Because TV Already Smeared Reagan

Monday, May 30, 2005

The entertainment's penchant for vilifying those evil conservatives surfaced again in a recent episode of "Law & Order: Criminal Intent."

In "False-Hearted Judges" one of the two detectives investigating the murder of a judge had this to say:

"Looks like the same shooters. CSU found the slug in a post, matched it to the one that killed Judge Barton. Maybe we should put out an APB [all-points bulletin] for somebody in a Tom DeLay T-Shirt."

Because those "extreme," "crazy," "ultra," and not to forget "right-wing" DeLay supporters are the most likely of all potential suspects to assassinate a judge. Please.

Naturally, DeLay wasn't thrilled and in response to a futile letter he wrote to NBC, the creator/executive producer of the show, Dick Wolf, said, "Up until today, it was my impression that all of our viewers understood that these shows are works of fiction ... but I do congratulate Congressman DeLay for switching the spotlight from his own problems to an episode of a TV show."

When "Law & Order" finally kicks the bucket maybe its writers should join those of "The West Wing" and collaborate to make a new fantasy series about a world where both crime is committed exclusively by DeLay supporters and the American people prefer a liberal government.

The Special Stripper

Sunday, May 29, 2005

A cop with nothing better to do:

NASHVILLE, Tenn. - A mother faces criminal charges after she hired a stripper to dance at her 16-year-old son's birthday party.

Anette Pharris, 34, has been indicted by a grand jury on charges of contributing to the delinquency of a minor and involving a minor in obscene acts.

"I tried to do something special for my son," Pharris said. "It didn't harm him."

Police spokesman Don Aaron said minors are not permitted in adult establishments.

"A person shouldn't be allowed to circumvent that law by hiring a stripper, a lady who took all her clothes off and spent a good amount of time dancing around minors," he said.
Thank you Sergeant Gestapo for your opinion but I fail to see how a private home can be considered an "adult establishment." Is a home with a liquor cabinet an alcoholic establishment?

At the risk of making a premature judgment, Mrs. Pharris is probably not up for the mother-of-the-year award, and hiring a stripper for your 16-year-old son is not an act I condone. But I would never wish criminal sanctions on such a person. Aren't there issues of greater importance the police should be concerned with?

Why are we Still Talking About Bolton?

Thursday, May 26, 2005

Bolton got borked in today's cloture vote which got the panties of many Republicans all bunched up because they hoped Tuesday's compromise would have been a sign of "comity" between the two parties. Frankly I could care less about the meaningless U.N. position. As Ann Coulter said tonight on Scarborough Country, "I like Bolton. He's a splendid pick for getting tough with terrorist and slave-holding nations like Sudan, but I don't care about the U.N. I care about the courts. They can send Ted Kennedy to the U.N. for all I care!"

Advice to Republicans: Allow Bolton's nomination to die on the Senate floor. That way you can say later that Democrats have had their way with at least a significant number of Bush's nominees and it's time for the majority party to have some say. Besides, it reflects badly on the Democrats to constantly obstruct Senate procedures. Bolton isn't that important anyway. Concentrate on the judicial agenda by getting important justices through the bottleneck procedures of the Senate.

Advice to Democrats: Stop caring so much about the United Nations! Drop the whole "we need to work with the rest of the world" nonsense and understand that defeating Bolton's nomination would hardly be a victory for the Democratic Party. On Tuesday your "mavericks" agreed to use the filibuster sparingly. Shouldn't you be using it on nominees that actually matter, like ones who potentially threaten your precious Roe v. Wade decision?

Defending Bill Maher

Far be it from me to defend the bonehead on a regular basis but his latest scuffle is hardly newsworthy. Republican Representative Spencer Bachus from Alabama took issue with Bill Maher's comments he made on his HBO show, Real Time, on May 13 about the Army missing its recruiting goal by 42% in April.

"More people joined the Michael Jackson fan club," Maher said. "We've done picked all the low-lying Lynndie England fruit, and now we need warm bodies."

Bachus wasn't happy. "I think it borders on treason," he said. "In treason, one definition is to undermine the effort or national security of our country."

In no way did Maher "undermine" the effort of anything. He was just making a joke to his liberal lovers in the audience. To be sure, he deserved to lose his Politically Incorrect show for calling the 9-11 hijackers "brave," but no offense was committed on May 13 - certainly not treason.

UPDATE: My new column titled Exaggerating the Crimes of Bill Maher up on the main site.

Defining "Extreme," "Too Conservative," and "Ultra Right-Wing"

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

Judge Janice Brown on the infamous rental car discrimination case:

In America, Clarence Brandenburg can attend a Ku Klux Klan rally, stand near a large burning cross wearing a hood, and give a speech saying, "Personally, I believe the nigger should be returned to Africa, the Jew returned to Israel." In America, Nazis can march through the streets of the predominately Jewish community of Skokie, Illinois, wearing uniforms and displaying swastikas. In each instance, racist and discriminatory views are being expressed. Nevertheless, these expressions are protected by the First Amendment to the federal Constitution and by our state Constitution. We as a nation so value the free exchange of ideas that we are willing to tolerate even offensive ideas, knowing that "one man's vulgarity is another's lyric" and today's heretical idea may become tomorrow's gospel.
Sounds like a rational argument to me, despite the Left's incessant crusade to label Janice Brown "extreme" "ultra" and "too right-wing" because she believes in the First Amendment.

In the New York Times today yet another editorial calls Brown -- a black judge -- racist, and cites her nomination to the federal bench as a weakness to the deal struck by the moderates in the Senate.

Cucumbers Aren't Just for Salads Anymore

Tuesday, May 24, 2005

Do a Yahoo! news search for "cucumber" and get this:

Maryland's largest school district is scrapping sex education materials that have come under fire for implying that homosexuality is a biological trait and for demonstrating how to put on a condom.

Gone from the curriculum will be materials that imply homosexuality is a biological trait, excluding viewpoints of those who believe same-sex attraction can be overcome.
Also dropped was a seven-minute video that was to be shown to 10th graders, in which a woman puts a condom on a cucumber to demonstrate its use.
When I was in high school we debated works of literature and history, not homosexuality. Kids are rising through the grade levels unable to read adequately or do basic math, but it's so important we teach them about homosexuality that there isn't any time to explore anything of academic importance.

Is homosexuality a biological trait or a choice? I'm inclined to say trait because the gays I know tell me their lifestyle has been anything but a choice.

So that's how I formed my opinion. There. Done. If there are any university studies on the subject then save the talk for college.

Now onto cucumbers. Call me crazy but I don't see how a condom being put on a cucumber is helpful or informative. There once was a time when social behavior was taught by the parents: table manners, phone etiquette, and when a man loves a woman.

But no matter how much sex education we ram down children's throats the rate of unwanted pregnancies continue to rise. It's not enough to put condoms in their backpacks next to the birth control pills, we have to show kids how to apply them by molesting produce.

Oh, so you put it around…silly me, I thought you ate it.

Rebelling Against the Filibuster Compromise

The following 18 Senators voted against Priscilla Owen's cloture vote, ignoring the agreement made last night which promised that Owen and two others would get final conformation votes. That 18 senators voted against cloture means they don't accept the agreement and wanted to prevent Owen from getting passed the obstructionist stage.

So now when Democrats most likely enact the "extraordinary circumstances" provision to filibuster reasonable nominees, these 18 politicians have no right attacking Senator Frist for reviving the nuclear option if it ever comes down to it. Remember these 18 names, especially Barbara Boxer.

Biden (D-DE)
Boxer (D-CA)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Feingold (D-WI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)

Roll Call courtesy of Michele Malkin's blog.

While Democrats may use their "extraordinary circumstances" provision responsibly, I have little faith considering how quickly some have jumped to conclusions regarding religious politicians. A reader just accused me of supporting a theocracy because I see nothing wrong with judges who have religious convictions. It's okay to believe in God, and it doesn't mean those who do inject it into the workplace.

Bittersweet Deal on Filibusters Reached

Monday, May 23, 2005

Both sides of the aisle held their breath as Senate centrists formed a compromise the day before Tuesday's "showdown" vote on Priscilla Owen.

To make a long story short: the filibuster lives.

However, Democrats have agreed to allow final confirmation votes for Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor to appeals court seats.

Here's what bothers me: the agreement said future judicial nominees should "only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances," with each Democratic senator holding the discretion to decide when those conditions had been met.

Of course Democrats will apply that label to any judge they consider "extreme," which includes those who believe in a higher power and the defense for unborn children.

Majority Leader Bill Frist, who wasn't in on the 14 senator deal, gave a mixed reaction. "It has some good news and it has some disappointing news and it will require careful monitoring," he said.

The Democrats definitely got the better end of the deal because they can save their "extreme, ultra, right-wing" rhetoric for the eminent Supreme Court vacancies. Did the Republicans think about that?

Image source: Martin America.

Dean Equates Abortion to Health Care

Sunday, May 22, 2005

Howard Dean got roughed up today on Meet the Press with Tim Russert . He once again said Osama bin Laden deserves a jury while Tom DeLay should already be in a jail cell, Democrats are the ones with moral values, and had the nerve to say abortion should be examined on a state-by-state basis.

Here is the exchange on abortion:

MR. RUSSERT: One issue where the Democrats seem to be changing their thinking is abortion. Here's Howard Dean on April 17: "I think we need to talk about abortion differently... Republicans have forced us into a corner to defend abortion..."

DR. DEAN: Absolutely. I'm not advocating we change our position. I believe that a woman has a right to make up her own mind about what kind of health care she gets, and I think Democrats believe that in general. The issue is not whether we think abortion is a good thing. The issue is whether a woman has a right to make up her own mind about her health care…

But when you talk about framing this debate the way it ought to be framed, which is "Do you want Tom DeLay and the boys to make up your mind about this, or does a woman have a right to make up her own mind about what kind of health care she gets…."

That's one hell of a health care plan for the baby -- I mean, fetus/bundle of cells that's getting a scalpel to his or her skull while being partially delivered.

We'd like to make abortion rare. You know that abortions have gone up 25 percent since George Bush was president?

And that number will decline when the people get to influence their own views of abortion once the seven-man ruling in Roe v. Wade gets overturned.


DR. DEAN: We need to reduce the number of abortions in this country.

Which will happen when we outlaw it.

MR. RUSSERT: But, Governor, the problem for Democrats has been that many request abortion on demand. When there are attempts to say that there should be parental notification for children under 18-- to be notified with a judicial bypass, if there's a spouse--a parental abuse situation. Many Democrats oppose it. Third-trimester abortion, "partial-birth" abortion, Democrats opposed it.

The doctor completely sidesteps the rational legislation Democrats oppose so much such as parental notification.

DR. DEAN: You know what I'd prefer to see, frankly? I'd prefer to see medical practice boards around the country, state by state--because people do believe different things about this in different states.

Which is exactly why the national ruling of Roe v. Wade makes no sense. People believe different things about this in different states.

There are ethical constraints around the issue of abortion. There is no question about that. I think those ought to be done state by state. And I think doctors ought to have a lot more say about it than they do now.

Baloney! State by state standards on abortion can only happen with the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Let's see you push for it Dr. Dean. And you're right, doctors do have a lot to say about abortion now. It increases the risk of breast cancer in women and the chance of premature births in future pregnancies.

Will Texans Lose Their Voting Rights Too?

Yesterday the Texas Senate approved a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage sending the issue to voters.

With a law prohibiting same-sex marriages already on the books, if the constitutional amendment passes in this November's statewide election, Texas will join 14 states that statutorily and constitutionally ban same-sex marriage.

The rhetoric on both sides of the debate is nothing unfamiliar. Democratic Senator Rodney Ellis equated the amendment to Jim Crow-era discrimination laws and called it "trash." "At least they had the good sense to never write their bigotry into the state Constitution."

Well we'll see if the people of Texas support the "trashy" amendment that's equal to blacks being sprayed with hoses and attacked by police dogs. Of course, the way our courts work today it doesn't matter what the people say because it only takes one judge to render the power of the vote meaningless.

Liberalism is a Mental Disorder and Slander

Saturday, May 21, 2005

My website is receiving an abundant amount of traffic due to my #1 position for a Yahoo! search of a review for Michael Savage's new book, Liberalism is a Mental Disorder.

Frankly I was a little disappointed by the way he carelessly threw around facts and fabricated anecdotes to make his arguments, so on the whole I cannot give the book a full recommendation unless you're a diehard Savage fan and/or enjoy excessive liberal bashing. To those I say have fun and give yourself a few more reasons to call liberals crazy.

I also revisited Ann Coulter's Slander which I reviewed almost three years ago, calling it "another collection of biased garbage from the queen of trash talk herself."

After giving it another shake I was amazed by the number of points that have turned out to be accurate from the book's original publication until now. The new Forward in the paperback edition by Rush Limbaugh (whom I don't like or listen to) makes the point that liberals reacted to the part in Slander where she wrote liberals call conservatives names - by calling her names. Wicked irony at its best.

Twisting the Knife a Little More

Howard Dean, whom we all know refused to affirm Osama bin Laden's guilt, had no problem jumping the gun early on House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, saying he deserves jail time for allegations of corruption.

"Tom DeLay is corrupt. No question about it," Dean said yesterday. "This is a guy who shouldn't be in Congress and maybe ought to be serving in jail."

The House ethics committee is investigating whether DeLay violated congressional rules by taking foreign trips paid for by lobbyists. He has not been charged with a crime, but Dean refuses to apologize for saying DeLay "ought to go back to Houston where he can serve his jail sentence."

Now consider Dean's remarks on bin Laden in 2003:

"I still have this old-fashioned notion that even with people like Osama, who is very likely to be found guilty, we should do our best not to, in positions of executive power, not to prejudge jury trials."

Again on DeLay: "Tom DeLay is corrupt. No question about it."

Again on bin Laden: "we should do our best not to prejudge jury trials."

Again on DeLay: "No question about it."

It seems to me that Dean is only hurting the already bleeding Democratic Party with his incessant steam-blowing. He has virtually no legitimacy since the infamous scream that was even exploited by his allies at the Daily Show. If the Dems want a shot at winning elections again they better push Dean out and soon.

Movie Review of Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith

Thursday, May 19, 2005

So this is it. Finally after so many years of geeks and nerds waiting for the final installment of the Star Wars saga, "Revenge of the Sith" is here, and coming from a critic who never drank the Kool-Aid or rode the band wagon: it's pretty damn good.

The movie opens with Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) and his master Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) flying through the galaxy each in a one-man spacecraft attempting to rescue Chancellor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) from the custody of General Grievous (Matthew Woods) and the feared Count Dooku (Christopher Lee).

Anakin and Obi-Wan board Grievous' ship with the utmost of ease as the good guys usually do in the Star Wars movies, and attempt to rescue the good chancellor. Palpatine, who's the leader of the Senate has been in power much longer than what the term limits allow for. The fight with Dooku is weak, suggesting a lot of ground has to be covered before the next episode.

The rescue mission is a success, needless to say, but the boorishly arrogant Jedi Council fails to elevate Anakin to the rank of Jedi Master. They believe he's too close to Palpatine, whom they don't trust (I think the black cape, looming eyes and ominous voice have something to do with it) and ask Anakin to spy on him rather than accept the greatest honor the Council has to offer.

This tasks feels unorthodox to Anakin and as the film progresses he grows more impatient with a Council that has the tendency to break their own rules and keeps him on the sidelines when he is needed most.

Back at home things aren't any better as his secret wife Padme (Natalie Portman) informs him that she's pregnant with his child - to which he reacts with the conviction of the characters from House of Wax.

It's hard to fathom such stale performances from actors who were wonderful in films like "Shattered Glass" (Christensen) and "Closter" (Portman), but that's what you get from George Lucas who has the ability to pen one of the most fascinating science fiction epics of all time, but can't write a decent script and get his actors to convincingly execute what he's mustered up.

The film is completely sanitized in its CGI world which is a mixed bag. The special effects have improved, of course, and the dazzling imagery is worth taking note of. Still, I think we'd rather pass on the overloaded locations created on an IMac for the simple but effective Dagobah Swamp from "Empire Strikes Back" and Tatooine from both "A New Hope" and "Return of the Jedi" many decades ago.

As we all know, Anakin soon transforms into Darth Vader, and to Lucas' credit, the transition is done wonderfully. I actually felt sad for a moment, just for a moment, that the Chosen One is alas slated to be the true savior's greatest enemy in "The Empire Strikes Back." I also pondered for a moment how great the younglings could have been had they not been slaughtered as children. Huh, so maybe Lucas has created characters worth caring about.

A fight breaks out between Anakin and his former master Obi-Wan, and the short dialogue exchange bears a striking resemblance to a line once read by a certain president a few years ago. Barking, "either you're with me or you're my enemy," Obi-Wan shoots back at his apprentice, "Only a Sith thinks in absolutes."

The political reference will certainly be buzzing once the entire country gets to see the film, and nerdy liberals will giddily rejoice at the quip even though I personally believe the Siths are made out to be the cool ones whereas the Jedis come off as arrogant and self-righteous.

The Dark Side totally rules in this film.

Being the first PG-13 installment of the series, many characters will have to die. Some too soon, and some only because in movies like Star Wars characters often die not because he's injured or ailing, but just because it's "his time." A hospital scene that had me chuckling involved a robotic nurse telling friends: "Medically she's perfectly healthy, but, I just don't understand it. She's lost the will to live!" 'At-a-boy Lucas! The best performance award goes to Ian McDiarmid for his wonderful portrayal of the evil Lord Palpatine and whom I believe is the best villain in the series. When he's not asked to recite love lines Christensen is rather convincing as well, especially when he finally dons the brown robes and turns to the Dark Side.

The greatest accomplishment about "Revenge of the Sith" is how it neatly ties all of the films together after so many doubts following "Attack of the Clones." This is my favorite of the series, having not seen the original trilogy until late into the nineties. Those who were raised on these films will most likely disagree with me.

And you can't blame Lucas for it, either. No matter how much better he could have made it, he wasn't going to get a better reaction from the fans than: "This was movie was awesome, the best Stars Wars film ever........since Empire Strikes Back."

The More Fur the Better

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

The Associated Press reports on the increasingly aggressive tactics of these left-wing idiots:

Last month, animal rights extremists followed the wife of a pharmaceutical company executive to her job, rifled through her car and stole a credit card. They used it buy $20,000 in travelers checks, which they then donated to four charities.

A Web site announcement boasting of the act included a more sinister threat: "If we find out a dime of that money granted to those charities was taken back we will strip you bear (sic) and burn your (expletive). This is OUR insurance policy."

The actions by the radical Animal Liberation Front appear to be the latest salvo in an ongoing battle pitting scientists, businesses and labs involved in animal research against those intent on stopping them — at almost any cost.

The president of the Foundation for Biomedical Research, a group backed by institutions that rely on animal research, said ALF members operate like terrorists.
Because filthy rats belong in the streets, not in laboratories that advance medical research and come up with cures to science's biggest medical mysteries.

If PETA and ALF had there way we'd be overrun by disease infested vermin. People would get sick, but because they're not animals such activists wouldn't care less, unless that person was putting a hook through a fish.

"Better Tasting" Doritos My A$$

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

Whoever came up with the bright idea of messing with the Doritos formula should be condemned to live out the rest of his life eating nothing but these crappy new chips.

Doritos, which now come in a darker red bag with the "NOW BETTER TASTING!" stamp imprinted on it, better not replace the traditional Nacho Cheesier flavor, which hits my weak spot whenever I crave junk food that's still free of trans fat.

These new chips, crispier yes, but duller in taste and leaves an artificial taste in the back of your mouth, will have you longing for the original recipe. Stay away from this junk and prey that it lasts as long as all those failed Coke varieties.

Of All Things, Hugs Banned in School

Monday, May 16, 2005

A 14-year-old girl received detention over a hug she gave her boyfriend at school. Officials at Sky View Middle said they had previously warned Cazz Altomare that what she was engaging in was unacceptable, but she continued to disobey the rule. The school allows "quick hello and goodbye hugs," but no "lingering" is allowed.

It's absolutely ridiculous that such a rule is in place. I do, however, have to support the action taken against the girl despite the protest from her own mother who sees nothing wrong with "lingering" hugs, because Altomare knowingly violated a school policy, stupid or not.

Meanwhile, middle school kids are hurrying off to explicit sex education class in their revealing designer outfits to get condoms and important lessons on going beyond the act of hugging, which of course is banned in middle school.

Death of the Republic

Thursday, May 12, 2005

This is why I don't care if we never elect a Democratic president again. Clinton may be finished but his judges rule on, completely ignoring the people.

A federal judge Thursday struck down Nebraska's ban on gay marriage, saying the measure interferes not only with the rights of gay couples but also with those of foster parents, adopted children and people in a host of other living arrangements.

The constitutional amendment, which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman, was passed overwhelmingly by the voters in November 2000.

Nebraska has no state law against gay marriage, but state Attorney General Jon Bruning said same-sex marriages were not allowed before the ban and would not be permitted now.

"Seventy percent of Nebraskans voted for the amendment to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and I believe that the citizens of this state have a right to structure their constitution as they see fit," Bruning said.

The challenge was filed by the gay rights organization Lambda Legal and the ACLU's Lesbian and Gay Project.
Until now I've been weighing the judicial filibuster debate pretty evenly with a little more support toward the GOP side, but the travesty in Nebraska shows how horrible liberal justices are for democracy; how horrible for the republic. Please, Senator Frist, end the bickering. No more listening to Democrats whine about how important filibusters are to checks and balances (a term that actually applies between branches not within). Judges must have a narrow interpretation of the Constitution. Judges must enforce the will of the people.

I don't care about your thoughts on gays. I have gay friends. I love "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy." We must stare reality in the face: Seventy percent of the people in Nebraska got screwed today. There's no positive spin you can put on it.

Condoms for Preteens

Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Yes, we live in an insane world. From Channel 32 WLKY:

School officials and organizers of a health fair for middle-school students got a surprise when they learned an AIDS education group [AIDS Resource Center of Wisconsin] was handing out condoms.

About 1,150 students attended the fair Thursday at North Central Health Care, which was designed to teach about dangerous effects of using alcohol and drugs.
So to encourage preteens to avoid using alcohol and drugs we'll just give them condoms, because, you know, everyone's doing it and we might as well encourage the inevitable. While we're at it let's give samples of birth control pills to the young girls as another way to teach about the dangerous effects of using alcohol and drugs.

Update: On a somewhat but not-really related topic, in one elementary school Bibles have been banned from the playground. That's right, elementary-schoolers can no longer voluntarily read the Bible on the playground, but they can trade color-coated condoms like baseball cards. Hat tip: The Def Conservative

What's Two More Dead Girls?

Glenn Beck, whom I haven't listened to much until recently, had a good radio program this afternoon. He was arguing how some people just don't deserve second chances in society. For example, if you're caught chasing young kids around with a chainsaw you probably shouldn't get another opportunity to do it again in the free world.

Sure enough, Jerry Hobbs was considered "rehabilitated" and "redeemed" after committing such an offense, and just today admitted to stabbing to death his 8-year-old daughter and her 9-year-old friend in an Illinois park.

How many more kids have to die before we realize almost all of these offenders have had recent prior offenses, often sexually violent ones, and should never see the light of day again?

First No Smoking Next No Working

Seeing that our government has already set a variety of standards from minimum wages to banning smoking in restaurants over the years, it's only a matter of time before we mimic the oppressive European Union. From the Associated Press:

The European Parliament voted Wednesday in favor of an obligatory 48-hour maximum work week, saying that an opt-out widely used by Britain should be scrapped.

The opt-out, which allows employees to work longer hours if agreed with the employer, has also been applied to specific industries like health care in other countries, including Germany and Luxembourg.

Conservative foreign affairs spokesman Liam Fox called on the government to "use all their diplomatic efforts to ensure that Britain is not saddled with yet more regulation that will cost British jobs."
How long before the U.S. Government tells us we can no longer work 48 hours - less than seven a day? Many families are dependent on 10-hour workdays and will surely suffer when they receive smaller paychecks for less hours worked.

But you might be thinking there's probably a good reason for the restrictions, right? Socialist deputy Alejandro Cercas, who drafted the parliament's report, said the vote was aimed at restoring public confidence in European social values.

"EU citizens are asking what the EU can do for them, and this is one of the things," he said. "Citizens want a social Europe."

Apparently many in the U.S. want one to if they support government regulating smoking, even if a restaurant had an adequate non-smoking section that received no complaints.

A Savage Stroke

Tuesday, May 10, 2005

If you can believe it, the Bush administration is prepared to pay hospitals and doctors for providing emergency care to illegal immigrants. The money, totaling $1 billion (that's $1,000,000,000), will be available for services provided through September 2008.

Talk about insanity. I haven't been hyping the illegal immigration problem as much as I should have lately - this front page news headline has been a wakeup call and as a result I will be paying a lot more attention to this issue.

I'm currently reading Michael Savage's Liberalism is a Mental Disorder for review on my site, and I can only imagine his reaction to Bush's plan. Savage's solution to the border problem is to use the military to seal off the borders completely and deport all illegal immigrants, forcing them to apply for legal status in the country.

It will be interesting to see how quickly Bush's usual supporters turn on him for his ridiculously lax position on the borders and illegal immigration.

Anti-Tobacco Hysteria Spreads

Monday, May 09, 2005

First it was my home state of Florida, now it's our neighbor Georgia that has decided government must get involved between consenting adults and places they frequent by banning the sinful social practice of smoking.

ATLANTA - Gov. Sonny Perdue signed a bill Monday to ban smoking in most public places in Georgia, ending a guessing game that had gone on for weeks.

The law will allow smokers to light up in only a few places, including bars and restaurants that do not admit people under 18; designated hotel and motel rooms; and workplace smoking areas that have an independent air handling system. Violators face fines of $100 to $500.

The Republican governor had said for weeks that he had misgivings about the bill, believing that government should not become "the end-all and be-all nanny for all people."
So then why did you sign it? If a restaurant is making good business by allowing smokers to dine then what's the point of Big Daddy government stepping in to intervene?

Because the sissy anti-smoking crowd believes their "rights" to eat in a smoke-free environment supersedes those who want to enjoy a good smoke with their meal and beer.

Make no mistake, I don't smoke. Never have and never will, but if a restaurant owner wants to allow smoking then the ball is in my court to either accept it or find another place to dine, not cry to Big Daddy so my will gets imposed on everyone else.

I wish I could blame this problem on the we'll-mind-your-business-for-you liberals, but it's been mostly Republican governors caving in to such foolish legislation.

Here in Florida, restaurants have seen profits plunge because smokers stay less and as a result drink and order less. Prices go up to recover shrinking revenues and everyone is lugubrious, all so we don't have to be bothered by smokers while we eat.

War of the Worlds Extends Off Set

The highly anticipated "War of the Worlds," which pairs Tom Cruise and Steven Spielberg together for the first time since the most-excellent "Minority Report," apparently extends off the set where Cruise has an "informational" tent set up for people curious about Scientology.

Via Arianna Huffington's new blog:

Cruise: The volunteer Scientology ministers were there to help the sick and injured. People on the set appreciated that. I have absolutely nothing against talking about my beliefs. We live in a world where people are on drugs forever. Where even children get drugged. Where crimes against humanity are so extreme that most people turn away in horror and dismay. Those are the things that I care about. I don't care what someone believes. I don't care what nationality they are. But if someone wants to get off drugs, I can help them. If someone wants to learn how to read, I can help them. If someone doesn't want to be a criminal anymore, I can give them tools that can better their life. You have no idea how many people want to know what Scientology is.
Well, living seven minutes away from Clearwater, where their home base is located, I can say I have a pretty good idea of what Scientology is and what their members look like. I expect to see many on the streets today on my way to the beach.

Me Looking Forward to a Star Wars Movie?

Sunday, May 08, 2005

Today is Mother's Day, so politics takes a back seat.

From what I'm being told about "Episode III" I may actually have a reason to anticipate the final installment of Lucas' sci-fi saga, which according to some early reviews redeems the first two episodes many moviegoers would rather forget.

I never got into the whole "Star Wars" business. I only saw the original three when they were re-released into theaters not long ago in remastered format.

Frankly, I found them less than thrilling. Perhaps when I should have been geeky about the whole thing I was busy being cool and having a life, or something, because having waited so long left me without appreciation for the dated movies. "Episode II" did have a cool fight with Yoda in it, so I know it isn't impossible to find something good in the saga.

And something about "Episode III" looks good to me. I'm actually looking forward to it.

We Respect Free Speech, Just Not Ann Coulter's

Friday, May 06, 2005

The fallout over that idiot who was arrested for "asking a question" to Ann Coulter at her speech last Tuesday has only proven her harsh criticisms of liberals (not all) to be true.

You guys on the Left (not all but many) are making a martyr out of this kid, screaming that his First Amendment rights were violated and that the Big Bad campus police roughed him up.

On Scarborough Country last night, Coulter was on fire - laughing at how liberals detest her to the bone for doing nothing but practicing free speech. Meanwhile, their darling Ward Churchill calls the 9/11 victims a bunch of "Little Eichmans" and they -- led by Bill Maher -- rush to his defense because his hateful rhetoric is free speech.

And Coulter, who calls liberals baby killers for supporting partial-birth abortion (meaning the baby is partially delivered before getting forked) is what - mean? Unfair? Not nice? So defend yourselves! But rather than make a cogent argument you guys are busy throwing pies and making the masturbation gesture in front of audiences. Then when the police rightfully detain you for being a menace you have the nerve to say your free speech rights were violated and that the cop hurt you when he slapped your pie-throwing hands with cuffs.

It's easy to understand why liberals hate Ann Coulter. She calls them out for what they are -- according to her. "Liberals don't care to debate," she wrote in a recent book, and sure enough she's met with pies and repugnant comments meant to be offensive. "Liberals are traitors," she wrote, because liberals support flag-burning and comments made by America-hating professors like Ward Churchill, but they don’t like conservatives who dare say things like affirmative action is discrimination on the basis of race; which, whether you agree with the policy or not - kind of is.

I used to be one of them: a Coulter-hater who couldn't stand her "hate" speech, and started Aggressive-Voice to refute her columns and books…until I saw firsthand how true she often is.

Liberals (not all but many) just can't accept opinions different from their own. This Raj clown was angry that Ann Coulter doesn't approve of gay marriage because she supports the traditional definition of one man, one woman. Like she said last night, "...we should not be overturning a 5,000-year-old institution like marriage on the whim of a few state court judges."

Somehow she and all the Republicans are bigots and anti-gay just because they wish against the state recognizing gay marriage.

Well guess what, it was your favorite president, Mr. Bill Clinton, who signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law, the first federal law to define marriage officially as a "union between one man and one woman."

So does this blanket definition of bigotry extend to Slick Willy? Is Mr. Clinton anti-gay for forcing homosexuals to hide their true identity while serving in the military under his "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy – a piece of legislation that is causing gays nothing but headaches?

I'm no conservative. I don't have to defend Ann Coulter and I often disagree with her opinions (drug laws, war in Iraq, internet regulation) but I'll side with her any day over Ward Churchill, any day over the flag burners, any day over the America-haters, any day over the liberal celebrities who rush to Europe to tell them how much of a horrible country we are, and any day over those who despise the woman - all because she is bold enough to speak her mind in a way that's meant to be abrasive and brutal.

How Liberals Debate

Wednesday, May 04, 2005

Meet Ajai Raj, another dumbass college liberal who lacks the capacity to challenge conservative ideas. On Tuesday May 3, conservative author Ann Coulter was giving a speech at the University of Texas and was fielding questions during the question-and-answer session at the end of her lecture.

Raj, just one of the millions of liberals who can't understand why conservatives define marriage as an institution between a man and a woman, asked this question: "How do you feel about marriages where the man does nothing but f*ck his wife up the as*?"

Raj then began making the masturbatory gesture as a police officer approached to arrest him for disorderly conduct in which he was engaging throughout the speech.

I still don't think this tops the liberal who recently asked Chief Justice Scalia if he ever sodomized his wife, or the handful of pathetic liberals who threw pies and salad dressing at various conservative speakers, but it goes to show you the mentality of pusillanimous college liberals and how uninterested they are in ideas that challenge their own.

UPDATE: One of the authors at Penny Arcade called the kid a "saint" and opined his actions were "totally awesome."

Add another tally to the list of liberals who condone such behavior but get mad when I generalize them.

UPDATE II: A reader informs me via e-mail that Tycho of Penny-Arcade was merely reacting to the fact that Raj was arrested wearing one of their shirts. I guess I would think that's cool too, but wouldn't call Raj's actions "totally awesome."

Image source: The Smoking Gun

I've Been Plagiarized

I'm the victim of plagiarism, and to be honest -- at the risk of making light of the situation -- it's kind of flattering.

To be sure, plagiarism is a serious offense and can ruin a journalist's reputation and/or career. It should not be taken lightly and universities are in the right to pursue strict academic discipline for violations of plagiarism laws. But when I found out that one of my articles was plagiarized in the college newspaper, The Beaver Tale, I couldn't help but feel somewhat appreciated.

So I didn't get a byline. It was wrong for the writer to use my property, but he has been sufficiently punished for the offense as it appears from the article that he has been fired.

I feel a bit of sympathy for the kid, as I would for any fan of my work, and I would like to disclose that I didn't know about the incident until he personally e-mailed me to apologize. Let this be a lesson to all writers: you should never plagiarize. It will catch up to you. Every time.

Book Review: Constitutional Chaos

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

I often use this blog to voice my opinions on the current state of the judiciary and how I approve and (mostly) disapprove of its actions. A great book that reflects almost to the tee my opinions on judicial activism and interpretation is Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When The Government Breaks Its Own Laws by Judge Andrew Napolitano, the senior judicial analyst at Fox News.

Napolitano, a self-described individualist, cites several examples of government wrong-doing and how the courts have been so willing to follow along. Neither a liberal nor conservative, Napolitano criticizes judges and politicians on all ends of the political ideology spectrum when they mess up.

Should law enforcement agents be able to impersonate terrorists and underage children on the Internet to elicit criminal activity?

Should prosecutors be able to offer witnesses reduced sentences for agreeing to testify against other defendants?

Should President Bush be allowed to hold terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay indefinitely without charging them with a crime?

I highly recommend Constitutional Chaos. You can read my full review here.

Throw Away the Key

Monday, May 02, 2005

I've never been a fan of imposing mandatory-minimum guidelines on judges, but here in Florida the explosion of child abduction cases has gotten out of hand. Too often convicted child molesters are released into society after serving lax sentences (sometimes just probation) and wind up preying on more innocent children.

Today, Governor Bush signed the Jessica Lunsford Act into law. It requires anyone convicted of molesting a child under 12 to serve a mandatory 25 years to life in prison. Those who serve less than life will be required to wear a global tracking device for the reminder of their natural lives.

It's unfortunate we waited this long to enact something so sensible, because a handful of girls who were raped and murdered within the last few years would still be alive today.