I can't believe it was unanimous.

The law "does not elevate accommodation of religious observances over an institution's need to maintain order and safety," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said from the bench in announcing the decision.

Ginsburg said judges who handle inmate cases should give deference to prison administrators.

So what we have here is a vindication of the ability of prisoners to worship freely, provided that doing so does not undermine prison security. Hardly an outrageous proposition -- especially since we give such accommodations to the terrositst ad Gitmo.

I don't know that I want to comment too extensively on the arrests of Rafiq Abdus Sabir and Tarik Shah on charges arrested on charges of conspiring to aid terrorists. I'd like to wait for a little more information to come out before forming an opinion.

But I am concerned about one paragraph I read in this article.

As recently as May 20, during a meeting at a New York City apartment, Sabir indicated he would travel shortly to Saudi Arabia to treat the wounds of jihadists at a Saudi military base, prosecutors said. Travel records showed he was scheduled to leave Thursday.

Now, was the whole "jihadists at a Saidi military base" just a ruse by the FBI to reel these guys in? Or are we being told, ever so obliquely, that the Saudis are providing medical care for wounded jihadis on their military bases? I guess what I'm really asking is if this should be seen as evidence of the Saudis playing both sides of the street.

Thoughts, comments, and reactions?

It appears that both France and the Netherlands will reject the proposed EU Constitution before the end of the current week. That would, one would imagine, kill the much maligned document. After all, those two countries are founding membrs of the EU, and represent large chunk out of a united Europe. The political leaders of Europe, though, are seeking to impose the document over the objections of the people.

There remains a remote chance that the people of France and the Netherlands will confound the opinion polls and endorse the constitution. But it is far more likely that, by the end of this week, two of the union’s founding members will have rejected the 474-page tome that was cobbled together after years of wrangling and which, our leaders would have us believe, paves the way for a more democratic and more accountable European Union.

However, it does not take a Eurosceptic to notice that at the first sign that their constitution might get thrown out, Europe’s politicians and bureaucrats take flight from democracy and seek refuge in the more comfortable world of inter-governmental negotiations. The constitution that is trumpeted as a triumph in democracy will not be allowed to suffer defeat at the hands of the people.

That is, of course, emblematic of the problem of the political Left in most parts of the world. So certain are they that their prescriptions for a better society are right and righteous, they will go to great lengths to implement their schemes over the objections of those that the plans allegedly benefit. Anything that stands in their way -- including the people themselves -- is simply dismissed as an obstacle to democracy. But let's be clear about one thing. Any further movement towards implementing the EU Constitution if either of the two countries ratifies it is a blow to real democracy.

What is the problem with the document? Why haven't people embraced it? I think this is the problem.

Above all, though, it is a document that few Europeans will actually read, even if they are determined to. And therein lies its central problem: a constitution, whose supporters claim will bring the institutions of Europe closer to its people, will forever be distant, unloved and largely unread

A 447 page document, written in legalese by lawyers and bureaucrats, will not gain the support of the people. The average European will never understand it. In short, it will not be a social contract. It will be the antithesis of the US Constitution.

Consider our Constitution. It is short, written in language that the average American can understand, and delineates functions and limits that the people embrace. That is what makes the government legitimate in the eyes of most Americans. We may disagree with the policies and practices of the government, but it is the Constitution that renders those things legitimate in our eyes.

Americans accept court decisions that they dislike when they are rendered in accord with that document and are rooted in it. It is only when the roots of a decision are not clearly and firmly planted in Constitutional soil that large segments of the people stand in opposition. That was the problem with Dred Scott, with Roe v. Wade, and with Lawrence v. Texas. That was the reason for the outcry over the recent Simmons case and its use of foreign law. It is the problem with the current cases moving towards a judicially created "right" to homosexual marriage. We Americans are familiar enough with our Constitution that we will not accept when it is transgressed.

What do the Europeans need to do to make an acceptable Constitution? Go back and make it shorter, less complex, and more accessible. Keep it simple and clear. Make it a document that the people of Europe can know and love. Only then will the people of Europe embrace it.

UPDATE -- France rejects the EU Constitution.

Pope Benedict XVI, on his first trip away from Rome, has spoken about his desire to work for reconciliation between Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

In his homily at a Mass that closed a national religious conference, Benedict referred to Bari as a "land of meeting and dialogue" with the Orthodox Church.

"I want to repeat my willingness to make it a fundamental commitment to work, with all my energy, toward reconstituting the full and visible unity of Christ's followers," he said to applause from the estimated 200,000 people at the Mass.

Benedict told worshippers words were not enough, and that even ordinary Catholics needed to make concrete gestures to reach out to Orthodox Christians.

"I also ask all of you to decisively take the path of spiritual ecumenism, which in prayer will open the door to the Holy Spirit who alone can create unity," he said.

There is much to work on for the split to heal, but there is significantly more in common between the two branches of Christianity than between the two ancient branches and Protestantism. May we see the breach healed in our lifetimes.

Columnist John Leo provides one of the most insightful explanations of what is at stake in the current battle for the courts. I've tried to say this many times, and wish that I had put it as well.

Democrats try to frame their case by saying that Republicans are attacking the independence of the judiciary. Not true. They are attacking the process by which the policy preferences of the left are removed from the democratic process and written into the Constitution. The current moment may be the one historic opportunity that the Republicans will have to halt and reverse this severe damage to the courts. If they blow this chance out of timidity or bipartisan niceness, many of us will conclude that the GOP is not really a serious party entitled to our support.

The GOP is trying to save the judiciary -- really the entire American system. Will they have the intestinal fortitude to do it?

I really don't mind if someone comes after me based upon something I have written. I put my thoughts, reflections, and analysis out into the blogosphere for anyone to read and comment upon. That means some will love what I say, some will hate it, and most will simply not take the time to comment at all.

Probably the only thing that bothers me (though not on a particularly deep level) is when someone makes an attack that is clearly dishonest. No, I don't mean Ridor's attempt to tar and feather me for not writing about something that I never read about in a little town somewhere in Texas. That sort of stuff is just pathetic, and is merely a part of his "charm".

No, I'm talking about when someone engages in hack-job editting to twist the meaning of my words into something other than what was clearly intended. You know, sort of like they do in movie ads, where "If you have the intellect of a golf ball, you'll love this film" becomes ". . . you'll love this film."

That leads me to the case at hand, involving a fellow who goes by the handle "dolphin".

There is no need for any Republican to feel bound by the shameful bargain made last Monday to prevent use of the Constitutional Option to break the judicial filibuster. Harry Reid broke it Monday night

In the privacy of his Capitol office last Monday night, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., asked for commitments from six Democrats fresh from the talks. Would they pledge to support filibusters against Brett Kavanaugh and William Haynes, two nominees not specifically covered by the pact with Republicans?

Some of the Democrats agreed. At least one, Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, declined.

Details of Reid's attempt to kill the two nominations within minutes of the agreement, as well as other events during this tumultuous time, were obtained by The Associated Press in interviews with senators and aides in both parties. They spoke on condition of anonymity, citing confidentiality pledges.

The conversation in Reid's office was among the final acts of a drama that played out unpredictably over several weeks. It culminated in a deal that cleared the way for votes on some nominees long blocked by Democrats, left other nominees in limbo and averted a bruising fight over the Senate's filibuster rules.

Now let's look at this. Reid exacted commitments from some of the Democrats who signed on to filibuster certain judges. That goes against the "extraordinary circumstances" pledge, as well as the "own discretion and judgement" provision. That goes against the clear understanding that had been reached.

The deal is therefore dead -- and when Half-Truth Harry got several of the Democrat signatories to break it Monday night.

In 1939, the home of Chech lawyer Arthur Feldmann and his wife, Gisela, were looted by a Nazi mob. Among the items taken were a set of four Old Master drawings. Both Feldmanns died during the Holocaust -- Arthur tortured to death by the Nazis, and Gisela at Auschwitz. In 1946, the drawings were obtained by the British Museum for a pittance at an auction. Their heirs have been seeking their return, but a British judge has ruled that the Museum is barred by law from returning the stolen property to the family.

During the case, lawyers for Attorney General Lord Goldsmith argued that a decision in favour of the Feldmann family could open claims to other art works in British museums, including the Elgin Marbles.

"Once the principle is established, then it could apply to any objects whatever their provenance," Will Henderson, a lawyer for Lord Goldsmith, told the court. "Whether they were looted during the course of the Holocaust or whether they were acquired in unseemly circumstances at any other time. What if the moral claim were very different — if it were a cultural claim rather than a proprietary claim? ... The door would be open."

In his ruling, [Vice-Chancellor Andrew] Morritt said no moral obligation can justify the British Museum trustees departing from the law protecting objects forming part of the collections.

"In my judgment, only legislation or a bona fide compromise of a claim of the heirs of Dr. Feldmann to be entitled to the four drawings could entitle the trustees to transfer any of them to those heirs," Morritt said in his 13-page ruling.

The Commission for Looted Art in Europe, a group that represents the Feldmann family, criticized the decision.

"The ruling is significant for all claimants of looted art from the Nazi era, setting aside any possibility of restitution being achieved in this way, and showing that the government ought now to legislate in order to achieve clarity for all claimants," the commission said in a written statement handed out in the High Court.

So out of fear that the treasures of the British Museum obtained during the colonial era might be vulnerable, the court rules that the British Museum can obtain and keep stolen property.

Congratulations, sir, for giving Hitler a victory from the grave. You would have made a good guard at the camp where Mrs. Feldmann died.

In one of the most arrogant, anti-constitutional decisions made by a judge that I have ever encountered, an Indiana judge has forbidden a pair of Wiccan parents from teaching exposing their son to their religious faith as a condition of the child custody provision of their divorce decree.

A Wiccan activist and his ex-wife are challenging a court's order that they must protect their 9-year-old son from what it terms their "non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals."

Thomas E. Jones and Tammy Bristol of Indianapolis are fighting a Marion Superior Court stipulation that they shelter the boy from their religion. The Indiana Civil Liberties Union has taken on the case, appealing the December decree to the Indiana Court of Appeals.

Jones, a Wiccan activist who has coordinated Pagan Pride Day in Indianapolis for the past six years, said he and his ex-wife were stunned when they saw the language in the judge's dissolution decree on Feb. 13, 2004.

"We both had an instant resolve to challenge it. We could not accept it," Jones said.

Neither parent has taken their son to any Wiccan rituals since the decree was issued, he said.

"I'm afraid I'll lose my son if I let him around when I practice my religion," he said.

Now I disagree with Wicca. I have some very firm beliefs on what fate eternity holds for those who practice Wicca. But when you have two parents who both practice the religion, it is unreasonable and intolerable for a judge to tell them that they cannot pass their religious values on to their child. For that matter, I have a problem if a judge were to order that one parent not pass on any or all of their religious beliefs to their child. Short of an immediate demonstrable harm to the child's well-being, it just is not a matter for the court to be involved in. It is the fundamental right of parents to oversee the religious upbringing of their children.

What was the basis for the ruling?

A court commissioner wrote the unusual order into the couple's dissolution decree after a routine report by the court's Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau noted that both Jones and his ex-wife are pagans who send their son, Archer, to a Catholic elementary school.

"Ms. Jones and Mr. Jones display little insight into the confusion these divergent belief systems will have upon Archer as he ages," the report said.

The dissolution decree said "the parents are directed to take such steps as are needed to shelter Archer from involvement and observation of these non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals."

The splitting parents challenged that section of the decree, but Judge Cale Bradford, who reviewed the commissioner's work, let it stand.

Uh, I thought that "diversity" was a good thing. I guess not in the eyes of these people. If the issue was the "confusion" that would be created by having the parents teaching one thing and the school something else, why not order the child removed fromt he Catholic school? After all, the kid is not Catholic, and everyone at the school knows that -- and have known that since he enrolled. The decision of the court simply does not make sense.

Additional commentary from Dolphin & Watching the Watchers.

I wish that I didn't have to write an entry with such a title. After all, that the First Amendment protects religious citizens should be crystal clear to everyone. Unfortunately, it isn't clear to many public officials.

Take this case in Contra Costa County out in California, where any group of citizens can reserve a room for public meetings on any topic, free of charge -- except for religious groups, which were forbidden to use the library at all.

A federal judge has ordered Contra Costa County to let religious groups use its public rooms for meetings in a case involving the Antioch Library.

The county says use of its public spaces for religious purposes violates its policies and it will continue to fight a lawsuit demanding access.

Last year it banned a religious group from the community meeting room at the Antioch Library and the group went to court to assert its free speech rights.

U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey White ruled this week that when the county makes available a room in a library, it cannot enforce a policy that bans religious purposes. His preliminary order issued Tuesday remains in effect while the parties continue to litigate the case.

The ruling affects libraries with meeting rooms managed by county library staffers. Libraries with meeting rooms managed by cities, such as Danville, San Ramon, Moraga and Orinda, are not affected, said Kelly Flanagan, a Contra Costa deputy counsel.

So let's be real clear here -- the reason for exclusion from the rooms was the religious content of the speech that was going to take place. That is a flagrant violation of the First Amendment rights of the group that sought to reserve teh room, and of every other religious group that sought (or might have sought) to use the library. In effect, it establishes atheism as the official religion of the library system.

Even the God-haters agree with that position.

The government cannot exclude groups "simply because they have a religious viewpoint," said Rob Boston, a spokesman for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that opposes religion in government.

"They had a policy from the get-go that discriminated against religious groups," he said. "We don't often agree with Alliance Defense Fund, but in this case, they have a point."

The fact that the library system plans on appealing this common sense ruling shows the depth of their bias. I wonder if the judge can be persuaded to order "sensitivity training" for library empoyees.

For years, those of us who believe that the Second Amendment means what it says have joked about the possibility of "knife control" to deal with the issue of knife crime.

We thought that we were kidding, and that the idea was too absurd to be considered by rational people.

Maybe we were wrong -- or these people are not rational.

A&E doctors are calling for a ban on long pointed kitchen knives to reduce deaths from stabbing.

A team from West Middlesex University Hospital said violent crime is on the increase - and kitchen knives are used in as many as half of all stabbings.

They argued many assaults are committed impulsively, prompted by alcohol and drugs, and a kitchen knife often makes an all too available weapon.

The research is published in the British Medical Journal.

The researchers said there was no reason for long pointed knives to be publicly available at all.

They consulted 10 top chefs from around the UK, and found such knives have little practical value in the kitchen.

None of the chefs felt such knives were essential, since the point of a short blade was just as useful when a sharp end was needed.

The researchers said a short pointed knife may cause a substantial superficial wound if used in an assault - but is unlikely to penetrate to inner organs.

Kitchen knives can inflict appalling wounds

In contrast, a pointed long blade pierces the body like "cutting into a ripe melon".

Some thoughts.

1) I don't care if such knives are "essential" -- it is my preference to use such knives.

2) The use of such knives for defensive purpose is a matter of fundamental right. Having already effectively disarmed the British populace, now it appears that these doctors wish to deprive them of the next most effective weapon. What next -- suggest that those being assaulted stand around and wave daisies at their attackers?

3) You'll get my long, sharp, pointy jknife from me when you pry it from my cold dead fingers.

4) What's next -- pointed sticks?

East Lynne School District in Cass County, Missouri had ten teachers an one principal/superintendent this year. Right now, they have two teachers and one principal/superintendent. The events that happened there this year are a classic example of what happens when the person in charge is an idiot who is more concerned about being obeyed than about the safety of his students and the input of his staff.

Seven of 10 classroom teachers in a tiny school district resigned after a colleague was fired for helping an 11-year-old girl who was left alone in a playground to pick up rocks as punishment.

The fourth-grader in the East Lynne School District in Cass County was assigned the task last September for refusing to do her schoolwork, but she was unsupervised except for a security camera. The playground was near a road but inside a fence.

The fired teacher, Christa Price, went to the principal — who is also the district superintendent — and asked him to reconsider the punishment, but he wouldn’t. So on her free period, Price helped the girl pick up rocks. Other teachers watched the girl the next day.

At contract time in March, Superintendent Dan Doerhoff recommended firing Price, a popular teacher who had had good performance evaluations, for insubordination. Seven other teachers then chose not to return their contracts.

“If a teacher who advocates on behalf of safety of a student is not fit to be a teacher at East Lynne or anywhere in Missouri according to this administration, then none of us are fit to teach at East Lynne,” the teachers who resigned said Tuesday in a statement.

Now let's look at this situation. The punishment is one that served no particular educational purpose, and the nine-year-old student was left unattended by a road with only a security camera observing her. That is great if you want to have a grainy tape of an unidentified man shoving a struggling child into the back of a non-descript van with an obscured license plate. On the other hand, it doesn't do much to protect the child from possible abduction or a car hitting her.

The fact that this administrative idiot then chose to fire the teacher, who he had given high evaluations over the course of four years, is absurd. He apparantly doesn't like being challenged or questioned -- even if they involve genuine issues of student safety.

But it gets even worse. Not only did he make sure she would not be back at the school, he also has tried to make sure that Ms. Price would never be permitted to teach anywhere ever again.

Doerhoff also refused to sign the certification renewal that Price needs to get another teaching job, saying doing so would have been inconsistent and “could put me in a pickle.”

Yeah. It might make people realize that you are an absolute asshole -- but since everyone already knows that, so why not just sign it as a sign of your good will.

Fortunately, the appropriate state agency is taking notice, and doing its best to see that justice is done.

Jim Morris, spokesman for the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, said the department’s Kansas City-area supervisor has offered to speak to certification officials on Price’s behalf.

My advice to teachers -- stay far away from this district.

My advice to the school board -- fire this administrator.

My advice to the citizens of the district -- vote out the board if they don't.

It is about time that Priscilla Owen, that fine justice of the Texas Supreme Court, has finally been confirmed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Senate on Wednesday approved Judge Priscilla Owen for a seat on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, more than four years after President Bush first nominated her.

The vote was 56-43.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist congratulated Owen and praised her as gracious, patient, bold and courageous.

"The fact that she is willing to put herself forward and has been beaten up mercilessly on the floor of the United States Senate but has stood tall ... says a lot for her," Frist said.

But Lincoln Chafee gave us one more reason to toss him from the GOP Caucus. He voted with the Democrats, in another cowardly betrayal of his party and his president.

Now I understand that the two police chiefs in New Hampshire who have filed trespassing charges against illegal border jumpers have engaged in creative interpretation of the law that could be called “constabulary activism”.

And I’ll even concede that there is a question of whether state and local law enforcement officials have the jurisdiction to enforce federal laws (for example, a friend’s former roommate held her mail hostage after she moved out in a dispute over a phone bill, and the city cops rightly pointed out that they generally lacked jurisdiction over cases of tampering with or stealing mail).

But surely there is no dispute that those in this country in violation of our nation’s laws and borders are NOT citizens.

But then again, maybe there is.

LouAnn Fornataro had harsh words for the police. “The people of New Hampshire ought to be outraged,” she said. “These chiefs of police have become vigilantes. The fact that they wear badges does not make them less than vigilantes. A law-enforcement officer has the responsibility to protect citizens from vigilantes. At the moment the vigilantes in New Ipswich and Hudson are wearing badges.”

Uh, Lou Ann – they aren’t citizens. That is precisely the problem. They are foreign criminals and invaders who are breaking American law, and the police departments in those two towns are trying to see to it that the laws of this country are enforced by the proper authorities. That isn’t being a vigilante – that is being a good cop and a good citizen.

And if you think being a border-jumping illegal invader is the same as being a US citizen, then you are clearly either nuts or stupid. Which is it?

And by the way, you will love this absurd quote, too.

Before stopping in Hudson with a petition signed by over 100 people, the task force went to New Ipswich, where they presented a similar petition to Chamberlain. Mark MacKenzie, a spokesman for the task force, said the citations sent the wrong message to the rest of the country. “And the message is not receiving a lot of support. Immigration is a complicated issue. People are in different phases of the immigration process trying to become legal citizens of this country,” MacKenzie said.

Uh, immigration may be a complex issue, but let me clarify something for you. Those who are actually in the immigration process trying to become legal citizens are not what the issue is here. They are not being cited. The folks getting the citations, and objected to by most Americans, are those who are NOT in the process of trying to become legal citizens, who are NOT here legally, and are therefore VIOLATING THE LAW. Until you and your fellow advocates of open borders deal with that minor detail, you won’t get very far with most of us.

Would somebody tell me how these folks missed 9/11, al-Qaeda and the rest of the reasons behind the War on Terrorism?

Conservative bias in the American news media is "not simply a matter of taste, but of life and death," a panel of liberal radio talk show hosts and representatives of leftist organizations told a group of Democrats on Tuesday.

"There is no more urgent problem facing America today," stated Mark Lloyd, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress (CAP), one of 10 panelists who spoke on "Media Bias and the Future of Freedom of the Press."

Gee, the fact that you folks don’t control the media any longer is a greater threat than those who hijack planes and crash them into buildings, a greater threat than those whose avowed aim is the destruction of the United States and its liberties. Seems to me that you have a really confused set of priorities.

And what is even more disturbing is that this little shindig was sponsored by a senior Congressional Democrat, John Conyers. I love this minor detail.

No individual or group dedicated to the monitoring of liberal media bias was invited to the event, though Conyers said he might invite "an independent or a Republican" at a similar forum in six months.

So, you want to talk about media bias without inviting those who might dispute your preconceived biases. After all, allowing conservatives to dispute the assertions of folks like Randi Rhodes, an Air America host who has twice been responsible for threats against the life of the President on her show, would certainly have created a different picture than what you people wanted to set forth. What you have explicitly and intentionally done is set up a biased forum (which you claim is wrong when it is done by the media – how much worse is it when done by a government official?) and plan on doing so again in the future, with perhaps a token representative just to give a patina of fairness.

And it was Rhodes who set out the agenda of the Left – a regime of politically based censorship targeted at the conservative media, explicitly designed to prop up the Democrat Party.

She had three recommendations for addressing media bias. The first was for Congress to adopt standards for labeling a broadcast as news instead of opinion or commentary.

"Second, I think we need to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, which served this country well from 1949 through 1987" by guaranteeing "competing viewpoints on issues of public importance."

Rhodes' final suggestion was "to protect our journalists," who "must be free to report and never be penalized with lost access to the people they cover or with retribution from partisan employers.

"If you fail to act," she told the liberal U.S. representatives in attendance, "I will be a member of a minority party for a very long time. That is, if the two-party system can survive this new propaganda machine called the news."

Let’s look at this scheme, which Rhodes tells us is designed to help the Democrats and hurt the Republicans. She wants the government to decide what constitutes news and what constitutes opinion in the media – never mind that much of the “objective” news coming out of the mainstream media has an explicitly anti-conservative spin to it, despite the fact that Rhodes and her fellow Leftists view it as too conservative because it doesn’t tip far enough their direction. She wants the government to tell the broadcast media what they must broadcast by reimposing the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” – something that would be anathema if applied to the print media. Lastly, she wants the government to control hiring and firing decisions in the media, and to force people to talk with reporters against their will – thereby giving members of the media greater rights to access to public officials and document than an ordinary citizen.

But I do think we owe the participants in this little hate-fest a debt of gratitude. After all, they have shown us just how hostile the American Left is to American values. They have shown us how stupid they believe the American public to be – after all, we cannot be trusted to sift fact from opinion or falsehood, and so they want the government to do it on our behalf, just like in Cuba, China, and North Korea.

Looks like the Left in this country are up to their old tricks again, trying to define “extraordinary circumstances” in such a way as to be understood as “any Republican nominee with ethics.”

Within minutes of the deal's announcement Monday night, NARAL Pro-Choice America announced that "extraordinary circumstances" should include any nominees who don't state their positions on Roe v. Wade, the court case that made abortion a constitutional right. Other liberals have defined "extraordinary circumstances" as any vacancy on the Supreme Court.

It seems clear, then, that the Left is insisting that the “deal” to end the filibusters was no deal, but instead a complete capitulation by the GOP. If the seven Democrats who signed on to this deal do, in fact, follow the lead of these outside the mainstream extreme left-wing groups, then it will be necessary for some of the GOP Senators who betrayed the GOP to admit that they were chumps who got rolled by their own dishonorable colleagues. Will they have the courage and integrity to do so? The fact that they made this bargain in the first place makes me doubt that they will have the courage to admit their mistake.

Since when do the federal courts have any jurisdiction over network “talent” booking decisions? After all, the First Amendment does not apply to private businesses.

In the latest twist in the broadening battle overdecency standards, the glam-metal band Mötley Crüe filed suit against NBC yesterday. The suit states that the network violated the group's free-speech rights and weakened its sales by banning it after Vince Neil, the lead singer, used an expletive on the air in a Dec. 31 appearance on "The Tonight Show."

The lawsuit, filed in a federal court in Los Angeles, accuses the network of censoring the band to mollify a Federal Communications Commission that has been increasingly quick to levy steep fines for broadcasting indecent material on television and radio. The lawsuit says the network, which banned the group after Mr. Neil inserted an expletive into his New Year's greeting to Mötley Crüe's drummer, Tommy Lee, added insult to injury by promoting a summer reality series featuring Mr. Lee.

The band, known for 1980's hits like "Shout at the Devil" and "Girls, Girls, Girls," is requesting a ruling that NBC's ban is unconstitutional, a court order forcing the network to lift it, and unspecified financial damages tied to the band's reduced media exposure.

You have no case. Now just go away.

Well, the Texas Legislature has done it. They have once again kicked the teachers in the teeth and said we don't mean squat to them.

Look at this story about the future of teacher retirement benefits.

Legislation aimed at stabilizing the $91 billion Teacher Retirement System won tentative House approval Monday, despite some claims that it pits active teachers against retired teachers.

Rep. Craig Eiland, the House sponsor of the measure, said if lawmakers do nothing to change the system, retired teachers won't be able to get a retirement payment increase for the next 12 to 15 years.

They haven't had one since 2001, he said.

It's also important to preserve the system as a defined benefit plan as opposed to a defined contribution plan, said Eiland, D-Galveston.

The system covers about 850,000 employees and about 240,000 retirees. The fund has $11 billion of unfunded liabilities and is 88 percent funded.

The bill would increase the retirement age to 60 from 55, although the change would affect only teachers who start working on or after September 2007.

It also attempts to stop incentives for early teacher retirement.

"We cannot afford it," Eiland said. "The whole purpose of this bill is to change retirement patterns, retirement behavior."

The proposal would change the base of retirees' benefits to the highest five years of their salary instead of the highest three.

Rep. Jim McReynolds, D-Lufkin, tried unsuccessfully to change that provision of the proposal.

"These are tough votes," McReynolds said. "It kind of pits us between our active teachers and our retired teachers." But in the end he voted for the bill, which tentatively passed 115-16. Some others who criticized parts of the bill abstained from voting.

Senators approved a similar proposal last week. If the Senate does not agree with changes made on the House side, a committee of a few lawmakers from each chamber will meet to work out the differences.

Later retirement. Lower benefits. A continued refusal of the state to make up the state contributions that were reduced more than a decade ago, creating this fiscal shortfall. We are still paid below state average, and the one "perk" that has been discussed this year will not start until after many teachers quit the classroom and will not benefit childless teachers or those who enter the classroom later in life or with older children.

Consider this retirement plan change, for a group of part-timers who make only $7200 a year plus their per diem when they meet in odd number years.

Senators and representatives earn $7,200 a year for their part-time jobs. They receive $128 per day for expenses during the 140 days they meet every other year.

The low pay is a result of Texas founding fathers' desire for citizen-legislators who would bring their real world experience to their law-writing duties.

But while the pay is low, the benefits can be good. The state pays for health insurance for lawmakers and their families.

Retired lawmakers can begin collecting pensions at age 50 if they serve for at least 12 years. Under SB 368, a retired official with 12 years' experience would get $6,431 more a year for a total pension of $34,500. Benefits increase with each year of service.

So the legislators, with their fully funded health insurance (like other state employees -- except teachers, who would be "too expensive to include" despite being promised equivalent benefits over a decade ago), will see an increase in their pension nearly equivalent to their entire annual salary. That will push their annual benefit above what many teachers get from TRS, and their retirement age and years of service are both lower than those of teachers.

Yep, you folks really have showed what great value you place on teachers.

After this dastardly sell-out of the Constitution and the President's judicial nominees, I join Patterico.

The next time John McCain runs for any elective office, I pledge to support his opponent. I will use my blog to encourage others to vote for his opponent.

I am singling him out because of his fascist campaign finance law, which will not stop me in any way from using this blog to oppose John McCain for the rest of his days.

That is my solemn pledge to you.

I urge others to take the Patterico Pledge!

(Hat Tip -- Michelle Malkin & Martin America)

UPDATE: Patrick Carver over at Southern Appeal posts the following information about the "moderates" who conspired to deliver the unkindest cut of all in the Senate.

For those of you wondering when the Gang of Seven GOPers are up for re-election and think they deserve a primary battle with a true conservative, here's a list:

2006
Chafee (RI)
DeWine (OH)
Snowe (ME)
2008
Graham (SC)
Collins (ME)
Warner (VA)
2010
McCain (AZ)

Keep in mind Warner and McCain may not run for re-election, so replacing with consistant conservative should be easier but those elections are a long way off.

Have they smeared their hands and arms with the blood of their victims, clear up to the elbows? Do we now hear them cry "Peace, freedom and liberty!" as they go about proclaiming themselves the boldest and best hearts of Rome America?

These seven must be made to pay for their betrayal. Can the caucus strip them of their chairmanships? Will the President cut them out of any role in nominating judges in their own states? In short, does the GOP have the will to do something about those who would undercut their own party and president?

Text of the crooked, backroom bargain at GOPBloggers.

Live blogging at Blogs For Bush.

Time to dump McCain and the rest of his moderate crew. We get less than half of our nominees, the Democrats keep the filibuster, and the Constitution is raped again by those who have no fidelity to it.

Averting a showdown, centrists from both parties reached agreement Monday night on a compromise that clears the way for confirmation votes on many of President Bush's stalled judicial nominees, leaves others in limbo and preserves venerable Senate filibuster rules.

"In a Senate that is increasingly polarized, the bipartisan center held," said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.

"The Senate is back in business," echoed Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of 14 senators who signed the two-page memorandum of agreement, which cited "mutual trust and confidence."

Under the terms, Democrats would agree to oppose any attempt to filibuster - and thus block final votes - on the confirmation of Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor. There is "no commitment to vote for or against" the filibuster against two other conservative nominees, Henry Saad and William Myers.

As for future nominees, the agreement said they should "only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances," with each Democrat senator holding the discretion to decide when those conditions had been met.

"In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement," Republicans said they would oppose any attempt to make changes in the application of filibuster rules.

And no doubt "extraordinary circumstances" means any time half-Truth Harry, Ted the Drunk, Leaky Leahy and the rest of the lackies of the hard Left tell them to support a filibuster.

Hat Tip -- Michelle Malkin, Scared Monkeys , Ace of Spades & Buzz Blog.

Text of the crooked, backroom bargain at GOPBloggers.

Live blogging at Blogs For Bush.

The Wall Street Journal editorializes today on the International Committee of the Red Cross and certain statements made by one of its officials.

The first concerns a story we heard first from a U.S. source that an ICRC representative visiting America's largest detention facility in Iraq last month had compared the U.S. to Nazi Germany. According to a Defense Department source citing internal Pentagon documents, the ICRC team leader told U.S. authorities at Camp Bucca: "You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards." She was upset about not being granted immediate access shortly after a prison riot, when U.S. commanders may have been thinking of her own safety, among other considerations.

A second, senior Defense Department source we asked about the episode confirmed that the quote above is accurate. And a third, very well-placed American source we contacted separately told us that some kind of reference was made by the Red Cross representative "to either Nazis or the Third Reich"--which understandably offended the American soldiers present.
We called the ICRC last Wednesday for its side of the story, and a spokesman in Geneva confirmed that "there was a serious misunderstanding between the ICRC's team leader and [Coalition] authorities during our last visit to Camp Bucca." The ICRC also confirmed that "the team leader subsequently decided to leave the Iraq assignment."

The spokesman added, however, that he "can categorically say that the team leader did not in any sense compare the detention regime in Iraq to what happened in the Third Reich." Pressed as to whether he could rule out those terms having been used, the spokesman declined, citing the ICRC's practice of confidentiality when it comes to relations with the governments with which it works.

Now it seems that the alleged quote is at least as well sourced – better sourced, in fact – as those in a certain recent Newsweek piece. And as the Journal notes, the so-called confidentiality policies of the ICRC didn’t stop the organization from commenting on allegations against the US by unlawful combatants at Gitmo. The organization is only willing to use its confidentiality policy to protect itself from charges of bias.

Of particular concern, though, is this little tidbit.

Which brings us back to the "Nazi" reference by that ICRC official at Camp Bucca. We wouldn't normally report the remarks, however offensive, of a single official. But after we started asking about the incident, we began to hear from other sources that someone was attempting damage control by alerting the ICRC's friends in the media and State Department about what we might report. One media proponent of the "torture" allegation against the U.S. warned on the Internet that we were out to smear the ICRC (which, we should add, is not the same as the American Red Cross).

So I guess that the ICRC not only views the US as the moral equivalent of Nazi Germany, but also considers any negative coverage by the press to be a smear.

Has the day come for the US to shut out the ICRC, in the hopes that some other organization might do a better job of monitoring the rights of prisoners?

I continue to be appalled that our putative allies, the Israelis, keep attempting to liberate an American traitor.

First Lady Gila Katzav, wife of Israeli President Moshe Katzav, gave her American counterpart, Laura Bush, a letter signed by 13 Members of Knesset demanding the release of Jonathan Pollard from federal prison. ***

Just prior to her visit to the Temple Mount, the two First Ladies spent a few moments together at the Western Wall. Mrs. Bush placed a note in a crevice of the holy site, an undisclosed message which she reportedly wrote on the plane on her way to Israel.

As she approached the Wall, Bush encountered a group of young female demonstrators calling for the release of Jonathan Pollard. Pollard is a former intelligence analyst for the U.S. Navy who risked his career and freedom to pass sensitive security information to Israel. Since his conviction in a plea bargain arrangement in 1986, Pollard has been serving a life sentence in federal prison.

As she entered the wall area, the girls chanted, “Free Pollard Now.” At the same time, a group of men held a similar demonstration in the plaza opposite the Wall.

The letter demanding Pollard’s release that Gila Katzav gave to Laura Bush was initiated by MK Gila Finkelstein (National Religious Party). “We’re happy that Katzav did not act in the manner of [Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon, and did not forget to hand over the letter,” said Finkelstein.

Israel needs to understand that further attempts to liberate the traitor Pollard will not be looked upon favorably by the American people. My forgiveness of Israel for its betrayal of the US is grudging at best, as I have explained in the past. Much of the material Pollard stole for money ended up in the hands of America’s enemies. Any deal that allows for Pollard’s release is, in my opinion, grounds for impeachment.

I’m confused. When Conservative politicians and Christians use churches to host political gatherings, the Left starts yammering about “theocracy.” What, then, is this political gathering in a church sanctuary to discuss political matters, sponsored by and featuring pastors and politicians?

After the Sunday service at Antioch Baptist Church, the pastors turned their pulpit over to opponents of President Bush's proposals to change Social Security.

Nearly 100 congregation and community members attended an afternoon meeting in the church's main sanctuary, where they heard from Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a Cleveland Democrat; Cleveland AFL-CIO Executive Secretary John Ryan; and Cleveland NAACP Executive Director Stanley Miller, among others.

But wait – there’s more to it.

The Rev. Marvin McMickle, the church's pastor, later said that he was one of more than 100 clergy who met with Tubbs Jones in February, when she urged them to discuss Social Security with their congregations.

He said he agreed to do so because the issue affects the lives of his church's members.

So I have to ask the question – is the stand against “theocracy” taken by the Left based upon principle, or is it simply that they don’t want Christians who might vote Republican to participate in the political process?

As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher's Council hold a vote every week on what they consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around... per the Watcher's instructions, I am submitting one of my own posts for consideration in the upcoming nominations process.

Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.

My gag reflex got a good workout while reading this report on the completion of a hagiographic work on the life and career of Senator Robert Byrd -- The Soul of the Senate.

Four years in the making, the first documentary about the life of Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., will premiere Saturday at the Clay Center in Charleston.

In its 58 minutes, “The Soul of the Senate” blends photographs and vignettes from Byrd’s early life as a boy and young state legislator to his role on the national and world stage today. It offers comments from many of his present and former colleagues.

Produced by MotionMasters and the West Virginia Humanities Council, the film is billed as “a story of strength and fortitude. A story of the orphan who became orator. The produce clerk turned statesman. A coal miner’s son who rose, with a bow and fiddle in hand, to be a giant in the United States government.”

Some historic shots were discovered in the massive television video archives WSAZ-TV has given to the Cultural Center in Charleston and Marshall University in Huntington.

“It was a treasure hunt,” said Diana Sole of MotionMasters.

“We had to pry some of those old [video] cans open. We found one film of Senator Byrd a week before he was sworn into the Senate.”

Sole also used footage taken by Bill Drennan and Mike Willard. In the mid-1980s, they worked on, but never finished, a documentary they planned to call “A Day in the Life of Senator Byrd.”

Photographs show Byrd playing his fiddle, leading Appropriations Committee hearings and walking with Erma, who married him nearly 68 years ago in 1937. A particularly colorful clip shows Erma watching her husband play fiddle on the television show “Hee-Haw.”

“Soul of the Senate” highlights moments in Byrd’s life from his graduation as valedictorian from Mark Twain High School in Stotesbury in 1934, to being congratulated by President John F. Kennedy as he received his law degree at American University in 1963, to chairing major committee hearings in the U.S. Senate.

Actor James Brolin adds an effective narration to the documentary, which also boasts an original musical score.

I've no doubt that this will leave out his time as an active Klansman, his filibuster of civil rights legislation, his record of voting against every black man ever nominated for the US Supreme Court., and his repeated public use of racial slurs. Sadly, a copy will be placed in every secondary school library in West Virginia, where future generations of West Virginians will be misinformed about this great blemish on the history of their state.

And may I be permitted to say that if Robert Byrd is truly the soul of the Senate, the institution is a shriveled, dessicated piece of excrement which deserves to be repudiated by every supporter of freedom, equality, and American patriotism.

Michelle Malkin and HundredPercenter News also comment.

I never particularly enjoyed teaching English, though I did it for six years of my teaching career. The thing I most enjoyed, though, was the literature that I got to deal with on a recurring basis, teaching it year after year. Closest to my heart each year were the weeks I spent walking my student's through Harper Lee's great novel, To Kill A Mockingbird. I always asked them, after the first reading assignment, to tell me what the narrator says the story is about in the first chapter. If you can't remembr, I'll tell you at the end.

My students were always fascinated that Ms. Lee became a recluse, rarely speaking to the press or making public appearances -- or even leaving her apartment -- while I am intrigued by the reports that the dear lady has completed several other manuscripts, which will be duly shipped off to publishers after her death. So it is with great interest that I saw this article -- photo included! -- about one of Ms. Lee's rare public outings.

Harper Lee, who has been dodging publicity for decades since she published her only book, To Kill a Mockingbird, made a rare step into the limelight to be honored by the Los Angeles Public Library.

Lee, 79, stopped giving interviews a few years after she won the Pulitzer Prize for her 1960 coming-of-age book exploring racial prejudice in the South. She has turned down most requests for appearances.

But she couldn't refuse an invitation from Veronique Peck, the widow of actor Gregory Peck, who won an Oscar for his starring role as lawyer Atticus Finch in the 1962 film version of the book and became a lifelong friend with Lee.

Mockingbird co-star Brock Peters, who played the black man falsely accused of rape in the film, presented the award to Lee.

After Veronique Peck whispered in her ear, Lee gave her only remarks of the evening: "I'll say it again. Thank you all from the bottom of my heart."

Maybe this isn't the most significant piece of news I will ever write about. Maybe no one will give a rip at all about my affection for this woman. And perhaps many of you hated reading her one published book during your high school years. But I have to agree with Mrs. Peck's words about the woman who created the character who became her husband's greatest role.

Veronique Peck said Lee is "like a national treasure."

"She's someone who has made a difference with this book," she said. "All the kids in the United States read this book and see the film in the seventh and eighth grades and write papers and essays. My husband used to get thousands and thousands of letters from teachers who would send them to him."

By the way, does anyone remember what that long story was ostensibly about? As I always reminded my students at the end of the novel, it was the story of how Scout's brother Jem broke his arm.

And so much more -- so very much more.

As we approach the bicentenial of the British naval victory over Napoleon's forces at Trafalgar, someone in the British bureaucracy has seen fit to dishonor Lord Nelson and his men at the official commemoration.

Instead of the British taking on a French/Spanish fleet at next month's event to mark the battle's bicentenary a "red" force will take on a "blue".

Navy organisers fear visiting officials may be embarrassed at seeing their side beaten, The Sunday Times reported.

Portsmouth MP Mike Hancock said an event which did not acknowledge who the enemy was is "absolute twaddle".

The Lib Dem MP said: "If we are going to re-enact it we should do it properly. I am sure the French do not pull any punches when they celebrate Napoleon's victories.

"The French will be there - let's not rub it in but at least be accurate. I see no reason why we should not be out there proud as punch proclaiming it."

He said it was unlikely the decision was made by a serving naval officer and concluded it must have been "a faceless bureaucrat somewhere who thinks their next posting might be in Paris."

One event sponsor said: "Surely 200 years on we can afford to gloat a bit."

"Not even the French can try and get snooty about this."

Official literature for the event refers to "an early 19th-century sea battle" instead of the Battle of Trafalgar, The Sunday Times said.

You must be freakin' joking. Not offend the French? Why commemorate the battle at all, if you don't want to note its name and the respective sides that took part in it. That would have been like commemorating the end of WWII without noting who won, who lost, and who committed a genocide second only to that perpetrated in the name of Communism.

What next? Signs by the roadside that say "On this site, on thus and such a date, something really interesting happened, but we don't dare tell you what it was for fear of offending someone."

Nelson's exploits, including this last battle, made him the model for generations of British naval officers. If you cannot accurately commemorate one of his greatest victories -- the one in which he gave his life for his country -- then why bother with the commemoration at all.

Besides -- the French have been getting their asses kicked regularly since at least the Battle of Agincourt. I'm sure they are used to being reminded of it by now.

Maryland Republicans want Lt. Gov. Michael Steele to run for Senate. They are likely to get their wish.

Prominent national Republican leaders are pressuring Mr. Steele to run. He has gotten entreaties from President Bush's top political strategist, Karl Rove, from Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and from Sen. Elizabeth Dole, North Carolina, on behalf of the party's senatorial campaign committee. The story is the same at the state level.

"I certainly am urging Lt. Gov. Steele to run," said John M. Kane, chairman of the Maryland Republican Party. "He would be a fresh choice, a fresh face for Maryland."

Mr. Kane believes Mr. Steele will run and if so does not expect other prominent Republicans will challenge.

Mr. Steele was mostly unknown outside Republican Party circles until Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. asked him to join the party ticket for the 2002 election. Since then, Mr. Steele has gotten a lot of press exposure, including national attention as the party's top elected black official.

Mr. Steele declined to be interviewed but said he is seriously considering the race. Pollsters and political analysts think he would be a strong candidate.

"The Republican Party at all levels would be well served to persuade Michael Steele that he ought to carry the Republican banner," said Keith Haller, president of Potomac Survey Research. A poll taken last month by the company showed Mr. Steele running about even with three Democrats -- U.S. Reps. Benjamin L. Cardin and Chris Van Hollen, and former Rep. Kweisi Mfume.

Mr. Cardin and Mr. Mfume, former president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, have announced they're seeking the Democratic nomination, while Mr. Van Hollen is considering a bid.

Steele is a solid conservative on social issues, though he is not a supporter of the death penalty. While some analysts think his positions to the right of Gov. Erlich might hurt him, they also note that he will likely have a $15-18 million warchest with which to bolster his campaign.

Some on the Left are already attacking him, using two of the favorite strategies of Democrat bigots, the Catholic card and the Uncle Tom card. Here's hoping that a majority of Maryland voters are wiling to do what a majority of Maryland Republicans have long done -- set aside hate-based politics and give this well-qualified man their votes.

Bill Clements was elected governor of Texas -- the first Republican since Reconctruction -- because of a split among Democrats which was exacerbated by an ugly primary challenge to a sitting governor. The result, over the next two decades, was the rise of the GOP juggernaut in this state that we know and love, one which provided the launch-pad for the career of the current president. What does that bit of history have to tell us about the threatened primary fight between Governor Rick Perry and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison? Clements himself provides us with the answers.

Make no mistake, if Texas Republicans have a blood bath in a primary battle between Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Gov. Rick Perry, we Republicans are providing the Democrats an opening for them to make a speedy comeback to political prominence. Further, we risk dividing our party for decades to come. This is serious business, and Republicans should take heed.

Some observers point out that Republicans have had contested gubernatorial primaries. It is true. I've been in several, including 1978. But those were tame. Every indication suggests a Perry-Hutchison primary would be something very different. Something no one but partisan Democrats would enjoy.

Discipline, focus and teamwork have been at the foundation of Republican success in recent years. Texas Republicans are the majority. We are elected to run the state government, and we win more and more local seats every year. In Harris County, important gains have been made locally. If we lose our focus, if we fight each other, we may end up with a result few experts believe is possible. Believe me, I have a unique perspective on this subject.

Clements then goes on to heartily endorse the reelection of both Perry and Hutchison to their current positions. I cannot help but agree with him. The seniority Hutchison has in the Senate is beneficial to both Texas and the United States as a whole. Perry has been, on balance, a good governor, providing fiscally conservative leadership for the state despite the back-stabbing betrayal of Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and a host of anti-homeowner legislators such who have steadfastly opposed property tax relief.

Nearly three decades ago, the Democrats gave Texas Republicans the opening they needed to become the governing party in this state. We Republicans must not do the same for the Democrats today. It is important that we heed the words of a man who we put in the Governor's Mansion for eight of the 27 years since the Democrats imploded, lest we fall victim to the same sort of internal conflict.

Nevada, like all 50 states, has two senators. John Ensign is a Republican in his first term, while Harry Reid, a Democrat, is the Senate Minority Leader. Which one do you suppose the Las Vegas Review-Journal is praising for being reasonable, and which is accused of engaging in paranoid hysteria?

If Nevadans wanted an accurate, abridged version of the Senate's debate over filibusters and judicial nominations, they needed only to watch their two senators on Wednesday.

Admittedly, John Ensign, a Republican, and Harry Reid, a Democrat, have decidedly different roles in the showdown. Sen. Ensign, in his first term in the upper house, is a rank-and-file member of the majority, while Sen. Reid, the minority leader, is the obstructionist left's commander in chief. But their comments on the Senate floor provided a defining contrast amid the blustery arguments.

Majority Republicans want to change Senate rules to prevent Democrats from taking the unprecedented step of blocking President Bush's judicial nominations with the unlimited debate of a filibuster. The president and majority leaders believe that because these nominees have majority support in the Senate, each should be entitled to a confirmation vote.

At the root of this confrontation is Democrats' lingering bitterness over another election defeat. They simply can't get over the fact that a majority of Americans have given Republicans control of both the White House and Congress. So Sen. Reid and his dwindling number of followers, desperate to hand some kind of defeat to a president they despise, have characterized a handful of judicial nominees as right-wing extremists. Their rhetoric comes across as paranoid hysteria.

"If Republicans roll back our rights in this chamber, there will be no check on their power," Sen. Reid said in his speech. "And not just on judges. Their power will be unchecked on Supreme Court nominees, the president's nominees in general ... and legislation like Social Security privatization."

Unchecked power? That's how it's described when Republicans simply exercise the majority status bestowed upon them by the American people?

Sen. Ensign delivered measured, reasonable remarks. He lamented that qualified jurists are increasingly uninterested in federal appointments because of the nasty games played in Washington -- for example, when Sen. Reid said that one nominee's confidential FBI file contained troubling allegations. Sen. Ensign urged that both parties come together and devise a system in which every nominee -- whether put forth by a Republican or Democratic president -- gets the courtesy of a vote.

"It is important for the American people and for our justice system that the Senate be allowed to fulfill its constitutional obligation to give these nominees an up or down vote," Sen. Ensign said.

Sen. Ensign's arguments win this debate.

The issue here is clear -- a minority cannot be allowed to keep a majority from confirming judges because it is unwilling to accept the results of the last four American elections, in which the American people have placed the GOP in power. The time has come to slap-down the unAmerican element of the Left which refuses to allow the the President elected by the American people and the Senators elected by the American people to carry out their constitutionally prescribed duties.

I cannot begin to express my level of admiration for Marc Epstein, Dean of Students at Jamaica High School in New York. He has come out and said to the public what many of us on the frontlines of the education wars have been saying privately for years -- bring back vocational education, and dump the notion that a college education is appropriate for every student.

In the old days, dropouts were an unfortunate-but-accepted part of school life. It was assumed that some kids didn't want to go to school, no matter what the authorities tried to do to keep them in.

But unskilled jobs were plentiful back then, and anyone willing to put in a hard day's work could find employment. Today, we can't expect that a class of illiterate hard-working ditch-diggers will make their way successfully through life in these United States.

Now I would have to differ with Epstein on that last point. There are plenty of such jobs out there -- why do you think we have 12 million border-jumping mexicans living and working in this country without legal documentation. They are here because there are those jobs out there, and people can work at them and make something of a living. It is a lousy way to get by, but these people are proof that you can get by that way. Of course, they have a work ethic, and the students who are not coming to school don't, believing that they can hustle their way on the streets to be the next Scarface or Snoop Dogg.

It's not unusual for our large high schools to have upwards of 300 students over the age of 17 who are still classified as freshman. If you add the 15- and 16-year-olds who are on that same treadmill, as much as one third of a 2,500-student enrollment is making little or no progress.

Many enter school late and leave early. It is left to the NYPD to round them up and bring them to truancy centers. Rarely do any of them reform.

I teach on a campus that has only grades 9 & 10 -- grades 11 & 12 are on another campus (this way we qualify as one 4000 student 5A school in football). I cannot begin to tell the problems I have with students who call themselves "freshmores". I would guess that we have about 200 of them at my school. They are in their second year of high school, but started that second year with fewer than the six credits required to be classified as grade 10. We spend an inordinate amount of time and money trying to keep these kids in school -- "credit recovery" labs where they can do the on computer the alleged equivalent ofwhat they wouldn't do in class, a special school program for them that keeps a very few in school only half a day, and other programs that keep our drop-out rate lower than 5%.

But the real problem is that these are kids who, for the most part, are not academically inclined. They need a high school diploma and some marketable job skills. Sadly, our career education program has only a limited number of slots, so acceptance into the classes is with teacher approval only. That eliminates from consideration any student with an attendance, grade, or discipline problem -- the very students who might most benefit from being in such classes. I suspect the same is true at Epstein's school, which leads him to the following conclusion.

So what is to be done? For starters, small technical-training programs that point kids towards acquiring a trade, a state license and a GED are in place. But at present there are few seats, limiting the large numbers who might thrive in this setting.

Bill Clinton stated, "College isn't for everyone." The time for tracking kids based on interests and abilities is long overdue.

It shouldn't be viewed as discrimination. We're warehousing tens of thousands of kids until the age of 21, when they have made no progress since coming to high school. This breeds crime, wastes valuable education dollars and in the end leaves these kids with the same skills they'd have had if they'd dropped out after the eighth grade.

We've spent the past four decades killing these kids with kindness. Enough is enough.

Yes, indeed. Enough is enough. Let's make the commitment to track such students early (their behavior is generally evident before they enter high school) and put them into programs that fit their needs. We do that with special education students as a matter of law, even when they are mainstreamed into regular classes. Why not do the same for those who have clearly demonstrated that they need something other than a college prep program and a university education? It isn't leaving children behind -- it is getting them to success by a different route.

When Charles Bieger, a St. Louis trunk salesman, died in 1930, he was buried beneatha family headstone that bore only his last name. Nothing more indicated that this man was decorated for heroism during the Civil War.

There is now a new tombstone on his grave.

I encourage folks to read the article, as it talks about some fine people who work to make sure that every Medal of Honor winner has his heroism commemorated. It also provides a really interesting bit of history about the award.

But the most interesting part of the article is this.

Descendants of Bieger don't know why his grave wasn't marked. The Post-Dispatch obituary on Bieger mentions the medal in its headline and says he was buried with military honors.

Surviving evidence also suggests that Bieger was modest about his bravery. An article on his exploits that was published in 1927, when he was 83, notes that the reporter had to keep directing the interview back to the fateful battle. Bieger wanted to talk about how he helped police crack open an old trunk that was used to hide a body in a notorious murder downtown.

"It required about 27 direct questions to worm this interesting information out of the veteran," reporter Robertus Love noted in his article in the old St. Louis Globe-Democrat.

Bieger, a native of Wiesbaden, Germany, immigrated to St. Louis with his family in 1857 and joined the Union cavalry in 1862. He was 19 when he accompanied an unsuccessful thrust from Memphis, Tenn., into Mississippi in February 1864.

The column was supposed to meet Gen. William T. Sherman's infantry at the rail junction of Meridian, Miss. But halfway there, the cavalry ran into a force led by the wily Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest.

On Feb. 22, 1864, the two sides fought a series of galloping clashes near Okolona, Miss. At Ivey's Hill, nine miles northwest of town, Capt. Frederick Hunsen was unhorsed and surrounded.

Bieger rode through gunfire, offered his horse to Hunsen and steadied the captain's wounded mount. Together they fled to safety.

The fight was a Confederate victory. The cavalry limped back to Memphis, forcing Sherman to withdraw from Meridian.

"Forrest licked us that day. Licked us good and plenty," Bieger said in 1927.

He returned to St. Louis after the war ended and eventually opened a trunk shop at Broadway and Market Street. (Forrest returned to Tennessee, where he briefly served as the first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.)

In 1895, Hunsen wrote a letter detailing Bieger's exploits. Congress awarded him the Medal of Honor in 1897.

T learn more about the Congressional Medal of honor and the heroes whose actions are honored with the nation's highest military honor, visit the Congressional Medal of Honor Society.

Out complaining that Bush Administration is the focus of evil in the world, no doubt. Certainly too busy to be concerned about this new report from Freedom House.

Women face a pervasive lack of freedom in the Arab world and no country in the region meets international standards for protecting their rights, human rights activists charged on Saturday.

Freedom House, a U.S.-based group, said a study of countries in the broader Middle East and North Africa had found that women were disadvantaged in nearly all areas of society, including justice, the economy, education, healthcare and media.

The study, which was distributed at a World Economic Forum regional meeting in Jordan, called for Arab governments to eliminate discriminatory laws and remove barriers to women participating in politics and business.

Sameena Nazir, editor of the report, said such moves were necessary both as a matter of principle and in order to make moves towards democracy in the region meaningful.

"Women are half the population of the Middle East," she told Reuters in an interview. "If they are not part of the democratisation process in a full capacity, the process will be incomplete.

The study ranked 16 Arab countries, the West Bank and Gaza on various areas such as access to justice, economic rights and social and cultural rights.

Only three countries -- Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria -- scored at or above a level described as reflecting "imperfect adherence" to universally accepted rights standards in more than one category.

Many countries, notably Saudi Arabia and some fellow Gulf states, had very low scores.

So while the supposed crusaders for women's rights are out here complaining that there are folks here who want a minor child to get parental consent before an abortion (just like she would need for any other surgical procedure), women in Saudi Arabia cannot even get medical treatment at a hospital for life-threatening emergencies without the consent of a male relative.

But I guess the NOW hags have their priorities -- consequence-free sex for children matters so much more than the lives and health of women.

I don't know if I should weep over this story, or whether I should engage in encourage massive rioting in the streets over the disrespect shown to my religious faith. In either event, I know I should be outraged over the rape of the First Amendment by both the school district and the judge in this case.

A public school prohibited a second grader from singing a religious song at a talent show, prompting a lawsuit Friday alleging violation of the girl's constitutional rights.

A federal judge declined an emergency request to compel Frenchtown Elementary School to allow 8-year-old Olivia Turton to sing "Awesome God" at the Friday night show, but allowed the lawsuit to go forward.

School officials in the western New Jersey community had said the performance would be inappropriate at a school event. A message seeking comment from a school board attorney about the judge's ruling was not immediately returned.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Stanley R. Chesler in Trenton to consider the case later came just hours before Olivia had hoped to sing the pop song by the late Rich Mullins.

One verse has these lyrics: "Our God is an awesome God/He reigns from heaven above/with wisdom, pow'r and love/Our God is an awesome God."

It is implicit in the nature of a talent show that the students, not the school, select their songs. Therefore there is no question of the school "imposing" or "endorsing" anything. There is nothing "inappropriate" in the song -- unless one accepts the warped notion that allowing someone to acknowledge their religious beliefs is inappropriate. However, such a position would put you directly in conflict with the Constitutional prohibition on "prohibitting the free exercise" of religion.

What makes me saddest is that I somehow doubt that the school would have stopped this little girl from getting up on stage and parading around dressed like a whore and singing "Bootylicious". And as the story points out, the school has no problem allowing in a witchcraft ceremony during the talent show, drawn from Macbeth, despite the fact that witchcraft is ALSO a religion.

Such situations sometimes stir in me a disturbing thought. Maybe the Islamists have it right -- maybe we Christians need to take to the streets and leave a path of death and destruction through the cities of this country in order to get the respect from government that our numbers merit and the First Amendment supposedly grants us. But I know that is Satan -- and my own sinful nature -- talking.

We Christians follow the Prince of Peace. He has commanded us to turn the other cheek. He has warned us that we will be reviled by those who reject him, and will be persecuted for the sake of his name. So while we will fight in the halls of governemnt for our rights, and pursue them in the courts, true Christians will not engage in the savage behavior we have seen of late from the intolerant practitioners of a certain false religion.

For Jesus Christ is our Lord.

And Our God IS An Awsome God!

This story makes the best case in the world for reviving the old practice of shunning.

Mary Kay Letourneau and her former sixth-grade student were married Friday night in a tightly guarded ceremony, nearly a year after she was released from prison for raping him.

Letourneau, 43, and Vili Fualaau, 22, have been in the spotlight since she was imprisoned in 1997. But when she was released last August, the couple — who have two daughters together — reunited.

I've read, watched, and written my last about this tawdry situation. It is my hope that Vili turns out to be an abusive spouse, and that some night he gives to her the sanction that all child molesters deserve.

Once again, we see just how peaceful your typical Islamist is.

Muslim protesters today called for the bombing of New York in a demonstration outside the US embassy in London.

There were threats of "another 9/11" from militants angry at reports of the desecration of the Koran by US troops in Iraq.

Some among the crowd burned an effigy of Tony Blair on a crucifix and then set fire to a Union flag and a Stars and Stripes.

Led by a man on a megaphone, they chanted, "USA watch your back, Osama is coming back" and "Kill, kill USA, kill, kill George Bush". A small detail of police watched as they shouted: "Bomb, bomb New York" and "George Bush, you will pay, with your blood, with your head."

Demonstrators in Grosvenor Square, some with their faces covered with scarves, waved placards which included the message: "Desecrate today and see another 9/11 tomorrow."

The demonstration as not organized by extremist groupt -- it was set up by some British groups that I understand are quite mainstream, the Muslim Council for Britain and the Muslim Parliamentary Association of the UK.

Of course, they brought in a guy who should not have been permitted to leave Gitmo before receiving his 72 virgins.

Former Guantanamo Bay detainee Martin Mubanga told the crowd he had seen a copy of the Koran "desecrated" during his time at Camp Delta.

He said: "This was one of the methods they used, throwing the Koran, my Koran, on the floor in my cell."

How many Bibles -- heck, how many Korans -- were desecrated and destroyed on 9/11? That didn't seem to stop your heroes, so I don't particularly sympathize.

More at GOPBloggers.

They've sent the USS America to the bottom.

The Navy sent the retired USS America aircraft carrier to its final resting place at the bottom of the sea Saturday, in a closely guarded series of explosions that the Navy didn't announce until days later.

The 84,000-ton, 1,048-foot warship, which served the Navy for 32 years, thus became the first U.S. carrier to be sunk since 1951, and the largest warship ever sunk.

"Explosions were internal to the ship and allowed a controlled flooding," said Pat Dolan, a spokeswoman with the Naval Sea Systems Command. She declined to say where the ship now sits, except that it was 50 nautical miles - or about 58 miles - off the coast, and more than 6,000 feet below the surface.

The Navy previously said the final explosions would be off North Carolina.

Before it sank, it also served as a target for a series of explosions over 25 days designed to help in the making of the of the Navy's next generation carrier, the CVN-21, now being designed at the Northrop Grumman Newport News shipyard.

It is always a sad thing to see such vessels go into the great beyond. Not every ship can be saved as a museum, though there was hope for USS America. I have to say I agree fully with this former member of the ship's crew.

"Very depressing," said Lee McNulty, a New Jersey resident and president of the USS America Foundation, which wanted to turn the ship into a museum. "Not a day goes by that I don't think about it. I just can't believe that she sunk. She's gone. Of all the carriers, that one should have been saved, just for the name of the America."

Before she the last explosions were detonated, the ship was given an appropriate farewell.

"A solemn moment of silence was held as the aircraft carrier ex-America slipped quietly beneath the waves," Dolan told the USS America Carrier Veterans Association on Monday. "We thank and honor all the veterans of the USS America who lived and fought for freedom and democracy aboard this majestic vessel."

Farewell, USS America. We honor you, and those who served aboard you.

USS America Museum Foundation

USS America Carrier Veterans Foundation

And here I thought they claimed to be persecuted by all of us awful Christians.

"Still, it's a great time to be an atheist," said Fitzgerald, who was raised a Baptist in Fresno. "Five hundred years ago, we'd be burned for what we were thinking. Fifty years ago, we'd lose our jobs. But today, we're free to be atheists.

Well, since there seems to be a consensus among the press that the riots over reported Koran desecration were understandable and the fault of the US, I think it is important that we apply the principle to the holy texts of all faiths when they are abused or disrespected as a matter of official government policy.

As such, I am starting the "Slay a Saudi for the Savior" campaign, and expect the support of every liberal and Muslim out there. This is simply a proportional response to this report.

Bibles found in the possession of visitors to Saudi Arabia are routinely confiscated by customs officials, and in some cases copies allegedly have been put through a paper shredder, according to religious rights campaigners.

Reports from the Islamic world of the abuse of Bibles and other items important to Christians emerge from time to time, but generally have little impact - in contrast to the wave of Muslim anger sparked by a Newsweek report, since retracted, of Koran desecration by the U.S. military.

"The Muslims respect the Koran far more than Christians respect the Bible," says Danny Nalliah, a Sri Lankan-born evangelical pastor now based in Australia.

During the 1990s, Nalliah spent two years in Saudi Arabia, where he was deeply involved with the underground church.

"It's a very well-known fact that if you have a Bible at customs when you enter the airport, and if they find the Bible, that the Bible is taken and put in the shredder," he said in an interview this week.

"If you have more than one Bible you will be taken into custody, and if you have a quantity of Bibles you will be given 70 lashes for sure - you could even be executed."

And since there are constant complaints about the abuse of Muslim women, how about this Saudi abuse of a nun?

A friend of his, a fellow Christian in Saudi Arabia, told him of witnessing a particularly unpleasant incident involving a Catholic nun.

The man had been in the transit lounge at the airport in Jeddah - the gateway to Mecca, used by millions of Hajj pilgrims each year - when a nun arrived at the customs desk.

"Some fool [travel agent] had put her on a transit flight in Jeddah. You don't do that to a Catholic nun, because she's going to be tormented."

"They opened her bag, went through her prayer book, put the prayer book through the shredder ... took the crucifix off her neck and smashed it, tormented her for many minutes."

Eventually another Muslim official objected to their conduct, came across and "rescued" her, pointing out to the customs officials that she was not entering the country but only in transit and would be leaving on the next plane.

I demand that the Muslim pigs involved suffer death by beheading for their abuse of this woman of God – right in the middle of Saint Peter’s Square.

I declare a Crusade against the infidels who would dare defile crucifix or shred a prayer book or Bible. We must avenge these insults to the Christian faith.

Death to the Islam!

Death to Mecca!

Death to Saudi Arabia!

***

Uh -- anyway, now that I've recovered my sense of proportion, I hope folks realize that this is not my actual belief. The above is a satirical piece. Unfortunately, the outrages committed by the Saudis are not something I've made up out of whole cloth. They are real.

That is why I urge the State Department to impose serious sanctions against Saudi Arabia and any other Muslim country that violates the rights of Christians. After all -- Christianity deserves at least as much respect as Islam.

And to the Islamist fifth-columnists working at CAIR --you'll get my support for your resolution when you get Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Muslim world to apply the same standard to Christian practices and beliefs.

UPDATE -- 5/20/05: Just in case folks didn't like my sources, here is a piece from today's Wall Street journal on the same Saudi policy regarding the Bible -- including this anecdote.

The Bible in Saudi Arabia may get a person killed, arrested, or deported. In September 1993, Sadeq Mallallah, 23, was beheaded in Qateef on a charge of apostasy for owning a Bible.

I wonder what Ms. Azza Basarudin (from the post below) feels about such cases?

More at GOPBloggers.

UPDATE -- 5/23/05 -- More on Saudi Bible desecration here.

UPDATE -- 5/26/05 -- Don't look now, but it isn't just Bibles that the Islamist Horde wants to ban and destroy -- now they want to confiscate Webster's Dictionary for defining anti-Semitism in a way that they don't like.

The latest edition of the dictionary "Webster" identified "anti- Semitism" as opposing Zionism and sympathizing with Israel's enemies, which showed "the racial trend and scientific distortion," officials of the Office of the Arab Boycott of Israel (OABI) were quoted as saying.

Ignorant cretins!

Am I the only one who is skeptical about the report of a Muslim woman receiving a defaced Quran in the mail? After all, the entire thing is entirely too coincidental., in light of the recent newsweek fraud.

Azza Basarudin, 30, said she received the Quran by mail on May 5 after ordering it through a used books division of Amazon.com that allows customers to order directly from third-party sellers approved by the company.

When she opened the Quaran, Basarudin said she found profanity and the phrase "Death to all Muslims" written on the inside page in thick black marker.

Basarudin, a graduate student in women's studies at UCLA, said she was overwhelmed by fear similar to what she felt after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks when her sister and mother were the target of anti-Muslim slurs.

"I dropped the book because I didn't know what to do," she said at a news conference at the Islamic Center of Southern California. "I was paralyzed after 9/11 — I couldn't leave my house for a couple of weeks — and I realized that fear was coming back."

A Muslim women’s study major? This woman sounds like a professional hysterical victim, ready to take offense at any perceived slight to her gender or religion. That she would be “overwhelmed with fear” seems to be a bit of an extreme reaction – until you consider that she claims she was left so stricken by a few harsh words directed at family members following the MUSLIM ATTACK ON AMERICA on 9/11 that she couldn’t even leave her home. That sounds like more padding for the impending lawsuit, rather than anything grounded in reality.

Of course, the professional victim groups in the Muslim community are already swarming, making demands.

Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, said his organization wants a public apology and investigation from Amazon.com, as well as the firing of those responsible for mailing the desecrated book. He would also like Amazon.com to fund educational programs that foster religious tolerance.

If you cut through Salam’s baloney, you will realize that what he really means is “I want Amazon to make a big fat donation to our group.” Never mind that the book didn’t ever pass through Amazon’s hands – it came directly from a little used bookstore in Pennsylvania. The owner claims not to know how this happened. Both companies have made an effort to make amends.

Richard Roberts, owner of Bellwether, said he doubts the book was defaced by his employees. The company buys used books at bargain prices from individuals, other book stores and libraries and then resells them through Amazon.com and other outlets.

He said before this incident, his six employees gave each book a cursory check before shipping and didn't look inside the pages.

Roberts said Bellwether has since instituted a more stringent quality control check. Bellwether is also suspended indefinitely from selling Qurans through Amazon.com, Smith said.

"I feel awfully bad about it. It's really a shame," Roberts said in a phone interview Wednesday.

Bellwether apologized to Basarudin by e-mail and offered to replace the book. Amazon.com also apologized, reimbursed her for the Quran's cost and mailed Basarudin a gift certificate, Smith said.

Of course, that isn’t nearly enough for the offended Basarudin, who is already making noises that sound suspiciously like she is planning to file a lawsuit.

"I couldn't even go near this book for a couple of days," she said. "I feel like I'm being violated all over again because I'm a Muslim."

I hate to say it, but I suspect that it is actually the folks at Amazon and Bellwether Books who are being violated because you are Muslim. After all, there is a pattern to many of the claims of “hate” directed against Muslims – they are often false reports perpetrated by the alleged “victim”. Until and unless there is more evidence to support Basarudin’s claim, I’m going to suspect that she is the person who wrote these nasty comments in the Quran.

And I’m going to hope that Amazon and Bellwether stand firm against the demands to assume dhimmi status.

I can’t help but wonder what would have been said if Ken Starr had made speeches raising money for GOP-related groups during the Whitewater and Lewinsky investigations. Even though he was scrupulously fair and honest in the investigation, the Left screamed bloody murder. So is it any wonder that I am highly suspicious of a speech by Tom DeLay’s nemesis, Ronnie Earle, to a group with ties to Howard Dean at a time when Dean is declaring DeLay guilty of criminal offenses that should put him in jail?

Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who denies partisan motives for his investigation of a political group founded by Republican leader Tom DeLay, was the featured speaker last week at a Democratic fund-raiser where he spoke directly about the congressman.

A newly formed Democratic political action committee, Texas Values in Action Coalition, hosted the May 12 event in Dallas to raise campaign money to take control of the state Legislature from the GOP, organizers said.

Earle, an elected Democrat, helped generate $102,000 for the organization.

In his remarks, Earle likened DeLay to a bully and spoke about political corruption and the investigation involving DeLay, the House majority leader from Sugar Land, according to a transcript supplied by Earle.

"This case is not just about Tom DeLay. If it isn't this Tom DeLay, it'll be another one, just like one bully replaces the one before," Earle said.

"This is a structural problem involving the combination of money and power," he added. "Money brings power and power corrupts."

The crowd of 80 to 100 Democratic activists responded by making donations that exceeded the event's fund-raising goal.

Governor Rick Perry needs to act NOW to remove Ronnie Earle, an outrageously partisan official conducting an outrageously partisan investigation, from this investigation. Even if one accepts Earle’s claim that the investigation is not a partisan witch hunt, the appearance of impropriety, such as the misuse of investigative and prosecutorial powers, is every bit as serious as an actual abuse, as it undermines faith in the justice system.

Especcially since Earl admits that his speaking at this fundraiser demonstrates that he is a corrupt politician -- since, as he himself says, "Money brings power and power corrupts."

UPDATE 5/20/05 -- Looks like I'm not the only one who sees Earle's speech as unethical.

"Ronnie Earle's unabashed partisanship in speaking at a Texas Values in Action Coalition (TEXVAC) fund-raiser proves Earle's motivations have nothing to do with truth or justice, and everything to do with electing Democrats and attempting to bring down the most effective House majority leader in modern history," said Tina Benkiser, chairwoman of the Texas Republican Party. "He is tainted and he should resign," she said.

And by the way, guess who was in the crowd at the fundraiser, and wh i would presume was one of the donors.

Former House Speaker Jim Wright.

That should give you an idea about the sincerity of Ronnie Earle and these Howard Dean Democrats when it comes to fighting corruption.

And I love this comment from one of the attorneys involved in the current case -- well-known Houston defense attorney Rusty Hardin.

According to Hardin, he told Earle in a courtroom conversation that "you have a history of indicting people whose conduct you don't approve of and you want to stop. You leave it to your assistants to worry whether there's a criminal case involved."

More at GOPBloggers.

UPDATE 5/21/05 -- Another good article is found here.

In an attempt to raise the overall scores of students at Lincoln Middle School in Vista, California, the principal plans to end the district’s last remaining program for gifted students in the hopes that placing those students in regular classrooms will result in improved performance overall. Parents of the gifted students are concerned about the special needs of their students being sacrificed and ignored, while parents of Latino students object to the possibility that the gifted program might survive in some form or fashion.

"All students should be treated equally," Latino parents said in a letter to the board and district administrators. "We believe that the school should not create differences between students who know more and students who know less."

Doesn’t anyone recognize the absurdity of that statement? Why shouldn’t we treat our best and brightest to an education that meets their needs, just as we do those in special education programs? On what basis do we hold back the top kids and dragoon them into providing free tutoring for their slower classmates in the hopes that it will raise the other students’ scores. Especially when you consider what the source of the problem is.

The student body at Lincoln is 63 percent Hispanic or Latino. Of the school's 1,293 students, 437 are English-learners, and 99 percent of those speak Spanish.

That group has pulled down test scores, putting Lincoln on "program improvement" status under the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

So what this really comes down to for these Latino parents is that they want THEIR children put first, not some other parents’ children. I guess it is a simple case of Leave No Latino Child Behind – and screw the rest.

When are we going to get rid of the notion that helping our brightest kids reach their potential is a bad thing?

I can just make her out in the distance, a gray hulk in the mist, as I drive to and from school each day. She is a presence – a reminder of what once was.

I would certainly hate to lose this beautiful old lady.

This old warship was at the surrender of the German fleet during World War I and withstood torpedoes at Omaha Beach in France on D-Day. Long moored in a berth at the Houston Ship Channel, the Battleship Texas is now a floating tourist attraction, and a badly leaking one at that.

Time and corrosive saltwater are slowly destroying the vessel once called the world's most powerful weapon, and cash-strapped conservators are scrambling to secure funding for an overhaul before it's too late.
"It's been rusting for 90 years," ship curator Barry Ward said. "It isn't going to fall apart tomorrow, but the longer you avoid a major repair, the harder it will be to repair the damage that's already been done."

A proposal to use $16 million in federal highway funds for ship repairs passed through a conference committee of the state Legislature this month. If lawmakers vote to approve the funds, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, which maintains the vessel, will start work on a dry dock that could feature a cradle capable of lifting the 34,000-ton ship out of the water permanently.

"However [the dock] is designed, this ship is part of our cultural history and it deserves to be saved," said Steve Whiston, director of the parks department's infrastructure division. "There's not another one like it left."

The Texas, commissioned in 1914, is the last surviving dreadnought battleship — a ship design that features large weapons of the same caliber, allowing for more concentrated blasts of fire. It is the only remaining U.S. battleship to survive two world wars, and is a microcosm of the technology of the era, Ward said.

"Her career spans the earliest days of flight through the nuclear age," he said.

Decommissioned in 1948, the ship was brought here by "Texans who couldn't stand the thought of a warship with the name 'Texas' on it being sunk as fodder during nuclear testing," Ward said.

It was docked south of Houston at the San Jacinto Battleground State Historic Site, the location of an 1836 battle that led to Texas' independence from Mexico.

As a result, numbers of confused children have asked whether Sam Houston fought Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna from the bow of a battleship. "We inherited the location," Ward said. "We don't do public monuments that way anymore. It's up to educators to teach students that the ship wasn't at the battle of San Jacinto. Otherwise it's just a jungle gym to them."

It's unlikely the Texas will be moved elsewhere, in part because conservators are unsure whether the fragile ship can withstand a sea voyage. "It's risky because of the stress of the tow, the cross currents and the waves," Ward said.

The ship was last towed to a dry dock in 1988 for a $12-million renovation of the hull — the first in 40 years. State lawmakers later approved an additional $12 million in bonds for ship maintenance but did not provide the money to issue the bonds. Ward hopes the federal highway money tentatively approved this month will lead to badly needed repairs.

The hull should be repaired every 10 or so years for damage caused by water, Ward said. "It's like changing the oil in your car — it's something that should be done regularly. But I would advocate getting her out of the water permanently so the state of Texas would never have to pay for that kind of cyclical repair again. We're going for a cure, not a Band-Aid."

Floating next to refineries and oil storage tanks, the 573-foot dark blue battleship looks startlingly out of place, but it is a popular field trip destination. Last week, a busload of seventh-graders climbed aboard and quickly scattered into nooks and crannies.

"I love ships," said Ariel Barron, 13. "You can read about them in a book, but it's better to see with your own eyes how things used to be."

Cheyenne Dutton said he was on his third field trip to the battleship. Each time he visits, he said, "something else is closed off. I wish they'd fix everything so we can see all of it."

Cheyenne nimbly climbed a ladder and stopped in front of a locked door. "See, we can't go in there," he said. "I think it stinks."

I’m with you, Cheyenne. We need to save this grand old ship, the last of her breed.

You can help.

The Washington Times reminds us today that the Senate Democrats outlined their filibuster plans in a memo four years ago.

Remember this quote?

"They also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous because he had a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment."

Dangerous because he is a Latino. If this had been a white nominee, he would have sailed through – but they blocked him because of his ethnicity.

And don’t forget – the decisions on who to filibuster were made based upon whether or not liberal advocacy groups would sign off on them – in particular homosexual rights groups and abortion advocates, who were concerned that certain nominees might hold religious beliefs that did not conform with the groups’ agenda.

So remember – this filibuster is based, in large part, on race, ethnicity, and religion – not on the Constitution, and not on legitimate matters of principle.

Now I understand the need to arrest terrorists, even if they are going after a tyrant like Castro. However, there is a minor detail in this story from the Washington Post that leaves me concerned about turning Luis Posada Carriles over to Venezuela.

He was twice acquitted in Venezuela in the airliner bombing. In 1985, still jailed while prosecutors appealed, he escaped a Venezuelan prison and began a two-decade odyssey through Central America.

Tried and acquitted twice. Not once, but TWICE. And yet Luis Posada was still in jail.

This case reeks of injustice, especially since extradition will mean turning him over to Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, who has gutted the Venezuelan justice system, or – indirectly – to his close ally, Fidel Castro. At what point do we reach the point where we must declare that we find complying with this extradition request is, in and of itself, an injustice.

I don’t know – and am glad I am not faced with making the decision.

Some people just hate America and the fact that the American people elected George W. Bush as president TWICE.

A former Iowa woman who pleaded guilty to two counts of threatening President Bush was sentenced Monday to 21/2 years in prison, U.S. Attorney Charles Larson Sr. said.

Catherine M. Guertin, 25, formerly of Independence and more recently of Denver, was sentenced in U.S. District Court on two counts of threatening the life of the president.

Judge Linda Reade ordered Guertin to be on three years of supervised release after her prison time. In addition, Guertin will not be permitted to be within one mile of the president or his immediate family.

A grand jury indicted Guertin on Aug. 18. She was arrested Sept. 17 in Colorado.

The indictment alleged that Guertin made the threats against Bush on May 3 and May 16 while she was living in Independence.

One count charges that she threatened Bush by saying, ''If I ever have a gun, I will shoot him between the eyes.''

The second count claims that on May 16 Guertin wrote statements threatening the president.

Guertin repeated the threats in court when she pleaded guilty in December.

A pity that the sentence is so short. And even sadder is the fact that she has not been charged and convicted for the December threat.

No doubt Err America will be ready with a job offer when she is released – assuming they have any listeners left by then.

I don’t usually support a school giving a punishment for statements made off school grounds and outside of school hours. But in this case, I think the nexus between a school event, the statement in question, and illegal conduct is such that the punishment is appropriate in this case.

A senior at a Frederick's Governor Thomas Johnson High School has been barred from attending her prom this Saturday because she told a newspaper she planned to drink alcohol on prom night.

Shawnda Lawson, 18, told The Frederick News-Post earlier this month that she had refused to sign a pledge that she wouldn't drink -- and she told the paper she likes drinking.

After the story was published, Lawson said she was told by her principal she was banned from the prom and told she was an embarrassment to the school.

County schools spokeswoman Marita Loose said school dances are a privilege, not a right.

Another student, Nicole Taylor, also told the newspaper she planned to drink on prom night. There is no word if she also faces punishment.

We lost a girl from my school several years ago when a drunk hit her boyfriend’s car on the way to his prom. We had several students injured – including one with a broken neck that could have left her paralyzed – in a wreck on the Galveston Causeway the year before that, but alcohol was not a factor. In reality, we have managed to dodge the tragedy of a car full of kids dying in a fiery wreck after getting liquored up. But when it is our turn to face such a prom tragedy, it will be the school (not the parents) that everyone expects to put a stop to the drinking – despite the fact that kids are searched by constables going in to prom and cannot leave the cordoned-off area of the hotel during the dance.

Therefore, I think this is a good, proportionate response to the statement made by Ms. Lawson to the newspaper. She may go out and get loaded, but no one will be able to complain that the school “should have done something”.

The liberty to worship and believe according to one’s conscience is a fundamental human right. When will India stop the violation of these rights by some of its provinces?

The police have arrested four persons who were distributing copies of the Bible and biblical literature to the people in Rajnagar Block, Orissa, May 13. The police action comes in the wake of the alleged conversion of 300 Hindu families to Christianity in Rajnagar. An angry Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has threatened to launch an agitation if the police fail to take action against “those responsible for violating the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act.” “The area is already tense, and at such a time open distribution of the Bible could add fuel to the fire,” said Mr. Sistikantha Kanungo, officer in charge of the Rajnagar police station. “That is why we arrested the four young men and detained them,” he added. The arrested are Ashok Namalpuri (28) of Chalakamba village in Nayagarh district, Gorachand Pal (22) of Gaeba village in Gajapati district, Siddheswar Nayak (29) and Bimal Wilson (22) from Koraput. They had come to Rajnagar in January last and were allegedly involved in conversions by distributing leaflets and pamphlets about Jesus Christ and Christianity and trying to influence school children, the officer added. For the last five months they were also teaching at two primary schools without charging any remuneration. Says Mr. Subhranshu Sutar, a social activist, “These young men were often seen distributing biblical literature and copies of the Bible in at least fifteen villages in Rajnagar Block alone.” Meanwhile, Mr. Hemant Sharma, the district collector of Kendrapara, has ordered an inquiry into the conversion of 300 Hindu families. The superintendent of police and the Rajnagar tehsildar will investigate the charges and submit a report within a week. “OFRA demands that a convert or a re-convert should inform and obtain permission from the district administration before converting to another religion. But nobody has taken any permission in this case. So once the report is filed and someone is found guilty, they would be booked. The law will take its course,” said Mr. Sharma.

No government has any place granting or denying permission to change one’s faith. No government has any place prohibiting the distribution of religious texts to willing recipients.

You can claim to be an Indian, Professor Churchill – but you can’t make the Indians claim you.

The statement, issued May 9 in the name of the tribal leader, Chief George Wickliffe, and posted on its Web site Tuesday, does not mince words:

"The United Keetoowah Band would like to make it clear that Mr. Churchill IS NOT a member of the Keetoowah Band and was only given an honorary 'associate membership' in the early 1990s because he could not prove any Cherokee ancestry."

The tribe said that all of Churchill's "past, present and future claims or assertions of Keetoowah 'enrollment,' written or spoken, including but not limited to; biographies, curriculum vitae, lectures, applications for employment, or any other reference not listed herein, are deemed fraudulent by the United Keetoowah Band."

That should settle the matter for anyone with a shred of integrity – though Churchill and his apologists will probably still make the fraudulent claim. His attempt to assert “Indian-ness” based upon an honorary membership in the tribe is like trying to claim the title of “Dr.” based upon an honorary degree.

The matter is very clear, according to the tribe.

"Mr. Churchill was never able to prove his eligibility in accordance with our membership laws," the statement said.

The chief said his tribe had decided to honor Churchill with the associate membership because Church-ill had promised to write the tribe's history and had pledged "to help and honor the UKB."

"To date Mr. Churchill has done nothing in regards to his promise and pledge."

So, to settle the matter once and for all – Ward Churchill’s claim to be an Indian is as fraudulent as his scholarship.

Comment on Churchill's claim -- SCSU Scholars

This report out of the Republic of Georgia.

The FBI said on Wednesday a grenade thrown at President Bush during a visit to Georgia last week had been a threat to the American leader and had only failed to explode because of a malfunction.

In a statement, a Federal Bureau of Investigation official at the U.S. embassy said the grenade, thrown while Bush made a keynote speech in Tbilisi's Freedom Square on May 10, had been live and landed within 30 meters (100 feet) of the president.

"We consider this act to be a threat against the health and welfare of both the President of the United States and the President of Georgia as well as the multitude of Georgian people that had turned out at this event," said the statement from C. Bryan Paarmann, the FBI's legal attache at the embassy.

"This hand grenade appears to be a live device that simply failed to function due to a light strike on the blasting cap induced by a slow deployment of the spoon activation device," said the statement.

Paarmann said a reward was offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the perpetrator.

And to all my anti-American Leftist readers, I have two words for you consider before you make comments lamenting the failure to murder the commander-in-chief.

President.

Cheney.

Dude;

You just married a woman you have adored from afar for years in a top secret tropical beach wedding less than a week ago.

Tonight you go to a big awards show without her, presumably because of her work schedule.

Then you win the big plum award of the night -- Entertainer of the Year.

When you gave your acceptance speech, who is the one person you should NOT have left out?

Bad form, dude. I suggest LOTS of roses -- and probably jewelry.

This is the latest from terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, whose forces are killing American troops and Iraqis who want to be free.

"Our Sunni faith stipulates that the sword and bullets be the only dialogue between us and worshippers of the cross."

Now, are you Leftists really sure you want to whine about Christian conservatives? Or are we your target of choice precisely because you know that we mean you no harm?

(Hat Tip -- Lone Star Times)

Fairleigh Dickinson University saw fit to treat its graduating seniors to the anti-American rantings of so-called journalist Seymour Hersh -- who proceeded to outrage a large number of them.

Journalist Seymour Hersh described U.S. soldiers in Iraq as "victims," eliciting jeers and cheers from an audience of about 6,000 people at a college commencement on Monday.

Hersh, speaking to graduates of Fairleigh Dickinson University and their families, said American soldiers are "doing an admirable job under terrible conditions" but don't know much about the war they are fighting.

"They are as much victims as the people they are sometimes forced to kill," Hersh said.

The comment was greeted by a loud expletive from one member of the audience. Booing and more swearing followed, but other audience members stood and cheered.

Now I'm sorry, but I've long had a problem with the concept that a commencement address is a forum to engage in a political speech. The event isn't about the speaker -- it is about the graduates, and when it gets abused by the speaker for some other purpose I take offense. I think that's why so many folks objected to Hersh's anti-American comments -- especially when he dishonored the warriors fighting in the War on Islamofascism that began only a few miles from the campus during the first weeks of the graduates' college career.

And I am particularly taken aback by Fairleigh Dickenson's decision to bring in the anti-American Hersh given their actions earlier in the semester. Yeah, I am referring to the firing of a professor because of his un-American beliefs.

[Professor Jacques] Pluss said he was dismissed in March because university officials learned of his involvement in the National Socialist Movement, which bills itself "America's Nazi Party." School officials said he was let go for missing too many classes.

The 51-year-old professor bristles when he is called a white supremacist or racist.

"The world is made up of different cultures, all of which have a place, all of which have a direction and all of which should have a say in determining their own futures," he said.

University officials declined to elaborate on Pluss' ouster. It was unclear what role -- if any -- Pluss' political views played in the decision.

Pluss, who had taught at the university since 2002, said he joined the neo-Nazi group in February but kept his views a secret on campus.

Yeah, I guess that there is a double standard on campus -- un-Americans on the right get fired, but un-American Leftists get honored. Frankly, I'm surprised they didn't go whole-hog and just invite Ward Churchill, the poster child for un-American college faculty who get to keep their job in the name of "academic freedom."

Police are searching for the pro-border jumping Leftist thug who injured a 66-year-old woman with a water bottel thrown at her head during a rally opposed to the so-called Danza Indigenas monument, which some claim is un-American, racist and seditious.

Baldwin Park police Sgt. David Reynoso said police have a videotape of the incident and are still reviewing it to see if the culprit can be found.

Investigators also are looking to the public for answers. Anyone who saw the person who threw the bottle could come forward and remain anonymous if they wish.

"We understand people have the First Amendment right to assemble and free speech. We don't discourage that,' Reynoso said. "What we do discourage is acts of violence, such as throwing water bottles. We ask people to keep calm, respect everybody and obey the laws.'

Police say the bottle came from the roughly 300 counter-protesters who showed up.

Save Our State had about 25 supporters at the site, police said.

Hey, it takes a lot of courage to assault an old lady when you outnumber her group six-to-one. I mean, you wouldn't want a conservative to think that they had the right under the Constitution to actually speak on public property -- especially if they might offend one of your precious "protected classes".

And then there is the response from this arrogant politician who has no respect for the rights of Americans.

Baldwin Park Mayor Manuel Lozano said he blames Turner for the woman's injuries because he took senior citizens to an event that could have become dangerous.

He contends Turner is preying on senior citizens to market "himself to make a big organization and spread his hatred throughout the region.'

"I was literally outraged,' Lozano said. "He should be held accountable for using senior citizens in that capacity.'

I bet this Leftist politician wouldn't be taking that line if it had been a bunch of border jumpers brought to an "open borders" rally. Too bad he has no res[ect for the First Amendment -- or any other part of the Constitution.

I know, love and respect many liberals who are good Americans -- but have to say that this sort of Leftism is a disease. Hopefully there are enough good Americans of all political stripes left to erradicate it.

For a description of the rally from the organizer -- The Wide Awakes

Just when I thought that Zero Tolerance stupidity couldn't get any more extreme, I encounter this little gem from the Atlanta area.

Two seniors at Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. High School will miss their baccalaureate -- but make their graduation -- after a stink that started over a cake knife.

Because of the school's zero tolerance policy on weapons, Ashley Pickens and Candace Grier, both honor students, were suspended from school for 10 days and told they would not be allowed to attend their baccalaureate ceremonies. The DeKalb school superintendent upheld that punishment but decided to allow the girls to walk with their classmates during graduation.

The trouble started when the girls brought a cake to school and looked for a knife to cut it. They say they found a butter-type knife in the school's band room and tried to return it, but the door had since been locked.

One of the girls put the knife in her book bag. Then a teacher saw it.

"He said it really didn't matter [that it was used for a cake]," Pickens said. "[He said] it's a knife on school grounds, and you have to be written up for it -- you ought to be glad we didn't have you arrested."

Now let me get this straight -- they used a school utensil and for that have been punished. Someone must be out of their mind!

But there is some hope.

School officials claimed they enforced clearly written codes of conduct. Wednesday, a school tribunal will hear the girls' appeal to attend baccalaureate ceremonies.

Maybe someone will recognize that a butter knife is not a weapon, but is instead a tool that they were using appropriately.

Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (Demagogue-Houston), has asked Governor Rick Perry to "disinvite" the Minuteman Project from the state of Texas.

"I urge the governor to disinvite the Minuteman Project. Ask them not to come here," Jackson Lee said Sunday.

The group has posted volunteers in Arizona to alert authorities to illegal immigrants crossing the border.

Organizers have expressed an interest in recruiting in Texas and beginning patrols along the Rio Grande in October.

Given that the governor did not invite the Minutemen, and given that any American citizen has the right to travel, visit, or reside anywhere in this country that they please, i don't particularly see where it is the governor's place to "disinvite" the group.

However, if "disinvitations" are to be issued, I'd like to suggest that Rick Perry extend one to Queen Sheila. She is an embarassment to the state of Texas, and the further away she stays from here the better.

The University of Oregon has a policy of offering special small section classes in the Math & English departments, limited to 18 students, with the first 10 slots reserved for African-American, Asian-American/Pacific Islander, Chicano/Latino, Native American or multiracial students.

Why?

University Senior Instructor Michel Kovcholovsky, who teaches the OMAS's math classes, said the classes were created to foster a comfortable environment for minorities. "That was the basic idea, so that they don't feel afraid to raise their hand and ask something."

The school does no favor to students by allowing them this sheltered environment. Furthermore, it violates the law by limiting access based upon race or ethnicity.

And I’m curious – would the university consider a special “white’s only” section to create a comfortable environment for white students who are afraid ask questions in front of minorities? I think we all know the answer to that.

So, The New York Times is about to start charging for access to the editorial page and the archives.

The New York Times Co. on Monday said that, starting in September, access to Op-Ed and certain of its top news columnists on the paper's NYTimes.com Web site will only be available through a fee of $49.95 a year. The service, known as TimesSelect, will also allow access to The Times's online archives, early access to select articles on the site, and other features. Home-delivery subscribers will automatically receive the service, the NYT said.

Am I correct in understanding that this is a signal that the former “paper of record” is failing to make enough off of on-line advertising and other marketing strategies directed at online consumers that it must start charging for access to formerly free material? Or has the paper circulation dropped so much that the online content must support it? Either way, sounds to me like one more step towards irrelevance.

(Hat Tip – Michelle Malkin)

The Jerusalem Post discusses today whether Jews (and, I would presume, others) should urge black leaders and others to disassociate themselves from Louis Farrakhan's second Million Man (sic) March given the racist history of Louis Farrakhan, co-organizer Malik Zulu Shabazz, and the Nation of Islam as an organization.

Among the black leaders who turned out for the Farrakhan news conference were: Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, District of Columbia Mayor Anthony Williams and Dorothy Height of the National Council of Negro Women. Not present, but reportedly backing the event, were Eleanor Holmes Norton, DC's delegate in Congress and NAACP chairman Julian Bond, as well as Coretta Scott King, widow of Rev. Martin Luther King.

Referring obliquely to the Jewish community, Farrakhan told the gathering: "There are those who... are threatened that we are all here together. And so, one by one, they will come to pick us off."

But the presence of Farrakhan's co-organizer and, some suggest, heir-apparent, Malik Zulu Shabazz, sent an even more sinister message. At a July 2003 news conference, Shabazz declared: "If 3,000 people perished in the World Trade Center attacks and the Jewish population is 10 percent, you show me records of 300 Jewish people dying in the World Trade Center... We're daring anyone to dispute this truth. They got their people out."

In advance of the press club announcement, the ADL's Abe Foxman sent letters to black leaders, imploring: "When will someone in the African-American community stand up and say the Million Man March has a positive message but the pied piper is a racist and anti-Semite?" Merely asking that question strikes rap impresario and black power broker Russell Simmons, who dialogues with liberal rabbis and does big business with Jewish and Israeli Hollywood, as "disrespectful" and likely to "spread anti-Semitism."

I'm sorry, but arguments like those put forward by Simmons are wrong-headed. Would he support a "Faith and Family Rally organized by David Duke? Would it be "disrespectful" and likely to "spread racism" if black leaders spoke out against such an event? Hardly -- and those who urged black leaders to be silent in such a case would be guilty of disrespect and the perpetration of racism for blaming the victim in such a case. So while iI may disagree with Abe Foxman on church-state issues, I applaud him for being on the side of angels in this situation.

The article ends as follows.

It's a tough call. Our challenge is to decide whether Jews' experience with a fruitcake Austrian painter has anything to teach us about the rantings of a black American calypso performer.

My response is to urg Foxman and other Jewish leaders to speak loudly and forcefully -- silence didn't work in Germany, and will do nothing to stop anti-Semitism today.

Listen up, you Islamist pigs. Don't make the US come back and kick your Taliban-loving asses again.

A group of Afghan Muslim clerics threatened on Sunday to call for a holy war against the United States in three days unless it hands over military interrogators reported to have desecrated the Koran. The warning came after 16 Afghans were killed and more than 100 hurt last week in the worst anti-U.S. protests across the country since U.S. forces invaded in 2001 to oust the Taliban for sheltering Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network. The clerics in the northeastern province of Badakhshan said they wanted U.S. President George W. Bush to handle the matter honestly "and hand the culprits over to an Islamic country for punishment". "If that does not happen within three days, we will launch a jihad against America," said a statement issued by about 300 clerics, referring to Muslim holy war, after meeting in the main mosque in the provincial capital, Faizabad.

Even if the charges are true, -- which appears unlikely, based upon the way Newsweek is backpeddling from this story -- we will turn US military personnel over to some Muslim backwater tribunal to be tried under rules set by your false prophet Muhammad sometime about a millenium after Hell freezes over.

Oh, and before any Muslim comes here asking me to tone down the level of contempt -- please note that this IS the toned-down version

I don't mind that out of town papers are writing about my congressman, Tom Delay. I don't even care that they are writing pieces that reflect negatively on him, and which seem to paint those of us who are backing him as blind to ethics questions. What I do object to, though, is the hiding of the political affiliations of those who criticize him. Take this Philadelphia Inquirer piece as an example.

Maybe DeLay's diehards are needlessly worried, because plenty of local Democrats doubt that he can be beaten. Karl Silverman, a NASA weather forecaster for the space shuttle, stabbed at his salad the other night and said: "So many people here wear blinders. They see politics as just another negative, so they ignore it, because they already have enough negatives in their lives. And they're ideologues anyway, so they figure, 'He's a Republican, he must be OK.' "

"Yeah," said John Cobarruvias, another NASA man. "They keep coming back for more. At the office, I keep asking people, 'How much more are you going to take?'"

The funny thing is, I recognized those two names. The thing is, I didn't recognize them in the context of their work for NASA (I live about 5 miles from Johnson Space Center and know a number of NASA employees and contractors.). No, I recognized the name because they are two of the leading Democrat activists in the area!

Yeah, you read that right. They are are not a couple of NASA employees who happen to be registered Democrats -- they are high-profile local Democrat activists.

Karl Silverman is the founder of the League City Neighborhood Democrats and sits on the Texas Democrat State Executive Committee as the Committeman for Senatorial District 11.

And John Cobarruvias -- you might have a very different perception of him if you had been informed that he is a frequent contributor of articles to the Democratic Underground, as well as being head of the Bay Area New Democrats, the group that sponsored last year's protest in front of Swift Boat Vet John O'Neill's home. Among his classier recent stunts was calling Tom DeLay a "bastard" in one of the local papers.

Now you will never get me to believe that Dick Polman, the Inquirer's political analyst who has over a decade of experience covering national political news, didn't know who these guys were. He would, in fact, have had to pick them precisely because they are two of the top Democrat voices in the area. To fail to identify them as anything but Democrat activists -- especially as humble, hard-working employees with NASA -- is rather disingenuous. It would be like quoting Howard Dean and identifying him as a Vermont physician! This was clearly an attempt to deceive the reader.

UPDATE: After this information was posted at Oh, That Liberal Media, one commenter pointed out that one of the sources cited was a former elected official with GOP connections. I therefore went back and found the following information.

Brian Gaston was a city council member in Sugar Land -- which I believe has a non-partisan form of government.

And I've since discovered that Therese Raia (a name I didn't recognize, despite being a Harris County precinct chair) is the SD17 Committeewoman.

Pat Baig, on the other hand, is an ersatz Republican who gave money to DeLay's opponent in last year's congressional race, Richard Morrison. That might have been an important detail, along with the fact that she never votes in GOP primaries.

Beverly Carter is a precinct chair in Fort Bend County, but is better known for running a local paper that has been at odds with DeLay for over a decade. She was censured by the Fort Bend County GOP when she endorsed Morrison last year.

Dean Hrbacek is another former Sugar Land city official -- a former mayor, whose defeat was partially orchestrated by Ms. Carter's paper and a local radio host who also wrote for her paper (before the host/columnist was convicted of exposing himself to a neighbor girl).

But, if anything, this shows that Polman wants to have folks think he has the pulse of the common man -- but all he does is talk to the same old local officials and politicos that everyone else does.

And as for why I pointed out the two Democrats, that is easy -- they are both local to me, rather than 30 or so miles away in the Sugar Land area, on the other side of the 22nd District.

Once again, we get a reminder that former presidential candidate and current DNC chair Howard Dean is not just a loose cannon. He is the best gift that we on the Right could have ever asked for. After all, he and Harry Reid are guaranteed to shoot their mouths off at least once a week, giving the American public a reminder of why it is importan to keep the Democrats as the minority party -- and make them even a smaller minority next election cycle.

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Party, said yesterday that the US House majority leader, Tom DeLay, ''ought to go back to Houston where he can serve his jail sentence," referring to allegations of unethical conduct against the Republican leader.

Now just set aside the fact that DeLay has not been accused of anything actually criminal, merely technical violations of rules that he may have been unaware of (and which a dozen Democrats have copped to by updating their ethics paperwork to fix the exact same sort of problems). When you get this sort of response from one of your party's senior members, you have gone too far.

''That's just wrong," [Massachusetts Congressman Barney] Frank said in an interview on the convention floor. ''I think Howard Dean was out of line talking about DeLay. The man has not been indicted. I don't like him, I disagree with some of what he does, but I don't think you, in a political speech, talk about a man as a criminal or his jail sentence."

Well, Barney, you guys went and made him party chair, and you are going to have to live with this sort of comment up to and through the next presidential election.

Thank you, Democrats!

Vincente Fox seems to think that blacks are fit only for the lowest forms of labor.

"There is no doubt that Mexicans, filled with dignity, willingness and ability to work are doing jobs that not even blacks want to do there in the United States," he said in a speech broadcast in part on local radio and reported on newspaper web sites.

Given the skin-color hierarchy that is found in Mexico, with darker-skinned Mexicans on the lower rungs of thesocial scale and lighter-skinned at the top, i'm not surprosed by such comments. I even hear such comments from my students from Mexico, and even from some of the US natives whose parents are originally from Mexico. These are the kids who tell me that their parents would be thrilled for them to date a white bly/girl. but not one who was black.

One more reason not to have an abortion -- other than the fact that it is the murder of another human being.

The research leader, Dr Caroline Moreau, an epidemiologist at the Hôpital de Bicêtre in Paris, said the results of the study, which appear in the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, provided conclusive evidence of a link between induced abortion and subsequent pre-term births.

Last night anti-abortion campaigners seized on the evidence to demand that all women seeking a termination be warned, routinely, that they are jeopardising the well-being of future babies. A series of earlier, smaller studies had failed to provide clear evidence of a link and so women currently opting for an abortion are not warned of the risk.

Dr Moreau said: "Clearly there is a link. The results suggest that induced abortion can damage the cervix in some way that makes a premature birth more likely in subsequent pregnancies."

Of course, the folks who make their money off of killing babies are not keen on the notion that they should inform women of the risks of the procedure. To them, informed consent (which is standard for every other surgical procedure) is something that interferes with "the right to choose".

The Pentagon has submitted its list for base closures and realignemnts. Already, the complaining begins. A host of articles and editorials have already appeared around our country, explaining why THIS base or That one should remain open -- often with very little basis in military necessity.

Take this piece, for example, about the impending demise of Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

The proposed closure was a blow to some of Walter Reed's workers and neighbors. "It's mind-boggling," said Navy veteran Harold Thompson, 25, who lives across the street from the hospital, where he visits his doctor. "It will be a real issue for me and other people in the neighborhood if Walter Reed shuts down."

Yes, Mr. Thompson, it would be an issue if you have to go all the way out to Bethesda to the hospital there. But it would be an issue of convenience, not one of national security or dire need. It would mean that you might have to spend a little more time, getting to and from your appointments. That is not, sir, a national security issue.

Ultimately, the whole concept of realignement is about budgets, military efficiency and national security, not jobs or the local economy. Let's remember that as the process moves forward.

Pope Benedict XVI has announced that he has waived the ordinary five year waiting period for the beginning of canonization proceedings for his predecessor, Pope John Paul the Great.

The pope made the announcement during a meeting with the Roman clergy at the Basilica of St. John Lateran, first telling the assembled priests, "and now I have a very joyous piece of news for you."

Immediately following Pope John Paul's death on April 2, there were calls from faithful for his sainthood. At his funeral Mass, pilgrims held up banners saying "Santo Subito" ("Immediate Sainthood").

The announcement came on the anniversary of an 1981 assassination attempt by a Turkish gunman against John Paul in St. Peter's Square (search).

The pope read a letter in Latin in which the Vatican official in charge of sainthood, Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, announced that Benedict himself had authorized the beginning of John Paul's path to sainthood. The announcement drew a standing ovation from the Roman priests.

Benedict, who had been seated, stood up to join the clergy in applauding the major tribute to his predecessor.

This is clearly a response to the calls of the faithful to begin the process now. At the funeral for the late pontiff, cries of “Santo Subito” were heard throughout the crowd. In my eyes, this is akin to the practice of the early church, where sainthood was often determined by the people themselves, and then recognized by the institutional Church. Perhaps the bestknown example is that of St. Thomas a Becket, whose tomb became a place of pilgrimage immediately after his death, and whose holiness and martyrdom led to his recognition as a saint within three years of his death in acknowledgement of the popular acclamation that he was a saint.

Soon, very soon, I expect that we will be hearing of his beatification and canonization.

Krauthammer absolutely demolishes the argument that doing away with the filibuster of judicial nominees is at odds with tradition. His conclusion is masterful.