How’s THAT Working out for you?

Well, at least for NBC News, its association with the fetid William Arkin (who's said that America’s troops are “lucky they aren’t spit on and called ‘baby-killer’ “) the answer is “Not so good.”

During the week of February 5 - February 9, 2007, NBC Nightly News lost a net total of 400,000 viewers. Many observers point to the William Arkin controversy as the primary cause of this ratings slide.

They fell behind CBS Evening News for the first time in nearly a decade.

It’s rumored that William Arkin’s new nickname around NBC is “iceberg,” and not because he eats a lot of lettuce.

Robert Fisk, Effete British Nancy-boy

"I don't want this to be seen as a Muslim mob attacking a Westerner for no reason. They had every reason to be angry - I've been an outspoken critic of the US actions myself. If I had been them, I would have attacked me."

And with those words, effete British rogue, Robert Fisk (pictured left...where else?) minced his way into the "Nancy-boy Hall of Fame" in Cambridge, England...a proud day to be sure for Sissy-Mary’s and Nancy-boys the world over.

How many other great men throughout history have wished to attack...themselves?

OK, none, but boy, the image of Robert Fisk attacking himself, I really wish that I could make that happen.

Sure, like many of his fellow Nancy-boys, I’d prefer to see Robert Fisk just off and intercourse himself, but fist-fighting....himself, well that would be spectacular!

Oh and Robert Fisk says the British in Afghanistan are doomed and the U.S. is powerless to stop the building anti-Western onslaught from the Islamic world.

Oh yeah, and he also says that Islam is still THE “religion of peace.”

And of course it is, if by “peace” you mean xenophobic, misogynistic, slave-trading, goat-humping, genocidal, megalomania.

Fisk’s assertion about Islam/”religion of peace” is on display virtually everywhere and on a daily basis, even right here in the good’ol US of A.

On February 18th 2007, a Nashville cabbie (don’t tell me, Mohammed Hussein? No, but good guess, his name was Ibrahim Ahmed) made anti-Semitic statements and praised Adolph Hitler’s campaign to exterminate Jews, during a religious argument that culminated when he ran over one of the passengers as he left the taxi, witnesses said during a hearing held yesterday.

The cab driver, Ibrahim Ahmed, said Hitler was merely “trying to rid the world of Jews,” when passenger Jeremie Imbus mistakenly thought that by “Jews,” Ahmed meant sand-fleas.

This, of course, enraged Ahmed who then accused Imbus (a Lutheran) of being a sand flea...Oooops, that's “Jew.”

Ahmed then punctuated the conclusion of that argument in the lovingly, peaceful Muslim tradition of running over Mr. Imbus after he exited the cab. "Ciao Bella!"

As Ace at Ace of Spades HQ put it, “They're not Holocaust deniers. They're Holocaust enthusiasts.

“When they say there was no Holocaust, they mean it in the same way Crocodile Dundee meant it about the knife, i.e., "That's not a Holocaust, this -- what's coming -- is a Holocaust."

http://minx.cc/?post=217055

You know what would be interesting?

Putting Robert Fisk and Ibrahim Ahmed in the same room together. That way they could both gang up and beat the living shit out of Fisk, before "holocausting him."

I know what you're thinking, "It's no fair, two against one," BUT then again, one of them would be Fisk, so that sort of makes it alright.

They don't just defend those in the "pedarist club," they're also members...

A few days old now, but still an amazing story.

The former President of the Virginia ACLU was recently busted by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement division of the Department of Homeland Security (ICE) for possessing some of the most vile kinds of child-pornography - violent, forced child-rape.

Charles Rust-Tierney, whose wife Diann Rust-Tierney has led the ACLU's anti-death penalty initiative not only downloaded and possessed these violent images, he also coached a number of youth teams in the area.

I guess the ACLU is a lot like the "Hair Club for Men," not just defenders of the club, but members!

NIIIIIICE!!!

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?ID=2900174&page=1

John Goss, FDNY 1962 - 1994, firefighter and artist

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

This was a painting I commissioned from John Goss, a firefighter who worked in Engine 35 in East Harlem (3rd Avenue & 125th Street) for over thirty years, all of them on "the backstep." I was fortunate to have worked with John from May of 1986 to April of 1987. There wasn't a better man to learn the job from.

<

John wasn't only a firefighter's firefighter, but a great artist, a kind and exceedingly humble man and one of the many FDNY firefighters I've been honored to have worked with over the years.

<

The above painting tracks my father's career from firefighter in Engine Company 201 (Brooklyn - 1953 - 1960), to Lieutenant in Engine 7 and Ladder 6 (Lower Manhattan - 1960 - 1965), to Captain of Ladder-107 (East New York/Brownsville, Brooklyn - 1965 - 1970), L-107, whose bucket is at the window, was a single Truck Company back then, to Battalion Chief in the Safety Division and then the 44th Battalion, Brownsville, Brooklyn (1970 - 1978), to Deputy Chief in the 4th Division (Harlem) to the 5th Division (Harlem), to DAC in Staten Island and then Manhattan (1978 - 1990).

<

In the above picture, John's likeness is that 4th Division Chief with his arm around that 5th Division Chief which is his rendition of my Dad's likeness. John said my Dad reminded him of Jimmy Cagney. I thought that was funny, considering my Dad was also a very quiet, humble man.

<

Both my Dad and John Goss died of cancer the same year, 1997. John died on the 11th anniversary of my appointment date, March 15th. Both men went from full-time firefighters to full-time cancer patients within a year of leaving the FDNY.

<

I think of them both every day.

Guess where gasoline prices are heading???

If you said UP, you're 100% right!

Is it Bush?

Is it the Democratic Congress?

Nope, it's neither, as it turns out, this coming Thursday (March 1st) marks the switch-over to the more expensive "summer blend." Gasoline prices in the metro area are expected to soar to near $3/gallon well before sumer!

Hey! HEY!! It's not all gloom and doom. In fact, it's long been a boon to Wall Street. As Paul Tharp of the NY Post writes, "Gasoline's rite of spring also gives Wall Street traders their most dependable and predictable profit rally of the year, often in the double digits, analysts say."

A week before the switch, this past Thursday, February 22nd, unleaded regular futures shot up a bold 2.9%

Peter Beutel of Cameron Hanover said, "Basically it's "Hear we go again,' " adding that many traders have used this strategy based on the summer switch - buy contracts on March 1st and sell half by May 1st and the other half by May 15th. Beutel claims, "It's consistently yielded profits for 19 of the last 22 years."

Last year that strategy produced a 39% trading profit on gasoline and over the past twenty years, it's paid an average of $77,107 per contract.

Still, the bad news, for consumers, is that gasoline prices are expected to rise from their 2/22/07 lows of $2.48/gallon (NY) & $2.13/gallon (NJ) by around 45 cents/gallon by EARLY spring!

Hey It's spring! Time to bend over and open up your wallets!!!

This is gonna hurt a little bit.

Big Apple's TAX BITE....second to none!

<


<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
No other large city comes close to New York's obscene tax bite, an outrageous $9.02 for every $100 of gross taxable income!

Philly comes in second at $7.16 per $100 gross taxable income (over 20% LESS), Los Angeles came in third at $6.88 per $100 gross taxable income (almost 25% LESS).

In fact, New York's tax bite is 47% higher than the average of $6.16 tax bite per $100 gross taxable income, the other eight cities with populations of over 1 million people have.

And according to New Yorkers who've left the Big Apple for other places, that bigger tax bite DOESN'T translate into better services. The NY Daily News quoted Michael Boccio, a former-New Yorker, who left for Chicago in 1991, who said, "In general, the policing, fire protection and ambulance response is better here. Having lived in New york and made the move, I can say that dollar for dollar, the quality of life is higher in Chicago."

Ronnie Lowenstein of the Independent Budget Office (IBO) said, "We always knew that New York City was high, I think some people may have assumed that was partly offset by lower-than-average state taxes. We don't have a lower than average state tax bite offsetting the local tax. That was kind of a surprise to us."

The IBO also found that despite the lavish spending, the poverty rate in NYC stood at 19.6%, above the big city average of 19.2%

Kathy Wylde, of the New York Partnership (a business advocacy group) said, "It's a very high hurdle for a city that's trying to diversify its economy. The only way we're going to stay competitive is by reducing taxes."

In a related story;

New York City Council Speaker, Christine Quinn has been trying to be seen as New York City's "ethics and reform candidate, only her record belies that stance. Her tenure has actually worsened NY C's reliance on "special interest politics."

To be sure, Quinn and her cohorts have banned Corporate special interest contributions, but NOT those from Labor Unions and other social activist special interests. This has made New York City politics increasingly beholden to Union and social interest special interest groups, a path that inexorably leads to increasing spending, higher taxes and ultimately an increased pace for the exodus of businesses from the City.

If you want to see the dysfunction of Liberal policies, just come to New York City, they're on full display.

Chimps join the arms race...

<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
"Researchers" (not quite real scientists, but close) claim that some chimps in Senegal have taken to using "spears" (a/k/a "pointed sticks") to hunt prey - "bush babies," smaller primates that are apparently a food source to some carnivorous chimps.

OK, so let me get this straight, a researcher sees a monkey hurl what amounts to a tree branch and gasps, "My stars, why these monkeys are only a half step away from space travel and a step away from monkey MTV!?"

Sorry, but I just don't get it!

I mean the same day this report comes out, poor Dennis Kucinich throws a pointed stick and people yell, "Hey! Grab the retard who threw that pointed stick and hit the old lady!"

Life's just so damn unfair.

At any rate, at least Dennis Kucinich seems as pissed off as I am about this terrible double standard, at least it would seem that way, judging from his letter of apology;

"While I deeply regret that my homemade javelin hit Mrs. Agnes T. Pritchard, it remains my contention that Mrs. Pritchard bears at least some of the responsibility for this incident. I mean it's not as if she couldn't have shuffled her walker over another six inches to avoid my missile.

"Moreover, I'm even more troubled that earlier that same day, a group of scientists fawned over a couple of chimps for hurling what amounted to a pointed stick, while when I do the very same thing, albeit with a lot more sophisticated "fashioning," I get no praise at all. Instead I'm labeled "A menace to little old ladies everywhere."

"So, why the double standard?

"What's with all this monkey love?

"I'm not cute and cuddly enough?

"I don't babble incoherantly in as lovable a way?

"I just think we all need to take a big step back and a big deep breath and reorder our priorities a little.

"And to Mrs. Agnes T. Pritchard, I am really very sorry about striking you. Suffice to say, I should've aimed better and you should've ducked better. Let's just leave it at that."

Sincerely,

Dennis Kucinich



OK, that's certainly chimpy enough for me.

That cute little bastard!

How can you stay mad at Dennis Kucinich....well...unless he's throwing feces, but that's just common sense.

Still, spear-chucking monkeys. Who'd have thunk it???

Well, I for one, am NOT the least bit afraid. I mean we still have guns right? So it's not like this is the beginning of Planet of the Apes or anything.

I'm not gonna worry at least until they come up with some kind of bad-assed monkey bow & arrow.


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070222-chimps-spears.html


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/23/ap/tech/mainD8NF6BTG0.shtml

What happened to the anti-war crowd???

A new poll shows that 57% of Americans "support the troops finishing the job in Iraq."

53% believe victory is still possible in Iraq, while only 43% do not.

A whopping 59% say an immediate withdrawal would damage America's standing in the world, and ONLY 17% favor an immediate withdrawal!

Wasn't it just a couple of weeks ago that some Liberals were claiming that polls showing that about 70% of Americans disapporved of the way the war in Iraq is being run, showed that "about 70% of the American people favored an immediate withdrawal from Iraq?

Guess that's not what that poll actually indicated.

http://www.pos.org/inthenews/20070220.cfm

Some GREAT NEWS for Giuliani

A Quinnipiac Poll released February 21st, 2007 shows that if the 2008 election were held today, Giuliani would beat Hillary Clinton in a head-to-head race 48% to 43%. More startling still is that he'd tie her in traditional democratic States, 46% in a dead-heat.

He'd fare even better against John Edwards, beating him 48% to 40% and besting Barack Obama head-to-head 47% to 40%

The Poll also shows that Giuliani has opened a rather wide lead on Arizona Governor, John McCain, 40% to 18%.

In Conservative Seneca, South Carolina, Giuliani's socially moderate views didn't seem to hurt him. As Lieutenant Todd Williams of the Seneca Fire Department, a Republican said, "I am personally not pro-choice, but with any candidate, you have to take some bads to get some goods."

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1019

http://www.nydailynews.com/02-22-2007/news/story/4999712p-421360c.html

Bill Richardson - Major DUFUS!!!

Recently New Mexico governor and 2008 Presidential candidate, Bill Richardson has called on fellow Democrats to sign a pledge to keep their campaigns "positive."

Dufus!!!

The ONLY people who sincerely revile "negative campaigning" are those candidates and their die-hard supporters, who, for lack of a better phrase, "Just don't do it right."

Americans like their politics the way they like their Cajun food, "dirty," or is that "doity?"

Doity politics has been an American staple since the days of George Washington.

Sure, some of us will say we disapprove of doity politics (NOT me, of course), but even most of the self-proclaimed disapprovers secretly LOVE it! And best of all, IT WORKS! It really, really works!!!

The sad-sack Dukakis camp called Geoerge Bush Sr's "Willie Horton ad" an example of "doity politics," but it was nothing of the kind. As Massachussetts Governor, Mike Dukakis DID indeed preside over an ill-conceived and ill-fated furlough program that furloughed some violent felons, of which Willie Horton was one.

Mike Dukakis approved of that program, right up to the time when a furloughed violent felon, by the name of Willie Horton, left the state and was busted in Maryland for a home invasion rape, robbery, where he raped a woman in front of her tied up husband.

It wasn't George Bush Sr's fault that Dukakis approved of such a misguided program! And it wasn't his fault that then candidate Al Gore didn't have the savvy to pull that issue off - Gore was the first to raise the Horton issue in the 1988 campaign.

The fact is that the Willie Horton ads were true and they reflected very poorly on Michael Dukakis' judgment.

So come on Bill!

Get on board and hire yourself a skilled campaign adviser, one skilled in the ways of doity American politics and just go for it.

Personally, I think this two-year campaign is a real bad idea. Most voters are completely sick of all the candidates after just nine or ten months. That's why I think Newt Gingrich's strategy of only considering a run some time this summer is a good one.

By then, most Americans may well be Clinton'd, McCain'd, Obama'd and Giuiliani'd out, leaving a wide opening for a "fresh face" like Gingrich's. I just hope that if Newt does enter the race, he does so with a hard-assed campaign manager, one skilled in the ways of doity politics.

An Interesting Tale About Liberal Racism

I saw this reposted by Tyrone (pictured left) over at Wake Up Black America (http://www.wakeupblackamerica.blogspot.com/ ) and I also found it to be a compelling story that explains a lot in relatively few words. It’s written by Russell Johnson over at (http://users.aristotle.net/~russjohn/literary/librac.html)

THE LIBERAL RACIST

Fiction by Russell T. Johnson

Once upon a time there was a guy who sincerely believed that he was a liberal. He ate liberal food, read liberal magazines, dressed in liberal clothes, had the kind of profession that liberals have. He watched liberal television and tuned in the liberal radio station to download his daily opinions.

He was so liberal that he had a New York accent even though he was from Texas. No kidding. He took pains to avoid the words that liberals dare not speak and was openly disdainful of those insensitive enough to say "black" instead of "African-American."
He was also super compassionate. He just oozed sympathy and sensitivity understanding and inclusion. Everywhere he went he left a trail of glistening compassion.

Then one day this guy showed his true colors. He was a talking liberal and a practicing racist.

One day Mr. Compassion signed up for a class so that he could earn his motorcycle license. Also in this class was a late-middle-aged black guy. This black guy had an offer of a higher paying job at some distance from his house. He couldn't afford a car and he couldn't afford the extra two hours' daily bus commute. He had arranged to buy a used motorcycle if he passed this course.

Being not so very young and not so very fit, the black guy's strength toward the end of the day began to flag. Mr. Compassion noticed him panting and struggling to horse his bike around the course. Using his best, most unctious touchy-feely social scientist voice, he took the black guy aside and assured him that it wasn't worth the exertion, everything's okay, tomorrow is another day.

The black guy was minutes from victory, and Mr. Compassion talked him out of it with sweet, sweet words. Rather than giving strength to the black guy, Mr. Compassion sucked it out of him like a vampire.

This black guy had tried to better himself economically through his own efforts, and Captain Liberal had held him down by pretending to be his friend. This was economic race warfare and the black guy had been beat with a helping hand.

Because he didn't get his motorcycle license, he couldn't take the better paying job. The course isn't offered again for several weeks, and the old black guy isn't likely to get any younger or any stronger, and that better job isn't going to be waiting for him. Even if it is, he has to come up with the cost of taking the course again, and the reason he's taking the course is because he's short of time and money.

The really insidious aspect of this kind of racism is that the black guy still thinks that Mr. Compassion is his best friend in the whole white world.

I wonder if Mr. Compassion even considers the harm he’s done.

Is his disguise so perfect that he fools even himself?

Is this something he does deliberately, or is it just worked into his program?
When you strip away the motives, the black guy lost his shot at a better job. Mr. Compassion can walk away from the consequences of his toxic benevolence.

The old black guy can't.

Male Sweat Can Boost Arousal in Women

Finally! Some good news for all us sweat-hogs, apparently there’s a chemical in male sweat that “can boost mood, brain activity and sexual arousal in heterosexual women.”

Apparently the study conducted last year involved 48 undergraduate women who took 20 sniffs from a bottle containing androstadienone, a compound found in male perspiration and other bodily secretions.

"The researchers measured the women's levels of the stress hormone cortisol and compared them to the women's responses to a control odor. Cortisol levels in the women rose within about 15 minutes of inhaling the androstadienone scent and remained elevated for more than an hour, UC Berkeley researchers found.

"They also discovered that blood pressure, heart rate and breathing increased, mood improved and sexual arousal was boosted.

"This is the first time anyone has demonstrated that a change in women's hormonal levels is induced by sniffing an identified compound of male sweat," said study leader Claire Wyart, a postdoctoral fellow at UC Berkeley. "There is much more going on than we think when we are smelling body odor."

"They also discovered that blood pressure, heart rate and breathing increased, mood improved and sexual arousal was boosted.

While the compound can make women feel more positive and sexually aroused, it's still unclear how it affects their behavior, Wyart said.

"Humans are more complex," she said. "You cannot expect them to have stereotypical responses like rodents."

OK, that’s good to know. I was about to claim bullshit on this study, based on my own first-hand experiences with my wife, who seems immune to the romantic lure of man-sweat.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070213/ap_on_he_me/body_odor_study;_ylt=Aj_nqdRT7RDz7WthnTODBBuKOrgF

Europe’s “Robust Growth is America’s “Soft Landing? Well According to MSNBC It Is

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

Recently MSNBC, quoting Britain's Financial Times, called Europe’s economy “robust,” alluding to it’s 2.7% annual GDP growth, while noting that while it’s EXPECTED to grow at that rate this year, it hasn’t YET done so.

Oddly enough, the very same analysts call for a "soft landing" in the US with an expected 2.5% growth for 2006! So a 0.2% difference in annual GDP growth is the difference between "robust growth” and a "soft landing?"

Apparently to the folks at MSNBC it is!

Considering that the U.S. has, since 2003 had annual GDP growth of 3.7% (2003), 3.4% (2004), 3.2% (2005) and an estimated 3.3% (2006), why hasn’t America’s far greater than “ROBUST” economy been touted since 2003???

Could it be "media bias?"

The Dysgenics of Crime and Why Rehabilitative Justice Doesn’t Make Sense

The most insidious impact of random violent crime (“street crime”) is its dysgenic effect on society. Generally a low IQ, substance abusing, dysfunctional member of society inflicts long-lasting, most often life-changing violence upon a higher functioning, productive member of society.

There is no possible worse outcome for a society that seeks to move forward.

Over 80% of the criminal class (those chronically incarcerated) are functionally illiterate. What is commonly called “street crime” (armed robberies, car-jackings, muggings, etc) is almost always the result of dysfunctional humans seeking a way to garner commodities without benefit of work. These people, like most of the chronically poor are impulsive, reckless, prone to substance abuse and irresponsible.

Crime victims, tend to be those who are productive, if not prosperous – that is, store owners, people who have things like cars, jobs (some money), etc.

The focus on “rehabilitative justice” with adult felons is extremely misguided primarily because as the saying goes, “You can’t get silk out of a sow’s ear,” meaning you can’t replace that productive victim with a “rehabilitated” predator – the requisite skills the predator has are too low to begin with, in most cases.

When a doctor is car-jacked and murdered by a typical thug, society loses greatly. It loses a productive physician, who most likely has an IQ above 130, and we’re left with one or more dysfunctional thugs, more often than not, illiterate, and almost certainly of very limited capacity. That doctor will not be replaced via the rehabilitation of 1,000 such rehabbed thugs.

Just as in the case below, with the murder of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom, America lost two College students, certainly literate, probably intent on leading productive lives and we’re left with five extremely dysfunctional street people, all, no doubt, barely literate and even if they COULD be rehabilitated, they almost certainly lack the basic skills and capacities their two victims possessed.

While random violence or “street crime” inflicts a huge human toll on the individual victims themselves, it inflicts an even larger, more devastating cost upon society at large.

Why’s the Duke Hoax a National News Story, But NOT This Actual, Grisly Hate Crime???

While the Duke Hoax, it officially became a hoax when the DNA evidence exonerated the accused, still garners major national media attention, a ghastly, grisly, all too real hate crime is all but being ignored outside of the Knox County, TN area.

Early Sunday morning, January 6th, 2007, authorities believe Channon Christian (top picture, left) and Christopher Newsom (top picture, right) were abducted during what apparently began as a carjacking.

"It apparently started with a carjacking," said Chief Deputy U.S. Marshal Rich Knighten . "They did some really nasty things to this lady."
Subsequently Newsom’s badly burned and mutilated body was found in a rail yard. It turns out the five assailants did some “really nasty things” to Christopher Newsom before they killed him. Authorities know that he was raped, his penis cut off, and beaten before being set on fire and shot several times. It is believed they forced his girlfriend, Channon Christian, to watch.

An equally cruel fate awaited her!


Reports state that Channon Christian, was beaten and gang-raped in many ways for four days by all five assailants, including an eighteen year-old female named Vanessa Coleman. They also took turns urinating on her. Then they cut off her breasts and put a chlorine-based cleaning product in her mouth, ostensibly to eradicate any DNA evidence, then murdered her and left her body in a garbage can inside a house once occupied by two of the assailants.

The District Attorney General of Knox County announced the list of charges facing now five suspects in the double murder of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom.The District Attorney General Randy Nichols is not saying whether or not he will seek the death penalty, but he does say the state will seek conviction for all charges filed in a 24-page indictment from the Knox County Grand Jury.Lemaricus Davidson, 25, faces a total of 46 charges. Davidson was indicted on 16 counts of Felony Murder growing out of rape, robbery kidnapping and theft of Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, 2 counts premeditated murder of Christian and Newsom, 2 counts especially aggravated robberies from Christian and Newsom, 4 counts especially aggravated kidnapping of Christian and Newsom, 20 counts aggravated rape of Christian and Newsom, and 2 counts of theft from Christian and Newsom.Letalvis Cobbins, 24, faces a total of 46 charges. Cobbins was indicted on 16 counts of Felony Murder growing out of rape, robbery kidnapping and theft of Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, 2 counts premeditated murder of Christian and Newsom, 2 counts especially aggravated robberies from Christian and Newsom, 4 counts especially aggravated kidnapping of Christian and Newsom, 20 counts aggravated rape of Christian and Newsom, and 2 counts of theft from Christian and Newsom.George Thomas, 24, faces a total of 46 charges. Thomas was indicted on 16 counts of Felony Murder growing out of rape, robbery kidnapping and theft of Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, 2 counts premeditated murder of Christian and Newsom, 2 counts especially aggravated robberies from Christian and Newsom, 4 counts especially aggravated kidnapping of Christian and Newsom, 20 counts aggravated rape of Christian and Newsom, and 2 counts of theft from Christian and Newsom. 

Just last night, police in Lebanon, Kentucky, arrested 18-year-old Vanessa Coleman. She faces 40 Tennessee state charges. Coleman was indicted on 12 counts Felony Murder growing out of rape, robbery kidnapping and theft of Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, 1 count Premeditated Murder of Christian only, 1 count Especially Aggravated Robbery of Newsom only, 4 counts especially aggravated kidnapping of Christian and Newsom, 20 counts of aggravated rape of Christian and Newsom and 2 Counts of theft from Christian and Newsom.

Eric Boyd, 24, also arrested in connection with the fatal carjacking, only faces federal charges as an accessory after the fact. He was not indicted by Knox county grand jury.Felony Murder carries a possibility of death, life without the possibility of parole and life with parole. Especially Aggravated Robbery is a Class A felony that carries a possibility of 15 to 60 years in prison. Aggravated Rape is a Class A felony that carries a possibility of 15 to 60 years of prison.

At a news conference Thursday, Nichols commended the cooperative efforts between several departments and credits that cooperation for the fast pace this case is moving through the court system.

Nichols says he hopes to move the case to trial on the first day it's set.The four are expected to make their first court appearance within ten to fifteen days.

Within a month of the Duke hoax, many in the mainstream media had already convicted the three alleged assailants in the all important “court of public opinion, but there’s none of that here.

I wonder why?

OK, no I don’t, the radical Left is heavily invested in the fairy tale that whites are racist, while “people of color” can’t be.”

Unfortunately for them, that fairy tale keeps bumping up against a pesky reality.

Whoops! Hate crime stats, despite the fact that almost every white on black crime is labeled a “bias crime,” while most black on white crimes are not, show that blacks still commit far more “hate crimes” than whites, but we’re not supposed to know that. In fact, blacks are some FIFTY times more likely to attack a white, than vice versa.

When it comes to murder, the stats are even more startling. While black victims are killed by white murderers about 2% of the time, almost 14% of white murder victims are murdered by blacks, a difference of a factor of SEVEN TIMES.

In the light of those FACTS, the mainstream media’s continued obsession with white-on-black violence, to the point where a hoax like the Duke Lacrosse rape-hoax garners reams of paper while real, actual and far more prevalent black-on-white crimes, like the ritualistic rape-murder of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom by a group of feral blacks goes largely unnoticed and unreported, is indicative of an agenda that the media has no right to, given that the media’s job is simply one of information delivery (reporting the news) and NOT “shaping public opinion.”


SEE:

http://www.volunteertv.com/special

http://p006.ezboard.com/Liberal-media-ignores-this-brutal-story/fnypdrant64609frm1.showMessage?topicID=55966.topic


THANKS to P-Mc for the LINK

Who Really Stands Against the Merit System?

With the recent drubbing that overt race/gender-based preferences took in heavily Democratic Michigan (the MCRI banning race-based preferences was voted in a 60/40 landslide), those so inclined realize they need new ways around the old problem of “disparate impact.”

“Disparate impact” has been the rallying cry of all those opposed to standardized exams in any form or venue.

While race and gender-based preferences in school admissions have been fueled largely by a misguided sense of redress, in employment, they’ve been fueled by something far more sinister.

Consider that to date, the overwhelming bulk of race/gender based preferences have been consigned to Civil Service positions that have traditionally been filled, at least since the days when nepotism and cronyism were eradicated by the Civil Service Merit System (CSMS), by various Civil Service standardized exams.

The interview process used in the private sector is innately subjective, but has withstood the most intense legal scrutiny, as have the battery of professional exams – the Law Boards, the five part CPA exam, various medical licensing exams, etc. which all suffer the same demonstrable "disparate impact" that all standardized exams do.

Only the lowly Civil Service exams have not been spared.

Coincidence?

Not very likely.

So, then who is the real enemy of the CSMS?


Is it women and/or blacks?

Certainly a number of groups representing plaintiffs from both those groups have filed numerous federal lawsuits usually based on the claim of “disparate impact,” but that is hardly indicative of any consensus among either of those groups against standardized testing nor the merit system.

The New York City Fire Department (FDNY) has had lawsuits filed against it by both women’s groups and the Vulcans (a black fraternal organization) over the years. While women’s groups have argued that the physical portion of the firefighter’s entrance exam (weighted at 50% of the final score) is “discriminatory” against females because of its emphasis on upper body strength, the Vulcans have argued that the written portion of the exam is “discriminatory” against blacks because of, yes, “disparate impact.”

Both groups point to the fact that the FDNY is over 90% white and male as proof of some form of insidious, though unprovable discrimination.

The FDNY has always had the highest standards out of all the City’s Civil Service positions. Like all such Municipal positions, those standards have been watered down over the past three decades.

Still, the question remains WHO is the real enemy of the CSMS?

The only answer should be the most obvious one of all – the various Municipal governments are the real enemies of the CSMS.

Bottom-line, there are very few politicians who like the CSMS. It takes Municipal hiring out of political hands and puts those jobs, jobs that could be used as patronage positions to reward supporters, into an open and uniform system with a single standard for everyone applying for the various positions.

Politicians like patronage. They also like nepotism and cronyism. They don’t much like the CSMS.

Could that be why, while professional exams, like the Law Boards and CPA exams, tests that also suffer “disparate impact” have been defended and protected by court rulings, New York City, like other Municipalities have done little, if anything to defend the standardized exams forced upon those municipalities to remedy a very real, very deliberate and overt form of discrimination – patronage and cronyism?

Of course it could.

While many blacks and most women oppose segregated standards as much as they oppose any form of segregation, municipal governments oppose those standards because they’ve taken hiring decisions out of politician’s hands.

An end of the CSMS would mean a return to day when local politicians directly control the hiring within that municipality, returning a lot of leverage to local politicians that had been stripped away for decades.

While some “women’s groups” and some black fraternal organizations (like the FDNY’s Vulcans) have been used as tools to assail the CSMS, its municipal governments who’ve had the most to gain and therefore the deepest antipathy for the Merit System.

Or was it Bill O’Reilly???

I know some of folks will say that the Super-moderate O’Reilly (against Capital punishment and more environmentalist than most Dems) takes credit for everything, but here he may well have a point.

After outlining his argument that no Presidential candidate would have, say David Dukes (who recently surfaced in both the Ukraine and Iran to deny the holocaust ever occurred) write for them, then how come there is so much less outrage when two self-avowed anti-Christian fanatics (McEwan & Marcotte) are hired by a mainstream Presidential candidate?

On the hypocrisy of outrage O’Reilly is certainly right, of course, McEwan and Marcotte are exactly the same as David Dukes, though I really don’t understand why either’s views should be verboten. I would certainly NOT dismiss a candidate who embraced David Dukes, even though I disagree with many of Dukes’ views. I probably wouldn’t vote for that candidate, but I respect their right to endorse and be endorsed by whom they wish to be associated. Same with Marcotte and McEwan, I don’t “blame” the Edwards campaign for their views, BUT I still associate that campaign with these two, so I associate that campaign with a vuirulent form of bigotry – anti-Christian bigotry.

At any rate, back to O’Reilly and the Edwards camp, it seems O’Reilly found out that William Donahue of the Catholic League had informed the Edwards campaign that Marcotte had written a post describing, in pornographic detail, “Mary, the mother of Jesus, having sex with the Lord.”

The Catholic League reported that John Edwards’ response was that while he disagreed with Marcotte’s words, he wouldn’t fire either Marcotte or McEwan.

O’Reilly claims he had a producer call the Edwards camp, but no one there would talk to them about the issue, so Bill O’Reilly went on TV and laid out the entire above scenario. As he notes, “Within minutes of the broadcast, the Edwards campaign got rid of Marcotte. McEwan left the next day.”
Indeed O’Reilly’s right about the timing of Amanda Marcotte’s being let go by the Edwards campaign, so could it be that Bill O’Reilly, and not Marcotte’s insanely poor judgment on the Duke case, in a post subsequently “sanitized” and radically changed, was the reason Marcotte was let go?

Could be.

At least the timing’s so right, that it certainly makes it hard to argue with O’Reilly’s claim of credit.

In fact, that same week, O’Reilly asked Jane Fleming, the executive director of the Young Democrats Association, the same question, on air, that he posed to the Edwards campaign off air, “Would you hire a person who’d said vile things about blacks.”
“No,” she answered tersely.

“So why is OK to hire someone who says vile things about Christians?”

Fleming had no answer and appeared flummoxed by the question the Edwards campaign wisely avoided.

But avoiding the question doesn’t avoid the issue!

For better or worse, John Edwards hired and willingly associated his campaign with two radical anti-Christian zealots. Amanda Marcotte is on the same level as a Ted Rall or a David Dukes – outright bigots who are proud of their bigotry.

As I said, no bigotry should be out of bounds, speech is free, the results (alienation, loss of support, loss of market-share for businesses, etc) are not. Speech comes with concomitant responsibilities and the speaker must bear the brunt of the effects of that speech.

Tim Hardaway, an NBA stalwart from 1989 to 2003, recently acknowledged that “...I hate gays. If there were a gay guy on my team, I’d do my best to distance myself from him...”
The NBA disavowed those remarks and asked Hardaway to leave Las Vegas where he was representing the NBA during All-Star weekend. Hardaway was free to voice those views, but they had consequences.

In response the always outspoken Charles Barkley said, “Timmy’s a good guy, but those remarks are just stupid...I’ve played with gay teammates and that never bothered me. You know bothers me? You not being able to play ball!...You know what else bothers me? People feeling they have to announce their sexuality, like, “Hay, I’m gay.” Who cares?!”
Just as Hardaway’s remarks are protected from government action by the 1st Amendment, they are NOT free from repercussions by employers.

Same with people like Amanda Marcotte, David Dukes and other extremists – their views are protected from government censure, but they are NOT free from ramifications with employers, or an unreceptive public. You have to be able to bear the impact of whatever speech you endorse. Just as David Dukes is alienated and ostracized for his views in America, the likes of Amanda Marcotte deserve the same condemnation...and those who endorse/hire her deserve to be held accountable for that faux pas.

Duke Rape Hoax Comments May Have Doomed Amanda Marcotte

One of the posts that got Amanda Marcotte (pictured left) into trouble with the Edwards campaign was this one, “...For awhile, I had to listen to how the poor dear lacrosse players at Duke are being persecuted just because they held someone down and fucked her against her will — not rape, of course, because the charges have been thrown out.

“Can’t a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it?

“So unfair."

She actually made things worse by amending and sanitizing it a bit, to;

“UPDATE: Since people are determined to make hay over this quick shot of a post, I’m deleting it and here’s my official stance. The prosecution in the Duke case fumbled the ball. The prosecutor was too eager to get a speedy case and make a name for himself. That is my final word.”

Wait, wait a minute...is that “update” more than “a bit sanitized?”

I THINK it IS!!!

Yup, it’s a good deal more than “sanitized,” in fact ALL her actual opinions are missing from the so-called “Update!”

Hmmmmm, I wonder why.

Could it be that with the rape charges dropped, and daffy DA Mike Nifong having been removed from the case and charged with numerous ethics violations regarding his handling of that case, the day of insisting that “a rape still might have occurred,” are long gone?

I mean even the Gang of 88, those 88 batshit crazy Duke profs who’d morphed from mere goofy gaggle to a witch-hunting mob, have astutely backpedaled away from their former positions and, I’m sure they’re hoping, any pesky litigation and negative attention (too late on that one) that might spring from the increasingly clear outcome – exoneration for the Duke LAX boys, false report charges for the accuser and disbarment for Nifong.

So I suppose it could be argued that Amanda Marcotte’s no College professor, which is, of course, very true, BUT the fact remains that many of that Gang of 88 have far more impressive batshit crazy bona fides than does Amanda Marcotte.

It would seem that all they have that she doesn't is the good sense to swim away from a sinking ship, a trait Ms. Marcotte apparently lacks.

The problem is that this episode calls John Edwards’ judgment into question as much as it does Marcotte’s. After all, she’s completely and unquestioningly insane, he, on the other hand, is supposed to be running for President.

For better, or worse (right now, it’s worse), Edward’s chose Marcotte and McEwan from a whole host of “liberal bloggers.” In Marcotte, he chose a bizarre extremist, almost completely lacking in nuance, steeped in a visceral anti-religious hatred and as the above posts indicate, devoid of the common sense to even swim away from a rapidly sinking ship.

Even her “update” offers an inane view of the Duke Rape hoax completely unfamiliar with the facts surrounding that case – The accuser changed her story more than a half dozen times to Durham police, who found her “unreliable.” Mike Nifong promptly took the investigation out of the hands of the Durham police and then refused to interview the accuser for nearly ten months! In the interim, he made a number of misleading, even illegal comments about the Duke players, rigged an illicit line-up, refused to share exculpatory DNA evidence with the defense team as prescribed by law. IN January of 2007, after his FIRST interview of the accuser, he immediately dropped the rape charges. Shortly thereafter, he himself was hit with a slew of ethics charges, removed from the case by the State Attorney General’s office.

The DNA evidence showed NONE from ANY of the Duke LAX players charged, but it did show samples from at least five other men.

The case is a sham, the charges are a hoax. Even the dim-witted patricians at the NY Times jumped ship months ago, but not those at the Institute for Batshit Crazy, like Amanda Marcotte. No, poor Amanda stuck to her guns (such as they are) even after everyone with a shred of common sense or even a basic survival instinct ran away from this disaster.

THIS is the kind of “Liberal blogger” that John Edwards chose to associate himself with! On the Democrats chances of wooing Conservative voters, Marcotte said, “Voters who are motivated by misogyny, homophobia, and racism aren’t going to leave a racist, misogynist, homophobic party for one that is all those things but just less so.” On NASCAR and white supremacy, she pontificated “There’s no real reason that NASCAR has to have a political edge to it, much less be some weird symbol of Southern male white supremacy and yet through careful Republican marketing, it has become just that.”

Amanda Marcotte’s proven how poor her own personal judgment is, she proves it again and again every day, but Edwards’ hiring her, says a lot about his judgment as well.

Well, let me leave you with my favorite YouTube on the Duke Rape Hoax;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_qWi5AVC_U&mode=related&search=

I really like THIS guy!

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

Australia’s Prime Minister, John Howard really gets the War on Terrorism.

After responding to Barack Obama’s call for a total U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq by 2008, with, “If I were running al-Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008 and be praying as many times as possible for a victory not only for Obama but also for the Democrats," he's unabashedly followed that up by saying, “I hold the strongest possible view that it is contrary to the security interests of this country (Australia) for America to be defeated in Iraq.”

It most certainly IS.

Howard added, “Let me make it perfectly clear, if I hear a policy being advocated that is contrary to Australia’s security interests, I will criticize it.”

John Howard gets the reality that neither America, Australia or the rest of the West can afford a negotiated “peace” with radicalized Islam.

It’s either victory now (that’s us crushing THEM) or 100 years or more of more war.

You''ve gotta LOVE this guy!

OK, maybe not as much as Steve Irwin, but he's right up there now.

I’m getting to like this guy!

Spitzer’s now in an all out war with fellow Democrat Sheldon Silver, the Speaker of the NYS Assembly and a law-making trial lawyer – a partner in the law firm Weitz & Luxenberg.

Spitzer has promised serious reform in New York and both Sheldon Silver and Joe Bruno are standing in his way.

Breaking the Silver/Bruno hold on NYS government would be a pretty good start on real reform.

Imagine that, a politician who actually tries to keep a campaign promise!

New York NEEDS real political reform really bad!!! So, I'm pulling for Eliot in this one.

Go Eliot GO!!!

I even kind of like this guy

Blue and White - Blue Wind - http://blueandwhite96.blogspot.com/



He’s the only Liberal blogger that I link to at this point.

Even though we don’t agree on much, at least he makes an effort to communicate his views and even tries to give his reasons for supporting the things he does.

Not bad....for a Liberal.

Not again!...More Global Warming Games

Heard the one about “BushCo paying off climatologists to change their views on global warming,” or “the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) paying climatologists $10,000 (from Exxon-Mobil) to change their views.”

Whooops!

It’s a LIE...a smear campaign cooked up by the folks at Greenpeace.

They’ve been peddling this scam for months and finally hooked and reeled in the folks at the UK Guardian, from there it was taken up by the British Independent, before it jumped “the pond” to the WaPo and CNN Money!

According to the Wall Street Journal, "What AEI did was send a letter to several leading climate scientists asking them to participate in a symposium that would present a "range of policy prescriptions that should be considered for climate change of uncertain dimension." Some of the scholars asked to participate, including Steve Schroeder of Texas A& M, are climatologists who believe that global warming is a major problem."

Exxon's director of its Washington office, Lauren Kerr has said that "none of us here had ever heard of this AEI climate change project until we read about it in the London newspapers."

Even so the policy of commissioning such research is also standard practice at NASA and other government agencies and at liberal groups such as the Pew Charitable Trusts, which have among them spent billions of dollars attempting to link fossil fuels to global warming.

Worse still, several members of the U.S. Senate have taken these reports on face value without ever even contacting the AEI to vet them. Yesterday Senators Bernie Sanders, Patrick Leahy, Dianne Feinstein and John Kerry sent a letter to AEI President, Mr. DeMuth complaining that "should these reports be accurate," then "it would highlight the extent to which moneyed interests distort honest scientific and public policy discussions. . . . Does your donors' self-interest trump an honest discussion over the well-being of the planet?"

According to the WSJ, "Every member of AEI's board of directors was graciously copied on the missive. We're told the Senators never bothered to contact AEI about the veracity of the reports, and by repeating the distortions, these four Democratic senators, wittingly or not, gave credence to falsehood."

Currently Exxon-Mobil is demanding a full retraction from the Independent.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009649

Bwaaaa Haaaa! MoveOn.org gets it WRONG...Yet AGAIN!!!

In a recent ad that vaunted Left-wing advocacy group MoveOn.org took on a few Republicans for supporting the troop surge, sadly as FactCheck.org relates, “The liberal group attacks GOP Senators Warner, Smith, and Brownback for supporting an "escalation" they oppose.”

Boy! Poor George Soros just isn’t getting much bang for his buck these days!

I guess it really is hard to find good help now-a-days.

Well, facts certainly have never been MoveOn’s strong suit, but it is nice to see them called on it every once in awhile.

In it’s summary FactCheck.org states, “MoveOn.org Political Action began airing ads attacking four Republican senators in their home states, accusing them of favoring escalation of the war in Iraq and saying all are "willing to send tens of thousands more troops to face danger in Iraq." The ads clearly misrepresent the stands of three of the targeted senators, who in fact had publicly expressed strong disapproval of sending additional US troops.”

<

Whooopsie!!!

Pentagon Probe Says Pre-Iraq Intel Was NOT Misleading

In a report which will be presented to Congress this Friday (February 9th, 2007), the DOD's inspector general will clear former Pentagon policy chief Douglas J. Feith (pictured left) of any charges that he engaged in illegal activities through the creation of special offices to review intelligence.

Some Democrats have contended that Feith misled Congress about the basis of the administration's assertions on the threat posed by Iraq, but the Pentagon’s investigation did not support that.

Two people familiar with the findings discussed the main points and some details Thursday on condition they’re anonymity be protected.

Asked to comment on the IG's findings, Feith responded in a telephone interview that he hadn’t seen the report but was pleased to hear that it concluded his office's activities were neither illegal nor unauthorized.

Feith, however, took strong issue over IG's finding that some activities had been "inappropriate."

"The policy office has been smeared for years by allegations that its pre-Iraq-war work was somehow `unlawful' or `unauthorized' and that some information it gave to congressional committees was deceptive or misleading," Feith said.

Feith called the inspector general's conclusion that some intelligence activities by the Office of Special Plans, created while Feith served as the undersecretary of defense for policy — the top policy position under Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld — were inappropriate but not unauthorized as "bizarre.”

"Clearly, the inspector general's office was willing to challenge the policy office and even stretch some points to be able to criticize it," Feith said, adding that he felt this amounted to subjective "quibbling" by the IG.

Feith left his Pentagon post in August 2005 to teach at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. He’s steadfastly maintained that their intelligence activities were prudent, authorized and useful in challenging some of the intelligence analysis of the CIA.

At the center of the prewar intelligence controversy was the work of a small number of Pentagon officials from Feith's office and the office of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz who reviewed CIA intelligence analyses and put together their own report.

When they briefed Rumsfeld on their report in August 2002 — a period when Vice President Dick Cheney and other administration officials were ratcheting up their warnings about the gravity of the Iraq threat — Rumsfeld directed them to also brief CIA Director George Tenet. Their presentation, which included assertions about links between al-Qaida and the Iraqi government, contained a criticism that the intelligence community was ignoring or underplaying its own raw reports on such potential links.

Differing opinion on Iraqi/al-Qaida links

In a dissenting view attached to the committee's report, three Democratic senators, including Levin, said that Pentagon policymakers sought to undermine the analysis of the intelligence community by circumventing the CIA and briefing their own views directly to the White House. This was a particular problem when the spy agencies' judgments did not conform to the administration's dire views on Iraqi links to al-Qaida, the senators said.

Later, two senators — Levin and Pat Roberts, R-Kan. — separately asked the Pentagon's inspector general to review the role of Feith's office. It was not immediately clear whether the intelligence committee would press ahead with its own investigation, or if the inspector general's report would suffice.

Eric Edelman, Feith’s successor as undersecretary of defense for policy, wrote a response to a draft of the IG's report last month, claiming that the activity deemed by the IG to be "inappropriate" was actually "an exercise in alternative thinking" conducted at Wolfowitz's direction.

Edelman has claimed that the IG had misinterpreted "what the (Pentagon's) work actually was — namely, a critical assessment by OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) for policy purposes of IC (Intelligence Community) reporting and finished IC products on contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida."

In short – “The invasion of Iraq was not based on lies.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070208/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iraq_pentagon_intelligence

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17051786/

Death rates for major cancers trend down for second straight year during GOP “Pro-Pollution” Reign?

The American Cancer Society reported that the year 2003 - 2004 marked the second straight year of declining deaths for a number of major cancers.

The findings suggest that the small drop last year (the first in over 70 years) was real and perhaps the start of a continuing decline.

The report credits much of the decline to smoking cessation and early detection and treatment of some cancers like prostate, breast and colorectal cancer. Still, wouldn't you expect cancer death rates to actually increase under a "pro-pollution" administration like the current one?

Lung cancer is still the leading cause of cancer death with over 160,000 deaths projected for 2007. Lung cancer mortality in men have been declining for years, but for women they’re still increasing slightly, though there is evidence that women’s death rates from lung cancer are beginning to plateau as well. Still, lung cancer, prostate, cancer, colorectal cancer and pancreatic cancer death rates have all declined in men, and breast, uterine, stomach and colorectal cancer deaths have all declined in women over that time period.

Dr. Elizabeth Ward, a managing director in epidemiology and surveillance in the cancer society says, “We’ve made a great deal of progress, but we still have a long way to go.”

These findings seem to be at odds with the claims from the some on the radical Left that the current administration has been “pro-polluter” and has harmed the environment.

If pollution had increased to any significant extent, it’s highly unlikely that these cancer death rates would’ve declined! In fact, by the hysterics from the Left, you'd swear that the current administration was undermining the nation's health, or something like that. I guess not, at least not according to the current cancer death rates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/health/18cancer.html?ex=1326776400&en=6aca41917e905f95&ei=5089&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss

The Latest Sharpton Scam?

Al Sharpton is considering suing the NYPD and the City of New York over what he calls “racial profiling.”

In fact, black males in New York do get stopped by police in greater numbers than their proportion in the city.

Last year blacks were the targets of 55% of the police stops in New York, while they represent only 24% of the population, while whites, who are nearly 35% of the population were involved in only 11% of the NYPD stops.

Sounds out-of-whack, doesn’t it?

But, percentage in society isn’t the basis for police stops, even though Sharpton and some others seem to believe it should be.

Police stops are based more on the percentage of crimes each groups commits. Viewed in that regard, blacks, who commit 68.5% of all the murders, rapes, robberies and assaults are stopped LESS than the proportion of the felonies that group commits, while whites who are stopped in 11% of the NYP are stopped double to their proportion of violent crime (5.3%). Those stats prove that the police are 13 times more likely to be searching for a black suspect than a white one, for any given violent crime, based on victim identification, thus it stands to reason that the rate at which police stop blacks far more often than whites, when looking for suspects in violent crimes.

Now that doesn’t sound as much like “racial profiling,” does it?

Higher crime rates determine which people get stopped by police. The NYPD, like all police departments, focuses the bulk of its resources where crime is the highest. That’s a public service. When Bill Bratton led the turn around on crime when Giuliani became Mayor in 1993, reducing New York City’s murder rate from over 2,000 to about a quarter of that, disproportionately benefited black New Yorkers, because the bulk of those saved in cutting that murder rate were indeed black.

As Heather Mac Donald, editor of the City Journal so eloquently put it, “If Sharpton really wanted to get the black stop rate down, he would be working day and night to bring the crime rate down. He would be telling young men to stay in school and to marry the mothers of their children so that boys would not grow up without fathers. He would be demonizing criminals, not the police. Until that happens, his pose as caring about the well-being of the black community should be regarded with skepticism.”

Without question, Heather Mac Donals is right.

Senator Feinstein throws down the gauntlet

In response to Senate Republicans considering scuttling the non-binding resolution against the troop surge in Iraq, Dianne Feinstein said, "It's obstructionism," said Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), "This is not tolerable in a situation where it's the number one topic in the nation, and the Republican party prevents the Senate of the United States from debating."
<
For his part, Arizona Sen. John McCain, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said proponents of the nonbinding, bipartisan resolution were undermining national security. "This is a vote of no confidence in both the mission and the troops," he said.
<
Republicans like McCain and John Warner (R-VA) are right that this non-binding resolution is a hypocritical attempt by some in the Senate to have it both ways. For those who approved Lt General David Petraeus and his nomination passed 81 – 0, they are especially hypocritical – you can’t approve a General who supports and intends to lead a troop surge and then vote “no confidence” against your own previous vote, approving Petraeus.
<
No, what those truly opposed to this war should be forced to so is to cut the funding for the troops in Iraq. That’s the only move that those of conscience, but that requires putting their political careers on the line and most of those who claim to oppose the war in the Senate would apparently rather not do that.
<
On Sunday, Feinstein called on Republicans to reconsider their procedural move.
<
"I think it's a terrible mistake to prevent this debate," she said. "If we can't get this done, you can be sure, a month or so down the pike, there's going to be much stronger legislation."
<
The Senate, where Democrats hold a 51-49 working majority, has tentatively set an early test vote for Monday.
<
In a bid to attract more GOP support, Warner added a provision pledging to protect money for troops in combat, but even that compromise drew the ire of some Democrats who said it leaned too far in endorsing the status quo. They want to see binding legislation to cap troop levels, force a new vote to authorize the war or begin bringing troops home.
<
Not going to happen.

<

The tightrope that many Senate Dems are trying to walk is that between their professed "support for the troops" and their professed "opposition to the war."

<

Just as trying to get cops to stand down when confronted with crime, so that they don't risk injury and death would NOT be supporting the police, in any meaningful way, as going after felons is what they DO and what they want to do.

<

Just as keeping firefighters from making "an aggressive interior attack," holding them back to fight the fire from the outside, would NOT be supporting firefighters.

Same with soldiers, seeking to keep them from fighting an enemy is NOT supporting the troops.

<

Prior to the Coalition invasion of Iraq, virtually all the world's intelligence agencies ALL believed Saddam's Iraq had WMDs., thus there were no "lies" that led up to the invasion, just a megalomaniacal dictator determined to maintain the facade that he did have WMDs to create a "deterrence by doubt."

<

Now that we've invaded, Iraq has become a magnet for jihadists being supported and sponsored by the likes of Syria and Iran and other rogue states - THAT'S A FIGHT WE NEED TO MAKE!

<

Again, there is no "peace option."

<

The other side (the jihadists) seems to believe it can win, and quite frankly, looking at the Left in this country, I can't imagine that that would give them any reason to doubt that conviction.

<

If you're going to sign onto a resolution voicing a "no-confidence" in the war, then make it clear you also have "no-confidence" in the tropps either and vote to defund the war in Iraq.

<

Trying to "have it both ways" is just plain cowardly.

PRIVACY - “I no think that word mean what you think it mean.”

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

According to a 2005 survey by the American Management Association, three out of four employers monitor the Internet usage of employees, and just over half of U.S. companies review and retain employee email messages.

Not only are employers allowed to monitor what employees do on workplace computers, they are obligated to retain and archive electronic business records. In workplace lawsuits, email creates the electronic equivalent of DNA evidence.

Many do not notify workers about the monitoring, according to the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC). In fact, there are very few laws regulating employee monitoring, and the PRC advises all employees to assume that their workplace activities and communications are being monitored.
Nancy Flynn, the executive director of the ePolicy Institute in Columbus, Ohio, agrees that employees should expect to be monitored, adding they should "comply 100 percent with the employer's computer usage and content policies."

Hmmm, what part of “company property” is so hard to understand?

If you send an email from a company computer there is an electronic record of that, so it’s baa strategy to post an online resume, for instance, from a company computer, and if you search kiddie porn sites from a work computer, the company you work for has a right to protect itself from your criminal actions by handing you over to law enforcement.

This ISN’T a “privacy” matter!

You have no reasonable expectation of privacy when on someone else’s computer!

<

How can that be at all hard to understand?