.000-05:00

I know it's Kentucky and all, but Sweet Jesus!

Student Arrested For Terroristic Threatening Says Incident A Misunderstanding

A George Rogers Clark High School junior arrested Tuesday for making terrorist threats told LEX 18 News Thursday that the "writings" that got him arrested are being taken out of context.

Winchester police say William Poole, 18, was taken into custody Tuesday morning. Investigators say they discovered materials at Poole's home that outline possible acts of violence aimed at students, teachers, and police.

Poole told LEX 18 that the whole incident is a big misunderstanding. He claims that what his grandparents found in his journal and turned into police was a short story he wrote for English class.

"My story is based on fiction," said Poole, who faces a second-degree felony terrorist threatening charge. "It's a fake story. I made it up. I've been working on one of my short stories, (and) the short story they found was about zombies. Yes, it did say a high school. It was about a high school over ran by zombies."

Okay, sounds innocent enough to me so far. Where is the Crime? Is it now Illegal in Kentucky to write a short story about Zombies going to School to get a bite to eat?

Are we not protected by the first amendment and freedom of expression?

Even so, police say the nature of the story makes it a felony. "Anytime you make any threat or possess matter involving a school or function it's a felony in the state of Kentucky," said Winchester Police detective Steven Caudill.

Holy Shit! They're serious! It's actually a felony in Kentucky to write a story that involves violence and schools... How screwed up is that? When I was in School, I kid you not, I was one of those kids who would probably been locked up. I had a "Wish I could Kill list," wrote violent stories about the people I disliked, turned in artwork of graveyards with student names on the tombstones, and laughed my ass off through the Auto-Body and Woodshop safety videos, finding the imagery and gruesomely FAKE gore absolutely hilarious.

This whole issue of School violence has been blown completely our of proportion. In all reality, you are TWICE as likely to be struck by lightning than to have a child involved in some way in a shoot shooting or school violence.

And what does this say about the curriculums at our schools. Macbeth and Julius Caesar are two VERY violent and VERY morbid pieces of literature that is REQUIRED for all students... Why, it's art!

But, let a student write a violent story or a story that involves a school (just any school will do) it's a felony in Kentucky! Wow... Just wow.

Poole disputes that he was threatening anyone.

"It didn't mention nobody who lives in Clark County, didn't mention (George Rogers Clark High School), didn't mention no principal or cops, nothing," said Poole. "Half the people at high school know me. They know I'm not that stupid, that crazy."

On Thursday, a judge raised Poole's bond from one to five thousand dollars after prosecutors requested it, citing the seriousness of the charge.

Poole is being held at the Clark County Detention Center.

Can you believe this? They have a student in jail with a $5,000 bond for writing a Zombie story... The Crime was SO SERIOUS that they had to raise his bond. Let me say this again so it can sink in; The crime of writing a story is SO SERIOUS that his bond had to be raised to $5,000 so that he couldn't let this dangerous author get away!

$5,000 bond! I know people who drove Get-a-way cars for arsonists and led the Police on a three county chase who got a $5,000 bond. This kid wrote a story and it wasn't even found at school. It was at his home, in a Journal, by his grandparents who are obviously idiots.

Now if there is evidence of some further plot to raise Zombies and attack the high school he was attending and if they indeed find some Voodoo materials and "How to Make a Zombie for Dumbies" in his room, then I fully support the actions undertaken by the State (hahahahaha) of Kentucky.

Of course, if they end up holding this kid and charging him with a Felony for writing a story, I'll support his HUGE lawsuit that will be in the pipes.

Could the Russians have moved Iraqi WMDs?

2005-03-08T18:21:00.000-05:00

Russia Moved Iraqi WMD

According to a former top Bush administration official, Russian special forces teams moved weapons of mass destruction out of Iraq to Syria.

"I am absolutely sure that Russian Spetsnatz units moved WMD out of Iraq before the war," stated John Shaw, the former deputy undersecretary for international technology security.

According to Shaw, Russian units hid Saddam's arsenal inside Syria and in Lebanon's Bekka valley.

"While in Iraq I uncovered detailed information that Spetsnatz units shredded records and moved all WMD and specified advanced munitions out of Iraq to Syria and Lebanon," stated Shaw during an exclusive interview.

"I received information from several sources naming the exact Russian units, what they took and where they took both WMD materials and conventional explosives. Moscow made a 2001 agreement with Saddam Hussein to clear up all Russian involvement in WMD systems in Iraq," stated Shaw.

Shaw's assertions match the information provided by U.S. military forces that satellite surveillance showed extensive large-vehicle traffic crossing the Syrian border prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Shaw's information also backs allegations by a wide variety of sources of Russia's direct involvement in Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program. One U.N. bioterrorism expert announced that Russia has been Iraq's "main supplier of the materials and know-how to weaponize anthrax, botulism and smallpox."

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Robert Goldberg cited former U.N. weapons inspector Richard Spertzel, who stated that Moscow supplied Baghdad with fermentation equipment to produce biotoxins.

According to Spertzel, the Russians on the U.N. inspection team in Iraq were "paranoid" about his efforts to uncover smallpox production.

Goldberg noted that no country has "done more to rebuild" Saddam's chemical and biological weapons programs or "been more aggressive in helping hide the truth" than Russia.

It is a fact that Saddam Hussein rose to power backed by Russian weapons and Russian money. Saddam was in debt to Moscow for over $8 billion for the arms he purchased from Russia when he was captured by U.S. forces.

The primary Iraqi chemical weapons were VX nerve gas and mustard gas, a blistering agent, both obtained from Russia.

According to the book "Russian Military Power," published in 1982, "It is known that the Soviets maintain stocks of CW (chemical weapons) agents."

The two primary Russian chemical weapons in the 1982 Soviet inventory were the nerve agent "VX" and "blistering agents - developments of mustard gas used so effectively in World War I."

Iraq did most of its WMD killing using Russian-made MiG and Sukhoi aircraft equipped with chemical sprayers. In addition, Saddam used French-made artillery and helicopters to dump gas on Iranian troops and Iraqi Kurds.

Iraq obtained Russian delivery systems and the same inventory of Russian-made chemical weapons at the same time. Iraqi SU-22 Fitter attack jets were armed with Warsaw Pact-designed bombs filled with chemical weapons. Iraq used these Russian jet fighters to drop chemical weapons on Iranian troops during the Iran-Iraq war.

Iraq tried to use these SU-22 jets during the 1991 Gulf War, but they were detected and destroyed on the ground before they could launch a deadly chemical attack.

Other Russian weapons found with chemical weapons include the FROG-7 missile, 122 mm rockets, 152 mm artillery and the M-1937 82 mm mortars. All the Iraqi artillery missiles, rockets, shells and mortar rounds filled with chemical weapons are of Russian design.

Iraqi forces were trained by Russians in the use of chemical weapons and equipped by Russia with anti-chemical suits. The Iraqi armed forces were trained, equipped and supplied with the proper logistics to perform chemical warfare by Russia.

The arming of Iraq with such weapons has a direct impact on events today in the Middle East. The presence of former Iraqi WMD systems in Lebanon raises serious questions surrounding the Feb. 14 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Many blame Syria for Hariri's murder.

However, the possibility that Hariri discovered the location of the Iraqi WMD systems inside his country lends some credible backing to a Syrian assassination effort to silence him.

In addition, the sudden sale of advanced missile and other weapons to Damascus by Moscow also supports the allegation that Syria is hiding something for Russia.

Russian weapons makers have previously insisted on hard, cold cash payments for their missiles, especially after the fall of Saddam and the collapse of credit deals done with Baghdad. More importantly, the Syrian economy is in bad shape, making it difficult for Damascus to come up with the required money for advanced Russian weapons.

Instead, it now appears that Moscow has extended both very good terms and no down payment required to Syria for an extensive purchase of advanced missiles and weapons. This is in contrast to weapons sales to other "good" Russian customers such as China, which can afford to pay up front for weapon systems.

There is no question that the Russian effort to remove Iraqi WMD systems was the most successful intelligence operation of the 21st century. The Russians were able to move hundreds of tons of chemical, biological and nuclear materials without being discovered by CIA satellites or NSA radio listening posts.

"There is a clear sense on how effective they were," noted Shaw.

"The fact that the CIA did not know shows just how successful the Russian operation was," he concluded.

I've always said that the question is not weither or not Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction, we have the evidence as the weapons were used against Iran and against the Kurds. We have the scientists who participated in the programs...

The Question MUST be "What happened to their Weapons of Mass Destruction?" and when the question is answered, we MUST find and destroy those weapons before they are used on us or on Israel. The fact that his information may be getting out may be why Syria is slowly pulling out of Lebanon to the Bekaa valley, and may be why the Syrian government may very well have been behind the assassination of the former prime minister of Lebanon. Why are they pulling back to this location? Why has the Bekaa valley been an important region in the mind of Syria's leaders? Both times they agreed to pull back, they agreed to pull back to Bekaa.

If these weapons are indeed hidden in the Bekaa Valley, then there is going to be a problem...

The Fix is in and were is the Media?

2005-03-08T17:46:00.000-05:00

Remember all that talk of Voter Intimidation and illegitimacy in elections coming from the left in 2000, 2002 and 2004? Well, it turns out that they've been working as Ballot-Box Stuffers and allowing illegal votes to be cast in the hopes that they can win elections. Now it turns out that the much contested Washington gubernatorial election that was decided by a little over 100 votes was tilted by people who voted twice, voted illegally or were dead when they supposedly voted.

Rossi team issues list of "felon" voters

Attorneys for Republican Dino Rossi yesterday released the names of more than 1,000 people who allegedly cast illegal votes in November's disputed gubernatorial election.

The list of alleged felons, people who voted twice and dead people recorded as voting is at the heart of a lawsuit Republicans filed to overturn the November election of Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire.

Rossi spokeswoman Mary Lane said the list - given to Democratic attorneys late yesterday in response to a subpoena and released to the media - is based on extensive research. While she said Rossi and his attorneys are confident in the "overall accuracy" of the list, she said, "it's not perfect. I'm sure there are going to be errors."

A check by The Seattle Times of 32 of the 1,135 names on the list found one case that appeared to be in error, and one that was unclear. The others appeared to be properly included on the list.

Searching for felon voters is complicated because of the cumbersome process of determining whether someone's voting rights have been restored and the difficulty in tracking a case to make sure felony charges were not later dropped or reduced. Records kept on computer by the courts and government agencies sometimes have gaps in them that make it difficult to say for sure what happened in a particular case.

Attorneys for the state Democratic Party said they hadn't had a chance to look at the material yesterday. But David McDonald, the party's chief counsel, said the names will be checked carefully before a trial in the case.

Republicans have been searching for felon voters since soon after the Nov. 2 election. Some of the work was done by the Building Industry Association of Washington, the home-builders group that is a strong backer of Rossi's.

Republicans were able to subpoena the Washington State Patrol's criminal database and the statewide voters list kept by the Secretary of State's Office. Names that showed up on both of those lists were then checked in court files.

Last week, Republicans gave the Democrats boxes of paperwork that included death certificates of people listed as voting as well as court records of the alleged felons who voted.

McDonald said research on the votes alleged to have been cast under the names of dead people showed many errors.

"I think we're going to find that most of this is business as usual. They've done a good job of press releases and superficial checking but not of doing their homework," McDonald said.

Harry Korrell, Rossi's chief attorney, said earlier he was "99.999 percent confident" that the list of felons was accurate.

Shortly after that, King County Executive Ron Sims said the county's administration of the election was "99.98 percent accurate."

"We'll see how Harry Korrell's 99.999 percent accuracy matches up to Ron Sims' 99.98," said Democratic attorney Jenny Durkan.

Rossi was initially declared the winner of the November election, the closest governor's race in state history. He won the initial count by 261 votes and a machine recount by 42 votes. But after a hand recount, Gregoire was declared the winner by 129 votes.

Rossi and other Republicans filed a lawsuit in January in Chelan County Superior Court alleging that the election was flawed because of felon voters and mishandling of ballots by election officials.

The next major step in that legal challenge will be Judge John Bridges' decision on what level of evidence Republicans will need to show in proving there were enough illegal votes that the election should be nullified.

Republicans have argued that it is enough to show that enough illegal votes were cast that the true outcome of the election is unknown.

Bridges has said Republicans must show the illegal votes "appear" to have changed the outcome, but hasn't yet ruled on the level of specificity that will be required during the trial.

Democrats say Republicans must show which candidate got each of the illegal votes.

That issue will be decided in the coming weeks, setting the stage for a trial. No date has been set.

So while the media was telling us stories of the intimidation of Florida voters, for which there is NO EVIDENCE AT ALL, the Demo-Commies were stuffing ballots in Washington and possibly elsewhere.

You really can tell exactly what the Demo-Commies are doing by simply listening to what they are accusing the Republicans of.

Assorted Bits of News and Fun 3-8-05

2005-03-08T17:12:00.000-05:00

Here are a few Rapid fire bits of news and fun things that don't really have much I can say about them. Enjoy:

The UN Launches Ad campaign on Land mines

The UN is launching a new ad campaign to combat the spread of land mines. Check it out. Warning! The video is a bit graphic.

Man Accused Of Cattle Fornication

A 63-year-old man is charged with sexual gratification with an animal for allegedly having sex with calves.

Harold G. Hart, of Neillsville, allegedly told police that he routinely stopped at a Greenwood farm, usually after bar closing or on trips to strip clubs near Marshfield or Neillsville.

A criminal complaint filed in Clark County Circuit Court said the farm's owners installed a motion detector on Jan. 22 after regularly seeing footprints and vehicle tracks on their land. Around 4 a.m. the next morning, a sensor sounded and Hart was caught leaving the barn, but Hart allegedly said he just used a bathroom in the barn and had never been there before.

Hart told police he had sex with heifers before he went into the service in 1963 and resumed about a year ago at the farm. He admitted to using a rope to tie calves around the neck and estimated he had been to the farm "at least 50 times," according to the complaint.

He told police he never had sex with animals while maintaining a relationship with a girlfriend or his wife, the complaint said.

Hart also is charged with disorderly conduct and two counts of obstructing an officer. Each charge carries up to nine months in jail.

Hart is scheduled to appear in court March 10.

FEC to extend campaign-finance to Web

2005-03-08T16:39:00.000-05:00

Commissioner warns of threat to blogs, online punditry

The Federal Election Commission is beginning the process of extending its controversial 2002 campaign finance law to the Internet, potentially threatening political blogging and online punditry, a member of the panel warns.

The Internet was exempted from the McCain-Feingold regulations in a 4-2 vote by the FEC in 2002, but U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly overturned the decision last fall, reports CNET News.com.

The judge wrote in her opinion that the commission's "exclusion of Internet communications from the coordinated communications regulation severely undermines" the campaign finance law's purposes.

Bradley Smith, one of six commissioners, told CNET that in just a few months, bloggers and news organizations could risk the wrath of the federal government for improperly linking to a campaign's website.

"This is an incredible thicket," Smith said. "If someone else doesn't take action, for instance in Congress, we're running a real possibility of serious Internet regulation. It's going to be bizarre."

Even forwarding a political candidate's press release to a mailing list, depending on the details, could be punished by fines, Smith said.

The panel's three Republican members, including Smith, voted to appeal the Internet-related part of the judge's decision, but they needed four votes and were unable to convince one of the Democrat members to join them. .

Here we go. They (the Demo-Commies) are making their move to eliminate a wing of the "New Media" by opening the door to the regulation of Bloggers.

cBS News was brought down by Bloggers, they exposed the LIE and now they must be punished. Drudge started the Internet Media Revolution. People realized that they could find the stories, find the rebuttals, and see the bias of the Main Stream Media. Then, there was the revolution. The people figured out that they could make their opinions known. They could point out the inaccuracies of the stories and the TRUTH could be found.

With their primary mouth pieces being slowly muzzled and the audience finally catching on to the game, the Demo-Commies MUST fight back. This is why they have opened this door. So afraid are they of the "New Media" they are willing to risk the complete destruction of internet punditry.

As with Talk Radio before it, the Internet Media Revolution has given a voice, not just to the representatives of conservative America, but to the very people who make up conservative America. The people themselves can speak their minds on the Biggest stage of them all. This is unacceptable.

The campaign finance law has a press exemption, but the panel is considering whether bloggers or online journals fit that description.

Smith said questions will arise, such as whether a Web page's link to a candidate's site constitutes a contribution.

How would that be calculated? The FEC already has received an advisory opinion suggesting the value placed on a blog that praises a politician or links to a campaign website might be based on what percentage of the computer cost and electricity went to political advocacy.

"It seems absurd, but that's what the commission did," Smith told CNET. "And that's the direction Judge Kollar-Kotelly would have us move in. Line drawing is going to be an inherently very difficult task. And then we'll be pushed to go further. Why can this person do it, but not that person?"

Smith said Kollar-Kotelly's opinion is not limited to ads: "She says that any coordinated activity over the Internet would need to be regulated, as a minimum. The problem with coordinated activity over the Internet is that it will strike, as a minimum, Internet reporting services."

Some have argued that the Internet doesn't fit under McCain-Feingold's press exemption.

The news exemption might not cover bloggers and online media, Smith said, because "the statute refers to periodicals or broadcast, and it's not clear the Internet is either of those."

"It becomes a really complex issue that would strike deep into the heart of the Internet and the bloggers who are writing out there today," Smith said.

CNET News noted federal law limits the press exemption to a "broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication."

But blogging, said Smith, "could also get us into issues about online journals and non-online journals. Why should CNET get an exemption but not an informal blog? Why should Salon or Slate get an exemption? Should Nytimes.com and Opinionjournal.com get an exemption but not online sites, just because the newspapers have a print edition as well?"

Also, he continued, "there's no standard for being a blogger, anyone can claim to be one, and we're back to the deregulated Internet that the judge objected to. Also I think some of my colleagues on the commission would be uncomfortable with that kind of blanket exemption."

He believes grassroots Internet activity is in danger unless someone in Congress is willing to stand up and say, "Keep your hands off of this, and we'll change the statute to make it clear."

Here in lies the real reason that the Bloggers are attacked. We're all bloggers. Weither we're members of the Press, commentators on the press, Journal keepers, or just someone behind a monitor sharing our lives; we're all bloggers. The Blog is a tool that we use to process, spread or combat the most important commodity of our time, information.

Until the Talk Radio Revolution, led by Rush Limbaugh, the Left had an information Monopoly. The New York Times, The Washington Post, almost every other major published newspaper, ABC, cBS, NBC, PBS, and just about every other television outlet all leaned left. Liberals were labeled as progressives, or didn't receive a descriptive annotation at all. Conservatives and their ideas were both labeled constantly. New Gingrich was a "Conservative Firebrand," while Robert Byrd, a former Klansman and a left-wing wacko, was simply a Senator.

Rush Limbaugh changed that. Conservatives everywhere found that they weren't all crazy and that they were not alone out there. There were people who agreed with them and who said the same things that they felt and thought.

Rush Limbaugh became Public Enemy number one for the Left. Clinton attacked Limbaugh on an almost daily basis. There was talk of "Hate Speech." Clinton even blamed Limbaugh for creating an atmosphere that led to the Oklahoma City Bombing...

But a funny thing happened. In the open market of free ideas, Conservative ideas were winning and Liberal Ideas were fading. The Mass market embraced the new media outlet. Conservative talk radio was so successful that literally HUNDREDS of talk show hosts were born. The Conservative Revolution was on and there was no stopping it.

Liberals panicked. They couldn't stop it, so they had to oppose it. Liberal copy-cats appeared. They almost never succeeded. They couldn't get the ratings to keep the advertisers and thus remain on the air. Liberal Radio failed. It's always failed and it will continue to fail. Sorry Mr. Franken.

Now the Bloggers are rising and they must be stopped.

Smith said he would "like someone to say that unpaid activity over the Internet is not an expenditure or contribution, or at least activity done by regular Internet journals, to cover sites like CNET, Slate and Salon."

Otherwise, he said, "it's very likely that the Internet is going to be regulated, and the FEC and Congress will be inundated with e-mails saying, 'How dare you do this!'"

Typical activities such as forwarding an e-mail from a campaign to a list of hundreds or thousands of people would be affected.

"Senators McCain and Feingold have argued that we have to regulate the Internet, that we have to regulate e-mail," Smith said. "They sued us in court over this and they won."

News of the impending FEC action has the "blogosphere" buzzing.

"The possibilities that [FEC commissioner Bradley] Smith lays out are chilling and, if enacted, could spell the end of blogging as we know it," says blogger Winfield Myers. "Indeed, it could turn much of what is published on the Net into a samizdat-style activity."

This is why we MUST stand together and resist this threat. I urge you to find your Congressmen and Senators and let them know that you won't stand for the regulation of the Freedom of Speech and Expression on the Internet. We'll win this battle and we'll continue to win the War of Ideas. It's inevitable.

Byrd attacks Republicans who are using HIS tactics!

2005-03-08T16:09:00.000-05:00

Want to see hypocrisy in action? Want to see the application of selective memory: Look no further than Senator Robert Byrd:

Former Klansman decries attempts to approve judicial nominees

In denouncing Republican efforts to get President Bush's judicial nominees to the floor of the Senate for an up-or-down vote, Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., compared Republican tactics to Adolph Hitler's use of power in Nazi Germany.

Byrd, a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, said that if the GOP were to succeed in preventing Democratic filibusters of Bush's nominees, the move would "incinerate" the rights of all senators.

As many as 10 of Bush's nominees face the threat of filibuster, including William Myers, former lead counsel at the Interior Department who is up for a seat on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Myers has majority support in the Senate, but lacks the 60 votes needed to shatter a filibuster. To get past that barrier, Republicans would like to use their majority power to change the rules.

Byrd compared the idea to Hitler's abuse of power.

"Hitler never abandoned the cloak of legality. He recognized the enormous psychological value of having the law on his side," he said.

And the other side of the story:

BYRD WP OP-ED: Factually inaccurate, inconsistent with his voting record

U.S. Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) had an op-ed in the Washington Post today ('Nuking' Free Speech,) arguing against the current Senate proposal to restore the rights of the majority and end the unprecedented filibusters against the President's Judicial nominees. But his arguments were both factually wrong, and historically inconsistent with his own voting record.

Sen. Byrd said that restoring Senate tradition "could rob a senator of the right to speak out against an overreaching executive branch or a wrongheaded policy. It could destroy the Senate's very essence -- the constitutional privilege of free speech and debate." But history - and Sen. Byrd's own actions - prove otherwise.

In fact, Sen. Byrd is often credited with pioneering the Senate procedure he now derides as a denial of free speech and a threat to our liberties. Recall that it was Sen. Byrd who led the charge to establish new Senate precedents in 1977, 1979, 1980, and 1987 - including a number of precedents that were designed specifically to stop filibusters and other delay tactics that were previously authorized under Senate rules or prior precedents:

In 1977, Senator Byrd led the establishment of a new precedent in order to break a post-cloture filibuster on a natural gas deregulation bill, stating: "I make the point of order that when the Senate is operating under cloture, the Chair is required to take the initiative under Rule XXII to rule out of order all amendments which are dilatory or which on their face are out of order." That precedent contravened prior precedent, which would have required the Chair to await a point of order from the floor.

In 1979, Senator Byrd led the establishment of a new precedent that allowed the Chair to rule on questions of germaneness raised during the consideration of appropriations bills - notwithstanding Senate Rule XVI, which states that all questions of germaneness on appropriations bills must be decided by the full Senate.

In 1980, Senator Byrd led the establishment of a new precedent to require an immediate vote, without debate, on any motion to go into executive session to consider a particular nomination. His new precedent was specifically designed, in his words, to "deal with a filibuster on the motion to proceed" to a nomination. Previously, a motion to proceed to a particular nomination was debatable. The new precedent was sustained by a vote of 54-38, and yet the precedent did not "rob a senator of the right to speak out against an overreaching executive branch," as Sen. Byrd claimed in his op-ed.

In 1987, Senator Byrd caused establishment of a new precedent declaring that certain tactics were to be construed as dilatory during roll call votes and therefore always out of order no matter what - even though the text of the Senate rules had clearly authorized such tactics. Previously, dilatory tactics were out of order only after cloture had been invoked.

And in 1975, the Senate voted three times (51-42, 48-40, and 46-43) in support of the power of a Senate majority under Article I to change the rules. Those precedents forced the Senate to act and led to a major change in the cloture rule.

The Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court:

* Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution clearly states that "[e]ach House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings."

* The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously held that, unless the Constitution expressly provides for a supermajority vote, the constitutional rule is majority vote. [See United States v. Ballin (1892).]

As Sen. Byrd must surely know after decades in the Senate, a majority of Senators has also always possessed the constitutional power to establish new Senate precedents - including precedents that reverse prior precedents, and precedents that contravene the text of the standing rules of the Senate. And I think he was very clear in 1979 when he claimed exactly the opposite of what he averred in today's op-ed:

"This Congress is not obliged to be bound by the dead hand of the past... The first Senate, which met in 1789, approved 19 rules by a majority vote. Those rules have been changed from time to time... So the Members of the Senate who met in 1789 and approved that first body of rules did not for one moment think, or believe, or pretend, that all succeeding Senates would be bound by that Senate... It would be just as reasonable to say that one Congress can pass a law providing that all future laws have to be passed by two-thirds vote. Any Member of this body knows that the next Congress would not heed that law and would proceed to change it and would vote repeal of it by majority vote." - U.S. Sen. Robert Byrd, Jan. 15, 1979

Sen. Byrd also claimed in the second graf that "President Bush has renominated 20 men and women to the federal bench, seven of whom the Senate rejected last year." That charge, though, is simply inaccurate. NONE of President Bush's judicial nominees have "been turned down in the Senate." None. The nominees were denied a vote altogether - despite the fact that they all had (and have) bipartisan majority support. ALL would be confirmed if a partisan minority of the Senate would allow an up-or-down vote.

So, The republicans are like Hitler for doing the SAME things that the Democrats did? I guess that means that the Democrats are like Hitler too, right Senator Byrd?

Quentin Tarantino takes on Jason Voorhees?

2005-03-08T14:34:00.000-05:00

You've been exposed to my Political side almost relentlessly, so here's a look at the movie geek under all that "conservative leaning libertarian" opinion:

EXCLUSIVE: The Ultimate Jason Voorhees Movie
Which Oscar-winner might direct? Seriously.

March 07, 2005 - IGN FilmForce has learned that none other than Oscar-winner Quentin Tarantino is in final negotiations to write and direct the Ultimate Jason Voorhees Movie, an all new Friday the 13th for New Line.

While the rumor mill had long suggested that the next movie might be Freddy vs. Jason vs. Ash, that project never came together for a number of reasons.

When I first heard the rumor that Ash would be taking on Jason and Freddy in a movie I about cried in joy. I loved the Evil Dead, Friday the 13th and the Nightmare on Elm Street series of movies... But then that fell apart and depression set it. Well, the depression is gone now and I'm as giddy as a school girl about this one...

Fans will instead be treated to the Ultimate Jason Voorhees Movie. The project will be a co-venture between New Line and Paramount Pictures. It is expected to be a "quickie" that could get underway as early as this year!

Tarantino's production company, A Band Apart, referred us to the William Morris Agency. A rep at WMA would only advise us that Tarantino has "not yet" been offered the job while refusing to elaborate any further.

If there's any (ultra-violent) filmmaker who could make Jason cool and scary again, it'd be the man who resurrected Travolta. I just wonder if the movie will be retitled Kill Jason?

Every single movie that QT has been involved with is on my "favorite movies" list. Kill Bill volumes 1 and 2 were among my favorite recent flicks and I've probably seen them dozens of times... I can't wait to see if this comes to light, and if it does, I can't wait to see Jason returned to BAD ASS status as opposed to a campy slasher that he has become.

Great Moments in History 3-8-05

2005-03-08T13:54:00.000-05:00

Every once in a while you find a story or a column or a book that opens your eyes to a moment in history that changes the way you think about an issue by opening your eyes to the unknown.

The unknown is the greatest enemy to any person with an open mind about things. In this case, I don't mean "The Unknown" as in the supernatural or those things that can never be known. I mean the things that did happen that through some strange reason never became known to us.

Examples for me was the complete collapse of American foreign policy and the world's opinion of America during the Nixon, Ford and Carter era. I was born in 1973 and never lived through much of that era or was too busy soiling my diapers to give a care.

Needless to say, I've had my eyes opened to a lot of American History that was never taught to me in American History classes and this story is one of those occations that my eyes have been opened and I hope that this helps you to see why it is that the House of Representatives is always a calm and orderly example of Government and why the Senate needs to be changed so that it can function.

Reed's Rules
The nuclear option, 19th-century style.
By John A. Barnes

Flip your television clicker over to C-SPAN's coverage of the House of Representatives and watch the speeches on the floor. View these for any length of time and you will notice a pattern. The chair will announce "The gentleman from so-and-so is recognized for five minutes." If he finishes before the time limit is up, the member will say, "I yield back the balance of my time." If he is not finished, the sharp rap of the speaker's gavel will be heard - even as the member continues speaking - and the voice from the dais will intone, "The time of the gentleman has expired." If the member holding forth doesn't sit down right quick - unless he asks for (and receives) unanimous consent to continue - he can be escorted from the floor.

Clearly, it is much easier to shut down a windbag in the House than it is in the Senate, where the filibuster still protects the right to effectively unlimited debate. But as the Senate moves closer to some sort of confrontation over filibusters of President Bush's judicial nominees, there's a question hanging in the air worth asking: Why is the filibuster allowed in the Senate but not in the House of Representatives?

The answer is that the filibuster did indeed once have a home in the House. That it doesn't anymore is a tribute to a 19th-century Republican hero: Speaker Thomas Brackett Reed of Maine. If he is recalled at all today, it is because of the memorable nickname his enemies fastened to him in the wake of Reed's successful abolition of the filibuster in the House: "Czar."

Even historically minded Americans have very little time for congressional leaders, who tend to be quickly forgotten regardless of their merits. Thomas B. Reed deserves better, for his name lives on in Reed's Rules, the guide to parliamentary procedure that governs the operations of the House of Representatives (and many state legislatures) to this day.

Like most prominent late-19th-century American politicians, Reed was a Civil War veteran, though he freely admitted that his one year spent aboard a U.S. Navy gunboat plying the Mississippi had never brought him under enemy fire. Qualified as a lawyer after the war, he served as a member of the Maine state legislature and state attorney general before being elected to Congress in 1876.

For 12 years, Reed bided his time. Blessed with an almost photographic memory, he learned the legislative process inside and out. He quickly concluded that the House suffered from a "tyranny of the minority," by which the will of the voters, as expressed through their ballots, could be frustrated.

The primary weapon of the minority was the so-called "silent quorum" or "silent filibuster." Under the House rules of the time, a quorum of 165 members, a majority, had to be present in order for business to be conducted. But in order for a member to be counted as "present," he had to affirmatively answer when his name was called by the clerk. If the member refused to answer, even if physically present in the chamber, he was marked absent. Since, invariably, some members actually were absent - either ill, traveling, or otherwise unavailable - it usually wasn't difficult for a minority, by remaining silent during the roll call, to prevent the majority party from reaching the necessary 165 members "present." Thus, the will of the majority was thwarted without an actual vote having to be taken. (Sound familiar?)

This tactic enraged Reed. When he was elected speaker at the beginning of the 51st Congress in 1889, conditions were ripe for change. For the first time since 1874, one party controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. (Again, sound familiar?) Determined to be an active legislator, not merely a figurehead, he knew that if he was to succeed he had to break the silent filibuster.

But the GOP majority in the House - 168 Republicans to 160 Democrats - was wafer-thin and some of its members were considered unreliable. (Think RINOs - Republicans in Name Only - were invented in 2001?) Even Joseph Cannon, Reed's close friend and confidant (and a future speaker himself), advised Reed not to make any attempt to move against the silent filibuster. More ominously, Democratic leader John Carlisle made it clear that he would consider any legislation passed in defiance of the silent filibuster to be unconstitutional, and would take the matter to the courts.

Reed was having none of it. A top-notch lawyer himself, he was satisfied that Carlisle would have no case if it ever came to a courtroom showdown. As for his own party, Reed was confident that the Democrats would react so wildly to any effort to abolish the silent filibuster that it would rally any wavering GOPers behind his effort.

The stakes, though, could scarcely have been higher. "He knew that the fight would focus upon him the nation's attention," writes Barbara Tuchman in her excellent account of Reed's breaking of the silent filibuster in her book The Proud Tower (from which this account is largely drawn). Reed also knew that if he failed, "his Congressional career would be over."

The new speaker's chance came on January 29, 1889, on a motion over a disputed election. Only 163 members affirmatively answered the quorum call, two short of the necessary 165. Instead of simply leaving it at that, however, Reed turned to the clerk of the House and directed him to "record the names of the following members present and refusing to vote." Reed then began reeling off the list of names of Democrats present in the chamber who had refused to answer when their names were called.

As Tuchman records the scene, "pandemonium broke loose" in the House chamber. It was the beginning of five days of parliamentary tumult. A few Democrats attempted to maintain decorum, demanding formally, "I appeal the decision of the Chair!" Most others, however, were less gracious. They shouted, swore, threatened, and pounded their fists on tables and desks. Nevertheless, Reed went on reading the list of names in a calm, assured voice. When he reached the name of Rep. James McCreary of Kentucky, the latter exclaimed "I deny your right, Mr. Speaker, to count me as present!"

Reed abruptly ceased reading and, for a moment, a hush fell on the raucous chamber. In a measured voice, Reed calmly observed, "The Chair is making a statement of fact that the gentleman is present. Does he deny it?" Reed then resumed reading his list of names.

Upon reaching the end, Reed declared that a quorum was present in the chamber. When a Democratic member appealed the ruling, Reed firmly denied the appeal. Every Democrat was on his feet yelling, except for a Texas representative, who was conspicuously sharpening a Bowie knife against the sole of his boot while sitting quietly in his seat.

A Republican member - probably one of those 19th-century RINOs - then moved for a debate on the rule change. Reed decided to allow it. For four days the debate raged. There were points of order, appeals, and endless quorum calls. Reed would repeat the same procedure as on the first day, reading the names of the silent Democrats into the journal as "present." Tempers reached such a fevered pitch that, at one point, a knot of Democratic members advanced menacingly down the center aisle toward the speaker's chair, giving the impression that Reed would be physically assaulted. Even the galleries joined in, with spectators and reporters shouting and screaming abuse at the speaker.

All manner of invective was tossed about, with various nicknames being chosen for the presiding officer. "Tyrant," "dictator," and "monster" were among the printable ones. But somewhere along the line, someone shouted "Czar," and that was the one that seemed to stick. From that day forward, he was "Czar" Reed.

Throughout this ordeal, Reed maintained an outward calm, though those who saw him in the privacy of his office could see his hands tremble with suppressed rage. What no one knew at the time was that Reed had already resolved to resign from the House if his effort to change the rules failed. "I had made up my mind that if political life consisted of sitting helplessly in the Speaker's chair and seeing the majority helpless to pass legislation, I had had enough of it and was ready to step down and out," he said later.

That turned out not to be necessary. After four days, the Democrats tried to absent themselves in actuality, refusing to come to the floor when the quorum was called. Two Republicans who were ill were brought into the chamber on cots. Still one vote short. Finally, Rep. John Sweney of Iowa, who was en route from his district during most of the battle, suddenly appeared at the door of the chamber with the words "One more, Mr. Speaker!" The fight was over. The Democrats sullenly returned to the chamber.

A new set of rules, drafted by Reed, was thus instituted. A quorum consists of 100 members, all members must vote, all present shall be counted, etc. Collectively, they were dubbed "Reed's Rules."

Theodore Roosevelt, who would later break with Reed over the annexation of the Philippines, was in awe. He called the breaking of the silent filibuster a reform "of far greater importance" than any piece of legislation. That became evident a few years later when the Democrats retook control of Congress. They immediately threw out "Reed's Rules," reinstituting the silent filibuster. Reed promptly turned it against them with relish. He succeeded in so thoroughly tying up the House that in frustration the Democrats were compelled to bring back Reed's Rules. Declining to gloat, Reed merely observed, "The scene here is a more effective address than any I could make."

Since that time, the House of Representatives has become the legislative body that is most responsive to its leadership. Few bills that are strongly supported by the speaker's party fail to reach a vote and pass. The minority party has a right to be heard, to vote, and, as Reed once put it, "draw its pay," but little more. This is not a matter of simple power politics, as Reed knew, but of representative government itself. The party winning the most votes in an election has the right to see its program voted on and moved, not merely debated. Otherwise, the public becomes cynical about the entire democratic process - and rightfully so.

Majority rule no doubt has its problems, but they pale in comparison with those presented by minority rule. The term was unknown in 1889, but "going nuclear" can be unavoidable when a majority party finds itself caught between keeping faith with its electors and an obstinate minority that simply refuses to yield. "Czar" Reed knew that. Does Sen. Bill Frist?

- John A. Barnes is the author of the forthcoming John F. Kennedy on Leadership: The Legacy and Lessons of an American President.

I can now say that not only do I expect the Senate to adopt a similar measure to stop the road-blocks of the senate filibuster, but I DEMAND it. Reed was right then and the leaders of the party now are right. The Majority is there because the majority was elected, and their hands cannot be tied by the minority who are the minority because they can't win elections. Push the Button! Go nuclear, and get something done to make this country better.

Do the Demo-Commies want America to Fail?

2005-03-08T13:12:00.000-05:00

There is a growing attitude in the American Left that says "Anything BAD that can happen to America is GOOD for the Democratic Party." One need only look back at the words and actions of prominent Democrats in the last three elections.

The Democrats ceased on a sluggish economy like it was a long lost lover. It was GOOD to them that the Economy was bad during a Republican presidency. When the Terrorists in Iraq started beheading people, they came out to say that it was BAD and thus we should get out. When the Abu-Grab-ass happened, they got the pictures and posted them everywhere for all to see...

But you no longer have to take my word for it. Nancy Soderberg. The Highest ranking Democratic foreign policy advisor has released a book called "The Superpower Myth." It spouts the Demo-Commie mantra that "it's not right that we should be the world's only superpower, that it causes an imbalance around the world, nothing good can come of it."

Well, Mrs. Soderberg was on C-Span the other day. What did she have to say?

Rob Harleston: "What do you mean when you write in your book The Superpower Myth, what is that all about?"

Soderberg: "What I argue is that the Bush administration has fallen victim to this myth that as a superpower we can bend the world to our will unilaterally primarily through military means. And I argue that that doesn't work... They need to shift towards a policy based more on reality."

Harleston: "Is that a philosophy or a policy that is just limited to the Bush administration?"

Soderberg: "We're the only superpower out there, and he's the only president of that superpower."

So which is it? Are we the lone Superpower or not?

Harleston: "The use of military force as a means to an end?"

Soderberg: "There's no doubt we sometimes need to use military force, but when the Bush administration came into office you remember the axis of evil, Iraq, North Korea, Iran they talked as if we could solve all those militarily. Well, we solved one of them militarily the other two are going to have to be solved diplomatically. They're refusing to build an international coalition..."

Well, part of her book promotion tour made it's way to Jon Stewart's The Daily Show:

Stewart: "This book about the superpower myth of the US, there's this idea the US is the sole superpower, and I guess the premise of your book is we can't misuse that power. We have to use it wisely and not just punitively,"

Soderberg: "That's right. What I argue is the Bush administration fell hostage to the superpower myth, believing that because we're the most powerful nation on earth we're all-powerful, could bend the world to our will not have to worry about the rest of the world. I think what they're finding in the second term is a little bit harder than that, and reality has an annoying way of intruding."

Stewart: "Wait, well, what do you make of -- see, here's my dilemma. I don't care for the way these guys conduct themselves, and this is just you and I talking here, but, boy, when you see the Lebanese take to the streets and all that, and you go, 'Oh, my God this is working,' and I begin to wonder, is it? Is the way they handle it really sort of like, 'Okay, my daddy hits me but look how tough I'm getting'? You know what I mean? Like, you don't like the method but maybe it's working?"

Soderberg: "Well, I think, you know, as a Democrat you don't want anything nice to happen to the Republicans, and you don't want them to have progress. I think the way to look at it is, they can't take credit for every good thing that happens, but they need to be able to manage it. I think what's happening in Lebanon is great, but it's not necessarily directly related to the fact that we went into Iraq militarily."

Stewart: "Well, do you think the people in Lebanon would have sort of had the courage of their convictions having not seen the invasion and the election which followed? I mean, it's almost as though the Iraqi election has emboldened this crazy -- I mean I'm smelling something over there, Nancy."

Soderberg: "Well, I think partly what's going on is the country next door, Syria has been controlling them for decades and the Syrians were dumb enough to blow up the former prime minister of Lebanon..."

Stewart: "I don't know, Nancy. I think this is all working, and I'm troubled by it, too. I have to admit I'm troubled by it,"

Stewart: "Do you think that these guys, the Bush people, understand what they've unleashed? Because at a certain point I almost feel like if the Bush people would just come out at the very beginning and said, 'Here's our plan. We're going to invade Iraq. We're going to get rid of a bad guy because that will drain the swamp.' If they hadn't gone the whole nuclear business, weapons of mass destruction, you know, if they hadn't scared the pants off everybody, just said straight up, 'Here's what's going on,' I think I wouldn't have any mixed feelings about what they're doing."

Soderberg: "Well, you know, the truth always helps in these things I have to say, but I think that there's also going on in the Middle East peace process, they may will have a chance to do a historic deal with the Palestinians and Israelis. These guys could really pull off a whole..."

Stewart: "This could be unbelievable,"

Soderberg: "Yeah, they could pull off a whole series of Nobel Peace Prizes here. It may well work,"

Stewart: "Oh, my God. Bush, he's got, you know...?"

Soderberg, "I admit it's scary for Democrats."

Stewart: "Bush is going to be a... Pretty soon Republicans are going to be like, 'Reagan was nothing compared to Bush.' Like my kids going to go to a high school named after Bush. I just know it,"

Soderberg: "Well, there's still Iran and North Korea, don't forget There's hope for the rest of us.".

WHOA! Can you believe that. This woman is hoping that we fail with North Korea and Iran so that Bush won't get any credit for his actions. They are hoping that the United States fails in it's mission to disarm North Korea and Iran because it would give the Demo-Commies an opening to attack the Bush Doctrine... They want us to fail so they can step in and show us the light.

Stewart is actually getting the picture. The Democrats have constantly been on the "Blame America First" and "Hope Bad Things Happen so we can get our Power Back" bandwagon for a while now. The truth is that the actions of the Bush administration has ended the Iraq problem, ended the WMD programs of Libya, Brought women the rights of education and voting in Afghanistan and Iraq, and was the pebble that started the tidal wave of democratic movements in the middle east.

It is working and, like Reagan before him, Bush will be given Credit for doing more in eight years to bring peace to the middle east and the world than ANYONE since Reagan.

Stewart (with fingers crossed) "Iran and North Korea. That's true. That's true. No, I absolutely agree with you. This is the most difficult thing for me to -- because I think -- I don't care for the tactics. I don't care for this, the weird arrogance, the setting up, but I gotta say: I haven't seen results like this ever in that region."

Soderberg "Well, wait it hasn't actually gotten very few. I mean, we've had..."

Stewart "Okay, I'm shallow. I'm shallow,"

Soderberg "Well, there's always hope that this might not work. There's always hope that this might not work." - "No, but I think, you know, you have changes going on in Egypt. Saudi Arabia finally had a few votes, although women couldn't participate. What's going on here is Syria has been living in the 60s since the 60s. It's part of this..."

Stewart "You mean free love and that kind of stuff, like free love and drugs?"

Soderberg "If you're a terrorist, yeah," - "I think it's all moving in the right direction. I'll have to give them credit for that. We'll see. We still have North Korea and Iran to go our way."

Sources:

Jon Stewart smells it, too

Soderberg: We Still Have Iran & N. Korea

Hell May Well Have Frozen Over! <- Update!

2005-03-08T02:52:00.000-05:00

Every once in a while a concept or story comes along that is just too damned good for it's own good. Back in the day, I was never really a big fan of Frank Miller's classic Sin City Graphic Novels... I was too wrapped up in the usual "Kiddie Comics" and stuff like The X-Men and Wolverine.

With time, Sin City grew on me and I've been waiting patiently for someone to impress Frank Miller with a good enough concept to bring the stories of Sin City to the Silver Screen. Frank Miller pretty much said we'd see Sin City on the Silver Screen as soon as Hell Froze over.

Enter Robert Rodriguez.

Mr. Rodriguez sold Frank Miller on a concept that would bring his comics to life, as they originally appeared. But the deal was sealed when Robert offered Frank a Directors chair... That's right, Frank "freaking" Miller Co-Directed this thing!

Words cannot adequately describe the sheer delight I felt when I saw this trailer for the first time... No, It wasn't just Jessica Alba's little snake dance or the Fishnet outfit on Rosario Dawson... Nope, it was EVERYTHING! The trailer is AMAZING from open to close: The Music, a track called "Cells" by The Servant, is killer minus the annoying vocal track. The visuals give you a taste of the art direction of both the original comic and the movie. The cast is TOP NOTCH with some serious Eye Candy and Top Notch actors and actresses. What's not to love?

Rodriguez has crafted a motion picture which mimics the art of the classic comic in EVERY way, and adds to it. The panels LEAP to life, Very few movies ever strike me as beautiful, and this is one of them. Now that I've seen the trailer, I can't wait for the movie and I can't stop watching it.

So check it out for yourselves already!

UPDATE!

There is a new trailer on the way and Movie-fone has a "mini" version of it up! Check out the latest glimpse into the world of Sin City right here!

Courts Gone Wild! Tsunami Suit Filed!

2005-03-07T23:08:00.000-05:00

It was only a matter of time before SOMEONE took the case, and now it's official:

European victims of December wave suing U.S. agency, Thai officials, hotel

The December 26 tsunami that took over 275,000 lives may have been an act of God, but more than 60 European survivors of the deadly wave have filed suit in New York district court to determine if Thai authorities, U.S. forecasters and a French hotel chain were negligent.

How? How the HELL could the Hotel, the Thai government or U.S. forecasters be negligent in the Tsunami? Someone please tell me that...

U.S. attorney Edward Fagan, who has successfully fought against Swiss banks on behalf of Holocaust victims, is joined by two other attorneys representing plaintiffs from Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and France, reported Agence France-Presse.

Named in the suit are the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and its Hawaii-based Tsunami Warning Center, the government of Thailand and the French hotel chain Sofitel, part of the group Accor.

The plaintiffs accuse NOAA of not informing Indian Ocean nations of the tsunami even though the warning center was aware of the undersea quake.

The NOAA does not have detectors in the Indian Ocean, and furthermore they didn't KNOW there was a Tsunami. The NOAA DID attempt to warn and contact the governments of the area that there was a POSSIBILITY of a Tsunami after the quake... How the HELL can they have been negligent?

Thai authorities are accused of not releasing information about the impending sea surge as soon as they received it a failure that plaintiffs claim was responsible for thousands of the deaths that occurred.

This I can see going through. The governments in the area DID receive warnings and knew about the quake and the possibility of a potential tsunami. The problem is that there isn't a tsunami warning system in the Indian Ocean. Without the warning system, all that the governments and the NOAA can do is warn of possible danger.

The hotel chain is named in the suit because the plaintiffs say it knowingly built the Khao Lak Beach resort in Phuket on an earthquake fault and failed to properly inform relatives of victims of the disaster, as well as failing to repatriate some bodies.

So let's sue EVERY contractor in California for building on a fault line! Let's sue everyone who has ever built in Hawaii because everyone knows it's been hit with Tsunami before! Let's sue every single contractor that built houses along the Mississippi river because they are building on a location that everyone knows floods out constantly! Hell, let's sue the families of the settlers who settled all these areas...

"We found that serious lapses were committed," said Herwig Hasslacher, one of the group's three lawyers. "We have evidence they did not warn us, even though they knew a quarter of an hour later about the strength and location of the quake, and although there is supposed to be a tsunami warning" from 6.5 on the Richter scale, according to Hasslacher. The quake registered 9.0.

The present suit is not intended to demand compensation, but to uncover evidence that would prove negligence.

"The U.S. government claims 'we are the protectors of the world'. (But) if we know there is a tsunami on its way to wipe out a major population, do we tell them?," asked U.S. lawyer Edward Fagan. "Nobody telling them it's coming. This is incredible!"

How did the U.S. Government know about the Tsunami? Let me say this slow so even the lawyers in the audience can understand it. There are no warning systems in the Indian Ocean. None. There is no alert that tells the American Government when there is a tsunami in India. The NOAA alerted everyone in the area that there was a possibility of a tsunami, that's all they could do. They didn't know that there was a Killer Wave ripping the coastal areas of the Indian Ocean to shreds until the reports of the wave started coming in.

Fagan has asked the court to ensure the preservation of key documents, such as satellite imagery and communications between NOAA, Thailand and Indonesia.

The court is expected to set a hearing date within the next 30 days.

Let me save this guy the trouble. DO you know what a Giant wave looks like in Satellite images? Nothing. It' looks like a large body of water. A tsunami is almost impossible to spot unless there are monitors in the area with GPS systems gauging the "motion of the ocean" so to speak.

For those not in the know, Tsunami waves don't rush across the ocean like the waves you see at the beach or those we see in hurricane footage. A tsunami is a massive quantity of water that is displaced. Until it gets to the shores, it's simply a wave. All waves are pretty much invisible to the naked eye or satellites, and doesn't really become a "visible" threat until it's too late. At that point, all the waters at the shore rush out to sea as though someone pulled the plug. Then, the crest of the wave approaches the shore and all hell breaks loose. The closer to shore the wave gets, the taller the wave gets.

The point is that a thirty foot wall of water doesn't look like a 30 foot wall of water, nor does it act like one until it's too late.

And since there are no warning system in the area to measure the tide, there was no way that anyone KNEW there was going to be a tsunami. All that could be done was what was done. Warn as many people as they could and wait to see what happens.

Woman arrested over 96 cents

2005-03-07T21:56:00.000-05:00

Reader Comments 3-4-05

2005-03-03T14:39:00.000-05:00

A concerned reader calling himself alt hippo commented on my recent rant about Demo-Commie Obstructionism in the US Senate:

I noticed that you used the phrase "Demo-Commie Obstructionism."

I sure did. It has a really nice ring to it, doesn't it?

Do you really believe that mainstream Democrats, Harry Reid, Joe Lieberman, or even John Kerry are Communists? If so, you should really report this to the FBI. Perhaps we could have a new era of McCarthyism around preserving a wilderness refuge in Alaska.

It's not just on the issue of ANWR that the Democrats are practicing obstructionism. They are doing so on Judges, and threatening to do it with other bills as well.

As for McCarthyism. It's a myth. Most of the horrors of McCarthyism occurred either before or after the famous trials. What most people DON'T know is that McCarthy actually FOUND CONFIRMED soviet agents working in the Military and government of the United States of America.

On Harry Reid:

In 1999, Reid Declared: "Most Of Us Have No Problem With Taking A Small Amount Of The Social Security Proceeds And Putting It Into The Private Sector." (Fox's Fox News Sunday, 2/14/99)

In 1999, Reid Said: "We're Visiting Chile Because It Is Doing Interesting Things In Social Security And Other Parts Of Its Free Market System... (Tony Batt, 'Reid To Embark On South America Trip,' Las Vegas Review-Journal, 3/30/99)

Now, In 2005, Reid Is Blocking Personal Retirement Accounts. 'For instance, [Reid] is against personal retirement accounts: ‘If someone wants to privatize Social Security, they are going to have to find someone else to get in bed with other than me,' Reid told a television audience in Nevada recently." (Terence Samuel, 'A Leader From The Wilderness,' U.S. News & World Report, 11/29/04)

"If they, for whatever reason, decide to do this [change Senate rules on filibusters], it's not only wrong, they will rue the day they did it, because we will do whatever we can do to strike back - I know procedures around here. And I know that there will still be Senate business conducted. But I will, for lack of a better word, screw things up." (Helen Dewar and Mike Allen, 'GOP May Target Use Of Filibuster,' The Washington Post, 12/13/04)

"In The Last Congress, [Reid] Conducted A One-Man Filibuster Of Nearly Nine Hours - Sipping Sparingly On Water So He Wouldn't Have To Leave The Senate Floor For The Restroom - To Upset A Republican Talkathon To Blast Democratic Delaying Tactics." (Bob Dart, 'Harry Reid: Breaking The Democratic Mold,' Cox News Service, 11/19/04)

"Indeed, As Daschle's Whip, Reid Helped Orchestrate An Unprecedented Filibuster Of Some Of President Bush's More Conservative Judicial Nominees." (Allison Stevens, 'Senate Democrats Set A Daschle-Like Tone For 2005,' Congressional Quarterly, 11/16/04)

Reid "Also Joined Daschle In Using Procedural Tools To Prevent Conference Committees From Meeting, To Protest What Reid Called Mistreatment By The Majority." (Allison Stevens, 'Senate Democrats Set A Daschle-Like Tone For 2005,' Congressional Quarterly, 11/16/04)

In 2003, Reid Held Up Dozens Of President Bush's Nominations Until Former Aide Was Appointed To NRC. “Sen. Harry Reid and the Bush administration have made a deal clearing the way for dozens of Bush nominees to take office in exchange for a Reid aide being nominated to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission "Reid announced last month that he would hold up Bush executive branch nominees until Bush picked [Gregory] Jaczko, 32, for an NRC vacancy." (“Reid Drops Hold On Leavitt Nomination In Deal Involving Aide,” The Associated Press, 10/8/03)

In The 108th Congress Reid Voted Against Cloture On Judicial Nominees Twenty Times, voted Against Miguel Estrada Cloture 7 Times,voted Against Priscilla Owen Cloture 4 Times, and voted Against Cloture On Charles Pickering, William Pryor (Twice), Carolyn Kuhl, And Janice Brown. But In 2001, Reid Said: "I Think We Should Have Up-Or-Down Votes In The Committee And On The Floor [On Nominees]." (CNN's 'Evans, Novak, Hunt & Shields,' 6/9/01)

Reid Led The Fight Against President Bush's Department Of Homeland Security.

Senate Dems Stalled Homeland Security For 112 Days. (H.R. 5005, Received In The Senate 7/30/02; H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #249: Passed 90-9: R 48-0; D 41-8; I 1-1, 11/19/02, Reid Voted Yea)

Reid Established 'War Room'; With As Many As 15 Staffers To Coordinate Messaging For Democratic Obstruction. (Geoff Earle, 'Reid Makes It Clear He's No Daschle,' The Hill, 12/1/04)

Reid's Aides Are Obstructionists In Their Free Time, Too:

One Reid Aide Was Arrested For Disorderly Conduct During President Bush’s Inaugural Address. "An aide to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was arrested on the West Front of the Capitol for disorderly conduct during President Bush's inaugural address - The aide, Nathan Ackerman, is a television producer on the Senate Democratic Communications Committee - an organization that was folded into Reid's new communications 'war room. - According to a Capitol Police report, Ackerman and another suspect 'were blocking the view of the audience and they were engaged in a verbal dispute with members of the audience.'" (Geoff Earle, 'Inaugural Run-In For Reid Aide,' The Hill, 1/26/05)

Reid's Liberal Voting Record Speaks For Itself:

Deseret News: "Reid Is One Of The Most Liberal Members Of Congress." (Lee Davidson, 'More LDS Members In Congress Than Ever Before: 17,' Deseret News, 11/18/98)

"After Losing A Senate Bid In 1974, Reid Ruefully Concluded, 'Nevada Isn't As Liberal As We Thought.'" (Thomas B. Edsall, 'Balancing Nevada, National Interests,' The Washington Post, 2/1/05)

Reid's Most Recent Overall National Journal Rating Was Farther To The Left Than Liberal Icons Such As Sens. Chris Dodd (D-CT), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), And Joe Biden (D-DE). (National Journal Website, nationaljournal.com , Accessed 12/3/04)

According To Non-Partisan National Journal, Reid Was More Liberal On Economic Issues Than Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA). (National Journal Website, nationaljournal.com, Accessed 12/3/04)

According To Non-Partisan National Journal, Reid Was More Liberal On Foreign Policy Issues Than Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) And Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY). (National Journal Website, nationaljournal.com, Accessed 12/4/04)

From 1991-2004, Reid And Former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD) Voted Together 87% Of The Time. (CQ Vote Analysis, Performed 1/31/05)

Reid Received A Lackluster 34% Lifetime Rating From U.S. Chamber Of Commerce. (U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Website, 'How They Voted Scorecards,' www.uschamber.com , Accessed 12/2/04)

So tell me again that he's not an obstructionist and at least an Extremist Liberal, if not a Socialist.

As for John Kerry possibly being a communist, there have been some documents found that could point in that direction (Link #1, and Link #2). On at least two occations, Kerry met with North Vietnamese Communist leaders in Paris while a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, as well as the FACT that John Kerry's image had a place of honor in a Communist Vietnam War Museum. Top that off with John Kerry's votes against the Reagan Strategy in fighting the cold war (he wanted a nuclear freeze and favored appeasement) and I could make a pretty good case for Kerry as Communist.

If I disagree with a particular plan of the Bush administration, does that make me an Obstructionist? You might be surprised to know that by a margin of 53% to 35%, the American people are opposed to drilling in ANWR.

Are the majority of Americans Communist obstructionists?

I disagree with the Bush administration on MANY issues. I'm not in favor of Faith Based organizations getting government support. I'm not in favor of Amnesty for Illegal Aliens. I'm not in favor of Work Visas. I'm not in favor of the Kennedy influenced Education Bill recently passed. Everyone is free to disagree with anyone. That's not what makes one an obstructionist. Using the filibuster to prevent an up or down vote on judicial nominees or legislation makes one an obstructionist. ANWR was one of those items that got a the threat of "screw things up" from Mr. Reid.

As for the people not supporting ANWR drilling: Poll shows 53% support ANWR drilling.

Polls don't necessarily mean much of anything. There were polls suggesting that Mondale was so far ahead of Reagan that he had no prayer of winning. There were polls that Suggested that Kerry was going to win the 2004 election.

Tippmann Relaunches the A-5 and M98c Line.

2005-03-03T14:37:00.000-05:00

As I've been posting about on the A5OG and the Tippmann forums, Tippmann is re-launching both the A-5 and M98 lines of markers with some improvements, color options and new options.

Official Press Release on the Custom Pro.

The New Pro Custom. Thanks to Dawn and TJ Allcot for the pictures.
The New Pro Custom takes the M98 series in a new direction. In a move to compete with the "Entry Level Electro" market, Tippmann worked closely with Wicked Air Sports to make a Killer new EQ board for all of Tippmann's markers. The result is the new Pro Custom E, featuring an A-5 Style Sear Tripping E-grip capable of 15 BPS out of the box, though WAS is claiming it's programmable from 10 to 30bps.

The electronics and batter all all housed in the grip frame and there looks to have been SEVERAL modifications of the Grip frame, so no luck for current M98 and 98C shooters. Looks like you WON'T be able to upgrade your markers with the Pro Custom E-Grip.

Just like the A-5 E-grip, you adjust the speed and firing mode of the Pro Custom via two small holes in the grip with a small screw driver. This will make the Pro Custom completely Tourney legal.

Now the good news, the Pro Custom E will retail at $239, and includes a redesigned stock barrel, double trigger, drop-forward and comes in two colors (black and silver).

There are two other variants of the Pro Custom:

The "Basic" edition will retail for $159 and included the new receiver, barrel, double trigger and drop-forward, with room to expand in the future to either an RT or E-grip.

An "RT" version will retail at $209 and includes everything on the "Basic" model but ads the firepower of the Tippmann response Trigger to the deal.

Official Press Release on the A-5 Stealth.

Also on the block to be released March 10th, are new versions of the A-5 with Silver and Camo upper receivers. Also on the way is an A-5 E-grip with the new WAS board in it.

Look forward to a full review as soon as I get them in. Also, on the rumor mill side of things, WAS let the cat out of the bag that the current board they are producing for Tippmann is designed to fit into THREE upcoming markers. That means that there' something else up Tippmann's sleeve here. Maybe an entirely new marker? Time will tell.

...And When the Right goes too Far...

2005-03-03T14:12:00.000-05:00

Senator wants cable, satellite TV subject to indecency rules

Indecency guidelines that over-the-air broadcasters must follow should be extended to cover cable and satellite broadcasters, congressional Republicans who are influential on telecommunications issues said yesterday.

Most viewers do not differentiate between traditional TV and cable, so they do not know when they might be exposed to objectionable programming, Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, the head of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, told the National Association of Broadcasters in Washington.

"In this country, there has to be some standards of decency," said Stevens, who said he would push for such legislation. The National Cable and Telecommunications Association, a trade group, said that people choose to pay for channels and, as part of their subscription, are able to block programming they do not want seen in their homes. Because of that, the group said, any legislation would face an uphill battle in court.

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, the head of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, supported the idea of indecency guidelines for cable and satellite and said he would consult with Stevens on possible legislation.

"It's not fair to subject over-the-air broadcasters to one set of rules and subject cable and satellite to no rules," Barton told reporters after a separate appearance before the broadcasters group.

The reason, Mr. Barton, is that over-the-air broadcasts are free and can be hauled in by anyone with an TV or radio. There is no way to control the access to this material. Thus I fully support decency standards for broadcast television. But Cable and Satellite television are PAY services and the people who BUY these services are WELL aware of the content on the channels provided.

As an example, anyone subscribing to HBO or Showtime KNOW they are going to be exposed to R-Rated and even UN-RATED materials. Anyone tuning into Nip-Tuck, The Shield and Rescue Me on FX (Great shows BTW) are warned before hand about the content of these shows and thus the bases are covered. How is this even an issue?

Last month, the House overwhelmingly passed a bill to raise the maximum indecency fine from $32,500 to $500,000. A similar bill has been introduced in the Senate but has not had a hearing.

Federal law bars nonsatellite radio stations and noncable television channels from broadcasting certain references to sexual and excretory functions between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., when children are most likely be tuning in.

The Federal Communications Commission has no power to regulate cable and satellite stations (Thank Gawd!), which are available to about 85 percent of the about 108 million U.S. households with televisions.

In December, the FCC rejected a request from a radio-station owner that the FCC begin imposing broadcast indecency regulations to subscription satellite services.

Last year, FCC Chairman Michael Powell told the broadcasters group that he did not "generally support the extension of content rules to cable and satellite unless Congress supports a statement asking us to do so."

The cable group referred to a Supreme Court ruling in 2000, which said that Congress violated free-speech rights when it tried to protect children from sexually oriented cable channels, such as Playboy Television.

When is the Religious Reich going to learn that you can't regulate what grown Americans can see, read, or hear? When are these Hyper-Moral Religious Morons going to realize that THEY are fueling the Anti-Christian movement in this country?

It's really simple. The more you react negatively to what everyone else WANTS to be exposed to and the more you attempt to legislate YOUR morality on everyone else, the more those people are going to resent you and move against you.

When are the Jesus Freaks going to realize that their freedom to speak their minds and have their favorite programs on the air are TIED DIRECTLY to the freedom of others to speak their minds and have their favorite programs on the air? It was only a matter of time before a movement was born to resist the Religious Reich when they try and force their opinions and morality on everyone else.

When the Religious folks finally realize that Howard Stern and South Park has as much right to be on the air as Pat Robinson and The 700 Club, they'll take a step in the direction of halting the Secular Movement's goal of eliminating religion all-together.

Love and worship your god all you want, but stop trying to force your god on me or anyone else for that matter.

On our Dependence on Foreign Oil.

2005-03-03T13:32:00.000-05:00

Senate GOP Ready to Push Artic Oil Measure

The first big environmental showdown of the new Congress is expected to come within weeks as the Senate plans to use a budget measure to try to open an Alaskan wildlife refuge to oil development, hoping to sidestep strong Democratic opposition.

Republican leaders have been stymied for years in their effort to allow oil development on a 1.5 million-acre coastal strip of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge because they have been unable to muster the 60 votes needed to overcome a Democratic-led filibuster.

But a maneuver to avoid the filibuster is likely to come to a head in the next three weeks. The House has repeatedly passed measures to allow drilling in ANWR, as the refuge is called, only to see the legislation stalled in the Senate.

Remember when John Kerry was running for President and promised to do everything in his power to reduce our dependence on foreign oil? Remember how hard you laughed and how funny it was, given the Demo-Commie positions all over the country against drilling on the home-land, drilling in the ocean, or drilling ANYWHERE for that matter.

Well, it's time to put up or shut up. We have enough oil in our own country that we could start pulling our money away from regimes like the Iranians and Saudis. But where is the deed to back up the words of the Demo-Commies?

Budget Committee Chairman Judd Gregg, R-N.H. said Tuesday it was reasonable to assume ANWR would be part of the budget measure. "The president asked for it, and we're trying to do what the president asked for," Gregg said after meeting privately with Republicans on his panel.

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., chairman of the Senate Energy Committee and a strong supporter of refuge oil development, said he was "very optimistic we're going to get the ANWR provision in this budget."

Gregg's panel was expected to begin work on the budget language next week. Senate floor action including a vote on the ANWR provision was likely before the congressional Easter recess March 19.

Given the wider majority of 55 Republicans against 44 Democrats and one Independent, Republicans leaders believe they have the best chance yet to gather the 51 votes needed to include ANWR in the budget language, which is not subject to filibuster.

I bet the Demo-Commies are just up in arms about this! "Why, they can't do that! We can't sit on our hands and block it! Oh NO! We can't allow this!" It's great to see that the people we voted in to eliminate the Obstructionist Movements in the Senate are going to do whatever they need to do to get the bills we want passed. If the Demo-Commies are just going to sit on their fingers and obstruct, then get around them. Attach bills to the Budget, enact the dreaded "Nuclear Option" and change the rules while we have the majority, do whatever it takes to do the things we need to do.

That would be a stinging defeat for environmentalists who consider protecting the refuge as their most important challenge in Congress. Environmentalists have stepped up their lobbying, hoping to convince lawmakers that drilling in the refuge would harm the area's breeding grounds for caribou, as well as polar bears, musk oxen and millions of migratory birds that camp on the refuge's tundra.

These Enviro-Wackos want you to envision fields of oil drills and pumps like in Texas or the Saudi desert. The truth is that they can go in and build a pipe-line, and two or three pumping stations which can drill down, and then in ANY direction to get to the oil that WE NEED underground. There is no need to build fields of pumps and rigs... It won't be like that in ANWR. We're not wanting to plow the refuge under. We're looking to use less that 1% of the refuge to build remote pumping stations and a pipeline... We can do it without destroying the mating grounds of the Caribou.

A small group of senators and key administration officials are flying to Alaska's North Slope this weekend to try to dramatize their argument that the refuge can be developed in an environmentally sound way, using modern drilling technology. They will visit the refuge and North slope oil drilling activities west of the protected area.

"We will see for ourselves how American ingenuity and innovation protects our environment and our wildlife while allowing us to develop our own energy," Domenici said.

See? We can do it! It's not going to keep the Caribou from screwing.

Three years ago, Senate Democrats and a handful of moderate Republicans beat back a pro-development measure by a 52-48 vote. In 1995, an ANWR drilling provision made it into budget language -the same tactic now surfacing- but President Clinton vetoed the bill.

President Bush strongly supports ANWR development. He argued for it in two election campaigns and made it a key part of the energy blueprint issued in 2001 by Vice President Dick Cheney.

Alaska's congressional delegation has pushed hardest for opening the refuge as Prudhoe Bay oil production continues to dwindle. In recent years, however, major oil companies have shown only modest interest as they focus on oil projects in other parts of the world.

This is the most important part. The Alaskan People and businesses WANT this development. It would do MUCH to boost the economy in Alaska as well as around the rest of the US as well.

With the Measure attached to a budget, which isn't subject to Demo-Commie Obstructionism, and we have a President that is in favor of actually DOING something to reduce out dependence on foreign energy instead of just talking about it, we may actually see something happen in government for a change.

Another Example of the Need for Tort Reform.

2005-03-02T13:30:00.000-05:00

The lawyers are lining up and preparing to file suit against the government on behalf of would-be assassins and citizens of foreign countries with which we are at war.

Bush assassin suspect suing U.S.?
Family of Muslim accused in plot blames America

The family of a 23-year-old Muslim scholar accused of plotting with al-Qaida to kill President Bush said yesterday they want to sue the Bush administration for allowing their son's detention and alleged torture in a Saudi prison.

Ahmed Abu Ali "was tortured on orders of the USA; they are monsters," his mother, Faten, said outside a federal courtroom.

Yeah, we're the monsters... Her son is plotting the assassination of the President of the United States of American and the government is the monster...

The young man's father, Omar, said, "The Saudi government are slaves of the Americans" and the U.S. government is lying when it says his son was under Saudi control for the 20 months before he was flown to the United States and charged.

An indictment filed Tuesday alleges that Abu Ali discussed assassinating Bush, conducting a terrorist attack in the United States and establishing an al-Qaida cell here. More than 100 of his supporters ridiculed the judge during the reading of the charges against Ali.

The Saudis are OUR slaves? No, my friends, it's the other way around. Look at who is holding all the cards. Who does most of the bowing? We do. We need their oil because the Demo-Commies and environmental wackos won't let us drill for oil here. We routinely turn a blind eye to the brutality of the Saudi government, and their attempts to stop the progress of Democratic reform movements in their country because our economy couldn't handle a Saudi oil embargo.

In exchange, the Saudi government has been quick to help us in the War on Terror. They have rounded up and killed terrorists in their own country, they have exiled Bin Laden and Al-Qaida and recently captured this Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, who intended to conspire with Al-Qaida to assassinate the President.

The federal indictment said that in 2002 and 2003 Abu Ali and an unidentified co-conspirator discussed plans for Abu Ali to assassinate Bush. They discussed two scenarios, the indictment said, one in which Abu Ali "would get close enough to the president to shoot him on the street" and, alternatively, "an operation in which Abu Ali would detonate a car bomb."

Federal prosecutors say Abu Ali joined an al-Qaida cell in Saudi Arabia in 2001. The alleged Bush plot occurred while he was studying in that country.

According to the indictment, Abu Ali obtained a religious blessing from another unidentified co-conspirator to assassinate the president. One of the unidentified co-conspirators in the plot is among 19 people the Saudi government said in 2003 were seeking to launch terror attacks in that country, according to the indictment.

"He was tortured," Nubani told the court. "He has the evidence on his back. He was whipped. He was handcuffed for days at a time."

Abu Ali is charged with six counts and would face a maximum of 80 years in prison if convicted. The charges include conspiracy to provide material support to al-Qaida, providing material support to al-Qaida, conspiracy to provide support to terrorists, providing material support to terrorists and contributing service to al-Qaida.

The judge wrote in December that there was "at least some circumstantial evidence that Abu Ali has been tortured during interrogations with the knowledge of the United States."

So what?!?! Who cares. The Saudis catch a man who is conspiring with Al-Qaida to assassinate our president and they rough him up for information. So what? This "we can't torture people" movement is SO 1969. Here is the problem with the movement; we're not allowed to use any form of interrogation and coercion at all. The enemy routinely tortures, maims, beheads and murders their prisoners. Where is the outrage at their actions?

Why is it that the media force-fed us torture and abu-grab-ass images but refused to show us the images of American Citizens being burned and hung from a bridge in Iraq? Why did the media not show us the beheadings of hostages in Iraq? Why is it that we are constantly being belittled and run down by the media while the refuse to show us the face of our enemy?

But here is the kicker:

Suspect Said to Admit Plan to Kill Bush

A Virginia man accused of plotting with al-Qaida to assassinate President Bush has admitted his guilt on numerous occasions, an FBI agent testified Tuesday.

Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, 23, admitted "multiple times" that he joined al-Qaida while studying overseas in Saudi Arabia and discussed plans with the terrorist network to assassinate President Bush, FBI agent Barry Cole said. The agent also said the suspect talked about plans for a Sept. 11-type attack in which "hijackers would board planes in Great Britain and Australia ... so they did not have to have U.S. visas."

"Once into U.S. territories they would fly into designated targets," he said.

Abu Ali also discussed killing U.S. congressmen, soldiers and blowing up naval ships in American ports, Cole said. He said Abu Ali's confessions are corroborated by the admissions of an al-Qaida cell leader in Saudi Arabia who surrendered to authorities.

Cole said that the al-Qaida leaders gave Abu Ali two options: He could either become part of a martyr operation or he could establish a cell in the United States and he would "marry a Christian woman, assimilate into the community and he would be provided operatives."

Cole also said that Abu Ali was hostile to his Saudi captors and that he would hurl insults at them, such as "Jew scum."

Abu Ali's lawyers were to offer their response later Tuesday. In the past, however, they have claimed that the government obtained its evidence through torture and so it is unreliable.

The government has denied those allegations.

So here we have a young Muslim man, neck deep in Al-Qaida plots and plans, a would-be assassin of the President of the United Stated of America, and a TERRORIST. And we have American Lawyers lining up to file suit against the Government of the United States because of something that the Saudi Arabian government did... Brilliant. It's great to see that all those long hours of law school are paying off.

Assault with a Deadly Rubber Band.

2005-02-27T06:18:00.000-05:00

So how PC and out of control have our schools become? Here's a brief glimpse into the insanity that is public schools:

Florida boy accused of assault with rubber band

A 13-year-old student in Orange County, Fla., was suspended for 10 days and could be banned from school over an alleged assault with a rubber band, according to a WKMG Local 6 News report.

Robert Gomez, a seventh-grader at Liberty Middle School, said he picked up a rubber band at school and slipped it on his wrist.

Gomez said when his science teacher demanded the rubber band, the student said he tossed it on her desk.

After the incident, Gomez received a 10-day suspension for threatening his teacher with what administrators say was a weapon, Local 6 News reported.

"They said if he would have aimed it a little more and he would have gotten it closer to her face he would have hit her in the eye," mother Jenette Rojas said.

Rojas said she was shocked to learn that her son was being punished for a Level 4 offense -- the highest Level at the school. Other violations that also receive level 4 punishment include arson, assault and battery, bomb threats and explosives, according to the Code of Student Conduct.

The district said a Level 4 offense includes the use of any object or instrument used to make a threat or inflict harm, including a rubber band.

Rojas plans to fight the ruling but her son still faces expulsion.

"It's ridiculous, it's a rubber band," Rojas said.

The school's principal could not comment because the case is still under investigation.

A district spokesman said there is still a series of meetings the district will have before Gomez is officially expelled.

Oh no! That rubber band is a dangerous weapon! Sweet Jesus! He could'a Put her eye out! He surely needs to be punished! Maybe Death by Firing Squad? They could use this:

The Firewheel Rubber Band Assault Rifle
With it's High Capacity 10-Shot Magazine, starter bag of bands, Gatling Gun action (with the wheel indexing a "barrel" into position each time it fires), variable Rate of Fire, Select-fire (semi-auto, shotgun, and full-auto) firing modes, fold-away stock, Effective Range of approximately 6 feet, this weapon will soon be the bane of Demo-commies like Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, and no doubt legislation will be forthcoming...

Gonna wash that Devil right out of my head...

2005-02-27T05:58:00.000-05:00

Demons exorcised live on TV. 'Scientific' experiment criticized as stunt for ratings

A man who claims he was possessed by demons was "delivered" in a televised exorcism broadcast live on British television, yesterday.

The subject, a man in his 40s identified only as Colin, was monitored by neuro-imaging technology that showed the audience what was occurring in his brain while Rev. Trevor Newport, a Pentecostal minister, prayed for him.

Yeah, I think I saw that... Only it was Leslie Nieslon who was trying to get the devil out of Linda Blair again... Oh wait, that was Reposessed... Can you believe that people still believe this stuff?

The UK's Channel 4, which carried the program, has earned a reputation for provocative broadcasting of medical procedures, having shown an abortion in 2004 and an autopsy two years prior.

The procedure was observed by 20 religious and scientific observers that included clerics from the Church of England and local mosques, psychologists, neuroscientists and psychiatrists.

Dr. Jonathan Bird, a neuro-psychiatrist from the Frenchay Hospital in Bristol, said he observed "very little activity in the parietal region of the brain" on the attached electroencephalograph. "We also saw some asymmetry in the temporal lobe," Bird added. "Whether that is a brain process or a spiritual process, I leave to the experts."

Following the exorcism, Colin told Channel 4, "I feel that I have had demons in my life and that they have been delivered. I believe there is a merciful God and this country needs to know that Jesus cast out spirits and still does."

"I was a bit nervous beforehand but after I was prayed for the nervousness just went" Colin said. "It was the most relaxed deliverance I have ever had."

Rev. Newport, of Life Changing Ministries, has conducted numerous exorcisms in his 25 years as an ordained minister. "Colin was very agitated beforehand and now he is completely relaxed" he told the audience. "A lot of people were perhaps expecting a more graphic demonstration this is quite a normal deliverance."

Normal or not, the two-minute televised ritual and "scientific experiment" has drawn criticism.

Conservative MP Ann Widdecombe told the London Evening Standard, "An exorcism is not an appropriate thing to be shown on television. Anything that you put on television even if it is in the name of science is seen as a form of entertainment."

"It's interfering in something very personal." added John Beyer, director of Media Watch UK. He accused Channel 4 of sensationalism. "Is this a legitimate investigation or just some stunt to create controversy and ratings? People who need 'exorcisms' are nearly always mentally ill. The channel is likely to get loads of calls from people saying they are possessed too because they haven't had proper help for their problems-from doctors."

Simon Andreae, Channel 4's head of science programming, responded to the criticism leveled against the broadcast: "We are delighted to have been part of one of the first scientific investigations into the neurology of possession. I hope that the program will form part of a wider debate about the relationship between science and religion."

People need to understand that back in the day, everything was the fault of the devil or demons. If you were sick, it was the devil. If you were depressed, it was the devil... Etc. Exorcisms were often BRUTAL torture sessions that went on and on.

The only miracle here is that yet another KOOK gets on TV and makes an idiot of himself and the whole world is talking about him now... Sheesh!

Illegal Immigration and Crime.

2005-02-27T05:05:00.000-05:00

It boggles the mind, really. Why we're not doing anything to combat the influx of illegal immigrants into this country is beyond me. Here's the weekly update:

3 admit trying to sell fake ID papers to Iran nationals

BROWNSVILLE — Three members of a ring accused of attempting to sell fake immigration documents to Iranian nationals pleaded guilty in federal court to various counts of fraud and identity theft.

Now why would Iranian Nationals want to get into the United States using fake identification?

Port Isabel residents Roberto Aburto, Azalia Gaona, Miriam Palestina and Rutilio Marquez are accused of taking $1,050 to make fake Social Security cards and green cards for three Iranians in August 2004.

Aburto, 31, Gaona, 27, and Palestina, 26, were arrested during two Sept. 9 raids in Port Isabel, but Marquez remains at large and is presumed to have fled to Mexico. (emphasis added)

Between Aug. 2 and Sept. 9, the group allegedly agreed to make nine sets of Social Security cards and green cards for undercover agents for $2,770.

According to court records, Aburto was stopped for a traffic violation by Port Isabel police and deported on Aug. 9 for an immigration violation but returned to town a few days later.

While he was gone, his wife Azalia Gaona, made a deal with an ICE informant on Aug. 10 to make fake documents using real social security numbers for three men who were reportedly from Iran for a total of $1,050.

All four members of the group allegedly participated in the manufacture of those and other forged documents.

Agents found fake Social Security cards and green cards...

At Aburto's house, agents found computer equipment that was allegedly used to create the fake documents.

Although Marquez remains a fugitive, he and the others were indicted by a federal grand jury on Oct. 5 and charged with 21 counts of conspiracy, misuse of a Social Security number, immigration document fraud and identification document fraud.

Jack Martin with the Federation for American Immigration Reform said his organization applauds the arrests but remains concerned other people like the Port Isabel ring could sell fake documents to terrorists.

"It's a tremendous issue of concern," he said. "We've always known that people associated with international terrorism could get themselves smuggled into the United States through the Mexican and Canadian border and then easily obtain counterfeit documents that would allow them to move around freely."

Nathan Selzer, with the Valley Movement for Human Rights, said reforming American immigration policy to allow more guest workers is the best way to put illegal document rings out of business.

"Our policy should be looking at causes of illegal immigration," he said. "Legitimate documents are kept out of the hands of honest, hard-working people; forcing them to these dangerous, clandestine and illegal operations."

Yeah... Bullshit! There is a REASON these guys were trying to skirt in under the radar. Ten to one it wasn't for the french fries.

Arizona: Feds let migrants pile up in prisons at $28K a day

Arizona taxpayers are paying more than $28,000 a day to incarcerate hundreds of illegal immigrants because the federal government hasn't filed the paperwork to deport them to Mexico, state prison officials say.
Arizona Department of Corrections Director Dora Schriro said deporting such criminals should be a "no-brainer" given the money that could be saved and the beds that could be freed in the state's overcrowded prison system.

Formal deportation orders for 46 of the 526 eligible inmates have been on file for several months, but state prison officials can't get Immigration and Customs Enforcement to pick them up, Schriro said.

"I don't know why it's not getting done anymore, but it's not getting done," she said.

Well no kidding.

At the same time, ICE officials held a news conference Wednesday to tout a record number of deportations in January - 766 - from a federal prison in Eloy, further angering state officials who say taxpayers are unfairly getting the bill for the criminals that remain in state custody.

ICE officials said they knew of no such problem.

The drain on the state's prison system prompted Gov. Janet Napolitano to send an invoice to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, requesting compensation for more than $118 million over the past 18 months. Napolitano demanded that the federal government pay up or take custody of the thousands of criminal illegal immigrants housed in Arizona prisons.

How's that for a set of Spaldings?

Each inmate costs the state $53.44 per day to house. The state recoups $17.12 of that through the federal government's State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, or SCAAP.

At the ICE news conference, Phillip Crawford, Phoenix director of detention and removal operations for ICE, said the record-setting number shows the agency's "continued commitment to removing criminal aliens from the United States." The deportations include illegal immigrants convicted of crimes ranging from sexual assault to drug trafficking.

He wouldn't comment on the inmates still in state custody.

I wonder why? Could it be because they aren't doing the job tasked to them?

Russ Knocke, an ICE spokesman in Washington, D.C., said immigration officials would have to review the cases individually to see if there is a delay in processing criminal immigrants for deportation.

He said ICE officials in Arizona have not received complaints or questions from state prison officials and have a system in place that rapidly and efficiently deports immigrants as they finish their sentences.

"If they have any instance where they have an alien who is eligible for removal and not being removed, I would encourage them to communicate with us," Knocke said.

Cam Hunter, a state prisons spokeswoman, said ICE officials were notified about a month ago about 400 inmates eligible for deportation but have not yet responded. The other, more than 100 inmates have been identified within the last month, she said. By the end of the year, the state expects to have 590 additional inmates who could be deported to Mexico, where ICE drops them at the Nogales border crossing.

Under a 1996 state law, illegal immigrants convicted of certain felonies are eligible for deportation to Mexico after they complete 50 percent of their sentences, she said. The law applies to Class 3 through 6 felonies, involving "nondangerous, nonrepetitive" offenses, excluding sex crimes.
Hunter said ICE, formerly the Immigration and Naturalization Service, has struggled with the deportations from the state prisons since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

"What we're experiencing ... is a marked slowdown of (ICE's) ability to respond because of staffing issues," Hunter said.

Some critics of the border policy said Arizonans already pay a hefty price for illegal immigration in terms of education, medical costs and government programs. Arizona's 350-mile stretch of border is the busiest in terms of arrests of illegal immigrants. The problem has spilled out from federal immigration detention centers down to state prisons and local jails.

Under SCAAP, the federal government has to pay to house inmates at a state or local facility. Last year, Napolitano said, the state housed an average daily population of 3,642 criminal immigrants at an estimated cost of more than $71 million but received about $9 million in federal reimbursement.

The Bush administration, which has sought to eliminate SCAAP since 2001, has remained steady in its opposition, arguing that it never was intended to reimburse states and counties for the full costs of jailing illegal immigrants.

Bush's proposed budget for next year does not fund the program.

This is where I break ranks with GW... This is simply ridiculous. Fund the program and deport the illegals already George. Screw the "Latino" voting block... Enforce the law and fix the problem.

How the HELL Does Something Like this Happen?

2005-02-27T04:43:00.000-05:00

From the "Women Drivers!" file comes this Gem of the Internet:

On June 13, 2004, at approximately 8:30 AM, Community Volunteer Fire Department's Engine 2 and Ambulance 2 were dispatched to the intersection of Alief-Clodine Road and Metro Boulevard in Southwest Harris County, Texas for the report of a car versus telephone pole.

Upon arrival, the engine company found a vehicle still running, hanging on the telephone wires by its right front tire.

Witnesses reported that the car had been traveling westbound on Alief-Clodine when the driver lost control of the vehicle, crossed the median, and made contact with the guide wire from the ground to the telephone pole, propelling the vehicle upward onto the wires.

Witnesses also reported that the driver jumped down from the vehicle and ran to catch a bus prior to the arrival of Engine 2 and the Harris County Sheriff's Department.

The vehicle ran for over an hour until the oil had completely drained from the motor and it seized.

Several wreckers and a Southwestern Bell crew removed the vehicle from its perch.

Gannon, Talon and Democrats... Oh my!

2005-02-27T04:09:00.000-05:00

In the past few weeks, the Jeff Gannon/Talon News fiasco has been propelled into the headlines and argued about all over the place. HOW DARE anyone pose favorable questions to the President in a room full of angry leftist propagandists?

What's really funny is the way that this whole thing came about. In case you didn't know, Gannon has been at the center of a controversy when it turned out that this credentialed reporter for Talon News (since defunct) had at one point participated in a DC area male escort service for which he either owned or participated in the operation of several web sites, some of which included fairly risque images of the afore mentioned reporter.

Now if that wasn't funny enough, now the Demo-commies are all in an uproar over this scandal.

If Gannon had been a Demo-commie liberal reporter for the New York Times throwing accusations at the president they would have called Gannon a hero for being who he was and being brave enough to face a cruel and evil society bent on his destruction.

Instead, he was first examined because he often asked "softball" questions of the President at the press conferences. That was crime enough to get the whole of the Liberal media examining his background.

Then a Blogger, people like you or me that the democrats describe as "wannabees at home wearing their Pajamas behind a computer screen" broke the story that a similar looking man was on several Gay Male Escort web-sites. How this blogger found this out would simply be speculatory on my behalf so... Ah, screw it. So this Blogger was surfin' the web looking for a Macho man to hook up with in the DC area when he stumbles across the images that would ignite a fire storm of accusations and liberal hypocrisy.

Since he was a conservative working for a conservative news group, the issue of his sexuality became a viable route of attack.

So what if he was/is a male escort? So what if he was/is gay? Isn't that something to be proud of? Doesn't the left brow-beat us on a daily basis about how we should all be accepting of gays and not discriminate against them because of their sexual preference? But what is the left doing today?

So what if he lied about his sexual habits? Didn't we all go through with that during the Clinton Administration. If it's sex, it's even okay to lie about it while testifying under oath. So why the attacks on this man?

What is it that makes this man different than any other Brave, gay Democrat? Why his political leaning of course. Yes, because he is a conservative, if he's gay it's fair game. If he lied, then he needs to be hung. See how this works? The left talks a good game and they show their true colors. Gotta love the sight of democrats being up in arms about a gay guy who lied to get a job...

Attention Ward Churchill: We want our Fifteen Minutes back!

2005-02-27T01:16:00.000-05:00

As is the case with most fools and idiots who open their mouths and spew ignorance and propaganda, they all eventually fade into the past, pariahs of the right to free speech. Such is the fate of Michael Moore, David Duke, Jessie Jackson, and soon, Ward Churchill.

These people are often brought down by their own inability to remain silent. They start out innocently enough, spouting hatred, ignorance, malice, propaganda and mis-information to anyone who would listen, justifying it as "Their opinion." Eventually though, they spout their ignorance to some good Samaritan who takes offence to their words and focuses the spotlight of public awareness on their ramblings.

These people relish in that focus. They see it as a chance to get their opinion out to the masses and convert the sheep. They continue to spout, only now in the lime-light of the media and pundits everywhere line up to take sides. The Democrats are quick to offer a defense of all speech (unless they don't agree with it) and the self appointed protectors of the right come out to condemn. The result is MORE people are hearing the message and more people are exposed to the lie.

But just like an ant on the sidewalk being stalked by a child with a magnifying glass, the focus eventually causes a spark. As more people are exposed to the message and the messenger, the more people begin to examine them both.

In the fiery focus of public attention we've learned that the good professor, a self professed Native American artist and Vietnam combat veteran , really isn't a Native American, nor an artist (he likes to copy other people's work), may not have seen any action in Vietnam, and may have lied to get his job.

The same thing happened to Michael Moore, who was forced to recant an offer of $50,000 to anyone who could find any "lies" in his propaganda opus, "Fahrenheit 9/11."

It's only a matter of time before the good professor losses his job and we are once again free from his blathering hatred of America.

But what can we learn from all of this fuss? First, we've learned that "Academic Freedom" means being completely Politically Correct and in some cases members of Communist Support Groups. We've learned of the systematic brain-washing of America's youth. We learn that Leftist ideas are force fed to students and if they stand up to protest they are failed or told to sit down and shut up.

But there is hope. In the State of Tennessee, there is legislation being written called the "Student's Bill of Rights." It would guarantee that ALL opinions are valued and valid, not just the opinions or old liberal professors.

We can take solace in the fact that as these idiots continue to ply their trade, they are all eventually caught by someone not willing to "sit down and shut up" or willing to risk a failing grade. We can take solace in the fact that eventually, someone focuses some much needed sunlight through a magnifying glass at these ants and starts a spark that can only end in the demise of these idiots.

So sit back and enjoy the fireworks. Sure, we may never get our fifteen minutes back from Professor Churchill, but at least we get to watch him squirm under the fiery light of truth. What is it that his generation used to say? Oh yeah, "Burn baby, Burn!"

John F'n Kerry Flip-flops on Iraq again!

2005-02-15T19:21:00.000-05:00

Senator Flipper is at it again folks! I can't believe this guy's nerve.

Kerry Backs Bush's $81.9 Billion War Spending Plan
Democratic Sen. John Kerry, whose baffling explanation of votes on Iraq war funding hurt his 2004 White House bid, said on Tuesday he would back President Bush's new $81.9 billion request for Iraq and Afghanistan.

"I think we're in a very different situation," Kerry told reporters. "I'm going to vote for this ... I think this money is important to our being successful and to the completion of the process."

The Massachusetts senator, who failed in his bid to unseat Bush last November in an election focused on national security, defended his decision to not back the president's previous request to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Mine was the right vote at the time and I wouldn't change it if we went back to that point in time because it was the right vote," Kerry said. "We didn't have a plan and they didn't spend the money correctly."

In October 2003, a year after voting to support the use of force in Iraq, Kerry voted against an $87 billion supplemental funding bill for U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. He did support an unsuccessful alternative bill that funded the $87 billion by cutting some of Bush's tax cuts.

In March last year as the presidential campaign heated up, Kerry provided his Republican opponents with political ammunition when he sought to explain the move by saying: "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."

"Should we have done a better job, could I have done a better job personally in fighting back on defining that?" Kerry asked. "The answer is yeah."

Kerry said the United States would have made better progress on Iraq, where an insurgency continues to rage almost two years after the March 2003 invasion, if he had been elected. He asserted the Bush administration was only now "trying some of the things" he proposed such as focusing on training Iraqi forces and getting other countries involved.

"I think my security proposals for the country were smack on, dead on," Kerry said.

Bush's request is expected to be approved by lawmakers despite concerns in the U.S. Congress about record federal budget deficits.

This from the guy who talked a good game about how Saddam needed to be eliminated, voted for the war effort, then decided that he was anti-war, who then said it would be irresponsible to vote against the funding of the war, before voting against funding the war, before deciding that he supported the war, before he decided that we need to pull out of Iraq immediately, before he decided that we should stay the course...

This guy really does have more waffles than a house of pancakes!

Now that all his doom and gloom predictions involving the Iraq War and the election have been proven wrong and it's become evident even to the more loony liberal out there that Bush was right, Now Mr. Flipper comes out in support of the war effort and in support of seeing it through to the end. Maybe if he hadn't played politics with the lives of our armed men and women risking their lives in the field of battle, you could have won the election.

Let's look at that statement though:

Kerry said the United States would have made better progress on Iraq, where an insurgency continues to rage almost two years after the March 2003 invasion, if he had been elected. He asserted the Bush administration was only now "trying some of the things" he proposed such as focusing on training Iraqi forces and getting other countries involved.

"I think my security proposals for the country were smack on, dead on," Kerry said.

Hello, Mr. Flipper? What month is it? Oh yeah... It's February. It's been less than a month ago that President Bush was sworn in. SO you're telling me you would have done better in the three weeks following your inauguration? I'd like to here more about this magical plan that would have done better, but guess what? You won't tell us a SINGLE thing that you would have done differently, just that you would have done it better.

Complaining about the issue and saying that you have a secret plan to do it better isn't going to get you anywhere...

Thank Gawd we didn't get stuck with President Kerry...

The Evolution of the Gas Tax.

2005-02-15T17:20:00.000-05:00

So after years of being preached to about how we should all be abandoning our internal combustion engines and getting Fuel-Cell and Hybrid automobiles, the liberals are beginning to see that all this progress is beginning to hit them in the wallet and they are getting worried.

States Mull Taxing Drivers By Mile
College student Jayson Just commutes an odometer-spinning 2,000 miles a month. As cBS News Correspondent Sandra Hughes reports, his monthly gas bill once topped his car payment.

"I was paying about $500 a month," says Just.

So Just bought a fuel efficient hybrid and said goodbye to his gas-guzzling BMW. And what kind of mileage does he get?

"The EPA estimate is 60 in the city, 51 on the highway," says Just.

And that saves him almost $300 a month in gas. It's great for Just but bad for the roads he's driving on, because he also pays a lot less in gasoline taxes which fund highway projects and road repairs. As more and more hybrids hit the road, cash-strapped states are warning of rough roads ahead.

Officials in car-clogged California are so worried they may be considering a replacement for the gas tax altogether, replacing it with something called "tax by the mile."

Seeing tax dollars dwindling, neighboring Oregon has already started road testing the idea.

"Drivers will get charged for how many miles they use the roads, and it's as simple as that," says engineer David Kim.

I see, so it's sorta like this:

"Why, if we're forced to divert money away from our already massive entitlement programs and expanded government to fund road maintenance, how the hell are we supposed to promise expanded welfare benefits and expanded governmental spending?"

"Well, we'll just have to create a new tax!"

Kim and his team at Oregon State University equipped a test car with a global positioning device to keep track of its mileage. Eventually, every car would need one.

"So, if you drive 10 miles you will pay a certain fee which will be, let's say, one tenth of what someone pays if they drive 100 miles," says Kim.

The new tax would be charged each time you fill up. A computer inside the gas pump would communicate with your car's odometer to calculate how much you owe.

The system could also track how often you drive during rush hour and charge higher fees to discourage peak use. That's an idea that could break the bottleneck on California's freeways.

So let's get this straight. We're going to track my every movement in my vehicle and tax me based on when I drive and where I drive? Plus, you're going to tax me MORE if I drive to work or through town during peak hours?

This won't break the bottle neck on the roads at all, since people are on the roads during peak hours not because it's fun to be stuck in traffic, but rather because that's when they a) go to work, b) go to school, c) have to get the kids to school, d) get off work, e) get out of school, or f) need to pick the kids up from school. That's right, the poor, the middle class, working mothers and students would be the most effected by this proposed system of taxation.

Privacy advocates say it's more like big brother riding on your bumper, not to mention a disincentive to buy fuel-efficient cars.

"It's not fair for people like me who have to commute, and we don't have any choice but take the freeways," says Just. "We shouldn't have to be taxed."

I gotta agree.

Not only will the "Tax-by-mile" cause people to look away from the more expensive hybrid and fuel-cell vehicles, but it is also patently unfair and targets the very people the liberals are quick to claim are in need of tax relief; The poor and middle class people living in rural areas that are forced to commute everyday to work or school in the city, The truck drivers out on the roads shipping the products to the stores and warehouses, mothers who not only have to travel to work and back but must also take the kids to school and pick them up and go to the grocery store.

Then there are the privacy issues. I don't like the gas tax, but I don't think that Big Brother spying on just where I am and just how long I'm on the road is exactly the right kind of replacement.

Once this system is in place, how long do you think it will be before we're seeing "upgrades" that automatically ticket you for exceeding the speed limit by not only monitoring the distance traveled, but the time it took you to get there? Or a system that automatically issues tickets when you violate a traffic law? Or a system that tells the police just where you and your sweetheart like to park the car and make out?

This is only the first step in a tax and monitoring system that violates the very principals of Taxation and civil liberties that Liberals claim to support, and all in the name of saving us all from the automobile that is destroying the environment and will kill us all. And yet there wasn't enough forethought within the liberal camps to foresee how their push to force people into the cars that THEY choose for us is going to effect the system on which our entire economy is built.

And so, in typical liberal fashion, a new tax is born.

Democrats, run for your lives!

2005-02-15T04:27:00.000-05:00

As Rush Limbaugh put it earlier today, someone's finally figured it out... What follows are the words of a Democrat who understands just why it is that they've been losing ground in the House, Senate, Judiciary and Exectutive branch of government. No snips...

Howard Dean's Party: Democrats, run for your lives!
BY TED VAN DYK - Saturday, February 12, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

If you've seen "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," you'll know how I feel about the state of the current Democratic Party. The film, as you'll recall, depicted the bodies of decent, normal citizens being taken over while they slept by alien entities marching in conformist and destructive lockstep.

In its original 1950s version, the film was meant to portray the McCarthyism of the time. But it strikes all too close to home for Democrats who once fought everything McCarthyism represented but who now are stuck in a reactionary groupthink of their own.

The culminating act of this sad transformation will come today when Howard Dean is elected national party chairman. This is the same Dean whose presidential campaign spent millions of dollars, failed to win a primary, and flamed out in episodes of reckless Bush rage. Mr. Dean pledges that he is interested only in serving his party and has no plan for a 2008 candidacy. Whether he does or does not, he will become the party's principal spokesman for the next three years. Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the party's congressional leaders, will be eclipsed by the more colorful, uninhibited Mr. Dean. Television news channel and network talk show producers will provide the former governor every minute of exposure he craves.

A national party's chairman is particularly important when his party is out of power. Until 30 years ago, the Democrats' official spokesman and titular leader, after a losing presidential campaign, was their defeated candidate in the prior election. Hence Adlai Stevenson and Hubert Humphrey took center stage for the party and personally selected the party's chairman (Stevenson chose Paul Butler, Humphrey chose Fred Harris and Larry O'Brien). That tradition ended, however, after the 1972 campaign, when George McGovern was pushed aside after his landslide loss. Subsequent losing candidates, including Al Gore and John Kerry, have similarly been sidetracked to make way for the new.

Mr. Dean's ascendancy to the chairmanship could have parallels with Mr. Harris's. After his 1968 defeat, Humphrey pondered a choice between Mr. Harris and former North Carolina governor Terry Sanford as party chairman. Mr. Harris, along with Sen. Walter Mondale, had co-chaired Humphrey's nominating campaign. Sanford had chaired his general-election campaign. Mr. Harris badly wanted the chairmanship after having been passed over for Sen. Ed Muskie as Humphrey's running mate. A soft-hearted Humphrey gave him the job. Mr. Harris, who had his own presidential ambitions, then cast his lot as chairman with the party's most activist constituencies. In so doing he ruined his own presidential chances, lost his Oklahoma Senate seat, and narrowed the party's base. Sanford would have broadened it.

Republican control of the White House, both houses of Congress, and state houses gives the GOP its strongest national position since at least the Eisenhower period of the 1950s. As Democrats ponder their role in opposition, they might consider how their predecessors conducted themselves during that time.

Democratic congressional leaders Sam Rayburn and Lyndon Johnson pursued a strategy in opposition which, down the road, paid long-term dividends for their party. They supported the Eisenhower administration on national security issues during a dangerous time--intervening with the White House when necessary to stop mistakes such as Vice President Richard Nixon's proposal to use nuclear weapons to bail out French forces at Dienbienphu. They observed the general rule that a president deserved to have the nominees he wanted for key administration and judicial appointments and questioned them only selectively.

Congressional Democrats of that period did, however, use their investigative authority to highlight episodes of public and private corruption. Most importantly, they began preparing the ground for landmark domestic legislation--which ultimately became the Great Society--even though they lacked majorities at the time to pass it. In 1965, after President Johnson's huge victory over Barry Goldwater, Democrats promptly passed the agenda they had nurtured during the Eisenhower years.

The party's visible leaders and voices are pursuing an entirely different strategy today. It generally amounts to angry opposition on all issues all the time. President Bush's Iraq intervention was problematic. But had Mr. Kerry been elected president, he would be following essentially the same path today in Iraq as Mr. Bush--that is, to build an elected Iraqi government's capacity to maintain sufficient security that American forces could leave. Yet most Democrats' reaction to the first essential step in that strategy, the successful completion of elections, has been to dismiss the elections' importance, to charge Mr. Bush with "having no exit strategy," or to demand he set a hard timetable for U.S. troop withdrawal.

For many years Democrats, more than Republicans, pointed to the need to reform Social Security for the long term. Social Security, after all, was a Democratic invention and a cornerstone of the party's commitment to economic security. Yet, in the face of the Bush reform initiative, many senior Democrats have chosen simply to deny the need for change. That is not a viable policy or political position. Democrats are quite right to challenge the notion of partial privatization of the system. But they have an equal obligation to offer an alternative reform plan, the components of which are self-evident and which would require little public sacrifice. Why not seize the opportunity the Bush initiative presents and move public opinion toward a Democratic alternative on Social Security?

The Democrats' present disorientation has been in the making for decades. When President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, he acknowledged that its political downside was the end of the Solid (Democratic) South. In 1968, Humphrey lost to Nixon because traditional blue-collar Democratic voters in New Jersey, Ohio and Illinois cast ballots for George Wallace's third-party candidacy. Postelection surveys indicated they did so because they felt alienated from what they saw as Democrats' values and orientations. The disaffections became wholesale in 1972 when Mr. McGovern's peace candidacy was overwhelmed by the "acid, amnesty and abortion" agenda of some of his supporters. As Mr. McGovern's 1972 platform coordinator, I can attest that most of his national convention delegates had less interest in his candidacy than in their own narrow social-agenda objectives.

Jimmy Carter reclaimed moderate Democratic voters, including some Christian conservatives, in 1976. But the erosion in the party's middle-culture base resumed in 1980 as millions of Democrats, including a high percentage of union members, cast Republican votes. President Clinton, as President Carter before him, reclaimed some of those votes. But when "HillaryCare" imploded in 1994, it not only sank health-care reform indefinitely, but also helped Republicans regain a House majority for the first time in 40 years. They have not relinquished it. Something else happened during the Clinton years. President Clinton's eight-year emphasis on short-term tactical politics--focused on his own political survival--left the party without any coherent intellectual foundation.

With the advent of the Dean chairmanship, the Body Snatchers' takeover will be complete and the party of ideas will have been fully transformed to one of reflexive and strident opposition.

Mr. Dean's passion and partisanship no doubt will deepen Democratic support in enclaves they already dominate. My home city of Seattle will remain a blue stronghold. But it will be only one of a few. If you examine the 2004 electoral map closely, you will see that several states, including Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and New Jersey, voted for Mr. Kerry but could trend longer-term toward the GOP. President Bush made gains over 2000 nationally among female, black, Latino and Catholic voters. If they cannot break free of Deanism--i.e., strident opposition to all things Bush--Democrats could find themselves by 2008 the party of Hollywood, Manhattan, San Francisco, Boston, Seattle, Al Sharpton, Michael Moore, George Soros and high-culture media--but not of most Americans.

Second-term blunders by President Bush, or international or economic setbacks, could make voters want change and give Democrats a political reprieve. But what if events go Mr. Bush's way? Unremitting, undifferentiated rage is not an appropriate platform for an opposition party. Voters will reject continuing negativism and obstruction.

Memo to Democrats: It is time to return to the old-fashioned way. Ask the questions: What are the needs of our country? What are our constructive proposals to meet them? How can we best push those proposals forward? If Democratic leaders and candidates ask those questions, and try seriously to answer them, voters may once again be prepared to let them govern.

Mr. Van Dyk, an editorial-page columnist for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, was active for 40 years in national Democratic policy and politics.

Guess who's not coming to dinner...

2005-02-15T03:02:00.000-05:00

I cannot believe this crap. What the HELL do they expect?

...The lobby of U.S. Immigration Court in Harlingen is just about empty, with only a bored-looking security guard manning the front entrance.

Down the hall, immigration Judge Elozar Tovar is running down a list of names and case numbers one after another, and yet the table reserved for defendants remains empty.

In less than two hours, Tovar will have ordered the deportation of about 34 undocumented immigrants. Of those 34 cases, not one of the defendants has appeared in the courtroom.

Delinquency is the norm, not the exception, in the Harlingen branch of U.S. Immigration Court. According to the Executive Office for Immigration Review, a division of the Department of Justice, which oversees the nation’s immigration courts, 88 percent of the 10,401 people scheduled to appear before the court in 2004 failed to do so.

Well no shit! I can't even begin to understand why they wouldn't show up to court and face deportation. What the hell are they doing free anyway? When you pick up a CRIMINAL, you should probably put them in jail, especially someone who is as great a flight risk as an illegal immigrant. When are we going to start using our heads?

Asked why so many aliens failed to appear, EOIR spokesman Greg Ganya handed the question to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, more widely known as ICE. It is that agency’s duty to see undocumented immigrants to court and deport them if and when they lose their appeal for residency.

"We don’t have a rationale for it here. Whether they appear or not tends to be a function of the people who bring all the charges," he said.

When an illegal alien is apprehended, he is issued a Notice to Appear in immigration court at a specified date, usually within six months or less...

Why not issue them a deportation notice, a set of handcuffs and a one-way ticket back to Mexico?

...At the time of apprehension, ICE decides whether the individual should be detained in the time leading to the court date. If the person has a criminal record or is perceived as a threat to national security, he will be placed in a detention facility. If not, the person is released, with or without bond, depending on whether he is considered a flight risk.

WHY!?! I don't understand this. What illegal immigrant isn't going to be a flight risk, you idiots! By their very being here and attempting to avoid detection, they are saying "Hello, if you let me go I'm going to run away and hide again." WHY would you let these people pack up and move to some other state and hide? Why aren't these people loaded onto 747s or busses and shipped back to Mexico? These people should be arrested on the spot, detained, processed and shipped back to Mexico.

"From a practical sense, the reason why people fail to show up is individual to each person," he said. "I couldn't’t tell you why; we don’t really look at it that deeply." - ICE spokesman Manny Van Pelt

Our tax dollars at work! A six year old kid could tell you why they don't show up. They don't want to go back to the Hell-Hole that is their home country.

The fact that ICE doesn't consider the high rate of no-shows worthy of examination isn't surprising.

An organization still coming into its own, ICE was only created in 2002 by a massive government overhaul that proceeded the 9/11 terrorist attacks and spawned the Department of Homeland Security. ICE, a division of Homeland Security, replaced the much criticized U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service and operates under the promising mandate of restoring integrity to the immigration system.

Budgeted at $3.6 billion for 2005, the division has the massive task of investigating terrorist threats, drug and human smuggling operations, as well as the monumental matter of enforcing immigration law.

A variety of people within the immigration field, from academics to legal representatives to federal officers, were contacted to explain the delinquency phenomenon. Everyone had a theory, but no one was able to offer a conclusive answer.

The most common explanation was that location and lack of jobs in the Rio Grande Valley make the area a funnel for undocumented immigrants to points north.

Well no shit, again. They're all migrating to Arizona and Tennessee and Florida. They've been caught and could have been deported, and instead they get a "second chance" to get away with their crime and continue to rob this country of Jobs, Tax revenue and increasing the costs of Welfare, health care and education.

WHY do we continue to let these people flow across the border and infiltrate our nation and culture and rob our treasuries? Why do we continue to elect people who will do nothing to stop the flow of criminals into our cities and states?

Denton Langford, an ICE agent in San Antonio, agreed to a degree, saying a good portion of those who didn't appear simply left the area and failed to notify the court of their change in address.

Well no shit, thrice. What the hell else are they going to do if they've been given a second chance to invade our country?

Most immigrants who appear in the Harlingen Court were captured somewhere in the 17,000 square miles that make up the McAllen sector of U.S. Border Patrol, which extends from Brownsville north as far as Palacios and west to Falcon Lake.

Every day, agents patrol the endless scrubland, keeping a close eye out for footprints and other signs that will give away an undocumented immigrant’s location. On an average day, agents capture about 270 people — and only about half will be Mexican, the majority of whom will opt to be returned home almost immediately to avoid the court system.

Does their low appearance rate in Harlingen mean that the Salvadorans who pass through here are less law-abiding than their counterparts in San Diego?

Probably not, said one attorney, who asked that her name not be used. She suggested ICE agents here simply were not doing a very good job of keeping undocumented immigrants in the area.

I'd agree. They should be slapping handcuffs on these people and sitting them in a cell until they can either be deported or properly processed, especially if there is an acknowledged problem with these people running after making bond. Why not just stop the process of bonding, since it's a MAJOR problem and start putting these people in that vacant courtroom right off the bat?

In truth, there is nowhere to put the majority of those apprehended. The detention center in Bayview, the only dedicated immigrant housing facility in the area, holds 800 people. That is far short of what would be required if every immigrant captured were to be held. According to Langford, Bayview’s beds largely are reserved for immigrants with criminal records.

If they capture 270 a day, and deported 270 a day, then a facility that could house 800 is THREE TIMES big enough to handle the flow of immigrants. If no one is showing up for immigration court, then there is no need for a waiting period. Ship 'em to the court after you catch them, house them at the facility after their case has been judged, then ship 'em out. See how easy? See how logical.

He said ICE will find extra space when the need arises, but the fact is the department simply doesn't deem it necessary to detain every immigrant, opting instead to release most of them on a minimal bond. According to Langford, the bond for an undocumented immigrant without a criminal record runs between $1,500 and $3,000.

Robert Garcia, a bail bondsman in the Valley, says the undocumented have adapted, often coming across with enough money to post the full bond themselves if they get caught.

"It’s a risky type of bond," Garcia said. "But a lot of these people have the money to post bond and not show up."

For someone who might already have paid thousands of dollars to human smugglers, $1,500 isn't a great loss. And with that money paid, freedom is only a bus ride away.

WHY! WHY! WHY! I just don't get it. Stop bonding them and make them all pay a $5000 fine for illegally entering the country and then ship them back. WHY are they turning these criminals loose and expecting them to be honest and come back for their trial. Why not just confiscate everything they have when they are caught and punt them right back to their home-land?

In the case of those captured in the Rio Grande Valley alone, more than 9,000 people a year join the swelling ranks of undocumented immigrants living in the United States.

Read that very carefully. 9,000 illegal immigrants A YEAR, who have been captured at the border by the INS and ICE are turned loose to enter the United States so they can steal jobs, swell welfare expenses, crowd our schools, and rob our health care systems. 9,000 a year.

* Notice. The article is presented here in a slightly trimmed form. For the full article, see the link at the top of the story.

The LAPD Cracks Down Again...

2005-02-13T04:22:00.000-05:00

Read up on Devin Brown here.

In a reaction typical of loony-liberal democommies, the Los Angelis Police Department has adopted a new policy regarding when an officer can shoot at a vehicle being used as a weapon to threaten police officers...

Thirteen year old Devin Brown and a 14 year old partner in crime decided to steal a car at around 3:30am and because didn't really know how to drive an LAPD officer who witnessed the vehicle thought he was dealing with a drunk. They signaled the children to pull over and so begins a 3.5 mile chase that ended when young Mr. Brown runs into a fence and comes to a stop

When officers approach the stolen vehicle repeatedly demanding that young Mr. Brown exit the vehicle and be arrested, he responds by attempting to use the stolen vehicle as a deadly weapon by throwing the vehicle in reverse and ramming the cruiser.

The police respond to an attempt to maim or kill them by opening fire on the vehicle. Ten rounds are fired into the vehicle resulting in the death of Devin Brown.

In response, the LAPD is not going to let officers defend themselves from attack with a deadly weapon such as a vehicle UNLESS they are threatened in another manner.

That shooting prompted Bratton to announce last March that the department should create new rules on when officers can shoot at moving vehicles.

Bratton said such a policy should prohibit officers from shooting "unless the officer or other person are threatened by deadly force, other than the moving vehicle," according to The Times.

A proposal has been formulated but has not been considered by the Police Commission yet. The commission's president, David Cunningham, told The Times the new regulation will probably be considered within the next month.

McDonnell told The Times the proposal would make exceptions for officers whose lives were threatened by a suspect's car.

What else are the officers supposed to think if a criminal throws his stolen vehicle into reverse and slams into the cruiser? Oh, I'm not in danger... No instead, officers are now told to "roll or jump to cover and get away from the vehicle." So the idea here is to let the guy go instead of stopping the criminal and taking him in.

What's wrong with California? The cops shoot a criminal using a vehicle as a weapon and THEY end up being the bad guys... WTF?!?!?! I don't get it. We can't harm a criminal, but if he attempts to harm or does harm a cop... It's okay... "We need to let him go to prevent anyone from getting hurt." Time for a wake-up call California. If you let a criminal get away with something every time they threaten someone, what are they going to start doing all the time? Yep, threatening people. This is why there are so many high speed chases in California. The government would rather let a criminal get away to perpetrate another crime on another day than catch him. Thus the criminals have the idea in their heads that if they start a high-speed chase, the cops will pull back and they'll get away.

If a 13 year old levers a shot-gun at a cop, can they shoot the kid without having to deal with this PC-Liberal-Criminal-Rights-Bullshit? He tried to attack the cops with a car for gawd's sake! ARGH!

Weekly Ann Coulter Fix: 2-9-2005

2005-02-11T06:21:00.000-05:00

I bring you excerpts from Conservative Dream Girl, Ann Coulter's Blog. This time she turns her razor wit on Ward Churchill, the "Native American" professor at Colorado University who's been in some hot water lately. Be sure to check out her blog and pick up her books, "Slander" and "Treason" are both great reads, and I'll be working on "How to Talk to a Liberal, If you must." soon.

SITTING BULL-S***
If Ward Churchill loses his job teaching at the University of Colorado, he could end up giving Howard Dean a real run for his money to head the Democratic National Committee.

Churchill already has a phony lineage and phony war record - just like John Kerry! (Someone should also check out Churchill's claim that he spent Christmas 1968 at Wounded Knee.) In 1983, Churchill met with Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi and later felt it necessary to announce that his group, the American Indian Movement, "has not requested arms from the Libyan government." In 1997, he was one of the "witnesses" who spoke at a "Free Mumia" event in Philadelphia on behalf of convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Come to think of it, Churchill could give Hillary a run for her money. All that's left for Churchill to do now is meet with Al Sharpton and kiss Suha Arafat.

In addition to an absence of evidence about his Indian heritage, there is an absence of evidence that he was in combat in Vietnam. After the POW Network revealed that Churchill had never seen combat, he countered with this powerful argument: "They can say whatever the hell they want. That's confidential information, and I've never ordered its release from the Department of Defense. End of story." Maybe we should ask John Kerry to help Churchill fill out a form 180.

In his most famous oeuvre, the famed 9/11 essay calling the 9/11 World Trade Center victims "little Eichmanns," he said "Arab terrorists" - his quotes - had simply "responded to the massive and sustained American terror bombing of Iraq" by giving Americans "a tiny dose of their own medicine."

Churchill has gone from claiming he is one-eighth Indian "on a good day" to claiming he is "three-sixteenths Cherokee," to claiming he is one-sixty-fourth Cherokee through a Revolutionary War era ancestor named Joshua Tyner. (At least he's not posing as a phony Indian math professor.) A recent investigation by The Denver Post revealed that Tyner's father was indeed married to a Cherokee. But that was only after Joshua's mother - and Churchill's relative - was scalped by Indians.

By now, all that's left of Churchill's claim to Indian ancestry is his assertion: "It is just something that was common knowledge in my family." (That, and his souvenir foam-rubber "tommyhawk" he bought at Turner Field in Atlanta.)

No tribe will enroll him - a verification process Churchill dismisses as "poodle papers" for Indians.

In 1990, Churchill was forced to stop selling his art as "Indian art" under federal legislation sponsored by then-representative - and actual Indian! - Ben Nighthorse Campbell, that required Indian artists to establish that they are accepted members of a federally recognized tribe. Churchill responded by denouncing the Indian artist who had exposed him. (Hey, does anybody need 200 velvet paintings of Elvis playing poker with Crazy Horse?)

A decade ago, Churchill was written up in an article in News From Indian Country, titled, "Sovereignty and Its Spokesmen: The Making of an Indian." The article noted that Churchill had claimed membership in a scrolling series of Indian tribes, but over "the course of two years, NFIC hasn't been able to confirm a single living Indian relative, let alone one real relative that can vouch for his tribal descent claim."

If he's not an Indian, it's not clear what Churchill does have to offer a university. In his book, "A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present," Churchill denounces Jews for presuming to imagine the Holocaust was unique. In the chapter titled "Lie for Lie: Linkages between Holocaust Deniers and Proponents of the Uniqueness of the Jewish Experience in World War II," Churchill calls the Third Reich merely "a crystallization" of Christopher Columbus' ravages of his people (if he were an Indian).

His research apparently consisted of watching the Disney movie "Pocahontas," which showed that the Indians meant the European settlers no harm. (That's if you don't count the frequent scalpings.)

Even the credulous Nation magazine - always on red alert for tales of government oppression - dismissed Churchill's 1988 book "Agents of Repression" about Cointelpro-type operations against the American Indian Movement, saying the book "does not give much new information" and "even a reader who is inclined to believe their allegations will want more evidence than they provide." If The Nation won't buy your anti-U.S. government conspiracy theories, Kemosabe, it's probably time to pack up the old teepee and hit the trail of tears.

In response to the repeated complaints from Indians that a phony Indian was running CU's Indian Studies program, Churchill imperiously responded: "Guess what that means, guys? I'm not taking anyone's job, there wouldn't be an Indian Studies program if I wasn't coordinating it. ... They won't give you a job just because you have the paper." This white man of English and Swiss-German descent apparently believes there are no actual Indians deserving of his position at CU. (No wonder the Indians aren't crazy about him.)

As long as we're all agreed that there are some people who don't deserve jobs at universities, why isn't Churchill one of them?

Student awarded for Bush-Hitler project

2005-02-11T05:49:00.000-05:00

Compares president's policies to Nazi pillage of Europe

A Rhode Island high school student won an art award and an A from his teacher for building an abstract scene that juxtaposes Nazi swastikas and quotes by Adolf Hitler with American flags, desert-colored toy soldiers and an image of President Bush.

Jeffrey Eden, 17, insisted he was trying to make comparisons between the U.S.-led war in Iraq and the German blitzkrieg without actually equating Hitler to Bush, the Providence Journal reported.

But his piece, titled "Bush/Hitler and How History Repeats Itself," immediately prompted a complaint after it was displayed at a store with other winners of the Rhode Island Scholastic Art Awards.

Paul Lewis, 34, of North Providence, found the artwork offensive and notified media after asking that it be removed. "President Bush's policies have no relationship to Hitler's," he said, "but the piece leaves the impression Bush is as evil as the Nazi dictator was."

Eden, who plans to study art after graduation from Chariho Regional High School, thinks he was "clear about what I was trying to get across."

"I believe those who misconstrued the artwork didn't take the time to really read into it," he told the paper.

Eden said he supports U.S. soldiers but contends the war in Iraq was unjustified.

"At the time we invaded, we did not have the justification nor the intelligence to take [Saddam Hussein] out the way we did," he said.

Where are these kids getting their faulty information? Allow me to educate young Mr. Eden and all you liberals out there who spout this crap.

1. Saddam Hussein agreed to a cease-fire and conditions of that cease-fire. All of which he ignored.

2. Saddam Hussein actively ordered his soldiers to carry out an assassination attempt on President George H.W. Bush.

3. Saddam Hussein ordered that American and British planes that were put into place to help stem the slaughter of the Kurds.

4. Saddam Hussein played a cat and mouse game with the UN for 12 years, defying resolution after resolution while setting up an elaborate bribery scheme known as Oil for Food.

All four of those items are violations of the Cease-fire agreement and thus grounds for the resumption of hostilities. The UN voted UNANIMOUSLY for a last resolution that threatened action... We were well within out legal rites to resume the war, since he was thumbing his nose at us.

Yet another example of how our schools are ruining the next generation. How does that qualify as art? How does that merit a passing grade. These are the same people who think that throwing elephant dung on a picture of the Virgin Mary is art.

Lawyer Convicted of Aiding Terrorists

2005-02-11T04:33:00.000-05:00

I'm going to break with the tradition of the "blogisphere" and do something I thought I'd never do, and that's quote the New York Times! Conservative readers, you have been warned! I will however attempt to translate for you, the loyal reader, the words of the Communist times.

Lynne F. Stewart, an outspoken New York lawyer known for aggressively defending unpopular clients, was found guilty today of aiding terrorism by smuggling messages out of jail from a convicted Islamic terrorist she represented.

Read as, Lynne F. Stewart, an outspoken and anti-American New York lawyer known for aggressively defending extremist and terrorist clients, was found guilty today of aiding terrorism by smuggling messages out of jail from a convicted Islamic Terrorist she represented.

Ms. Stewart faces up to 20 years in prison for her conviction on five federal charges that included conspiracy, giving material support to terrorists and lying to the government involving her work with the client, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman. Two co-defendants, Ahmed Abdel Sattar and Mohamed Yousry, were also convicted of all the charges against them in federal court in Manhattan.

Ms. Stewart, 65, who remains free on bail but who may not leave the state until her sentencing on July 15, said that she would appeal. "I will fight on. I'm not giving up," she told reporters. "I know I committed no crime. I know what I did was right."

Federal prosecutors, for whom the verdict was undeniably a big victory, said they would have no comment, but Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales hailed the convictions as sending "a clear, unmistakable message that this Department will pursue both those who carry out acts of terrorism and those who assist them with their murderous goals."

Here's the thing. She actually gave an interview in which she announced that her client no longer supported a cease fire agreement, a message from the Sheik to his terror cell to resume operations.

Ms. Stewart was quoted after the decision came down:

"I see myself as a symbol of what people rail against when they say that civil liberties are eroded," she said, her voice breaking with emotion. "We don't live in the same America we lived in even three or four years ago.

"We will all wake up one morning to hear someone say guilty and be placed in jail," she said. "I hope this verdict will be a wake-up call to all the citizens of this great country that you can't lock up the lawyers. You can't tell the lawyers how to do their jobs."

Of course we don't live in the same America. We were attacked on 9/11 by terrorists like the ones YOU defend Ms. Stewart. These people are evil terrorists and when you deliver the message of a convicted terrorist to his followers that may well result in the death of innocent people, you are a terrorist as well.

We're not all going to wake up and hear someone presume us guilty. But I damned sure hope that the terrorists do. I sure hope that the Criminals do. And most of all I hope that idiots like you do as well.

Ms. Stewart's indictment in April 2002 was announced with great fanfare at a press conference in Washington by the attorney general at the time, John Ashcroft, and the case was one of the most important terrorism prosecutions handled by the Justice Department since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Ms. Stewart was convicted on two counts of conspiring to provide material aid to terrorists, by making the views and instructions of Mr. Abdel Rahman available to his followers in the Islamic Group, a militant organization in Egypt with a history of terrorist violence. She was also convicted on three counts of perjury and defrauding the government for knowingly flouting federal prison rules that barred Mr. Abdel Rahman, a blind Islamic cleric from Egypt, from communicating with anyone outside his federal prison except for his lawyers and a wife.

Ms. Stewart's troubles arose from her work over a decade to defend Sheik Abdel Rahman, who is serving a life sentence in American prison for inspiring a thwarted 1993 plot to bomb the United Nations, the Lincoln and Holland tunnels and other New York landmarks.

The jurors' task was to decide whether Ms. Stewart had crossed a line from vigorously defending a convicted terrorist client despised by the public, as she insisted she was doing, to conspiring actively with Mr. Abdel Rahman and Islamic militants overseas who followed his virulently anti-American preaching, as prosecutors asserted.

Of course she crossed the line and broke the law. The woman delivered messages from a terrorist leader to his terrorist followers. She Violated court orders in communicating with the Terrorist leader and then taking his message out to people the man is not allowed to communicate with. This woman is no better than the terrorist scum that is rotting behind bars.

Ms. Stewart's supporters decried the trial as an example of a new post-9/11 government intolerance, saying the Justice Department was trying to silence her dissent and suppress her combative style of lawyering. But as the prosecutors' evidence emerged, lawyers became divided, with many concluding that Ms. Stewart had flouted the law and ultimately did no service to her client.

Yeah... Of course the government in intolerant of TERRORISM and those who aid the TERRORISTS! Jeeze... You'd think that people would see the point here.

Because she has now been convicted of a felony, Ms. Stewart, who has had a four-decade legal career, is expected to be disbarred and never allowed to practice law again.

Good. She should be disbarred, jailed, and made share a sell with the terrorist scum she defended. See how long he puts up with her when her monthly visitor comes calling.

Almost all the government's evidence consisted of transcripts of secret government recordings of calls on Mr. Sattar's telephone and of Ms. Stewart's prison meetings with Mr. Abdel Rahman, which were conducted in Arabic through Mr. Yousry. Based on that evidence, there was little dispute about many of the central facts.

After Mr. Abdel Rahman was sentenced to life in prison in 1996, his followers in the Islamic Group, a militant organization that had taken responsibility for bloody attacks in Egypt, issued a series of threats against the United States that included demands for his release. Federal prosecutors decided to impose severe rules, known as Special Administrative Measures, which barred the sheik, who was already held in solitary confinement, from speaking with anyone outside prison but his lawyers and one wife.

Ms. Stewart repeatedly signed documents in which she agreed to uphold the rules and said she would not "use my meetings" with the sheik to pass messages to anyone else, "including, but not limited to, the media."

Ms. Stewart brought a letter containing messages from Islamic Group members to meetings with the sheik in the federal prison in Rochester, Minn., on May 19 and 20, 2000. With Mr. Yousry translating, she received a statement from the sheik. On June 14, after much debate within the sheik's legal team, which included Ramsey Clark, a former United States attorney general, Ms. Stewart called a Reuters reporter in Cairo and read him Mr. Abdel Rahman's statement.

In his message, the sheik said he was withdrawing his support for - though not canceling - a cease-fire that the Islamic Group had observed for three years in Egypt. He called on his followers to reconsider the truce.

This is the kind of woman who is considered by some in the nation as a hero. She literally delivered statements to Terrorists groups through the media and delivered messages from terrorists to the Sheik. People like this should be prosecuted as Traitors to this country and HUNG in Times Square for the whole world to see.

Ms. Stewart's chief lawyer, Michael E. Tigar, said that the government's secret video recording of Ms. Stewart's meeting with her client was a gross violation of the attorney-client privilege.

She's aiding a known Terrorist leader. If we had Osama Bin Laden behind bars, would we not record every single word the man says? Would we not watch his lawyers like hawks for just this sort of activity? Forget "lawyer/Client" privilege. He's actively continuing in the role of leader of a terrorist cell from his jail cell. WE MUST be able to stop that. What is the point of jailing these terrorists if we're going to let them give orders, statements, or receive messages from his terror group through a loony-liberal-lawyer?

The core issue in the trial was why Ms. Stewart had done what she did. Prosecutors said she had knowingly worked to deceive the government and smuggle out the sheik's messages in order to promote a return to terrorist violence in Egypt.

I don't care WHY she did it. SHE DID IT. That's all that matters...

Testifying on her own behalf, Ms. Stewart said the cease-fire press release was part of a legal strategy that involved provoking the government, if necessary, in order to keep the sheik in the public eye. Her ultimate goal as a lawyer, she said, was a political negotiation to send the sheik back to Egypt to serve out his sentence.

Ms. Stewart said her view was that she was acting within a lawyer's unwritten "bubble" in the prison rules that allowed her to defend her client as she thought best.

"Oh, I was just trying to get some publicity so the media would be spending more time covering my client, and as such help me betray my country... I mean defend my client by provoking the government by stabbing them in the back... I mean bringing the public over to my side..."

Shut the hell up!

You delivered a message that may well have led to the death of innocent people. You violated an agreement you signed. You violated the law. You betrayed your country. Sure, Democrats everywhere love you for it, but the majority of Americans hope you rot. Bye bye Ms. Stewart.

The government never showed that any violence ever resulted from Mr. Sattar's calls or from any action by Ms. Stewart or Mr. Yousry; there were no victims in the case. The Islamic Group never cancelled the cease-fire, which remains in effect to this day. The defendants were never accused of plotting any terrorism in the United States.

So what? THEY'RE TERRORISTS, plotting terror activities across the globe. Ms. Stewart participated in those plots by a)keeping the Sheik in the loop by delivering messages to him and b)sending out messages and statements to the terrorists via the media. They're all guilty.

The prosecutors showed that she had never formally challenged the rules, nor had she ever discussed her interpretation of the "bubble" with any prosecutors or prison officials before her trial. One of the prosecutors' strongest points was made by Anthony Barkow, the assistant United States attorney, who made their final argument to the jury.

"She thought she could blow off the rules that apply to everyone else because she's a lawyer, and she's above the law," Mr. Barkow said. "She said, 'I think my client is more important than the law. My cause is more important that the risk to lives of innocent people.' "

On the stand, Ms. Stewart often appeared indifferent to the extremist message of her client, Mr. Abdel Rahman.

Of course she was indifferent. She's a lawyer and supports the ideals and actions of the Sheik. She probably did think that as a lawyer she was above the law, but the simple matter is that she's not.

She is a terrorist and she will be punished. Let's all hope that more Terrorists... I mean Lawyers find their way to the right side of the prison bars, behind them.

Senate OKs Class Action Lawsuit Limits

2005-02-11T03:05:00.000-05:00

Hammering the lawyers!

The Senate approved a measure Thursday (72 to 26) to help shield businesses from major class action lawsuits like the ones that have been brought against tobacco companies, giving President Bush the first legislative victory of his second term.

Under the legislation, long sought by big business, large multistate class action lawsuits could no longer be heard in small state courts. Such courts have handed out multimillion-dollar verdicts.

Instead, the cases would be heard by federal judges, who have not proven as open to those type of lawsuits.

"We look forward to this legislation coming to the House floor next week so we can send it to President Bush, who has made its enactment a top priority," said a statement from House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, House Judiciary chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and House Agriculture chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va.

"The Senate has taken a critical step toward granting families, consumers and employers relief from the heavy burden of lawsuit abuse," said Thomas Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "Now it's time for the House to finish the job and take back our civil justice system from plaintiffs' lawyers seeking jackpot justice."

About freakin' time! There are literally thousands of class-action lawsuits over everything. Yes, people are entitled to damages if a company is at fault for something, but these suits where people win millions of dollars for spilling hot coffee on themselves or because they got a splinter... It's gotta be reeled in because it's going too far.

Businesses need to be able to do business without juries handing out Multi-Million dollar rewards to people who sue over any little thing.

The Association of Trial Lawyers of America said insurance, tobacco, drug, chemical and other companies had financed the push to get the legislation through the Senate. "Every American's legal rights are diminished by this anti-consumer legislation," said association president Todd A. Smith said.

Bush and other bill supporters - who have pushed for the legislation for almost six years - say it is needed because greedy lawyers have taken advantage of the state system by filing frivolous lawsuits in state courts where they know they can get big verdicts.

Senators who back the bill say lawyers make more money from such cases than do the actual victims, and that lawyers sometimes threaten companies with class action lawsuits just to get quick financial settlements. Regular people, they assure, will not lose their day in court.

This is the problem right here. What is the average pay-out that a trial lawyer gets in any lawsuit he or she files? Upwards of 33%. In a class action lawsuit, the overall award is huge, but it's split amongst those involved in the suit. So let's say a class action Lawsuit is settled in court for $10 Million Dollars. The Lawyer immediately takes $3.3 Million of that money to pay himself. Then the remaining $6.7 Million is split up amongst ALL the people who were involved. Lets say 12 million people signed up for the lawsuit. Guess what the people who were wronged gets. Around $558,000. Does that sound right?

Opponents say Bush and other bill supporters are trying to help businesses escape proper judgments for their wrongdoing - and also to hurt the trial lawyers who litigate the cases, some of whom are big Democratic contributors.

"Are there bad lawyers that bring meritless cases? Sure there are, and we should crack down on them," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada, a former trial lawyer. "But this bill is not about punishing bad lawyers. It is about hurting consumers and helping corporations avoid liability for misconduct."

No, it's about making it a little harder for a Lawyer to get rich off the pain and suffering of others. It makes the lawyer go in front of a federal judge and make his case in a court that isn't going to approach a class action suit with a "Well, they're a big company, they can handle it." attitude.

Bush and other supporters say the bill, which would send most multistate class action lawsuits to federal court instead of allowing them to be heard in state courts, is needed because lawyers try to file lawsuits in friendly jurisdictions where they are most likely to get large payouts.

EXACTLY! It shouldn't be about shopping around for a judges or juries that are pre-disposed to big awards or anti-business tendencies. Since these suits are almost always crossing state borders, which state's laws should apply? It simply makes sense for the case to be heard in federal court.

The bill's aim "is to make sure when companies are called on the carpet, when they are involved in a class action litigation, they're in a court, in a courthouse with a judge where the companies have a fair shake, where the odds, the decks aren't stacked against them," said Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del.

Oh my GAWD! I'm agreeing with a Democrat... I need a drink... Make it a double...

"The reason why this bill is the highest priority of the Bush administration and the Republican leadership in Congress is because of one simple fact: Class action suits moved from state courts to federal court are less likely to go forward, to be tried, and they are less likely to reach a verdict where someone wins or loses," said Senate Democratic Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill. And if the plaintiffs win, businesses are "less likely to pay a reasonable amount of money in federal court than in state court."

Don't you mean the Lawyers won't be able to get a reasonable fee Mr. Durbin? Don't you mean that since those lawyers won't be getting huge shares of the awards which in turn means that the DNC will be getting less big, fat checks Mr. Durbin?

Under the compromise legislation, class-action suits would be heard in state court if the primary defendant and more than one-third of the plaintiffs are from the same state. But if less than one-third of the plaintiffs are from the same state as the primary defendant, the case would go to federal court.

At least $5 million would have to be at stake for a federal court to hear a class-action suit.

The bill also would limit lawyers' fees in so-called coupon settlements - when plaintiffs get discounts on products instead of financial settlements - by linking the fees to the coupon's redemption rate or the actual hours spent working on a case.

Senate bill is S. 5, can be found at: this link.

You mean a lawyer would actually only be paid for hours worked and/or if the rewards are actually accepted and used? You mean they won't be able to just grab a huge lump some of the money that the plaintiffs win in an award and run? About freakin' time! That's two big stories where the good guys win in one day! It's awesome to be on the sidelines seeing the good guys win!

House Approves Standard Electronic ID

2005-02-11T01:50:00.000-05:00

From the C-Net Story:

Finally, someone had the bawls to sponsor a bill which will FORCE states to CONFIRM the legality of ANY person attempting to get a state ID or a Driver's License and standardize the Driver's License system.

The U.S. House of Representatives approved on Thursday a sweeping set of rules aimed at forcing states to issue all adults federally approved electronic ID cards, including driver's licenses.

Under the rules, federal employees would reject licenses or identity cards that don't comply, which could curb Americans' access to airplanes, trains, national parks, federal courthouses and other areas controlled by the federal government. The bill was approved by a 261-161 vote.

The measure, called the Real ID Act, says that driver's licenses and other ID cards must include a digital photograph, anticounterfeiting features and undefined "machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements" that could include a magnetic strip or RFID tag. The Department of Homeland Security would be charged with drafting the details of the regulation.

Republican politicians argued that the new rules were necessary to thwart terrorists, saying that four of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers possessed valid state-issued driver's licenses. "When I get on an airplane and someone shows ID, I'd like to be sure they are who they say they are," said Rep. Tom Davis, a Virginia Republican, during a floor debate that started Wednesday.

This is awesome work that will go a long way toward fixing the illegal immigrant problem as well as the Identity theft and fake IDs.

States would be required to demand proof of the person's Social Security number and confirm that number with the Social Security Administration. They would also have to scan in documents showing the person's date of birth and immigration status, and create a massive store "so that the (scanned) images can be retained in electronic storage in a transferable format" permanently.

HAHA! Yes! Time to start cheering! Now, if a state wishes to continue to receive federal funds for their government they will be forced to halt the practice of offering IDs and Driver's Licenses to Illegal immigrants since they will be FORCED to provide proof of Legal Resident status, a Social Security number (which will now be researched), and provide information such as birth certificates, etc.

Another portion of the bill says that states would be required to link their DMV databases if they wished to receive federal funds. Among the information that must be shared: All data fields printed on drivers' licenses and identification cards, and complete drivers' histories, including motor vehicle violations, suspensions and points on licenses.

The Bush administration threw its weight behind the Real ID Act, which has been derided by some conservative and civil liberties groups as tantamount to a national ID card. The White House said in a statement this week that it "strongly supports House passage" of the bill.

Oh Scary! Not a national ID card! NO! We can't have a form of ID that will make it tougher for Illegal immigrants, terrorists and Criminals to get ID! It's... It's Un-American!

We already have one form of national ID, the Social Security Card. Yep. You already have a national ID card. The problem is that Social Security Cards are easy to fake. It's just a piece of paper with a type-written number on it. Anyone with a good scanner, printer and a computer can fake one of these things.

The idea here is to standardize the data contained on something that is already considered the chief form of ID for any US Citizen, the Driver's License. You show a driver's license to buy an airline ticket. When you are engaged by a Police officer, you must present your ID or driver's license. When you try to open a bank account, they must have your ID. When you get a Job, you have to have a driver's license AND a Social Security card.

Having been in retail for a while, I can attest to the different nature of IDs and driver's licenses that are out there. Some states have long alpha-numeric "numbers," some states simply put the Social Security number on the ID. Other states have short numbers. The state of Tennessee has an optional Social Security Number on the ID. Often instead of the SSN, it says "On File" or is blank altogether.

This law will standardize this important form of ID. It will make all IDs from ANY state contain the same information and require the SAME standards.

Thursday's vote mostly fell along party lines. About 95 percent of the House Republicans voted for the bill, which had been prepared by the judiciary committee chairman, F. James Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican. More than three-fourths of the House Democrats opposed it.

I wonder why? If it's gonna make it tough on Illegal Immigrants, Terrorists or criminals you know that the Liberals and the ACLU will be out in force.

Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat from Washington, D.C., charged that Republicans were becoming hypocrites by trampling on states' rights. "I thought the other side of the aisle extols federalism at all times," Norton said. "Yes, even in hard times, even when you're dealing with terrorism. So what's happening now? Why are those who speak up for states whenever it strikes their fancy doing this now?"

I can answer that question, Mrs. Norton.

Illegal Immigrants are flooding into this country by the MILLIONS and Terrorists who wish to attack us are carrying IDs and Driver's Licenses that they've obtained in states where the screening process for IDs is a Joke, such as Tennessee. The Driver's License is already considered the chief form of identification in this country and creating a federal standard for this form of ID is a good idea that has been needed for YEARS.

Civil libertarians and firearm rights groups condemned the bill before the vote. The American Civil Liberties Union likened the new rules to a "de facto national ID card," saying that the measure would force "states to deny driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants" and make DMV employees act as agents of the federal immigration service.

NO! We can't possibly have that! State and Federal Officials enforcing the law! No wonder the ACLU doesn't like it. Yes, it will force states to stop participating the crime of illegal immigration. That means that CRIMINAL IMMIGRANTS would no longer be able to get driver's licenses, meaning that if they drive, they are breaking even more laws. It's not a national ID card. It's standards applied to State ID cards that are already the chief form of ID in this nation.

Because an ID is required to purchase a firearm from a dealer, Gun Owners of America said the bill amounts to a "bureaucratic back door to implementation of a national ID card." The group warned that it would "empower the federal government to determine who can get a driver's license--and under what conditions."

Of course it would! Who should be allowed to receive State IDs and Driver's licenses? Well, Legal residents of the United States of America. Resident Aliens who have entered the country legally. Legal Immigrants who have moved to this country permanently and legally.

So who would be excluded? Oddly enough, right now it would only be Illegal Immigrants, terrorists, and criminals. No wonder the Democrats are against it, it would eliminate half of their base.

Turning the Tables on Loony Liberals!

2005-02-09T02:54:00.000-05:00

The Kreeper is Published in the local paper!

2005-02-08T04:55:00.000-05:00

"...I've been contacted by the local paper here in Sevier County Tennessee and my "Revisiting Illegal Immigration" article will appear in The Mountain Press in the next few days. I had to edit it down a little to make it fit to their standards for the editorial page for reader submissions. As soon as it's up on their website, I'll post a link..."

Well, they finally printed it. I can't wait to hear the reaction to this one...

Click here to see the "trimmed" Illegal Immigration article as published in the editorial section of The Mountain Press!

A little bit of the bite is trimmed out and so is a little of the redundant remarks, and everything had to be conveyed in 500 words or less, so I had to get pretty liberal (which is something I rarely do) with the "cut" option, but it works great, I think.

Previous editorial Submissions by myself:
On the Facts of War - A submission in response to letter after letter about how awful it was that we lost, at that point, around 900 soldiers in the War on Terror. I tried to convey a sense of context to the readers by using stats from an E-mail I received and some interesting tid-bits of information. Unfortunately they gave it the title of "Reader offers "Refreshing" War Memories."

On the idiocy of some letters to the editor. - A response to several letters published on the same day in the editorial section. I addresses each idiotic notion directly, and I'll give you, my loyal readers the full scoop! All three letters to which I am responding are here.

What's the Big Freakin' Deal with GoDaddy.com

2005-02-08T03:17:00.000-05:00

This Bud ad was nixed before the show even aired... Why? It's funny. But a little ad by Godaddy.com made it past the pre-game censors and made it to air.

I gotta ask... What's the big deal about this ad?

The Godaddy.com ad that features the very healthy and very curvaceous Nikki Cappelli (a.k.a Candice Michelle) having some wardrobe malfunctions as she testifies in a "broadcast censorship hearing" (in Salem Mass. of all places) is drawing fire from the media and the religious right.

In a move that will further cement the broadcast media and the NFL as hypocrites, Fox and the NFL decided to pull the Godaddy spot because it was too racey, too titillating, too controversial, too sexy, too crude, and not family friendly enough.

MSNBC "When the GoDaddy.com spot aired in the first half, it became obvious to us that its content was very much out of step with the tenor set by the other ads and programming broadcast by FOX on Super Bowl Sunday, so FOX made the decision to drop its repeat airing,” Fox advertising President Jon Nesvig said in a statement. “We understand GoDaddy's disappointment with our decision, but ultimately we are responsible for what our network broadcasts."

This coming from the Television Network that airs family friendly shows like "Trading Spouses." This from the Sports League that has more skin readily viewable on the sidelines when it comes to the cheerleaders, more salacious activities perpetrated by the players on the field, accepts the Coors Twins into almost every game broadcast over the air waves, and employs criminals.

In the rush to separate themselves from the intentional and unacceptable behavior exhibited at last years' Super Bowl half time show, the NFL went out of it's way this year to present a boring and uninspiring half time show, which I am sure that the people behind the Lingerie Bowl appreciated very much.

But now people are out there, attacking this ad like it was really something awful. It was poking fun at the "horrific events" of the last Super Bowl and the over-reaction of the Government, the religious right and the media to an event that is such a NON-EVENT.

Janet was more covered up than the cast of Desperate Housewives during an average show and it lasted less than a second. If not for the five-hundred-trillion times it was replayed, slowed down, looped, and enhanced, NO ONE would have even really given a damn. But what we got was weeks of TV talk shows debating the heated issue of Janet Jackson's anatomy.

This year, they would have done anything and everything they could to make it seem that the NFL had turned over a new leaf. Never mind the Nicollette Sheridan/Terrel Owens skit on Monday night football. Never mind the employment of admitted drug users/dealers. They are a family friendly show, damnit!

Oh my gawd! The strap on her top broke off! Oh my god! She did a little spin! The horror! Come on people. What was SO bad about this commercial? How does it possibly corrupt the young children watching the Super Bowl more than knowing that people like Randy Moss can get away with running over Meter Maids and people like Jamal Lewis can get off with a slap on the wrist for setting up cocaine deals.

What is it that you fine, upstanding and concerned parents are going to "have to explain" to your children? "Yes dear, sometimes Spaghetti straps with break and that could mean that your boobies may pop out if you dance around a table."

It was a joke that effectively jabs everyone and put the company on everyone's mind. Jeeze! Can we please put this sort of thing in context instead of letting the Politically Correct Steam-roller usher in a new age of censorship.

I actually heard Ann Coulter, a woman I would probably marry if only I had the chance, say "simulated pornography." WTF? Simulated Pornography is what goes on on daytime soaps, or Prime Time dramas where people actually simulate sexual acts. Prompting a strap to fail and doing a little twirl doesn't measure up to the standard of actors and actresses ripping each other's cloths off while slobbering all over each other... Everything might be "strategically covered in the shot, but there's no doubt what's intended.

But I digress. If you don't want to see it, turn the channel instead of trying to infringe on the rights of others who want to see that sort of thing. Stop bitchin' about it "being on" and hit the button on the remote that says "Channel."

Today we mourn the passing of a great American Hero

2005-02-06T03:42:00.000-05:00

February 6th, 1911 will be remembered as a very important day in the history of this great nation. It will be known as the beginning of the end for Soviet aggression. It will be remembered as the day a Great Hero was born and an new age was on the horizon.

On this day in 1911, Ronald Wilson Reagan was born.

Reagan would go on to become the President of The United States at a time where this country was at a breaking point. Soviet aggression and Liberal Appeasement formed an unholy alliance that saw the dark shadow of oppression sweep across eastern Europe and across the globe.

In the face of Evil, the liberals told us that we should accept Soviet Aggression. They stood by and watched Iran fall into Communism and Islamic Extremism. They stood by as Terrorists seized American Citizens and watched the world fall into darkness.

America was at the breaking point. Our foreign policy was to retreat from confrontation, our home front was quickly losing hope.

Then came the Reagan Revolution.

Ronald Reagan taught us that there was Hope. He taught us that there can be peace through only two options. Strength or Surrender. Ronald Reagan gave Americans hope. He gave them back their national pride and he blazed a path of Faith, pride and freedom across the globe.

The Soviets were confronted at every turn. They didn't know how to deal with an American President that wasn't content to talk with them while they invaded nation after nation and overturned government after government. The Democrats didn't know what to do. How do they oppose a man who told Americans everywhere that they had hope for peace and prosperity and that their nation was a great shining city upon a hill, a beacon for freedom and liberty and justice... They couldn't oppose his policy, as it was working, they could only attack the man as "careless," "reckless," and a "cowboy."

Instead of disarming in the face of the Soviet Threat, Reagan rebuilt the Military and give it it's pride back. He worked to WIN a war with the Soviets, instead of working to accept them. Instead of backing down, he strode forward, using the concept of the Strategic Defense Initiative to force the Soviets to the table.

Under the threat that their missiles might never hit their targets and facing the fact that the Americans would then be able to strike back with impunity, the Soviets were forced into a spending spree that would destroy the communist government. And for once, the Soviets came to us to make peace and not to "Bury us."

Reagan stood at the Berlin Wall and said "Tear down this wall." And through the tireless efforts of American Foreign Policy, that wall came down and the German people were united and free once again.

Reagan will forever be remembered as not only one of the greatest of the American Presidents, but also as the Hero that brought our national Pride back, gave us hope and direction, and returned this nation to glorious beacon of freedom and liberty and justice.

I'll never forget where I was on June 5th, 2004. Nor will I forget the tears and sorrow I felt over the course of the Funeral Ceremonies that week. I'll never forget the out-pouring of support along those roads. People of all ages and races and callings showing their love for a man who picked this nation up and placed it on his shoulders. People, young and old, rich and poor, liberal and conservative, black and white, men and women, united in sorrow at the loss of a great hero.

Today, we celebrate the life and accomplishments of the last great statesman.

Today, I bring you a fitting Tribute to the life and accomplishments of Ronald Wilson Reagan, and A fitting tribute to a fallen hero.

God Bless America, and God Bless The Gipper! We will never forget you Mr. President.