I got into a discussion tonight with some folks on a mailing list. It began about drops in traffic over Memorial Day -- which most of us had.

The one paarticipant posted the following somewhat discouraged comment.

OK, if next week isn't 100 views per day, I'm quitting.

(Please go visit Indian Cowboy -- he's a libertarian blogger who comments on politics, society, and science, based upon what I've seen.)

I then decided to post some blogging tips -- for what they are worth, since I am hardly one of the folks who reaches stratospheric numbers, though I have built up a small following over the last two years (the blogiversary is rapidly approaching!)

Here's what came up with, after being prodded to take my initial list of six and expand it to seven. One blogger even inspired me to make my little email into a post, which she has linked. (She also has her own, as does her friend Maureen.)

Seven Tips For Building Blog Traffic

1) Blog daily, and at a consistent time. That gets folks into the habit of looking at your site every day.

2) Become an expert. Make yourself a "go-to-guy" on certain issues. I did on the Abdul Rahman case earlier this year, and have written a lot on William Jefferson. School censorship cases are also a topic that I often write on.

3) Find out what is hot and blog on it. I try to blog on at least one article from RealClearPolitics' Buzztracker section each day. I also like the Washington Post as a source for articles, because they have a link to Technorati with their articles.

4) Be interesting; be yourself. Duh!

5) Don't be afraid or ashamed to be provocative.

6) Trackback to other bloggers writing on the same article. Trackback to bloggers you admire. Trackback to open trackback posts/linkfests.

7) Join blogging alliances/groups that you find compatible.

I've discovered that they can all use a little elaboration, so here are my notes on my seven tips.

1) I tend to post at two times during the day. The first is in the early morning, before I go to school.start my day. The second is within an hour or two of my returning home. My traffic spikes when folks get to work (be honest -- how many of you check blogs while at work) and when they come home -- or at least after dinner.

2) Go with what you know, or what interests you. I didn't choose the Rahman story, it sort of chose me. I wrote because it mattered to me, and people responded -- including one newspaper in India, where a columnist spent half his space on blogs about the Rahman story writing about my blog and my take on the story.

3) Is it being a bit of a traffic whore? Maybe -- but then again, I don't blog on a story unless it appeals to me. If the same wire service story appears on 100 different newspaper websites, why shouldn't I link to washingtonpost.com instead of the Podunk Farm News? And those Buzztracker stories are the major ones that I would be inclined to write about anyway -- it is just a question of where my link goes to, the New York Times or the Pine Gulch Gazette? Use what you can to attract those hits -- your content is what will ultimately keep them.

4) Keep it real -- let yourself, your insignts, and your beliefs come through. And even be willing to admit your mistakes. By the way, remember that these folks you debate with can become your online friends, even if you disagree with them.

5) Go out on a limb. State a far out opinion. Make an outlandish statement or two. Such things make people think, or shout, or laugh -- and can make them come back.

6) But always make sure that you reference them somehow -- whether via a quote, a hat tip, or an acknowledgement that they are writing too. It is the polite thing to do, and may get them new readers from your site at the same time you get new readers from theirs.

7) Hey -- you need friends and allies out there in the cold, hard blogospheric world. Find a blogroll or three to join that shares your interests or outlook.

Well, I hope that helps.

Also -- for more on this topic, visit these two posts at Pro Blogger -- he has just written on the topic and has beau-coup links to different folks writing about building blogs.

Happy Blogging!

It seems that a Canadian university is conducting a Star Chamber proceeding against one of its professors -- because of what he has posted on his personal website hosted on a non-university server. Why? Because a homosexual activist does not like it.

A Cape Breton University (CBU) professor is the target of a human rights complaint by a homosexual student. Comments posted by the professor at his private web site critical of the Anglican Church of Canada for its permissive and condoning stand in relation to same-sex "marriage" are the cause of the complaint.

History Professor David Mullan wrote to his local Anglican bishop in 2004, criticizing the trend: "When Anglicanism in some manner recognizes homosexuality as a legitimate 'lifestyle' for Christians, it will become a church in schism," he charged.

On February 20, homosexual CBU student Shane Wallis, who also co-ordinates the campus' Sexual Diversity Office, lodged a formal human rights complaint with the University. In an e-mail response to Wallis' charge of a human rights offence, Wallis stated in his complaint that Mullan responded that "homosexuality is a repudiation of nature and the apotheosis of unbridled desire."

Please note that in this instance, "sexual diversity" means "anything except monogamous heterosexuality" -- and that while Shane Wallis may believe in "sexual diversity", he does not believe in intellectual diversity. After all, his complaint is based upon the expression of views and beliefs that contradict his own.

What is more, the university has adopted a procedure that repudiates basic human and civil rights.

From Professor Mullan's web site it can be seen that, because the University has acknowledged that the proceedings of a CBU human rights tribunal may be used against him in a court of law, he has declined to participate in complaint hearings. He has, however, challenged both Wallis and the University to acknowledge his free speech rights as a Canadian.

"I have a Human Rights complaint against me, as a result of two letters to my former Anglican bishop placed on my private website and a reply I sent Shane Wallis in response to an unsolicited email," Professor Mullan explains on his web site.

"I met yesterday morning (in April) with the Human Rights Officer. At that time I asked her whether anything I said in the process might be used against me in court. Today, after legal consultation, she replied that yes, it could be. I immediately told her that I would not participate in the process. I told her also in our meeting that I find that the requirement that I give evidence, effectively incriminating myself (rather like the Tudor Court of Star Chamber and the ex officio oath) when asked for it is in my judgement a violation of the common law, and of my rights as a free-born Englishman. The procedure is a farce, and if pushed I will sue the institution for violating my civil rights."

"The process can never be fair until these conditions are altered, and until the complainant stands under potential judgement for entering a frivolous complaint," he adds. "No one in his right mind would participate in this without incurring the fees of a solicitor, and when found innocent, someone needs to re-imburse the defendant."

What is more, Wallis filed a second complaint because Mullan had the integrity to go public with this attempt to suppress his fundamental human rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion. It would appear that the recently discovered right to not be offended, right to not be challenged in one's beliefs, and right to screw anything you want are being used to trump those rights. The complaint about breaking confidentiality is apparantly based upon the newly discovered "right to do secretly what no one would stand for publicly" -- for the proceeding has no right to remain silent, and any and all involuntarily coerced statements made in the proceedings may be used against the speaker in a court of law. Again, basic human rights are not a consideration at Cape Breton University.

When i was young, Canada was a free country -- or so it appeared when I visited there. When did that change?

Oh, and by the way, I wrote Shane Wallis the following email. I hope he is man enough to respond.

Shane--

How is it that you have come to the conclusion that your own personal weaknesses and inadequacies are a legitimate basis for suppressing the human rights of individuals to hold religious beliefs and to express them publicly?

Did your university teach you the fascist view that only government-approved thoughts, beliefs, and opinions may be expressed in public, or was did you learn that elsewhere?

Why do you fear views which differ from your own? Is it a fear of diversity, or a recognition of the weakness and inadequacies of your own beliefs?

By the way, my questions have nothing to do with your sexual practices or personal relationships -- they have to do with fundamental questions of human rights enshrined in the founding charters of free societies. I hope you'll take a moment and respond.

Regards
Greg
AKA Rhymes With Right
www.rhymeswithright.mu.nu

To Dr. Mullan, I offer my prayers and best wishes as he fights the good fight for freedom in Canada. And I remind him that America is still free -- though the sodomy lobby is would certainly like to make it less so.

Howard Dean has intimated that Christians and Jews who believe actually believe what Scripture says about homosexuality are bigots.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean claims to be reaching out to red-state voters, but yesterday, he suggested that opponents of homosexual "marriage" are bigots.

Mr. Dean was responding to news that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican, plans to bring to a vote a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban homosexual "marriage."

"At a time when the Republican Party is in trouble with their conservative base, Bill Frist is taking a page straight out of the Karl Rove playbook to distract from the Republican Party's failed leadership and misplaced priorities by scapegoating LGBT families for political gain, using marriage as a wedge issue," said Mr. Dean, using the abbreviation for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender.

"It is not only morally wrong, it is shameful and reprehensible," Mr. Dean said.

Excuse me, sir, but who is the bigot here -- those who sincerely hold to moral and religious beliefs that date back thousands of years, or those seek to cow those believers into silence? Who is the hatemonger -- a majority that believes that marriage is and should be limited to one man and one woman and seeks to enact those beliefs democratically, or members of the minority who seek to impose alternate beliefs through the courts?

The answer should be obvious.

Even as the Terrorstinians demand money from the United States to fund their Hamas government, their media insults our nation and our most important symbols.

This American has a response -- a firm rejection of the Terrorstinian assault upon my nation's symbol and the insult to our people. I've worked up a little response for you, camel-boy -- and it does not involve censoring you, rioting, or threatening your life.

Let the fatwas fly, my friend, for I fear you not -- nor do I respect you and your malignant beliefs.

We will not give into terrorist demands for submission. We will not give into jihadi demands for dhimmitude. America will pursue them until the last jihadi terrorist lies dead in a pool of his own blood and awakes in the bowels of Hell.

(H/T Tel-Chai Nation)

OPEN TRACKBACKS: Third World County, Conservative Cat, Bacon Bits, Blue Star Chronicles, Adam's Blog, Sed Vitae, Cigar intelligence Agency

More on the raid on William Jefferson's Congressional office.

First, it appears that Jefferson was not merely refusing to cooperate, but was actively covering up evidence of criminal conduct.

The Justice Department yesterday vigorously defended the recent weekend raid of Rep. William J. Jefferson's Capitol Hill office as part of a bribery investigation, asserting that the Democratic lawmaker attempted to hide documents from FBI agents while they were searching his New Orleans home last August.

The government questioned in a 34-page motion filed in U.S. District Court here whether it could have obtained all the materials it had sought in a subpoena if it had not launched the surprise raid on Jefferson's congressional office May 20. According to the government filing, an FBI agent caught Jefferson slipping documents into a blue bag in the living room of his New Orleans home during a search.

"It is my belief that when Congressman Jefferson placed documents into the blue bag, he was attempting to conceal documents that were relevant to the investigation," FBI agent Stacey E. Kent of New Orleans stated in an affidavit that was part of the government's court submission. The document was filed in response to Jefferson's lawsuit demanding that the government return to him documents seized during the raid on his Capitol Hill office 11 days ago.

* * *

Last Aug. 3, FBI agents searched Jefferson's New Orleans home while the congressman and family members were present. Kent said she was assigned to watch Jefferson and his family during the search, according to her affidavit accompanying the government motion yesterday.

She said she observed him looking at several pieces of paper on a table. At one point, she said, he asked to see a copy of the subpoena.

"After a copy had been brought to him and he reviewed it, I observed Congressman Jefferson then take the subpoena and the documents he had been reading earlier and place them together under his elbow on the kitchen table."

At one point, she said, he moved to the living room, which had just been searched, and sat on a recliner. While sitting, he slipped the subpoena and the documents into a blue bag that he knew had already been searched, Kent's affidavit said.

"After several minutes, I approached Congressman Jefferson and told him that I needed to look at the documents that he had placed into the bag," the agent stated. "Congressman Jefferson told me the documents were subpoenas."

He finally pulled out the documents that were from a B.K. Son. The search warrant had asked for all communications between Jefferson and Son, the affidavit said. Son is the chief technology officer of iGate.

is it any wonder that Jefferson was not notified, and that those who might help with his obstruction of the investigation were not allowed in the office during the search?

And another group has weighed in on the legality of the search. And once again, the smart money is with the Justice Department in holding that the Speech and Debate Clause is not an absolute shield for criminal congresscritters.

A legal watchdog group insists that the FBI's recent raid of Louisiana Democratic Congressman William Jefferson's office was perfectly legal, despite the subsequent complaints about the raid by both Republican and Democratic leaders of the House.

"Nowhere in the Constitution is there immunity from investigation for members of Congress. It just isn't there," said Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center. "There is nothing there that says that they can't be subject to the same type of investigatory processes as every other American. They're American citizens."

* * *

... Boehm accused Hastert and Pelosi of "making an argument that they know does not exist."

"They can't point to a single court case. They can't point to any section or clause of the Constitution. And so when I say they're making the argument in bad faith, it's in bad faith because it's not there," Boehm told Cybercast News Service.

* * *

... Boehm argued that members of Congress deserve to be treated in the same manner as anyone else who might have broken the law.

"I think the American public is entitled to know that members of Congress who break the law are going to be investigated and then prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law," he said. "And when Republican and Democratic leaders try to stop that they're sending a message and the message is: we're above the law. And that's the wrong message."

Well said!

You may remember my story of evacuating during Hurricane Rita last fall. It looks like the state has made arrangements to deal with a major issue during that stressful time -- the lack of fuel along the highway.

Some gas stations will let motorists pump for free if their fuel tanks run low during a hurricane evacuation, state officials said Tuesday.

The free fueling plan comes after thousands of cars were left abandoned on the side of highways during Hurricane Rita last year, when more than 3 million people evacuated the Houston area and jammed roads for hours.

Most stations along evacuation routes ran out of gas, making fuel availability a priority in the state's revamped evacuation plan.

Motorists won't be allowed to fill their tanks completely and only vehicles with little fuel remaining will be given access to the free pumps, said Jenniffier Hawes, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Public Safety.

Drivers looking to top off will be sent to pay at other stations, she said.

"It's going to be expeditious," Hawes said. "We don't want a lack of financial resources to leave someone stranded."

The free gas will be available at stations located at 50-mile intervals on evacuation routes, she said. Valero, Shell, Exxon Mobil and Marathon are the stations providing the free fuel.

Now, will they have provisions to get the needed fuel to the stations along the route?

And will they contra-flow the traffic early enough to get everyone out of Houston if the big one heads our way again?

I'm the last one to think that a kicking a teacher is appropriate behavior -- but this strikes me as a bit of an over-reaction.

A 6-year-old special education student who kicked a Naples teacher's aide and spent several hous in juvenile jail is facing felony battery charges.

Her mother, however, wants to know why the case has gone so far.

Takovia Allen suffers from behavioral problems and attends a special class at Lely Elementary in Naples.

According to an arrest report, on May 2, a teacher was trying to line up students to go to music class. Takovia refused to go and kicked the teacher's aide in the ankle.

After a discussion among school officials and two law enforcement officials called to the school, the girl was arrested.

Takovia was taken to juvenile jail and held there for several hours before being released to her mother.

She is being charged with battery on a public education employee.

It's possible she will enter a program that includes counseling. If she completes the program successfully the charges could be dropped.

Is a six-year-old really able to formulate the level of intent necessary to commit a FELONY?????

I know the goal is to get the kid counseling (which may or may not really be necessary), but i think the method used here is heavey-handed.

I guess the loons had it all wrong!

Conspiracy theorists, beware: That aluminum foil beanie—headwear believed, since at least the 1950s, to stop brain-control rays—may make it easier for The Man to read your mind, according to Massachusetts Institute of Technology grad students. Inspired by fringe beliefs that invasive radio signals can probe citizens’ thoughts and that wearing foil on your head may fend them off, an experiment by four Ph.D. candidates found that certain key frequencies—owned by the Feds, naturally—are actually enhanced by such “protection.”

(H/T Dr. Sanity)

And now time for our Wednesday linkfest and open trackback carnival!

You know the rules -- link back to this post with your best/favorite current posts. I won't limit your number of posts, but instead ask you to exercise prudent judgement about how many you send.

Some folks have told me they have problems trackbacking to this site. If this is the case, please use the Wizbang Standalone Trackback Pinger to establish the link.

And, of course, don't forget the big three rules.

No Spam. No Porn. No Problem.

OTHER OPEN TRACKBACKS: Third World County, Conservative Cat, Bacon Bits, Blue Star Chronicles, Adam's Blog, Sed Vitae, Cigar intelligence Agency

Does this finally settle matter for the Euro-trash who have maligned one of the greatest athletes of our era?

Dutch investigators cleared Lance Armstrong of doping in the 1999 Tour de France on Wednesday, and blamed anti-doping authorities for misconduct in dealing with the American cyclist.

A 132-page report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss possible legal and ethical violations by the World Anti-Doping Agency and to consider ''appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations.''

The French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that six of Armstrong's urine samples from 1999, when he won the first of his record seven-straight Tour titles, came back positive for the endurance-boosting hormone EPO when they were retested in 2004.

Armstrong has repeatedly denied using banned substances.

The International Cycling Union appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman last October to investigate the handling of urine tests from the 1999 Tour by the French national anti-doping laboratory, known by its French acronym LNDD.

Vrijman said Wednesday his report ''exonerates Lance Armstrong completely with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France.''

Now we know that Armstrong accomplished his feats without artificial enhancement.

We also know that a bunch of flaccid Frenchies have again shown their national character -- No Courage, No Class.

And we confirm this simple truth -- we grow 'em bigger and better in Texas.

Well here we are, a weak-and-a-half after the search of Rep. William Jefferson's Capitol Hill office -- and the Houston Chronicle has finally deigned to weigh in on the issue. Most major media outlets have long since spoken on the matter, as have most of us political bloggers -- but the Chronicle acted with all deliberate speed and waited to say a word until now.

But to their credit, they do get it right.

The law, in its majestic equality,"Anatole France wrote, "forbids the rich and the poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets and to steal bread." Under the same principle, however, when an influential member of Congress is suspected of taking bribes, the law grants no immunity from court-approved investigation and, if warranted, prosecution.

The Constitution does grant members of Congress protection from arbitrary arrest while they are at or on their way to and from the Capitol. In the same passage, however, it withdraws such protection in cases of treason or other felonies.

The FBI's recent raid on the congressional office of U.S. Rep. William Jefferson was the first of its kind, but the blame for its necessity rests solely with Jefferson. The congressman from New Orleans refused to comply with a lawful subpoena for certain of his papers, saying he should not be forced to incriminate himself. Agreed, but he has no grounds to object if law enforcement officers, equipped with a court-approved warrant, do the job for him.

Haven't I been saying the same thing since the search?

I wonder what took them so long -- other than figuring out how to gratuitously slam Bush on an unrelated issue in the editorial even as they praise the work of his administration.

Ever wonder how many bricks were delivered to Congress (the Senate in particular) during the recent debate over immigration? Or about what happened to them once they arrived?

Well, here are your answers.

If the impact was notable, so were the logistical difficulties, particularly given the mail screening and other protective measures put into effect at the Capitol after the anthrax attacks of 2001.

Initially, organizers of the Send-a-Brick Project encouraged people to send bricks on their own, and Ms. Heffron said things had gone relatively smoothly.

But many people, she said, preferred that the organization itself send the bricks and an accompanying letter to selected lawmakers.

The project will do it for an $11.95 fee. So when 2,000 individually boxed bricks showed up at once, Senate officials balked, threatening to force the group to pay postage to have each delivered to its intended recipient. The dispute left the bricks stacked up until an agreement to distribute them was worked out.

"We received them and we delivered them to all the addressees," said a spokeswoman for the office of the Senate sergeant-at-arms.

As the bricks landed in Congressional mailrooms and cramped offices, the effort was applauded in some offices but drew a bemused response elsewhere.

"Given the approval ratings of Congress these days, I guess we should all be grateful the bricks are coming through the mail, not the window," said Dan Pfeiffer, a spokesman for Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana.

The senders of the bricks were encouraged to add a letter telling lawmakers that the brick represented a start on building a border wall.

Many could not resist putting their own message on the bricks. "No Amnesty," said a typical one, referring to a contested Senate plan to allow some illegal immigrants to qualify eventually for citizenship. "Stop the Invasion, Build a Wall," said another brick painted like a flag and shown on the group's Web site at www.send-a-brick.com.

Besides the border fence, the group supports technology improvements for border security, added money and personnel for the Border Patrol and an enhanced security presence in general on the southern border.

The brick effort was scheduled to wind down this week, though the organization encouraged people to continue if they desired.

On Tuesday, representatives of the architect of the Capitol collected bricks from lawmakers' offices and stacked them on loading docks with plans to donate them to a nonprofit group.

This is actually a pretty fun article -- though it shows just how out of contact some of our legislators really are.

And about time!

Roger Clemens and the Astros have officially reached an agreement, according to a person in the negotiations who told the Chronicle. A press conference will be announced shortly.

Clemens, whose 341 career victories are more than any person alive, went 18-4 with a 2.98 ERA in 2004 while winning the National League Cy Young Award, extending his record Cy Young collection to seven.

After helping the Astros to the National League Championship Series in 2004, he was 13-8 with a major-league best 1.87 ERA last season while helping the Astros reach the franchise’s first World Series. Although Clemens flirted with Boston and the Rangers, his former Astros teammates laughed and cautioned that he’d return to Houston.

Clemens’ signing should bolster the club.

“It will add a boost to the team,” ace Roy Oswalt said. “Any time you get a guy like that in the rotation, it would be great.

"We have to have a spark, and hopefully he will give it to us.”

Catcher Brad Ausmus was pleased.

“I think it’s a huge boost to our pitching staff,” Ausmus said. “Why? That’s a stupid question. He’s a horse. He’s probably the best pitcher in the history of the game. He’s the type of guy that for a full season you can count on for 200 innings.

Astros owner Drayton McLane negotiated deep into Tuesday night with Roger Clemens’ agents, and he headed to Houston early Wednesday morning.

“We worked on it last night, so that’s why I’m going to Houston right now,” McLane said as he boarded his private airplane in Temple. “We’ve worked to try to get this thing done.”

McLane has been optimistic for weeks, and he has made definite progress with Clemens’ agents, Randy and Alan Hendricks.

And while we are bringing back the old guys -- what shape is Nolan Ryan's arm in?

After all, the Astros are already 6.5 games behind the St. Louis Cardinals.

UPDATE: If you do the math, Clemens will get $14 million for four months in the majors.

Roger Clemens and the Astros have officially reached an agreement, according to a person in the negotiations who told the Chronicle. A press conference is set for 11 a.m. to announce the signing.

The deal is a pro-rated $22 million agreement, a major league record for a pitcher. Clemens will start at Class A Lexington, then go to Class AA Corpus Christi, followed by a trip to Class AAA Round Round before landing in Houston on June 22, Clemens' agent Randy Hendricks said today.

UPDATE 2: My earlier source on the prorated contract seems to have been wrong. These are the correct figures.

When he is added to the major league roster, he gets a one-year contract worth $22,000,022 -- his uniform number is 22. Because he won't be playing the full season, he gets only a prorated percentage of that, which would come to about $12.25 million if he rejoins Houston in late June. The tentative goal is to have him start against the Minnesota Twins on June 22 -- if he's put on the big league roster on that day, he would earn $12,632,307.

In oh-so-liberal San Francisco, the right to choose to have an abortion is sacred.

So is the right to choose to commit sodomy with a person of your same sex.

But taking a JROTC class in high school -- such a choice must NOT be allowed!

Or at least that is the direction things are headed.

Let's hope that the School Board listens to the wise opinion of the Argus.

THE San Francisco Board of Education is going too far in its latest plan to consider giving the boot to Junior ROTC at city high schools.

The board of education says it's taking the action in response to the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy, which requires gay service members to conceal their sexuality.

This is just the latest in a long history of actions that have given the city an anti-military reputation, and we think it's time for city officials to cool it on the rhetoric. It's getting old and the sons and daughters of California and San Francisco who serve their nation in times of need deserve better.

Sentiment against the Iraq war is high and it can be tempting to make headlines by taking out frustrations on the military. City officials need to keep in mind — both with regard to the ROTC program and to other issues — that the war is a policy issue; it's not the fault of the ROTC program, military recruiters or the brave men and women who serve.

But there's a more important issue than whether the board is being unfair to the military. It's the some 1,600 students enrolled in the program who could end up being hurt the most.

They now earn physical education credits and learn discipline through the JROTC and each of them is in the program because they want to be. When board members vote in June, they should keep those students in mind.

My guess, though, is that this opinion will be ignored.

After all, this is San Francisco we are talking about, where something as trivial as the good of students can never be allowed to trump a far-left political statement.

OPEN TRACKBACKS: Third World County, Conservative Cat, Bacon Bits, Blue Star Chronicles, Adam's Blog, Sed Vitae, Cigar intelligence Agency