Jason Whitlock weighs in:
Nancy Zimpher, president of the University of Cincinnati, will be hailed in some circles and assailed in others for the bold stance she took with her basketball program.
She basically fired Bob Huggins for recruiting too many poor, academically and socially underprepared black kids. She called off the whole, tired charade.
I offer her praise. I respect her honesty.
She's uninterested in playing statistical games about who did and who
didn't graduate. She's unimpressed with Huggins' charitable activities in and around Cincinnati. She apparently doesn't believe Huggins has a legitimate interest in helping the underclass.
With the Bearcats safely tucked in the money-generating Big East, Zimpher wants to fix the nasty perception that Cincinnati is a halfway house for lawless, difficult-to-educate black basketball players. Getting rid of Huggins is the first step in that process.
I spent the better part of two hours perusing the letters that flew between Huggins' attorney and UC's legal counsel this summer. Zimpher's message was concise and clear.
"Mr. Huggins continues to recruit individuals that exhibit a disregard for the law and respectful behavior," one of the university's letters read. "I fully understand that off-the-court trouble and the poor choices made by student-athletes are not restricted to UC's basketball team. Indeed, such discipline and control issues are a national problem. Yet problems appear to be more prevalent in Mr. Huggins' basketball program."
The letter went on to state that in a 16-year span, 21 of Huggins' players had run afoul of the law in a significant way, including three players/recruits who were scheduled to play at UC this season.
"In short," the letter continued, "although Mr. Huggins may claim some specific successes, the University is seeking an environment and climate where the development of the whole student is sought and the successful education of all our students is realized. And while some may argue that academically challenged individuals who experience difficulty conforming their behavior to appropriate norms deserve a chance at success that a winning college basketball team can provide, UC believes that it can better advance its mission by building a winning program around scholar athletes who earn degrees that will allow them to succeed not only in athletics but more importantly in life generally."
Now we can play games and pretend like we don't know what Zimpher and Cincinnati are saying. But we know what she's saying. We know the type of players Huggins used to resurrect the UC basketball program and garner personal fortune and fame. He raided junior colleges for poor black players, snagged an occasional transfer and patched them around other players from the other side of the tracks.
Those players served their purpose for Huggins. They elevated UC to a level where it would be worthy of joining a major conference, and now Zimpher and UC are ready to wash their hands of Huggins and his image-eroding junior-college players.
Yes, the saga continues. Another institution used poor blacks for its benefit, disrespected them in writing and then kicked them to the curb.
Some will blast Zimpher and UC for its callousness. I won't.
Again, I offer her praise. I respect her honesty.
What must be questioned is the sanity of the black community that continues to allow its youth to be used by institutions that don't respect them.
The University of Cincinnati basically just said that, for 16 years, Bob Huggins had little interest in educating the black athletes he recruited. That's not a secret nor is it much of a surprise. It's probably even unfair to blame Huggins.
The blame falls on the players, their families and the black culture that gleefully participates in and condones this exploitation because a handful of black kids sign NBA contracts.
Cincinnati, just like every other mainstream academic institution, has virtually no interest in properly educating the black underclass. It's not the mission of a mainstream institution. UC, Duke, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio State, USC, Notre Dame and all the rest are set up to educate upper- and middle-class kids.
"Academically challenged individuals who experience difficulty conforming their behavior to appropriate norms" are not wanted at Cincinnati or at Boston College, Nebraska, Texas Tech …
And you know what? It's not in the best interest of those academically challenged individuals to go to Cincinnati. When you go someplace where you're not wanted, you get treated like you're not wanted. You get used. You get used by the well-intentioned basketball coach, the well-intentioned school president, the well-intentioned student body and the well-intentioned professors.
Black athletes participating in Division I sports graduate at an alarmingly low rate because the people running the institutions don't view the athletes as capable of being truly educated, and the institutions are ill-equipped to educate the black underclass.
Again, I want to thank Nancy Zimpher for her honesty and integrity. Maybe one day poor black athletes and their parents will study their history and realize that countless black leaders and professional athletes were educated and groomed at historically black colleges. There's absolutely nothing second-rate about the education, and black students are seven times more likely to graduate at a historically black college than at a mainstream institution.
At first I thought Jason was nuts, then right on, then nuts. I can't make up my mind.
Thursday, August 25, 2005
A Slight Omission
In today's Journal of the American Medical Association, five researchers from the University of California, San Francisco, review nearly 2,000 studies on the hotly debated questions. They conclude that legislative proposals to allow fetal pain relief during abortion are not justified by scientific evidence.
But their seven-page article has a weakness: It does not mention that one author is an abortion clinic director, while the lead author - Susan J. Lee, a medical student - once worked for NARAL Pro-Choice America.
JAMA editor-in-chief Catherine D. DeAngelis said she was unaware of this, and acknowledged it might create an appearance of bias that could hurt the journal's credibility. "This is the first I've heard about it," she said. "We ask them to reveal any conflict of interest. I would have published" the disclosure if it had been made.
UCSF obstetrician-gynecologist Eleanor A. Drey, medical director of the abortion clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, said: "We thought it was critical to include an expert in abortion among the authors. I think my presence... should not serve to politicize a scholarly report."
But their seven-page article has a weakness: It does not mention that one author is an abortion clinic director, while the lead author - Susan J. Lee, a medical student - once worked for NARAL Pro-Choice America.
JAMA editor-in-chief Catherine D. DeAngelis said she was unaware of this, and acknowledged it might create an appearance of bias that could hurt the journal's credibility. "This is the first I've heard about it," she said. "We ask them to reveal any conflict of interest. I would have published" the disclosure if it had been made.
UCSF obstetrician-gynecologist Eleanor A. Drey, medical director of the abortion clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, said: "We thought it was critical to include an expert in abortion among the authors. I think my presence... should not serve to politicize a scholarly report."
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
High Gas Prices A Good Thing?
Larry Kudlow writes:
"I say three cheers for higher energy prices. Why? Because I believe in markets. When the price of something goes up, demand falls off (call it conservation) and supply increases (call it new production). We're seeing a tectonic shift."
While higher gas prices sting, I think I agree with Kudlow.
"I say three cheers for higher energy prices. Why? Because I believe in markets. When the price of something goes up, demand falls off (call it conservation) and supply increases (call it new production). We're seeing a tectonic shift."
While higher gas prices sting, I think I agree with Kudlow.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Helping "A Community of Individuals Democratically Find Practical Solutions to Important Contemporary Social Problems"
Who put this fool on the Court:
In a book slated for release next month, Justice Breyer -- among the more liberal members of the court -- gives a detailed insight into his philosophy of deciding cases, namely that the Constitution should be viewed in light of its overarching goal, which he sees as creating a participatory, democratic society. In the process, he offers a rejoinder to a longtime intellectual opponent, Justice Antonin Scalia, who advocates "originalism," or a more literal interpretation of the Constitution's meaning at the time of its writing....
The 161-page book, set for publication Sept. 13, aims to popularize ideas Justice Breyer has already advanced in academic lectures and articles. A judge's task, he says, is construing the Constitution in a way "that helps a community of individuals democratically find practical solutions to important contemporary social problems." He calls that freedom to participate in government "active liberty," a complement to passive liberties that protect the individual from interference by the government....
In a book slated for release next month, Justice Breyer -- among the more liberal members of the court -- gives a detailed insight into his philosophy of deciding cases, namely that the Constitution should be viewed in light of its overarching goal, which he sees as creating a participatory, democratic society. In the process, he offers a rejoinder to a longtime intellectual opponent, Justice Antonin Scalia, who advocates "originalism," or a more literal interpretation of the Constitution's meaning at the time of its writing....
The 161-page book, set for publication Sept. 13, aims to popularize ideas Justice Breyer has already advanced in academic lectures and articles. A judge's task, he says, is construing the Constitution in a way "that helps a community of individuals democratically find practical solutions to important contemporary social problems." He calls that freedom to participate in government "active liberty," a complement to passive liberties that protect the individual from interference by the government....
You Wouldn't Want To Report That
Ralph Peters notes:
What should have made headlines? It would've been nice to see more attention devoted to the complexity and importance of drafting a new constitution for Iraq. But my nomination for the "Greatest Story Never Told" is a quieter one: Locked in a difficult war, the U.S. Army is exceeding its re-enlistment and first-time enlistment goals. Has anybody mentioned that to you?
Remember last spring, when the Army's recruitment efforts fell short for a few months? The media's glee would have made you confuse the New York Times and Air America.
When the Army attempted to explain that enlistments are cyclical and numbers dip at certain times of the year, the media ignored it. All that mattered was the wonderful news that the Army couldn't find enough soldiers. We were warned, in oh-so-solemn tones, that our military was headed for a train wreck.
Now, as the fiscal year nears an end, the Army's numbers look great. Especially in combat units and Iraq, soldiers are re-enlisting at record levels. And you don't hear a whisper about it from the "mainstream media."
What should have made headlines? It would've been nice to see more attention devoted to the complexity and importance of drafting a new constitution for Iraq. But my nomination for the "Greatest Story Never Told" is a quieter one: Locked in a difficult war, the U.S. Army is exceeding its re-enlistment and first-time enlistment goals. Has anybody mentioned that to you?
Remember last spring, when the Army's recruitment efforts fell short for a few months? The media's glee would have made you confuse the New York Times and Air America.
When the Army attempted to explain that enlistments are cyclical and numbers dip at certain times of the year, the media ignored it. All that mattered was the wonderful news that the Army couldn't find enough soldiers. We were warned, in oh-so-solemn tones, that our military was headed for a train wreck.
Now, as the fiscal year nears an end, the Army's numbers look great. Especially in combat units and Iraq, soldiers are re-enlisting at record levels. And you don't hear a whisper about it from the "mainstream media."
You Can't Teach An Old Dog New Tricks
Former NFL running back Lawrence Phillips, who was wanted by police for domestic violence, was arrested Sunday after allegedly running his car into three teenagers who argued with him during a pickup football game, police said.
Phillips, 30, was booked on suspicion of attempted murder and domestic abuse and held without bail, according to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Web site. It wasn't immediately clear if Phillips had an attorney to represent him.
Police had been seeking Phillips since earlier this month for allegedly attacking his girlfriend twice, once choking her into unconsciousness.
Phillips, 30, was booked on suspicion of attempted murder and domestic abuse and held without bail, according to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Web site. It wasn't immediately clear if Phillips had an attorney to represent him.
Police had been seeking Phillips since earlier this month for allegedly attacking his girlfriend twice, once choking her into unconsciousness.
How Much Do Kids Cost?
From columnist Scott Burns:
Let's say that the cost of living for a young married couple without children gets an index number of 100. From there, the revised equivalence scale has an index to represent the cost of living for each size and age of family composition.
A young single person, for instance, would get an index of 71. The arrival of a first child takes the index to 127. The arrival of a second child moves the index to 147.
The index continues to climb as the children age. It reaches 204 when the older child is 6 to 15 years old and peaks at 231 when the older child is 16 to 17. (The index is apparently unaware that some children go to college.) . . . From there the index starts to descend, going down to 186 when only one child is at home (assuming the other isn't at Stanford or Harvard). It reaches a mere 120 when the couple makes ''empty nester" status. It hits 104 when the couple is retired, and bottoms at 57 when a spouse dies.
What does this mean in cold hard dollars? Nothing good - unless you're planning on staying childless:
Between the day we marry (index 100) and the day the index peaks at 231 - a period of about 17 to 19 years - real family income needs to grow at 4.5 percent to 5 percent a year to maintain our standard of living . . . [If] inflation is 2.5 to 3.5 percent, the simple project of marrying and having a family requires income growth of 7 percent to 8.5 percent a year . . . for nearly two decades.
Unfortunately, that rarely happens:
. . . Typical workers can expect a raise of 3.7 percent this year, following an average raise of 3.6 percent in 2004. At best, that's 1 percentage point over the rate of inflation, not the 4.5 to 5 percent a young family will need to avoid a declining standard of living.
That's an average American wage increase, mind you. Since wages have been going up much faster for highly-skilled workers than for the working poor over the last few decades, I think it's safe to say that having children is particularly expensive if you aren't, say, one of Richard Florida's beloved "creatives." And working class parents are also more likely to have large families - so they're really paying through the nose.Burns puts it best:
Many young couples, armed with visceral knowledge of this reality, decide to have fewer children. Some - an increasing number - decide to have none.
What about the others? Are they dumb? No. They are heroes, real everyday heroes.
Let's say that the cost of living for a young married couple without children gets an index number of 100. From there, the revised equivalence scale has an index to represent the cost of living for each size and age of family composition.
A young single person, for instance, would get an index of 71. The arrival of a first child takes the index to 127. The arrival of a second child moves the index to 147.
The index continues to climb as the children age. It reaches 204 when the older child is 6 to 15 years old and peaks at 231 when the older child is 16 to 17. (The index is apparently unaware that some children go to college.) . . . From there the index starts to descend, going down to 186 when only one child is at home (assuming the other isn't at Stanford or Harvard). It reaches a mere 120 when the couple makes ''empty nester" status. It hits 104 when the couple is retired, and bottoms at 57 when a spouse dies.
What does this mean in cold hard dollars? Nothing good - unless you're planning on staying childless:
Between the day we marry (index 100) and the day the index peaks at 231 - a period of about 17 to 19 years - real family income needs to grow at 4.5 percent to 5 percent a year to maintain our standard of living . . . [If] inflation is 2.5 to 3.5 percent, the simple project of marrying and having a family requires income growth of 7 percent to 8.5 percent a year . . . for nearly two decades.
Unfortunately, that rarely happens:
. . . Typical workers can expect a raise of 3.7 percent this year, following an average raise of 3.6 percent in 2004. At best, that's 1 percentage point over the rate of inflation, not the 4.5 to 5 percent a young family will need to avoid a declining standard of living.
That's an average American wage increase, mind you. Since wages have been going up much faster for highly-skilled workers than for the working poor over the last few decades, I think it's safe to say that having children is particularly expensive if you aren't, say, one of Richard Florida's beloved "creatives." And working class parents are also more likely to have large families - so they're really paying through the nose.Burns puts it best:
Many young couples, armed with visceral knowledge of this reality, decide to have fewer children. Some - an increasing number - decide to have none.
What about the others? Are they dumb? No. They are heroes, real everyday heroes.
Can't We Just Build A Really, Really Big Wall
There are only 2,000 Border Patrol agents out along the vast Mexican border at any time, and they are not only undermanned but often outgunned. Attacks on them are at record highs--around 200 in the Tucson Sector so far this year, according to Border Patrol. They are increasingly shot at like tin clowns being plinked by high-school hooligans with carnival-booth air rifles--except that it's hot lead flying from smugglers who move aliens and drugs and, in an increasingly common twofer, aliens hauling drugs as their fee for passage.
Not helpful is a negligent President Bush, forever singing the song of homeland vigilance, but providing only 210 additional Border Patrol agents when Congress called for 2,000. All manner of "OTMs" (Other Than Mexicans) are caught crossing the border--119,000 so far this year. Many are released on our home turf with a "notice to appear" for their deportation hearing. (Since last October, 70,624 have been released, including 50 from "special interest" nations, according to Border Patrol.) Many of these OTMs--98 percent in one Texas district--can't be bothered to show up for their hearing, since by the time the special day rolls around they are putting up your siding or driving your cab . . .
Not helpful is a negligent President Bush, forever singing the song of homeland vigilance, but providing only 210 additional Border Patrol agents when Congress called for 2,000. All manner of "OTMs" (Other Than Mexicans) are caught crossing the border--119,000 so far this year. Many are released on our home turf with a "notice to appear" for their deportation hearing. (Since last October, 70,624 have been released, including 50 from "special interest" nations, according to Border Patrol.) Many of these OTMs--98 percent in one Texas district--can't be bothered to show up for their hearing, since by the time the special day rolls around they are putting up your siding or driving your cab . . .
Monday, August 22, 2005
The Space Elevator Idea Lives
It now costs about US $20 000 per kilogram to put objects into orbit. Contrast that rate with the results of a study I recently performed for NASA, which concluded that a single space elevator could reduce the cost of orbiting payloads to a remarkably low $200 a kilogram and that multiple elevators could ultimately push costs down below $10 a kilogram. With space elevators we could eventually make putting people and cargo into space as cheap, kilogram for kilogram, as airlifting them across the Pacific.
The implications of such a dramatic reduction in the cost of getting to Earth orbit are startling. It's a good bet that new industries would blossom as the resources of the solar system became accessible as never before. Take solar power: the idea of building giant collectors in orbit to soak up some of the sun's vast power and beam it back to Earth via microwaves has been around for decades. But the huge size of the collectors has made the idea economically unfeasible with launch technologies based on chemical rockets. With a space elevator's much cheaper launch costs, however, the economics of space-based solar power start looking good. . . . I have found that the schedule for more elevators, after the first, could be compressed to as little as six months. The first country or consortium to finish an elevator would therefore gain an almost unbeatable head start over any competitors.
The implications of such a dramatic reduction in the cost of getting to Earth orbit are startling. It's a good bet that new industries would blossom as the resources of the solar system became accessible as never before. Take solar power: the idea of building giant collectors in orbit to soak up some of the sun's vast power and beam it back to Earth via microwaves has been around for decades. But the huge size of the collectors has made the idea economically unfeasible with launch technologies based on chemical rockets. With a space elevator's much cheaper launch costs, however, the economics of space-based solar power start looking good. . . . I have found that the schedule for more elevators, after the first, could be compressed to as little as six months. The first country or consortium to finish an elevator would therefore gain an almost unbeatable head start over any competitors.
Saturday, August 20, 2005
...And Another Thing
What sort of message are we sending to our youth when those 199 think they can go to college?
Congrats to NKU
They finally have minimum standards for admission:
Something will be missing when classes start Monday at Northern Kentucky University - 199 potential students.
For the first time in the school's 37-year history, admission standards have replaced an open enrollment policy that welcomed anyone with a high school diploma.
Admission has been denied to 199 applicants who failed to meet NKU's new minimum standards for high school grades and college entrance exam scores.
No offense, but how dumb are the 199 rejected applicants...and how many are from Newport.
Something will be missing when classes start Monday at Northern Kentucky University - 199 potential students.
For the first time in the school's 37-year history, admission standards have replaced an open enrollment policy that welcomed anyone with a high school diploma.
Admission has been denied to 199 applicants who failed to meet NKU's new minimum standards for high school grades and college entrance exam scores.
No offense, but how dumb are the 199 rejected applicants...and how many are from Newport.
The Age of the Information Monopoly Is Over
The nation's second-largest real estate brokerage is expected to announce today a plan to pool all U.S. residential property listings on its website, a move that would create a formidable national competitor to industry-backed Realtor.com.
The move by Re/Max International Inc. also could eventually help reduce consumers' costs of buying and selling homes, as competition with other Web-based brokerages heats up.
Online real estate companies and consumer advocates have long complained about the real estate industry's efforts to limit access to property listings on the Internet. They see it as an attempt to thwart competition from Web-based upstarts, which typically charge lower commissions or charge referral fees.
The move by Re/Max International Inc. also could eventually help reduce consumers' costs of buying and selling homes, as competition with other Web-based brokerages heats up.
Online real estate companies and consumer advocates have long complained about the real estate industry's efforts to limit access to property listings on the Internet. They see it as an attempt to thwart competition from Web-based upstarts, which typically charge lower commissions or charge referral fees.
"I Respectfully Decline to Participate"
I'm not a huge fan of Bob Costas, but that may change:
Friday, Aug 19
I "Respectfully Declined To Participate" With Last Night's LKL, Bob Costas ExplainsAs TVNewser reported exclusively this morning, Bob Costas refused to host Larry King Live last night, because he didn't want to talk about Natalee Holloway and Dennis Rader for an hour. CNN has sent TVNewser statements from Costas and LKL's EP:
"I didn't think the subject matter of Thursday's show was the kind of broadcast that I should be doing. I suggested some alternatives but the producers preferred the topics they had chosen. I was fine with that, and respectfully declined to participate. There were no hard feelings at all. It's not a big deal. I'm sure there are countless topics that will be mutually acceptable in the future." -- Bob Costas
Friday, Aug 19
I "Respectfully Declined To Participate" With Last Night's LKL, Bob Costas ExplainsAs TVNewser reported exclusively this morning, Bob Costas refused to host Larry King Live last night, because he didn't want to talk about Natalee Holloway and Dennis Rader for an hour. CNN has sent TVNewser statements from Costas and LKL's EP:
"I didn't think the subject matter of Thursday's show was the kind of broadcast that I should be doing. I suggested some alternatives but the producers preferred the topics they had chosen. I was fine with that, and respectfully declined to participate. There were no hard feelings at all. It's not a big deal. I'm sure there are countless topics that will be mutually acceptable in the future." -- Bob Costas
Most Overrated NFL Linebacker
According to former NFL great Chris Carter:
Most overrated: Brian SimmonsThe Cincinnati Bengals' eight-year veteran sometimes disappears in games. He shouldn't, though. He has the ability to be a great player. The Bengals' defense needs to improve if Cincinnati is to finally finish above .500 after back-to-back 8-8 seasons.
I tend to agree. Good player, but not great. Considerably overpaid.
Most overrated: Brian SimmonsThe Cincinnati Bengals' eight-year veteran sometimes disappears in games. He shouldn't, though. He has the ability to be a great player. The Bengals' defense needs to improve if Cincinnati is to finally finish above .500 after back-to-back 8-8 seasons.
I tend to agree. Good player, but not great. Considerably overpaid.
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Not Bad Work If You Can Get It
Sometimes failure (i.e. getting worse as an aging NBA player) pays off:
DALLAS -- Michael Finley was waived late Monday night by the Dallas Mavericks, who took advantage of a one-time amnesty provision that will allow them to avoid luxury taxes on the $51.8 million owed their captain over the next three seasons.
The Mavs spent all day Monday exploring trade options, and waited until just before the late-night deadline to release Finley and take advantage of the provision in the NBA's new labor agreement.
Finley becomes an unrestricted free agent and is still guaranteed the money from his Mavericks contract, plus whatever he gets from a new team.
...The Mavs avoid a dollar-for-dollar tax on Finley's $15.9 million salary for the 2005-06 season. The two-time All-Star is due $17.3 million and $18.6 million over the final two seasons of the seven-year contract he signed in 2001.
That's $51.8 million NOT to play.
DALLAS -- Michael Finley was waived late Monday night by the Dallas Mavericks, who took advantage of a one-time amnesty provision that will allow them to avoid luxury taxes on the $51.8 million owed their captain over the next three seasons.
The Mavs spent all day Monday exploring trade options, and waited until just before the late-night deadline to release Finley and take advantage of the provision in the NBA's new labor agreement.
Finley becomes an unrestricted free agent and is still guaranteed the money from his Mavericks contract, plus whatever he gets from a new team.
...The Mavs avoid a dollar-for-dollar tax on Finley's $15.9 million salary for the 2005-06 season. The two-time All-Star is due $17.3 million and $18.6 million over the final two seasons of the seven-year contract he signed in 2001.
That's $51.8 million NOT to play.
This is Embarrassing
WASHINGTON – Like pardons and executive orders, vetoes are among the cherished privileges of the Oval Office. Ike liked them. So did presidents Truman and Cleveland - and both Roosevelts.
But apparently not George W. Bush. In fact, well into the fifth year of his presidency, he has yet to issue a single veto.
But apparently not George W. Bush. In fact, well into the fifth year of his presidency, he has yet to issue a single veto.
Bad News for TV and Print Media
Julie Roehm has more than $2 billion to spend this year, and the way she's been spending it worries executives at News Corp., the Washington Post Co., and virtually every other media company on the planet. As Chrysler's director of marketing communications, Roehm, 34, oversees a budget that Advertising Age ranks as the sixth-largest pool of ad dollars in the nation...
Roehm rarely misses a chance to talk about how delighted she is with online advertising. Last year she spent 10% of the budget online; this year she is allotting closer to 18%; next year, she says, she will allocate more than 20%. Do the math: In 2006 roughly $400 million of Chrysler's money that used to go into TV, newspaper, and magazine ads will be spent on the Internet. Says Roehm: "I hate to sound like such a marketing geek, but we like to fish where the fish are."
Roehm rarely misses a chance to talk about how delighted she is with online advertising. Last year she spent 10% of the budget online; this year she is allotting closer to 18%; next year, she says, she will allocate more than 20%. Do the math: In 2006 roughly $400 million of Chrysler's money that used to go into TV, newspaper, and magazine ads will be spent on the Internet. Says Roehm: "I hate to sound like such a marketing geek, but we like to fish where the fish are."
Monday, August 15, 2005
Maybe Money Does Buy Happiness After All
MONEY can buy you happiness - but only if you are richer than your neighbours, according to the results of research released yesterday.
Sociologists found that it was not strictly true to say that being well-off will not make a person happy.
But it depends on whether a person is able to "keep up with the Joneses".
Researchers in the United States examined the "hedonic treadmill hypothesis" that suggests people are in a continual wealth race with their neighbours.
Measurements were taken of the age, the total family income and the general happiness of a group of people aged 20 to 64.
The results showed that the richer people were relative to their peers of the same age, the happier they tended to be.
Glen Firebaugh, from Pennsylvania State University, who led the study, said: "We find, with and without controls, that the higher the income of others in one's age group, the lower one's happiness.
"Families whose income earners are in jobs with flat income trajectories are likely to become less happy over time.
"Thus the relative income effect observed here implies adverse effects for some individuals over the working years of their life cycles."
Relative income was much more important than absolute income when determining the happiness of individual Americans.
Because of the relative effect, continued income growth within rich countries such as the US is irrelevant to overall happiness, according to Mr Firebaugh.
"Rather than promoting overall happiness, continued income growth could promote an ongoing consumption race where individuals consume more and more just to maintain a constant level of happiness," he added.
While income was important, the best predictor of happiness was good physical health, the researchers found.
Sociologists found that it was not strictly true to say that being well-off will not make a person happy.
But it depends on whether a person is able to "keep up with the Joneses".
Researchers in the United States examined the "hedonic treadmill hypothesis" that suggests people are in a continual wealth race with their neighbours.
Measurements were taken of the age, the total family income and the general happiness of a group of people aged 20 to 64.
The results showed that the richer people were relative to their peers of the same age, the happier they tended to be.
Glen Firebaugh, from Pennsylvania State University, who led the study, said: "We find, with and without controls, that the higher the income of others in one's age group, the lower one's happiness.
"Families whose income earners are in jobs with flat income trajectories are likely to become less happy over time.
"Thus the relative income effect observed here implies adverse effects for some individuals over the working years of their life cycles."
Relative income was much more important than absolute income when determining the happiness of individual Americans.
Because of the relative effect, continued income growth within rich countries such as the US is irrelevant to overall happiness, according to Mr Firebaugh.
"Rather than promoting overall happiness, continued income growth could promote an ongoing consumption race where individuals consume more and more just to maintain a constant level of happiness," he added.
While income was important, the best predictor of happiness was good physical health, the researchers found.
Finally, A College President With Backbone
The NCAA is a dinosaur. The major conferences should just pull out.
CHARLES E. KUPCHELLA
President University of North Dakota
An Open Letter to the NCAA:
The quiet serenity of our beautiful campus was disturbed early August 5 by news reports that the NCAA had decided to address the Indian nickname issue. The early reports were unclear; the words mascot, nickname, and logo were used interchangeably, and the loaded words “abusive” and “hostile” were invoked without definition and without any real clear idea as to how they were being applied. We don’t have a mascot, and our logo was designed by a very well-respected American Indian artist. We couldn’t imagine that these reports would apply to us.
Later, we saw the full release. While it looked like the action taken by the NCAA was insulting, and a flagrant abuse of power, we knew that good, well-meaning people were involved in the decision and we wanted to consider our reaction carefully.
We were initially stunned by the charge “abusive” and “hostile,” and then angry. We reflected and gave it a week before drafting this response. I must admit to sinking at one point during the past week to the notion that my Association was guilty of “political correctness run amok” as suggested by some papers.
We want to file an appeal, but first we need to know the basis for your decisions. We need the answers to some questions first, in other words.
I do not wish to take up the issue, here, of any absolute or general “correctness” of using American Indian imagery. Those on both sides of the issue have long ago made up their minds, and no amount of talking over many years seems to have moved anyone from one side of the issue to the other. Suffice it to say, some choose to be insulted by the use of these terms; others are befuddled by this reaction to what they consider to be an honor. What I would like to take up here is a matter of the appropriateness and legality of the NCAA’s action. I mean to take up the issue of whether the NCAA has gone over the edge and out of bounds in the action announced on Friday.
Is it the use of Indian names, images, and/or mascots to which you are opposed? If it is all of the above, which logos, images, and mascots do you indict by your announcement? Is it only certain ones? As I said, a very respected Indian artist designed and created a logo for the University. The logo is not unlike those found on United States coins and North Dakota highway patrol cars and highway signs. So we can’t imagine that the use of this image is “abusive” or “hostile” in any sense of these words.
Is it the use of the names of tribes that you find hostile and abusive?
Not long ago I took a trip to make a proposal to establish an epidemiological program to support American Indian health throughout the Upper Great Plains. On this trip I left a state called North Dakota. (Dakota is one of the names the indigenous people of this region actually call themselves.) I flew over South Dakota, crossing the Sioux River several times, and finally landed in Sioux City, Iowa, just south of Sioux Falls, South Dakota. The airplane in which I traveled that day was called a Cheyenne.
I think you should find my confusion here understandable, since obviously if we were to call our teams “The Dakotans,” we would actually be in more direct violation of what apparently you are trying to establish as a rule, even though this is the name of our state. This situation, of course, is not unlike that faced by our sister institution in Illinois.
Is it only when some well-meaning people object to the use of the names of tribes? If so, what standard did you use to decide where the line from acceptable to “hostile” and “abusive” is crossed? We note that you exempted a school with a certain percentage of American Indian students. We have more than 400 American Indian students here. Who decided that a certain percentage was okay, but our percentage was not? Where is the line between okay and hostile/abusive?
We have two Sioux tribes based here in North Dakota. One has, in fact, objected to our use of the name, “Sioux,” applied to our sports teams. The other said it was okay, provided that we took steps to ensure that some good comes of it, in educating people and students about the cultural heritage of this region. This mix of opinions is apparently not unlike that faced by our sister institution in Florida.
Is it only about applying names to sports teams? If so, would this be extended to the use of the names of all people, or is it just American Indians? Why would you exempt the “Fighting Irish” from your consideration, for example? Or “Vikings,” which are really fighting Scandinavians, or “Warriors,” which I suppose could be described as fighting anybodies? Wouldn’t it be “discrimination on account of race” to have a policy that applies to Indians but not to Scandinavians or the Irish, or anybody else for that matter? This seems especially profound in light of a letter to me from President Brand (8/9/05) in which he, in very broad-brush fashion and inconsistent with the NCAA’s recent much narrower pronouncement, said, “we believe that mascots, nicknames or images deemed hostile or abusive in terms of race, ethnicity or national origin should not be visible at our events.” (my emphasis)
As to the flagrant abuse of power question, I want to make sure I have this straight. We’ve recently built some magnificent facilities costing well over $100 million, under rules permitting us to host championship tournaments and otherwise participate fully in NCAA sanctioned activities, in which the very architecture of the building incorporates names and images of American Indian people. Do you really expect us now to spend large amounts of money to erase what we consider to be respectful images and names of Indian people who inhabited this region in the interest of the NCAA Executive Committee?
Hostile and abusive??
Help me understand why you think “hostile and abusive” applies to us. We have more than 25 separate programs in support of American Indian students here receiving high-end university educations. Included among these is an “Indians Into Medicine” program, now 30+ years running, that has generated 20 percent of all American Indian doctors in the United States. We have a similar program in Nursing, one in Clinical Psychology, and we are about to launch an “Indians into Aviation” program in conjunction with our world-class Odegard School of Aerospace Sciences. I am very proud when I visit reservations in our state to see that a large number of the teachers, doctors, Tribal College presidents, and other leaders are graduates of the University of North Dakota.
Do you really expect us to host a tournament in which these names and images are covered in some way that would imply that we are ashamed of them?
Concerning tournaments already scheduled: Is the NCAA taking the position that it can actually unilaterally modify a contract already made? Perhaps the charge (sometimes heard) that the NCAA exhibits too much of the arrogance that comes from its status as a monopoly – apart from the question of whether it’s an effective organization – does indeed have a basis.
If the NCAA has all this power, why not use it to restore intercollegiate athletics to the ideal of sportsmanship by decoupling intercollegiate athletics from its corruption by big budgets? Why not use the power to put a halt to the out-of-control financial arms race that threatens to corrupt even higher education itself?
Yes, I know that in theory the NCAA is actually an association, and that UND is a member of it, and therefore it’s really we who are doing all of these things to ourselves, or failing to do all of these things ourselves. But is the NCAA really a democratic organization? Why did we not put these issues to a vote by all member schools??
In his USA Today essay, Myles Brand proclaimed that this is a teachable moment, suggesting that the NCAA decision is “aimed at initiating a discussion on a national basis about how American Indians have been characterized . . . .” Great idea! Let’s have the discussion – one that we should have had before this ruling was handed down, one that actually includes American Indians and puts this in the perspective of all that is important to them at this time in history. And while we are at it, why not also address the state of intercollegiate athletics – whether or not student-athletes at some schools are being exploited, and whether or not there is an out-of-control financial “arms race” threatening the integrity of higher education itself.
In considering how to appeal, we find it exasperating that we can’t tell what the basis for your initial decision was and how you singled us out in the first place. In a letter from Myles Brand to me (8/9/05) he suggests that we could, in an appeal, argue that our symbols or mascots do not create a hostile or abusive environment. But his letter also seems to suggest that as long as some think the environment is hostile, case closed.
By the way, the last time this issue was stirred up on our campus, a formal charge was made to the Office for Civil Rights that the use of our logo or nickname created a hostile environment here at the University. The Office for Civil Rights sent a half-dozen people to our campus. They fanned out across campus and after more than a week here, found no such thing. Did the Executive Committee find some things they missed, perhaps? Or does a committee in Indianapolis trump the Office for Civil Rights here, on the ground, in North Dakota?
Finally, I expect that we will file an appeal, because should we wish to take this issue to court, the courts would undoubtedly ask if we have exhausted all administrative remedies. Please send us the appropriate application forms, and give us an indication of how the appeal will be heard and when. If the timing of this appeal were such that your deadline occurs before the appeal is resolved, we would ask that the deadline be put off, otherwise we may well have to go to the expense of seeking an injunction halting the imposition of these policies until all of our questions can be answered satisfactorily.
We thank you in advance for considering our questions.
Sincerely,
Charles E. KupchellaPresident
CHARLES E. KUPCHELLA
President University of North Dakota
An Open Letter to the NCAA:
The quiet serenity of our beautiful campus was disturbed early August 5 by news reports that the NCAA had decided to address the Indian nickname issue. The early reports were unclear; the words mascot, nickname, and logo were used interchangeably, and the loaded words “abusive” and “hostile” were invoked without definition and without any real clear idea as to how they were being applied. We don’t have a mascot, and our logo was designed by a very well-respected American Indian artist. We couldn’t imagine that these reports would apply to us.
Later, we saw the full release. While it looked like the action taken by the NCAA was insulting, and a flagrant abuse of power, we knew that good, well-meaning people were involved in the decision and we wanted to consider our reaction carefully.
We were initially stunned by the charge “abusive” and “hostile,” and then angry. We reflected and gave it a week before drafting this response. I must admit to sinking at one point during the past week to the notion that my Association was guilty of “political correctness run amok” as suggested by some papers.
We want to file an appeal, but first we need to know the basis for your decisions. We need the answers to some questions first, in other words.
I do not wish to take up the issue, here, of any absolute or general “correctness” of using American Indian imagery. Those on both sides of the issue have long ago made up their minds, and no amount of talking over many years seems to have moved anyone from one side of the issue to the other. Suffice it to say, some choose to be insulted by the use of these terms; others are befuddled by this reaction to what they consider to be an honor. What I would like to take up here is a matter of the appropriateness and legality of the NCAA’s action. I mean to take up the issue of whether the NCAA has gone over the edge and out of bounds in the action announced on Friday.
Is it the use of Indian names, images, and/or mascots to which you are opposed? If it is all of the above, which logos, images, and mascots do you indict by your announcement? Is it only certain ones? As I said, a very respected Indian artist designed and created a logo for the University. The logo is not unlike those found on United States coins and North Dakota highway patrol cars and highway signs. So we can’t imagine that the use of this image is “abusive” or “hostile” in any sense of these words.
Is it the use of the names of tribes that you find hostile and abusive?
Not long ago I took a trip to make a proposal to establish an epidemiological program to support American Indian health throughout the Upper Great Plains. On this trip I left a state called North Dakota. (Dakota is one of the names the indigenous people of this region actually call themselves.) I flew over South Dakota, crossing the Sioux River several times, and finally landed in Sioux City, Iowa, just south of Sioux Falls, South Dakota. The airplane in which I traveled that day was called a Cheyenne.
I think you should find my confusion here understandable, since obviously if we were to call our teams “The Dakotans,” we would actually be in more direct violation of what apparently you are trying to establish as a rule, even though this is the name of our state. This situation, of course, is not unlike that faced by our sister institution in Illinois.
Is it only when some well-meaning people object to the use of the names of tribes? If so, what standard did you use to decide where the line from acceptable to “hostile” and “abusive” is crossed? We note that you exempted a school with a certain percentage of American Indian students. We have more than 400 American Indian students here. Who decided that a certain percentage was okay, but our percentage was not? Where is the line between okay and hostile/abusive?
We have two Sioux tribes based here in North Dakota. One has, in fact, objected to our use of the name, “Sioux,” applied to our sports teams. The other said it was okay, provided that we took steps to ensure that some good comes of it, in educating people and students about the cultural heritage of this region. This mix of opinions is apparently not unlike that faced by our sister institution in Florida.
Is it only about applying names to sports teams? If so, would this be extended to the use of the names of all people, or is it just American Indians? Why would you exempt the “Fighting Irish” from your consideration, for example? Or “Vikings,” which are really fighting Scandinavians, or “Warriors,” which I suppose could be described as fighting anybodies? Wouldn’t it be “discrimination on account of race” to have a policy that applies to Indians but not to Scandinavians or the Irish, or anybody else for that matter? This seems especially profound in light of a letter to me from President Brand (8/9/05) in which he, in very broad-brush fashion and inconsistent with the NCAA’s recent much narrower pronouncement, said, “we believe that mascots, nicknames or images deemed hostile or abusive in terms of race, ethnicity or national origin should not be visible at our events.” (my emphasis)
As to the flagrant abuse of power question, I want to make sure I have this straight. We’ve recently built some magnificent facilities costing well over $100 million, under rules permitting us to host championship tournaments and otherwise participate fully in NCAA sanctioned activities, in which the very architecture of the building incorporates names and images of American Indian people. Do you really expect us now to spend large amounts of money to erase what we consider to be respectful images and names of Indian people who inhabited this region in the interest of the NCAA Executive Committee?
Hostile and abusive??
Help me understand why you think “hostile and abusive” applies to us. We have more than 25 separate programs in support of American Indian students here receiving high-end university educations. Included among these is an “Indians Into Medicine” program, now 30+ years running, that has generated 20 percent of all American Indian doctors in the United States. We have a similar program in Nursing, one in Clinical Psychology, and we are about to launch an “Indians into Aviation” program in conjunction with our world-class Odegard School of Aerospace Sciences. I am very proud when I visit reservations in our state to see that a large number of the teachers, doctors, Tribal College presidents, and other leaders are graduates of the University of North Dakota.
Do you really expect us to host a tournament in which these names and images are covered in some way that would imply that we are ashamed of them?
Concerning tournaments already scheduled: Is the NCAA taking the position that it can actually unilaterally modify a contract already made? Perhaps the charge (sometimes heard) that the NCAA exhibits too much of the arrogance that comes from its status as a monopoly – apart from the question of whether it’s an effective organization – does indeed have a basis.
If the NCAA has all this power, why not use it to restore intercollegiate athletics to the ideal of sportsmanship by decoupling intercollegiate athletics from its corruption by big budgets? Why not use the power to put a halt to the out-of-control financial arms race that threatens to corrupt even higher education itself?
Yes, I know that in theory the NCAA is actually an association, and that UND is a member of it, and therefore it’s really we who are doing all of these things to ourselves, or failing to do all of these things ourselves. But is the NCAA really a democratic organization? Why did we not put these issues to a vote by all member schools??
In his USA Today essay, Myles Brand proclaimed that this is a teachable moment, suggesting that the NCAA decision is “aimed at initiating a discussion on a national basis about how American Indians have been characterized . . . .” Great idea! Let’s have the discussion – one that we should have had before this ruling was handed down, one that actually includes American Indians and puts this in the perspective of all that is important to them at this time in history. And while we are at it, why not also address the state of intercollegiate athletics – whether or not student-athletes at some schools are being exploited, and whether or not there is an out-of-control financial “arms race” threatening the integrity of higher education itself.
In considering how to appeal, we find it exasperating that we can’t tell what the basis for your initial decision was and how you singled us out in the first place. In a letter from Myles Brand to me (8/9/05) he suggests that we could, in an appeal, argue that our symbols or mascots do not create a hostile or abusive environment. But his letter also seems to suggest that as long as some think the environment is hostile, case closed.
By the way, the last time this issue was stirred up on our campus, a formal charge was made to the Office for Civil Rights that the use of our logo or nickname created a hostile environment here at the University. The Office for Civil Rights sent a half-dozen people to our campus. They fanned out across campus and after more than a week here, found no such thing. Did the Executive Committee find some things they missed, perhaps? Or does a committee in Indianapolis trump the Office for Civil Rights here, on the ground, in North Dakota?
Finally, I expect that we will file an appeal, because should we wish to take this issue to court, the courts would undoubtedly ask if we have exhausted all administrative remedies. Please send us the appropriate application forms, and give us an indication of how the appeal will be heard and when. If the timing of this appeal were such that your deadline occurs before the appeal is resolved, we would ask that the deadline be put off, otherwise we may well have to go to the expense of seeking an injunction halting the imposition of these policies until all of our questions can be answered satisfactorily.
We thank you in advance for considering our questions.
Sincerely,
Charles E. KupchellaPresident
Friday, August 12, 2005
Orthodox Evangelicalism?
Sam Torode has written a great article discussing evangelicalism and orthodoxy. As someone who is torn between the two, this piece is very enlightening.
Here's a sample:
For all their diversity, evangelicals hold several principles in common. This list isn't exhaustive, but here are some key emphases of evangelicals:
(1) Salvation is by faith alone, not works.
(2) The Bible is the standard for Christian doctrine and practice.
(3) Everyone needs a personal relationship with Jesus.
(4) "The church" means all Christians everywhere, and there is no "true" or "perfect" church this side of heaven.
When I became disillusioned with the Baptist faith, I eagerly drank up the writings of Catholic and Orthodox apologists (often former Protestants themselves) who challenged these four principles. I took up their arguments and shot off combative e-mails to my evangelical friends. Among other things, I argued that:
Here's a sample:
For all their diversity, evangelicals hold several principles in common. This list isn't exhaustive, but here are some key emphases of evangelicals:
(1) Salvation is by faith alone, not works.
(2) The Bible is the standard for Christian doctrine and practice.
(3) Everyone needs a personal relationship with Jesus.
(4) "The church" means all Christians everywhere, and there is no "true" or "perfect" church this side of heaven.
When I became disillusioned with the Baptist faith, I eagerly drank up the writings of Catholic and Orthodox apologists (often former Protestants themselves) who challenged these four principles. I took up their arguments and shot off combative e-mails to my evangelical friends. Among other things, I argued that:
- Salvation by faith alone is not biblical. The only time the words justified, faith, and alone appear together in the Bible, it's to say that "a man is justified by works, not by faith alone" (James 2:24).
- Sola scriptura (the idea that the Bible alone is our guide—not church tradition) isn't found in the Bible, either. Since Scripture doesn't interpret itself, we need an authoritative interpretive community to make sense of it.
- The evangelical focus on a "personal relationship" with Christ tends to obscure our corporate identity as members of the church. The New Testament writers don't say anything about "asking Jesus into our hearts." Instead, they tell us to repent and be baptized into the church.
- Jesus and the apostles founded a church, not a loose affiliation of freelance believers. The apostles laid hands on bishops to oversee this church, so as to keep the doctrine pure and prevent schism. This church must still be around today, because Jesus promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against it.
The All Carlos Huerta Team
Explanation here.
A little background:
The NCAA usually allows a player to only have four years of eligibility plus a redshirt season. In extreme cases, a player might get a sixth year because of injury issues. Because of all the hype starting in high school, redshirts, injuries, freshmen eligibility and other factors, it sometimes seems like certain players have been around for ten years or more. Sometimes a player has only played for a few seasons but you can't imagine your college football life without him.
Every fan has a specific standard for the player who appeared to hang around college football forever. For me it was former Miami PK Carlos Huerta.
Huerta is the all-time leading scorer in Miami history with 397 points playing from 1988 to 1991. Because Miami was so good and was always on TV, the name Carlos Huerta was drilled into my subconscious after he was a part of just about every college football Saturday for four years hitting extra point after extra point for the high octane Canes. As years go by and the great Hurricane teams tend to blend together in memory, it seems like Huerta was there from the Orange Bowl win over Nebraska in 1984 through the Frank Costa years of the mid-1990s.
A little background:
The NCAA usually allows a player to only have four years of eligibility plus a redshirt season. In extreme cases, a player might get a sixth year because of injury issues. Because of all the hype starting in high school, redshirts, injuries, freshmen eligibility and other factors, it sometimes seems like certain players have been around for ten years or more. Sometimes a player has only played for a few seasons but you can't imagine your college football life without him.
Every fan has a specific standard for the player who appeared to hang around college football forever. For me it was former Miami PK Carlos Huerta.
Huerta is the all-time leading scorer in Miami history with 397 points playing from 1988 to 1991. Because Miami was so good and was always on TV, the name Carlos Huerta was drilled into my subconscious after he was a part of just about every college football Saturday for four years hitting extra point after extra point for the high octane Canes. As years go by and the great Hurricane teams tend to blend together in memory, it seems like Huerta was there from the Orange Bowl win over Nebraska in 1984 through the Frank Costa years of the mid-1990s.
Two Sports...Two Worlds
Something is terribly out of whack here. Tyler Hamilton, an American cyclist, tested positive for blood doping last year. Even as he appeals, he is in the process of serving a two-year suspension. Rafael Palmeiro tested positive for steroids and endured a suspension of 10 days. The disparity in the penalties is simply ludicrous. Either the Olympic judgment, as meted out by the World Anti-Doping Agency, is too severe ... or baseball law is a joke.
I think both. I'd go with a one year suspension for a positive test.
I think both. I'd go with a one year suspension for a positive test.
Most Beloved Dead Celebrities
Here's the list from Marketing Evaluations, Inc.:
1. Lucille Ball
2. Bob Hope
3. John Wayne
4. Jimmy Stewart
5. Red Skelton
6. Johnny Carson
7. John Ritter
8. Jackie Gleason
9. "Peanuts" creator Charles Schulz
10. Michael Landon
John Ritter? Come on. And where's Peter Jennings? He was a brilliant, caring, handsome, man-of-the-people saint (or, at least that's what ABC keeps telling me).
1. Lucille Ball
2. Bob Hope
3. John Wayne
4. Jimmy Stewart
5. Red Skelton
6. Johnny Carson
7. John Ritter
8. Jackie Gleason
9. "Peanuts" creator Charles Schulz
10. Michael Landon
John Ritter? Come on. And where's Peter Jennings? He was a brilliant, caring, handsome, man-of-the-people saint (or, at least that's what ABC keeps telling me).
400 Foot Waterfall Discovered...in California
I've always assumed that every inch of this country has already been "discovered." That is not the case. How cool is this.
WHISKEYTOWN, California (AP) -- Dick McDermott knows these parts as well as any man can.
The 92-year-old used to earn a meager living mining the creeks that meander through the deeply wooded hills. He has slogged through the brush and hiked overgrown logging roads, hunting deer and gathering wood for his homemade fiddles.
But McDermott says he's never laid eyes on the nearly 400-foot waterfall that park officials recently discovered in a remote corner of the Whiskeytown National Recreation Area, 43,000 acres of wilderness in northern California.
"Sure, I was surprised," he said from his home in the park, where he's lived for more than 70 years. "I've been all around that place, I never seen 'em."
Until recently, very few had seen the roaring water that tumbles three tiers before pouring neatly into Crystal Creek. That such a spectacle should evade even park officials for nearly 40 years is remarkable, said park superintendent Jim Milestone.
WHISKEYTOWN, California (AP) -- Dick McDermott knows these parts as well as any man can.
The 92-year-old used to earn a meager living mining the creeks that meander through the deeply wooded hills. He has slogged through the brush and hiked overgrown logging roads, hunting deer and gathering wood for his homemade fiddles.
But McDermott says he's never laid eyes on the nearly 400-foot waterfall that park officials recently discovered in a remote corner of the Whiskeytown National Recreation Area, 43,000 acres of wilderness in northern California.
"Sure, I was surprised," he said from his home in the park, where he's lived for more than 70 years. "I've been all around that place, I never seen 'em."
Until recently, very few had seen the roaring water that tumbles three tiers before pouring neatly into Crystal Creek. That such a spectacle should evade even park officials for nearly 40 years is remarkable, said park superintendent Jim Milestone.
The Story of the Summer
I think most people realize that the Sept. 11 Commission was a complete fraud...Dem lapdogs trying to damage an incumbent Republican president and cover their former boss' (Clinton) ass.
Well, this is rather revealing.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Sept. 11 commission knew military intelligence officials had identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta as a member of al-Qaida who might be part of U.S.-based terror cell more than a year before the terror attacks but decided not to include that in its final report, a spokesman acknowledged Thursday.
Al Felzenberg, spokesman for the commission's follow-up project called the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, had said earlier this week that the panel was unaware of intelligence specifically naming Atta. But he said subsequent information provided Wednesday confirmed that the commission had been aware of the intelligence.
The information did not make it into the final report because it was not consistent with what the commission knew about Atta's whereabouts before the attacks, Felzenberg said.
The intelligence about Atta recently was disclosed by Rep. Curt Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees. The Pennsylvania Republican has expressed anger that the intelligence never was forwarded by the military establishment to the FBI.
The discourse project, Pentagon and at least two congressional committees are looking into the issue. If found accurate, the intelligence would change the timeline for when government officials first became aware of Atta's links to al-Qaida.
According to Weldon, a classified military intelligence unit called ''Able Danger'' identified Atta and three other hijackers in 1999 as potential members of a terrorist cell in New York City. Weldon said Pentagon lawyers rejected the unit's recommendation that the information be turned over to the FBI in 2000.
According to Pentagon documents, the information was not shared because of concerns about pursuing information on ''U.S. persons,'' a legal term that includes U.S. citizens as well as foreigners legally admitted to the country.
Felzenberg said an unidentified person working with Weldon came forward Wednesday and described a meeting 10 days before the panel's report was issued last July. During it, a military official urged commission staffers to include a reference to the intelligence on Atta in the final report.
Felzenberg said checks were made and the details of the July 12, 2004, meeting were confirmed. Previous to that, Felzenberg said it was believed commission staffers knew about Able Danger from a meeting with military officials in Afghanistan during which no mention was made of Atta or the other three hijackers.
Staff members now are searching documents in the National Archives to look for notes from the meeting in Afghanistan and any other possible references to Atta and Able Danger, Felzenberg said.
Now this strikes me as kind of important, no? Oh, and by the way, I don't think those staffers will find any incriminating documents in the National
Archives. Why? Because Sandy Berger already removed them.
Sandy Berger, Bill Clinton's National Security adviser, pleaded guilty to stealing documents from the archives and hiding them in his socks. These were documents, if you will recall, that were to be presented to the Sept. 11 Commission and could have been embarrassing to the Clinton administration.
Well, this is rather revealing.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Sept. 11 commission knew military intelligence officials had identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta as a member of al-Qaida who might be part of U.S.-based terror cell more than a year before the terror attacks but decided not to include that in its final report, a spokesman acknowledged Thursday.
Al Felzenberg, spokesman for the commission's follow-up project called the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, had said earlier this week that the panel was unaware of intelligence specifically naming Atta. But he said subsequent information provided Wednesday confirmed that the commission had been aware of the intelligence.
The information did not make it into the final report because it was not consistent with what the commission knew about Atta's whereabouts before the attacks, Felzenberg said.
The intelligence about Atta recently was disclosed by Rep. Curt Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees. The Pennsylvania Republican has expressed anger that the intelligence never was forwarded by the military establishment to the FBI.
The discourse project, Pentagon and at least two congressional committees are looking into the issue. If found accurate, the intelligence would change the timeline for when government officials first became aware of Atta's links to al-Qaida.
According to Weldon, a classified military intelligence unit called ''Able Danger'' identified Atta and three other hijackers in 1999 as potential members of a terrorist cell in New York City. Weldon said Pentagon lawyers rejected the unit's recommendation that the information be turned over to the FBI in 2000.
According to Pentagon documents, the information was not shared because of concerns about pursuing information on ''U.S. persons,'' a legal term that includes U.S. citizens as well as foreigners legally admitted to the country.
Felzenberg said an unidentified person working with Weldon came forward Wednesday and described a meeting 10 days before the panel's report was issued last July. During it, a military official urged commission staffers to include a reference to the intelligence on Atta in the final report.
Felzenberg said checks were made and the details of the July 12, 2004, meeting were confirmed. Previous to that, Felzenberg said it was believed commission staffers knew about Able Danger from a meeting with military officials in Afghanistan during which no mention was made of Atta or the other three hijackers.
Staff members now are searching documents in the National Archives to look for notes from the meeting in Afghanistan and any other possible references to Atta and Able Danger, Felzenberg said.
Now this strikes me as kind of important, no? Oh, and by the way, I don't think those staffers will find any incriminating documents in the National
Archives. Why? Because Sandy Berger already removed them.
Sandy Berger, Bill Clinton's National Security adviser, pleaded guilty to stealing documents from the archives and hiding them in his socks. These were documents, if you will recall, that were to be presented to the Sept. 11 Commission and could have been embarrassing to the Clinton administration.
Thursday, August 11, 2005
Why They Hate Us?
Apparently, because we intermarry.
AN American journalist who was shot dead in Basra last week was executed by Shiite extremists who knew he was intending to marry his Muslim interpreter, it has emerged.
Steven Vincent was shot a week before the planned wedding to Nouriya Itais and had already delivered a $2,500 dowry to her family.
The disclosure casts new light on the grip of Islamic religious sects in the British-run south- east of Iraq - raising concern that they will take control once troops start to withdraw. Mr Vincent was abducted from his hotel three days after writing a piece in the New York Times accusing British officials of allowing religious parties to infiltrate the Basra police.
In America, his death was taken as retribution for his article. But in London yesterday, British officials pointed out that the police in Basra believed it was retribution for his affair.
"We warned him to look after his security in a more professional manner than he was doing," said the official.
The couple were found by Iraqi police after being shot by their captors. Medics managed to save Ms Itais.
AN American journalist who was shot dead in Basra last week was executed by Shiite extremists who knew he was intending to marry his Muslim interpreter, it has emerged.
Steven Vincent was shot a week before the planned wedding to Nouriya Itais and had already delivered a $2,500 dowry to her family.
The disclosure casts new light on the grip of Islamic religious sects in the British-run south- east of Iraq - raising concern that they will take control once troops start to withdraw. Mr Vincent was abducted from his hotel three days after writing a piece in the New York Times accusing British officials of allowing religious parties to infiltrate the Basra police.
In America, his death was taken as retribution for his article. But in London yesterday, British officials pointed out that the police in Basra believed it was retribution for his affair.
"We warned him to look after his security in a more professional manner than he was doing," said the official.
The couple were found by Iraqi police after being shot by their captors. Medics managed to save Ms Itais.
Be Careful What You Say AROUND Your Cell Phone
From the London Guardian:
The main means of tracking terrorist suspects down has been the monitoring of mobile phone conversations. Not only can operators pinpoint users to within yards of their location by "triangulating" the signals from three base stations, but - according to a report in the Financial Times - the operators (under instructions from the authorities) can remotely install software onto a handset to activate the microphone even when the user is not making a call.
The main means of tracking terrorist suspects down has been the monitoring of mobile phone conversations. Not only can operators pinpoint users to within yards of their location by "triangulating" the signals from three base stations, but - according to a report in the Financial Times - the operators (under instructions from the authorities) can remotely install software onto a handset to activate the microphone even when the user is not making a call.
Five Jazz CDs You Must Own
From Terry Teachout, arts critic for The Wall Street Journal:
• The Essential Louis Armstrong (Sony). A brand-new two-CD set by the greatest of all jazz musicians, not perfectly chosen but full of good things and easy to find.
• Duke Ellington, Masterpieces 1926-1949 (Proper). An unusually low-priced four-CD imported box set that contains most of Ellington’s best pre-LP recordings.
• Ken Burns Jazz Collection: The Definitive Charlie Parker (Sony). An exceptionally good single-disc introduction to bebop’s key figure.
• Miles Davis, Kind of Blue (Sony). The most popular and influential jazz album of the Fifties.
• Pat Metheny, Bright Size Life (ECM). One of the earliest and most successful attempts to "fuse" jazz and rock. It still sounds fresh.
Pat Metheny is my favorite, and everything he's ever done is very good. But I'd have to agree that this is probably his best. Recorded in the late '70s, it sounds brand new.
• The Essential Louis Armstrong (Sony). A brand-new two-CD set by the greatest of all jazz musicians, not perfectly chosen but full of good things and easy to find.
• Duke Ellington, Masterpieces 1926-1949 (Proper). An unusually low-priced four-CD imported box set that contains most of Ellington’s best pre-LP recordings.
• Ken Burns Jazz Collection: The Definitive Charlie Parker (Sony). An exceptionally good single-disc introduction to bebop’s key figure.
• Miles Davis, Kind of Blue (Sony). The most popular and influential jazz album of the Fifties.
• Pat Metheny, Bright Size Life (ECM). One of the earliest and most successful attempts to "fuse" jazz and rock. It still sounds fresh.
Pat Metheny is my favorite, and everything he's ever done is very good. But I'd have to agree that this is probably his best. Recorded in the late '70s, it sounds brand new.
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
My 'Canes and Eminem
Which rapper most resembles your favorite college football team. (Thanks to Johnny.)
Monday, August 08, 2005
Hunter Kelly, Rest In Peace
Hunter Kelly, whose battle with a nervous system disease inspired the charitable works of his Hall of Fame quarterback father, Jim Kelly, died yesterday. He was 8.
Hunter died at Women & Children's Hospital of Buffalo, Hunter's Hope Foundation spokesman John Dudek said. The cause was respiratory failure.
"He has been struggling for a while," Dudek said.
Born in 1997, Hunter Kelly was given no more than two years to live after being diagnosed with Krabbe disease, a rare inherited degenerative disorder of the central and peripheral nervous systems. The incurable disease hinders development of the myelin sheath, a fatty covering that protects the brain's nerve fibers.
The Hunter's Hope Foundation, established in 1997 by Kelly and his wife, Jill, has raised more than $6 million for research.
Kelly led the Buffalo Bills to an unprecedented four AFC titles in the early 1990s. He paid tribute to Hunter in his Hall of Fame acceptance speech in 2002.
"It has been written throughout my career that toughness is my trademark," Kelly said. "Well, the toughest person I've ever met in my life is my hero, my soldier, my son, Hunter."
Hunter died at Women & Children's Hospital of Buffalo, Hunter's Hope Foundation spokesman John Dudek said. The cause was respiratory failure.
"He has been struggling for a while," Dudek said.
Born in 1997, Hunter Kelly was given no more than two years to live after being diagnosed with Krabbe disease, a rare inherited degenerative disorder of the central and peripheral nervous systems. The incurable disease hinders development of the myelin sheath, a fatty covering that protects the brain's nerve fibers.
The Hunter's Hope Foundation, established in 1997 by Kelly and his wife, Jill, has raised more than $6 million for research.
Kelly led the Buffalo Bills to an unprecedented four AFC titles in the early 1990s. He paid tribute to Hunter in his Hall of Fame acceptance speech in 2002.
"It has been written throughout my career that toughness is my trademark," Kelly said. "Well, the toughest person I've ever met in my life is my hero, my soldier, my son, Hunter."
Bring Back FDR and Truman
Michael Lind says the Dems need to become a socially conservative, economically liberal party to regain power. I agree.
Can the Democratic Party regain the kind of majority enjoyed by the New Deal Democrats between the 1930s and the 1960s? Not an occasional bare majority, but the kind of solid, enduring majority that permits the passage of major legislation?
The answer is yes--but only if the Democratic Party ceases to be defined by social liberalism. As a social liberal party with economic liberal and economic conservative wings, the Democrats are doomed to perpetual minority status. As an economic liberal party with social conservative and social liberal wings, the Democrats might have a chance--but only if the social conservative Democrats outnumber the social liberal Democrats in the Democratic Party itself.
Can the Democratic Party regain the kind of majority enjoyed by the New Deal Democrats between the 1930s and the 1960s? Not an occasional bare majority, but the kind of solid, enduring majority that permits the passage of major legislation?
The answer is yes--but only if the Democratic Party ceases to be defined by social liberalism. As a social liberal party with economic liberal and economic conservative wings, the Democrats are doomed to perpetual minority status. As an economic liberal party with social conservative and social liberal wings, the Democrats might have a chance--but only if the social conservative Democrats outnumber the social liberal Democrats in the Democratic Party itself.
Here's More
Civil rights activist Dick Gregory mocked the existence of African-American conservatives in America.
"They (black conservatives) have a right to exist, but why would I want to walk around with a swastika on my shirt after the way Hitler done messed it (the swastika symbol) up?" Gregory said in an interview with Cybercast News Service. (The swastika was an ancient symbol generally regarded an emblem of strength and luck before the Nazi Party adopted it in 1920.) "So why would I want to call myself a conservative after the way them white racists thugs have used that word to hide behind? They call themselves new Republicans," Gregory said.
Gregory trashed the United States, calling it "the most dishonest, ungodly, unspiritual nation that ever existed in the history of the planet. As we talk now, America is 5 percent of the world's population and consumes 96 percent of the world's hard drugs," Gregory said.
"They (black conservatives) have a right to exist, but why would I want to walk around with a swastika on my shirt after the way Hitler done messed it (the swastika symbol) up?" Gregory said in an interview with Cybercast News Service. (The swastika was an ancient symbol generally regarded an emblem of strength and luck before the Nazi Party adopted it in 1920.) "So why would I want to call myself a conservative after the way them white racists thugs have used that word to hide behind? They call themselves new Republicans," Gregory said.
Gregory trashed the United States, calling it "the most dishonest, ungodly, unspiritual nation that ever existed in the history of the planet. As we talk now, America is 5 percent of the world's population and consumes 96 percent of the world's hard drugs," Gregory said.
Reason #1 Why the Black Underclass...
...is still the black underclass.
Atlanta (CNSNews.com) - A featured speaker at Saturday's civil rights march in Atlanta said the Bush administration and Republican Party leaders are "thieves" who "need to be locked up" for stealing the past two presidential elections and presiding over federal budget deficits and the war in Iraq. "They all need to be locked up because they are all criminals and they are all thieves," said Judge Greg Mathis, the star of the syndicated television program "The Judge Mathis Show."
Mathis made his remarks to an enthusiastic crowd assembled in Atlanta to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Participants are launching a two-year campaign to extend and strengthen key aspects of the act when it expires in 2007.
"It is indeed criminal to steal an election and within two years run up a federal deficit of half-a-trillion dollars, send our young people over to Iraq to die for an unjust war. What they are doing is criminal," Mathis said to loud cheers.
The march was sponsored by the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition and included leaders from the National Urban League, The Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the NAACP, and the AFL-CIO.
Entertainer/activist Harry Belafonte also used charged rhetoric during the march when he referred to black members of the Bush administration as "black tyrants." Mathis, whose speech drew the largest and most raucous reception from the crowd, also chastised the Supreme Court for its role in the 2000 presidential recount. "[The] Supreme Court was an accomplice to the biggest election crime in history in 2000. And I call it a crime because indeed that is exactly what it was," he said to applause.
The Bush administration was equated with past policies of slavery and segregation and labeled "the enemy of our (black America's) progress" by Mathis. "They shot and missed when they enslaved, segregated and oppressed our people. They shot and missed when they stole the past two presidential elections. They shot and missed when they denied our right to vote," Mathis said.
An extension and strengthening of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is imperative to ensure black Americans the right to vote, according to Mathis. "The enemy of democracy continues to attack voting rights here, while they try to fight for democracy in Iraq," he said.
'Intimidation and discrepancies'
Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California appeared at the march and noted that minorities may not have had full voting rights in the last two presidential elections. "Some changes have to be made so we don't have a repeat of 2000 and 2004 where there was intimidation and discrepancies at the polls," Pelosi told Cybercast News Service during the voting rights march. "In the state of Ohio, where they had fewer voting booths and long lines in minority neighborhoods and no lines and many voting booths in white neighborhoods, that the balance is not what it should have been," she added.
U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) echoed the accusation of many at the march that Bush was an illegitimate president. "The last two elections were stolen. They were stolen and so we will not rest until we reclaim our democracy and this is what today is all about," Lee told the crowd gathered. Lee also called the war in Iraq "unnecessary, immoral and illegal" and added "our nation was lied to in order to justify this invasion and occupation."
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) made it clear who the marchers were directing their anger at on Saturday.
"We are here to take on President Bush, [Vice President] Dick Cheney. We are here to take on [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay. We are here to take on the new appointee to the Supreme Court, John Roberts," Waters said from the podium to cheers from the crowd.
'Cause Mother Earth so much pain'
Musician Stevie Wonder addressed the marchers demanding that the Voting Rights Act be extended and strengthened. "Having to demand that we have a bill that will guarantee the voting rights of all American citizens forever is ridiculous," Wonder said. He also read the lyrics of an upcoming song to be released in September. "At this time we have a choice to make. Father God is watching while we cause Mother Earth so much pain. It's such a shame. Not enough money for the young, the old, the poor, but for war there is always more," Wonder said.
The Bush administration was also targeted by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), who declared that the president's "record against human rights, civil rights, economic rights, is absolutely terrible."
Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) said America was being ruled by the "Bush mentality," where "crony capitalism" was supreme.
Jesse Jackson said the Voting Rights Act extension is critical because "the same old enemies of civil rights and voting rights will always keep up their ugly activities. "Race baiters and discriminators may go underground, but they never move out of town," Jackson said.
The organizers of Saturday's march want to strengthen and preserve Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which maintains that states with a discriminatory past must submit all changes in voting procedures to the U.S. Department of Justice for approval in order to ensure the changes do not have racially discriminatory effects or purposes.
While the Bush administration and House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) have indicated that they would support full reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act provisions in 2007, the organizers of Saturday's march believe they must begin acting now to ensure their goals.
Atlanta (CNSNews.com) - A featured speaker at Saturday's civil rights march in Atlanta said the Bush administration and Republican Party leaders are "thieves" who "need to be locked up" for stealing the past two presidential elections and presiding over federal budget deficits and the war in Iraq. "They all need to be locked up because they are all criminals and they are all thieves," said Judge Greg Mathis, the star of the syndicated television program "The Judge Mathis Show."
Mathis made his remarks to an enthusiastic crowd assembled in Atlanta to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Participants are launching a two-year campaign to extend and strengthen key aspects of the act when it expires in 2007.
"It is indeed criminal to steal an election and within two years run up a federal deficit of half-a-trillion dollars, send our young people over to Iraq to die for an unjust war. What they are doing is criminal," Mathis said to loud cheers.
The march was sponsored by the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition and included leaders from the National Urban League, The Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the NAACP, and the AFL-CIO.
Entertainer/activist Harry Belafonte also used charged rhetoric during the march when he referred to black members of the Bush administration as "black tyrants." Mathis, whose speech drew the largest and most raucous reception from the crowd, also chastised the Supreme Court for its role in the 2000 presidential recount. "[The] Supreme Court was an accomplice to the biggest election crime in history in 2000. And I call it a crime because indeed that is exactly what it was," he said to applause.
The Bush administration was equated with past policies of slavery and segregation and labeled "the enemy of our (black America's) progress" by Mathis. "They shot and missed when they enslaved, segregated and oppressed our people. They shot and missed when they stole the past two presidential elections. They shot and missed when they denied our right to vote," Mathis said.
An extension and strengthening of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is imperative to ensure black Americans the right to vote, according to Mathis. "The enemy of democracy continues to attack voting rights here, while they try to fight for democracy in Iraq," he said.
'Intimidation and discrepancies'
Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California appeared at the march and noted that minorities may not have had full voting rights in the last two presidential elections. "Some changes have to be made so we don't have a repeat of 2000 and 2004 where there was intimidation and discrepancies at the polls," Pelosi told Cybercast News Service during the voting rights march. "In the state of Ohio, where they had fewer voting booths and long lines in minority neighborhoods and no lines and many voting booths in white neighborhoods, that the balance is not what it should have been," she added.
U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) echoed the accusation of many at the march that Bush was an illegitimate president. "The last two elections were stolen. They were stolen and so we will not rest until we reclaim our democracy and this is what today is all about," Lee told the crowd gathered. Lee also called the war in Iraq "unnecessary, immoral and illegal" and added "our nation was lied to in order to justify this invasion and occupation."
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) made it clear who the marchers were directing their anger at on Saturday.
"We are here to take on President Bush, [Vice President] Dick Cheney. We are here to take on [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay. We are here to take on the new appointee to the Supreme Court, John Roberts," Waters said from the podium to cheers from the crowd.
'Cause Mother Earth so much pain'
Musician Stevie Wonder addressed the marchers demanding that the Voting Rights Act be extended and strengthened. "Having to demand that we have a bill that will guarantee the voting rights of all American citizens forever is ridiculous," Wonder said. He also read the lyrics of an upcoming song to be released in September. "At this time we have a choice to make. Father God is watching while we cause Mother Earth so much pain. It's such a shame. Not enough money for the young, the old, the poor, but for war there is always more," Wonder said.
The Bush administration was also targeted by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), who declared that the president's "record against human rights, civil rights, economic rights, is absolutely terrible."
Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) said America was being ruled by the "Bush mentality," where "crony capitalism" was supreme.
Jesse Jackson said the Voting Rights Act extension is critical because "the same old enemies of civil rights and voting rights will always keep up their ugly activities. "Race baiters and discriminators may go underground, but they never move out of town," Jackson said.
The organizers of Saturday's march want to strengthen and preserve Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which maintains that states with a discriminatory past must submit all changes in voting procedures to the U.S. Department of Justice for approval in order to ensure the changes do not have racially discriminatory effects or purposes.
While the Bush administration and House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) have indicated that they would support full reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act provisions in 2007, the organizers of Saturday's march believe they must begin acting now to ensure their goals.
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Quote of the Day
"Well you see, Norm, it's like this... A herd of buffalo can only move as fast asthe slowest buffalo and when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest onesat the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as awhole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving bythe regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human braincan only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Now, as we know, excessivedrinking of alcohol kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest andweakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminatesthe weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. Andthat, Norm, is why you always feel smarter after a few beers." -- Cliff Claven explaining to Norm his "Buffalo/Brain Cell Killing Alcohol Theory"
A Warning to All the Women Out There
PANAMA CITY, Fla. -- A man who got angry with his wife because she wanted to cuddle after sex when what he really wanted to do was watch sports on television was sentenced to death for killing her with a claw hammer.
Christopher Offord, 30, was sentenced Wednesday by Circuit Judge Dedee Costello, who said the brutality of the crime outweighed any mental problems Offord may have had.
"The defendant struck his wife approximately 70 individual blows after spending a happy interlude with her," the judge said. "Her desire to cuddle after sex does not justify the extremely violent, brutal response of the defendant."
Offord pleaded guilty to first-degree murder in the 2004 slaying of Dana Noser, 40, at his apartment.
He confessed to a bartender at a sports bar before his arrest. He told investigators that his wife had been nagging him to come back to bed.
Offord did not speak in court but said in a jailhouse interview in June: "I figured I killed her so I deserve to die."
Christopher Offord, 30, was sentenced Wednesday by Circuit Judge Dedee Costello, who said the brutality of the crime outweighed any mental problems Offord may have had.
"The defendant struck his wife approximately 70 individual blows after spending a happy interlude with her," the judge said. "Her desire to cuddle after sex does not justify the extremely violent, brutal response of the defendant."
Offord pleaded guilty to first-degree murder in the 2004 slaying of Dana Noser, 40, at his apartment.
He confessed to a bartender at a sports bar before his arrest. He told investigators that his wife had been nagging him to come back to bed.
Offord did not speak in court but said in a jailhouse interview in June: "I figured I killed her so I deserve to die."
Good Work If You Can Get It
Detroit Lions president Matt Millen has agreed to a five-year contract extension, owner William Clay Ford Sr. announced Wednesday.
Millen, who is in the fifth and final season of his original contract, said that he agreed to the deal last month, but the announcement was delayed to avoid taking the focus off the team. The extension will run through the 2010 season.
The Lions have gone 16-48 since Millen was hired out of the Fox television booth, including a league-record 24-game road losing streak.
A contract extension? 16-48?
Millen, who is in the fifth and final season of his original contract, said that he agreed to the deal last month, but the announcement was delayed to avoid taking the focus off the team. The extension will run through the 2010 season.
The Lions have gone 16-48 since Millen was hired out of the Fox television booth, including a league-record 24-game road losing streak.
A contract extension? 16-48?
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Oooh, This Is Good For An Argument
To wit: "Suffering is meaningless. Suffering and death and evil are meaningless horrors, privations that produce nothing."
The tsunami that swept over southeast Asia in December left in its wake not only death and destruction but a profound and vexing puzzle. What kind of a God would allow such a thing to happen? In the weeks and months that followed, skeptical commentators posed this question with irritated insistence, as if discovering for the first time--thanks to the sheer scale of the tsunami's devastation--that we live in a world that may inflict grave harm with seeming randomness.
In "The Doors of the Sea," David Bentley Hart, an Orthodox theologian, tries to provide an answer. His book is, among much else, a rhetorically powerful and conceptually dense restatement of what Christianity has to say, over the centuries, about the suffering and death produced by nature itself--that is, by events outside human agency.
...Mr. Hart also addresses what he takes to be a confused explanation of natural disaster offered by well-meaning Christians themselves, who claim that the sufferings and deaths produced by tsunamis and their like are part of God's plan, God's providential will. Those who say this, and they are many, are likely to offer bromides like "it's all for the best" or "we can't understand what God means by such things" to those bereaved by catastrophe. But if the classical Christian view is right, this is nonsense. It is not for the best. God doesn't mean anything by it. Suffering and death and evil are meaningless horrors, privations that produce nothing. The best response for the bereaved, apart from lament, is to direct their gaze to a time when all tears will be wiped away.
Discuss among yourselves.
The tsunami that swept over southeast Asia in December left in its wake not only death and destruction but a profound and vexing puzzle. What kind of a God would allow such a thing to happen? In the weeks and months that followed, skeptical commentators posed this question with irritated insistence, as if discovering for the first time--thanks to the sheer scale of the tsunami's devastation--that we live in a world that may inflict grave harm with seeming randomness.
In "The Doors of the Sea," David Bentley Hart, an Orthodox theologian, tries to provide an answer. His book is, among much else, a rhetorically powerful and conceptually dense restatement of what Christianity has to say, over the centuries, about the suffering and death produced by nature itself--that is, by events outside human agency.
...Mr. Hart also addresses what he takes to be a confused explanation of natural disaster offered by well-meaning Christians themselves, who claim that the sufferings and deaths produced by tsunamis and their like are part of God's plan, God's providential will. Those who say this, and they are many, are likely to offer bromides like "it's all for the best" or "we can't understand what God means by such things" to those bereaved by catastrophe. But if the classical Christian view is right, this is nonsense. It is not for the best. God doesn't mean anything by it. Suffering and death and evil are meaningless horrors, privations that produce nothing. The best response for the bereaved, apart from lament, is to direct their gaze to a time when all tears will be wiped away.
Discuss among yourselves.
Whose Side Am I On?
I think the Sony executives and the two idiots who sued should both be fined.
LOS ANGELES (AP) - Sony Pictures Entertainment must pay $1.5 million to settle a class-action lawsuit accusing the studio of citing a fake movie critic in ads for several films.
Moviegoers who saw the films "Vertical Limit,""A Knight's Tale,""The Animal,""Hollow Man" or "The Patriot" during their original theater runs must file a claim to be eligible for a $5 per ticket reimbursement, lawyer Norman Blumenthal said Tuesday. He represented a group of filmgoers who sued Sony Pictures in 2001.
Any funds remaining after claims are satisfied would go to charity, he said.
Sony Pictures declined comment. The studio did not admit any liability under terms of the settlement.
After the dispute came to light, the studio temporarily suspended two executives and vowed to monitor its publicity and advertising more closely.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl entered a final judgment in the case last month, Blumenthal said.
The lawsuit, originally filed by two California moviegoers, claimed the ads fooled the plaintiffs into seeing "A Knight's Tale."
In one ad for the action-comedy, a critic identified as "David Manning of The Ridgefield Press" was quoted calling star Heath Ledger "this year's hottest new star!"
In an ad for "The Animal," Manning was quoted declaring, "The producing team of 'Big Daddy' has delivered another winner!"
At the time, The Ridgefield Press, a small weekly newspaper in Connecticut, did not have a movie critic named David Manning, the lawsuit said.
Some of the movies Manning praised had already received positive reviews from real critics.
LOS ANGELES (AP) - Sony Pictures Entertainment must pay $1.5 million to settle a class-action lawsuit accusing the studio of citing a fake movie critic in ads for several films.
Moviegoers who saw the films "Vertical Limit,""A Knight's Tale,""The Animal,""Hollow Man" or "The Patriot" during their original theater runs must file a claim to be eligible for a $5 per ticket reimbursement, lawyer Norman Blumenthal said Tuesday. He represented a group of filmgoers who sued Sony Pictures in 2001.
Any funds remaining after claims are satisfied would go to charity, he said.
Sony Pictures declined comment. The studio did not admit any liability under terms of the settlement.
After the dispute came to light, the studio temporarily suspended two executives and vowed to monitor its publicity and advertising more closely.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl entered a final judgment in the case last month, Blumenthal said.
The lawsuit, originally filed by two California moviegoers, claimed the ads fooled the plaintiffs into seeing "A Knight's Tale."
In one ad for the action-comedy, a critic identified as "David Manning of The Ridgefield Press" was quoted calling star Heath Ledger "this year's hottest new star!"
In an ad for "The Animal," Manning was quoted declaring, "The producing team of 'Big Daddy' has delivered another winner!"
At the time, The Ridgefield Press, a small weekly newspaper in Connecticut, did not have a movie critic named David Manning, the lawsuit said.
Some of the movies Manning praised had already received positive reviews from real critics.
Zero Savings Rate
If there is a housing bubble (don't know) and it bursts (may or may not), then we've got problems.
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The savings of U.S. consumers are:
a) at the lowest rate since the Depression.
b) at peaks not seen even during the stock market boom of the late 1990s.
c) all of the above.
If you're wondering how "all of the above" could be the correct answer -- and it is -- walk outside your front door and look around.
Even as a government report Tuesday showed the national savings rate at zero -- that's right nada -- the rise in the value of homes has given the average U.S. household a net worth of greater than $400,000, according to a separate report from the Federal Reserve.
Household real estate assets have risen by just over two-thirds since 1999, and the run up has enabled consumers to spend more money than they are bringing home in their paychecks. They're viewing their homes almost like ATM machines, using home equity loans and refinancings to pull out cash and support a higher level of spending.
"[Rising home values] are making people feel they don't need to save," said Lakshman Achuthan, managing director of the Economic Cycle Research Institute.
That means they are spending more of their paychecks than they would otherwise. That's good news for the current economy but it could cause trouble longer term, according to some economists.
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The savings of U.S. consumers are:
a) at the lowest rate since the Depression.
b) at peaks not seen even during the stock market boom of the late 1990s.
c) all of the above.
If you're wondering how "all of the above" could be the correct answer -- and it is -- walk outside your front door and look around.
Even as a government report Tuesday showed the national savings rate at zero -- that's right nada -- the rise in the value of homes has given the average U.S. household a net worth of greater than $400,000, according to a separate report from the Federal Reserve.
Household real estate assets have risen by just over two-thirds since 1999, and the run up has enabled consumers to spend more money than they are bringing home in their paychecks. They're viewing their homes almost like ATM machines, using home equity loans and refinancings to pull out cash and support a higher level of spending.
"[Rising home values] are making people feel they don't need to save," said Lakshman Achuthan, managing director of the Economic Cycle Research Institute.
That means they are spending more of their paychecks than they would otherwise. That's good news for the current economy but it could cause trouble longer term, according to some economists.
Two Reasons to Love Shaq
Reason #1: He lends his name to a line of shoes that are affordable (hear that MJ).
Reason #2: This:
Shaquille O'Neal has done what the skeptics said Shaq would never do.
The Big Pay Cut, by his own choosing, has surrendered his standing as the game's highest-paid player.
True story: O'Neal will have the richest salary in the league for only one more season. That's because Shaq, after agreeing to a new five-year contract worth $125 million, called back to tell his bosses he'd take $100 million instead.
So for the next half-decade, through his 38th birthday, O'Neal will earn $20 million annually. That means Kevin Garnett and Chris Webber will make more in 2006-07, followed by Allen Iverson and Stephon Marbury surpassing Shaq in 2007-08, after which Tim Duncan, Jason Kidd and old pal Kobe Bryant zoom by in 2008-09.
It's all happening because Shaq, who first had to opt out of the $30.6 million Miami owed him for the '05-06 season alone, knows the Heat have a better chance to put championship depth around him at this lower number.
Reason #2: This:
Shaquille O'Neal has done what the skeptics said Shaq would never do.
The Big Pay Cut, by his own choosing, has surrendered his standing as the game's highest-paid player.
True story: O'Neal will have the richest salary in the league for only one more season. That's because Shaq, after agreeing to a new five-year contract worth $125 million, called back to tell his bosses he'd take $100 million instead.
So for the next half-decade, through his 38th birthday, O'Neal will earn $20 million annually. That means Kevin Garnett and Chris Webber will make more in 2006-07, followed by Allen Iverson and Stephon Marbury surpassing Shaq in 2007-08, after which Tim Duncan, Jason Kidd and old pal Kobe Bryant zoom by in 2008-09.
It's all happening because Shaq, who first had to opt out of the $30.6 million Miami owed him for the '05-06 season alone, knows the Heat have a better chance to put championship depth around him at this lower number.
Monday, August 01, 2005
The Return of Apartheid
Well, sort of.
Only 8 percent of the guests on the major Sunday morning talk shows over the past 18 months were African Americans, with three people accounting for the majority of those appearances, according to a new study by the National Urban League.
Black guests -- newsmakers, the journalists who questioned them and experts who offered commentary -- appeared 176 times out of more than 2,100 opportunities, according to the study, which is scheduled for release today. But 122 of those appearances were made by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, former secretary of state Colin L. Powell, and Juan Williams, a journalist and regular panel member on "Fox News Sunday."
"There's very clearly a division, an exclusion," said Stephanie J. Jones, executive director of the Urban League Institute, who initiated the study, "Sunday Morning Apartheid: a Diversity Study of the Sunday Morning Talk Shows."
Only 8 percent of the guests on the major Sunday morning talk shows over the past 18 months were African Americans, with three people accounting for the majority of those appearances, according to a new study by the National Urban League.
Black guests -- newsmakers, the journalists who questioned them and experts who offered commentary -- appeared 176 times out of more than 2,100 opportunities, according to the study, which is scheduled for release today. But 122 of those appearances were made by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, former secretary of state Colin L. Powell, and Juan Williams, a journalist and regular panel member on "Fox News Sunday."
"There's very clearly a division, an exclusion," said Stephanie J. Jones, executive director of the Urban League Institute, who initiated the study, "Sunday Morning Apartheid: a Diversity Study of the Sunday Morning Talk Shows."
"Testify"
The boys from P.O.D. (the P-Man's favorite) have a new CD coming out in the fall. I just came across this little nugget on their web site.
Last week Sonny and Wuv flew to New York to present 6 songs from their upcoming record, TESTIFY to the Atlantic Records staff!!
Sonny and Wuv stood up in front of the executive staff at Atlantic Records and shared about their faith and vision to continue bringing their message to the world.
In the meeting Sonny said, "I believe in Jesus Christ. I will never back down from my faith...We know that no matter what happens, our name is good on the streets. You can ask anyone and we are good with the people in the streets. We do this in a way that even our own kids will look back and be proud."
I'm sure the suits at Atlantic were scratching their heads. Who is this Jesus fellow they keep talking about?
Last week Sonny and Wuv flew to New York to present 6 songs from their upcoming record, TESTIFY to the Atlantic Records staff!!
Sonny and Wuv stood up in front of the executive staff at Atlantic Records and shared about their faith and vision to continue bringing their message to the world.
In the meeting Sonny said, "I believe in Jesus Christ. I will never back down from my faith...We know that no matter what happens, our name is good on the streets. You can ask anyone and we are good with the people in the streets. We do this in a way that even our own kids will look back and be proud."
I'm sure the suits at Atlantic were scratching their heads. Who is this Jesus fellow they keep talking about?
Deano's At It Again
Howard Dean is a...well...you be the judge:
[Dean] also said the president was partly responsible for a recent Supreme Court decision involving eminent domain.
“The president and his right-wing Supreme Court think it is ‘okay’ to have the government take your house if they feel like putting a hotel where your house is,” Dean said, not mentioning that until he nominated John Roberts to the Supreme Court this week, Bush had not appointed anyone to the high court.
Why is Dean’s statement so ridiculous?
Dean’s reference to the “right-wing” court was also erroneous. The four justices who dissented in the Kelo vs. New London case included the three most conservative members of the court - Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Associate Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was the fourth dissenter.
The court’s liberal coalition of Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer combined with Justice Anthony Kennedy to form the majority opinion, allowing the city of New London, Conn., to use eminent domain to seize private properties for commercial development.
“We think that eminent domain does not belong in the private sector. It is for public use only,” Dean said.
[Dean] also said the president was partly responsible for a recent Supreme Court decision involving eminent domain.
“The president and his right-wing Supreme Court think it is ‘okay’ to have the government take your house if they feel like putting a hotel where your house is,” Dean said, not mentioning that until he nominated John Roberts to the Supreme Court this week, Bush had not appointed anyone to the high court.
Why is Dean’s statement so ridiculous?
Dean’s reference to the “right-wing” court was also erroneous. The four justices who dissented in the Kelo vs. New London case included the three most conservative members of the court - Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Associate Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was the fourth dissenter.
The court’s liberal coalition of Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer combined with Justice Anthony Kennedy to form the majority opinion, allowing the city of New London, Conn., to use eminent domain to seize private properties for commercial development.
“We think that eminent domain does not belong in the private sector. It is for public use only,” Dean said.
Money Down The Drain
Joe Johnson averaged 17 points, 5 rebounds and 3 assists on an offense-oriented Phoenix team last year. He's a nice player. But this is waaaaay too much money. There's a reason Atlanta is the worst run organization in the NBA.
It appears that Joe Johnson's wish to swap a supporting role in Phoenix for star status in Atlanta is on the verge of being granted.
NBA front-office sources told ESPN.com that the Suns and Hawks have locked into serious trade discussions that could send Johnson to the Eastern Conference via sign-and-trade as early as Tuesday afternoon.
The proposed deal, according to sources, would bring guard Boris Diaw and two lottery-protected future first-round picks to Phoenix -- along with a trade exception in the $5 million range -- after Johnson signs a contract under terms established by Atlanta: $70 million over five years with an estimated balloon payment of $20 million up front.
It appears that Joe Johnson's wish to swap a supporting role in Phoenix for star status in Atlanta is on the verge of being granted.
NBA front-office sources told ESPN.com that the Suns and Hawks have locked into serious trade discussions that could send Johnson to the Eastern Conference via sign-and-trade as early as Tuesday afternoon.
The proposed deal, according to sources, would bring guard Boris Diaw and two lottery-protected future first-round picks to Phoenix -- along with a trade exception in the $5 million range -- after Johnson signs a contract under terms established by Atlanta: $70 million over five years with an estimated balloon payment of $20 million up front.
Reporters Don't Like It When The Tables Are Turned
White House press doyenne Helen Thomas is plenty peeved at her longtime friend Albert Eisele, editor of THE HILL newspaper in Washington, D.C.
In a column this week headlined "Reporter: Cheney's Not Presidential Material," Eisele quoted Thomas as saying "The day Dick Cheney is going to run for president, I'll kill myself. All we need is one more liar."
Thomas also said: "I think he'd like to run, but it would be a sad day for the country if he does," according to Eisele's column.
But Thomas said yesterday at the White House that her comments to Eisele were for his ears only. "I'll never talk to a reporter again!"
Thomas was overheard saying. "We were just talking -- I was ranting -- and he wrote about it. That isn't right. We all say stuff we don't want printed," Thomas said.
But Eisele said that when he called Thomas, "I assume she knew that we were on the record."
"She's obviously very upset about it, but it was a small item -- until Drudge picked it up and broadcast it across the universe," Eisele said.
Still, he noted that reporters aren't that happy when the tables are turned. "Nobody has thinner skin than reporters," Eisele said with a laugh.
In a column this week headlined "Reporter: Cheney's Not Presidential Material," Eisele quoted Thomas as saying "The day Dick Cheney is going to run for president, I'll kill myself. All we need is one more liar."
Thomas also said: "I think he'd like to run, but it would be a sad day for the country if he does," according to Eisele's column.
But Thomas said yesterday at the White House that her comments to Eisele were for his ears only. "I'll never talk to a reporter again!"
Thomas was overheard saying. "We were just talking -- I was ranting -- and he wrote about it. That isn't right. We all say stuff we don't want printed," Thomas said.
But Eisele said that when he called Thomas, "I assume she knew that we were on the record."
"She's obviously very upset about it, but it was a small item -- until Drudge picked it up and broadcast it across the universe," Eisele said.
Still, he noted that reporters aren't that happy when the tables are turned. "Nobody has thinner skin than reporters," Eisele said with a laugh.
Saturday, July 30, 2005
How Ironic
From Hugh Hewitt:
I received a call from Amy Goldstein of the Washington Post today, requesting I call her back to discuss the nomination of John Roberts. I assumed that this is because (1)I worked with John Roberts in the White House Counsel's office for a year and (2)the big document dump may have turned up memos with my name on them which are of interest to the Post. Goldstein had a big story on the docs in Wednesday's Post.
Then again, it might be about the White House basketball team on which I was the player-coach and for which Judge Roberts played. That team's level of play was truly a scandal.
Or she might be calling about the "White House V-Toes," the 1985 White House Nike Capitol Challenge 5-k Team, for which both Judge Roberts and I ran.
The subject didn't matter to me. I had my assistant call back and say fine. She could interview me. Only one condition: The interview had to be conducted on air, live, during my broadcast. Would she please call the show line at 3:06 Pacific?
I had a similar request from a New York Times reporter for a similar interview a couple of days back. I made the same offer. He didn't respond.
Amy Goldstein did respond. She declined. My assistant relayed that Ms. Goldstein didn't want her story "out there" before it ran.
Fine, I thought. But then I got to thinking: Isn't journalism supposed to be in the public interest? If Goldstein wants information from me, and I am willing to give it to her, isn't she putting her own interests in a "scoop" or an "angle" ahead of the public's by refusing to conduct an interview she thought would be useful in the first place? And isn't she going forward with a story she knows may well be unnecessarily incomplete because she doesn't like the fact that her questions and my answers would have been on the record?
I of course want my listeners to get a chance if not to see the sausage that is MSM "news" being made, at least hear it being ground fine. I had hoped to compare whatever I was able to provide Ms. Goldstein with whatever it is that she publishes on the subject. Interesting all around, no?
But she declined to conduct the interview she requested. How interesting to note that the Post is willing to use sources that insist on anonymity, but not sources that demand transparency.
I received a call from Amy Goldstein of the Washington Post today, requesting I call her back to discuss the nomination of John Roberts. I assumed that this is because (1)I worked with John Roberts in the White House Counsel's office for a year and (2)the big document dump may have turned up memos with my name on them which are of interest to the Post. Goldstein had a big story on the docs in Wednesday's Post.
Then again, it might be about the White House basketball team on which I was the player-coach and for which Judge Roberts played. That team's level of play was truly a scandal.
Or she might be calling about the "White House V-Toes," the 1985 White House Nike Capitol Challenge 5-k Team, for which both Judge Roberts and I ran.
The subject didn't matter to me. I had my assistant call back and say fine. She could interview me. Only one condition: The interview had to be conducted on air, live, during my broadcast. Would she please call the show line at 3:06 Pacific?
I had a similar request from a New York Times reporter for a similar interview a couple of days back. I made the same offer. He didn't respond.
Amy Goldstein did respond. She declined. My assistant relayed that Ms. Goldstein didn't want her story "out there" before it ran.
Fine, I thought. But then I got to thinking: Isn't journalism supposed to be in the public interest? If Goldstein wants information from me, and I am willing to give it to her, isn't she putting her own interests in a "scoop" or an "angle" ahead of the public's by refusing to conduct an interview she thought would be useful in the first place? And isn't she going forward with a story she knows may well be unnecessarily incomplete because she doesn't like the fact that her questions and my answers would have been on the record?
I of course want my listeners to get a chance if not to see the sausage that is MSM "news" being made, at least hear it being ground fine. I had hoped to compare whatever I was able to provide Ms. Goldstein with whatever it is that she publishes on the subject. Interesting all around, no?
But she declined to conduct the interview she requested. How interesting to note that the Post is willing to use sources that insist on anonymity, but not sources that demand transparency.
Friday, July 29, 2005
Hee Hee
Nancy Pelosi is a fool (as if you didn't already know that).
Q Can you elaborate, Madame Leader, on some of the offers that were made to Democrats that you know about?
REP. PELOSI: No.
Q In which case -- it's a pretty serious charge, that you're saying some of them didn't pass legal muster to you.
REP. PELOSI: Yeah.
Q You're saying that -- that Republicans were trying to bribe Democrats?
REP. PELOSI: I didn't use the word bribe.
Q Well, you said it wasn't legal.
REP. PELOSI: I said that offers were made that were, in my view, questionable. And I know that they would be at a cost to the taxpayers. And I say that without any hesitation.
Q But that's a very serious charge.
REP. PELOSI: It is.
Q Could you just -- could you just give us the specifics of what you've heard?
REP. PELOSI: No, I'm not going to. I'm telling you, and -- why don't you go ask the Republicans or the White House what they were offering people? They would know best; they're the ones who were making the offers. I think that this has to stop. We have to stop the Republican rip-off of the legislative process on Capitol Hill. It has to stop now...
Q Madame Leader, I'm sorry to belabor this point, but it is -- let me see how to phrase this -- is there a difference between horse trading and federal violation regarding offering something of value for somebody's vote?
REP. PELOSI: Yes.
Q There's got to be a difference, right?
REP. PELOSI: Yeah. There is.
Q So now you're beyond just the normal give and take of --
REP. PELOSI: Yes.
Q I don't see how you can just lay that out there without giving us the specifics --
REP. PELOSI: Well, I just did. But I just did.
Q Is that fair, though? Is that the way you would like to be treated?
REP. PELOSI: That's the way we are treated. That's the way we are treated.
Q Are you going to pursue any sort of ethics complaint --
REP. PELOSI: I may. I may. I may. Not me, but those who have the information may. But these are the kinds of things that are very hard to prove if the deal is not consummated. That doesn't mean the deal wasn't offered. And it really -- because they have a poverty of arguments in favor of CAFTA, they have to resort to these extraordinary means.
Q Can you elaborate, Madame Leader, on some of the offers that were made to Democrats that you know about?
REP. PELOSI: No.
Q In which case -- it's a pretty serious charge, that you're saying some of them didn't pass legal muster to you.
REP. PELOSI: Yeah.
Q You're saying that -- that Republicans were trying to bribe Democrats?
REP. PELOSI: I didn't use the word bribe.
Q Well, you said it wasn't legal.
REP. PELOSI: I said that offers were made that were, in my view, questionable. And I know that they would be at a cost to the taxpayers. And I say that without any hesitation.
Q But that's a very serious charge.
REP. PELOSI: It is.
Q Could you just -- could you just give us the specifics of what you've heard?
REP. PELOSI: No, I'm not going to. I'm telling you, and -- why don't you go ask the Republicans or the White House what they were offering people? They would know best; they're the ones who were making the offers. I think that this has to stop. We have to stop the Republican rip-off of the legislative process on Capitol Hill. It has to stop now...
Q Madame Leader, I'm sorry to belabor this point, but it is -- let me see how to phrase this -- is there a difference between horse trading and federal violation regarding offering something of value for somebody's vote?
REP. PELOSI: Yes.
Q There's got to be a difference, right?
REP. PELOSI: Yeah. There is.
Q So now you're beyond just the normal give and take of --
REP. PELOSI: Yes.
Q I don't see how you can just lay that out there without giving us the specifics --
REP. PELOSI: Well, I just did. But I just did.
Q Is that fair, though? Is that the way you would like to be treated?
REP. PELOSI: That's the way we are treated. That's the way we are treated.
Q Are you going to pursue any sort of ethics complaint --
REP. PELOSI: I may. I may. I may. Not me, but those who have the information may. But these are the kinds of things that are very hard to prove if the deal is not consummated. That doesn't mean the deal wasn't offered. And it really -- because they have a poverty of arguments in favor of CAFTA, they have to resort to these extraordinary means.
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Best Book Blurb Ever
"The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam", a new book by Robert Spencer, just came out and includes the following blurb on the top of the book:
"May Allah rip out his spine from his back and split his brains in two, and then put them both back, and then do it over and over and over again. Amen." -- "praise" for the author on RevivingIslam.com."
"May Allah rip out his spine from his back and split his brains in two, and then put them both back, and then do it over and over and over again. Amen." -- "praise" for the author on RevivingIslam.com."
An Objective Reporter
From The Hill:
Reporter: Cheney’s not presidential materialIf Vice President Cheney is indeed a “serious darkhorse” candidate for president in 2008, as Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward recently suggested, he probably won’t want to enlist legendary White House reporter Helen Thomas to help with his press relations, even though she has proposed a campaign strategy he could run on....But asked this week if she is promoting a Cheney candidacy, Thomas made it clear she isn’t.
“The day I say Dick Cheney is going to run for president, I’ll kill myself,” she told The Hill. “All we need is one more liar.”
Thomas added, “I think he’d like to run, but it would be a sad day for the country if he does.”
Is that "I'll kill myself" statement a promise?
Reporter: Cheney’s not presidential materialIf Vice President Cheney is indeed a “serious darkhorse” candidate for president in 2008, as Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward recently suggested, he probably won’t want to enlist legendary White House reporter Helen Thomas to help with his press relations, even though she has proposed a campaign strategy he could run on....But asked this week if she is promoting a Cheney candidacy, Thomas made it clear she isn’t.
“The day I say Dick Cheney is going to run for president, I’ll kill myself,” she told The Hill. “All we need is one more liar.”
Thomas added, “I think he’d like to run, but it would be a sad day for the country if he does.”
Is that "I'll kill myself" statement a promise?
Religion of Peace
News from Indonesia:
The government continues to investigate, arrest and prosecute Islamic terrorists. But religious conflicts continue as well. More moderate Moslem leaders, while helping the government by preaching against the Islamic radicals, also want government help to stem the growth of Christianity. Missionaries, both Indonesian and foreign, have been successful in converting an increasing number of Moslem Indonesians. The Islamic clergy want the government to intervene. By law, only five religions are allowed in Indonesia, and the government has a tradition of getting involved in religious affairs. While 85 percent of Indonesians are Moslem, most of the remainder are Christian. On some islands, the population is half, or more, Christian. On those islands, many Moslems see Christianity as a more "modern" religion. Christian clergy and missionaries are generally better educated than their Moslem counterparts, and the Christians tend to be more successful economically as well.
The government continues to investigate, arrest and prosecute Islamic terrorists. But religious conflicts continue as well. More moderate Moslem leaders, while helping the government by preaching against the Islamic radicals, also want government help to stem the growth of Christianity. Missionaries, both Indonesian and foreign, have been successful in converting an increasing number of Moslem Indonesians. The Islamic clergy want the government to intervene. By law, only five religions are allowed in Indonesia, and the government has a tradition of getting involved in religious affairs. While 85 percent of Indonesians are Moslem, most of the remainder are Christian. On some islands, the population is half, or more, Christian. On those islands, many Moslems see Christianity as a more "modern" religion. Christian clergy and missionaries are generally better educated than their Moslem counterparts, and the Christians tend to be more successful economically as well.
Who Confirmed This Guy?
I believe he was a Reagan appointment. The Gipper let us down with this guy.
SEATTLE (AP) - The sentence itself was fairly straightforward: An Algerian man received 22 years for plotting to bomb the Los Angeles airport on the eve of the millennium. It was what the judge said in imposing the term that raised eyebrows.
U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour said the successful prosecution of Ahmed Ressam should serve not only as a warning to terrorists, but as a statement to the Bush administration about its terrorism-fighting tactics.
"We did not need to use a secret military tribunal, detain the defendant indefinitely as an enemy combatant or deny the defendant the right to counsel," he said Wednesday. "The message to the world from today's sentencing is that our courts have not abandoned our commitment to the ideals that set our nation apart."
The problem is that this nutjob will be out of jail in 22 years, if not sooner. Do you think he'll try this again? Yep.
SEATTLE (AP) - The sentence itself was fairly straightforward: An Algerian man received 22 years for plotting to bomb the Los Angeles airport on the eve of the millennium. It was what the judge said in imposing the term that raised eyebrows.
U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour said the successful prosecution of Ahmed Ressam should serve not only as a warning to terrorists, but as a statement to the Bush administration about its terrorism-fighting tactics.
"We did not need to use a secret military tribunal, detain the defendant indefinitely as an enemy combatant or deny the defendant the right to counsel," he said Wednesday. "The message to the world from today's sentencing is that our courts have not abandoned our commitment to the ideals that set our nation apart."
The problem is that this nutjob will be out of jail in 22 years, if not sooner. Do you think he'll try this again? Yep.
Saturday, July 23, 2005
Huh?
It pays to have friends in high places:
A jury has cleared Assistant U.C. Basketball Coach Keith Legree of a drunken driving charge. The jury found Legree not guilty after deliberating just seven minutes. Cincinnati Police pulled Legree over back in March on Central Parkway.
The breath test was ruled inadmissible at trial, because it did not yield a sufficient sample. Jurors also viewed police video recording the traffic stop, but apparently could not conclude he was intoxicated based on what they saw on the video.
The video showed Legree slumped over in his car...and the police officers had to violently shake his car to awaken him from his "slumber". You be the judge.
A jury has cleared Assistant U.C. Basketball Coach Keith Legree of a drunken driving charge. The jury found Legree not guilty after deliberating just seven minutes. Cincinnati Police pulled Legree over back in March on Central Parkway.
The breath test was ruled inadmissible at trial, because it did not yield a sufficient sample. Jurors also viewed police video recording the traffic stop, but apparently could not conclude he was intoxicated based on what they saw on the video.
The video showed Legree slumped over in his car...and the police officers had to violently shake his car to awaken him from his "slumber". You be the judge.
This is Terrifying
First, some good news:
The group portrait of British Muslims painted by YouGov's survey for The Daily Telegraph is at once reassuring and disturbing, in some ways even alarming.
The vast majority of British Muslims condemn the London bombings but a substantial minority are clearly alienated from modern British society and some are prepared to justify terrorist acts.
The divisions within the Muslim community go deep. Muslims are divided over the morality of the London bombings, over the extent of their loyalty to this country and over how Muslims should respond to recent events.
Most Muslims are evidently moderate and law-abiding but by no means all are.
YouGov sought to gauge the character of the Muslim community's response to the events of July 7. As the figures in the chart show, 88 per cent of British Muslims clearly have no intention of trying to justify the bus and Tube murders.
Now, the bad news:
However, six per cent insist that the bombings were, on the contrary, fully justified.
Now, the very bad news:
Six per cent may seem a small proportion but in absolute numbers it amounts to about 100,000 individuals who, if not prepared to carry out terrorist acts, are ready to support those who do.
Do these attitudes reflect those of American Muslims?
The group portrait of British Muslims painted by YouGov's survey for The Daily Telegraph is at once reassuring and disturbing, in some ways even alarming.
The vast majority of British Muslims condemn the London bombings but a substantial minority are clearly alienated from modern British society and some are prepared to justify terrorist acts.
The divisions within the Muslim community go deep. Muslims are divided over the morality of the London bombings, over the extent of their loyalty to this country and over how Muslims should respond to recent events.
Most Muslims are evidently moderate and law-abiding but by no means all are.
YouGov sought to gauge the character of the Muslim community's response to the events of July 7. As the figures in the chart show, 88 per cent of British Muslims clearly have no intention of trying to justify the bus and Tube murders.
Now, the bad news:
However, six per cent insist that the bombings were, on the contrary, fully justified.
Now, the very bad news:
Six per cent may seem a small proportion but in absolute numbers it amounts to about 100,000 individuals who, if not prepared to carry out terrorist acts, are ready to support those who do.
Do these attitudes reflect those of American Muslims?
The City of Peace?
SHARM EL-SHEIKH, Egypt (Reuters) - At least 83 people were killed and 200 injured when car bombs ripped through shopping and hotel areas in the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh on Saturday in the worst attack in Egypt since 1981.
Shaken European tourists spoke of mass panic and hysteria as people fled the carnage in the early hours, with bodies strewn across the roads, people screaming and sirens wailing.
The regional governor said two car bombs and possibly a suitcase bomb had rocked the resort, popular with divers and European holidaymakers, as well as diplomats who have convened world summits. Egypt has called it "the city of peace."
Shaken European tourists spoke of mass panic and hysteria as people fled the carnage in the early hours, with bodies strewn across the roads, people screaming and sirens wailing.
The regional governor said two car bombs and possibly a suitcase bomb had rocked the resort, popular with divers and European holidaymakers, as well as diplomats who have convened world summits. Egypt has called it "the city of peace."
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Yikes!
This is shocking...and scary.
New, riskier forms of mortgage finance also allow buyers to borrow more. According to the NAR, 42% of all first-time buyers and 25% of all buyers made no down-payment on their home purchase last year. Indeed, homebuyers can get 105% loans to cover buying costs. And, increasingly, little or no documentation of a borrower's assets, employment and income is required for a loan.
Interest-only mortgages are all the rage, along with so-called “negative amortisation loans” (the buyer pays less than the interest due and the unpaid principal and interest is added on to the loan). After an initial period, payments surge as principal repayment kicks in. In California, over 60% of all new mortgages this year are interest-only or negative-amortisation, up from 8% in 2002. The national figure is one-third. The new loans are essentially a gamble that prices will continue to rise rapidly, allowing the borrower to sell the home at a profit or refinance before any principal has to be repaid. Such loans are usually adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs), which leave the borrower additionally exposed to higher interest rates. This year, ARMs have risen to 50% of all mortgages in those states with the biggest price rises.
New, riskier forms of mortgage finance also allow buyers to borrow more. According to the NAR, 42% of all first-time buyers and 25% of all buyers made no down-payment on their home purchase last year. Indeed, homebuyers can get 105% loans to cover buying costs. And, increasingly, little or no documentation of a borrower's assets, employment and income is required for a loan.
Interest-only mortgages are all the rage, along with so-called “negative amortisation loans” (the buyer pays less than the interest due and the unpaid principal and interest is added on to the loan). After an initial period, payments surge as principal repayment kicks in. In California, over 60% of all new mortgages this year are interest-only or negative-amortisation, up from 8% in 2002. The national figure is one-third. The new loans are essentially a gamble that prices will continue to rise rapidly, allowing the borrower to sell the home at a profit or refinance before any principal has to be repaid. Such loans are usually adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs), which leave the borrower additionally exposed to higher interest rates. This year, ARMs have risen to 50% of all mortgages in those states with the biggest price rises.
Jihad!!
The President of Pakistan has called on his people to undertake a jihad, or holy war, against religious extremism in a speech about the wave of arrests that he has ordered in the aftermath of the London bombings on July 7.
"I urge you, my nation, to stand up and wage jihad against extremism and to stand up against those who spread hatred and chaos in the society," said President Pervez Musharraf in an hour-long televised address.
"I urge you, my nation, to stand up and wage jihad against extremism and to stand up against those who spread hatred and chaos in the society," said President Pervez Musharraf in an hour-long televised address.
What Would Pops Think?
The word "fail" should be banned from use in British classrooms and replaced with the phrase "deferred success" to avoid demoralizing pupils, a group of teachers has proposed.
Members of the Professional Association of Teachers (PAT) argue that telling pupils they have failed can put them off learning for life.
A spokesman for the group said it wanted to avoid labeling children. "We recognize that children do not necessarily achieve success first time," he said.
"But I recognize that we can't just strike a word from the dictionary," he said.
The PAT said it would debate the proposal at a conference next week.
Members of the Professional Association of Teachers (PAT) argue that telling pupils they have failed can put them off learning for life.
A spokesman for the group said it wanted to avoid labeling children. "We recognize that children do not necessarily achieve success first time," he said.
"But I recognize that we can't just strike a word from the dictionary," he said.
The PAT said it would debate the proposal at a conference next week.
This Sounds Like Fun
Overlooking Jerusalem at Tzurim Valley National Park, archaeologists and volunteers work on one of Jerusalem's most unusual excavations. They are sifting tons of dirt removed in 1999 by Islamic work crews who were remodeling an underground area of the Temple Mount—known as Solomon's Stables—to create the Marwani Mosque (CT, March 6, 2000, p. 27).
Some of the dirt went to Jerusalem's municipal dump, where it was mixed with the city's garbage. Some of it was discarded in the Kidron Valley. The remodeling was done without archaeological supervision. Bar Ilan University archaeology professor Gabriel Barkay called these events "an archaeological tragedy." The Temple Mount is the third holiest site in Islam and is known as Al Haram al Sharif, the Noble Sanctuary. It is also the holiest site in Judaism.
Last November, Barkay trucked 70 loads of dirt up to the park on the slopes of Mount Scopus, where volunteers began sifting the rubble.
Bar Ilan is sponsoring the project, but funding has come from private donations, which have been barely enough to keep it going.
The sifting is done in the shadow of the Hebrew University. But aside from a few archaeology students employed as supervisors, the university is not involved. And aside from the provision of land by the National Parks Authority, the Israeli government has ignored the project.
"The [Israeli] Antiquities Authority would prefer the Temple Mount [to] evaporate entirely," Barkay told ct, "because they cannot fulfill their legal obligations to safeguard the archaeological remains there."
Excavating dirt totally removed from its context is anathema to archaeologists. Barkay compares it to an autopsy.
"Although we cannot resuscitate this material to tell us more about the Temple Mount, still it testifies about the living conditions of that material before it got 'killed,'" he says.
Every period, from pre-history to the modern era, is represented in the dirt, from flint implements to beautiful figurines. Some discoveries, like thousands of pottery shards and several hundred coins, are easily dateable. Other items, like jewelry, are nearly impossible to date out of context.
Arrowheads found include one dating to the siege of Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. "It was probably shot at the armies of Zedekiah, the last king of Judah, who guarded the temple just before it was burned by the Babylonians," Barkay said.
A seal impression in hardened clay, mentioning the name of Jerusalem, dates to the Hellenistic period.
"Nothing is really sensational or unique," Barkay said. "But it has a cumulative value. It adds up to new information about the Temple Mount."
The biggest surprise has been large amounts of remains from the early Christian or Byzantine period.
Barkay said part of Jerusalem's history will have to be rewritten. Most historians thought the Temple Mount was largely deserted then.
Although they are only about halfway through the 70 truckloads of dirt, Barkay planned to stop the process at the end of June in order to analyze the finds. He said he doesn't know when they'll start up again. Funding remains a critical issue.
Some of the dirt went to Jerusalem's municipal dump, where it was mixed with the city's garbage. Some of it was discarded in the Kidron Valley. The remodeling was done without archaeological supervision. Bar Ilan University archaeology professor Gabriel Barkay called these events "an archaeological tragedy." The Temple Mount is the third holiest site in Islam and is known as Al Haram al Sharif, the Noble Sanctuary. It is also the holiest site in Judaism.
Last November, Barkay trucked 70 loads of dirt up to the park on the slopes of Mount Scopus, where volunteers began sifting the rubble.
Bar Ilan is sponsoring the project, but funding has come from private donations, which have been barely enough to keep it going.
The sifting is done in the shadow of the Hebrew University. But aside from a few archaeology students employed as supervisors, the university is not involved. And aside from the provision of land by the National Parks Authority, the Israeli government has ignored the project.
"The [Israeli] Antiquities Authority would prefer the Temple Mount [to] evaporate entirely," Barkay told ct, "because they cannot fulfill their legal obligations to safeguard the archaeological remains there."
Excavating dirt totally removed from its context is anathema to archaeologists. Barkay compares it to an autopsy.
"Although we cannot resuscitate this material to tell us more about the Temple Mount, still it testifies about the living conditions of that material before it got 'killed,'" he says.
Every period, from pre-history to the modern era, is represented in the dirt, from flint implements to beautiful figurines. Some discoveries, like thousands of pottery shards and several hundred coins, are easily dateable. Other items, like jewelry, are nearly impossible to date out of context.
Arrowheads found include one dating to the siege of Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. "It was probably shot at the armies of Zedekiah, the last king of Judah, who guarded the temple just before it was burned by the Babylonians," Barkay said.
A seal impression in hardened clay, mentioning the name of Jerusalem, dates to the Hellenistic period.
"Nothing is really sensational or unique," Barkay said. "But it has a cumulative value. It adds up to new information about the Temple Mount."
The biggest surprise has been large amounts of remains from the early Christian or Byzantine period.
Barkay said part of Jerusalem's history will have to be rewritten. Most historians thought the Temple Mount was largely deserted then.
Although they are only about halfway through the 70 truckloads of dirt, Barkay planned to stop the process at the end of June in order to analyze the finds. He said he doesn't know when they'll start up again. Funding remains a critical issue.
Quote of the Day
John Howard smacks down a stupid question from a stupid reporter:
PRIME MIN. HOWARD: Could I start by saying the prime minister and I were having a discussion when we heard about it. My first reaction was to get some more information. And I really don't want to add to what the prime minister has said. It's a matter for the police and a matter for the British authorities to talk in detail about what has happened here.
Can I just say very directly, Paul, on the issue of the policies of my government and indeed the policies of the British and American governments on Iraq, that the first point of reference is that once a country allows its foreign policy to be determined by terrorism, it's given the game away, to use the vernacular. And no Australian government that I lead will ever have policies determined by terrorism or terrorist threats, and no self-respecting government of any political stripe in Australia would allow that to happen.
Can I remind you that the murder of 88 Australians in Bali took place before the operation in Iraq.
And I remind you that the 11th of September occurred before the operation in Iraq.
Can I also remind you that the very first occasion that bin Laden specifically referred to Australia was in the context of Australia's involvement in liberating the people of East Timor. Are people by implication suggesting we shouldn't have done that?
When a group claimed responsibility on the website for the attacks on the 7th of July, they talked about British policy not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan. Are people suggesting we shouldn't be in Afghanistan?
When Sergio de Mello was murdered in Iraq -- a brave man, a distinguished international diplomat, a person immensely respected for his work in the United Nations -- when al Qaeda gloated about that, they referred specifically to the role that de Mello had carried out in East Timor because he was the United Nations administrator in East Timor.
Now I don't know the mind of the terrorists. By definition, you can't put yourself in the mind of a successful suicide bomber. I can only look at objective facts, and the objective facts are as I've cited. The objective evidence is that Australia was a terrorist target long before the operation in Iraq. And indeed, all the evidence, as distinct from the suppositions, suggests to me that this is about hatred of a way of life, this is about the perverted use of principles of the great world religion that, at its root, preaches peace and cooperation. And I think we lose sight of the challenge we have if we allow ourselves to see these attacks in the context of particular circumstances rather than the abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder.
PRIME MIN. BLAIR: And I agree 100 percent with that. (Laughter.)
PRIME MIN. HOWARD: Could I start by saying the prime minister and I were having a discussion when we heard about it. My first reaction was to get some more information. And I really don't want to add to what the prime minister has said. It's a matter for the police and a matter for the British authorities to talk in detail about what has happened here.
Can I just say very directly, Paul, on the issue of the policies of my government and indeed the policies of the British and American governments on Iraq, that the first point of reference is that once a country allows its foreign policy to be determined by terrorism, it's given the game away, to use the vernacular. And no Australian government that I lead will ever have policies determined by terrorism or terrorist threats, and no self-respecting government of any political stripe in Australia would allow that to happen.
Can I remind you that the murder of 88 Australians in Bali took place before the operation in Iraq.
And I remind you that the 11th of September occurred before the operation in Iraq.
Can I also remind you that the very first occasion that bin Laden specifically referred to Australia was in the context of Australia's involvement in liberating the people of East Timor. Are people by implication suggesting we shouldn't have done that?
When a group claimed responsibility on the website for the attacks on the 7th of July, they talked about British policy not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan. Are people suggesting we shouldn't be in Afghanistan?
When Sergio de Mello was murdered in Iraq -- a brave man, a distinguished international diplomat, a person immensely respected for his work in the United Nations -- when al Qaeda gloated about that, they referred specifically to the role that de Mello had carried out in East Timor because he was the United Nations administrator in East Timor.
Now I don't know the mind of the terrorists. By definition, you can't put yourself in the mind of a successful suicide bomber. I can only look at objective facts, and the objective facts are as I've cited. The objective evidence is that Australia was a terrorist target long before the operation in Iraq. And indeed, all the evidence, as distinct from the suppositions, suggests to me that this is about hatred of a way of life, this is about the perverted use of principles of the great world religion that, at its root, preaches peace and cooperation. And I think we lose sight of the challenge we have if we allow ourselves to see these attacks in the context of particular circumstances rather than the abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder.
PRIME MIN. BLAIR: And I agree 100 percent with that. (Laughter.)
The "Leaders" of Black America
Are there a bigger bunch of fools than the Congressional Black Caucus?
Football Hall of Famer O.J. Simpson lapped up loads of attention at the Congressional Black Caucus Spouses’ gala and golf tournament earlier this week. Simpson was the biggest celebrity at the event — a benefit to raise money for the group’s successful scholarship program to send needy children to college.
...Simpson was mobbed by young staffers at the Sunday night gala at Dream nightclub, where gawkers were secretly debating whether he should be there at all. “I’m kind of embarrassed that I shook his hand,” said one aide to a black Member. Questioning herself, she added, “But he was acquitted.”
Football Hall of Famer O.J. Simpson lapped up loads of attention at the Congressional Black Caucus Spouses’ gala and golf tournament earlier this week. Simpson was the biggest celebrity at the event — a benefit to raise money for the group’s successful scholarship program to send needy children to college.
...Simpson was mobbed by young staffers at the Sunday night gala at Dream nightclub, where gawkers were secretly debating whether he should be there at all. “I’m kind of embarrassed that I shook his hand,” said one aide to a black Member. Questioning herself, she added, “But he was acquitted.”
The Rove-A-Dope Continues
W is about to change the shape of the Supreme Court for the next 15 to 20 years, and the Dems continue to fiddle.
Less than 15 hours after President Bush announced that John Roberts would be his nominee for the Supreme Court, leading Democrats stood before a bank of television cameras Wednesday and criticized the president. But their ire had nothing to do with Roberts.
Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Jane Harman assailed the president for failing to punish Karl Rove for his alleged involvement in disclosing the name of a CIA operative.
ROLL CALL reports: "In a set of talking points issued Wednesday morning, the Senate Democratic leadership urged rank-and-file Senators to continue spotlighting Rove's involvement in the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity. 'A Supreme Court nominee will not distract the country from the growing credibility problem at the White House,' Democrats were told to echo."
Less than 15 hours after President Bush announced that John Roberts would be his nominee for the Supreme Court, leading Democrats stood before a bank of television cameras Wednesday and criticized the president. But their ire had nothing to do with Roberts.
Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Jane Harman assailed the president for failing to punish Karl Rove for his alleged involvement in disclosing the name of a CIA operative.
ROLL CALL reports: "In a set of talking points issued Wednesday morning, the Senate Democratic leadership urged rank-and-file Senators to continue spotlighting Rove's involvement in the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity. 'A Supreme Court nominee will not distract the country from the growing credibility problem at the White House,' Democrats were told to echo."
"Dumbass Questions"
Hopefully we'll see and hear more of this during the Roberts' confirmation hearings. This is from his hearings after being nominated for the Court of Appeals:
In the beginning of Wednesday's Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for Bush nominee John G. Roberts Jr. Chairman Orrin Hatch praised Democrat Sen. Charles Schumer of New York for asking "intelligent" questions, but then Hatch switched gears.
"Some [of his questions] I totally disagree with," Hatch of Utah said. "Some I think are dumbass questions, between you and me. I am not kidding you. I mean, as much as I love and respect you, I just think that's true."
A stunned Schumer asked if he heard the chairman correctly, to which Hatch said yes. Again, Schumer asked Hatch if he would like to "revise and extend his remark," congressional speak for change his mind.
A former trial attorney, Hatch replied: "No, I am going to keep it exactly the way it is. I mean, I hate to say it. I mean, I feel badly saying it between you and me. But I do know dumbass questions when I see dumbass questions."
In the beginning of Wednesday's Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for Bush nominee John G. Roberts Jr. Chairman Orrin Hatch praised Democrat Sen. Charles Schumer of New York for asking "intelligent" questions, but then Hatch switched gears.
"Some [of his questions] I totally disagree with," Hatch of Utah said. "Some I think are dumbass questions, between you and me. I am not kidding you. I mean, as much as I love and respect you, I just think that's true."
A stunned Schumer asked if he heard the chairman correctly, to which Hatch said yes. Again, Schumer asked Hatch if he would like to "revise and extend his remark," congressional speak for change his mind.
A former trial attorney, Hatch replied: "No, I am going to keep it exactly the way it is. I mean, I hate to say it. I mean, I feel badly saying it between you and me. But I do know dumbass questions when I see dumbass questions."
What Was His Motivation?
The invasion of Iraq? Please. This scumbag was training in Afghanistan during the 1990's with all of the other scumbags, years before the invasion of Iraq. When will people learn that these wingnuts hate the West because of Jews and Christians. That's their motivation.
Terror investigators hunting the London bombing mastermind are to question a suspected Al Qaeda planner held in Pakistan.British-born Haroon Rashid Aswad was seized at a religious school with a suicide bomb belt, explosives and GBP 13,000 in cash.
Security sources in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, claim he had up to 20 telephone conversations with London bombers Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer. One of these is believed to have been just hours before the blasts.
The UK's DAILY MAIL reports on Thursday: Security sources say he trained at an Afghan camp which was visited by Osama Bin Laden and that he is linked to two of Bin Laden's planners and an Al Qaeda suspect held in America.
U.S. investigators have been told that Aswad attended the Khalden camp in Afghanistan, favoured by foreign terror trainees. British shoe bomber Richard Reid is among those who attended the camp and it has been reported that London bomber Khan also went there.
Terror investigators hunting the London bombing mastermind are to question a suspected Al Qaeda planner held in Pakistan.British-born Haroon Rashid Aswad was seized at a religious school with a suicide bomb belt, explosives and GBP 13,000 in cash.
Security sources in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, claim he had up to 20 telephone conversations with London bombers Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer. One of these is believed to have been just hours before the blasts.
The UK's DAILY MAIL reports on Thursday: Security sources say he trained at an Afghan camp which was visited by Osama Bin Laden and that he is linked to two of Bin Laden's planners and an Al Qaeda suspect held in America.
U.S. investigators have been told that Aswad attended the Khalden camp in Afghanistan, favoured by foreign terror trainees. British shoe bomber Richard Reid is among those who attended the camp and it has been reported that London bomber Khan also went there.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Beamed Up
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- James Doohan, the burly chief engineer of the Starship Enterprise in the original "Star Trek" TV series and motion pictures who responded to the apocryphal command "Beam me up, Scotty," died early Wednesday. He was 85.
Super "Show Me The Money" Drew
Rosenhaus is such a sleazeball, it wouldn't surprise me if he pushed the kid in the water first and then save him just to garner the good publicity.
In the new logo that emblazons the front of the T-shirts often worn by the few employees of Rosenhaus Sports Representation, the "S" is large and exaggerated, reminiscent of the famous crest worn by Superman.
On Tuesday afternoon, for one imperiled toddler, NFL agent Drew Rosenhaus, who collects superhero figurines as a hobby, became a real-life Superman.
Orange County (Fla.) Police confirmed that Rosenhaus, acting quickly in a moment of crisis, saved the life of 4-year-old Maurice Hill, who had essentially drowned in the pool at the Grand Floridian Hotel in Orlando. Rosenhaus administered CPR to Hill, who had no pulse when he was yanked from the pool, until paramedics arrived and took over the treatment of the youngster.
"He basically brought [Hill] back," said Cpl. Carlos Torres, public information officer for the Orange County Police Department. "The kid was gone and [Rosenhaus] saved a life. It's legitimate. Who knows how it would have turned out had he not been around? The guy was a hero today."
Said Cpl. Bob Leben, the deputy who commenced the investigation of the incident: "[Rosenhaus] certainly stepped up."
In the new logo that emblazons the front of the T-shirts often worn by the few employees of Rosenhaus Sports Representation, the "S" is large and exaggerated, reminiscent of the famous crest worn by Superman.
On Tuesday afternoon, for one imperiled toddler, NFL agent Drew Rosenhaus, who collects superhero figurines as a hobby, became a real-life Superman.
Orange County (Fla.) Police confirmed that Rosenhaus, acting quickly in a moment of crisis, saved the life of 4-year-old Maurice Hill, who had essentially drowned in the pool at the Grand Floridian Hotel in Orlando. Rosenhaus administered CPR to Hill, who had no pulse when he was yanked from the pool, until paramedics arrived and took over the treatment of the youngster.
"He basically brought [Hill] back," said Cpl. Carlos Torres, public information officer for the Orange County Police Department. "The kid was gone and [Rosenhaus] saved a life. It's legitimate. Who knows how it would have turned out had he not been around? The guy was a hero today."
Said Cpl. Bob Leben, the deputy who commenced the investigation of the incident: "[Rosenhaus] certainly stepped up."
The Rudolph Misperception
Eric Rudolph is usually described as some sort of Christian terrorist. But check out this letter to his mother:
"Many good people continue to send me money and books. Most of them have, of course, an agenda; mostly born-again Christians looking to save my soul. I suppose the assumption is made that because I'm in here I must be a 'sinner' in need of salvation, and they would be glad to sell me a ticket to heaven, hawking this salvation like peanuts at a ballgame. I do appreciate their charity, but I could really do without the condescension. They have been so nice I would hate to break it to them that I really prefer Nietzsche to the Bible."
Uh, I think the whole Christian terrorist thing just flew out the window. I'd call him a Nietzsche terrorist.
"Many good people continue to send me money and books. Most of them have, of course, an agenda; mostly born-again Christians looking to save my soul. I suppose the assumption is made that because I'm in here I must be a 'sinner' in need of salvation, and they would be glad to sell me a ticket to heaven, hawking this salvation like peanuts at a ballgame. I do appreciate their charity, but I could really do without the condescension. They have been so nice I would hate to break it to them that I really prefer Nietzsche to the Bible."
Uh, I think the whole Christian terrorist thing just flew out the window. I'd call him a Nietzsche terrorist.
Nino on Roberts
For what it's worth: A few years ago, Justice Scalia said to a friend of mine that he and other Justices thought of John Roberts as far and away the best Supreme Court litigator in the country. I asked the friend why Justice Scalia said that, and (paraphrasing from my memory) the answer was something like this: "No matter how intense the questioning, Roberts is never flustered, and is always able to calmly answer any question whatsoever, while skillfully weaving in the substantive points that he wanted to make in the first place."
W Should Have Nominated The Wife
Since the Washington Post wrote about Bush's women and abortion today, how about Judge Roberts's? John Roberts's wife, Jane, has served as executive vice president of Feminists for Life (FFL is one of my favorite groups).
Definitely Not Guiliana
Less than two weeks since the London terror attacks, the city's Mayor Ken Livingstone has sparked controversy by defending the use of suicide bombers in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and charging that Israel had indiscriminately slaughtered Palestinians in acts that "border on crimes against humanity."
"Given that the Palestinians don't have jet planes, don't have tanks, they only have their bodies to use as weapons," Livingstone told Sky News in an interview.
"In an unfair balance, that's what people use," said Livingstone, who has often been strongly critical of Israel in the past.
"Given that the Palestinians don't have jet planes, don't have tanks, they only have their bodies to use as weapons," Livingstone told Sky News in an interview.
"In an unfair balance, that's what people use," said Livingstone, who has often been strongly critical of Israel in the past.
Monday, July 18, 2005
Resign Now
Granted, this guy is still probably smarter than Nancy Pelosi and Patrick Leahy, but not much.
DENVER — A Colorado congressman told a radio show host that the U.S. could "take out" Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons.
Rep. Tom Tancredo (search) made his remarks Friday on WFLA-AM in Orlando, Fla. His spokesman stressed he was only speaking hypothetically.
Talk show host Pat Campbell (search) asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.
"Well, what if you said something like — if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites," Tancredo answered.
"You're talking about bombing Mecca," Campbell said.
"Yeah," Tancredo responded.
The congressman later said he was "just throwing out some ideas" and that an "ultimate threat" might have to be met with an "ultimate response."
DENVER — A Colorado congressman told a radio show host that the U.S. could "take out" Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons.
Rep. Tom Tancredo (search) made his remarks Friday on WFLA-AM in Orlando, Fla. His spokesman stressed he was only speaking hypothetically.
Talk show host Pat Campbell (search) asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.
"Well, what if you said something like — if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites," Tancredo answered.
"You're talking about bombing Mecca," Campbell said.
"Yeah," Tancredo responded.
The congressman later said he was "just throwing out some ideas" and that an "ultimate threat" might have to be met with an "ultimate response."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
