Friday, April 29, 2005

Be gone for a couple of days...

I'll be at the Minnesota State Republican convention tomorrow (I'm a delegate) in Stillwater bright and early (a little too early, actually).. Yes, I will make my voice known with regard to concerns that I have stated here on this blog. I'll report on what happened on Sunday night.

After the convention, it's off to pick up my travel trailer to bring it to our new seasonal site near Detroit Lakes, MN...I'll be back on Sunday.

I just bought a Tungsten C PDA with wi-fi capabilities from Ebay...can't wait to receive it. It would be convenient to blog with when I'm on the go.

Now to find some hot spots!!

Have a good weekend!

Yes I am a supporter, but... this really irks me...

I just heard on the radio that, with regard to his Social Security Plan, President Bush went out of his way to ensure that poorer workers would enjoy a greater rate of return on their contributions to Social Security than would middle or upper income workers. Now there is not a doubt in my mind that Bush's advisers came up with this concept in an effort to make the plan more palatable to those of our electorate to whom class envy is a way of life.

As one can plainly tell by the social security logo in the left column of this blog, and as by virtue of my membership on the Blogs for Bush blogroll, I am a big supporter of the President and his policies. But every once in a while (can you say immigration policy?) he does or says something that really leaves a bad taste in my mouth. This is one of those occasions.

Why the class envy card? Isn't it good enough to say (or to plan) that everyone's rate of return will be higher with his new program than with the current one? Given the track record of the stock market and funds over time, there is no doubt in my mind that this would indeed be the case.

I just hope that the current mental illness which seems to have hit the Republican party as of late has not spread to the executive branch of our government. Or if it has, that the executive branch (along with the rest of the Republican party) will find a cure for it soon.

And their point with the blogosphere is? Recent MSM gaffes

This from Brit Hume's Special Report from Fox News:

Salazar Expresses Regret
Colorado Democratic Senator Ken Salazar (search) this week referred to the Christian group Focus on the Family, which supports President Bush as "the Anti-Christ of the world." But Salazar now says he didn't mean that, saying, "I regret having used [those words]."

Air America Apologizing

In an audio skit about President Bush's Social Security (search) proposal earlier this week, a voice on Air America, the liberal radio network, said, "here's your answer, you ungrateful whelp," and then sounded three shotgun blasts. Air America is now apologizing for that, calling it a "bad" skit and insisting, "our normal vetting process failed."

AP Incorrect

The AP this week quoted the President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Albert Mohler Jr, as saying that putting more evangelicals on the court will mean rulings more in tune with Christian beliefs. But Mohler never said that. The AP now says it "incorrectly paraphrased" him.

NPR: "We Regret Any Error or Confusion"

A National Public Radio (search) host said, "a book by a conservative commentator ... has leveled ... charges [similar]" to those by Republicans that judicial activist judges bring violence upon themselves. But the book, "Men in Black" by Mark Levin, never says that. NPR now says it was just "turn[ing] to a critique of the book" from a previous subject, and "we regret any error or confusion."

"Post"-ed a Correction

And finally, The Washington Post (search) today has a headline saying that Tom DeLay (search) "is likely to be found culpable." But the piece accompanying it doesn't say that, instead saying that Delay is "in danger" of being found in violation of House ethics rules, but could also be "vindicated." The Post now says its headline "overstated" the situation.

But, not to be outdone, our very own Strib:

"Caught in a Contradiction"

An editorial page editor at the Minneapolis Star Tribune (search) insisted earlier this week that his paper has never advocated a change to Senate filibuster rules. But after some media noted that when President Clinton's proposals were being filibustered, the paper called on politicians to "crusade for changes in Senate procedures," Editorial page deputy editor Jim Boyd now admits his paper has been "caught in a contradiction." He says he and his staff "missed" the old editorial.

Kinda begs the question:

With the relatively unlimited time and resources available to them to fact check, just why is the MSM so quick to point its collective bony finger of indignation toward bloggers?

hat tip to PianoBuff from Unto the Breach

Waltz of the Ambulance Chasers.. or should I say "hearse chasers"

There was an unfortunate incident in St. Cloud a couple of weeks ago, in which an inebriated man ultimately died after being subdued upon becoming assaultive, first with a bar employee and then with a bouncer at the Red Carpet, a local St. Cloud nightspot. Justin Smiley, 28, who was reportedly out celebrating his graduation from St. Cloud Technical college, as well as the impending birth of his child, died yesterday after being unplugged from life support over a week ago.

Although the fact that a young father had ended his life, partially due to his choice to become stuporously intoxicated, was very sad indeed; what I found nearly as sad was this full page ad in today's St. Cloud Times:

I was at Bravo Burritos while I caught sight of the ad and thought it to be some kind of a twisted joke. But it wasn't. As if ambulance chasing isn't enough. To say that this ad was in poor taste would be akin to describing wearing a halter top to a funeral as being a a bit underdressed.

I have called this law firm (got the answering service after hours) to voice my utter shock and disbelief, and I plan on calling them again tomorrow. After seeing this ad, I will never again listen to trial lawyers complain that they have an "undeserved" reputation that places them just below pond scum (with apologies to any pond scum I may have offended in this writing).


As of this writing (6:46p CDT, 4/28) the Ad is still up and running on the St. Cloud Times website. I know that there have been numerous complaints. My assertion in the last paragraph still stands.


Thanks to Overlawyered, who sheds an even brighter light on this den of cockroaches:
A tort suit in the making, but state ethical rules prohibit soliciting the decedent's family directly. What to do if you're an enterprising plaintiff's lawyer hoping to comply with the letter of the rules? Post an ad in the paper! To wit, one asking "Have you or anyone you know been injured in a local bar?"


As of 9:13 AM today (4/29/05), this law firm still has the same ad posted on the St. Cloud Times web site. Look for the scrolling "Ad Link" frame in the right column.

I have received this email from one of the attorneys at said law firm:

I thank you for your email and I understand you called a couple of times. I
wish you would have left your number and I would have called you back.

I'm not sure if you read my other emails, but I never did this to get that
case. His family was already represented. I have been looking into this
issue for a couple of months. His incident has raised the attention of the
community. It is very unfortunate that he died.

Did you see my ad in the paper today? Unfortunately it was pushed back in
the sports by the Times. The Times is also the reason that the first ad is
in red and says what it does vs. the defendant who many agree is the cause
for what happened.

I appreciate your understanding that business is business, although I'm not
sure you really are giving me that benefit.

Call me if you would like to talk more.


Below was my response:

I also thank you for your response. While you cite the Times as being
responsible for the content of the ad, and that you had never expected
to get family's account, why the timing? Additionally, it is my
understanding that the ad has run for more than one day (I may be
wrong). At any rate, it is still running on the St. Cloud Times web

The timing of this ad, on a full page, before the man was even buried,
is what at face value appears upsetting. If you were upset regarding
the copywriter's verbiage or the color of the ad, could you have not
called the Times and cancelled it? If not in the actual newspaper, then
on the web site?



I have not yet seen the ad of which he speaks that ran today in the sports section of the St. Cloud Times. I will get a copy and report regarding its contents. Suffice it to say that the offending ad, in all its splendor, is as of this update (1:50p CDT 4/29/2005) still running on the St. Cloud Times web site.

Additionally, I will post the response I get from Mr. Bryant. And for the record, I did leave my number (albeit with the answering service).


I just received this correspondence from Mr. Bryant:
what ad is still running? Did you look at the Paper today? There's a
different one in the Sports section.

I'm not blaming the Times. I took out the ad. I'm paying for it. So I
understand what I could have done. I'm just trying to answer some of the
questions that have been posed about the color and the wording.

The ad was finished last Friday. It ran before he died. Then he died
Tuesday night and I spent a lot of Wednesday dealing with a lot of calls in
both directions. The ad isn't there today.
I replaced it with the new one.

I wrote back giving him the link to the "offending" ad that is still linked to the St. Cloud Times web site.

As Matt Drudge would say...Developing...

I just received another email from Mr. Bryant, who said that he did not know that the ad in question was still linked:
I didn't know that, but have you looked at the paper yet?

As I have stated before, I do not know the contents of the new ad, but will report back as soon as I do...


I checked today's St. Cloud Times sports section and saw a different full page ad:

This ad has also now replaced the ad that was linked at the St. Cloud Times. The Ice Palace applauds Bradshaw & Bryant for its decision to turn what was a visible black mark on the profession into a more honorable cause.

Project A.R.O.R.A.

triple_a at Residual Forces has stumbled upon a brilliant idea. Called Project A.R.O.R.A. (Against Republicans Obstructing the Republican Agenda), its focus is simple. Not one more dime in campaign or other contributions until they start coalescing and stop obstructing their own agenda. I'm joining it. How bout you?

How Many Manys?... what's in a word?

Says Dave, an emailer to Fraters,

I've reached the final point of no return with the MSM. Russert does it. Georgie does it. Ted does it. Gibson does it. Most network reporters do it. Lefties do it when they want to kill a conservative point.

What is it they are doing? They represent the perspective they are reporting on by quantifying it with the magical preciseness of "MANY".

They are doing it when the report on the new Pope. Many Germans are concerned about the new Pope. Many American Catholics are upset with the new Pope.

Is "Many" less than "Most"? Is Many a lazy way to infer "Most"? (We never said most, we said many.)

Often, they use the term "MANY" when they want to state a negative (as opposed to making a positive point) in either a report or a debate. Many has become fact instead of myth.

What constitutes many? 3 out of 100? 20 out of 40? 100 out of 10,000? 800 showing up to an antiwar rally in a city of 2,000,000? I would think 800 out of 2,000,000 is closer to a "very few". (Stastically, zero)

How do they know if the position and supporters they are reporting on is a groups of "many"?

They never have to state how MANY are the MANY they refer too. Just "Many".

Talk about relativism! "Many" is the new "trick word" replacing both "basically" and "frankly".

I could never have said that better myself!

Big hat tip to Chad the Elder!

Thursday, April 28, 2005

And they all lived... happily ever after?

The Minnesota House approved a measure that would mandate a doubling of the current content of ethanol currently in gasoline in Minnesota. Family farmers, now on the brink of bankruptcy, will have a new market and be able to line their pockets; the environment will improve as a result of reduced fossil fuel burning; we'll have cheaper energy since we won't have to rely as much on middle eastern oil; automobile performance will benefit from the higher octane content, resulting in better-running and more fuel-efficient cars; politicians will enmass more votes in their vest pockets, and everyone will live happily ever after, right? Well, maybe not everyone. Well, maybe not most people. Let's start off with family farmers(from
Campaign contributions, says Hollis, have rallied the eloquent spokespersons of agribusiness to make it seem that the very survival of Midwest farmers rides on the shoulders of the subsidies program. And so, he says, the votes are cast according to the candidate who promises to keep federal dollars flowing into the subsidies. But, as Hollis points out, the reality of the subsidy program is very different from the rosy picture painted by the politicians. Farmers have had their lands consolidated by large corporations, the local waters and overall physical and social landscapes of their communities desecrated by corporate agricultural practice, and their tax aid swallowed up by about the wealthiest 7 percent of the industry.

Protecting ethanol subsidies in the new Energy Bill is a major issue now on the table for ADM’s political partners (conspicuously absent has been any major media coverage—between ADM advertisements—of any opposition to ethanol). ADM-formed groups like the Renewable Fuels Association and National Corn Growers continue to stir up plenty of support among farmers for their cause. These groups, along with Daschle et al., make the case that the biofuels market presents an important economic opportunity for family farms. However, the subsidy program cloaked as financial aid to farmers has actually crushed thousands of corn farmers under the foot of ADM and other top agribusiness corporations.(emphases mine)

So much for the family farm. But how about an improved environment?
The most blatant argument against the biofuels industry in its current form, from a sustainability perspective, is that it does not represent good farming. Maximizing profits under a subsidized program dictates large-scale, monocropped farms. This lack of crop integration is a leading cause of soil erosion and invites pests and disease. Heavy fertilization is used to replenish the soil. This leads to non-point source pollution that has been the root of incalculable environmental degradation rendering a vast majority of the waters of the Corn Belt states unsuitable for drinking or swimming. The wanton application of petrochemical pesticides and herbicides is leaving a legacy of toxic and non-biodegradable residue in the watersheds of our amber waves of grain. The seeds for a large majority of the corn and soybeans grown in this country are genetically engineered and are threatening the integrity of the crops throughout the continent.

In sharp contrast, carbon dioxide (the number-one greenhouse gas involved in fuel combustion) is constantly recycled in biomass fuel life cycles. Each year, the fuel crops remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during photosynthesis (whereas petroleum fuels release carbon gases sequestered tens of millions of years before animal life was even possible on the planet). Ethanol, when used to oxygenate fuel, is a great alternative to using methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE). MTBE, the only other oxygenate used in this country, is known to contaminate both ground and surface water. But the main case against ethanol still stands: It takes as much or more energy to grow and process the crops as is returned in burning the fuel.(emphasis mine)
Well, okay.. under this plan family farmers will go under, the environment will be toast, and we'll actually be burning more fossil fuel. But it will be cheaper to put in our cars, right?
For either biodiesel or ethanol, land mass necessary to satiate a portion of oil consumption would compete with other food crops and translate to big bucks at the gas pump(emphasis mine). “Abusing our precious croplands to grow corn for an energy-inefficient process that yields low-grade automobile fuel amounts to unsustainable, subsidized food burning" Dr. Pimemtel states in his findings on the ethanol industry published in the September 2001 issue of the Encyclopedia of Physical Sciences and Technology. Dr. Pimentel calculates that an acre of U.S. corn yields about 7,110 pounds of corn for processing into 328 gallons of ethanol.
Well, okay.. under this plan family farmers will go under, the environment will be toast, we'll actually be burning more fossil fuel, and it will be just as expensive at the pumps in the long run; BUT cars will run better, more efficiently, and have higher gas mileage on the higher-octane fuel, right? Well, let's go to simple physics:

From Mark's Handbook for Mechanical Engineers:

* Gasoline yields about 20,260 Btu's/lb of thermal energy from combustion
based on its HHV. On a volume basis that becomes 124,800 Btu's/gal.


* Ethanol yields about 12,770 Btu's/lb of thermal energy from combustion
based on its HHV. On a volumetric basis that becomes 83,910 Btu's/gal.
So, if I did my math correctly, one would need 32% more ethanol per volume than gasoline to obtain the same amount of energy. Additionally,
E85 has always been priced below gasoline, partly because it delivers fewer miles per gallon. Studies show as much as 10-15 percent less(emphasis mine). Sudenga says the price gap has widened as gasoline prices have increased.
In addition, Current automobiles will need to undergo costly renovations:
The concern here is that un-combusted ethanol (especially during rich cold start conditions) may migrate past the piston ring resulting in cylinder wall washing, which reduces cylinder wall lubrication and could run down into the crankcase, diluting the engine oil. Alcohols are corrosive. Therefore, any part that comes in contact with the fuel has been upgraded to be tolerant to alcohol. Normally, these parts include a stainless steel fuel tank and Teflon-lined fuel hoses.
Okay... so family farmers go under, we'll be burning more fuel, the fuel will ultimately become more expensive, the environment will still be polluted (if not more so), cars will run less efficiently, and current ones will need expensive renovations. If all these people will be unhappy after this legislation is passed, then just who will live happily ever after under this legislation?

I guess that just leaves the corporate farmers and the politicians, doesn't it?


triple_A at Residual Forces has some great additional comments on this issue.

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

A good friend comes home

Major Hal Borowiak is now home safe from his tour of Iraq. Mind you, Hal and I are friends from grade school, making him the same age as me. And mind you, further, that I take at least two bathroom breaks during the middle of the night. I have nothing but genuine admiration for Hal, who has dedicated his life to serving his family, his country, and his community.

I'm really looking forward to sharing a cold one with you soon, bud!

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

They are Insane!...those Republicans...

They will never learn. They will just never learn. They are simply delusional. The Republican chairman of the House Ethics Committee has just buckled and have given the dems yet another grand opportunity to call the kettle black and have provided them yet another junket for a fishing expedition, all in an effort to "make nice."
Rep. Doc Hastings (search), R-Wash., announced that he will empanel a subcommittee to investigate some of the charges surrounding DeLay if the Democrats agree to a compromise effort designed to break the impasse that has kept the committee from organizing.

The Republicans were "prepared to vote at the earliest opportunity to empanel an investigations subcommittee to review various allegations concerning travel and other actions" by DeLay, he said.

Four of the five Republicans on the committee are on board for immediate movement, Hastings said. Reps. Judy Biggert of Illinois, Melissa Hart of Pennsylvania and Tom Cole of Oklahoma joined Hastings at the news conference. Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas did not attend. The panel also has five Democratic members.

Republicans are trying to force Democrats to return to the table by suggesting that if DeLay is the stopping point for organizing the panel then they are willing to take him out of the mix. DeLay has repeatedly said he has done nothing wrong and has asked to appear before the committee to explain all the travel he has taken that has been called into question. He has called Democratic demands part of a smear campaign.

The Republicans have again, as they have done so many times before, buckled under pressure in their never-ending efforts to prove a negative, that they are really good guys, and if they just play nice to the opposing party, everyone will at once bury their hatchets and engage in rounds singing Kumbaya and other pretty songs.

The Republicans continue to harbor the delusion that "If only we offer another sacrificial lamb this time, the bad old democrats will surely be assuaged and their attacks will surely stop!" This mentality is reminiscent of a wife who stays in an abusive situation, perpetuating her own victimhood. She hangs on, thinking, "If only I'm a little nicer to him... if I only cook or clean better--then he'll love me and quit beating me!", only to ultimately end up in an emergency room, suffering from an unfortunate "accident" on the stairs. Yet despite years of undergoing the same cycle of abuse, she hangs on.. thinking someday...

Just as it is in the nature of an abusive husband to continue the abuse as a means of asserting power, it is likewise in the Machiavellian nature of the democrat party and their willing counterparts in the MSM to continue unfounded character assassinations--and for the same reason. Given the history of the last 30 years, the Republicans should have realized by now that every good faith action toward the opposition party will only be taken advantage of and thrown back in their collective face. Yet the Republicans keep on turning the other cheek..thinking someday...

Just what are the dynamics that keep up this symbiotic (though decidedly dysfunctional) relationship between republicans and democrats? Perhaps Michael K. Gilbertson, Ph.D., B.C.E.T.S., can show us some insight:

At this point a reader familiar with the Stockholm Syndrome might wonder if that phenomenon is relevant to the discussion. It might be. Several years ago in Stockholm a bank robber held a woman as hostage for several days in the bank's vault. When rescued, the woman denied that her captor was responsible for her pain. She was in fact quite indignant at the force the police had used to capture her assailant. She seemed to be infatuated with the gunman.

The key here might be the infantilization of the hostage who was dependent upon her captor for food, water, and toilet privileges. Frank Ochberg (1995) thinks this traumatic age regression (my term, not Dr. Ochberg's) accounts for the almost primal gratitude for life's necessities that many hostages feel if they're shown even a little kindness. He specifically links the Stockholm Syndrome with the bond many battered women feel for their abusers.

So, could the Republican's perpetual, systematic, and self-defeating propensity for making nice with their abusive democrat and MSM detractors be part of a syndrome?

Given the Republican's said pattern of pathological behavior over history with nearly identical results, I can come up with no better explanation.

A well-known radio talk show host has recently released a best-selling book entitled Liberalism is a mental disorder. It would appear that some "conservatives" are suffering from a malady of their own.


triple_a has a post on the ineptitude of the state Republican leadership in passing the Conceal & Carry act. I guess the mental disorder is more widespread than I thought.

Friday, April 22, 2005

Took the Night Writer up on it.. and kicked the tires...

The Night Writer in this post suggested a site in which many of us could contribute articles and possibly even make some dough doing it. So I decided to try it last night and duplicated a couple of posts from the Palace. Not that I'm expecting to make any money--just thought it would be nice to expand my horizons. I thought it worked a heckuva lot slicker than Blogger (though like an old pair of worn out underwear that you're just not ready to part with, I'm not quite ready to make a leap out of Blogger, yet).

This from the Night Writer:

I think it's an interesting concept, and while I'd still make my daily visits to the Fraters, Mitch, the Captain and the other NARNians as well as MOBsters such as Bogus, MAWB Squad, Kool Aid Report, the Psycmeistr and Centrisity (to name but a few), these are all strong voices that would be great regular contributors to a consolidated Minnesota site - and even better if they could make a few bucks in the process!

May I humbly suggest that the Night Writer add himself to that esteemed list!

Thursday, April 21, 2005

A matter of Trust? The DFL are devoid of it.

ST. PAUL (AP) — The state Senate on Thursday decided against an effort to force a floor vote on a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage.

Thousands of ban opponents rallied outside the Capitol.

Sen. Michele Bachmann, the Stillwater Republican who has led the push for the ban, said Senate Democrats have denied her repeated efforts to get the bill heard.

Senate leaders countered that Bachmann, a candidate for the U.S. House, is flouting Senate rules to advance her political career.

At the same time, about 2,500 gays, lesbians and their supporters attended a rally on the Capitol grounds a few hundred yards away, organized by OutFront Minnesota.

Speakers warned the bill would not only ban gay marriage in the state constitution, but also civil unions, and could threaten domestic-partnership benefits offered by municipal governments.

"We are Minnesotans. We are Americans," said state Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, who is gay. "We always have been and we always will be. This legislature and this governor need to know this is our government too, and they have to know they can't take it away from us."

Bachmann's bill would put a constitutional amendment that defines marriage only as between a man and a woman on the November 2006 ballot.(emphasis mine)

(read entire story here

Government control uber alles!! The proletariat be damned!! That seems to be the mindset of the Minnesota DFL (and one could probably extrapolate this to the national party as well, but I digress). I did not post the whole story, because if you read the last sentence, it pretty much says it all. Over 60% of Minnesotans oppose gay marriage. A majority also oppose the legalization of civil unions. According to the poll, however, a majority of Minnesotans opposed amending the Minnesota Constitution for those purposes. All the motion does is to once and for all put the question to the voters!!!

What are Dean Johnson and the rest of the DFL so afraid of? The polls, though contradictory in nature, clearly state that most Minnesotans oppose such an amendment (though they oppose gay marriage and civil unions at the same time), so why the hesitance to let them vote on it? Could it be that upon closer examination, the voter who opposes gay marriage will want to think twice about the need for a consitutional amendment after noting what happened in San Francisco? Are they afraid that the information blitz that will certainly ensue should this get on the ballot would result in less-than desirable results (in their personal view)?

It was the electorate who made the choice to put the DFL lawmakers where they are. But, in the eyes of the DFL, that same electorate cannot be trusted to make a choice on a decision that will clearly dictate the norms of society in which they live! It would appear that the elitist members of the DFL do indeed have an issue with trust. Perhaps it should be so remembered when it comes time to "trust them" again with our votes in the next election.

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Is being overweight, over-rated? Findings stun food fascists..

In an article in today's Houston Chronicle:

Associated Press

CHICAGO — Being overweight is nowhere near as big a killer as the government thought, ranking No. 7 instead of No. 2 among the nation's leading preventable causes of death, according to a startling new calculation from the CDC.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated today that packing on too many pounds accounts for 25,814 deaths a year in the United States. As recently as January, the CDC came up with an estimate 14 times higher: 365,000 deaths.

The new analysis found that obesity — being extremely overweight — is indisputably lethal. But like several recent smaller studies, it found that people who are modestly overweight actually have a lower risk of death than those of normal weight(emphasis mine)

This news has to be as sonorous to these folks as Roseanne Barr singing the National Anthem; not to mention all the trial lawyers who have now lost a ton of opportunities to line their pockets with the proceeds of frivolous lawsuits. Perhaps the states' attorneys general who were successful in shaking down big tobacco can now sue McDonald's for a different reason: For making people live longer and thus becoming more of a drain on our social security system.

At any rate, it serves these clowns right for badmouthing Mexican food!

I think I'm going to like this guy! Pope Benedict XVI on the right to life..

"...[A] State which arrogates to itself the
prerogative of defining which human beings are or are not the subject of rights,
and which consequently grants to some the power to violate others' fundamental
right to life, contradicts the democratic ideal to which it continues to appeal and
undermines the very foundations on which it is built. By allowing the rights of the
weakest to be violated, the State also allows the law of force to prevail over the
force of law. One sees, then, that the idea of an absolute tolerance of freedom of
choice for some destroys the very foundation of a just mode of social life. The
separation of politics from any natural content of law, which is the inalienable
patrimony of everyone's moral conscience, deprives social life of its ethical
substance and leaves it defenseless before the will of the strongest."

Long Live Pope Benedict XVI!!

On not blogging... almost forever...

I have been busy with taking classes lately. Also, I am not able to blog during work hours. I apologize for my absence lately!

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

Dolphins vs. Schiavo

On CNN last night, they had a heartfelt, warm, touching story about hundreds of people who banned together to try to keep vulnerable dolphins alive
Rescue workers and volunteers worked nonstop to help as many as they could to return to deep water. Some dolphins made it. About two dozen died.

For 26 that clung to life there was only one chance for survival -- transfer to the Marine Mammal Conservancy rehabilitation facility on Key Largo, farther up the Keys from Marathon.

The dolphins were placed in a water pen where they have been given around-the-clock care by hundreds of volunteers who signed up for four-hour shifts.

A veterinarian injects the mammals with vitamin E to help with muscle cramping. Unable to eat on their own, they are fitted with a feeding tube to get them the needed nutrition.

Now, reverse the clock a few weeks ago, when the same CNN covered the death watch for Terri Schiavo (CNN transcript from
He has received death threats. Protesters have even staged rallies at Schiavo's house. Given the level of religious zealotry evident in the debate over Schiavo, there is reason for concern. Florida has seen its share of violence by extremists. In 1993, Michael Griffin murdered an abortion doctor in front of a Pensacola clinic. He's serving a life sentence. Paul Hill, one of Griffin's supporters, took the lives of an abortion doctor and his escort the following year. He was executed for his crime. One of Hill's supporters was caught by the FBI in Miami Beach. He was sentenced last year for plotting to blow up abortion clinics. The Florida department of law enforcement says it is monitoring the situation in Pinellas Park and, in its words, quote, collecting intelligence.

Okay, so the same reporter (John Zarrella) covers the dolphin-saving activists as noble and good, while just two weeks ago he compared all the Terri-Schiavo activists to abortion clinic bombers.

Question: Why didn't John Zarrella compare all the dolphin rescuers to the eco-terrorists, such as the Earth Liberation Front? Why were all the Schiavo protesters, in a not-so-veiled manner, blanketly associated with abortion clinic bombers? Why were those who wanted to keep the dolphins alive with feeding tubes held up as sensible and caring, while those who wanted to keep Schiavo alive dismissed as religious zealot whackos?

Tell us, Mr. Zarrella. What's your agenda? Inquiring minds want to know.

Score one for the good guys!!

BAGHDAD, Iraq — U.S. troops battled arms smugglers and fighters near the Iraqi town of Qaim along the Syrian border Tuesday, killing an unknown number of foreign insurgents, the U.S. military said. Local hospital officials reported at least nine people killed in clashes in the same area, and said they believed the dead were civilians.

The raids came as separate car bombs in two northern cities killed a total of 10 people, and as the Iraqi government claimed to have captured a former member of Saddam Hussein's regime at a farm northeast of Baghdad.

The Qaim raid occurred a day after insurgents tried unsuccessfully to ram two cars and a fire truck loaded with explosives into a Marine outpost there, but military officials said the attack was not related to the raid.

Insurgents opened fire when the U.S. troops began their raid on the smuggling ring Tuesday, and several militants, including at least one suicide bomber, were killed, the U.S. military said in a statement. No Americans were injured, it said. (click link to read entire story).

With every report coming from the MSM regarding our kids getting hurt or killed in Iraq, it certainly is refreshing to hear of the other team taking it on the chin (I'm sure it happens much more than we know, it's just nice to read about it).

Monday, April 11, 2005

Let's Burn Him!!! ..Dems on yet another witch hunt..

Just in case you haven't seen the latest in democrat fashionware with regard to the boogeyman dejour:

This item, curiously, is no longer available at (that is, after it became featured on Drudge). However, you are still free to choose from other beautiful slogans:
As I have stated here and here, the democrat party is only out on its bi-annual witch hunt; the only thing missing are the torches and the pitch forks: (look for them at the next moveon.orgre rally).

When the Republicans, trying forever to be the "nice guys", offer up DeLay as yet another sacrificial lamb to "make nice" with the democrats and the MSM, the dems will only look for another, and yet another fabricated witch, while at the same time ignoring their very own witches. How about a basic primer for starters:
(run out of a leadership position on a rail after stating something honoring Strom Thurmond's career)

And all the while ignoring the antics of this clownwho was a card-carrying member of this exclusive club, and has thrown around the "n" word as freely as others say "pass the salt."

Earlier, on the democrat witch list:
they castigated him for what they said was a questionable book deal while in office...

While at the same time, of course, they ignored a real witch:
When she signed a questionable book deal while in office.

Yes, dear readers, as long as there remains on the left a paucity of ideas, no positive platform on which to run, and a string of continuing losses in national elections, look for these bozos to continue their witch hunts. And look for this blogger to continue laughing.


It would appear that the Republican cave-in on this issue has begun, from none other than Rick Santorum. Also check this, from Christopher Shays.

Kinda begs a question... with plenty of skeletons in their closet, when was the last time a democrat said one of their own should step down?


It would appear that the liberals have overlooked yet another of their own witches... none other than their own Mr. Socialism Bernie Sanders (I-VT). It would appear that Mr. Sanders has his wife and daughter on his payroll. Read the whole story here.


Speaking of witches, the dems have overlooked none other than their own leader, Nancy Pelosi. It appears that Ms. Pelosi was fined $21,000 for funnelling over $100,000 in illegal campaign contributions to democrat candidates in her bid to become House minority (gad I love that term when applied to democrats) leader... get the full story here (subscription required).


Just so the left's hatred for our Commander in Chief is not forgotten:

Sunday, April 10, 2005

The slide has begun.... ... yet another death watch...

First it was Terri Schiavo. Now meet Mae Magouirk, an 81 year old non-terminal woman, being deprived of nourishment via the disconnection of her feeding tube. Ms. Magouirk had a living will made out that provided for discontinuing use of a feeding tube should she be in a terminally ill or persistive vegetative state. Said Beth Gaddy, Mae's granddaughter (not even next of kin under Georgia law):

"I think it’s time she (her grandmother) goes home to Jesus, that’s she’s too sick and would not have a good quality of life,” Kenneth Mullinax said.

Thing about it is, Mrs. Magouirk was lucid upon admission to the hospital, yet fluids and nutrition have been denied her since March 28th. She was neither in a vegetative state, nor terminally ill.

Said WorldNetDaily:
The dehydration is being done in defiance of Magouirk's specific wishes, which she set down in a "living will," and without agreement of her closest living next-of-kin, two siblings and a nephew: A. Byron McLeod, 64, of Anniston, Ga.; Ruth Mullinax, 74, of Birmingham, Ala.; and Ruth Mullinax's son, Ken Mullinax.

Magouirk's husband and only child, a son, are both deceased.

In her living will, Magouirk stated that fluids and nourishment were to be withheld only if she were either comatose or "vegetative," and she is neither. Nor is she terminally ill, which is generally a requirement for admission to a hospice.


According to Mullinax, his aunt's local cardiologist in LaGrange, Dr. James Brennan, and Dr. Raed Agel, a highly acclaimed cardiologist at the nationally renowned University of Alabama-Birmingham Medical Center, determined that her aortic dissection is contained and not life-threatening at the moment.

Who will be the next among us to die a "death by convenience"?

BIG HAT TIP to Bogus Gold, The Night Writer, and Father Rob Johansen's Throwback.

*****UPDATE FROM Bogus Gold

Mae Magourik - Good News Update
From Blogs for Terri:

BREAKING NEWS: Mae is out of the hospice

Just received telephone call (3:00 PM ET) from Ken Mullinax, nephew of Mae.

Terri saves another life!

Followed by this email:
THANKS TO THE SUPPORT OF ALL OF THE FRIENDS OF TERRI, MY AUNT MAE MAGOUIRK HAS BEEN AIR LIFTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA-BIRMINGHAM MEDICAL CENTER ... and receiving IV fluids, nourishment and some of the finest medical care available in the United States! Praise be the name of the Lord GOD... Thanks to Terri's friends... It would NEVER ever have been possible without bloggers who love life , and the truth!! I am racing from my home to UAB now and will type a detailed update after I see my Aunt Mae! Thanks guys, your calls, emails, blogs and prayers did it ALL!!! I so love you guys!!!!!!!!!! Ken Mullinax, nephew of Mae

-End email

Perhaps there may be hope after all?

Friday, April 08, 2005

Avast there, scurvy dog!!!....

I'll be playin' a pirate at "This show this weekend!! Posted by Hello at the beautiful Paramount Theater in St. Cloud..... Looking forward to it!!!

Pot Screams at Kettle ...plank in DNC's eye ignored

As I have alluded in a previous posts, the democrats are trying their level-best to ensure that Tom Delay meets the same fate as did Trent Lott. In this Houston Chronicle story:
The Campaign For America's Future, a liberal advocacy group, plans to run ads in the Washington Times, which is widely read by Republicans in Congress, saying DeLay does not measure up to the ethical standards of Republican icons such as presidents Reagan and Eisenhower.

"Republican House members can't duck from DeLay much longer," said Toby Chaudhuri, communications director for the group. "They must decide whether they stand with DeLay or with decency."
It seems that the dems want to hold DeLay's feet to the fire for apparently playing cronyism with his wife and daughter.

But my oh my, it would appear that democrats have conveniently short memories; especially the senate minority leader:

In Nevada, Reid Is the Name to Know
Members of one lawmaker's family represent nearly every major industry in their home state. And their clients rely on his goodwill.

By Chuck Neubauer and Richard T. Cooper, Times Staff Writers
WASHINGTON — It was the kind of legislation that slips under the radar here.

The name alone made the eyes glaze over: "The Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002." In a welter of technical jargon, it dealt with boundary shifts, land trades and other arcane matters — all in Nevada.

Lobbyists — A graphic accompanying an article in Monday's Section A on Nevada Sen. Harry Reid's lobbyist relatives incorrectly said that the University of Nevada at Reno paid $10,000 a month to the Lionel Sawyer & Collins law firm. In fact, the university paid the firm $40,000 in the last half of 2002, according to federal lobbyist reports.

As he introduced it, Nevada's senior U.S. senator, Democrat Harry Reid, assured colleagues that his bill was a bipartisan measure to protect the environment and help the economy in America's fastest-growing state.

What Reid did not explain was that the bill promised a cavalcade of benefits to real estate developers, corporations and local institutions that were paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in lobbying fees to his sons' and son-in-law's firms, federal lobbyist reports show.

The Howard Hughes Corp. alone paid $300,000 to the tiny Washington consulting firm of son-in-law Steven Barringer to push a provision allowing the company to acquire 998 acres of federal land ripe for development in the exploding Las Vegas metropolitan area.

Barringer is listed in federal lobbyist reports as one of Hughes' representatives on the measure that his father-in-law introduced.

Other provisions were intended to benefit a real estate development headed by a senior partner in the Nevada law firm that employs all four of Reid's sons — by moving the right-of-way for a federal power-transmission line off his property and onto what had been protected federal wilderness.

The governments of three of Nevada's biggest cities — Las Vegas, North Las Vegas and Henderson — also gained from the legislation, which freed up tens of thousands of acres of federal land for development and annexation. All three were represented by Reid's family members who contacted his staff on their clients' behalf.

The Clark County land bill, which was approved in a late-night session just before Congress recessed in October, reflects a new twist in an old game: These days, when corporations and other interests want to cement a vital relationship with someone in Congress, they're likely to reach out to hire a member of the family.

Reid said he supported the bill because it was good for Nevada — and not because it helped his family's clients. And when it comes to lobbying relatives, he said, he has plenty of company.

"Lots of people have children, wives and stuff that work back here," he said. "It is not as if a lot of cash is changing hands."

Seeking favors is as old as the Capitol, but the new tendency to come at it from the side — through family members — may be a consequence of campaign-finance reform: As restrictions have tightened on traditional political giving, interest groups have cast about for new ways to ingratiate themselves.

Nothing strikes quite such a personal note as channeling fees or lucrative jobs to relatives — whether the relatives lobby Congress or perform other services. There are no restrictions. Neither House nor Senate rules bar the practice.

At least 17 senators and 11 members of the House have children, spouses or other close relatives who lobby or work as consultants, most in Washington, according to lobbyist reports, financial-disclosure forms and other state and federal records. Many are paid by clients who count on the related lawmaker for support.

But Harry Reid is in a class by himself. One of his sons and his son-in-law lobby in Washington for companies, trade groups and municipalities seeking Reid's help in the Senate. A second son has lobbied in Nevada for some of those same interests, and a third has represented a couple of them as a litigator.
If Senator DeLay is going to be under the microscope, it would appear to be only fair that the Senate Minority Leader should be held up to a similar level of scrutiny. But when you're on a witch hunt, it would appear that petty issues such as fairness are irrelevant. As can be easily discerned from this website, when you are devoid of a positive message, and you can't win at the ballot box, I guess that the only thing left to do is attack, attack, attack.

Gremlins IV .... starring blogger

I haven't been able to post for the last 36 hours or so due to Blogger's servers being down... I think I need to take Market Power and Bogus Gold's lead and find a new hosting site...

AAAARRRGGHHHHH (Just practicing up for the show)....

Thursday, April 07, 2005

Memo Mystery...solved?

Just moments ago, it was learned that a staffer (legal counsel) for Florida republican senatorMel Martinez admitted to writing the suspicious Schiavo "talking points" memo. Brian Darling, the staffer, immediately tendered his resignation which was accepted by Martinez. Martinez states that he never fully read the memo, but had shared it with Senator Tom Harkin as they were working together on the Schiavo case. According to this story:
(Martinez) said he had not read the one-page memo. He said he inadvertently passed it to Sen. Tom Harkin (news, bio, voting record) (D-Iowa), who had worked with him on the issue. After that, other Senate aides gave the memo to reporters for ABC News and The Washington Post.

Harkin said in an interview that Martinez handed him the memo on the Senate floor, in hopes of gaining his support for the bill giving federal courts jurisdiction in the Florida case in an effort to restore the Florida woman's feeding tube. "He said these were talking points -- something that we're working on here," Harkin said.

Powerline, specifically John Hinderacker (Hindrocket), who has been at the forefront of this story ever since it broke, had this to say just moments ago:
Assuming this is for real, it solves the mystery of where the "talking points memo" came from. It leaves open the question of why ABC and the Washington Post reported the memo the way they did. Mike Allen, the Post's reporter, has previously said that the memo came from a Democratic Senator who said he got it from a Republican Senator. That is consistent with the current AP account. But the story that Allen wrote with a Post colleague on March 19 is not consistent with the current version of the facts. On March 19, Allen wrote:

Republican officials declared, in a memo that was supposed to be seen only by senators, that they believe the Schiavo case "is a great political issue" that could pay dividends with Christian conservatives, whose support is essential in midterm elections such as those coming up in 2006.

A one-page memo, distributed to Republican senators by party leaders, said the debate over Schiavo would appeal to the party's base, or core, supporters. The memo singled out Sen. Bill Nelson (news, bio, voting record) (D-Fla.), who is up for reelection next year and is potentially vulnerable in a state President Bush won last year.
The latest story also confirms how absurd it was for ABC, the Post, and other news outlets to label the anonymous memo a "GOP talking points memo." We have no idea who the unidentified Martinez staffer is, but he apparently was not authorized to speak for his boss, and most certainly was not empowered to speak for the leadership of the Republican party. We'll try to track him down and get his story, but in the meantime, this story serves as an object lesson in how the mainstream media can take a dopey, one-page memo by an unknown staffer and use it to discredit the entire Republican party.

I was wrong in this instance with regard to my suspicion that the memo was authored by democrat operatives.. but the fact that the MSM from the beginning maintained that this was a party-wide and party-endorsed memo is spurious at best and fraudulent at worst. Although we may not see a flight of democrat operatives, there are still some MSM news editors who have some 'splainin' left to do.

Wednesday, April 06, 2005

MSM... better late than never?

The Washington Times has an article regarding the purported Schiavo Memo: Is the Schiavo Memo Faked? One of the things I find interesting in this story is the fact that there are many democrats who say up and down that the memo was passed around from republican to republican, but nobody can recall actually seeing it.
The Times surveyed all 44 Democrats and the chamber's one independent, and only one of them, Sen. Tom Harkin, Iowa Democrat, said through a spokeswoman that he saw it circulated on the Senate floor.
"He said that the memo was being circulated by Republican members on Thursday before we went out of session, and that is when he saw it," said his spokeswoman, Allison Dobson.

Interestingly enough,
Two Democratic offices refused to respond — Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat — the latter even as he continued to accuse Republicans of being behind it.
"We will not participate in the survey. News outlets have investigated and authenticated the memo was real and came from Republican sources. We have no further comment," said spokeswoman Tessa Hafen. "If you want more information on the memo, you should work on finding the Republican who wrote it."
She did not respond to a request to name the newspaper or network that had "authenticated" the memorandum.
It seems ever since these guys started asking questions, I have yet to see a shred of evidence that it was actually put out by any republican staffers....

Yet, dear readers, tall-tale legends of the elusive origins of this memo live on, even if only in the minds of wishful thinking opportunists:
Joe Shoemaker, a spokesman for Senate Minority Whip Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, said in several conversations over three days that his boss saw the memo on the floor.
Asked independently, however, Mr. Durbin said he never saw it.
"No, I did not see it," he said. "I heard about it reported on the news."
Asked about the discrepancy, Mr. Shoemaker later said that the senator's floor staff thought he had seen it. The staffers saw a "gaggle" of senators standing around discussing a document during floor debate, and Mr. Durbin walked over to them.

A "gaggle" of senators? After the truth of this finally comes out in the wash, my guess is that we will likely be seeing a "flight" of democrat operatives and MSM news editors.

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

A tale of two web sites... ..the best of visions, the worst of visions.

Morning Reads
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove says, "Private accounts must be part of any permanent Social Security fix ... expressing optimism Congress will end a partisan standoff and pass such a measure this year," according to a Bloomberg report....
Meanwhile, in a parallel universe:

Meet Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), the man Republicans have chosen as their Majority Leader in the House of Representatives.

Tom DeLay is at the center of a bewildering array of investigations into corruption, abuse of power, and ethics violations.

Learn more in our DNC Special Report...

Meanwhile, back in the GOP parallel universe:
Rising Tide
We will be devoting our time and resources to doing everything we can to enact the President’s agenda. Our election victory was first and foremost a victory of ideas. American voters sent a clear message—they voted for the programs and policies set out by the President during the campaign, and voted for Republicans in Congress so they could get that agenda passed. But, President Bush, Speaker Dennis Hastert(R-IL) and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) cannot accomplish this mission alone. They need our help once again.
Again, to the DNC parallel universe:
The Bush Budget Disaster

Ordinary Americans are facing severe cuts if George Bush's new budget becomes law. Bush plans devastating cuts to America's top priorities, from homeland security to health care to education to benefits for veterans and much more. Despite these cuts, this budget is a fiscal disaster, with Bush's trademark irresponsibility pushing America deeper into the red with another record deficit.

How does the Bush budget disaster affect your state? Choose your state below to find out.(drop down menu)
Meanwhile, back in the RNC's parallel universe:
Chairman Mehlman
Ken Mehlman has served as Chairman of the Republican National Committee since January 2005 and when he was elected presented four goals for his term as Chairman: Enact and articulate our reform agenda; Deepen and broaden the GOP so we’re growing our party; Work to elect the best candidates in 2005, 2006 and 2008; and, Institutionalize the grassroots focus.

Yet again, back in the DNC parallel universe:
The Republicans' risky plan to privatize Social Security will cut guaranteed benefits, require borrowing trillions of dollars from foreign countries like China and Japan, and turn our Social Security money over the same type of people that gave us the financial scandals of Enron, Global Crossing, and Tyco.

The American people have figured out that this will not benefit them - only 1/3 of them support what the President is trying to do.

The message is simple - you can't trust Republicans with your money. We need to stay strong on that message.
Is anybody else recognizing a pattern here? In one parallel universe you have a positive upbeat message with a vision. In the other, vitriolic hyperbole. In one parallel universe, you see an agenda driven on ideas. In the other, an agenda driven on acrimony and division, with no accompanying clear vision other than to protect the status quo. In one parallel universe you have those who dare to dream. In the other, a den of as-if xenophobic naysayers, intent on stagnation for no other logical reason than out of spite. Not that I'm shedding any tears over this, mind you. The more the moveon.ogres and the current DNC leadership maintain their tantrum that they've been throwing since November of 2000, the more likely the GOP is to maintain their majorities in both houses and the presidency.

Monday, April 04, 2005

The Clinton Legacy?

Bill Clinton has spent the past few years looking for his legacy. I think we may have found it:

CHICAGO (Reuters) - One in five U.S. teenagers say they have engaged in oral sex, an activity that some adolescents view as not sex at all and certainly less risky than intercourse, a report released Monday said.

The survey of 580 children with a mean age of 14-1/2 found 20 percent said they had engaged in oral sex, compared to 14 percent who said they had engaged in sexual intercourse.

In addition, one-third of the multi-ethnic 9th graders surveyed said they intended to have oral sex within the next six months and nearly one-fourth planned to have intercourse during the period. It was more common for boys to have performed oral sex on girls than vice versa, the report said.

Previous studies and numerous campaigns aimed at deterring teenaged sex have focused on intercourse, but as many as half of adolescents experience oral sex first, the report said.

The risk of transmitting infections, including HIV, is significantly less with oral sex than with intercourse but is likely underestimated by teenagers, said the report in the journal Pediatrics.

After all, Bill Clinton said, "I did not have sex with that woman".

From a 1998 study involving college students:

This study was conducted in March, 1998. On January 26, 1998, President Clinton addressed the nation to quell rumors that he had had an affair with Monica Lewinsky, a White House intern. In a much-quoted statement, he said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" (Shogren, Willman, & Cooper, 1998). By August, the press had reported details of the President's relationship with Ms. Lewinsky (Baker & Hams, 1998), including the fact that the two had engaged in oral sex (Broder, 1998; Janofsky & Van Natta, 1998). The national debate that arose as to whether oral sex was sex, and whether the President had been telling the truth when he denied having a sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky (Fisher, 1998; Kuczynski, 1998), received media attention in late 1998, when the President's lawyers argued that he did not perjure himself when he denied having a sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky because having oral sex does not constitute a sexual relationship (Gerstenzang & Shogren, 1998).(emphasis mine)

They found:

Not surprisingly, vaginal and anal intercourse were rated as more likely than oral intercourse to be considered sex. This finding is consistent with the results of Sanders and Reinisch (1999)

So Kennedy had the Cuban Missile Crisis; Reagan had the fall of communism; Carter, the Middle East peace agreements; Bush I & II war leadership; and Clinton? The Lewinsky.

No wonder this guy liked Clinton so much.

A battle rages on ...for the heart and soul of the DNC

An interesting article in today's Washington Times outlines a battle developing between the far-left wing leadership of the democrat party and the more centrist-leaning Democrat Leadership Council. The Democrat Leadership Council, the likes of whom endorsed Joe Lieberman for president, and the ones mainly behind the successes experienced in 1992 and 1996, said:

"To win back the White House in 2008, our party must change. We must be willing to discard political strategies that may make us feel good but that keep falling short. We must finally reject the false choice between exciting our base and expanding our appeal, because unless we both motivate and persuade, we'll lose every time," said DLC founder Al From and President Bruce Reed in a new manifesto for their party.

Considering that the democrats won handily in both 1992 and in 1996 by campaigning toward the center, this could be considered sage advice. But it would appear that the Daily Kos and other Move-on.orgres (pun intended) have taken Bill Clinton's definition of insanity to heart and will do the same thing over and over again until they get it right. From Democrat blog Swarm:

Steve Gilliard on the DLC (Democratic Leadership Council):

Al From: shut the f*ck up (edit mine)
Since everyone is going on about the DLC, I think I have the shortest essay possible on the subject.

They are losers. Al From is the political descendent of Pierre Laval.

Their 2002 was a disaster, and they backed the always pathetic Joe Lieberman for President, like he would have won one state.

So exactly why should we listen to them?

It's no longer 1992 and that's a long-ass losing record. They've been losing since 1994, so why the fuck do they think they have anything to bring to the table now?


I'll say this; there are no good folks at the DLC. Any more than there were kind people working for Petain. Unless they want to upend the organization, why are they still there?

F*ck these people. They're losers, big time losers and they act like they're the Pittsburgh Steelers in 1979. Al From is all too willing to betray the core principles of the Democratic Party because it doesn't make him a kingmaker anymore. If From wasn't an asshole, and his presence on the Journal's pages, or did he forget how Bob Bartley lied about Vince Foster, only proves it.

Look, the fact is that the Democratic Party is changing and the days of kingmakers like From is coming to an end. Howard Dean's candidacy for DNC chair should be like a slap in the face. Dean is hardly popular with the insiders, but the fact is Dean comes into the game with the most cards, including popular support. Al From couldn't get arrested in a Meetup. The fact that people care who the DNC chair is should matter. Vichyites like From represent no one but themselves. The fact that they think people still care about their opinions is amazing.

And it all boils down to this: they're losers.

Well, one could say that Gore and Kerry weren't exactly winners. On this last election, the DNC moved further left than they have in years, with all their attack poodles at the fore, and, even though they won't admit it they lost big. Their solution? Go even MORE to the left:

As for the DLC, it's time to euthanize the organization (ed note: with events as of late, somehow that statement doesn't surprise me). Whatever role it may have played is spent. As of now, it's the single most divisive Dem-affiliated organization, refusing to play nice with others even in these desperate ABB times. As such, it deserves nothing but exclusion and ridicule.

There are relative voices of reason in the DNC. Said Leon Panetta,

"I think the party of Roosevelt became the party of Michael Moore and Fahrenheit 9/11," said Panetta, the former chief of staff to President Clinton and head of the Panetta Institute. "There will be a real push to move the party more to the left and that would be a serious mistake because that's not where the country is.

At least 62,000,000 Americans agree with Panetta. Regardless, that particular fact continues to be lost on the moveon.ogres. Judging by William Jefferson Clinton's definition of insanity, the only thing left to do is order a heck of a lot of these and reserve the losers corner of the political ring for another 20 years. The upshot of it is, should this status quo continue, at the very least this party will have an easier go of it, and the entertainment value of it all will be inestimable. Go KOS!!!

Sunday, April 03, 2005

Another Contributor Added to the Ranks Please welcome Natalie!

I'd like to extend a warm welcome to our newest contributor, Natalie. Natalie, among many things, is a master in martial arts. She hails from Detroit, Michigan. Natalie has a keen eye on issues, and her writing will blow you away. I look forward to seeing Natalie's contributions here at the Palace!

Saturday, April 02, 2005

A Man of the times who remained steadfast in the truth.

Pope John Paul II has now entered the final chapter of his life with grace and dignity. I am humbled, and amazed, and saddened. But most of all, I have a great sense of hope and encouragement.

Pope John Paul II, despite the permissive and secularly-centered culture of the world of the past 27 years, remained steadfast in maintaining the truths and doctrines of the Catholic church. After storm upon storm of criticism heaped upon him from both catholic and non catholics, regarding abortion, euthanasia, marriage of priests, birth control, and gay marriage, the Pope remained unwavering to the Catholic Church and its teachings. After all, ultimate truth is ultimate truth. Truth itself is unwavering. The Pope also taught humility in acknowledging the shortcomings of the Church, specifically regarding the issue of the sexual abuse scandals that have rocked the Church in the past 20 years.

But what gives me hope and encouragement, dear readers, despite his unpopular stances on the above issues, the Pope remained the best-loved and most highly revered public figure on the world scene. I cannot say for sure, but I believe that in today's secular, no-holds barred, anything-goes society, people long for guidance. Like most children instinctively know (although they may express otherwise), a sense of limits and boundaries borne of love helps them to feel secure in their world. A firm, loving parent who sets boundaries is at once loved and respected by the child, despite the child's innate tendency to rebel. The child in his or her heart of hearts knows what the parent says to be true, and internally accepts it. A sense of being loved and cared for also emanates from that structure.

The Pope, dear readers, was that loving, authoritative parent, and provided structure, to which although we often rebelled against, nonetheless provided the same structure and sense of being loved which every human desires and needs.

We have been truly blessed these past 27 years. May God bless us with an equally steadfast successor.

Maybe I'll break a leg...

I'll be gone much of the day as I'll be singing my heart out at our preshow in Kimball, Minnesota. Although it starts at 7:30pm, I'll be spending much of the day putting finishing touches on my pirate costume and I need to be at practice at 3:00p. I'm looking forward to it. I'll be back around midnight tonight. Have a good day!

Friday, April 01, 2005

...It is...finished

As Terri Schiavo breathed her last, a new era was ushered in. No longer can the most vulnerable among us count on the law to protect even our most basic human rights. They say that the political world is filled with voters with very short memories. But I tend to think that the plight of Terri Schiavo will not be forgotten. Those who see the real life and death issues that this case exemplifies, those who see right through the abuses of the courts in overlooking extenuating circumstances and in the process denying a vulnerable woman her civil rights, will remember Terri Schiavo as they file in the voting booths.

But most of all, dear readers, we have have had a rare inward, no-holds-barred glimpse into the collective psyche of those who partake in the culture of death. Their collective Dorian Gray-like countenance came down from the attic in a rare command appearance, and displayed its true ugliness. I have pointed out the vast similarities between the agenda of the culture of death and the agenda of the world's infamous despotic regimes. We see proponents of this agenda, with a godlike complex in none other than Michael Schiavo's attorney:
Felos illustrates this power in his own life by describing an incident while on a plane during a time when he was engaged in a “right-to-die” case and had become very involved in the hospice movement. He pondered, “I wonder what it would be like to die right now?” and “indulged the thought by imagining the plane starting to lose it trajectory and descend.” The plane did, creating chaos in the cabin as people began to realize the plane was going to crash. “Needless to say, the juxtaposition of my imagined death and the possibility of a real demise heightened for me my different reactions. I assure you, my hubris in assuming that I would meet a life-ending crash with equanimity was not lost on me.” (181-182) The pilot later explained to the passengers that there was an unexplained problem with the auto pilot which caused the momentary descent. “At that instant a clear, distinctly independent and slightly stern voice said to me, ‘Be careful what you think. You are more powerful than you realize.’ In quick succession I was startled, humbled and blessed by God’s admonishment.” (182)

The fact that this absolutely insane scheister was given deference to practice law in the case of a dying woman; the fact that Terri Schiavo was never represented by her own attorney; the fact that all of the extenuating circumstances were ignored by the powers that be, suggests that an underlying evil is at work. If nothing else, the case of Terri Schiavo, as in so many times in our world's history, has once more placed us face-to-face with evil. The question is, how much longer are we as a society going to be complacent before it is recognized as such, and the courage is mustered to deal with it?


It would appear that the Republicans in Congress are beginning to heed the clarion call of a frustrated electorate, and are responding to it:

Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said Schiavo not only was a daughter and a sister but "most importantly, an innocent person was penalized by a court system that grants convicted murderers fair treatment under the law, but not a woman whose only crime was not filing a living will."

He added: "The actions on the part of the Florida court and the U.S. Supreme Court are unconscionable. In California, Scott Peterson, a convicted murderer, was sentenced to death, yet his constitutional rights were upheld to ensure that he received due process and fair consideration in court. Terri Schiavo was given a death sentence, and passed away without the right to due process."

In a later conference call with reporters, Santorum said the courts had practiced nothing less than "judicial tyranny" in this case and took aim at those who say Congress overstepped its bounds.

"[This is] routinely done by the courts — deciding they are now a super-legislature," Santorum said. "I'm not sure if the press realizes how serious this conflict is between the branches of government and how gravely concerned members of Congress are with [the] kinds of judicial tyranny we've seen. ...

Said Tom Delay,

"This loss happened because our legal system did not protect the people who need protection most, and that will change," House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (search) said Thursday after receiving news of Schiavo's death.

"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior, but not today. Today we grieve, we pray, and we hope to God this fate never befalls another."

Said Bill Sammon, a Fox correspondent and writer for the Washington Times:
"This is almost a declaration of war from conservatives against the judiciary,"

But war had long ago been declared, dear readers, by the activist judiciary against the wishes of the electorate, ever since the left has relied on the unelected and unaccountable activist judiciary to push their agenda. The Terri Schiavo case was merely the last salvo fired over the bow of the conservative electorate, and they, through their elected representation, are finally responding. A balance of power again needs to be asserted to bring down the judicial oligarchy and restore America to three co-equal branches of government. It is my fervent hope that Delay, Santorum, and others who realize the gravity of this situation will continue to press this issue and make restoring the balance of power between the branches of government a priority.

Conflicting Reports on the Pope's health

From the Drudge Report:

Italian media gave contradictory reports about Pope John Paul's vital signs on Friday, first saying his heart and brain activity had stopped and then reporting this was not true... Developing...


Fox News has more info..