Abigail Brayden

The search for better...

2008-12-29T23:09:00.002-05:00

This is the hallmark of the civilized man, constantly questioning the reasons for his behavior, wondering if there is a better way, searching for that better way, putting himself in the position of “the other,” trying to understand it all.

Ah... indeed! Indeed!
And it is a part of being a Christian as well, right?
Trying to understand and to do better, to grow, to improve, to strive....

Honoring Life...

2008-12-17T22:50:00.002-05:00

During college, the priest of the Catholic Student Center used to pray that people would support the honoring of life in all forms...in all ways. I recently came across this two statemens. The first hits home for me as we think about celebrating the birth of a baby who was, at first, in some ways, by some people, surely unwanted and unexpected. And the second as we pray for all the brave soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines and others in the service of our country who will be away from their families this Christmas.

First, no one can honestly believe that killing a baby in the womb is a matter of privacy. Either you are totally devoid of any knowledge of biology and the U.S. Constitution, or you are dishonest in your application of whatever knowledge you have.

Second, while one can honestly disagree with how we deal with terrorism — ignore it, lawyer it, excuse it, combat it, isolate it or condone it, one cannot intellectually justify turning that disagreement into an impeachable offense.

Pandas: Still Unhuggable

2008-11-22T22:44:00.003-05:00

Thanks to the Ranger for pointing out that, once again, humans should not attempt to hug pandas. In a zoo. In a cage. There is a reason that they don't let the pandas roam free like they do with say, the golden lion tamarin.

Oh. And make sure you read to the end of the article, which says that this was the same panda from the original dangerous panda hugging incident of 2006.

Did I say something about blossoms...?

2008-11-18T21:00:00.003-05:00

I totally meant Abundant Health.
My bad.

Go look at it. She's really smart about all the health stuff. The biggest thing I learned lately...the effect of natural Metabolism is overrated.

And, she really is a good friend because she referred me here, based on the fun pug content.

PS: If by some strange ~~coincidence~~ miracle, you are from Slippery Rock, she would appreciate it if you said "Hi"

:)

Panda results continue

2008-11-01T10:31:00.003-04:00

So...you know that the biggest entry into my blog is?
People searching google for dangerous pandas!
Seriously!
This post from back in 2006 generates most of the traffic...
but when I last asked this question back in 2007... people actually responded. check out the comments.
I JUST noticed them today...even though one of them is over a year old. Halo Scan must have been snubbing me.
Anyway...who knew that so many people would be so interested in Panda dangers for so many years....

UPDATE 11/18: I checked and yes...people are still pretty obsessed with the dangerous side of the Panda....

All Settled

2008-11-01T10:09:00.002-04:00

The friend I mentioned...She started her blog!
Check out Healthy Mahma's blog: Eclectic Blossoms of Green!

She just posted about a fun competition...and I am currently in the process of working on my submission post.

I'm excited! It's a great idea and a fun way to be healthy and to maintain a daily relationship with the Lord as well.

Plus there are prizes!! :)

Come on...you know you want to play....

:)

The Name Game

2008-10-26T07:51:00.002-04:00

So...my best friend is trying to make a new blog...
It's amazing how difficult it is to choose a name.

When she gets it all worked out, I'll be sure to link to it here, because I know it will be great :) :)

However, does anyone have any tips? How did you choose the names for your blogs??

This is almost as much pressure as naming pets and children...I would imagine... ;)

Tony Snow 1955-2008

2008-07-12T10:17:00.003-04:00

A key factor concerning life...

2008-06-29T23:09:00.002-04:00

I was listening to someone discuss Obama the other day and I remembered hearing Glenn Beck talk about the fact that Obama supported killing babies AFTER birth. Yeah...it's about as shocking as it sounds.

Stones Cry Out discusses this idea today... and ends with the following:

And to stave off at least one line or argument recall Mr Obama fully supports late term abortion which is certainly inside everyone’s notion of fetus as having a right to life, after all if one induced labor and brought it to term … the child would live without extreme measures to sustain life required. Mr Obama after all signed on to legislature trying require hospital staff to kill any children “which accidentally are delivered alive.” One wonders how he contrasts that with his exegesis of the parable of the Good Samaritan.

No more rest...

2008-06-29T23:05:00.000-04:00

Yeah...I think a year is long enough for a break, don't you? :)

The Worth of "Do-goodery"

2007-06-09T13:15:00.001-04:00

As usual, I find myself agreeing with Jonah Goldberg:

For years, I've been one of many arguing that the press is liberal because certain kinds of people want to become journalists. Ditto teachers, government workers etc. Meanwhile, conservatives tend to define their happiness closer to home: family, community etc. Making more money helps the conservative provide more for his family. Getting promoted in some bureaucracy demonstrates that you're doing good at your do-goodery. Making a million bucks in business is a fairly conservative aspiration. Winning a MacArthur "genius grant" not so much. There are a thousand other ways to look at the tendency (lest readers feel inclined to overwhelm my email box with different interpretations). Conservatives are greedy, a liberal might say. Liberals are insecure, a conservative might retort. Conservatives are independent (money maximizes independence). Liberals part of the system (status exalts success in the system). All of them probably have a bit of merit. All of them are probably easy to over-emphasize as modes of analysis, since ideological affinities are more complex (and, in a way, more simple) than all of this might suggest.

Indeed. Is it better to look better to the rest of the world, or do look "good" to your family? Maybe. Is it streotypical to divide it down party lines? Sure.
Do we have a good chance of being right in those divisions? Probably.
Do different people have different preferences/requirements in this area?
Absolutely.

If, for instance, I don't have a family to provide for/spend time with, I may have an equal chance of caring about status or money, depending on how much money I may want now or in the future.

However, I would add that the liberal side has the added benefit of trusting that if they are doing good and not making money and need money later, the government will be there to help :)

A Link between Christian Thought and Common Sense

2007-05-26T09:18:00.000-04:00

Kathryn Jean Lopez had a great post on the Corner last evening where she excerpted from a Planned Parenthood website for Teens.
The bottom line of Planned Parenthood's advice for a pregnant girl is to consider if she is ready to take care of a baby around the clock. The consider this a good reason then to encourage her to strongly consider abortion. Lopez then mentions the abstinence movement in America and how it is so often sidelined by those who want to simply categorize it as "Crazy Christianity" that wouldn't work because kids are gonna do what they are going to do.
But the point Lopez then makes is a good one:

But what if you seriously said to kids, before they found themselves in an awful mess and I don't mean maybe: Are you ready to help a child feel wanted and loved 24 hours a day for the next 18 years and beyond? Are you mature enough? Are you ready to give up hanging out with your friends and going to college? Are you ready for the responsibility for another human being for as long as you live? Is that really just "Jesus freak" common sense or is it just common sense? What's so dangerous about reasoning with kids and making clear what their options are and helping them then, before they go too far?

This is exactly right. If the "Can you take care of a baby?" argument is a good one for having an abortion, than it is also a good one for promoting abstinence. I often wonder is people think that God sat around making random recommendations in the Bible or whatever. There are very common sense reasons behind the structure that God lays out for us in His word. He has our best interests at heart. He wants us to be free in Christ, but also free from the heavy chains of sin and pain. The good decisions that God wants us to make are good decisions even apart from Christianity. You don't have to be a Christian to know that if you cheat on your spouse, very bad things can happen. You don't have to be a Christian to realize that if you get really drunk, you can get into a lot of trouble that can last past that one big party night. You don't have to be a Christian to know that if you don't practice abstinence than you can get pregnant or get infected.
Now, these things obviously don't happen to everyone, but then can. And they can whether or not you believe that they can.

Of course, I fully support and encourage people to consider the love that God laid out for them through His Son...but if you can't consider that right now, at least consider practicing common sense, even if that common sense happens to be in line with what the Jesus freaks are doing. You may save yourself a lot of trouble in the end.

Cat-related Graphics

2007-05-26T08:40:00.000-04:00

I never thought there would be so much to say about captioned cat pictures, but Evangelical Outpost has overview of these cat macros. The one in the opening paragraph is pretty funny...but as you scroll down through please don't miss the "Cat monorail" shot.

Liars, Non-leakers, and Wrongful Convictions

2007-03-08T09:26:00.000-05:00

It's a tough life out there...especially for a liar. Hey, I didn't say it first, the Washington Post did:

Mr. Wilson was embraced by many because he was early in publicly charging that the Bush administration had "twisted," if not invented, facts in making the case for war against Iraq. In conversations with journalists or in a July 6, 2003, op-ed, he claimed to have debunked evidence that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger; suggested that he had been dispatched by Mr. Cheney to look into the matter; and alleged that his report had circulated at the highest levels of the administration.

A bipartisan investigation by the Senate intelligence committee subsequently established that all of these claims were false -- and that Mr. Wilson was recommended for the Niger trip by Ms. Plame, his wife.

How dare they turn on poor Joe Wilson? Arg. Jonah Goldberg has this all characterized in its absolutely correct light. No matter what we may hear in the news about how the Libby verdict means the White House was out to get Plame and Wilson, it's wrong. Just plain wrong. It's mindboggling to think that they can spout such wrongness, but apparently journalists are down with that sort of thing.

For the record and in clear and plain English - Libby did not leak anything.
Nothing. Libby was not the leaker.
What's more, before this trial even started, we all knew he wasn't the leaker. (The leak came from the State Department.) Did the jury understand Libby wasn't the leaker? I'm not sure. Did they all understand what they were even convicting him of? I'm not sure of that either. [See right there? I'm so frustrated that I'm ending a sentence in a preposition!]

Anyway, here are some excerpts from Jonah's piece:

A man of less mettle might grow frustrated with the effrontery of the Washington Post's editorial page calling him a liar, a blowhard and the real destroyer of his wife's career. Simply because it's true hardly justifies stepping on his story line. Don't they know he's the author of a book, "The Politics of Truth," and a winner of awards for his self-proclaimed courage for "speaking truth to power"? Why should a bipartisan Senate intelligence report cataloging his dishonesty and distortions stand against a man with such important hair?
...
The Wilsons' civil lawsuit against Dick Cheney, Rove et al — filed, they assure us, "with heavy hearts" — claims that the White House's revelation of her identity put her life and the lives of her children in danger. (Never mind that it wasn't the White House who outed her but Richard Armitage over at the State Department.) Even after baring all for Vanity Fair, the golden couple clearly take every effort to maintain their privacy. While heading for a vacation getaway, Wilson couldn't resist giving one last interview at the Houston airport. One of his sons blurted out for everyone to hear, "My daddy is famous, my mommy is a secret spy." Clearly the pressures of the Wilson family code of silence had gotten to the lad.
...
Lesser mortals might have a hard time sleeping at night knowing that they're having the time of their lives through a level of dishonesty dwarfing the transgressions that may send Scooter Libby to prison. But, thank goodness, the golden couple is better than that. They're troopers.

I'd even say there were multiple levels of dishonesty. Mindboggling, truly. I can only shake my head in shock.

(However, must say that my shock is mixed with pride for the Washington Post for speaking truth to Wilson. :)

No, please, not a movie!

2007-03-02T15:21:00.001-05:00

...Anything but a movie!!!

But unfortunately my pleading will probably not be answered. JustOneMinute (who has an awesome subtitle, by the way) reports that there is going to be a Joe and Valerie movie.

Why?? Why?!!!

Sigh.
And here's a gem from the Variety article:

WB has secured the life rights of Plame and Wilson. Studio also will use Plame's memoir, "Fair Game," if the CIA permits her to publish it. Plame made a reported publishing deal in the $2.5 million range last year, and Simon & Schuster is expected to publish late this year. While it would be ironic for Plame's story to be illegally leaked by the White House, only to have another government branch deny her the right to tell it herself, the CIA has the latitude to silence Plame.

Yeah, sure, ironic. You know what I find even more ironic? That the Wilsons are suing for the alleged outing AND planning to make at least $2.5 million off it. They can't really claim pain and suffering in that case.

Moreover, how can Variety say that Plame's story was "illegally leaked by the White House?" If something illegal happened in the telling of the story, wouldn't that person have been arrested? Are they forgetting that Libby is not on trial for leaking anything, but rather for, essentially, having a bad memory?

Sigh.

This just goes to show the problem with all of this. No one really understands the intricacies of this story, often because they don't want to. It's easier to blame the White House. It's just like Global Warming in that way. Which, sadly, is why liberals will eat it up.

Watching Clock

2007-02-24T14:10:00.000-05:00

I was just discussing this problem with my mom last week. Yup, "spring forward" is a bit earlier this year, which means that all of us who have VCRs, TVs, computers, etc that automatically adjust for DST will be off this year...and every year for - THE REST OF ETERNITY!

No, it's not that extreme, but it is annoying. If you don't turn the automatic adjustment off, then after you manually adjust the time on March 11, you'll have to manually adjust it back when the automatic change kicks in a month later.

Sigh.

I think 17% is very respectable

2007-01-31T10:31:00.000-05:00

17 % nerdy that is:

What does this mean? Your nerdiness is:

Not nerdy, but then again maybe not all that cool either.

Now go ahead and take the test. You know you want to. And then report back which question make you laugh the most. Actually I recommend it to all of you. Really. It's fun. Try it :) And I might not be "all that cool" but my level of coolness must mean my recommendations are worth something :)

(HT: She Lives, where there is also a funny cartoon about a computer problems that Beverly should check out. As well as a Jack Bauer meets Puppy Poo cartoon that the Ranger would enjoy.)

Monday Quick Hits

2007-01-22T16:05:00.000-05:00

What do you do when you find a bunch of little interesting things, about which there isn't much to say? Well, I guess you make a quick hits post. It's not the most creative thing in the world, but if I were you, I'd want to know about this stuff :)

* There's an equation for which day of the year is the most depressing. Apparently it's today. I think doing math to find out if I could be legitimately depressed on a certain day, would only make me more depressed!

* Amazingly, the Niger-Wilson-Plame-CIA story is still alive and well and...extremely misunderstood. But The Corner (itself a giant quick-hits blog I suppose) is keeping on top of all the misinformation. Here's the latest helpful post.

* Looking for new and interesting kids books? Or...at least looking for someone to tell you about them? Well, there is a blog for everything as there is the BooksforKidsblog. If you haven't tried to buy a kids book lately...it's a lot more difficult then you may think.

*Lastly, also on Instapundit...news about snowflakes...which is interesting to me because we just did a kids club lesson on the uniqueness of snowflakes...and then we made snowflakes out of coffee filters:)

(And just a sidenote...I want to comment on how strange it is that Blogger's own spell check gets hung up on the word "blog." What's the deal?)

The Ever Amusing Pet Door

2007-01-20T11:36:00.000-05:00

How could I not link a photo news story about a cat whose "girth" got him stuck in a pet door while trying to "plunder" some dog food? It's irresistible. He's like a kitty pirate.

Divine Pondering by the Periodic Table

2007-01-17T22:17:00.000-05:00

Someone built a wooden table, in the shape of the Periodic Table of Elements, and within that table, put samples of all the elements. It's quite the thing. He also sells posters, has video of sodium explosions and writes cool articles for popular science.

The Periodic Table has always appealed to me, even before I was a Christian, it just seemed so neat and orderly. But now looking at it, I really do marvel at how God created all the elements in the world in such a way that a majority of them fit into rows that are 18 columns long, and that their locations in the table, correspond to ways in which the elements react to each other, or whether or not they form covalent or ionic bonds...

As a scientist, I could describe this much more in depth, but that would be digressing. The point is, we all know that God makes beautiful things: check out the freshly fallen snow throughout much of the country, or the beautiful spring flowers, or the constellations of twinkling stars on a cool crisp night. God is a fan of artistry, beauty and majesty. But He understands the importance of order, and He wows us with that as well.

Our God - an Awesome God.

Are you here looking for Dangerous Pandas?

2007-01-15T16:04:00.000-05:00

Seriously. Are you? If so, please tell me why.

I'm asking this question because looking at my sitemeter recently shows that a lot of people are coming here after doing a search for some variation on the dangerous panda concept. See for yourself.

This is very odd to me. I mean, I understand I'm probably a search result because I wrote this post about the guy who tried to hug a panda and got injured. But I don't think pandas are generally dangerous creatures...though I certainly wouldn't be trying to hug one. And so I think that the guy's injuries are more a function of his stupidity than of the fierceness of the panda bear.

Anyway, I just wanted to say for the record that I do like pandas and remark on what an odd search result this is...and how much odder it is that so many people run such a search.

So, if you are here because you were doing a search on "panda dangerous" or "dangerous pandas" or anything like that, please share. My inquiring minds wants to know :)

Thank you (in advance).

I live in Ohio, so I can't avoid it

2007-01-09T18:28:00.000-05:00

Although, I am over it. The Game that is. You know, the one where OSU lost really, really badly. Unfortunately I stayed up to watch the whole thing, in hope of a last minute comeback...but...no.

I was discussing this with the Ranger earlier today (who, by the way, jokingly predicted a Florida blow out!) and expressed my frustration for the Bucks inability to adjust their defense away from the super-failure-zone to a more plausible man-to-man coverage.
That's right, I may be a girl (and sometimes inadvertently throw like one) but I also know a little football - I even spotted a few fouls last night and called out yardage gain and loss! Go me. But still...what was up with the Zone?? I have a special place in my heart for ol'Jim Tressel since his previous coaching position was right here at Youngstown State University...but Jimmy what happened? Well, there's always next year. And Florida does get credit for the 98 man rush. That made a big difference. (Seriously, didn't it seem like they had extra guys out there on the line? At least during the blitz). Tressel is still a good coach and Ohio State still had a 12-0 record.
And...most importantly...
They did, in fact -

BEAT MICHIGAN!

:)

Meanwhile, James Think expresses his own football frustration in the form of a resolution:

Inquire as to why the Bengals defense believed OT rules included a change from tackling to two-hand touch.

Football. Sigh.

Stars, God & Romania

2007-01-09T17:58:00.000-05:00

I just made a new blog discovery:
The Earth is Not Flat!

As I scanned down through the most recent posts, I found a post linking to an online planetarium - Stellarium. Now, true, back in college some of us mocked the planetarium and those who ran it (but we did the same to the observatory "Cancelled due to Apathy" anyone?)But I love stars just the same. Just the other night I was pointing out Orion to my mom. So give it a try. Enjoy the pretty Jupiter, with it's pretty big red spot and many moons, and if you didn't to know something else about that planet, I know a little boy that couple probably give you more than enough information.

The very next post was about Romania entering the EU. When I investigated why this was important to the blog author, I found out he is a missionary teacher in Romania. Of all places.

A short while later there's a post including images of science fiction space ships! So a blog covering Christianity, Physics, Astronomy, Romania and Star Trek? What a find :)

Resurgence

2007-01-09T17:51:00.000-05:00

As someone who has had extremely light posting for quite a few months, I can certainly appreciate one's reasons for needing a break. Drew, from Darn Floor, has quite a few good reasons...some of which I'm sure are quite adorable. And so, I noticed today that he is back, and so I'm un-commented him out and he's back in the, sadly, still-skeletal blog roll over there.

Welcome Back Darn Floor :)

Welcome 2007

2007-01-01T01:44:00.000-05:00

Happy New Year!

Somehow December went by without a post, so I wanted to start the new year off right. It's almost 2am though, so please don't expect anything prolific. I just wanted it to be known that I haven't forgotten about this blog and that family obligations have limited my online time. I'm looking forward to getting back to my old life in the new year... and let me just say, that there's nothing like giant changes of pace to make one realize how good that "old life" can really be :) Praise the Lord for perspective and humility, but also of course for His grace and mercy.

May God start blessing you all early in 2007!!

Voting Day Posts

2006-11-07T16:52:00.000-05:00

In case you don't know how to plan your evening, John Fund is there to help you.

And...if you still need something to fill the time, you can hug a moonbat.

Or...based on what I just read here, you can say a prayer for Michael Steele and any other candidate who may be facing similar undeserved mockery in the polling place. You know, these candidates, whether Democrat or Republican, deserve our respect for being willing to put themselves out there to serve.

I voted today

2006-11-07T15:39:00.000-05:00

But I didn't get a sticker that said so.
Too bad, but I can deal.

I had to wait a little bit, and one of the machines wasn't working. One of the poll workers was concerned about what would happen at 5pm, but I don't think it's a big deal. It is a mid-term election after all.

I also took some advice that I think the Ranger heard on NARN and wrote my name in for an uncontested race to make sure my vote was counted. We'll see how that works.

So if you haven't done so...Get Out and Vote, even if you don't get a sticker :)

Election Issues

2006-11-06T11:41:00.000-05:00

Or rather, one issue - Stem Cells.

I don't know how many people reading this are still in the dark about the truth of this issue...but if you're aware of how it is being misrepresented, then please, tell your friends. Especially if you live in a state with a Stem Cell issue on the ballot. If you are pro-life, then you should be against stem cell research of form that is advocated by the likes of Michael J. Fox. That group is for all types of stem cell research, most importantly the type that involves the killing of embryos - the ending of life. The misrepresentation here is their failure to mention that there is stem cell research that exists which does NOT involve the destruction of embryos. Research using Adult Stem cells is just as likely to produce life saving results as embryonic stem cell research, perhaps even more so. No evidence has been produced that says that embryonic stem cell research is the better way to go. Instead, folks like Michael J. Fox make it seems like the pro-life crowd, those of us also against embryonic stem cell research are against all types of research, which we are not. Neither are we against research that may lead to cures for Parkinsons or paralysis or the life. Rather we are for research that does not require the killing of embryos.

Here is the second misrepresentation: A government ban on embryonic stem cell research is not a ban on ALL research, embryonic or otherwise. The Private research sector is alive and well. Send them all the money you want. Why does the government have to fund the ending of life? It doesn't and shouldn't.

Today's the day

2006-10-26T12:49:00.000-04:00

Happy Birthday Ranger!!

Try not to eat too much Birthday Cup cake!!
:)

Eat at Chili's today, Help St. Jude

2006-09-25T16:56:00.000-04:00

Hey, remember, today's the 25th. Have you gone to Chili's yet? You can place a togo order if a sit-down dinner is not on the schedule tonight. You can go to the main page and enter your zip code in the lower right hand corner to find a pdf menu of the location nearest you. So, eat at Chili's tonight and they'll send the profits to St Jude Children's Research Hospital.

Or if you want, just donate to St Jude online.

Thanks for your support of a worthy cause!

UPDATE: I took my own advice and enjoyed a Mushroom Swiss Burger (to-go). I highly recommend it.

Down with Theocracy Propaganda

2006-09-22T13:09:00.000-04:00

Joe at Evangelical Outpost posted a list of clarficiations about his own positions. It's certainly interesting and a wise thing to do to head off anyone trying to recast his views in other ways.

This one really caught my attention:

I am indeed convinced that anyone who truly believes the U.S. is on the path to theocracy is a moron.

Indeed. I am also convinced of this. And I wonder how many people "truly" believe it and how many people just say it to cause hysteria. Regardless of the President's views on personal faith, or even on faith based programs, this country is so far from a theocracy, it's pretty ridiculous to even consider that we are anywhere near such a path.

Here are some of his other comments that are full of truth and common sense - two things severely lacking in mainstream media stories - especially those from the AP:

*I don't condone torture or support those who do. I also don't think the word has been properly defined in a way that is useful in clarifying the political debate on the issue. There is a broad spectrum that ranges from undeniable acts of outrage to the type of discomfort that I was subjected to in Marine Corps Boot Camp. Confusing the term in order to bash the President has done more harm than good and may unnecessarily inflame anti-American sentiment .

*Generally speaking, I don't think that the American public is stupid. I do, however, think they (and I include myself in this criticism) tend to be ill-informed and think in clichés. Anyone who thinks the Democratic Party is good for the poor or minorities or thinks that Republicans are for small government hasn't been paying attention.

*I'm honestly not sure what to think about global warming. But what I am convinced about is that the proposed solutions to the problem would be more detrimental to humanity than the effects of climate change.

Now, as a fair disclaimer, I took did not include everything that Joe said, but I didn't exclude things in order to make him look like he believes one thing or another. If you want to know what he said in its entirety, feel free to read it all, I am simply including the things with which I agree.

That's fair isn't it?

Either way, here's the last thing he said, and it's quite possibly something I would say about myself too, though I may increase the figure to about 61% :)

While I'm opinionated and hard-headed, I am open to persuasive power of rational argumentation. I've only thought through about 46% of my opinions so there is still plenty of room for convincing. In other words, if you think I'm wrong, you're more than welcome to try to set me straight.

This Just In: Panda Hugging is Dangerous

2006-09-21T12:47:00.000-04:00

Seriously. A guy tried to hug a panda in China. It didn't go well:

An intoxicated Chinese man who tried to give a panda a hug at Beijing Zoo found himself biting it in self defense after his clumsy attempt at affection was savagely rejected, local media reported Thursday.

Zhang Xinyan, a building worker on holiday from China's central Henan province, climbed into an enclosure that held Gu Gu, a seven-year-old panda, at Beijing Zoo after the man had drunk four pints of beer during lunch at a nearby restaurant, the Yanzhao Metropolis Daily said.

Zhang, who couldn't remember the incident clearly, had wanted to hug the panda and shake its hand after having watched similar scenes on television.

"When I was in there, the panda was eating bamboo. Then, it seemed some people shouted, which startled the panda. He rushed over to bite my leg," Zhang said.

Even if he was intoxicated...that's quite a feat. I mean...pandas may be cute, but they're HUGE. Now, I'm pretty aware when it comes to news bites about Pandas, but not once have I seen someone hug a panda. Even a drunk someone.

Sounds like it would make a good YouTube piece though...

"Gee-whiz weapons"

2006-09-20T10:23:00.000-04:00

I wonder if the capture of Osama Bin Laden is coming soon. I've been hearing lately from some liberal oriented news show guests that even if we capture/kill Bin Laden, the terrorists who supposedly take their cues from him are splintering and planning their own parties. So even without Bin Laden, they'll still be big mean terrorists. This may in fact be true, and if it is, I would guess it's been true for a long time. My guess is that what would cause the splintering is the fact that Bin Laden had to go into hiding in the caves and then eventually stop using his cell phone and could not longer get on the party line.

Anyway, the point is, do these liberals know something about an imminent capture of Bin Laden that is causing them to backtrack on the "We have to focus on Bin Laden and not Iraq" propaganda?

Maybe, maybe not.

In the meantime, it would be good to consider the previous line of propaganda - you know, the one about how Bush is personally in charge of the OBL hunt?
No Neutrality had opined about this last week:

[F]rom critics of the president's decision to prosecute the war on terror: "He [Bush] (or sometimes even "We") can't even find Osama Bin Laden!"

Last I checked, Bush isn't in Delta Force, Special Ops or anything of the sort. Most of the time, his whereabouts are pretty well known, and it almost always leaves him with little or no time to be off scaling the rugged hills of Afghanistan. After all, this is the guy who is derided for not having the foresight to see 9/11 coming so he was caught in dereliction of duty reading a book to school children when the planes hit the WTC. I guess he was supposed to be piloting an F-15 in the air over ManHattan like ANY decent president would have done.

I might be off here, but I thought we had specially trained guys with knives between their teeth and Gee-whiz weapons in their arsenals who do the really spiffy manhunt stuff? So if that's the case, aren't the armchair S.E.A.L team leaders really slamming the ability of the troops in the field, not the commander-in-chief?

That's right, we usually know where the President is. But...Vice President Cheney on the other hand...

Maybe they'll be blaming him next, figuring he should be getting something done in that undisclosed location of his...

Not enough time or interest

2006-09-19T17:07:00.000-04:00

I agree that people have a reason to be concerned that there isn't enough web space devoted to counter-pointing/critiquing Keith Olbermann. But in my view there isn't enough time in the day to adequately do the job justice. Nor am I that interested in listening to him so as to do the job at all. If I know that there is little to no chance that he will say something valuable, why waste my time?

But Media blog is on the case today if you want some anti-olbermann stuff.

Hungry? Eat at Chili's on September 25th!

2006-09-11T16:42:00.000-04:00

On Monday September 25th, all profits from all Chili's restaurants nationwide will benefit St Jude Children's Research Hospital.

Of course, I recommend donating to St Jude any day of the week because it is a tremendous hospital that helps so many children every year. They not only do cancer research, they also treat kids with cancer and so they need all the money they can get. So, if you can't donate outright, but you can eat out, then this is the day and place to do it. :)

But we can't ignore HIS ignorance

2006-08-17T17:28:00.000-04:00

I'm posting these excerpts of a Jimmy Carter interview third hand, but I just couldn't resist:

SPIEGEL: Should there be an international peacekeeping force along the Lebanese-Israeli border?

Carter: Yes.

SPIEGEL: And can you imagine Germans soldiers taking part?

Carter: Yes, I can imagine Germans taking part.

SPIEGEL: ... even with their history?

Carter: Yes. That would be certainly satisfactory to me personally, and I think most people believe that enough time has passed so that historical facts can be ignored.

Huh.
So, what exactly does it take to apply the "Let's ignore historical facts" rule? Sadly, I'd say not much for democrats, as they seem to do it often.

In fact, the Carter comments earlier in the interview ignore some historical facts that aren't even that historical:

SPIEGEL: You also mentioned the hatred for the United States throughout the Arab world which has ensued as a result of the invasion of Iraq. Given this circumstance, does it come as any surprise that Washington's call for democracy in the Middle East has been discredited?

Carter: No, as a matter of fact, the concerns I exposed have gotten even worse now with the United States supporting and encouraging Israel in its unjustified attack on Lebanon.

SPIEGEL: But wasn't Israel the first to get attacked?

Carter: I don't think that Israel has any legal or moral justification for their massive bombing of the entire nation of Lebanon. What happened is that Israel is holding almost 10,000 prisoners, so when the militants in Lebanon or in Gaza take one or two soldiers, Israel looks upon this as a justification for an attack on the civilian population of Lebanon and Gaza. I do not think that's justified, no.

First, Carter incorrectly characterizes the US as "encouraging" Israel in it's "unjustified" attack. The US did no such thing, we simply said Israel had the right to defend herself, with which I can't imagine Carter would disagree. Or maybe he would - since it's Israel. Maybe Israel isn't allowed to defend herself, being Israel and all...

But THEN he gives the same line that I heard from the Syrian Ambassador time and again just after the fighting started: What happened is that Israel is holding almost 10,000 prisoners, so when the militants in Lebanon or in Gaza take one or two soldiers...
Okay, there is a difference between prisoners and kidnappees. The Lebanese prisoners in Israel are in jail, they were arrested for crimes committed in Israel - they are not Soldiers captured in their own country like the Israelis are. This comparison is not valid and I wish people would Just. Stop.

It's amazing really, as one goes through this interview, how Carter is just wrong on so many things.
Here he is alleging that the Media has been a pawn of the Bush Administration:

SPIEGEL: So how does this proximity to Christian fundamentalism manifest itself politically?

Carter: Unfortunately, after Sept.11, there was an outburst in America of intense suffering and patriotism, and the Bush administration was very shrewd and effective in painting anyone who disagreed with the policies as unpatriotic or even traitorous. For three years, I'd say, the major news media in our country were complicit in this subservience to the Bush administration out of fear that they would be accused of being disloyal. I think in the last six months or so some of the media have now begun to be critical. But it's a long time coming.

Huh. "The last six months?" So...the media wasn't critical of the Administration during the '02 midterms? Or the '04 election? Or after the '04 election? Carter is really out on a limb here, catering to the conspiracy theorists.

And then here he is being wrong about Cuba:

SPIEGEL: You sought to normalize relations with Castro, but that never happened. Has anything been achieved through Cuba's isolation?

Carter: In my opinion, the embargo strengthens Castro and perpetuates communism in Cuba. A maximum degree of trade, tourism, commerce, visitation between our country and Cuba would bring an earlier end to Castro's regime.

"A maximum degree of trade"? Seriously? With a regime whose oppressed peoples would rather risk their lives floating to America in bread baskets than stay there?

Just before that, Carter showed his hypocrisy as well:

SPIEGEL: You've written about your meeting with Fidel Castro. He appears seriously ill now and Cuban exiles are partying already in the streets of Miami. You are probably not in the mood to join them.

Carter: No, that's true. Just because someone is ill I don't think there should be a celebration of potential death. And my own belief is that Fidel Castro will recover. He is two years younger than I am, so he's not beyond hope.

Now, I agree that celebration in the streets over "potential" death is a bit uncouth - but I would like to see Carter follow it up with a condemnation of those in the Arab street who celebrate over the actual deaths of thousands of Americans.

The vast amount of wrongness displayed by Jimmy Carter is quite astounding. I have to hand it to Spiegel though, they didn't make it easy on him, multiple times implying that he stunk at Middle East Peace negotiations and even flat out asking if his presidency was a failure. Now, if only they had asked him about Iran....

(Via Heavy-Handed Politics & LittleGreenFootballs

House Rules - The King James Version

2006-08-14T10:58:00.000-04:00

What follows are excerpts of something quite hilarious. I especially recommend it to all those who have tried to maintain some semblance of order in the house by telling a child something like "No, stop painting the table with your milk!"

Laws of Forbidden Places
Of the beasts of the field, and of the fishes of the sea, and of all foods that are acceptable in my sight you may eat, but not in the living room. Of the hoofed animals, broiled or ground into burgers, you may eat, but not in the living room. Of the cloven-hoofed animal, plain or with cheese, you may eat, but not in the living room. Of the cereal grains, of the corn and of the wheat and of the oats, and of all the cereals that are of bright color and unknown provenance you may eat, but not in the living room. Of quiescently frozen dessert and of all frozen after-meal treats you may eat, but absolutely not in the living room.
...
Laws When at Table
And if you are seated in your high chair, or in a chair such as a greater person might use, keep your legs and feet below you as it were. Neither raise up your knees, nor place your feet upon the table, for that is an abomination unto me. Yea, even when you have an interesting bandage to show, your feet upon the table are an abomination, and worthy of rebuke.

Eat your food only; do not eat that which is not food; neither seize the table between your jaws, nor use the raiment of the table to wipe your lips. I say again to you, do not touch it, but leave it as it is.

And though your stick of carrot does indeed resemble a marker, draw not with it upon the table, even in pretend, for we do not do that, that is why. And though the pieces of broccoli are very like small trees, do not stand them upright to make a forest, because we do not do that,that is why.

Sit just as I have told you, and do not lean to one side or the other, nor slide down until you are nearly slid away. Heed me; for if you sit like that, your hair will go into the syrup. And now behold, even as I have said, it has come to pass.
...
On Screaming
Do not scream; for it is as if you scream all the time.

Likewise if you receive a portion of fish from which every piece of herbal seasoning has not been scraped off, and the herbal seasoning is loathsome to you and steeped in vileness, again I say, refrain from screaming. Though the vileness overwhelm you, and cause you a faint unto death, make not that sound from within your throat, neither cover your face, nor press your fingers to your nose. For even I have made the fish as it should be; behold, I eat it myself, yet shall not surely die.
...
Concerning Face and Hands
Cast your countenance upward to the light, and lift your eyes to the hills, that I may more easily wash you off. For the stains are upon you; even to the very back of your head, there is rice thereon.
...
Various Other Laws, Statutes, and Ordinances
And hum not the humming in your nose as I read, nor stand between the light and the book. Indeed, you shall drive me to madness.

Indeed.

(HT: Gratuitous Advice)

Timely Apparel

2006-06-27T19:22:00.000-04:00

Thanks to the Ranger, I am currently wearing this shirt.

Super Cool :)

The US "needs" the UN? Seriously?

2006-06-09T15:02:00.000-04:00

Here's Kofi Annan, defending remarks made by his deputy:

“I think the message that was intended is that the US needs the UN, and the UN needs the US, and we need to support each other"

Huh. Well, I'd certainly agree that the UN needs the US, especially US funding which Bolton threatened to cut, but I can't really see how the US needs the UN. It's not line they're ever there for us. It's a constant battle and in the end, not always that worthwhile.

For more on the remarks by the British Deputy UN Secretary-General, check out what the Ranger has to say.

The Tipping Point in the Immigration Discussion

2006-05-26T12:31:00.000-04:00

For months now, as immigration has been discussed almost nightly on Lou Dobbs (which I never watch) or fairly regularly on Glenn Beck (which I listen to when I can) I've had trouble getting worked up over the issue. I know it should matter to me whether immigrants that came here illegally can stay or go or have a job or get in-state tuition...and...it does matter, I guess. I mean, I often have an opinion on such issues, but can't bring myself to engage in a lot of dialogue about them.

Until now.

Before today, all I really knew about the Immigration Bill passed in the Senate this week, was that it provided for a fence, which I saw as an improvement over no fence. Then I heard Glenn say this morning that the Senate bill (among other things) gives in-state tuition to immigrants and actually asks for less fence then the House bill. (by the way, Beck said also that he thinks that Senate isn't as serious about immigration because only 1/3 of the members are answerable to the people in November, while the entire House is up for re-election.)

So, while those items were frustrating, they didn't hold my ire.

NRO has an editorial this morning about the bill, here's what really showed me that what is going on in the Senate is, in fact, Temporary Madness:

The bill forbids the federal government to use any information included in an application for amnesty in national-security or criminal investigations. Any federal agent who does use that information would be fined $10,000 - which is five times more than an illegal alien would have to pay to get the amnesty. The Senate, on a tie vote, defeated John Cornyn's (R., Tex.) attempt to rectify these provisions.

You have got to be kidding me.
Seriously.

Where's the uproar over this? Why is it sticking out in an editorial, but no where else? Where's the list of Senators who voted this down?

It's one thing to say that people have amnesty, and will not be punished for illegally coming into this country in the first place, but it's something else entirely to say that they are also protected from investigations involving national security.

Consider the following scenario:
----

Terrorist X, proud member of Al Qaeda, is living in the US. He snuck over the border from Mexico a few months before 9/11, and he knew some of the bombers, but not well. More importantly, he knows some guys that are here legally, that are making some plans. Terrorist X wants to be involved and to have official documents in order to ride planes with his pals. He's excited over the amnesty program, and knows that he doesn't have to worry about making up stories for his paper work because the Federal authorities can't use any of it to capture other terrorists.
----

Unbelievable. I mean, I just made that all up, but it isn't that far outside the realm of possibility.

If these provisions are not left out of the final bill, and if I had the money, I'd start a fund for the federal agents to help them pay their $10,000 fines for national-security investigations.

Like I was saying...

2006-05-25T15:35:00.000-04:00

Things are going pretty well with America's economy:

It's a steady economy.

Economic pundits keep telling us about the impending slowdown. Well, they've been waiting for a slowdown for years. Actually, I've heard about this slowdown for 25 years, ever since Reagan restructured and revived American capitalism through low tax rates, deregulation, and disinflation.

The reality is about 3.5 percent growth since the early 1980's with very few interruptions. Total employment and wealth creation have soared during this entire span of time.

There's a lesson here: Tax incentives matter. Price stability matters. Markets are smarter than central planners.

Yes, those things matter. Much like Republican majorities in the Senate :)

(HT: Instapundit-even though he has a little less grace for Congress...)

Purpose, Contentment & Motivation

2006-05-22T22:44:00.000-04:00

Tonight I was reading the May 22nd issue of Newsweek (that sounds current, but it came out last week, I got it second hand). There was an article written by a woman with a Master of Science degree...but she wasn't really using it. She was delivering pizzas. And she had chosen this job. Twice. She claims to love it, and I believe her. There's a lot of things I do that I love...but I don't know that I always like that fact that I'm doing some of them as a job instead of a different job. And after reading it I thought, I don't want to be like this when I'm 43. I don't want to be working at a restaurant or baby-sitting or tutoring and also be happy about it.

One of the big reasons that I am willing to give away my hard earned money to the Republican senate candidates, is because I believe Republican majorities are good for the economy and thus good for my job-finding prospects. The President may have sad approval ratings and people may answer polls saying they think the country is going in the wrong direction or whatever...but the reality is that none of this is stopping everyone from spending money. High gas prices aren't stopping people from buying new cars - even SUVs, or driving around town all day or driving across country on vacation. The economy is in great shape, and I sincerely believe Republicans in Congress will help keep it there and keep me hopeful about getting a full-time job that doesn't involve cash tips :)

And, whether you like DeWine or not, we need to look at the big picture :)

Bleeding Red

2006-05-20T13:37:00.000-04:00

Well, Hugh Hewitt has done it again. He has posted a list of links to all the GOP Senators and Senate candidates that need monetary help in this year's election. Why is it important? Well, as Hugh says:

It is a lot of money, but the stakes are incredibly high, including success in the war and the ability to confirm good judges to the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts.

In fact, no matter what the problem is, the answer can't be more Democrats.

That's exactly right. We can argue about all the things that Republicans may be doing wrong, but at least we can agree that the Democrats won't be doing anything more right. :)

Now, I may still be getting mail from South Dakota's Sen. Thune, Alaska's Sen. Lisa Murkowski and others to whom I gave money in '04, but it was worth it. Except in the case of that guy from Florida....

Anyway, it's short list, and I'm only mildly self employed and still willing to give. So far I've hit Sen. Kyl, Mark Kennedy and of course, Mike DeWine. Go Buckeyes!

It doesn't take very long at all. In fact, I think it will take longer to set up this post than to make those 3 contributions. So, what are you doing today to keep the Senate in GOP hands? I saw Ted Kennedy live on the Senate floor last week, and we really don't need to see him in charge of any committees, please :)

UPDATE: After I wrote this post, I went and hit
* Santorum (because PA is right next door)
* Steele (because I'm always hearing about the vast amount of liberal influence in Maryland)
and
*Talent (because Missouri is a good swing state in which to have republican Senators for '08)

I don't usually talk about charitable contributions - but afterall, this isn't charity, it's the Senate majority...conservatives in charge of every committee. (Taxes are more like charity than this is...)

And, since Hugh kindly used me as an example this afternoon, I thought I should probably add the updates.

"Israelis Foil Hamas Plot to Kill Palestinian President"

2006-05-08T15:53:00.000-04:00

Who knew about this?
Cliff May wants to know: Why isn't this big news?

That's a good question. The Ranger said the same thing yesterday. My guess: If the Israeli government is willing to help the Palestinian President stay alive in the face of assassination, that shows integrity on their part and casts Hamas in a relatively bad light. That is something the press would not want to do. It's much better to cast the Palestinians as civilian "freedom fighters" and the Israelis as military oppressors.

Email Image

2006-05-08T15:23:00.000-04:00

Special thanks to Joe at Evangelical Outpost for his Yak Shaving Razor Anniversary Edition because it pointed me to the Email Icon Generator. As you can see, my email address is now displayed as an image. I'm hoping this will decrease the amount I spam I get to my email account, but we will see.

Also, I am a relative novice at displaying images on a blog, so I didn't know how to turn a web address into a displayed image. So I viewed Joe's source code to find out. I was planning to display the html code here, but I couldn't figure out how to display the code instead without meaning it to be actual code. So you can go to View -> Source
here on my page to find out how I did it, or send me an email.
:)

And hey, if you know how to display code without making it code, that would be a great email too. Thank You!

On-going Goss

2006-05-05T21:13:00.000-04:00

I was tired of psychotically updating this post, so I thought I'd start a new one about the Goss resignation. However, there's not much to say. Blogs are writing about the story, but there's not too much to say. With all of Shep Smith's Studio B assertions that he'd find the story, no one knows anything.
Though I think there might be something to John Podhoretz's observations:

doubt there's a big scandal here, if only because the president chose to appear with Goss to announce the resignation. If Goss were somehow implicated in matters relating to Duke Cunningham, say, there's no way on earth Bush would have made such a friendly show of his departure. Seems more likely to me that there was some kind of showdown between Goss and Negroponte and Negroponte said, "Either he goes or I go," and there Goss went.

Either way, it seems that the idea of the "White House shake-up" is becoming less and less accepted. Score another one for Bill Kristol and his initial skepticism.

Jim's Contribution

2006-05-05T21:05:00.000-04:00

From TKS:

Dear Central Command,

A quick thought and piece of advice on the tape of Zarqawi not understanding how to use the machine gun, and his idiot buddy burning his hand on the barrel, etc. Great work, but next time, add wacky sound effects. Promote it as "al-Qaeda's Funniest Home Videos." Have Ashton Kusher appear and declare that Zarqawi has been "punk'd."

And if you can fiddle with the audio, give Zarqawi the voice of Minnie Mouse. Can you imagine his followers' mortification if their fearless leader had a squeaky little "girly man" voice?

Just thinking outside the box here. Keep up the good work,

Jim

Ha :)

Die-hard Ohio Republicans

2006-05-05T14:25:00.000-04:00

I missed this earlier in the week, but here's a tidbit of what Michael Barone has to say about Ohio and the Primary this past week: [via Hugh Hewitt]:

Now we have more than polls to go on: Ohioans voted yesterday in the two parties' primaries. There's some bad news in the results for Republicans, but not as bad as I expected. Ohio does not have party registration, so every voter gets to choose which party's primary he will vote in. The aggregate of those choices has some relevance to the general election result. It can't be considered anything like a precise forecast, of course. But one of the hypotheses strategists of both parties have been considering is that Republican turnout may be down this year relative to Democratic turnout. Republicans are downcast, the theory goes, angry at their party's high spending and their president's stand on immigration; and in Ohio that goes double, for Ohio's Republican state government has raised taxes. Democrats, on the other hand, the theory goes, are fired up, angry at George W. Bush and the Republican Congress and, in Ohio, at Taft and the Republicans.

That's right. It's a THEORY. John Kerry has been trying to sell the badness of Ohio since the election. The place is not burning down and Republicans are not discouraged. Furthermore, the lack of party registration is a huge thing to consider. In the '04 primary I took a Democrat ballot because I wanted to vote among the Democrat candidates, knowing that President Bush was (thankfully) a forgone conclusion for the Republican nomination.
Anyway, Barone continues:

Republican primary turnout in total votes was the highest this year in the past 25 years.

The Republican percentage of primary turnout was 51.6 yesterday, down 2.6 percentage points from 2002 (when turnout for both parties was a 25-year low) but almost exactly the same as in 1998 and 1994.

People may be turned off by politics and politicians, but they're still voting like crazy—or at least in greater numbers than in the recent past. And people may be turned off by Republicans, but a lot of Republicans are still voting. ... Somehow, despite all the discouraging news and dismal poll numbers, there are a lot of plodding, dull, dutiful people, too stubborn to take instruction from their betters in the mainstream media, who insist on going out and voting Republican. Hard to explain. But that's what the numbers seem to say.

If you want a lot more numbers, read it all. Barone has a lot of numbers and a lot of good analysis.

What's the deal with Goss?

2006-05-05T14:11:00.000-04:00

He's resigning. Any guesses why?

I'm seriously asking that question because it's been less than two years and apparently this was his dream job. I hope he's not resigning because a handful of big mouths who work for him can't keep from leaking whatever they feel like leaking to their buddies in the press.

Sigh.

UPDATE: Bill Kristol is predicting on FoxNews that neither President Bush nor Porter Goss wanted this to happen so "something else" must have happened to cause this "sudden resignation." And Bill Kristol is after all the star predictor.

UPDATE #2: Chris Wallace is reporting that he talked to someone who said that this was part of the "White House" shake-up. Hmm. I suppose, but...Porter Goss doesn't work in the White House.

UPDATE #3: Bill Kristol is skeptical of Chris Wallace's info. But Goler is reporting again that this is part of a shake-up. We shall see.

If Only...

2006-05-01T15:12:00.003-04:00

CNN's current graphic is calling this "A Day Without Immigrants."

I wonder if the person who came up with that title is himself a protestor...or not.

Because when I see that I think "We can only have one day? Is there any way to extend the offer?"

May 1st: SuperShoppingMonday

2006-04-30T22:03:00.000-04:00

So I've heard that illegal immigrants are planning to boycott both shopping and working on Monday May 1st. I have serious doubts that the economy will even notice this because really, how much do you think illegal immigrants are spending? I'm not at all convinced that our country is going to grind to a halt without illegal immigrant spending.

However, someone did mention to me that if I want to go to a mexican restaurant, Monday is probably not the day. This isn't a problem because I am no fan of mexican food - I like Taco Bell, but I don't think that counts.

Anyway, I didn't do any shopping this weekend, but here is a list of the things I plan to buy on Monday - (and believe it or not, it's not comprehensive)
-gallon of skim milk
-loaf of bread
-chocolate syrup, 2 bottles
-couple cans of fruit
-1 outfit, business casual
- cup of coffee at Caribou with SpiderChick

and I may be convinced to buy more. The Ranger is trying to encourage me to buy a DVD/VCR player because my current VCR is somewhat possessed...and then there's the rice krispies I've been waiting to buy...

Sure, you can say that all this doesn't add up to a lot of money, but it can't possibly be much less than the average illegal immigrant is spending on any given day. Cause really, who has time to shop when you're slaving twelve hours a day in the fields?

:)

Let's go to the video tape

2006-03-22T15:16:00.000-05:00

Hugh Hewitt was on CNN last night, being interviewed by Anderson Cooper along with Time's Michael Ware and CNN's Nic Robertson. Hugh recaps the interview and I have to agree that Anderson is does indeed run a "fair show." I did get the sense that he was going out of his way to let Hugh talk when Ware was spinning out of control. However, was Anderson in charge of the Iraq footage being shown next to Hugh and the others during the segment?

The discussion was about the portrayal of Iraq by the news media, which is something I've seen covered on a few channels in the last day or so. But while Hugh was arguing that the MSM is out to support a bad version of events there, all the Iraq footage was of burned out cars, and troops investigating other sorts of Baghdad violence. So, while they were talking about the media's eagerness to show more bad then good, they were showing all bad.

Maybe the segment producer knew that Hugh was gonna mention Eason Jordan and he couldn't restrain himself from presenting such lopsided video feed.

(Cross-posted at StonesCryOut)

Some signals aren't as "strong and clear" as they should be

2006-03-18T13:30:00.000-05:00

I've recently added Regime Change Iran to the blog roll at the left because it's a good round up of news relating to a country with "suspect" nuclear aspirations. It's mostly links and quotes of news articles, but the subtleties of the Iran situation are often left out of major news headlines - so having an extensive list of articles to peruse is quite useful.

The real question is...What kind of useful things are the articles describing? The answer: apparently not much. Friday's Daily Briefing (posted on Thursday) said John Bolton was "very encouraged" about the Security Council discussions on Iran. Well, sure. But what does that mean?

Again...not much. On Friday, RCI linked a Fox News Article quoting Bolton as saying "The mood of the discussion is certainly in the direction of a strong and clear signal to Iran on the part of the Security Council."

I agree that the signal is strong, but I think the content of the signal is more important than the strength. What is the Security Council strongly signaling?

Here's what I know they are strongly signaling:
* We are talking about Iran
* We are talking about Iran and its nuclear weapons program
* We are determined to keep talking about it
* We are so determined that we are not complaining about the fact that Russia and China are trying to drag this out as long as possible

Fox assumes early in the article that the council is determined that this strong and clear signal will be concerning Iran's "suspect nuclear program."

No kidding. But what is contained in the signal? That's the whole point. The UN is already communicating a bunch of things just by sitting around and having discussions. When it finally releases a formal statement, I don't know how strong and clear it will be or what it will ask but I'm not all that hopeful. Mostly because of this last paragraph:

The diplomats will try to come up with a "clear strategy" on what happens next, Russia's Deputy U.N. Ambassador Konstantin Dolgov told The Associated Press. "We need to have an agreed way ahead within the IAEA, in the Security Council."

You see? They are planning a strategy about what to do next. In other words, they aren't deciding what to do next, they are planning about making a plan about what to do next.

Springing into action indeed.

This reminds me of something I read just this morning from James Lileks' 2005 roundup in The American Enterprise:

Iran announces it will no longer allow inspectors into the Khomeini Memorial Peaceful Nuclear Research Facility for Hastening the Destruction of Israel. European diplomats threaten to take the matter to the U.N. Subcommittee of the Task Force for Occasionally Threatening to Issue a Strongly-Worded Report. But the group's next meeting isn't until 2007, and it must first take up the horror of Israel's security fence. Iran promises to allow inspections in exchange for 500 million Euros, payable in coins of enriched uranium. The E.U. agrees, with the condition that the interest rate on the loan will be adjusted upward if Iran makes nuclear bombs. If they actually detonate a bomb there would be an immediate balloon payment, make no mistake about it.

"Occasionally Threatening to Issue a Strongly-Worded Report"?
Yeah. That sounds about right.

(Cross-posted at StonesCryOut)

International Energy Games

2006-03-15T14:35:00.000-05:00

This is interesting:

Ministries Agree on Bill To Limit Foreign Investment in Russian Economy
When I saw that headline I thought it odd because everything else I've read has indicated that Russia wants to use the possibilities of foreign investment as leverage in global policy making. That is, if European countries like France and Germany become dependent on Russian oil and gas resources, then those countries would be more likely to side with Russia against the US or whomever else Russia contended with diplomatically. But Russia cannot afford to keep drilling for oil and gas because of its weak infrastructure. So it needs investment. Countries like China would be happy to invest, because China wants the same thing from Russia - dependency and an ally on the world stage. So, I thought, maybe Russia is getting wise.

But then of course, I read the article:

Vladimir Taraskin, director of the Industry and Energy Ministry's legal relations department, said that the law may come into force in July 2007. He said that the draft law deals with 39 strategic types of activity, which are divided into five sectors: the space industry, the nuclear power sector, arms and military technology production, special technology and aviation.

I've thought about it a bit, and I don't think gas and oil fit into any of these categories. So basically, they are limiting investment, but only in smaller areas that will not affect its ability to make alliances or dependencies.

And as for resources for those industries? Mother Russia isn't giving up control of those either:

"There are other criteria covering monopoly activity and the development of resource fields of federal significance," Taraskin said.

And just to make us think that maybe they are going to bend on the energy issue, the article quote Taraskin as saying:

There is a proposal to include the electricity sector in the draft law also - concerning wholesale generating companies, but this is only being discussed

I don't know what his definition of "discussed" is, but I'd imagine that any discussion isn't all that serious. The ministries can have all the discussions they want, but there happens to be a G8 energy conference this week, where they are seriously discussing foreign investment in Russia.

On Monday Russia was laying out its demands concerning foreign investment in the energy sector.

"We have set ourselves the task of providing the world with energy resources on a reliable, long-term basis," Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said at the conference.

Notice, they have done it themselves. They want to be the ones to provide energy to the world - and I think they want the rest of us to pay them to do it.

It's no secret that Europe does not want to fall into this dependency trap, but they have few other options. And that is no secret to Russia:

"Gazprom was, is and will be a reliable guarantor of gas supplies to Europe," [Gazprom deputy CEO Alexander]Medvedev said...

"[EU] dependency is only going to increase," Medvedev said. "There are only four sources of gas in the world: Qatar, Iran, Algeria and Russia."

Wow. Quite a group. Russia's economy isn't great, but it's gas resources are, and they probably have one of the most stable energy infrastructures. And once again, they know it too -

When asked whether Russia was the only one of the four that could be considered stable, Medvedev said, "You can answer that question yourself."

Of course we can, but Russia wants to answer it for us. Russia has the resources, but not the money. So the other question is, who has the money and the need for resources?

The biggest answer to that is China. China wants legitimacy as a diplomatic and capitalistic power. They have their hands in investments all over the world, places like Africa, Venezuela, and Saudi Arabia & Iran.

If China can pump enough money into countries that are desperate for investment, then China can count on them to take their side in global diplomatic arguments. Perhaps it seems that countries like Sudan and Zambia are not important political allies, but what about Venezuela and Iran? These countries need neither more money, nor more strength in their anti-US positions. Russia may seem weak, but a government run by a group of former KGB spies is not the government I want controlling Europe behind the scenes.

There isn't a petition or a protest that we can start to stop these machinations. All we can do is be aware and hope that policy makers know that we may be able to trust our allies only as long as they can afford it.

(Cross-posted at Stones Cry Out)

Adorable.

2006-02-20T14:17:00.000-05:00

The Ranger is going to love this.

Look it up

2006-02-20T14:13:00.000-05:00

This is interesting, but it kinda makes my head spin. Maybe it's all the italics - or the fact that I think "Blargon" is a stretch of a word.

(via: The Volokh Conspiracy)

Is Accuracy Still Important to the AP?

2006-02-13T13:11:00.000-05:00

The Ranger has a hilariously titled post linking to this debunking of an AP article on the infamous non-story of Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame, a favorite around here.
Here's the AP sentence:

Wilson's revelations cast doubt on President Bush's claim in his 2003 State of the Union address that Niger had sold uranium to Iraq to develop a nuclear weapon as one of the administration's key justifications for going to war in Iraq.

And Simberg's response:

We've been over this many times, but apparently, it's necessary to do so again. Here are the sixteen words:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
That's it. It doesn't say that uranium was sold to Iraq, it doesn't say Niger. It says that the British government has learned about attempts to purchase uranium from Africa. Africa is a big place. Nowhere in the speech does it claim that the attempts were successful, and nowhere in the speech is Niger mentioned. The sentence, as written in the AP story, is completely false, but many persist in believing it, because apparently it confirms their prejudices

Seriously though, this is a non-story, and it will become more and more irrelevant as news organizations continue to get the facts wrong. How can we be bothered to care about it if they don't even care enough to do a little fact checking?

NOTE: The AP has changed the story linked on Transterrestrial Musings to a different AP article. The article I've linked above is the one from which Simberg is quoting.

In Support of Offense Equality

2006-02-08T14:25:00.000-05:00

Often times I read posts that tax my brain so much I have to read them slowly and more than once to fully understand the complex reasoning involved. This is fine if I have interest in the subject. If I don't, sorry, but I'm not into taxing my brain without good reason!

However, this Eugene Volokh post discussing the problems with both opposing Muslim offense over the Mohammed cartoons and supporting flag burning bans is quite interesting. I don't know if Volokh is completely right about this, since I don't know of anyone who burned down a building because someone else burned a flag(and I think that many of those currently rioting will always been looking for something over which to riot)- but the logical conclusions seem quite sound. Here is a sample section:

One risk, then, is that banning the desecration of one symbol will help lead to bans on desecration of the other -- allowing flagburning bans will change swing voters' views about freedom of offensive speech, or will trigger their concerns about equality, and will lead to bans on desecration of religious symbols.

Of course, it's quite possible that this slippage will be resisted -- that even if there's not much of a good logical distinction between flagburning bans and bans on insults to religious symbols and figures, American politics will lead to the adoption of the former but rejection of the latter. But that itself, I think, will be harmful: Right now, when American Muslims are deeply offended by pejorative depictions of Mohammed, we can tell them: "Yes, you must endure this speech that you find so offensive, but others must endure offensive speech, too. Many Americans are deeply offended flagburning, much as you are deeply offended by depictions of Mohammed, but the Constitution says we all have to live with being offended: We must fight the speech we hate through argument, not through suppression."

But really, I encourage you to tax your brain and read the whole thing.

The Plame Story continues

2006-02-06T14:41:00.000-05:00

Well, it's been a while since I saw anything of note in the ridiculous Plame leak investigation. But this Byron York article has some interesting points about what Libby may or may not have known, and more importantly, whether or not it mattered if he knew or said anything at all.

The NSA Hearings - at times both unbelievable and infuriating

2006-02-06T13:49:00.000-05:00

First off, I find it incredible that Congress is holding NSA hearings and that we can all see them on CSPAN. I think they would be a lot better off letting people like Goss, Negroponte and Gonzales testify in a closed session...but then I guess the Democratic Senators wouldn't be able to put on a show by asking questions like "Can the President suspend Posse Comitatus?" What kind of question is that Senator Feinstein? Gonzales responded appropriately by saying that he was there to discuss the Terrorist Surveillance program and not some punch of hypothetical issues...like...you know, the President trying to creat propaganda by covertly trying to affect political processes, media or policy. Unbelievable.

As Senator Sessions said a few minutes later "The world is hearing this" and people should not be casually suggesting that the President and Attorney General are lying and conducting terrorist investigations in a free-wheeling, willy nilly matter. People who are fired up about this don't seem to understand that it is about terrorism. No one in the NSA cares if I talk to someone in Spain about how much it snowed in Ohio or how I'm not thrilled that the Steelers won the Superbowl. And really, I shouldn't care if they did care. Because what if my friend in Spain turned out to be a Terroist and I didn't know it. American foreign and domestic policies don't turn on individual conversations. No one care. What the NSA cares about is protecting us and not just being a super snoopy big brother.

UPDATE: I just saw that John Podhoretz had this to say about the hearings:

SEN. DAILYKOS FEINSTEIN ASKS A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS OFF A SHEET...
...including one about whether the president can, on his own initiative, engage in illegal propaganda activities inside the United States. She cites statute 502K-12 subsection ABCD (well, not actually, but that's what it sounded like). When Attorney General Gonzales, properly considering himself sandbagged by an issue involving a statute in the U.S. code having nothing whatsoever to do with the case at hand, protests that he does not want to give an uninformed answer to a complex question, Sen. Feinstein announces, "I don't want to argue with you," and then goes right on to insist that of course the president would be tempted to suspend many civil liberties. Bad form, Senator. Rude and unjust. God forbid you should actually listen when Gonzales attempts to offer a reasoned answer to your outrageous, DailyKos-level question.

As evidenced from my first paragraph above, I couldn't say it better myself :)

Clearly, statistics hide the truth

2006-02-04T17:15:00.000-05:00

This is so funny because it's true, no one wants to believe that the economy is getting better:

It's too bad the economy is in such bad shape...
Just think how good the news would be if it were in good shape.
Payroll growth averaged 160,000 per month in 2005; it has averaged 229,000 in the past three months. The drop in the jobless rate in January to the lowest level since April 2001 was a surprise: Economists surveyed by MarketWatch expected the unemployment rate to remain at 4.9%.
...
My wife was "discussing" the state of the economy with a liberal friend who was convinced that it was in seriously bad shape. In the end my wife said that it must be "only the numbers" that made it look so good. Her friend agreed.

This reminds me of when John Kerry's stump speeches made it sound like Ohio was on fire and everyone was fleeing or withering away in holes in the ground since they didn't have any jobs or anything to eat. After hearing him speak, I was always surprised to find my electricity still functioning and my cell phone operable.

Anyone who watches the news would have a problem thinking that the economy was in decent, if not good, shape. Of course, you wouldn't know it by the consumer confidence levels or the huge amount of traffic at the malls and shopping centers on a rainy Saturday afternoon in burning Ohio.

Maybe I shouldn't scream when Teddy comes on TV

2006-01-30T15:50:00.000-05:00

Glenn Reynolds on President Bush's increasing approval ratings:

He's been trending up there for several days. I'm not sure why, but it seems as if he does better whenever John Kerry and Ted Kennedy get face time on the national news. The Democrats would be wise to let other people represent them.

Yes...they would be wise...

But really, what are the chances?

Anti-Americanism: The Political Gateway Drug

2006-01-27T18:04:00.000-05:00

Mark Steyn guest stars on the Wall Street Journal editorial page today with a column about the new conservative in charge of Canada, Stephen Harper. However, I thought this to be the most interesting idea:

But these days anti-Americanism is the first refuge of the scoundrel, and it's usually a reliable indicator that you're not up to the challenges of the modern world or of your own country.

Steyn doesn't elaborate upon this, but what he's said here is clear enough: If you're going to end up being a stupid national leader and later ousted by your own citizens, it probably began when you whined against America :)

(The article is behind the "WSJ gate," but if you are a subscriber you can find it
here.)

UPDATE: Over the weekend, Opinion Journal posted the Steyn column providing full access to the rest of us :)

"And now, coming to the plate..."

2006-01-21T19:33:00.000-05:00

Back in college, my friend Becs and I would have conversations about what music they would play if one of us were to be walking up to the batter's box. She would choose something and then continuously change her mind. As a huge White Sox fan at a time when their stadium was never full, she had a lot of time during their games to think about it. I, on the other hand, could never make such a decision. I guess the fact that I knew it would never happen kept me from really making the commitment to a certain song. (Though I'm sure the Ranger has his song all ready to go for when he gets called up to the majors.)

Anyway, apparently this is a common conversation to have, and over at The Corner, John J. Miller chose entrance music for the NR staff.

Sadly, I must admit to not being able to recall the tunes to any of the songs listed.

John Podhoretz is sad too, but for a different reason: Miller left him off the list!

"Let's give them the Evil Eye and see what happens"

2006-01-20T14:44:00.000-05:00

Sometimes, when discussing the general bad/annoying behavior of a politician, athelete, football coach, etc, it's funny to say things like "Yeah, Mr. X, we're looking in your direction" to let him know we aren't just speaking generally.
However, when we say such things, it's just to make ourselves laugh and perhaps feel a little bit better, like we are doing something to make the world a better place. But we know we really aren't doing anything because we don't actually mean that the aspersions and looks we cast in his direction will have any effect on our "Mr. X."

The U.N apparently has other ideas, according to this Reuters story:
"Shame, not sanctions, initial U.N. goal for Iran"

Sure, okay, we can try that first. But I don't have high hopes. Jim Geraghty doesn't either:

Dear United Nations,

You're turning into a parody of yourself. Under current circumstances, the Middle East may experience some turbulence, and then explode. A leader who believes that he is launching a cataclysmic clash that will preherald the return of the Mahdi is not going to be "shamed" into giving up a nuclear weapons program. It's the end of the world and the second coming of the 12th Shi'ite imam is right around the corner; disapproving looks from Security Council members are not going to deter him.

Sadly, I don't know if anything coming from the Security Council these days will deter him. But for the record, I'm casting disapproving looks in your direction, Iran!

The Bible, a Cross and a Teddy Bear

2006-01-11T11:23:00.000-05:00

All three are now banned from being carried/worn by employees of British Midland International flights that are going to Saudi Arabia.

A Teddy Bear? Really?

Sigh.

Who is this guy anyway?

2006-01-11T11:14:00.000-05:00

I totally agree with Doug here. Belafonte can't be called anything else than unamerican and he really needs to Just. Stop. Talking.
The ironic thing is I first heard about this story when a friend of mine, an intelligent businessman, was reading the daily paper and said "Who is Harry Belafonte?"
I said, "A singer."
"Well, why is he so ridiculous?"

The man had no idea who Belafonte was and the fact that I couldn't really recall enough information about the guy to give a better description, both made me more than a little happy. (Although in my head I immediately had some sort of reggae or whatever soundtrack running...banana songs and whatever.)

I also love the Scrappleface link that Doug points out, particularly the fact that Ott has Kim Jong Il questioning Belafonte's choice to rank Bush over Kim himself. Ha!

Oh and "Ex-celebrity"! Yes, that is how I should have described Belafonte when asked :)

Behold: The Amazing Powers of the Magnetic Field

2006-01-05T18:36:00.000-05:00

I'd have to consult with the Ranger on this one, but I'm skeptical just like Instapundit:

AN EXTRAORDINARY "hyperspace" engine that could make interstellar space travel a reality by flying into other dimensions is being investigated by the United States government.
...
The theoretical engine works by creating an intense magnetic field that, according to ideas first developed by the late scientist Burkhard Heim in the 1950s, would produce a gravitational field and result in thrust for a spacecraft.

Also, if a large enough magnetic field was created, the craft would slip into a different dimension, where the speed of light is faster, allowing incredible speeds to be reached. Switching off the magnetic field would result in the engine reappearing in our current dimension.

I don't know...
What I find problematic is that the "other dimensions" aren't first being investigated by the "United States Government". Those are theoretical enough on their own. And what part of government is investigating this? Should we be more outraged at this investigation than at say...Wiretapping?

:)

Classic Christmas TV

2005-12-13T20:44:00.000-05:00

Shawna has posted her favorite Christmas movies, and maybe I should do that too...but right now all I can think to say is "How could I have forgotten about Emmet Otter's Jugband Christmas???"

Along with Mickey's Christmas Carol and the Charlie Brown Christmas special, it was a yearly favorite in my home. I think I still have them all somewhere on VHS, taped off the TV and laced with the commercials of the times. Too funny.

Even funnier: just this weekend I was discussing The Christmas Carol with a first grader. Let me tell you, explaining the concepts of "present" and "future" are a lot more difficult than I thought. This young girl had also never seen The Muppet Christmas Carol - a travesty in my opinion. So I told her she could watch it with me. Gotta love Kermit and Gonzo :)

Yes, It's a Christmas Tree.

2005-12-01T12:39:00.000-05:00

This is good news all around.

Because really, other "holidays" don't have Christmas trees, do they? So what sense does it even make to call them "Holiday" trees??

None.

X-rays and Sugar Tolerance

2005-11-10T17:05:00.000-05:00

This was Overheard in a New York Office:

Boss: Those cupcakes are delicious. What a sugar rush!
Intern: I broke out in hives.
Boss: In hives?
Intern: A rash. My skin is very sensitive.
Boss: To sugar?
Intern: Yup.
Boss: That's amazing.
Intern: When I was a kid I got sick and I had to have, like, ten X-rays a day. Literally, five X-rays a day. And I think that messed up my photons.
Boss: Your photons?
Intern: Yeah, that's how X-rays work, you know? They reverse your photons. That's how they get the image.
Boss: Oh.
Intern: That's why my skin is so sensitive, because they messed up the photons. They won't admit it, because they don't want me to sue them. But I know what's up.

No kidding. "They" won't admit it? Gee. I wonder why...

You know, as a physicist, I'm always curious to see how x-rays and...photons...are understood in society at large. Prayerfully, this is not at all how society at large understands x-rays and photons.

This is what I've been saying...

2005-10-29T15:08:00.000-04:00

Bush: Effort to Discredit Wilson ‘Superfluous’
by Scott Ott

(2005-10-29) — President Bush today refused to comment directly on the five-count grand jury indictment that led to the resignation of Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby as the vice president’s chief of staff yesterday. However, he said he was concerned about the suggestion that “anyone in my administration wasted valuable time trying to discredit former ambassador Joe Wilson.”

“There’s no sense in making an effort to discredit Joe Wilson,” said Mr. Bush. “It would be superfluous. He’s a self-discrediting machine.

Book Shelf Rating

2005-10-19T13:40:00.000-04:00

Today the Corner linked to a National Review piece from 1999 listing their choices for the best non-fiction books of that century. I'm quite surprised to know that I own 7 of these books.

Here is how the panel defined their choices:

We have used a methodology that approaches the scientific. But-certainly beyond, say, the first 40 books-the fact of the books' presence on the list is far more important than their rankings. We offer a comment from a panelist after many of the books; but the panel overall, not the individual quoted, is responsible for the ranking. So, here is our list, for your enjoyment, mortification, and stimulation.

Typically amusing National Review Writing, wouldn't you say? :)

Now 7 out of 100 is probably not a great score...but I'm young and my book buying tastes have not always fallen along the lines of the non-fiction, far reaching, world-changing and extraordinary. (I still have my childhood collection of Baby-sitter Club and Nancy Drew Books). But I would say that 7% is a respectable score, given that I'd never heard of many of the books on the list.

Here are my 7 selections:

The Second World War, Winston S. Churchill

The Gulag Archipelago, Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn

Modern Times, Paul Johnson

The Diary of a Young Girl, The Diary of a Young Girl, Anne Frank

Relativity, Relativity, Albert Einstein

Mere Christianity, C. S. Lewis

The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Richard Phillips Feynman

Just don't ask me how many of them I've read in their entirety :)

This Just In: News from 400 years ago!

2005-10-19T13:16:00.000-04:00

Whether or not William Shakespeare actually wrote the writings that bear his name is a debate that has been going on for decades at least...but most probably centuries. I'm guessing there was a William Shakespeare contemporary trying to take credit as Will's plays became more and more popular. But anyway, to the AP, this is all news:

Scholars Argue if Shakespeare Penned Plays

LONDON - Some scholars just won't let Shakespeare be Shakespeare. A small academic industry has developed to prove that William Shakespeare, a provincial lad from Stratford-upon-Avon, could not have written the much-loved plays that bear his name.

Triple Threat

2005-10-19T12:14:00.000-04:00

From Fraters Libertas:

Blogs: on the way to becoming as mainstream and annoying as e-mail.

...or at least as annoying as telemarketers.

"Cartoon-icide"?

2005-10-12T16:50:00.000-04:00

Credit to the Ranger for sending me this headline, saying
Ahh...okay. Possibly the most ridiculous headline of the year

UNICEF Bombs Smurfs to Highlight Plight

I had missed Best of the Web's previously mentions of this first on Monday (using the term "Smurficide") and then on Tuesday saying:

An item yesterday on Unicef's Smurf snuff film stated that Belgians speak Belch. While this is the language of the French-speaking parts of Belgium, large parts of the country speak a variant of Dutch known as Phlegm. We regret the omission.

Today's edition of Best of the Web also has a contender for the "Year's Most Ridiculous Headline":

Outer Space Fish Balls Real Chinese Take-Away

I have no idea.
Even after reading the article I'm convinced some sort of punctuation is missing. Or...something...

The Hidden Story

2005-10-06T19:55:00.000-04:00

Or perhaps...the Hiding Story. I certainly didn't know about the a suicide bombing in Oklahoma by a student and that he was seen buying fertilizer and that he tried to buy ammonium nitrate.

Notice anything? I couldn't find this story on any major news websites. WorldNetDaily was the closest to nation-wide news I could find. What's up with this? I watch a lot of cable news. I mean a lot and I had no idea about this until I heard Lileks and Hugh Hewitt mention it tonight.

Bizarre.

Consumer Confidence and Katrina?

2005-09-20T18:50:00.000-04:00

As another large hurricane grows in the Gulf of Mexico, threatening American oil production once again, perhaps it's a good a time as any to talk about how Katrina has affected the American economy - or more so, how some people think Katrina has affected it.

Last week there was talk that consumer sentiment is slumping because of Hurricane Katrina and now the Fed raises interest rates. But what does this talk about consumer sentiment really mean and is it even valid? Reading about why the Fed is raising rates, it's good to know there isn't much talk about "consume sentiment" which is good, cause I think it's bunk. I'll grant that the economy is in shock, just like many people are in shock. I'll even grant that less people have been shopping in the last few weeks - or rather, that they are spending less money on those trips. But, is the reason for these tighter purse strings necessarily worry over the economy?

Could it be that they are saving money to donate it to the relief work?

Could people have been home watching the 24/7 news coverage instead of shopping?

Could they be spending their time volunteering instead of shopping?

Or...I wonder if this economic analysis of the economy takes into account the fact that one of the major cities in the US is no longer spending any money. But ok, I'll assume they considered that.

The result was similar to trends in other consumer surveys as well as a string of major polls showing waning support for the Bush administration's economic policies.

"I think there's probably also a degree of loss of confidence in the government," said David Sloan, economist at 4CAST Ltd. in New York.

Loss of confidence in government? I don't know, I appreciate the Mr. Sloan is crediting the average American shopper with such complex thought processes. As Jim chronicled yesterday, some American shoppers are just tired of thinking about Katrina, so it's not stopping them from hanging out at the mall or anything.

For me personally, I know I've been spending less money in the stores, both because I am unemployed (which I was before Katrina) and because I wanted to be able to contribute to organizations like the Red Cross and the Salvation Army. I also look at a lot of things differently now. The way I treat water is different. I'm not so quick to dump out fresh water just because it sat on the counter for a while. It's true that I'm being more efficient about my driving since the gas prices went so high. But they've dropped over 50 cents in my area and I'm still being efficient...because really, I should have been all along right? So often in times of crisis we are awoken to things about our behavior that should have been changed long ago. Perhaps those of us whose actions are changing because of Katrina are only benefiting from better focus and awareness - not because we are so worried about the economy or because we trust the government any more or less than we did before - or more or less than we should have in the first place.

(Cross-posted at StonesCryOut)

And Justice For All...

2005-09-16T20:50:00.000-04:00

I happened to catch some of CourtTV this afternoon when they were showing a clip of Chai Vang testifying. His description of the way he took out his gun to shoot Jessica Willers, one of many he killed that day, was amazingly matter of fact. He explained that the hunters were attacking him with racial slurs and didn't seem to understand that racial slur isn't something worthy of lethal self defense. Thankfully, the jury agreed.

Hmong Man Found Guilty in Hunter Deaths

Additionally, the article cites someone playing the race card:

Outside court, one of Vang's friends questioned the all-white jury's makeup and maintained Vang was innocent.

"All Caucasian, all American. Why can't there be one Hmong? Why can't there be one minority in there?" Pofwmyeh Yang said. "I believe only one person can judge, and that's God. But God didn't judge today."

Now, admittedly I'm Caucasian, but looking at the case, if I weren't white I would be somewhat offended at this implication that non-whites should be on a jury to secure freedom for a murderer. And "All Americans"? Yes, they have to all be Americans in order to be on a jury, right?

Additionally, as a Christian I agree that God is the final judge of us all, but in a civilized society we must have laws and the breaking of those laws must have consequences. That is what we saw today.

(Cross-posted at StonesCryOut)

Hurricane Relief Weekend Sept 1 - Sept 5

2005-09-05T23:59:00.000-04:00

Note: This post will be on top all weekend. Scroll down for new posts

The Blogs Across America Hurricane Relief Day has been expanded to a Hurricane Relief weekend because of the tremendous response. As of late Friday morning, over $300,000 in contributions have been logged. And so we continue on. I've moved the relevant information from my previous post to this one. Please continue to pray about more ways you can help. I've linked more charities here. But there are even more here. As the days wear on, we begin to see the depth of the need along the Gulf Coast and how massive the relief efforts will be.

~~~
Hugh Hewitt and Glenn Reynolds put out the call and the bloggers are answering. NZ Bear is providing a complete list of the charities that bloggers are recommending.

The charity I recommend is the Red Cross. I choose it because it was the first place I thought to donate and the first organization I heard about bringing supplies and support to the Gulf region.

To donate by phone:
1-800-HELP-NOW

My friends and I at Stones Cry Out have chosen the Salvation Army.
1-800-SAL-ARMY

Additionally, while surveying the complete list, I discovered the Soldiers' Angels is organizing an effort as well. I continue to urge donations to Soldiers Angels in all forms, as they will focus on Soldiers who will soon be returning to the region, only to find their familes scattered and their homes destroyed. Please pray for them as they deal with the news of this disaster while also serving so bravely around the world.

Prayer and donations are needed. See how you can work to provide both.
May God bless our efforts and may the money be used in the best and most efficient ways possible.

Also, you can log your donation here to help know how much we have all been able to help. And you can do so anonymously. You don't have to give your name or blog site in order to log your contribution.

Technorati Tags: Hurricane Katrina and Flood Aid

The Role of the President

2005-09-03T17:30:00.000-04:00

Hurricane Katrina has brought back to our minds an important question: What exactly is the job of the President in the middle of a national catastrophe?

During 9/11, the President was an encourager and a symbol of the strength of America - of a strong response and a strong spirit.

However, what was his practical role? I don't know that I could, off the top of my head, quantify what exactly the President did to relieve the crisis at Ground Zero, the Pentagon and Pennsylvania. I'm sure there was a lot of delegation but if it had gone horribly, it would have been on his head. As it worked out, it was a high-moment of his presidency. It must be said though, that part of that high moment came from the fact that we as a nation were banded together against a common enemy - we don't have that now. There is no "evil" against which to direct our anger and frustration and since I would guess that the people in New Orleans (and many people nationwide, for that matter) don't know the name "Mike Brown" or "Lt. Gen. Honore" or maybe even "Gov. Blanco," the President takes the fall.

And, for the most part, he should be held responsible and I would guess that he would not shirk that responsibility. However, the President (and all American citizens) must be able to depend on our individual states' first responders. We cannot count on the federal government for the easement of all our pain and suffering. All states must consider their disaster relief plans on an individual basis. Though I would say it may indeed be the President's job to urge the states to do so.

So, I think Mark was on the right track earlier - unfortunate as it may be for the President. This Rich Lowry article runs along the same lines:

Law enforcement, of course, is primarily a state and local responsibility, but in the age of the 24-hour news cycle, people look to the federal government and the president to solve any problem on their TV screens. Already the question is being asked if the feds could have jumped in sooner (the National Guard is now arriving in force).

But...could there be other things to consider? As pertains to the pre-hurricane preparation, Powerline reports thatthe answer is yes:

The mayor called the order unprecedented and said anyone who could leave the city should.
Gov. Kathleen Blanco, standing beside the mayor at a news conference, said President Bush called and personally appealed for a mandatory evacuation for the low-lying city, which is prone to flooding.

So, for all the criticism about the President's preparedness efforts he did at least two things: asking for mandatory evacuation of New Orleans and declaring diaster areas ahead of time. The first stressed the seriousness of the storm to those who otherwise may have tried to ride it out. The second allowed the process of calling up troops and allocating funds to begin earlier than it would have.

The President has saved lives. Himself. I of course don't know who actually is to blame for the fact that all that has not gone as well as it should. I know the President will deservedly take some of the blame. But I also know that he himself acted in such a way as to save thousands of lives and alleviate the current crisis in New Orleans.

(Cross-posted at Stones Cry Out)

Technorati Tag: Hurricane Katrina

Fifteen Minutes of News Coverage

2005-09-02T10:50:00.000-04:00

Just now on Fox news, Dr. Kristen Dascomp called in from University Hospital of New Orleans. She said that patients were now being evacuated as the helicopters could finally land on the roof of the building and take some of the patients and staff. Apparently the first helicopter was only thinking he had to take 20 people, but now the correct information has been relayed and more helicopters are coming. The news anchor asked the doctor, "How many people are there with you needing to be evacuated?"
"Eleven hundred."

Yeah, that's a big difference.

Meanwhile, the anchor asked about a jail set up in the hospital. Dr. Dascomp said, "Well, it's not so much a jail..." She said there were some people wandering into the hospital during the hurricane who were neither patients nor staff, so they set up a place for them on the first floor and tried to get them accommodations as much as they could (because remember, they were still taking care of patients). Eventually, those people ran out of food and water and with no money they became restless and aggressive towards the hospital staff that were also living on that floor. So to protect to the staff and the patients, those individuals were quarantined in their own area.

Amazing. The hospital tries to take care of them instead of kicking them to the street and they react by asking for more and more from the hospital staff to the point where they are making threats and need to be "quarantined."

Also, the doctor said that she has no idea where the evacuated patients are going, that there is no communication in the hospital and the only way to spread information is to run through the halls and shout out announcements.

And also in the area of unbelievable, the congressional black caucus is remarking on Katrina right now and saying that the difference between those who got out and those who had to stay is poverty, age and race.

Sigh. I agree that some people are poor and I agree that going to the super dome before the storm turned out to be not to good. But anyone who died in the storm could have done that and survived the storm. However, my real problem is that I keep hearing about the people who didn't have the "means" to escape. Well, maybe. Except I keep seeing people interviewed on TV saying "I lost my car, I lost everything."
To which I say: IF YOU HAVE A CAR, WHY DIDN'T YOU DRIVE OUT??!

He also said, "It would be unconscionable to stand by and do nothing."
WHO?? is standing by and doing nothing? What??
sigh. The President said it today, We can both thank the workers there for their efforts and acknowledge that the results are not enough - and we can do it without being offensive.

And then the Black Caucus speaker alludes to the Bible about giving people food when they are hungry. And as that is happening, a huge convoy of hundreds of trucks, boats and busses is flowing into New Orleans. In fact, Fox News cut away from Jesse Jackson to show the convoy arriving in the city.

Let's be unified to get this done. Please.

Hurricane Relief Day

2005-09-01T23:59:00.000-04:00

Today bloggers around the world join in a coordinated effort to raise support for the victims of Hurrican Katrina. I encourage you to pray and donate as your are led. And even if you cannot donate, prayer is free...it only costs our time.

NOTE: I've moved the rest of the information in this post to the Hurricane Relief Weekend post. Please do what you can to help.

Recovery, evacuation, looting

2005-09-01T22:29:00.000-04:00

Best of the Web today has a roundup with a lot of informative quotes. It would take me longer to post all of it than for you to read it. It's not a pretty picture.

Again, Donate. The cost of this relief effort is in excess of 1/2 billion dollars a day.

A day.

Chavez makes an offer

2005-09-01T22:14:00.000-04:00

...to export some of his communist soldiers to "help" in the Gulf Coast:

CARACAS, Venezuela - Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez is offering planeloads of soldiers and aid workers to help American victims of Hurricane Katrina...

Please tell me that someone else is also suspicious about this. I can't imagine that bringing "planeloads" of Venezuelan soldiers is any kind of good idea.

Al Sharpton is out of control

2005-09-01T20:39:00.000-04:00

He's bloviating on Countdown on MSNBC right now - big time. He says things like "We can rebuild Iraq but we can't get food and water into New Orleans." and "We're acting like it's hundreds of thousands of people."

Ahhh! No, it's not that many, but it not an easy ride in or out. Think about the situation, please. Consider what you are saying, Mr. Sharpton, and how atrocious it sounds.

He said things about "right wing rising up around" other things, but not doing anything now. That if it wasn't New Orleans but if it was somewhere "near Crawford, FEMA would have gotten there a lot quicker."
All of this is insulting to how hard the Coast Guard, the New Orleans' police, the National Guard have been working there. I know it has been difficult and things haven't gone perfectly at all, but people are working so hard we cannot even imagine.

And so, Sharpton's reaction? Unbelievable.

Then Olberman closes it all up by thanking Sharpton for his "insight."
So...does insight now mean "political hay-making"?

UPDATE: As a response to Rev. Sharpton, here are Radioblogger's words to Jack Cafferty's earlier today after Cafferty lost his mind on CNN:

All righty then. You feel better now, Jack? You creep. While you are complaining about how inactive the government's been, The Coast Guard has saved hundreds of people. While you think Bush is a day late and a dollar short, the federal government was mobilizing before the storm ever hit. Disaster areas were declared before the storm ever got there.

If you think Bush landing in New Orleans the day after is a good idea, you simply are a buffoon. That's right. Resources are already stretched to over-capacity, and let's plan security and logistics for a presidential vist while people are stranded. That's a real good idea, Jack.

If you want to have had troops on site as the storm hit, so they'd be ready to immediately respond, you'd have dead troops now as well.

I don't care a whit if the whole world is watching. I'd rather the whole world chipped in and helped, like we've done for them every time something bad happened in their neck of the woods.

By the way, Jack? How have you pitched in to help? How much encouragement are you providing to the people that are actually on the ground making a difference right now? You are saying their effort is bungled, badly managed, and a world-wide disgrace and an embarrassment. Very nice, Jack. If you want to see an example of a world-wide disgrace and an embarrassment, look in the mirror.

Don't be a Jack, America. Don't be part of the kick-em-while-they're-down crowd. Make a difference.

All of this could be said to Sharpton, who apparently hasn't stopped to think of any of it.

(Cross-posted at Stones Cry Out)

Do you feel it?

2005-09-01T20:32:00.000-04:00

Back during the '04 campaign, I remember Hugh Hewitt noting various senetorial campaigns that needed all the money they could get. I remember he said "give till it hurts." We all said similiar things during the weeks of Tsumani relief. And now, Hugh Hewitt leads the charge again saying:

Please dig deep and give. Then give again. Then give until you really feel it.

So, do you feel it? Does the giving hurt?
You have so many choices:
American Red Cross
Salvation Army
Feed the Children
Soldiers' Angels
Catholic Charities
Samaritan's Purse

...to name a few.

Please. Give. And trust that if the giving hurts now, then when you need it, someone will be there to help you.

Struggles continue in New Orleans

2005-09-01T18:30:00.000-04:00

...And they will for many days to come.

I saw a lady interviewed last night who said she thought she could go to her home in New Orleans on Monday and survey the damage. Monday?? No. I'm sorry. I don't think so.

I don't know who the red haired lady was on CNN this afternoon, but she was hard to take. Yes, it is a bad bad situation at the convention center, but contradicting CNN's own military analyst as well as everyone else she interviewed. That military guy said that food and water were coming into the city, but it wasn't being filmed by the cameras. This is certainly true, but it is also true that people are in dire circumstances. But again, it doesn't even look like America. It's very unbelievably sad.

And an example of this is a man my dad saw on the news this morning. This older man was sitting on his porch and a boat came by to pick home up and the man said he wasn't going to go and the rescuer said "Well, you need some water." The man said "I have water. I'll be ok." He stayed right there. Whoever was anchoring the broadcast at the time expressed shock and disbelief that the man didn't want to leave. As my dad and I talked about it, we weren't that shocked. Where was the man going to go if he went into the boat? The boat would have taken him to a dry section of interstate and dropped him off and he would have had to walk somewhere and sit and wait to get on the bus. It's true that it may not be safe for him to stay in his house, especially if it continues to rain and the water somehow manages to rise more, but in the meantime, staying at his house where he has water and clothes and probably some canned or dry goods - he's safer and probably more sanitary than waiting on the street outside of the convention center or the Superdome.

It's a devastating situation, but the military and the aid workers are doing the best they can under ridiculously bad circumstances.

I urge you again to donate to the relief effort.

This is a long term effort and we cannot allow the aide money to run out.

Additionally, if you are willing to donate living space for Gulf Coast victims, you can go to this New Orleans site that is supporting message boards for available housing around the country. There are also housing listings nationwide at the New Orleans' Craigs List. As there is computer access at the Astrodome and probably at other shelters, this could be very helpful in alleviating the numbers of people who will need to be housing in long term recovery.

Please continue to pray about what you can do to help.

(Cross-posted at StonesCryOut)

One year ago

2005-09-01T17:56:00.000-04:00

In all of this it almost -- it did -- slip my mind that yesterday was the birthday of my blog. Abigail Brayden is 1 year old. The blog. Not me :)

August 31, 2004, I started this blog to help explain some of the positions of the President and how he was representing more than just republicans. Of course, that is well known now and the blog has taken on a wider scope. I'm just happy to still be here - 350+ posts later. One year ago, I never thought I would be part of such a great group blog like Stones Cry Out or participating in a massive relief effort to help Americans. God is good and I am blessed and thankful. I pray that those suffering now along the Gulf Coast can see His goodness very soon.

Hitting Home: American Refugees

2005-08-31T23:20:00.000-04:00

Today as I was watching coverage of the devastation and tragedy in New Orleans and the Gulf Coast I thought "This doesn't even look like America. It's just not something we see in this country. And "refugees"? Refugees in America?! It's just unimaginable"

And just now on CNN, Aaron Brown got choked up on the same word. It's hard to comprehend using the word "Refugee" to describe an American right here in our own country.

Please join in prayer, not only for the families and their suffering, but for the rescue efforts that are going on from the military to the police to the normal every day folks who are themselves survivors but are now going around and rescuing others. As darkness is covering New Orleans, rescue efforts will be even slower. Prayers are needed.

...as well as donations.

You can call

1-800-HELP-NOW
to donate to the Red Cross.

Or
1-800-SAL-ARMY
for the Salvation Army.

Tomorrow is blog relief day. As I heard a few reference on TV tonight, we gave over 1 billion dollars to help people on the other side of the world, how much are we willing to give to those in our own country. Because how many other countries do we really think are going to have telethons to raise money for America?

Here is a list of participating blogs as well as many helpful charities to whom you can contribute.

More on this tomorrow. Tonight, prayer. It's an unbelievable situation that is impossible for some of us to even begin to understand. But God understands and He can bring comfort and peace beyond all understand.

UPDATE:Tonight (9/1) NBC's Brian Williams shared that he had said to a co-worker "When we get back to the states..." and then realized that they were in America. It didn't look like the America they had known, but it was America just the same.

One and not the other

2005-08-27T19:30:00.000-04:00

I've enjoyed Tucker Carlson's new show, The Situation, on MSNBC for the last few weeks (not as much lately, since it moved to 11pm) but unfortunately watching it means I also have to hear quite a bit from Rachel Maddow. While I do give her credit for being intelligent and well spoken, she's also pretty arrogant about some things and, well, blatantly liberal. The Ranger took her to task this week for refusing to condemn Hugo Chavez in the same breath as Pat Robertson.

I think Tucker was absolutely right about what he said. And I also think that, in the Ranger's post, the word "fame" in the prepositional phrase "of Air America fame" should be in quotes.

Don't you just love to vote?

2005-08-23T13:40:00.000-04:00

Especially when you don't have to drive anywhere or walk past people trying to hand you nail files and magnets with local candidates names on them? :)

Anyway, Patrick Ruffini is running a political straw poll and trying to use it to get a statistically valid* sample. You can view the results (even without voting)by state, region or blog, by red or blue. It could have quite the value, as Hugh Hewitt said:

If the blogs can generate reliable results through professionals like Ruffini, the end-run around MSM and its biased poll taking is complete.

And really, who doesn't want to complete an end-run around the MSM?

Speaking of football - or really...speaking of not speaking of it, Hugh also had this to say:

There's an alarming amount of Eagles blogging going on at Galley Slaves. Don't they realize that the Tribe is now tied for the wild card spot in the American League, rendering all football blogging premature?

That's right. The Tribe! Oh....yeah... :)

And the article Hugh links to there has the following headings:

Indians bring out bats
Five homers plenty as Tribe moves into virtual tie for wild-card berth

:)

UPDATE: In deference to Rick Brady's vastly superior knowledge and experience in the field of statistics and polling, I changed "significant" to "valid" in my writing above.
Thanks again Rick :)

(Cross-posted at Stones Cry Out)

Box 44: Pro Bono (2)

2005-08-22T23:58:00.000-04:00

ProBono, seems like a simple thing, but I would rather call it:
For Sale: White House
It's my last Adopt a box assignment. I enjoyed this whole process though, but I must say if anyone else reads through these boxes and finds sometimes I missed, please email me or leave a comment. I would really appreciate it.

This last box has both interesting cases and nice perspectives on John Roberts. However, this mostly all took place in 1984, and with reelection looming, I'm guessing it influenced the docket though. But it didn't influence John Roberts. He presents the best legal argument in each case. Even in a case that may be politically helpful for the President, Roberts seems to agree only after the legal concerns are addressed. He's also concerned not just for technicalities of law but about things that may appear illegal even if they are not. And sometimes, he agrees that the best thing to do is not say anything - especially when someone threatens to put a lien against the sale of the White House.

But if you are interested in some more detail, then here it is:

1. New York County Lawyers Association
Memo from Roberts to Fred Fielding - 1/25/84 (p.3)
Roberts simply described a letter to the President regarding a report from the Assoc. on HR 4043. Apparently the bill was proposed to be amended by the House Committee on Science & Technology and the Association wanted to recommend additional proposals for the bill.

The bill was the Administration's "proposal to encourage joint research by reducing risk of anti-trust liability and eliminating the threat of treble damages for such ventures."
The Association agreed with the bill and was now reiterating its agreement in a report, to help promote risky and expensive research in areas vital to the national interest. Roberts wants to send a letter thanking the association for its report and advised to have it sent to justice and commerce.

There are some more memos and letters sending the same thanks and information back and forth.
Then there is the Association's letter to the President (p.8) with the attached report (pp 9- 17). But, what exactly is a risky, expensive kind of venture? The report says that with competitive research and under existing law research on such things as a better ball point pen or plastic coffee cup would proceed quite well, but that encouragement - through anti-trust and other means - is needed for such research as "space industrialization," "desalting of seawater" and "non-polluting power sources."
Ethanol anyone?

The report then goes on to recommend various specifics to the bill. Basically they want the President to define such ventures that would benefit from joint research so that the R&D community would know that they may proceed with said research. The dear was apparently that if the research firms felt that there was a chance that existing legislation would shut down their work they wouldn't even look into it or start spending the money. This recommendations therefore, were in the name of more and more research, with specific federal backing. However, I do appreciate the fact that they expect the President to consult with the technology industry, the scientific community and relevant government agencies before deciding which research goals would fall under the new guidelines.

It goes on and on and on, cause really - it wasn't written by one lawyer, but rather an entire association of them. They do quote Winston Churchill though (p.11), with which one can rarely go wrong.

They also nicely summarized (and underlined) their conclusions on p.17. I won't restate them here because...I've stated them already.

2. Farmland Industries
Memo from Roberts to Fred Fielding - 2/6/84
Someone wants their opinions on a draft letter from President Reagan to Farmland Industries ("FI"). Apparently the president of FI wrote Reagan, urging him to support "expansion of the Commodity Credit Corporation credit guarantee program" on behalf of " '500,000 farm families' ".

Wow. Could this relate to ethanol and corn in Iowa in some way too? It is 1984 after all.

Roberts closes his memo having no objection to the letter and since it is written to the president and not the company itself, there is no endorsement of FI to be considered. However, as cited in a memo dated 2/1/84 - they all had good reason to believe that this letter from the President would be printed in the FI newsletter and sent to all 500,000 letters.

Like I said. Election year, 1984. But who can blame them for talking about it amongst themselves.

The draft (pp.23-25) is written in true Ronald Reagan style, which means it is nice to read - even with all the agriculture talk. :)

Pages 26-27 display FI's original letter and the resolution agreed upon by its members.

3. Go America, Inc. (pp.28-32)
Group of documents concerning an offer from the president of this private company wanted to allow the President to use the Go America symbol throughout government and industry. Roberts memo to Fred Fielding on 2/6/84 (p.28) says accepting such an offer would be inappropriate since Go America is not a 501(c)(3) [non-profit] organization. Therefore, the President's use of the symbol would be his endorsement of the marketing of a private company.

Fielding agrees and passes that along to the Special Assistant to the President (p.29) and then we can read the Go America letter itself (pp.31-32).

Roberts was right about this one and the Democrats certainly can't accuse him of asking the President to help a "greedy corporation."

4. A Lien against the White House? (pp.33-47)
This is really bizarre and I don't even know that I understand it, but apparently Earl C. Berger believed that the administration had failed to pay some damages due because of some litigation and on August 22, 1983 Berger wrote the following to Craig Fuller

I am preparing litigation looking forward to executing and selling the White House of our President, because the Order for Remand has not been properly honored or carried out.
But I am not averse to compromise, and payments due to the teachers and to myself, as their attorney.

He's "looking forward" to selling the White House? Is he serious with this?

Apparently he was because the next letter was to Fred Fielding saying:

Letters to Mr. Fuller go unacknowledged or acted on. He ought to advise Mr. Reagan that his forthcoming campagin (sic) by functionaires, but can be avoided simply

Lastly, an unsigned letter to Mr. Futrell, president of the NEA, that contains many random spelling errors as well as the history of this grievance (p.47). Be prepared though, the scanning is particularly sketchy here.

So what happened? I don't have much of a clue except that some teachers paid some fees and then lost them and then, you know, decided that the best thing to do was to sell the White House. Good plan, that.

The catch for someone looking for one in all this insanity: The 1974 case "spawned litigation involving substantial attorneys fees in which I had some involvement at Hogan and Hartson. I suggest, therefore, that this matter be reassigned to someone else on the staff" (p.35).

However that Hogan & Hartson attorney here is not Roberts but rather one David Waller. This was years before Roberts would be with H&H. So could someone make a connection there? Maybe, if they wanted it.

But I'm still wondering, did anyone manage to sell the White House?

That's it. End of Box.

(Cross-posted at Stones Cry Out)

Box 35: Piracy on the High Seas

2005-08-22T19:00:00.000-04:00

..aka...Box 35:Pardons
:)

I continue my Judge John Roberts Adopt a Box O'Docs assignment.

Again, nothing in this box to hurt Roberts. There's barely anything here written by Roberts himself - and what is there shows him to be cordial, helpful and adherent to protocol.

So, why write so much about this box? I was sucked in by all the talk of the "High Seas" ...

First subject in question of the Pardon: Ramiro De La Fe (who should really be known as Ramiro De La Fe et. al because there is a large group of defendants involved in the indictment, but apparently the pardon is only for De La Fe).

His warrant for arrest, dated July 26, 1967, is from Miami, Florida and requires Mr. De La Fe to "answer to an indictment charging him in conspiracy to commit piracy on the high seas; assault with a dangerous weapon; destruction of navigation appliances; unlawful boarding of a vessel on the high seas; in violation of Title 18, United States Code...."

Okay, first - piracy??
Second, "High Seas"? Is this some sort of technical nautical term?
Third, "Navigation appliances?" Appliances? So, something more than like a compass I guess?
Fourth, "High Seas"
And...fifth ...Piracy? Seriously?
We really need to get another name for that offense.

The indictment describes the conspirators plan to "commandeer a vessel" and take it to Cuba. Yes. Cuba. In 1967. Which makes it seem like a bigger offense. They planned to dismantle the radio (aka navigational appliance). In fact, they did indeed take the vessel using "dangerous weapons, that is, guns, with intent to do bodily harm" (p.15).
Finally, on that same page, "high seas" are defined here to mean "The Atlantic Ocean."

The Indictment doesn't indicate that De La Fe et. al. made it to Cuba, but they did get the vessel, using guns, take it to Florida and then take it away to the ocean again, at which points, one assumes, they were caught.

Now, that was 1967. All letters and memos included in this box are dated throughout 1983/1984.

Why 1983? Well, as a memo from David Stephenson, Acting Pardon Attorney to Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President explains -

On May 5, 1983 President Reagan approved a revision of the rules governing petitions for pardon and other forms of Executive clemency, the first revision since 1962.

So, new rules, that's why.

The memo explains the benefits of the new rules and then attaches the rules themselves, an obvious official description from the DOJ.

Anyway, most of the memos about this case written by Roberts himself that would have been in this box were restricted for reason "B6: Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."

Next case: fast forward to Nov.15, 1984 - A Roberts Letter on White House Stationary to "Mr. Goldsmith." (p.20)
Roberts says Goldsmith's letter was referred to him by Chief of Staff, James Baker. Apparently, Goldsmith was mad because he helped the US Attorney's Office and wasn't set free from custody afterward. He also said he had a pending pardon request. Roberts asks that Goldsmith understand the protocol matters here, saying that "it would be inappropriate for the White House to interfere in any way with the decision of the Parole Commission, or to interfere with the processing of your application before the Acting Pardon Attorney."

I think it was quite kind of Roberts to let Goldsmith know what was going on, not only that, but Roberts goes on to say that he referred Goldsmith's letter to the DOJ.

Next Memo from Roberts to Roger Clegg - Assoc. Deputy Attorney General (p.21)
Roberts forwarded letters from an inmate as well as his own reply to Clegg.
However, those other documents are not in the box. Just the memo.

Then there's a White House tracking sheet re: Goldsmith and then another restriction form with reason B6 cited again.

Finally, a letter dated 10/1/84 on Congress of the United States letterhead to the Parole Commission on behalf of Goldsmith from Peter W. Rodino. (p. 24-25)

Rodino (D-NJ) admits to not knowing Goldsmith personally, but here again is the mention of Goldsmith's cooperation, specifically with the DEA. For this, he should be freed apparently. Rodino's logic "One must conclude that Mr. Goldsmith's experience was at least equivalent to and far more severe than any incarceration could have been."

Huh?

Personally, I think Congress should have followed Roberts' lead and stayed out of it. Roberts was correct to cite such protocol in matters of pardons. They are sensitive subjects and are best handled in the most careful way, without concern for congressional politics. And what was Goldsmith doing writing to a New Jersey Congressman? Did he send letters to all of Congress? Talk about a fishing expedition.

Last two papers in the box are restriction documents on parole hearings and testimonies citing both B6 and "B7: Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes" and also "C: Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of gift."

So as I said, nothing here to hurt Roberts. But could we hear about the "High Seas" one more time, please?? :)

(Cross-posted at Stones Cry Out)

The Iran Emergency in Box 29

2005-08-20T14:24:00.000-04:00

I volunteered to Adopt a Box O Docs - Documents released by the Reagan Library concerning John Roberts' years in the White House Counsel's office. The program is organized by Hugh Hewitt & Generalissimo Duane.

My Assignment: Box 29 - Iran Emergency

Bottom Line: There's really nothing here that can hurt Roberts. He penned a few memos that basically passed along White House Counsel's legal OK on a report to Congress and an accompanying notice. If the Left accuses Roberts of not caring about commas, underlining, or basic math, then we can counter with these memos, otherwise there's not much to say.

The documents as a whole are interesting nonetheless, and so here is my full report:
The main document in this box is titled "National Emergency With Respect to Iran" or also "The Semi-Annual Report to Congress on Iran Emergency."

The report is included 3 different times, first on what looks like internal White House stationary (p.7-11), second in two-column format with the header "Administration of Ronald Reagan 1985/Apr 22" (p.12-14) and third on paper with the headline "THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary" (p.21-24).
Preceding the report is a notice, extending the state of emergency with Iran.

There are two memos to the President from Secretary of the Treasury James Baker. The first (p.6) advises the President that he must make this report to congress. The second (p.18) advises him that he must publish the notice in the Federal Register in order to be sure that the Nov 14, 1979 "declaration of national emergency with respect to Iran" not be allowed to expire on Nov 14, 1985. Sec Baker warns:

If the Iran emergency were allowed to lapse, the Government would be limited to existing measures regarding Iran. This could prevent you from taking steps necessary to implement the January 1981 agreements with Iran, from effectuating new settlements with Iran, or from protecting the interests of U.S. nationals with claims against Iran. It could also impair the Government's position in litigation involving Iran.

Who knew that seemingly insignificant small pieces of paper like a "notice" could be so important in the Government's foreign policy. I guess I just wonder whether James Baker was really concerned about the lapse or whether his memo was a matter of protocol.

The report itself discusses the trials going on at the tribunal and the various ways claims were decided one way or another. There were claims by individuals and organizations and various Government departments were also involved including Justice, Treasury and State concerning the Algiers Accords.

Either way, the report came from the White House and was given the Ok by Roberts and the Counsel's office, not the other way around.

Roberts himself wrote three memos for Staff Secretary David Chew.

1. November 12, 1985 (p.2) Roberts relays information from Treasury and State about stats in the report concerning the number of claimants and confirms a proposed change in language - moving from the date the Congress passed a bill (July 31) to the date the President signed it (Aug 16). These corrections were made by the final version of the report in this box on pages 21-24.

2. November 6, 1985 (p.3) This memo was obviously written first. It confirms Counsel's review of the report and request some changes. One involved a total number of small claimants. This change was not reflected in any version of the report. The other was the above stated change regarding the dates on the bill. Roberts states that the "legally significant date is the date the President signed the bill into law."

3. October 30, 1985 (p.15) This earliest memo concerns the notice of extending the Iran Emergency. Roberts stated that Counsel found "no objection from a legal perspective" but proposes some changes to punctuation "[s]oley in the interests of stylistic conformity with last year's notice." It's all about the commas and the underlining.

The final version of the report was released on November 13, 1985.

(Cross-posted at Stones Cry Out)

In Focus: Soldiers' Angles

2005-08-08T22:30:00.000-04:00

If you've read blogs lately, listened to Hugh Hewitt or...well...done a lot of other things - you've probably heard about Soldiers' Angels.

Maybe you've even adopted a Soldier. If so, way to go!! :) But I know that I used to think that adopting a soldier and sending him or her packages and letters was the only thing I could do with this great organization - besides giving them money that is :)

Of course, adopting a soldier is always an option, and a great one. They give you the soldier's address and sometimes email and so you can communicate in a lot of ways.

But there are many other opportunities...

If you don't want to commit to a single soldier or can't afford the cost of sending packages, you can join the Soldiers' Angels Letter Writing Team. With the LWT, you pick a day on which you wish to receive a name - or two days (mine are Monday and Thursday) and each week on your chosen day(s), they send you the name and address of a soldier, and maybe something about them, and you send a card or letter.
In their words:
"Just once! No long term commitment, unless you find a
friend!!! If you are interested in joining the Letter Writing Team,
please contact Linda at lindom@gmail.com."

This is a great program because even without sending packages, mail call is such an important time for the military, getting a surprise note of support from back home is such an encouragement - and sometimes, they write you back!! :)

Now, if you don't want to send mail and buy stamps, but obviously have email (you're reading this right?) you can join the "E-Squad - Email Support Team"
It's easy. You write to SA, tell them you want to join, they write you back with an email address and you start emailing. No cost and not much time commitment. You can write the emails while you are waiting for the Stones Cry Out page to load...and perhaps, refresh :)
For more information, email Mel at melsfaves2000@hotmail.com.

Here are some other opportunities, as described by Soldiers' Angels themselves:

Adopt Another Soldier
Whether your soldier is still fighting for our freedoms or has already come home, we need angels to volunteer to adopt another soldier! It is heartbreaking to hear stories of soldiers who never get to hear their name called at mail call. We need to make sure that this doesn't happen!!! Countless soldiers have told us the joy they felt when their name was called at mail call, and then to find that someone they
didn't even know had taken it upon themselves to adopt them and provide support to them. Some have cried. If you can adopt a new soldier today, email us at 2ndAdoptions@gmail.com.

Wounded TLC Team
Have a special place in your heart for our heroes who have been wounded in the line of duty? The Wounded TLC Team is exactly what you have been looking for. These brave men and women have sacrificed so much and could use some real encouragement! If you have a heart for these soldiers, please contact Elaine at bakerdzen@earthlink.net.

And still more teams available which you can find out about by visiting the message boards.
~~

For any other Soldiers' Angles questions you can email them directly at SAMembership@gmail.com. They are great about giving whatever information you need. They are there to help you help the Military :)

Really, I can't stress enough how a simple letter can make a difference. Last week I got the name of a soldier in a remote area of Afghanistan, many of the troops serving with him don't get any mail and they are asking for simple things like socks, batteries and letters. So I'll be sending him an envelope full of cards addressed to "any soldier" so that he can hand them out to the people in need. If you have extra stationary and note cards lying around, this is an awesome use of those resources :)

Please consider these opportunities to say Thank you to the soldiers. They will be so thankful to you :)

(Cross-posted at StonesCryOut)

The Israeli Terrorist

2005-08-06T12:21:00.000-04:00

On Thursday, a deserter from the Israeli army opened fire on a bus in Galilee, and killed 4 Israeli Arabs (including the bus driver). Then the people on the bus and a crowd from the outside (because the bus was stopped) surrounded the gunman and began to beat him with stones. The mob was over 200 strong and the gunman was killed.

There are many issues here, the first being how this is covered in the press, since it was an Israeli gunman fighting for Israeli rights. Here are some quotes from the Boston Globe:

The attack was one of the deadliest by an Israeli on Palestinian civilians in years, and it followed predictions by security services that some opponents of the Gaza withdrawal would take extreme measures to prevent it as the Aug. 17 starting date approaches. In particular, Israeli authorities have said, opponents might launch attacks on Palestinians to draw reprisals against Israelis and reignite fighting between the two sides -- perhaps forcing the government to reconsider the plan.

I don't know, but I don't think that Palestinians need an excuse to blow up Israelis. Let me be clear that I think this man was wrong to open fire on this bus and I have no sympathy for him. But the Globe seems to be showing more sympathy for Palestinians as victims in this one paragraph than the press as a whole has ever shown to Israeli victims.

However, they are kind enough to include this quote:

Many settlers and their supporters plan to resist soldiers and police officers sent to remove residents. But leaders of the main settlement movement have vowed not to resort to violence.

"Such incidents cannot be part of the democratic struggle in Israel," a settler leader, Bentsi Lieberman, said to reporters near the Gaza Strip, where thousands have protested in recent days.

It's clear that Israelis understand they can't resort to violence in their protests - terrorist style violence anyway. I would like to see some recognition of the fact that Israelis themselves are stepping up to say that what this Israeli gunman did was wrong. Why is this so hard for Arabs to understand?

Here is Prime Minister Sharon's statement, condemning the attack. It's good to know that Sharon condemns all terrorist attacks, even the Israeli ones. As James Taranto said yesterday:

In the typical terrorist attack by Palestinian Arabs, Palestinian officials, if they criticize it at all, do so only on the ground that it's counterproductive, and the parents usually hail their child's "martyrdom." So, while Jewish terrorists are every bit as despicable as Arab ones, Israel's response to this atrocity shows that Jewish civilization is vastly superior to its Arab counterpart.

I agree. Jewish civilization is superior to Arab civilization. It's more respectable to not honor terrorists or superficially condemn them just because they share your race. However, what sort of "civility" do we see in Israel if a crazy mob comes and kills someone like that? I understand that the Israeli people live in constant threat of a bus bomber, that they have for years and that they've pretty much had it with terrorists in their country. They started fighting this war against terror years before September 11. But does all of this necessitate the crazy mob mentality?
I mean, even if, right after 9/11, a similar thing had happened on a New York bus, right near Ground Zero, would we see this kind of mob? Would we see Americans beating a gunman to death, rather than restraining him, dipping their hands in his blood rather than calling the police?

It's a whole different culture in the Middle East. I heard someone say on the news the other day (Oh, maybe it was Rich Lowry) that Muslims in India don't have the same culture of hate for Jews and other non-Muslims, that there is something particular to the Arab world that makes the interpretation of the Koran more deadly.

It's different in the Middle East. More different than I think we've been willing to admit in our desire for peace and unity. The Israeli government may indeed be more civil and responsible than its Arab counterpart when it comes to condemning terror in all forms. However, what passes as civil and humane among the citizens themselves is far different from what we would imagine here in America.

Of course we wouldn't dance in the streets over another country's tragedy either.

(Cross-posted at Stones Cry Out)

Rich Review: Lowry at YAF

2005-08-05T23:31:00.000-04:00

This afternoon, for whatever reason, I stopped the DVD I was watching and flipped the channels...delighted to discover National Review's Rich Lowry on CSPAN speaking at the Young America's Foundation Conservative Student Conference.

While I missed his actual speech, I saw much of the question and answer, and it was so good - I took notes! So if you weren't blessed enough to be at the conference and you weren't one of the other 6 CSPAN viewers, here are some high points you missed: (And they aren't in chronological order, in case you are checking up on me:)

1. "Real" Journalism
A student asked about the fact that many who work for National Review had other jobs before becoming journalists and what advice Lowry had for those that wanted to be journalists later in life. After humorously confessing to being a journalism geek (while in high school he video-taped Fireline and played it back until he was sure he had all the arguments correct) he came down on the "elite/mainstream" media for saying that you have to go to journalism school in order to be a "real" journalist. He said that journalism school is often a waste of time and that people hoping to write should read as much as they can and write as much as they can and that
journalism is basically calling people on the phone and getting them to tell you things and then summarizing it.
Ha! I wonder if Mr. Rather would stoop to that kind of description :)

2. The Rise of China
Lowry - It's dangerous when a rising power cannot discern its true national interest
He said that this phenomenon occurred in Germany, pre-World War I when it alienated the rest of Europe for no apparent reason. He expressed concern that China would make a similar mistake.
He may be onto something, because really...has China seemed to exhibit any kind of clear strategy? They maintain this crazy big brother communist grip on their country by monitoring phone calls, letters and emails - but at the same time exalt business growth and other capitalist principles.

However, perhaps it would be worse if China did have some sort of master plan to take over the world - assuming of course that it was better than what Pinky and the Brain would try to implement on a weekly basis.

3. It's just too crazy in North Korea
In the course of answering a question about what to do about the "Axis of Evil" Lowry said:
How much pressure can you put on a guy who's happy to have his people starve and eat grass?
Yeah...good point. I mean, it's already horrible for people in that country and obviously Kim Jong Il doesn't care too much about his country, except for the areas that contain nukes. However, Lowry adds:
China can put pressure on them, but they won't...Perhaps we should say to China "You seem happy with proliferation in the region, so maybe Japan needs nukes too."
This is another good point about China. If they think Kim is too crazy to use the nukes he loves, they might not care how many he makes or tests or whatever. But if they knew that nearby countries with non-crazy leaders had nuclear capabilities they may feel differently about the whole things, especially if those countries decided to side with Taiwan.

4. The Ubiquitous Border Question
I've been meaning to write about this for some time as the Ranger and I have had some discussions about it - and today Rich made my point in just a few sentences:
It's hard to shut down the border as a border because it's just too large. You could stengthen it in certain points but then of course you have the problem of immigrants going to other areas. The key is internal enforcement
YES! Exactly. He went on to describe how we have to crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants and refuse to give them driver's licenses. He said we have to basically say "If you broke our laws to come into this country, we don't want you here. Go home."
That sounds right and he admits it will be "very painful" but it's a lot easier and more cost efficient (not to mention feasible) than covering every foot of the border. People are contributing to law breaking inside the country and we already have agencies set up to handle this, let's handle it. If immigrants know that we are cracking down, I don't think they will be as eager to come.
Most important, Lowry added, is that these steps need to be taken before any temporary guest worker program can be put in place.

5. Intelligence Reform?
Will it happen? Can it happen? Lowry contends that the most recent changes are simply like "moving boxes" and not real reform. Unfortunately, he doesn't hold out hope for real reform. He sites some intelligence failures about what it was like on the ground in Iraq - how the electricity was barely working and that if we had a CIA agent simply walk down the street they would have known that.

Mostly though he says that what we need are people who are willing to go into the tough places, blend into the landscape - learning the language and the culture. That real reform means that:

We need people willing to deal with tough, nasty people and ready to do tough, nasty things without, if something goes wrong, being called in front of a congressional committee.

This is so absolutely true. There is very little that can substitute for on the ground human intelligence and if our military and CIA have to worry about reports and questions when working in places like Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea and China - they won't be able to do the work that needs to be done.

~~

That's the round up. It was quite good, so if you are flipping the channels and happen upon Rich Lowry on CSPAN, stop a minute and see what there is to learn :)

(Cross-posted at Stones Cry Out)

Ohio in the "News"

2005-08-04T17:05:00.000-04:00

So, if Democrats lose badly when they are trying to win, I can't bear to look when they are shooting for "barely lose":

After Ohio, Dems Map 50-State 'Virtual Victory' Plan
by Scott Ott

(2005-08-04) -- Encouraged by their close loss in this week's special election for a vacant House seat in Ohio, the Democrat National Committee (DNC) has mapped a 50-state "virtual victory" strategy for 2006 and 2008.

"It feels so good to almost win," said DNC chairman Howard Dean. "We now believe we can rally our base around the hope of down-to-the-wire losses in traditionally Republican districts coast-to-coast."

While the concept of virtual victory is familiar to the party that nearly won the presidency in 2000 and 2004, this is the first time the DNC will stake millions of dollars on advertising explicitly promoting narrow defeats. The ad campaign is tentatively titled "Close Counts."

But I have to give them credit for having a plan. That at least, is an improvement :)

Hee.

Animals worthy of Baby status, but not humans

2005-08-04T12:10:00.000-04:00

Also from Wednesday's Best of the Web:

Life Begins at Conception--if You're a Panda

"A 13-year-old giant panda gave birth to a cub at San Diego Zoo, but a second baby died in the womb, officials said Wednesday."--Associated Press, Aug. 3

"A cancer-ravaged woman robbed of consciousness by a stroke has given birth after being kept on life support for three months to give her fetus extra time to develop."--Associated Press, Aug. 3

Sigh.