January 2006 Archives

Congrats to Justice Alito, who was sworn in just a little while ago by President Bush.

This is a large victory for common sense. Bush promised to appoint judges that wouldn't legislate from the bench, and he's really delivered with Roberts and now Alito.

TB and I wish Justice Alito a long and productive career on the Supreme Court.

As you've probably heard, there's a Cindy Sheehan for Senate blog. Since y'all know how strongly I feel about Cindy, you probably knew I'd jump in with my take....

I fully support Cindy running for Senate.

As far as I'm concerned, it would make the campaign fun - can you imagine a debate between Sheehan and Feinstein? Liberal persuasion aside, they're not even on the same planet. You'd be able to play the answers to the moderator's questions randomly at parties and see if anyone could match the answers each other or even to the questions. And besides, it would be really fun to see Cindy get her ass handed to her by someone on the left for a change - rather than the usual dodge we get now.

If you haven't voted at the Cindy for Senate blog, please do so right away.

Other blogs who already support Cindy For Senate^TM:

Gateway Pundit
Michelle Malkin
Beautiful Atrocities
Glenn Reynolds
Junkyard Blog
The Rubber Stamp

It's a list that's sure to grow very long.

The World Can't Wait - if you'll recall, they're the ones who organized a protest day last year and called for high school students to walk out of class - are sponsoring the big protest tomorrow at the reflecting pool in DC during the state of the union address. The headliner, fresh from a communist photo-op, is Cindy Sheehan.

It will be interesting to see how many participants they get - the anti-war crowd has hurt themselves by being loony and dishonest. But whoever does show up is expected to bring noisemakers such as pots and pans, drums, etc:

During the State of the Union people will drown out Bush's address with drums and violins, banging pots, sounding car horns lifting voices, and churches will ring their bells. People will use flashlights to shine the light on Bush's lies.

Yeah, I'm sure that'll work. No mention of which church is going to be ringing its bells, either.

This bunch has marginalized itself time and time again through their willingness to display their disconnect with reality. Bush's approval ratings, although not great, have been rebounding lately, and The World Can't Wait must have written their press release last fall:

As Bush's approval ratings drops, people will be in the streets demanding Bush step down. According to the group, the people in America now know that we were falsely led into war, the devastation in New Orleans has more to do with government failure then nature, unemployment has risen to its highest rate in over a decade, and the people are no longer willing to accept Bush as president. Debra Sweet, national coordinator of World Can't Wait said, "Bush lies, spies, breaks the law, lets thousands die, receives huge disapproval ratings and just keeps going. The only way this regime will be stopped is if we, the people, urgently mobilize in truly massive, determined, unrelenting protest with the concrete demand that Bush step down and take his program with him."

As for Cindy (on break from her "Dictators of Love" tour - will Fidel be next?), her presence alone will undoubtedly draw a collective yawn from the media, who tired of her antics once it was clear what an embarrassment she was to the left. I do hope someone gets a transcript of her speech, though. I don't know if she can top herself after threatening to run for office, but I'd like to see her try...

Mexico was planning to give out maps to help its citizens cross illegally into the US. But no more (at least for now). And the reason why is gonna surprise you:

MEXICO CITY - Mexico will suspend its plan to distribute maps to migrants wanting to cross the U.S. border illegally, but an official said Thursday the decision was not made because of American pressure.

But why scuttle the plan if not because of US pressure? Because the maps, once in the hands of Americans who care, might use the maps to help illegals get caught:

Miguel Angel Paredes, spokesman for the federal Human Rights Commission, said the government wanted to "rethink" its plan because human rights officials in border states expressed concern that the maps would show anti-immigrant groups — like the Minutemen civilian patrols — where migrants likely would gather.

"This would be practically like telling the Minutemen where the migrants are going to be," Paredes said. "We are going to rethink this, so that we wouldn't almost be handing them over to groups that attack migrants."

In other words, we don't want illegals to get caught.

Now, the group will "seek other ways" to help migrants, Paredes said.

Maybe tunnel digging equipment...

Via Little Green Footballs:

Iran has asked the United States to allow direct flights between the two countries after a break of more than two decades, a senior civil aviation official said on Thursday.

The request comes as the United States and its European Union allies are pressing for the Islamic Republic to be reported to the United Nations Security Council where it could face possible sanctions for its nuclear program.

"We sent a letter to the relevant American officials on Wednesday, announcing Iran's willingness to resume direct flights," Nourollah Rezai-Niaraki, head of Iran's Civil Aviation Organization, told state television.

He said the decision to make the request was taken by hardline Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad due to demand from the large Iranian community living in the United States.

"They have repeatedly complained about wasting time and losing their baggage on connecting flights," the official said.

Iranian airliners have been barred from the United States since the US government broke ties with Tehran after the 1979 Islamic revolution.

An Iranian civil aviation spokesman said Ahmadinejad's decision did not signal any move to try to improve relations between the two old foes. "I hope American officials do not adopt a political stance in making a decision on this request," said spokesman Reza Jafarzadeh.

The United States and the EU accuse Iran of trying to make nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program. Tehran says it needs nuclear technology to satisfy booming domestic electricity demand.

Iran is subject to US economic sanctions imposed in 1996, under the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act. Due to the sanctions, Iran has struggled to maintain its ageing fleet of aircraft, mostly US-built Boeing planes bought before the 1979 revolution.

And right on heels of their decision to resume nuclear development. Hmmmm. I really hope that no one in our government seriously considers this...

If you belong to UFCW and have been patting yourself on the back for successfully getting your Democrat handpuppets to pass the Wal-Mart bill in Maryland, you probably haven't yet had time to take stock of your numerous accomplishments for the working poor in Maryland.

Steve H. Hanke and Stephen J.K. Walters have conveniently put together a terrific accounting for you in today's Opinion Journal. Since Wal-Mart will not build the distribution center in Somerset county (the poorest county in the state), this is what you have spared its hapless residents from being a victim of:

• The center's 800 employees would have created an additional 282 jobs among "upstream" suppliers and "downstream" retailers and service establishments; all told, the center would have boosted county employment by 14% and private-sector employment by 20%.

• Total annual employee compensation in Somerset would have risen by $46.5 million, or 19%.

• Annual output (or "gross county product") would have risen by $128.3 million, or 19%.

• State and local tax receipts would have increased by $19.2 million annually; this would include $8.5 million in property taxes, $5.6 million in sales taxes, and $1.4 million in personal income taxes.

These folks are lucky to have you looking out for them, eh? But don't start the high-fives yet. There was also a planned center in Garrett County as well that's not going to be built as a direct result of your efforts. So double up on the champaign, folks - you've earned it.

Oh, and by the way - sorry you didn't have the same success on behalf of Indiana workers. Maybe you'll have better luck in Colorado...

Okay, folks, pretend you're Harry Reid for a moment...

If your smearing of Judge Alito has made you and your party look like a bunch of buffoons;

If your breathless accusations over Abramoff and his clients' donations haven't successfully washed away the $66,000 you received;

As your accusations of illegality over the NSA's efforts, become more and more shrill and dishonest;

If your insistance that President Bush fire an employee that hadn't even been charged, or indicted, or convicted of any wrongdoing makes you sound childish;

If your continuous attacks and repeating the phrase "culture of corruption" over and over have made the Democrats in congress even more unpopular than the Republicans;

And just having finished directing your fellow Democratic Senators to ignore Judge Alito's qualifications and vote for partisan political gain only;

What do you think your next move should be? Change directions, maybe?

Not if you're Harry - nope, you set up an organization to step up the same types of attacks that have failed so miserably:

WASHINGTON - An organization with strong backing from the top Democrats in Congress intends to launch a costly election-year campaign to promote issues on the party's agenda, officials said Tuesday, beginning with a television commercial arguing it's "time for a change" after a season of political corruption.

Americans United "will use all the campaign-style tactics which characterize political campaigns," ranging from paid advertising to grassroots organizing, according to a memo describing the group's plans.

"Campaign-style tactics" means attack ads. And lots of fund-raising, too:

Officials said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada and House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California met with potential donors in Los Angeles earlier this month, underscoring their personal interest in the group's efforts.

Americans United got it's start-up funds from MoveOn.Org and several large unions. The unions involved so far appear to be:

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
National Education Association
American Federation of Teachers
AFL-CIO
Service Employees International Union

The ethics-minded lefties have cleverly set this up as a 501(c) so that donors don't have to be disclosed. Also, the group will not support any individual candidate, so there will be no limits on the size of donations. This dovetails nicely with the Democrats' primary campaign strategy - since they don't as of yet have an agenda of their own, right-bashing is their only tactic at present. And AU can easily run ads supporting each individual Democratic candidates' platform of Bush and Right-bashing and still run a disclaimer on each ad stating their non-affiliation. Pretty clever, eh?

And there's more - the group is designed to emulate the very methodology of what Dems call the "Culture of Corruption":

"Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi are very supportive of efforts to advance progressive issues, much like the Republicans have done for years with conservative causes through such groups as Progress For America," said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid.

I would think that the last thing Reid would want to do is copy his "corrupt" adversaries.

This coming election season promises to be the most fun ever.

Shut Up, They Explained

The left's regulatory war against free speech.

The subject of new media in relation to campaign finance reform has been brought up numerous times in the last couple of years. This column by Brian C. Anderson in today's Wall Street Journal keeps the flame alive and burning.

It's a rather long column, but well worth the time to read. This should continue to be an issue with which we have no disagreement with the left side of the blogosphere.

Via AP/Yahoo:

All 10 Republicans voted for Alito, while all eight Democrats voted against him. The partisan vote was almost preordained, with 15 of the 18 senators announcing their votes even before the committee's session began.

The full Senate expects to take a final vote on Alito's nomination before the end of the week. That vote is also expected to follow along party lines, with only one Democrat — Ben Nelson of Nebraska — coming out so far in support of Alito. Republicans hold the balance of power in the Senate 55-44, with one independent.

This one's going to have long-term ramifications for the Democrats. The demand from party leadership to ignore Alito's qualifications and vote against him for party gain sets the tone for future SCOTUS nominations including those that the left might make if they get back into the white house.

FRANKFORT, Ky. - With a bust in the balance, Kentucky's governor is siding with Colonel Sanders over Pamela Anderson.

Gov. Ernie Fletcher wrote the "Stacked" actress to say a bust of the KFC founder will stay in the Kentucky Capitol, despite Anderson's claim that Sanders is a symbol of cruelty to chickens.

"Colonel Sanders remains a Kentucky icon," Fletcher wrote last week. "His success story has been an inspiration to many. The industry he began has employed hundreds of thousands of workers over the years. His business and his legacy have been good for Kentucky."

Please take note that his rationale involves people. As it should be. The folks in Kentucky take Harlan Sander's legacy very seriously. But the governor kept his composure over the issue, stubbornly refusing to engage in senseless breast-beating. Indeed, he was apparently a gentleman when responding to Ms. Anderson's request:

Fletcher was courteous in his letter, thanking Anderson for her comments. "I hope you will feel free to contact me any time an issue is important to you," he wrote.

Coincidentally, we're having fried chicken tonight in the B residence.

MONDAY, Jan. 23 (HealthDay News) -- Compounds in black currants may help protect against Alzheimer's disease, according to a study in the current issue of Chemistry & Industry magazine.

Via AP/Yahoo:

DEARBORN, Mich. - Ford Motor Co., the nation's second-largest automaker, said Monday that it will cut 25,000 to 30,000 jobs and idle 14 facilities by 2012 as part of a restructuring designed to reverse a $1.6 billion loss last year in its North American operations.

The cuts represent 20 percent to 25 percent of Ford's North American work force of 122,000 people. Ford has approximately 87,000 hourly workers and 35,000 salaried workers in the region.

Bad news for the auto industry - especially with bad news coming from GM recently. Ford detailed the underlying reasons for the cuts:

The No. 2 U.S. automaker after General Motors Corp. has been hurt by falling sales of its profitable sport utility vehicles, growing health care and materials costs and labor contracts that have limited its ability to close plants and cut jobs. The United Auto Workers union will have to agree to some of the changes Ford wants to make.

In other words, high gas prices have hurt the SUV market, and the union has increased Ford's overhead and hampered it's ability to be competitive. Of course, the union is sensitive to Ford's situation and stands ready to assist:

"The impacted hourly and salaried workers find themselves facing uncertain futures because of senior management’s failure to halt Ford’s sliding market share."

Er - I said, the union stands ready to assist:

"Certainly, today’s announcement will only make the 2007 negotiations all the more difficult and all the more important."

EXCUSE ME - I SAID, READY TO ASSIST?

"The UAW-represented workers affected by today’s action are covered by the job security program and all other provisions and protections of the UAW-Ford National Agreement. Our union will rigorously enforce those programs."

Well. I just can't understand why anyone would outsource, can you?

Maybe UAW should consult with the UFCW - a few greased liberal palms, maybe an aggressive PR campaign, and who knows? Maybe some laws could be passed that would keep Ford in business and employed at current levels until the end of time - whether they ever sell another car or not.

Here's the list of states that the unions are lobbying to enact legislation similar to the "Fair Share" bill recently passed in Maryland:

Alaska
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin

The first push was to be in Wisconsin, but the measure was killed by the state assembly:

Assembly Bill 860 would have required companies with more than 10,000 employees in Wisconsin to pay 80-percent of its workers' health care costs. If not, then the company has to reimburse the state when those workers hop on to the state-funded Badger Care program.

Sound familiar? Unlike Maryland, the Governor supports AB 860:

A highlight from Tuesday night's State of the State speech was Governor Jim Doyle's wish that retailer Wal-Mart take employee health care off the shoulders of taxpayers. "Badger Care is intended to help working families, not multi-billion dollar corproations," he said.

I guess he's so blinded by hate for eeeevil business that he forgot that those multi-billion dollar corporations hire working families, eh?

Doyle's office said more than 1,200 Wal-Mart employees are on the state's taxpayer funded Badger Care program, costing the state $2.7 million a year.

But they're not working families, right, Doyle?

If you live in one of the above states, keep an eye out. And if you're looking for a job, the twenty states not listed are soon to have a boom.

Or rather, more viral than usual. Arianna and the gang have come up with a contest:

The Huffington Post Contagious Festival is a unique opportunity for talented designers, political activists of any persuasion, filmmakers and comics to reach millions of people with creative, viral online work. The contestants that create the best projects get Internet fame and the chance to meet with friends of Huffington Post from the worlds of entertainment and politics to discuss future projects and opportunities.

First prize (based on website traffic) is $2500 and dinner with Arianna Huffington. The second prize (determined by judges) winner gets $2500 but is spared the evening of shrill moonbattery. The judges include a pair of "criminal impersonators" (My guess - Arianna either can't afford the real thing, or maybe her favorites have all been recently executed) and the flaming moonbat John Cusack.

They also have a list of websites to provide inspiration. Included are a site featuring photos of a model sitting on a toilet and vomiting, and a fake commerial featuring a suicide bomber. All of the "inspiration" sites seem to be parodies save one - Charles Johnson's (Little Green Footballs) famous Rathergate memo comparison (which was not a parody) seems wholly out of place sandwiched between the regurgitating gal mentioned above and a spittle-infused manifesto sensitively titled "Fuck the South".

So is Arianna trying to tell us something?

Deborah Howell, Ombudsman of the Washington Post gets a valuable lesson about the left as she gets a flood of obscene and vicious attacks over a column she wrote. The money quote:

"But it is profoundly distressing if political discourse has sunk to a level where abusive name-calling and the crudest of sexual language are the norm, where facts have no place in an argument. This unbounded, unreasoning rage is not going to help this newspaper, this country or democracy."

Welcome to the family, Deborah.

H/T Lorie at Polipundit.

Harry Belafonte on tour campaigning for Democrats later this year. He would look good standing next to Howard Dean and Cindy Sheehan, don't you think?

It would be a huge boost to the Republicans.

(Originally posted 12:26 PM EST, updates below)
A supposed audio tape of Bin Laden was aired on Al Jazeera today:

CAIRO, Egypt - Al-Jazeera on Thursday broadcast portions of an audiotape purportedly from Osama bin Laden, saying al-Qaida is making preparations for attacks in the United States but offering a possible truce to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan.

The voice on the tape said heightened security in the United States is not the reason there have been no attacks there since the Sept. 11, 2001, suicide hijackings.

Instead, the reason is "because there are operations that need preparations," he said.

"The delay in similar operations happening in America has not been because of failure to break through your security measures. But the operations are happening in Baghdad and you will see them here at home the minute they are through (with preparations), with God's permission," he said.

"We do not mind offering you a long-term truce with fair conditions that we adhere to," he said. "We are a nation that God has forbidden to lie and cheat. So both sides can enjoy security and stability under this truce so we can build Iraq and Afghanistan, which have been destroyed in this war. There is no shame in this solution, which prevents the wasting of billions of dollars that have gone to those with influence and merchants of war in America."

The speaker did not give conditions for a truce in the excerpts aired by Al-Jazeera.

Hmmm. If we let you have Afganistan and Iraq, you'll leave us alone. Sorry, but that's an old plan. The left thought it up long ago.

Just a question: If we were really doing poorly in Iraq, if we were really doing poorly in the GWOT, would Bin Laden really be asking for a truce?

Or maybe it's because he's afraid of France.

Update (6:05 PM EST) and bump: The full transcript is here (via Powerline). Here's a taste - Osama on torture:

Jihad is continuing, praise be to God, despite all the repressive measures the US army and its agents take to the point where there is no significant difference between these crimes and those of Saddam.

These crimes include the raping of women and taking them hostage instead of their husbands. There is no power but in God.

The torturing of men has reached the point of using chemical acids and electric drills in their joints. If they become desperate with them, they put the drill on their heads until death.

If you like, read the humanitarian reports on the atrocities and crimes in the prisons of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.

I agree with John over at Powerline:

"It doesn't take a genius to see that things are going very badly for bin Laden and al Qaeda. Where does he turn for hope? To American opinion polls--which, of course, he reads very selectively. Still, think how encouraging it must be to him to read about calls for withdrawal from Iraq by Congressmen like Jack Murtha. It's hard to see much daylight between Murtha's position and bin Laden's: we're losing in Iraq; the American people are tired of the conflict; Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists; and al Qaeda is less likely to attack us if we just give up and go home."

It's remarkable how similar Bin Ladin's tape is to the anti-war crowd's rhetoric. I wonder how long it will be before:

1. Cindy Sheehan (or her pal George Galloway) uses quotes from the tape in a moonbatty diatribe
2. A promenant liberal takes the power drill allegation seriously and starts using it as a smear against the administration?

Shouldn't be long - and I'll let you know when it happens.

A. Would you believe that your union was collecting dues and spending the funds to improve life for all Americans?

WASHINGTON, Jan. 19 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The health care system is in crisis and now, a major supermarket chain has joined the movement to help create a solution. Kroger, the nation's largest grocer, announced plans today to mobilize its employees and customers to participate in community meetings and online surveys sponsored by the Citizens' Health Care Working Group. Joe Hansen, International President of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) is one of the fourteen members of the Working Group and has been reaching out to employers such as Kroger to enlist their involvement in this national dialogue. Kroger is the first to respond.

"Reaching out" - I feel so warm and fuzzy. Hard to resist, isn't it? C'mon, lets all have a group hug right now! And look, there's the Kroger bunch, who volunteered to help save the world even though the selfless do-gooders at UFCW didn't ask! Such noble folks, one and all. Hey, there's a puppy! Can we pet it? Who knows the words to "kumbaya"?

B. Or would you believe that your union is spending your hard-earned money to strengthen it's grip on what it already has, and increase it's membership any way it can?

More than 200,000 of the UFCW's 1.4 million members are hourly Kroger employees.

I choose B.

The incredible rise in property values has made lots of money for homeowners - at least those who have sold their homes. For those that just want to stay where they are, it's had the opposite effect. As values rise, so do taxes. It's been reported primarily as a problem for places like San Fransisco, where prices are stratopheric. But it's a problem in other places too:

PHILADELPHIA, PA - Mayor John F. Street and City Solicitor Romulo L. Diaz hosted a City Hall press conference today to unveil details of the City’s new Financial Hardship Guidelines and Conditional Forgiveness Policy, which will assist a significant percentage of delinquent Philadelphia real estate taxpayers in meeting their financial obligations.

“Homeownership is the American dream and Philadelphia has one of the highest rates of homeownership among major cities in the country,” Mayor Street said. “It is our goal in this Administration to create as many homeownership opportunities as possible. Although everyone has a responsibility to meet their obligations to pay their taxes, no hardworking family that makes a reasonable effort to comply with the law should lose their home because of delinquent real estate taxes. It was out of this sense of fairness and compassion that we created the Conditional Tax Forgiveness Program.”

In many communities in the greater Philly region, housing values have more than doubled in the last five years, and along with it comes a corresponding increase in taxes. While it may seem like local governments are winning the lottery, many can't keep No city or state, whether run by conservatives or liberals, wants to be in the forclosure business.

While I applaud Philadelphia for caring, I also wonder why they don't just lower property taxes to a level reflecting a reasonable amount of annual growth (is 4% OK?) from, say, five or six years ago, and avoid having to offer forgiveness in the first place? And no, I wouldn't buffer rate changes in a down market, either. Taxes should be like roller coasters - rise slowly, but fall fast and steep.

By the way, that was a rhetorical question. I already know the answer, same as you.

Via AP/Yahoo:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, announced his opposition on Thursday to Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito.

Also not a surprise:

Other leading Senate Democrats planned to declare their opposition later in the day to Alito, who nonetheless appears headed toward confirmation in the Republican-controlled Senate.

I guess Ben Nelson was an anomoly. And there's this as well, showing the strategy (if you can call it one) of the Dems in this matter:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 18 - With little chance of stopping Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr.'s confirmation to the Supreme Court, Senate Democratic leaders urged their members Tuesday to vote against him in an effort to lay the groundwork for making a campaign issue of his decisions on the court.

The vote count "matters a lot, and I think the debate leading up to it matters," said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, a member of the Judiciary Committee and the Democratic whip.

"If a nominee disappoints the country with their service on their court and their decisions, I think some people may ask the important question, Did the Senate really take a close look at this nominee?" Mr. Durbin said. "Did they tell us this was coming?"

So there you have it. If you were going to vote yes, don't - for the good of the party.

It's not about Alito's qualifications for the court. That's irrelevant.

It's about political posturing. And the country be damned.

Update (5:00 PM EST): Family Research Council: "Once again, it is clear that shameless partisan Democrats, beholden to their extreme liberal base, are committed to politics over a fair constitutional process."

Yep.

In my assessment of the History Channel's Lincoln documentary earlier this week.

The History Channel has a viewer forum, scrolling through the comments, it appears that lots of folks were offended. Here are a few:

"i was intrigued until the Gore Vidal's snipe at the war on terror. Completely uncalled for. An important historical topic ruined by over-the-top political banter that should have been edited out."

"That was just terrible about the snide "War on Dandruff" comment. Thank goodness my children weren't in the room, so I did not have to explain to them about this hateful remark."

Hmmm... I wonder how many students were asked to watch this?

"Disappointed is an understatement. Having gathered the family to watch "Lincoln", we went from being made dizzy by the bizarre film movement to being disgusted by the commentary which presented Lincoln as a mentally ill pervert and homosexual."

"This show evoked utter disgust and disappointment - it pandered to the current PC indulgences of revisionist history and sensationalism. Gore Vidal's comments comparing the war on terror to a war against dandruff were appalling and revealed the author's tenuous hold on reality."

"If my complete knowledge of President Lincoln was limited to your 1/16/06 broadcast I would have to conclude that he was gay, suicidally depressed, married a woman he never loved for purpose of political gain, fixated upon his own death, couldn't handle more than one term in congress due to his "issues"..."

Congrats to the History Channel. Lincoln was assassinated twice. Once on April 14, 1865 and again on January 16, 2005.

There are lots more. I wonder if the gratuitous remarks from Gore Vidal will be edited out of the Saturday re-airing based on the complaints? I predict not.

... against terrorists, that is:

BREST, France (Reuters) - France said on Thursday it would be ready to launch a targeted nuclear strike against any state that carried out a terrorist attack on French soil.

In a speech defending France's costly nuclear deterrent and toughening policy against terrorism, President Jacques Chirac said Paris must be able to hit back hard at a hostile state's centers of power and its "capacity to act."

"The leaders of states who would use terrorist means against us, as well as those who would consider using in one way or another weapons of mass destruction, must understand that they would lay themselves open to a firm and adapted response on our part," Chirac said during a visit to northwestern France, where France's nuclear submarines are based.

"This response could be a conventional one. It could also be of a different kind."

Imagine what Chirac's response would have been if the same right to defence was publicly claimed by President Bush...

The despicable Ted Rall must have been drooling on himself in his fervor to attack the administration about the missile strike last week targeting Al Zawahiri:

U.S. Drone Planes Have a Nearly Perfect Record of Failure

If only he had waited a couple of days:

Top al-Qaida Operatives Believed Killed

This morning's AP/Yahoo article about the visit of Iranian President Ahmadinejad's visit to Syria included this paragraph:

Iran's insistence to proceed with its peaceful nuclear activities have raised great concern in the European Union and the United States, which have been pushing for referring the issue to the Security Council, a first step toward possible sanctions.

I guess AP has once again decided that the US, Europe, and just about everyone else on the planet is wrong....

Dick gave the Democrat radio address Saturday. The transcipt of his address can be found here, and audio can be found here. I didn't hear it live, but took an interest after I ran across the transcript. It contains a few things the media didn't include in their coverage.

Here are a few excerpts, in no particular order:

"Instead of a reliable Medicare prescription drug benefit for seniors, we have a complicated mess that wastes tens of billions of dollars on giveaways to pharmaceutical companies and big insurance companies."

The polticians giving these addresses should be required to give their voting record on topics they wish to discuss. It would shut them up in many cases - for example, would Dick be railing on this program if he had to disclose the fact that he voted for it?

"The litany of corruption today in Washington reaches the highest levels you can imagine: from the White House, to Congress, to the well-appointed corporate suites on K Street.

"Now, neither Democrats nor Republicans have a monopoly on virtue. The leadership that brought us to this moment, though, is undeniable. For the last five years, Republicans have enjoyed almost total control of the federal government. This nearly unprecedented concentration of power has produced, sadly, a culture of corruption that is preventing government from dealing with the real needs of our nation.

Disclosure would have been useful here as well. Sen. Durbin recieved ~$8,000 in Abramoff-related money. And because it was tainted, gave it away (plus an extra 3 grand) to a charity. It still frustrates me that so many are giving this "tainted" money to charity. Why not give it back to the donors? Is it a fear that doing so would give the same appearance of impropriety that keeping it does? If you rob a bank, and give the money to a church, does it really wash away your guilt? Note - I'm not suggesting that Dick or anyone else stole the money - it's just an easily relatable analogy.

Dick also mentions that "neither Democrats nor Republicans have a monopoly on virtue". Is this an ad lib or did it pass muster with party leadership? For the last couple of weeks, Pelosi, Dean, Reid, et al have been saying that the Abramoff scandal is a purely Republican one, using primarily as their reasoning that Democrats didn't get personal donations from Abramoff. It's a fundamentally flawed argument - the donations by Abramoff's clients (made on Jack's directive) inherently have a higher "taint" level than the relatively smaller personal donations. The Democrats are in this up to their necks, same as the Republicans. But the Dems think they smell blood in the water, even though many are simply catching the scent of their own hands.

It should not be lost on anyone that the new Democratic plan for reform is anything but an attempt to pre-empt the announcement the week before of work to begin on a Republican plan:

"When the President delivers his annual State of the Union address at the end of the month, I hope he will join us, on a bipartisan basis, in reforming the way Washington does business."

I predict that even if the resulting plans are nearly identical, failure of the Republicans to favor the Democrat plan will result in cries of "foul" from the Dems - after all, bipartisanship almost never means working with the other party - it means them working with you.

"neither Democrats nor Republicans have a monopoly on virtue" - could this be the beginning of a softening of tone for the Democrats? If so, I haven't seen it yet from any other Dem. The alternative is that Durbin is trying to distance himself from his own party. Either would be a dramatic development - the Democrats have made so much political hay about this that it would be a stunning admission. Durbin breaking ranks would serve to highlight future division in the ranks.

Either way, wire brushes and lye soap won't remove the stains. Being honest about the issue won't either, but in the long run would be entirely more healthy - for both parties. And maybe in time the stains will fade.

Last night the History Channel aired a special on Abraham Lincoln. We only watched a little of it - the part I saw was as dark and negative as I've seen. We changed the channel when Gore Vidal came on and made comparisons between Bush and Lincoln, suggesting that Bush is only "pretending" that he's a wartime President. Then he followed with (and I didn't tape it so the wording may not be exact):

"The ‘War on Terror’ is like a war on dandruff. It’s a metaphor, it's nothing. The Civil War was real.”

He didn't actualy mention Bush by name, but it was clear from the context who he meant.

How utterly inappropriate to use a documentary on Lincoln to showcase your BDS. Can the left get any lower?

No, it's not what you might think. Instead, she's talking about a bust of Colonel Sanders, founder of Kentucky Fried Chicken:

FRANKFORT, Ky. - Pamela Anderson is leading a charge to remove a bust of KFC founder Colonel Harland Sanders from the state Capitol.

Mmmm. For some strange reason I feel hungry.

The actress called the Kentucky native's likeness "a monument to cruelty" to chickens in a statement issued by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the animal rights group.

You know, it must be tough for the PETA folks. Missing out on all that yummy food.

Anyway, Governor Fletcher has assured us that he won't be swayed by Pamela's boob-headed rantings:

"Colonel Sanders was one of Kentucky's most distinguished citizens, a great entrepreneur and a fine charitable man of faith, and he certainly has a place in Kentucky history. We believe he warrants appropriate recognition as such," Fletcher spokeswoman Jodi Whitaker said.

Pamela shouldn't be so negative about busts. After all, hers got her through a lifetime of zero talent.

KFC spokeswoman Laurie Schalow called the move to oust the colonel "just another misguided publicity stunt by PETA in their attempt to create a vegan society."

I don't really take advantage of all the information that can be gleaned from the reporting that comes with my hosting account. I do occasionally look at visitor stats, but for the most part I don't care.

Awstats is one of the programs that comes with my account, and my preferred one for at-a-glance stats. I rarely scroll down to all the details, but today I did, and I find that my blog got five hits from search engines on the phrase:

"jack abramoff shirtless"

and one hit from:

"abramoff shirtless"

I'm glad to say they didn't find what they were looking for here.

Deep in the swamps of Huffington Post, Arianna is having a little fun with the Republican party's email encouraging State of the Union parties. Since I'm sure she gets the same Democratic Party spam-o-grams that I do in addition to the Republican ones, it surprises me that she fails to mentions that the Dems are hosting parties as well. This is from the email I received yesterday:

Dear Friend,

On January 31st, George Bush will deliver his State of the Union address, to be followed by the Democratic response. We can't afford to sit back and listen -- we have to act if we're going to change the direction of this country. You can kick off this year of change by hosting a Watch Party that night.

Don't let the name fool you -- these Watch Parties are about more than watching. Your event will provide crucial information to Democrats in your community before the speech, and the opportunity to hear directly from our party's leaders immediately after.

Besides connecting with your friends and neighbors to discuss the state of our nation, you and your guests can join a nationwide conference call with Governor Howard Dean, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, offering immediate reaction and opportunities for rapid response.

You can start planning your Watch Party in a few simple steps by visiting:

http://www.democrats.org/events/create

Throwing a Watch Party is simple. If this is your first time planning one, our online event tool takes care of planning your event and inviting others.

As the event approaches we will also make sure you get the latest research and information about what will be in the president's speech so that you and your guests are prepared to respond everywhere -- from the letters to the editor column to the water cooler.

Online event tool, eh? I'll admit I'm a sucker for neat and clever web gizmos designed to make my life easier. So I visited the above mentioned link and planned a "Watch Party" - all in good fun, of course. The theme is intervention for distraught liberals - I figure after the embarrassing week they just had with the Alito hearings, news of more successes for the administration may be more than some of them can bear.

You can look up my party by going here. Do it fast, though, as I fear it won't be there long. If you get there too late, I saved a screen shot (click on the image for bigger view:

Who knows? Maybe it'll catch on. After all, bitterness and hatred hasn't worked so far - maybe it's time for the Democrats to change.

Update 1/17/2005: The DNC website deleted my party. If you missed it, there's a screen shot above.

Via AP/Yahoo:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. - Wal-Mart Stores Inc., faced with a new Maryland law designed to pressure the retail chain into spending more money on health insurance for its employees, is considering a challenge to the groundbreaking legislation.

Sarah Clark, a Wal-Mart spokesman, said Friday the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Maryland Chamber of Commerce had questioned the validity of the law.

"I'm sure that is something our attorneys are looking into as we decide our course of action," she said.

I don't think Wal-Mart really has a choice here. If they delay, UFCW and AFL-CIO's push to have lefty puppets enact similar legislation in 30+ other states will continue, causing considerable expense and undeserved bad publicity for the retailer. Fighting this one successfully would would be a win-win for everyone - 30+states would save the expense and controversy, Wal-Mart would be able to continue to create jobs in Maryland (which they need), and the unions would be able to use the millions (fleeced from members, none of whom work at Wal-Mart) it would have squandered on something more constructive and beneficial to its rank and file.

On second thought, the unions, in their self-inflicted blindness to the realities of the twenty-first century, will probably be unwilling to change the formula that has caused them steadily diminished membership and prominence over the last three decades. I guess we'll have to settle for two out of three.

This from CNS is speculative but interesting:

Having ascended to the national stage as one of the most vocal critics of President Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, Pennsylvania Democratic Congressman John Murtha has long downplayed the controversy and the bitterness surrounding the two Purple Hearts he was awarded for military service in Vietnam.

Murtha is a retired marine and was the first Vietnam combat veteran elected to Congress. Since 1967, there have been at least three different accounts of the injuries that purportedly earned Murtha his Purple Hearts. Those accounts also appear to conflict with the limited military records that are available, and Murtha has thus far refused to release his own military records.

A Cybercast News Service investigation also reveals that one of Murtha's former Democratic congressional colleagues and a fellow decorated Vietnam veteran, Don Bailey of Pennsylvania, alleges that Murtha admitted during an emotional conversation on the floor of the U.S. House in the early 1980s that he did not deserve his Purple Hearts.

"[Murtha] is putting himself forward as some combat veteran with serious wounds and he's using that and it's dishonest and it's wrong," Bailey told Cybercast News Service on Jan. 9. Murtha served in the Marines on active duty and in the reserves from 1952 until his retirement as a colonel in 1990. He volunteered for service in Vietnam and was a First Marine Regiment intelligence officer in 1966 and 1967.

You'd think after the beating he's taken over the cut and run statements, Murtha would want to keep this issue from causing even more damage.

Of course, his medals could very well be legit. Rep Murtha, why not end the speculation by releasing your complete military record? All it takes is one simple form - after you get done, you can give lessons to John Kerry...

Update (12:15 PM EST): Ya gotta admit the folks at CNS know how to stir the pot - now they have the Washington Post on their trail - duck, guys! The WaPo quotes Nancy Pelosi, who predictably and breathlessly says:

"The Swift Boat-like attacks on an American hero, Congressman Jack Murtha, are despicable and have no place in politics."

Since we all know the Swift Boat crowd was never effectively disputed, Nancy must be telling us the CNS story is true. Although her contention that truth is despicable and has no place in politics is a little over the top...

Update 2 (1:19 PM EST): Ed Morrissey throws down on CNS' story:

If someone wants to attack John Murtha's policy statements, there's ample room for criticism there. If people have issues with his defeatism, then they should specifically call Murtha out for that. Let's not get into denigrating a former Marine's commendations when he has not abused them himself for political purposes, especially when he has such a long record of honorable military service.

As I said in the comments - Murtha has made his own bed politically by his statements made in this century. There's no need to go back fifty years for irrelevant stuff.

Also, here's Murtha's response, from of all places, the Huffington Post (thanks, Cap'n Ed):

"Questions about my record are clearly an attempt to distract attention from the real issue, which is that our brave men and women in uniform are dying and being injured every day in the middle of a civil war that can be resolved only by the Iraqis themselves."

"I volunteered for a year's duty in Vietnam. I was out in the field almost every single day. We took heavy casualties in my regiment the year that I was there. In my fitness reports, I was rated No. 1. My record is clear."

Update 3 (2:00 PM EST): Greyhawk weighs in as well:

Let me be clear: attacks on Murtha's Vietnam record are pointless. Murtha's latest statements against the success of US troops in Iraq speak for themselves; his current behavior renders his past insignificant. Democrats, grown tired of waiting for an attack on Murtha's war record from the Right, have created their own. He's painted as a victim now - of "right wing chickenhawk" contempt for real war heroes. But those serious about standing up to the current John Murtha would be well advised to let his fellow Democrats and the mainstream media keep this war "unilateral".

That's the goal of 16 year-old Shauna Fleming:

LOS ANGELES, Jan. 13 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Shauna Fleming, 16, was recently challenged by Ret General Richard B. Myers, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to collect another million thank you letters for U.S. military members serving around the world. With over 1.6 million letters, notes and emails already collected and distributed to members of the U.S. Armed Forces through her "A Million Thanks.org" campaign, Fleming's new goal is to collect a million Valentine cards and messages in the next 30 days. Be reaching her goal, Fleming will have symbolically given a thank you to every man and woman actively serving in the U.S. military including Reservists.

"2.6 in 2006 is my New Year's Resolution," said Fleming from her home in Orange, Calif. "The Department of Defense's, 'America Supports You' effort that I joined last year, is also helping through their Web site http://www.AmericaSupportsYou.mil , so I just might be able to do it."

Fleming's "A Million Thanks" was the first organization to join "America Supports You," a Department of Defense outreach program designed to recognize citizens' support for the U.S. military and to communicate that support to members of our Armed Forces and their families at home and abroad. Since the launch of "America Supports You," thousands of citizens, businesses, and community groups -- from local schools and establishments to nationally-known corporations and organizations -- are undertaking projects to support the military.

"We are very excited about Shauna's Valentine's Day challenge, and we look forward to helping her reach her goal of 2.6 in 2006," said Allison Barber, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs. "Shauna understands so well the impact that letters have on troop morale, and we are proud to be a part of her newest initiative."

Since beginning her initial letter efforts for the troops in 2004, Fleming has had the opportunity to discuss her program with many top military and political leaders including Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, General Richard Myers, and even during an Oval Office meeting with President Bush. Actor Gary Sinise is also helping Shauna toward her goal.

In addition to mailing thank you letters to soldiers that Americans send her, Fleming has personally handed out thank you letters to thousands of military members during her visits to USO's, VA hospitals, military bases, aircraft carriers, and during a day long visit to wounded soldiers at Walter Reed Hospital in Washington, D.C.

"Right now our soldiers and service members need a morale boost and what's better than sending them a heart of thanks," said Fleming.

She has a website: Valentines For Troops and A Million Thanks. Of course you can learn more at America Supports You.

Stop for a minute and think of the contrast between Shauna and the "but I support the troops" crowd in the Democratic party. Mothra could learn a thing or two for this exceptional young American.

During the first Gulf War, a school and several churches "adopted" me. Getting mail from them helped me keep my experience in perspective, and gave me reasons to smile in a pretty serious place.

Thank you, Shauna.

Welcome Polipundit Readers (thanks, Lorie!)! Please tell your friends about Shauna Fleming's campaign - our troops deserve all the support we can fess up and more!

[Scroll down for update...]

Via InstaPundit:

PORKBUSTERS UPDATE: Here's a joint statement by a number of bloggers on the House leadership election:

We are bloggers with boatloads of opinions, and none of us come close to agreeing with any other one of us all of the time. But we do agree on this: The new leadership in the House of Representatives needs to be thoroughly and transparently free of the taint of the Jack Abramoff scandals, and beyond that, of undue influence of K Street.

We are not naive about lobbying, and we know it can and has in fact advanced crucial issues and has often served to inform rather than simply influence Members.

But we are certain that the public is disgusted with excess and with privilege. We hope the Hastert-Dreier effort leads to sweeping reforms including the end of subsidized travel and other obvious influence operations. Just as importantly, we call for major changes to increase openness, transparency and accountability in Congressional operations and in the appropriations process.

As for the Republican leadership elections, we hope to see more candidates who will support these goals, and we therefore welcome the entry of Congressman John Shadegg to the race for Majority Leader. We hope every Congressman who is committed to ethical and transparent conduct supports a reform agenda and a reform candidate. And we hope all would-be members of the leadership make themselves available to new media to answer questions now and on a regular basis in the future.

Signed,

N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear

Hugh Hewitt, HughHewitt.com

Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit.com

Kevin Aylward, Wizbang!

La Shawn Barber, La Shawn Barber's Corner

Lorie Byrd, Polipundit

Jeff Goldstein, Protein Wisdom

John Hawkins, Right Wing News

John Hinderaker, Power Line

Jon Henke / McQ / Dale Franks, QandO

James Joyner, Outside The Beltway

Mike Krempasky, Redstate.org

Michelle Malkin, MichelleMalkin.com

Ed Morrissey, Captain's Quarters

Scott Ott, Scrappleface

John Donovan / Bill Tuttle, Castle Argghhh!!!

The fiscal irresponsibility of our current congress really irks me, so naturally I signed up as soon as I heard. You can go and sign up here.

One thing I noticed that I hope gets corrected - NZ Bear appears to be soliciting cosigners to this statement, but not a single one of the 160+ signers in the comments have been elevated to the list of supporters in the article. It kinda makes it look like the statement is a vehicle to get attention for a select few bloggers and anyone else who may feel strongly about the PorkBusters cause is relegated to a background cheerleading post for those who are the real supporters - i.e., the names that don't show up in the comments. Don't misunderstand - I don't care about getting a mention in the article, as it's not about getting links for me. But maybe a few of the commenters won't see it the way I do and be terribly disappointed.

However, maybe NZ doesn't want to add any signers-on. If that's the case, fine, but he needs to clarify the the statement

"If you would like to be known as also supporting this statement, please include a comment below, or Trackback to this post on your blog."

to something sounding a little less inclusive.

Either way, I still support the cause, and will continue to in the future.

Update (22 Jan 06 1:18 PM EST): James Joyner of Outside The Beltway points out in a comment that I misread the intent of NZ Bear's statement:

LB,

I'm not sure how one would interpret "If you would like to be known as also supporting this statement" as "If you would like me to edit this statement to include your name."

Those who fought in the War for Independence thereby signaled their support for the Declaration of Independence. They were not, however, asked to sign the document post hoc.

Upon taking a second look, I realize he's right. My humble apologies for the error - I misread this one - badly, I'm afraid. Thank you to James for setting me straight.

As predicted, the so-called "fair share" health care bill passed yesterday:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. (AP) -- Maryland has become the first state in the nation to require Wal-Mart to spend more on employee health care or pay the difference into the state's Medicaid fund. Similar laws may be coming elsewhere.

Maryland is racking up some extraordinary firsts. Here are some others:

This is going to have a chilling effect on business in the Old Line State - while the ink is drying on this bill, the socialist lobbyists are trying to figure out how to extend this to smaller businesses, and also how to add more state mandated benefits. Maybe mandatory company-paid daycare? The sky's the limit when socking it to eeevil business.

Of course, this will ultimately hurt consumers - the poor shop at Wal-Mart in droves, and they're going to love the new higher prices imposed to help pay for this new government mandate. At least until Wal-Mart loses market share to smaller companies unsaddled with the requirements of the "fair share" bill, who can now compete with the retail giant due to the unfair advantage Maryland has gifted them. Then Wal-Mart will simply cut jobs and facilities until it hurts less. UFCW should have greased Mike Miller and Michael Busch for a job security bill first.

It's even going to hurt the UFCW - if the state can force these kinds of requirements on employers, who needs unions?

And last, this will not help lower the cost of health care for anyone. Indeed, since the medical insurers know what Wal-Mart's required by law to spend, there's no incentive to negotiate when setting rates.

Just about any way you look at it, Maryland has now become one of the most business-unfriendly states in the union. And the liberals in the Maryland's General Assembly did it solely to pander to the unions and other socialist special interests.

Happy New Year, Maryland. Texas beckons.

First, I agree with Peggy Noonan from yesterday's Wall Street Journal:

"But this one is all kind of over, isn't it? It definitively ended when Mrs. Alito walked out in tears. But to me it seemed over on day one. The Democrats on the committee seemed forlorn in a way, as if they knew deep in their hearts that nobody's listening. Two decades ago they could make their speeches and fake their indignation and accuse a Robert Bork of being a racist chauvinist woman hater and their accusations would ring throughout the country. But now the media they relied on have lost their monopoly. Everyone who's fired at gets to fire back, shot for shot."

The badgering Judge Alito endured from the Dems reached apogee when his wife left that room, underscoring the fact that Schumer, Kennedy, etc. had crossed the line numerous times in their uncivil monologues. All except Biden, of course. He passed the opportunity for monologues by and went straight to soliloquy as a preferred method of communication.

You could sense the desperation of the Democrats this week. 700+ questions, and they made their most impassioned points on Roe, CAP, Vanguard, and NSA intercepts. The questioning on CAP was especially telling of the Dem's mood as they asked the same questions over and over again, hoping for some sort of Perry Mason moment where Alito might break down in tears and confess that he may have actually met (and heaven forbid, shook hands with) other members of CAP when he joined.

Yet, as Peggy writes, it was already over. There was to be no Perry Mason moment. The Democrats launched a coordinated effort to break Sam Alito, and they failed miserably.

Imagine what it must have been like behind the scenes. The Senator's staffs, along with the usual special interest groups whose interests the Dems have been placing above those of the nation during the past few days, must have been working around the clock to carefully parse the Judge's every word and try to find inconsistancies and anomolies to use in the next day's badgering questioning. How many people worked at these tasks? 50? 100? More?

Yet they found no red meat. All they were left with was CAP and Vanguard - slim pickings indeed. But in the wake of their embarrassing disaster, they still cling to some hope. "Maybe if we had more time...", as if they hadn't enough already. And so it is that the Democrats are demanding that they be given more time to review everything in a vain attempt to find something, anything, that they can use to support a filibuster or worse:

WASHINGTON - Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court is gliding toward confirmation despite a week of hearings in which Democrats tried to hobble his prospects with withering questions on abortion, presidential power and ethics.

I would suggest that the questions I watched were far from withering - they were transparently desperate - but I digress.

Democrats argue that the former Reagan administration lawyer is likely to tip the court's balance to the right in replacing centrist Sandra Day O'Connor. But with little success so far peeling away Alito's support to be the nation's 110th Supreme Court justice, the Democrats were noncommittal about trying to mount a filibuster on the Senate floor.

Instead, they are seeking to slow Alito's ascension by demanding that the Judiciary Committee's chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., delay the panel's vote a week.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid "is urging all Democrats to refrain from committing to a vote either for or against confirmation prior to the caucus next Wednesday," Reid spokesman Jim Manley said.

The hearings wound toward a close Friday with testimony from law professors, former colleagues and a representative of an abortion rights group.

Democrats want to give their caucus time to study the hearing transcripts, Manley said. Also to be considered is whether any reason exists to filibuster the nomination, but the chances of such a maneuver appeared slim.

"I don't think he's going to get many votes from Democrats on the committee," Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), a New York Democrat on the committee, told CBS' "The Early Show." "As for a filibuster, it's something we'll have to discuss. So it's not on the table or off the table right now."

You can almost smell the fear, can't you? You could smell it yesterday, when many of the Dems chose to be absent during the testimony of judges supporting Alito:

They also objected to a panel of Alito's colleagues on the Court of Appeals, saying that the judicial code of ethics advises against judges presenting character testimony. They said Alito would be faced with a conflict of interest after receiving the judges' endorsements if decisions by those judges ever end up before the Supreme Court. Leahy declined to question the panel in protest.

This, of course, was a stupid argument - if you really want to find out about someone, ask the people who are closest. And judges have testified or submitted supporting (or dissenting) letters on nominees in the past. Besides, not one Democrat seemed concerned about any code of ethics when they demanded that Alito rule as to whether he would uphold or overturn Roe in advance of actually hearing a case as a justice.

The press had us geared up for a far more substantial battle than the Dems were actually prepared to fight. And a more fitting validation of the quality of President Bush's judicial picks can be found nowhere if not in the spectacular failure the Dems have experienced this week.

SB 790 should be coming up for a vote to override Gov. Ehrlich's veto today. You'll recall that this is the bill that singles out Wal-Mart to pay additional taxes for not forcing enough of it's employees to fess up 11 bucks a month for health insurance. And they're following their previous pattern of misleading press releases:

On the CNBC "Street Signs" program this afternoon, Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich danced around the issue of his financial relationship with Wal-Mart Stores. Ehrlich is now fighting to stop a legislative override of his veto of the "Fair Share Health Care Fund Act" that would require Wal-Mart to pay a minimum amount for employee health care benefits as do other large employers in Maryland.

Despite the Governor's evasion of the facts, the public deserves to know that Wal-Mart hosted a fundraising reception on behalf of the Governor on December 15, 2004, just months before he vetoed the health care bill. The invitation makes it very clear that Wal-Mart is the sponsor of the $1,000 per person event and that the Governor is the beneficiary since it states, "Make Checks Payable to Bob Ehrlich for Maryland Committee." A copy of the invitation is below and available on http://www.ufcw.org.

The 825,000 Marylanders who lack health insurance deserve to know the true financial relationship between the Governor and Wal-Mart Stores as he fights against the legislation that will provide fair health care for all the state's citizens, even those who work for Wal-Mart.

The "invitation" mentioned can be read here. Please note the date of the event - December 15, 2004. UFCW er, WakeUpWalMart would have you believe that the event was a secret back-door payback for a veto that wasn't to occur until "just months" later. Actually, the event was covered by local media, and far from secret. The deserving public already knew. And it was planned over six months before the veto. This is very old news, folks. For UFCW to regurgitate this old story as new is simply dishonest.

Wakeupwalmart would also have you believe that this is about 825,000 underinsured Marylanders. It's not. Wal-Mart only employs around 15,000 in Maryland, and many of those are already insured. The only thing wakeupwalmart cares about is growing the ranks of the UFCW - which has proven to be difficult in this age of shrinking unions.

I'll be checking periodically to see about the vote, and you'll be able to see it here soon after I hear of the results. In the meantime, there are a couple of interesting views on the issue in the editorial pages today. The first is from the Washington Post:

"Maryland's legislature passed the bill last year, but Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R) vetoed it. Lawmakers, urged on by big unions, appear on the verge of overriding the veto despite furious lobbying by Wal-Mart. The legislators, joined by Giant Food (Wal-Mart's unionized competitor), insist disingenuously that they are not singling out the big-box retailer but are merely setting a standard. Yet hundreds of smaller companies in Maryland that fail to meet the 8 percent spending threshold for health care are untouched by the legislation; in total their uninsured employees may be a greater drain on the state's health system than Wal-Mart's. The bill's backers say that Wal-Mart, because it is so large, bears a special obligation to set a good example. But since when do states have the right to penalize firms simply because they are big and successful?"

Read the whole thing. The point about Food Giant shouldn't be missed - I wonder how many fund-raisers Wal-Marts competitors organized last year?

The other, by Len Nichols shows up in the Baltimore Sun:

Now Wal-Mart, because it is so efficient, can afford to pay more for health care. But suppose we made it pay more - then what? Prices would rise and wages would fall. This would hurt Wal-Mart consumers and workers, most of whom are low-income, the very group we are all trying to help.

Please note that Len appears to be no friend of Wal-Mart, but still thinks this is bad legislation.

I agree, and hope it doesn't pass.

Joe Biden thinks the confirmation hearing process is broken and should be deep-sixed:

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominees are so mum about the major legal issues at their Senate confirmation hearings that the hearings serve little purpose and should probably be abandoned, Democratic Sen. Joe Biden said Thursday.

"The system's kind of broken," said Biden, a member of the Judiciary Committee considering the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito.

"Nominees now, Democrat and Republican nominees, come before the United States Congress and resolve not to let the people know what they think about the important issues," such as a president's authority to go to war, said Biden.

As the committee headed into its fourth day of hearings on the Alito nomination, Biden told NBC's "Today" show that a better solution might be to skip hearings and send nominations straight to the Senate floor for a vote.

"Just go to the Senate floor and debate the nominee's statements," the Delaware senator said, "instead of this game."

I'm sure that many would agree. Personally, I hope we keep the confirmation process intact so that the public can see what an embarrassment the Dems have made of it. But what evades Sen Biden is that it's the questions and those doing the asking that are the problem, not the nominee's answers:

Biden defended Democratic senators' questions about Alito's membership in a university group, Concerned Alumni of Princeton, known for its opposition to opening the school to women and bringing in more minorities. Alito's wife, Martha-Ann Bomgardner, was moved to tears during the hearing Wednesday because of questions concerning whether her husband held any bias against women or minorities.

"I take him at his word that he didn't know what the group stood for, but I'm required to ask him," Biden said. He said membership in the group raised questions about "how sensitive he is to the plight of women."

And ask him again, and again... but you take him at his word. Nice that he gives such a good example of what's really broken in the same interview, yet he refuses to see it for what it is. Major legal issues, indeed. Crazy Politico nails it on the head:

"With over 4000 cases before the 3rd District Court, the opposition party has spent 3 days worrying about his time at Princeton 15 years before that, and not going over problems with his opinions in those cases. The reason is there are no problems with them. Even liberal judges and lawyers have sent in letters praising his conduct on the bench."

Crazy Politico has more as well. I'll add to his list the questions asked solely to give the Democrat Senators yet another opportunity to bash the President. Totally inappropriate and off-topic. And a shameful lack of respect toward Judge Alito and the American public whose interests are supposed to be represented here.

Like most of you, I've been trying to soak up as much as I can about the hearings. I don't have the resources at work to watch or even listen live, but I've caught the last part of the day live after work and have depended on pundits and the web to fill in the gaps. A couple of observations:

PowerLine, as usual, has the most engaging commentary on the hearings. I think Scott is a little over the top in declaring that "Alito may in fact be the best-qualified man in the country for the job", but to be fair Scott has the experience to say such things whereas I don't.

But I'm not posting this to pick on Scott - rather, I wanted to point out another of his posts in which he descibes a couple of former clerks, both Democrats, who enthusiastically support Judge Alito:

"They have come out to support Judge Alito as a man of sterling character and an exemplary judge. They say they are confident that he will not advance a political agenda. They say the imputation of racism to Judge Alito and the implication that he supports discrimination is personally offensive to them. They consider it an embarrassement to senators they would otherwise support. Jim describes the venture as a terrible attempt to discredit a man of unassailable integrity in front of milions of people."

In many respects, this kind of thing is meaningful and helpful to non-lawyers like me. The kind of person you are is reflected in the lives you touch, when those who would normally be rivals step up to offer defence, it should certainly help the public gain some confidence that Alito is the right choice.

Scott also mentions Mrs. Alito's exit from the hearings today - I just saw Schumer on Fox News (5:56 PM EST), when asked by John Gibson about Mrs. Alito leaving in tears, he said, "I don't know anything about that". Is he even on the same planet with the rest of us?

In the coverage I've seen so far, Judge Alito appears to me to be under plenty of stress. He's not as polished and unflappable as Judge Roberts was. That's not a bad thing, though. I don't think I'd last very long under the continuous badgering from the Dems - most likely I'd have taken my ball and bat and gone home in the first few hours. And I think most of the viewing public view it the same way - the Dems' malicious attacks are in the end garnering a lot of sympathy for Alito, and I'll predict that the polls will reflect it.

It really does seem that the Democrats are helping public support for Judge Alito more with their actions than they could if they supported him themselves.

To my post Sunday about the collision between the Nisshin Maru and the Artic Sunrise. Andrew Davies, stationed aboard the Greenpeace ship Esperanza, posted the following comment:

Thanks for trying to tell both sides of the story, but there is an important inaccuracy in the above post.

The captain of the Arctic Sunrise in fact did put his ship into full astern, trying to avoid the collision.

Check out the video on our site again. You can see from the smoke coming out the stack of the Sunrise that her engine is working hard. You can also see that she is moving dead slow, or even in reverse - while the Nisshin Maru is moving at a good clip.

So yes, at first the Arctic Sunrise captain maintained course and speed (as required), then realizing the Nisshin Maru was not going to give way (as required), he went full astern in an attempt to avoid the collision.

It should also be pointed out that in the minutes before the incident, the Nisshin Maru was tied up along the OTHER side of the tanker (the third ship in the video). It cast off, turned to port and went all the way around the stern of the tanker in order to line up on the Sunrise.

Finally, I want to also point out that we have as much a right to be in this part of the ocean as they do. I have been out myself in our small boats, getting between whale and harpoon, and we are at all times considerate of the whaler's safety - if only they were as considerate of ours.

For more about our work I encourage you to check out our crew weblog.

First, thanks to Andrew for his comment. It's always nice to hear from folks you write about. And since he surely realized that this is a conservative site unlikely to be friendly toward leftist organizations like Greenpeace, worthy of respect as well.

I've taken his advice and viewed the video again. And again. I must have watched it over 50 times. So many times that I delayed posting this until today. And it appears he may be right about a couple of things.

The Artic Sunrise is indeed moving slow - nonetheless, when the video starts it is moving toward the Nisshin Maru's bow. Since the Nisshin Maru was making a hard left turn at the time, it's obvious that it's bow was not moving toward the Greenpeace ship - it was the Greenpeace ship moving toward the Nisshin Maru.

As you play the video, listen to the engine sound. It doesn't vary throughout the tape segment. From the time the video starts, it appears that Artic Sunrise is indeed in reverse. I take this not from the audio alone, but from the video and a couple of photographs released by the owners of the Nisshin Maru. I found them posted at Jennifer Marohasy and they really clarified things:

This first photo has a good view of the water near the Artic Sunrise's bow. It's clearly the wake of a boat in reverse. In the second picture, look at the churning water towards the stern. Remember that the engine sound doesn't vary. Not knowing the sounds of the engine in the Artic Sunrise, I had no way of knowing prior to viewing this picture whether the Sunrise was idling or working hard. The smokestack didn't help here, Andrew. Could be a dirty engine (wouldn't that be ironic), and this is also in a cold climate - no, the smokestack alone is a poor indicator. But the picture helps to show that the Greenpeace vessel is indeed in reverse and actively trying to avoid collision for the duration of the tape. So to answer the question of whether the Artic Sunrise rammed the Nisshin Maru... No. They didn't.

But that doesn't automatically answer the question of who's at fault for the collision. As I mentioned before, the Sunrise is closing on the bow of the Maru at the beginning of the video. If the ships were over a kilometer apart at the beginning of the incident, then the Artic Sunrise closed much of that gap herself - and unnecessarily so. The purposeful close proximity manuvering of the Greenpeace ship in a wide-open stretch of sea, combined with their signature tactic of blockading created a condition under which accidents were more likely to occur.

Andrew is right that Greenpeace has as much right to be in the ocean as anyone else. But that right needs to be applied with a little wisdom. A pedestrian has a right to cross the street. If I step out in front of a moving car, I should expect to be hit. In most places, the law would likely be on my side. But as a practical matter, it would still be my fault, since I could easily (and wisely) wait for the car to pass, giving that large, moving chunk of metal the respectful distance it deserves.

That's the name of the "water dog" in Sen. Kennedy's new book for children:

NEW YORK - Meet the latest children's author, Sen. Ted Kennedy, and his Portuguese Water Dog, Splash, his co-protagonist in "My Senator and Me: A Dogs-Eye View of Washington, D.C."

Scholastic Inc. will release the book in May.

"I am very excited about the opportunity to create a book for young readers and their families that will deepen their understanding of how our American government works," Kennedy said in a statement Monday issued by Scholastic.

So Teddy is going to show kids how government works using a water dog named Splash? This could only be better if he dedicates the book to Mary Jo Kopechne.

Ted Kennedy's book is 56 pages and includes illustrations by David Small, winner of the 2001 Caldecott Medal for his pictures in Judith St. George's "So You Want to Be President?"

Here's the cover:

If the name isn't familiar, the story should be - Paul is the former Canadian Defence Minister who announced his belief in UFOs last September, saying "I'm so concerned about what the consequences might be of starting an intergalactic war, that I just think I had to say something."

In a bold move to help flagging sales at Alcoa (makers of Reynolds Wrap), Paul is coming to the USA to deliver the keynote speech at a forthcoming conference in Hawaii on "Extraterrestrial Civilizations & World Peace". Here's the press release:

KEALAKEKUA, Hawaii, Jan. 9 /U.S. Newswire/ -- the Hon. Paul Hellyer, former Canadian Minister for National Defense, recently declared that evidence confirming the reality of UFOs and visiting extraterrestrial civilizations is subject to "what has probably been the greatest and most successful cover up in the history of the world." He confirmed that senior political officials even at the rank of Minister of Defense, a position he himself occupied, are out of the loop when it comes to information concerning UFOs and extraterrestrial civilizations visiting the Earth. Hellyer will be speaking at a forthcoming conference in Hawaii on "Extraterrestrial Civilizations & World Peace." In this, the first scheduled public presentation of his UFO related views on U.S. soil, the Hon. Paul Hellyer will deliver a key note address on many of the key policy issues over the UFO "cover up," and efforts to covertly target visiting extraterrestrial civilizations using space weapons.

The conference is scheduled for June 9-11. I kinda feel sorry for the folks in Roswell, this is sure to cut into their tourism revenue for June.

Hellyer has raised a profound policy question concerning the designation by the U.S. military of visiting extraterrestrials as an "enemy." According to Hellyer, this had led to the development of "laser and particle guns to the point that they can be used against the visitors from space." It is this targeting of visiting extraterrestrials that deeply concerns Hellyer, and he asks "is it wise to spend so much time and money to build weapon systems to rid the skies of alien visitors?" Hellyer poignantly raises the key policy question: "Are they really enemies or merely legitimate explorers from afar?" Hellyer's question has profound importance in understanding the relationship between visiting extraterrestrial civilizations and world peace.

Of course, I don't buy into any of this. If the military really regarded aliens as a threat, John Murtha would be advocating the redeployment of all our space weapons to a standoff location - right?

Paul Hellyer is the first senior politician to unambiguously declare the existence of a government cover up of evidence concerning visiting extraterrestrial civilizations. He is blazing a trail that many other senior politicians are destined to take.

Yeah, I see a groundswell of politicians taking this route. By the way, check out the web page for the conference here. Note the qualifications of the speakers - there are the ones you might expect, such as "extraterrestrial contactee". But I want to know where the latest dig was for the "Exoarcheology Researcher". And my guidance councellor was remiss in not mentioning the field of Exopolitics to me in high school. Don't forget to check the biographies as well. They refer you to Wikipedia for information on Hellyer. Classy. My favorite, though, is in the bio for Joan Ocean:

She was the convenor of the first Dolpin-Extraterrestrial Civilizations conference in Kona, Hawaii (2005), and is pioneer in human-dolphin-extraterrestrial communications.

I bet those late night bull sessions are fascinating.

Update: Just for fun, here's Joan's website about bigfoot. Apparently, they can read, write, and de-materialize whenever sane folks with cameras are nearby.

Update 2: I wasn't going to mention it, but I was disappointed the registration form was missing the checkboxes for "Alien Contact" and "Whales/Dolphins told me" under the question "How Did You Learn of the Extraterrestrial Civilizations & World Peace Conference?"

From Howard Dean on today's CNN’s Late Edition via press release:

“There are no Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff, not one, not one single Democrat. Every person named in this scandal is a Republican. Every person under investigation is a Republican. Every person indicted is a Republican. This is a Republican finance scandal. There is no evidence that Jack Abramoff ever gave any Democrat any money and we’ve looked through all of the F.E.C. reports to make sure that’s true…I know the Republican National Committee would like to get the Democrats involved in this. They're scared. They should be scared. They haven't told the truth. They have misled the American people, and now it appears they're stealing from Indian tribes. The Democrats are not involved in this.”

Why then, Howie, are they all scrambling to give all the tainted money away?

Greenpeace has been spending much of its time lately chasing the Japanese whaling ship Nisshin Maru, engaging in petty vandalism and attempts to adversely impact safety at sea for the Japanese ship. Today, they rammed the ship, apparently taking advantage of the much larger and less manuverable ship's inability to avoid the collision:

Glenn Inwood, a spokesman for the Japanese agency, the Institute for Cetacean Research, said the Arctic Sunrise had rammed the Nisshin Maru.

"They hit the bow of our vessel, put a hole in the Nisshin Maru and caused considerable damage," Mr Inwood said. "It's lucky no-one was killed."

It is the third time the Japanese have clashed with Greenpeace ships.

In 1999 the same two boats collided and in December a chaser nudged the larger Greenpeace ship Esperanza away from the stern of Nisshin Maru.

Of course, Greenpeace sees it differently:

The incident happened in calm Antarctic waters north of Prydz Bay as Mr Rattenbury was mid-interview with the Herald.

He described how the Nisshin Maru came around a supply ship it had loaded with whale meat, entering into a collision course towards Arctic Sunrise.

From about 300 metres, Nisshin Maru came at the port side of Arctic Sunrise, which under the rules of the sea had clear right of way. Its captain, Arne Sorensen, was sounding the ship's horn repeatedly. The factory ship's horn blared in reply.

Over the next minute, Captain Sorensen swung the helm away, and Mr Rattenbury seemed hopeful that the two ships would shift to a parallel course, but the black bow of the Nisshin Maru loomed ever closer.

"They're coming back," Mr Rattenbury said. "We're going to hit. We're going … Oh s---. This is going to hurt. Brace. The captain is calling for us to brace … "

A distinct metallic shudder rang through the telephone line.

"We're hit, right in the bow. The foremast appears to be bent … We're going to hit again."

The collision left Arctic Sunrise with a dented bow and nearly collapsed foremast, but the hull was not penetrated.

Fortunately there's a video posted by Greenpeace on their website. Here's the money quote from the Captain of the Artic Sunrise:

"The ship that has the other one on the starboard side has to give way. The Artic Sunrise was on the starboard side of the Nisshin Maru, therefore, I maintained my course and speed."

Not being an expert on maritime rules, I looked up what the rules are. This stuck out at me:

(b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

The Nisshin Maru is much larger and heavier than the Artic Sunrise (8000 tons vs. 949), and less able to manuver. The captain of the Artic Sunrise, on the other hand, had a responsibility to take action to avoid collision even if he had to ignore the rules to do so. And by his own admission, he chose to collide with the Japanese ship instead.

Greenpeace, as usual, is skating on razor thin ice here. They've been spending the last few weeks placing their ships in the way of the Japanese ships in order to impede their movements. They have vandalized the Japanese ships with paint. And all of this risky manuvering around other ships was done out in open water where there was never a good reason to operate in such close proximity.

Now I'm no fan of whaling, but environmental terrorism isn't the answer. No whales are worth risking human lives, and Greenpeace should know better. Next time they pull a stunt like this someone may get hurt or worse.

Since the campaigns to damage (or destroy) Wal-Mart have shaped up (at least to me) to be part of the wider left-right political debate, I thought I'd take note of some recent news items:

While wakeupwalmart.com and the other union organizations aren't likely to be successful in unionizing (and thus destroying) Wal-Mart, they are getting a little success through the back door. Apparently as many as 30 states are considering legislation to force Wal-Mart to devote 8-11% of its payroll to health insurance. This follows an attempt at similar legislation in Maryland that was vetoed by Gov. Ehrlich last May.

The problem with the Maryland bill was not just the intrusion into business. The bill, sponsored by Democrats and heavily supported by unions and Wal-Mart's competitors, was targeted directly at Wal-Mart. The threshold was set at 10,000 employees, and only 3 or 4 businesses in the state are large enough. Wal-Mart was the only one not saddled with company-crippling union-mandated health plans and thus would have been the only one to be subject to the tax. Supporters promise to resurrect this ill-concieved plan this year. Although their chances for overriding the veto are good, I expect this bill will be successfully challenged in court based on its discriminatory nature, and potential conflict with existing federal labor law. Should that occur, the other 30 or so states will likely abandon their similar bills.

Remember the Zogby poll sponsored by WakeUpWalMart that said 56% of Americans thought Wal-Mart was "bad for America"? Turns out that that John Zogby may have had a conflict of interest issue - he was accepting money for testimony against Wal-Mart in civil suits (here's an analysis of the Zogby poll by Mark Blumenthal at Mystery Pollster). A more recent poll (Jan. 4) appears to effectively disspell the Zogby poll as hopelessly skewed (more details here).

The poll, sponsored by Working Families for Wal-Mart, also exposes an interesting fact. The vast majority of union members shop at Wal-Mart - 32% shop regularly, 64% shop occasionally, for a whopping 96%. Amazing how union members act counter to their leadership time and time again. Maybe if union leadership paid attention to their members instead of their political interests....

Last week, it appears that Wal-Mart was a victim of their own website. Someone did a search on a Planet of the Apes video, and the site recommended a Martin Luther King video as a "similar item". Naturally, the anti-Wal-Mart troops rallied around this as proof that Wal-Mart is a racist institution. Wal-Mart says the mistake was just over-zealous marketing, as the MLK film was cross-referenced to disparate items in order to spur sales.

Incidentally, if you search "similar items" to "Wal-mart - The High Cost of Low Price" (paperback) at Amazon.com, you get a list that includes a children's book called "Missing Pieces (Red Rock Mysteries)" by Jerry B. Jenkins & Chris Fabry (Screen Shot Here) . Here's part of the description:

Someone is playing mailbox baseball in the town where Bryce and Ashley Timberline live. All clues point to their stepsister’s boyfriend, Randy, and Bryce is determined to prove it. Will Randy find out before they can discover the truth?

Also in the same list is a breathless conspiracy book about 9-11 (The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions by David Ray Griffen) that claims the Bush administration was actively involved in the planning and execution of the 9-11 attacks.

Is Amazon making a statement about the maturity and intelligence of the anti-Wal-Mart crowd?

To round out this round-up, there's a press release from Institute for America's Future (a far-left group) that claims Wal-Mart "sucked more than $20 billion out of local economies across America this holiday season". The basis for their analysis are figures from Institute for Local Self Reliance (ILSR). Among ILSR's claims to fame is an apparently famous study of a McDonalds:

ILSR also tracked the dollar flows of a neighborhood franchise--MacDonald's--in study that remains a classic. We found that of the $750,000 spent there almost two-thirds left not only the neighborhood but the metropolitan area. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we insisted that every time a fast food restaurant opened the number of jobs in the local economy actually declined.

I patiently await their study of the disproportionately high income McDonald's brings in to Oak Brook, Illinois, or a similar study of the effect of Target or Best Buy (both based in ILSR's backyard of Minneapolis). Or how about a historical analysis of the effects of the Sears Catalog in small towns during the 1950's?

Update: The link for Institute for America's Future is good, aparently their website is having problems.

Yesterday All Things Beautiful posted a nice roundup of the former Army sergeant Mark Seavey's exchange with Mothra and Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.). The video of the exchange is available at Michelle Malkin. Here's the words of Mark Seavey:

"Yes sir my name is Mark Seavey and I just want to thank you for coming up here. Until about a month ago I was Sgt Mark Seavey infantry squad leader, I returned from Afghanistan. My question to you, (applause)

"Like yourself I dropped out of college two years ago to volunteer to go to Afghanistan, and I went and I came back. If I didn't have a herniated disk now I would volunteer to go to Iraq in a second with my troops, three of which have already volunteered to go to Iraq. I keep hearing you say how you talk to the troops and the troops are demoralized, and I really resent that characterization. (applause) The morale of the troops that I talk to is phenomenal, which is why my troops are volunteering to go back, despite the hardships they had to endure in Afghanistan.

"And Congressman Moran, 200 of your constituents just returned from Afghanistan. We never got a letter from you; we never got a visit from you. You didn't come to our homecoming. The only thing we got from any of our elected officials was one letter from the governor of this state thanking us for our service in Iraq, when we were in Afghanistan. That's reprehensible. I don't know who you two are talking to but the morale of the troops is very high."

I'll add my comment to the fray, albeit late. It's beyond belief that an elected servant chooses to ignore a constituent like this - and in public, too. I hope some Republican shows this tape on the house floor the next time support for the troops comes up as a subject.

This tape would be a terrific cornerstone of a Republican ad campaign as well.

It's a new year, but the moonbats remain the same. The Senorita of Shameless Exploitation yesterday shows us once again the immeasurable distance between her thought processes and reality:

"Then we have the unfortunate innocents of Iraq. I have heard reports of up to as many as 200 of them killed yesterday. So if 200 were reported, one has to really wonder what the true count was. Bill O'Reilly and George Bush define a terrorist as someone who "kills innocent men, women and children." Am I the only one who sees the irony and stunning hypocrisy in this statement?" Who do Bill and George think are being killed in Iraq? Well-trained and an organized Army? Terrorists? We all know that is false. This is who is being killed in Iraq: living breathing human beings, identical to Americans, or any other human beings on earth, who are just trying to go about their lives trying to survive in a war torn country that was no threat to America or our way of life."

Cindy suggests that the "200" deaths are attributable to Bush, therefore the artificially low number reported. Here's who really killed 200 people two days ago:

KERBALA/RAMADI, Iraq (Reuters) - Two suicide bombers killed 120 people and wounded more than 200 in attacks near a Shi'ite holy shrine and a police recruiting center on Thursday, the bloodiest day in Iraq for four months.

Seven U.S. soldiers were killed in two roadside bomb attacks, three bombs exploded in Baghdad and insurgents sabotaged an oil pipeline near the northern city of Kirkuk, causing a huge fire.

Coming a day after 58 people died in a wave of bombings and shootings, the latest bloodshed ratcheted up tension between Iraq's minority Sunni Arabs and majority Shi'ite Muslims.

Am I the only one who sees the irony and stunning hypocrisy in Cindy's refusal to see that her beloved "freedom fighters" are the terrorists responsible for the deaths?

In a rare moment of clarity, Cindy admits the ineffectiveness of her (along with the rest of the hate America crowd) tactics of marches and vigils:

"Apparently, candlelight vigils do very little to stop, or even slow down a little, the carnage committed by the war criminals in DC."

I wonder if this revelation affects her plans for a moonbat convergience in Crawford this Easter. So what to do to correct it? More of the same!

"Hold your vigils and marches in relevant places: such as warmongering local Congressional offices."

Yeah, Cindy, that should do it. (snicker)

to one and all. Sorry for the lack of blogging lately, but I've been spending my holiday down time with TB and the kids - as much as I enjoy blogging, time with my family is precious and I'm determined to soak up every second until I return to work Tuesday. Today I'm making cookies with the kids. Maybe a movie tomorrow, or the park if it's nice out.

Many blogs are making year end posts. Being a very new blog, you won't find one here. But I'll give you my pledge that I'll be posting with the year-enders on Dec 31, 2006. I hope that you find what I do here interesting and entertaining, and I'll be listening if you tell me you don't.

Expect the blog to evolve - I hope to tackle a wider variety of topics in the coming months. And slowly, the look of DGITL may change as well, as I get better at manipulating Movable Type.

And last, thank you for visiting here. I have enjoyed the feedback, and have made quite a few new friends over the last three months. It's been a lot of fun. I'm looking forward to more of the same in 2006.

God Bless and Happy New Year!