I fixed the William Shatner link on this post. So sorry for the HTML flub. If you've never heard this, you really should.

I first heard it in college, and I've had trouble sleeping ever since. Sometimes I wake up in a cold sweat and scream "Mr. Tambourine Man!"

I've always known Hillary Clinton was a communist, but she could at least try to hide it.

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

"On behalf of the common good" is never justification to violate an individual's rights.

Is there anything left that hasn't been blamed on global warming?

Britain's Antarctic ice station has a design problem few architects can have envisaged when it was built -- within a decade it is likely to float away.

The existing base is built on an ice shelf which is likely to break off into the sea if global warming continues at its current rate.

The guilt is enough to make me want to cry all over the steering wheel of my SUV this morning.

When one study says there's no risk from second hand smoke, the anti-smokers just go out and get another study.

Passive Smoking Heart Risk Double Earlier Estimates - Passive smoking may be much more dangerous than scientists had thought, researchers said on Wednesday in new study that is likely to boost demand for a ban on smoking in public places.

When researchers come out and proudly proclaim that their study should help advance a specific agenda, you can color me skeptical. The virulently anti-smoking World Health Organization found that there was no statistical link, nor any proof that second hand smoke has negative health effects.

Kudos to the Pink Pistols for standing their ground. Prior to their Pride Festival, event organizers sent them a letter saying that they would be forbidden from carrying firearms. It boldly told them "Should anyone bring a firearm this Stonewall Columbus event, the firearm will be confiscated and not returned and the individual will be rejected from the event." (emphasis mine)

Some members of the Pink Pistols were not intimidated and did take their guns with them. That's when all hell started to break loose.

Initially three, then later, four members of the Central Ohio Pink Pistols, a group promoting the safe handling of firearms in the GLBT community, were threatened by the Executive Director of Stonewall Columbus, who wielded a 2-foot club, and up to 30 volunteer security personnel at the Stonewall Columbus Pride Event on Saturday, June 26. The Pink Pistols were repeatedly ordered to surrender their legally-owned and carried firearms by a steadily-growing army of guards. Knowing the law was on their side, the Pink Pistols refused to surrender their property or knuckle under to illegal threats of violence, search, and seizure by Stonewall Columbus personnel.

My guess is that the main thing that kept this mob of rent-a-cops from attacking is that their victims were pretty well armed. The police were called, but it wasn't the event staff who called them.

According to sources, about halfway through lunch, the first two staff persons, one bearing a 2-foot long, inch-thick truncheon (which she referred to dubiously as a "keychain", by virtue of the split keyring and key at one end), accosted the group with the statement: "I thought I told YOU PEOPLE not to bring firearms in here?" The person in question was assumed from context to be Kate Anderson herself, since she did not identify herself, but seemed to be referring to the email.

The Pink Pistols did not respond. Then she said, "I'm going to confiscate those firearms, turn them over to me right now!"

The Pink Pistols responded that they would do no such thing. Ms. Anderson repeated that they must turn over their weapons, and they would get them back after the event.

The responses she received were variations on "no, we do NOT have to surrender the firearms to you, and no, we're not going to leave either, because we are part of the gay and lesbian community, AND it's legal to open carry in the state of Ohio and we have the law on our side, and you don't. We'll just continue sitting here, enjoying the day."

Ms. Anderson retreated briefly and returned with 10 security guards. She again insisted they surrender their firearms. Still, the Pink Pistols refused. More guards were called, until approximately 30 security guards surrounded the three Pink Pistols. Ms. Anderson at this time brandished her truncheon and demanded once again that the Pink Pistols either turn over their firearms or she would take them, but the Pink Pistols once again refused.

Kim Rife recalls: "I have a sense about these things, and I think her 'plan' was to 'subdue' us. So I started informing her that if they so much as TOUCHED us, and confiscated our firearms they'd be guilty of a third degree felony, robbery, assault and anything else our lawyer could come up with." Ms. Anderson said she should call the police, and Ms. Rife and Ms. Lee said that would be a good idea, and suggested she do so.

Mr. Jones, another marcher and member of COPP, recalls the reaction of Ms. Anderson. "At this point she is obviously taken aback, as it was apparent that she had planed to use force."

One of their members called the attorney for Ohioans For Concealed Carry, who was on call for their support, to double-check their legal position. This additional attorney corroborated the legality of the Pink Pistols' actions, and was informed the police were on their way. During this entire exchange, the Pink Pistols remained calm, ate their lunches, and chatted amongst themselves.

According to Sergeant Mull of the Columbus Police Department's Public Information Unit, police were dispatched at 2:56 pm on a possible charge of trespassing. Firearms were mentioned, but also that the weapons were holstered and legally carried.

When the police arrived, they were polite and professional, for which the Pink Pistols applaud them. The Columbus Police Department entered the situation with a spirit of negotiation and respect for the law and the rights of everyone, for which they should be commended. The intricate nature of the new concealed-carry law was discussed at length, including where the law permitted a firearm owner to carry a weapon, whether a licensee could carry on government property, and whether a parade permit afforded "private property" control to the permit holder. Eventually, after running the chain of police command, a call to the City Prosecutor was made, and the point was still ambiguous. But the Prosecutor felt strongly enough that the police could at least make arrests to clear the scene if necessary, so the Pink Pistols were asked to compromise and depart at that time.

The Pink Pistols did depart. They are, after all, civil human beings. Under the law, they probably did not have to, but when the Police ask you to move on it's best that you heed their command. It's a shame that such anti-gun bigotry from one of their own spoiled an event for which they had probably spent weeks preparing.

Apparently sleeping on the job is a right now.

Software engineer Terry Williams claims he has a right to sleep on the job. Williams says his sleep disorders force him to take nap breaks at work.

He was fired by Telecommunications Systems of Maryland and is now suing the company for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.

I pretty much despise comment registration. But if you are going to put an annoying comment registration policy in effect on your site, you should do the following things:

1. Tell people about it before they start typing their comments.
2. Code the HTML so that when they type a big long comment and then get an error for not registering, they don't lose everything.

How can this be true? I thought Republicans were supposed to be the party of big money special interests, while Democrats were the party of the common man.

Only one of the top 25 donors to political 527 groups has given to a conservative organization, shedding further light on the huge disparity between Democrats and Republicans in this new fund-raising area.

The top three 527 donors so far in the 2004 election cycle - Hollywood producer Steven Bing, Progressive Corp. chairman Peter Lewis and financier George Soros - have combined to give nearly $24 million to prominent liberal groups. [...]

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks 527 data, liberal organizations have amassed nearly $80 million in donations compared to a mere $8 million for their conservative counterparts.

This has always been the case. For all the money George Bush raised in 2000, most of it came from small donors. Apparently, that is holding true for this election cycle as well.

"[Americans] are possibly the dumbest people on the planet." -- Michael Moore in Britiain's Mirror newspaper.

Judging by the number of people that believe his lies, there is a ring of truth to that.

After banning guns, swords, knives, airguns, and the carrying anything considering physically "offensive", citizens of the United Kingdom have resorted to begging criminals for mercy marching against gunmen.

The Mothers Against Violence group is being headed by Pat Regan, whose son Danny, 26, was blasted to death by three bullets.

The march is part of a national campaign which aims to rid the streets of violence and gun-related crime.

Unlike in the U.S. where moms march against gun ownership, moms in the UK don't have much left to march against. Everything is banned, which is having the expected results.

Crimes involving firearms have doubled in West Yorkshire in five years, from 1,062 to 2,044 for the year 2002/3.

Doubled. That's a pretty telling statistic, considering crime has been falling in the U.S. (where access to guns is prolific) since 1994.

Sales Up Despite Ban on Smoking - Restaurant revenue in Montgomery County increased in the six months after a countywide ban on smoking took effect, a finding that anti-smoking advocates hope will boost their efforts to enact similar bans statewide and in the District. -- Washington Post, June 28, 2004.

Consumer Spending Rises in May - Americans' incomes and spending rose strongly last month, but much of the money went to pay higher food and gasoline prices, the government reported today. -- Washington Post, June 28, 2004.

On the one hand people are spending more money on food, and that's good. And of course, it will be used as "proof" that smoking bans are a good thing. On the other hand, consumer income and spending is on the rise, but it's being dragged down because people are spending more money on food; and that's a bad thing.

Of course the smoking ban was never about sales revenue. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 percent of all restaurants were already non-smoking. If a smoke ban was so profitable, the other 60% would have jumped on that bandwagon voluntarily. Forcing restaurant owners to ban smoking is about violating people's property rights. The government shouldn't be in the business of telling people what they can and cannot do with their private property. Especially over something so trivial and unproven as second hand smoke.

UPDATE: Here come the naysayers. Would anything less be expected from Reuters?

"I want to behead Saddam Hussein for what he did. He killed four members of my family," said Akeel Kathim, another driver. "Despite that I hope he comes back because only he can end the security crisis."

The roads were safe under Saddam because criminals faced severe sentences such as long prison terms, or the severing of hands for illegal money dealing. During the chaos of occupation, armed gangs preyed on motorists. Now al-Quds's 25 drivers can only wait to see if Allawi delivers.

"I used to take jobs at two in the morning. Now I shut down at six because it is too dangerous to drive at night," Bashar said. "The future is uncertain now. I hope I we can work at night again soon."

So, Saddam may have killed most of his family, but at least it was safe to drive at night. So much for progress.

The absolute worst song I've ever heard is William Shatner's rendition of Mr. Tambourine Man. Suddenly, there is a new contender. Barbra Streisand sings for John Kerry.

PEOPLE
I MEAN G - O - P - EOPLE -
WHO'D BELIEVE THERE'S SUCH PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD?
BUSH SEEZA
LOTTA CONDOLEEZA,
THEY'RE DIVIDING THE PLANET'S OIL
ACCORDING TO RICHARD "POIL"
AND THEY'RE ALL JUST TRAINEES
OF CHENEY'S.

RUMSFELD,
WE MUST GET RID OF RUMSFELD -
HE'S THE SPOOKIEST PERSON IN THE WORLD.
AS FOR POWELL -
HE'S NEITHER FISH NOR FOWL.
HE'S IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM,
WHILE THEY'RE ALL FIDDLING WITH DOOM.
NO ONE'S MINDING THE STORE.
WHAT'S MORE,
LET'S DISCUSS THIS WAR WE'RE LOST IN,
DON'T ASK WHAT IT'S COSTIN' -
WHAT'S A TRILLION OR TWO TO RULE THE WORLD?

It goes on and on for several more verses. And of course, there's plenty more moonbattery posted proudly on the rest of her site.

UPDATE: Fixed the Shatner link.

Geek notes that Moveon.org supporters have resorted to roughing up people that dare to disagree with them.

You can't force people to like you. Then again, you can always sue them when they don't.

The more I hear about Vice President Dick Cheney telling Senator Patrick Lehey to go fuck himself, the better I like Cheney. In an interview with Fox News' Neil Cavuto, Cheney sheds some light onto the subject:

CHENEY: I expressed my dissatisfaction for Senator Leahy.

CAVUTO: Over his comments about you and Halliburton?

CHENEY: No. It was partly that. It was partly - also, it had to do with - he is the kind of individual who will make those kinds of charges and then come after you as though he's your best friend. And I expressed, in no uncertain terms, my views of the - of his conduct and walked away.

CAVUTO: Did you curse at him?

CHENEY: Probably.

(LAUGHTER)

CAVUTO: Do you have any regrets?

CHENEY: No. I said it, and I felt that...
(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: So let me understand, he comes up, he sees you, Mr. Vice - he's all nice, shakes your hand. And then what do you do, let into him?

CHENEY: Explain my unhappiness with the way he conducted himself. What - part of the problem here is, that instead of having a substantive debate over important policy issues, he had challenged my integrity. And I didn't like that. But, most of all, I didn't like the fact that after he had done so then he wanted to act like, you know, everything's peaches and cream.

And I informed him of my view of his conduct in no uncertain terms. And as I say, I felt better afterwards.

When asked about the matter, White House spokesman Scott McLellan said, "These things happen from time to time". When asked about how his conduct was received by his collegues, Cheney said, "Well, I think that a lot of my colleagues felt that what I had said badly needed to be said, that it was long overdue."

Long overdue indeed. I'm always amazed at how politicians can spew all this venom and hatred about one another and then come together with open mouth kisses on each other's ass when they meet face to face. Bush and Daschle come to mind.

Apparently the felons they are sending door-to-door to get out the vote don't have a history of violence. They're the white collar felons who've committed fraud, embezzlement, or identity theft, so there is nothing to worry about.

Go ahead and give them your name, address, and social security number.

Until I recently watched Breakfast at Tiffany's (for the first time), I never knew that Audrey Hepburn wasn't related to Katherine Hepburn.

That California would try to ban or limit the sales of BB guns is not all that surprising to me. But this run-on sentence by the Pasadena Star-News left me scratching my head.

The death of Deputy Mike Arruda in a shootout prompted by a man with a pellet gun that looked like a semiautomatic handgun has strengthened a police union's support for a bill that would make it a crime to display fake guns in public and brandish a BB gun in a threatening manner.

I had trouble understanding how a cop could be killed by a BB gun. That is, until I got down to the 29th and final paragraph.

Arruda was accidentally shot by a fellow deputy during a shootout at a Motel 6 in Hacienda Heights earlier this month.

His death is a tragedy, and it is very easy to make the claim that had this ass clown not pulled out a BB gun and started threatening people, Arruda would still be alive today. But blaming the BB gun is idiotic. Had the perpetrator pulled out a black cell phone or a comb, the exact same outcome could have transpired.

After years of conspiring to keep CD prices artificially inflated with minimum pricing incentives, the music industry coughed up a few million dollars and hundreds of thousands of music CD "gifts" to public libraries and schools. But librarians and school officials are not very happy that their end of the payout was heavily laden with CD singles of Whitney Houston.

The Puget Sound Educational Service District, serving 35 school districts, received 1,300 copies of Houston's soaring rendition of the "Star-Spangled Banner," a disc that includes only one other song, "America the Beautiful."

Other discs have raunchy rap unsuitable for school libraries, and some librarians said it looked like the music companies were dumping stale inventory.

Lucky for me, I received a cash settlement. But as I noted back in February, it wasn't even enough to buy a single CD.

Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), an avid Michael Moore fan, arrives at the premier of Michael Moore's latest mockumentary.

Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) joins his collegue. Florida voters must be proud.

(Hat tip to Allah.)

Spoons delivers the absolutely absurd news that U.S. troops are being told they cannot use their Israeli ammunition to kill Iraqi terrorists dead. Apparently killing them is just fine, but we don't want to hurt their feelings by using those dirty Jew bullets to send Muslim terrorists to meet their 72 virgins. (I think we had a similar policy during WWII when FDR was worried about offending Hitler.)

Allah Pundit is taking it all in stride.

Owen Courreges notes that Russia has taken a big step backward. The Jehovah's Witnesses have lost their standing as a legally licensed religion.

Without that, the group's 10,000-member Moscow community is forbidden to rent premises, print literature, or officially assemble. The court further ordered the Jehovah's Witnesses to "terminate their activity," which could subject members to fines or arrest simply for gathering in a private home or discussing their faith with friends.

Homer Simpson's crusade for legalization of marijuana is cut short when he and his supporters forget to vote. -- Simpsons Episode 1316, April 14, 2002.

Pot activists forget to file signature petitions in Nevada -- AP, June 25, 2004.

This only makes me like Cheney even more.

Right Wing News has Michael Moore in quotes. At the end, there is a flyer that Moorewatch is encouraging people to hand out at theaters. In my opinion, this is preferrable method of protest than calling theaters and encouraging them not to carry Fahrenheit 9/11. I'd much rather see Moore's lies debunked than have him play the "victim of censorship" role.

Washington Times lists all the women that are missing from Bill Clinton's book. I would post them all here, but I've only got so much room to play with.

Democrat advocacy groups are sending tough guys to people's homes to get out the vote.

According to the Associated Press, a group that wants to get George W. Bush out of the White House is now paying convicts to sign up potential voters in at least three states -- and maybe as many as 17.

America Coming Together told the AP that it believes felons deserve a second chance -- and therefore it is paying them to go door to door in Missouri, Florida, and Ohio, where they ask voters what issues are important to them; hand out information on voter registration; and sometimes collect personal information, such as telephone numbers and driver's license numbers.

I think rehabilitated felons deserve a second chance too. But this isn't the way. Keep in mind that these are the same people that would take away your right to keep and bear arms or defend yourself. I think Geek put it best when he said: "In a hypothetical Donk Utopia, the .gov would first have deprived you of your means of personal and home defense and next would have sent convicted felons to your doorstep to case the place collect your vital information "help you" to register to vote. "

John Kerry is a little upset at the schedule mishap in the Senate. He flew all the way back to Washington to actually represent his constituents cast a rare vote in the Senate, and the GOP had the nerve to postpone the vote. CNN captures his outrage:

"Oh, no. Not in this Senate, not with these people. Once again, it's my way or the highway, shut the door, lock the people out, don't let them take part in the democracy, don't respect the institution. Don't show the common courtesies that actually bring people together to find the common ground. So they found a way all day to twiddle their thumbs, do very little, attend a reception at the White House, but not let John Kerry vote.

"That's the way they play."

The guy is gone more than 80% of the time, and when he does show up he expects the rest of the Senate to work around his schedule. This is coming from the man whose party blocked all judicial appointments until they got their way. This man filibustered the appointments of no less than four minority candidates, ensuring that the Senate would not get to vote on them.

Kerry has missed so many votes over the past two years, maybe the Republicans figured one more wouldn't make a difference.

Spoons points out that minority home ownership is on the rise. Apparently, however, that is bad news and of course, it's all Bush's fault.

If the ratings on IMDb are any indication, Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is a love it or hate it movie.

Perhaps most telling is the breakdown by nation.

Granted the movie has yet to be released and there are only a few thousand votes, the movie appears to be polarizing and steeped in controversy. And as usual, Moore stands to make a financial windfall from it.

I'm not sure how I missed this one, but better late than never. The unintended consequences of the Australian gun ban are taking hold. I'm surprised PETA isn't stepping into the fray on this one.

Brian Kentwell says he has been left with no choice but to "hammer" injured or dying animals as he patrols 75 kilometres of irrigation channels in the district.

Mr Kentwell feels he is a casualty of the new handgun legislation that now precludes the use of pistols in the agricultural category.

Mr Kentwell, who has been manager of the Marthaguy Irrigation Scheme for 15 years, said he was no longer permitted to use the 9mm Ruger he was specifically licensed to carry for the humane euthanasia of stock and native animals bogged in channels or injured when hit by vehicles.

"Just last week I had to put down a kangaroo that had two broken legs. It's not very pleasant at the best of times and doubly difficult without a firearm," he said.

Kentwell is applying to register his rifle, but the government is so backed up he'll have to wait months. Of course, he can't even carry a sword any more either.

The Washington Times has the latest from Virginia Democrat and Governor Mark Warner:

Virginia Gov. Mark Warner said yesterday elected officials should quit using phrases such as "user fees" and "revenue enhancements" and instead call them what they are - taxes. [...]

"You've got to be straight with the people," Mr. Warner told a gathering of about 120 at a Democratic Leadership Council luncheon in Northwest.

On the campaign trail, Mark Warner promised, "I will not raise taxes! I will not raise taxes! I will not raise taxes!". Once he reached office, Warner pushed for the largest tax increase in Virginia history, which a month later turns out not to have even been needed.

How he managed to say that without his pants bursting into flames is beyond me.

Police taser guns are referred to as "less than lethal". With high profile police brutality cases in the news, they are intended to be an alternative to a policeman shooting someone in the chest with their service pistol. This Police conference/sales pitch in Toronto described their mission as "exploration for alternatives to police use of lethal force" and heralded taser guns as the product of addressing "the issue of deaths arising from police use of force".

But with increasing frequency the tools provide to the police are being abused. They are being used simply to punish suspects or make them toe the line when their uncooperative. Often times the officer is in no danger at all, which is the litmus test for an officer firing his sidearm.

A Seattle family is contemplating a lawsuit after their 16 year old son was tased four times, while handcuffed.

Within minutes, a routine pat down turned violent and Kenneth lay on the ground, handcuffed and bleeding. A Seattle police officer had pressed a Taser four times against the back of Kenneth's neck.

Each of the 50,000-volt jolts lasted five seconds and left a dime-sized char mark. Scars still remain almost a year later.

After an internal investigation, the department concluded it was an unfortunate misunderstanding and ruled three of the four officers involved did not violate department policies. The fourth was ordered to undergo additional Taser training.

The way they brush it off as inadequate taser training, they make it sound as if he's using the wrong size batteries. Instead of teaching officers how to use the device, they should be teaching them when to use it.

And this is far from an isolated incident. In Kansas City, a senior citizen and grandmother was tased twice in her own home. Her crime was illegally honking her horn.

Last week, Louise Jones, 68, was shot with a police Taser gun in her home. She said the officer twice used the weapon on her after coming to her home to give her a ticket for honking her horn. Police say Jones was shocked because she assaulted the officer by pushing him away.

A cop, undoubtedly younger than 68 years old and probably trained in self defense had to tase an old woman, twice. Keep in mind that the development and adoption of these devices was intended to be an alternative to lethal force. Instead, they seem to be being used at cattle prods.

Remember that police are almost never justified in shooting people who are simply trying to run away. But in Kansas City, where the rules were just made more restrictive, the bar for taser use had to be raised up to that level. Previously they could tase people for not jumping fast enough for them.Police are conducting an internal investigation into what happened, but there has been no resolution yet. But police commissioners did take action, raising the level of force required before officers can justify using the Taser guns.

Previously, it was the department's policy that a "passively resistant" person could be shocked with a Taser gun. Now, a person must be pushing, pulling or trying to flee from an officer before the weapons can be used.(emphasis mine.) The lawyer for the Seattle family, Fred Diamondstone, highlights the free-tasing attitude of police.

"Clearly, as an alternative to using deadly force, (the Taser) is a wonderful tool," Diamondstone said. "What concerns me is the use of the Taser in a very low-end situation, a situation where there's no immediate threat to the officer. ...

"Just because somebody is uncooperative doesn't mean you jump to using less-than-lethal force."

In Kansas City they seem to think so.

"We want the word out," says [Michael Moore], who says he should have responded more quickly to allegations of inaccuracy in his Oscar-winning 2002 anti-gun documentary, "Bowling for Columbine." "Any attempts to libel me will be met by force," he said, not an ounce of humor in his familiar voice. "The most important thing we have is truth on our side. If they persist in telling lies, knowingly telling a lie with malice, then I'll take them to court." -- Michael Moore, quoted by the New York Times.

His threats don't scare Christopher Hitchens, who thoroughly debunks Fahrenheit 9/11.

The IRS is apparently planning to pay off stool pigeons who turn in their tax cheating neighbors. In principle, I don't disagree with the concept. The government has been putting prices on criminal's heads for over 150 years. The problem is that the IRS is not a law enforcement agency, and doesn't play by their rules. In fact, Congress has been looking at the IRS' overzealous gestapo tactics for years.

In my home town of Virginia Beach, the story of a local restaurant, The Jewish Mother, is well known. The restaurant was raided and shut down by IRS goons, on nothing more than the word of a disgruntled employee.

Colaprete's restaurant, his home, and the home of his manager were raided by IRS agents on the say-so of a former Jewish Mother bookkeeper who was trying to wriggle out of an embezzlement rap. The effort didn't work (she later became an unwilling guest of the state of North Carolina), but the results were what Colaprete himself referred to as a "dance with the devil."

By raided, I mean they marched in and stuck guns in the faces of employees. Knives and forks were taken out of customer's hands, and anything with numbers on it was thrown into the back of a government van. After about 6 months, all the files, books, cash registers, and computers were dumped on the front doorstep without so much as an apology, and no charges filed.

The accuser it turns out, had a history of embezzlement. The owner of the Jewish Mother, John Colaprete, was preparing to file a complaint against her for embezzling $40,000. She had initially approached the FBI, but they wouldn't touch it. They didn't find her to be credible. The IRS didn't bother to make any checks into her background, and took the story at face value. They just rolled in with the swat team and started cracking heads. In the end, Colaprete never fully recovered, and was forced to close one of the two Jewish Mother locations.

Congress has tried to crack down on the IRS's tactics, but I'm far from convinced.

California has come up with another way to reward criminals who break immigration laws. San Francisco is considering allowing them to vote.

A plan is being considered that allow non-citizens, including illegal immigrants, to vote in San Francisco school board elections.

The San Jose Mercury News said Monday the proposed November ballot measure was aimed at getting more parents involved in their children's education by waiving California's requirement that voters be U.S. citizens.

The slippery slope here is obvious. First they're allowed to vote for school board elections, based on the premise that they send their kids to taxpayer funded schools and thus have a vested interest. Next they'll pushing to allow illegal aliens to vote in city council elections, county elections, recall Arnold Schwarzenegger elections, etc, etc.

If illegal aliens are going to get all the benefits of citizenship, why even have immigration laws at all. Perhaps the INS should stake out polling places on election day.

Last week the terrorist group Hezbollah announced their intention to help distribute Michael Moore's new film, Fahrenheit 9/11. Wall Street Journal Op-editor, James Taranto, quipped "Far be it from us to say that Michael Moore and Hezbollah are on the same side. But Hezbollah certainly seems to think they are." Well, it appears that Michael Moore seems to think they are as well.

The movie industry publication Screen Daily reported, "In terms of marketing the film, [distributor] Front Row is getting a boost from organizations related to Hezbollah which have rung up from Lebanon to ask if there's anything they can do to support the film."

The story then quotes Front Row Managing Director Gianluca Chacra: "We can't go against these organizations as they could strongly boycott the film in Lebanon and Syria."

Terror-war supporting organization Move America Forward publicized the Chacra quote and reacted strongly against it.

"Michael Moore dismisses Americans who are upset with his film and the impact it has in undermining support for the war against terrorism," said Vice Chair Melanie Morgan. "At the same time, his distribution companies are concerned about offending the sensibilities of terrorists. That certainly gives rise to asking the question: Whose side are you on?"

Michael Moore is always on the side that will line his pockets the most. In this case he and Hezbollah share the same goals and a common enemy in George W. Bush. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, so to speak.

Lies and misdirection from gun grabbers is nothing new. But in an attempt to catalog the plethora of misinformation coming from the gun fearing wussies, I feel compelled to point out this story from the gun ban group, Ceasefire Maryland. (emphasis mine)

Three police officers were shot to death yesterday when they approached a house in Birmingham Alabama to serve warrants. The bullet proof vests the officers were issued were no match for the SKS assault rifle, named by officials as the weapon used in the killing. The SKS rifle is a copycat of the AK 47 assault rifle. It is cited by the ATF as the rifle most frequently used to kill law enforcement officers and is readily available in the US despite the current federal assault weapons ban.

Nevermind the fact that just about any rifle cartridge (other than the .22) will pierce body armor. This is a blatant lie. Other than the fact that they fire the same round, the SKS is nothing like the AK-47. Just to clarify what they mean by "copycat", here's their definition:

The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban prohibited the manufacture, transfer, and possession of 19 specific semi-automatic assault weapons, such as AK-47s, AR15s, and UZIs. However, the gun industry immediately began to evade the law by making minor cosmetic changes to assault weapons, renaming them, and marketing them as "copycat" models. "Copycat" assault weapons are functionally identical to those banned by the 1994 law, which is why the assault weapons ban must also be strengthened.

Actually gunmakers weren't "evading" the law, they were complying with it. But that's not the point. Did you get the part about "copycat" guns? A "copycat" firearm is one that was created to be functionally identical to guns banned by the 1994 law. They claim that the SKS is a "copycat", thus it must have been created to circumvent the ban on AK-47s. Right?

Now for a brief history lesson. AK-47 stands for Avtomat Kalashnikova Obrazets 1947. It was produced in, you guessed it, 1947 and became the main battle rifle of the Soviets in the 1950s. The SKS was created by Sergei Gavrilovich Simonov. The modern SKS rifle, the 7.62x39 SKS 45, was adopted from older SKS models in, you guessed it, 1945. According to Wikipedia, the "SKS is said to be the precursor to the AK-47, but it is of a much heavier construction than the AK-47". Chinese and Soviet Bloc states created other incarnations of the SKS in the 1950s and 60s. It was used early in Vietnam before being replaced by the much superior AK-47.

That said, it's impossible to make the case that the SKS rifle is a "copycat" of the AK-47. AK-47s and AK clones are still being produced today, but SKS rifles are imported surplus rifles manufactured in the 1960s. An AK-47 costs about $350; an SKS $125. That's quite a big difference for a post-ban "copycat" rifle.

Finally, here are some photos. Here is the SKS.

Here's the AK-47.

The differences between the two rifles are numerous and astounding. Most obvious is that the SKS lacks a pistol grip, and detachable magazine. That means it's not classified as a so-called "assault weapon" under the Clinton Gun Ban. Then again, neither is this AK-47. It has has both a pistol grip and detachable magazine, but none of the other "assault weapon" features such as bayonet lugs or a folding stock. Although it's not abundantly clear by the photos, the AK is also about a foot shorter than the SKS. The SKS most certainly cannot be "fired from the hip" which is one of the tenets of the 1994 ban. Plus, this particular rifle was manufactured over 25 years before the ban took effect. If this rifle was tailor made to circumvent the ban as alleged, the Ruskies had amazing foresight.

That these Alabama police officers were killed is tragic. But just about any .30 caliber rifle round would have easily penetrated their vests. That holds especially true for your average hunting rounds (like the .308) which are usually much larger than the 7.62x39 that the AK and SKS shoot. Banning the SKS is not the solution.

Democrats are going to give press credentials to webloggers who want to cover the Democrat convention.

California Democrats are once again kowtowing to illegal aliens by championing a law to provide them with driver's licenses. The previous law, signed by former Gov. Gray Davis who was trying to keep his job, was repealed before it took effect. Now the Democrats in the Legislature are re-enacting the legislation to try again.

Sacramento's chief of police, Albert Najera, favors giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

"Why are we penalizing people for coming to California after we entice them here with jobs and quality-of-life standards far above what they can ever achieve in their homelands?" he wrote. "Why don't we face reality and concede that we cannot keep our standards of living and our low cost of quality products and services or our booming building industry without foreign nationals?"

It's pretty disturbing that a police chief would blame the victim for the actions of criminals. I guess carjacker victims shouldn't "entice" criminals by driving such a nice car. As comedian George Carlin would say, "She had it comin'. She was wearing a short skirt."

In Virginia, the Legislature made it tougher for people to get a license after it was discovered that many of the 9/11 hijackers used a lax Virginia law to get identification. Virginia faced some harsh criticism for making it easy for terrorists to move freely about the country.

Whose side is California on?

Given their weekly calls to repeal Ohio's concealed handgun permitting law, the Cleveland Plain Dealer has made it no secret that they are rabidly anti-gun. After losing the fight to quash Ohio's concealed handgun bill, they announced they would publicize information about permit holders in hopes of discouraging people from applying. Now they are crying about a so-called "loophole" in the law, that permits someone to carry (gasp) more than one gun.

Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro's office confirmed what will no doubt worry almost everyone: Nowhere in the legislation's 99 pages is there any language limiting the amount of heat a citizen can pack.

Two guns, four guns, six guns, a dozen all legal. Really, the only thing limiting the number of guns you can carry is how many you can carry, physically, until you topple over from the weight of the lead.

The loophole, whether an oversight or intentional, is one of the many flaws of the legislation, says Seven Hills lawyer Stephen C. Miller, who teaches the concealed-carry law's required safety course at Stonewall Ltd., a Broadview Heights gun store and range. [...]

By allowing people to carry more than one gun, the state's lawmakers have put police officers, who usually carry only one weapon, at a firepower disadvantage, Miller says.

The presumption is that guns corrupt otherwise law abiding citizens, and that people who are legally licensed to carry handguns will be running around shooting at police. The gun fearing wussies also appear to be stupid enough to believe that a goblin who would go around shooting at cops would not only license his handgun, but obey a law that limits him to carrying a single sidearm.

Of course, they aren't really stupid enough to believe that, they're just hoping that the you are. If they can convice the voting public that a cop-killer will be swayed by tougher concealed handgun legislation, they can advance their gun grabbing agenda. Perhaps some inane comic book metaphor would help.

The character in these illustrations, whom Miller calls "Captain Ohio," is weighed down with 12 hidden guns that could carry a total of more than 100 rounds. That's quite a portable arsenal, fully legal under state law.

It's only legal if Captain Ohio takes a safety course, passes a police background check, and spends the cash it takes to get licensed. Considering he and his guns are fictional, it's pretty unlikely he'll be granted a license.

The Supreme Court has repealed the Fourth and Fifth Amendments and ruled that "papers please" requests by police are not unConstitutional. The SCOTUS heard the case of Larry "Dudley" Hiibel, who was arrested and convicted in Nevada for failing to give an officer his name.

If you watch the dash-cam video and read the transcript of the Terry stop and arrest, you'll see that the police officer has no reason to request identification from Hiibel. He is standing on the side of the road chatting with his daughter. Police claimed the two were fighting and they are responding to a domestic disturbance call. The officer claims he's performing an investigation. When asked what he's investigating, the best the officer can come up with is "I'm investigating an investigation."

The verbal sparring resulted in the arrest of Larry Hiibel, and the unwarranted assault face-plant and arrest of his daughter, whom the police were supposed to be protecting. The only charges that stuck were for "delaying" a police officer, for which Hiibel was fined $250. He appealed the conviction all the way to the Supreme Court, claiming that his Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, and his Fifth Amendment protection against self incrimination had been violated.

By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court disagreed. I think Justice Kennedy's remark pretty much sums it up. (emphasis mine)

"Obtaining a suspect's name in the course of a Terry stop serves important government interests," Kennedy wrote.

AUGH! Far be it for a citizen's Constitutionally protected civil rights to get in the way of "important government interests".

It used to be that the Constitution protected the rights of individuals. Now it's seen as an obstacle (albeit a minor one) to "important government interests".

After wrapping up a week of class warfare campaigning, Kerry was off to a posh Nantucket vacation.

Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, had this to say about the relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda: "There were connections between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government. We don't disagree with that. What we have said is that we don't have any evidence of a cooperative or a collaborative relationship between Saddam Hussein's government and these al-Qaeda operatives with regard to attacks on the United States."

But that's not what is being reported, as Neal Boortz points out.

"Saddam, al-Qaeda Not Linked. Sept. 11 Panel's Conclusion at Odds with Administration." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

"9/11 Panel Debunks Saddam Link. Report: No Evidence of al-Qaeda Ties." Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Now listen to the words of Keith Olberman of MSNBC last Wednesday. "Memo to vice president: 9/11 Commission finds 'no credible evidence' of any link between al-Qaeda and Iraq."

I think this cartoon pretty much sums it up:

(Hat tip to Curmudgeonly & Skeptical.)

LT Smash takes a look at a public government school teacher who also happens to be an activist for communism.

It looks like it's time to gas up the B-52s.

"Far be it from us to say that Michael Moore and Hezbollah are on the same side. But Hezbollah certainly seems to think they are." -- James Taranto, Best of the Web author noting that the terrorist group Hezbollah has offered to help distribute Michael Moore's latest propaganda film, Fahrenheit 9/11.

"Police: Bodies in lake 'suspicious' " -- CNN headline.

The first paragraph of the article notes that the "bodies that washed ashore on Lake Michigan [were] bound together by nylon rope and tied to bags filled with sand."

Leave it to Maureen (...) Dowd to take a puff piece 60 Minutes informercial about Bill Clinton's book and turn it into an anti-Bush anti-war tirade.

The Clinton alpha instinct on Monica, fueled by a heady cocktail of testosterone and opportunism, was the same one that led W. into his march of folly with Iraq. After 9/11, the president, vice president and secretary of defense wanted to go to the Middle East and knock the stuffing out of somebody bad - because it would feel good, because it would put our enemies on notice, and because it would make the president look strong.

The folks at 1600 Pennsylvania didn't have Osama's address. They couldn't go after Iran or North Korea because those countries could defend themselves and retaliate, maybe with nukes. They couldn't invade Pakistan or Saudi Arabia because they're our "allies." But the Bush team knew that it wouldn't be hard to get rid of the second-rate dictator and romance novelist who posed no real threat.

Am I missing something, or is that "romance novelist" crack about Saddam's rape rooms?

Tricky Dick may actually believe in his concocted connection, but he must also realize that the administration can't lose the terrorist-linkage argument for war, having already lost the W.M.D. argument.

If our leaders didn't lead us there, why did 69 percent of Americans, in a Washington Post poll last September, believe that Saddam was involved in the attacks?

Well 57 percent of Americans also believe that our nation has lost jobs over the past 6 months, when in fact more than 1.2 million jobs have been created? That must be Bush's fault too.

Mr. Clinton, though he was vilified by the right, tittered at by the world and dolled up in pink-and-black suede shoes as a toddler by his mom, is selling a zillion books.

As Republicans keep saying, with fingers crossed, W. has stayed even with John Kerry despite the litany on Iraq, terrorism and domestic affairs that has turned out quite differently than promised.

But one thing you can say for Bill Clinton: His "Who's gonna stop me?" Oval Office power surge produced a much lower body count.

Tell that to Vince Foster, or the people who died in the Sudanese aspirin factory. Better yet, tell that to the families of those killed in the World Trade Center bombings, the Pentagon, Oklahoma City, or Waco. Clinton has plenty of blood on his hands.

When the 9/11 Commission found that Iraq didn't directly help with the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks, the New York Times misreported that the commission had completely debunked the whole reason for the war in Iraq. Under the headline "Panel Finds No Qaeda-Iraq Tie", the Times claimed that BUSH LIED!!! and almost seemed to yearn for the return of Saddam Hussein. As even Andrew Sullivan points out, it's the New York Times who is in the wrong.

The vice-president's direct attack on the New York Times' portrayal of the 9/11 Commission report was a zinger. On balance, i think Cheney is right. The links between al Qaeda and Saddam may not have amounted to a formal alliance, but they existed all right, as the Commission conceded. The NYT itself reported that "The report said that despite evidence of repeated contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda in the 90's, 'they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship.'" But if there were "repeated contacts" between al Qaeda and Iraq, how can it be true that, as the headline put it, that "Panel Finds No Qaeda-Iraq Tie"? Headlines truncate things, of course. But Cheney is dead-on in describing this headline as misleading. Here's Tom Kean, the chairman of the Commision: "What we have found is, were there contacts between al-Qaeda and Iraq? Yes. Some of them were shadowy - but they were there."

Of course, the Times isn't backing down, and they are lashing out at the Bush Administration for daring to defend their position. The folks over at Power Line recognize the Times as the lynch pin for the Vast Liberal Media Conspiracy.

As a news organization, the New York Times is illegitimate. It no longer seeks to inform its readers; rather, its daily effort is to misinform and mislead them. You simply can't believe anything you read in the Times.

The competence of the New York Times can be summed up in two words: Jayson Blair.

Desperate for an agenda, Presidential wanna-be John Kerry is ramping up the class warfare. Apparently the government is just giving away money to those evil, hated rich people while poor folks are rounded up and forced into servitude to Bush campaign contributors like McDonalds and Wal-Mart.

"If a president can go out and fight for four years to provide over a trillion in tax cuts to the wealthiest people in America, we can fight for a few months to raise the minimum wage for the poorest people in America," Kerry told an audience at Northern Virginia Community College.

Kerry preys on economic ignorance and class envy to get people to vote for him. I had thought that tax cuts were just a way of the government letting taxpayers keep more of their own money, but according the Kerry the government is apparently just giving away trillions of dollars. And while Bush is giving all this money away to rich cronies, minimum wage earners (who don't really pay much income tax any way) are left to fend for themselves.

Kerry said three of four women who would benefit from the increase are adults. Such a boost in the minimum wage, which has not changed from $5.15 since 1997, would provide a family with enough money to buy 10 months of groceries or pay for eight months of rent, he said. [...]

Kerry said Americans are "living with a minimum wage that is lower in value that it's been at any time since 1949 when Harry Truman is president.

People aren't really meant to "live" on minimum wage. Minimum wage workers are low-skilled people who don't yet have enough training or experience to earn more. People who are "stuck" in a minimum wage job, are those who aren't doing enough to get ahead. (Or they keep doing the things that hold them back.)

Then again, there are other side-effects of minimum wage laws. The great Dr. Walter Williams explores what he calls racist policies that kowtow to big labor unions.

One effect of minimum wages is that of discrimination against the employment of less-preferred workers. A worker might be less-preferred in the eyes of a particular employer in a number of ways. He might be low-skilled, less intelligent, or a different nationality or race. Put yourself in the place of an employer, and ask: If the law requires me to pay, say, $9 an hour, no matter whom I hire, does it pay me to hire someone who has skills enabling him to produce only $5 worth of value per hour? Most people would view hiring such a worker as a losing economic proposition.

Are low-skilled workers made better or worse off as a result of the $9 minimum wage? It's almost a no-brainer to conclude that being hired at $5 an hour puts more food on the table than not being hired at $9. What's more, minimum wages reduce training opportunities. Most of us gain skills through on-the-job-training. Minimum wage laws deny that opportunity.

Plus there is also the overall effect on unemployment. If an employer has three workers making $5 an hour, and is suddenly forced to pay them more, he may lay one of them off and expect the other two to pull up the slack. While the two guys making more money are better off, it's little consolation to the guy that got laid off to pay for their raises.

Still yet, you could look at it this way. Lets say a guy is getting paid $8 an hour to sweep the floor. Here you come, fresh out of high school looking for a summer job, and offer to sweep that floor for $6 an hour. Why should the government be allowed to tell you that's illegal for you to work for that little bit of money? When you don't have very many skills and you're out there competing for work, sometimes your price point is the only competitive advantage you have. John Kerry hopes to take that away, and something tells you that his big union contributors will be happy to reward him for it.

If Ravenwood were an icon, this would probably be it.

(Hat tip to Mays)

UPDATE: By request, here I am naked.

Bush is desperately trying to dispel the myth that the economy is doing poorly. In his radio address, he touted the good economic numbers. Meanwhile, Democrats are harping about jobs being sent overseas. Rep. Nick Lampson of Texas claims that all our high tech computer jobs are being sent abroad. The democrat's solution, he says, will be to put all those computer techs back to work... building roads.

Rep. Nick Lampson of Texas, in the Democrats' weekly radio address, said Bush's term has seen more and more jobs heading overseas with little done by the president to stop it.

"No matter how hard some of our friends and neighbors work; no matter how much training or retraining they've gotten; the opportunities before them are shrinking," he said. "America's jobs are being sent overseas; even the accounting and computer jobs that we once thought were secure are now disappearing."

Democrats have the better plan to turn the economy around and bring more jobs back to the people, Lampson said.

"The 'American Jobs Plan' would invest in our work force, helping those who have suffered under the existing policies, and those who will lead us into the global marketplace of the future," he said. "Our proposal would put over 2 million people back to work almost immediately, rebuilding the highways, transit systems, and other infrastructure that are the backbone of our wonderful nation."

No offense to computer workers (as I am one), but I'd rather not ride on a rail system welded together by some out of work poindexter. Perhaps I'm an old fashioned guy, but when I envision people in construction I picture big burly guys that whistle at women who walk by. For some reason pasty skinned computer nerds who haven't seen the sun since the latest computer worm hit the scene don't spring to mind.

I will also note three things about the Democrat's rhetoric. First, for the first three months of 2004, only 4600 jobs have been outsourced. Second, they aren't your jobs they belong to the employers. Third, the democrats plan sounds an awful lot like a New Deal style big government jobs program.

I gotta get me one of these 45 mm pistols. I bet it kicks like a mule though.

For the past several years, I've told you that the smoking ban was not about health but about property rights. The government is telling people what they can and cannot do with their private property. No where is that more evident than in Ireland, where U2's Bono can't even light up in his own bar.

The singer, real name Paul Hewson, was spotted lighting up during a late-night bash in the plush Tea Room restaurant of the Clarence Hotel, which he and fellow U2 mates own.

"It was the wee small hours. I was in the company of people from out of town who didn't know about the ban and for a moment nor did I," newspapers quoted Bono as saying on Friday.

"I was quickly reminded by the staff and a few friends. I apologized then and I apologize now."

These types of policies are being adopted all over the United States. Business owners are a minority, so voters and politicians don't pay them much heed when they vote to strip away their property rights. Today, bar owners cannot smoke in their own bar, but soon the reach of the pleasure police could be coming into people's homes. In Georgia, they have already been toying with the idea of banning smoking in cars where children are present. And of course the next step is to ban smoking in homes where children are present (or employees if you have a maid or manservant).

Of course the intent of smoking laws is to "protect" the employees from harm. Apparently in the restaurant industry people are forced into servitude. That must be the case, because otherwise an employee bothered by smoking would simply find another job. Personally, I think Bono should have fired the guy. In fact, how about firing everyone for 10 minutes while he enjoys his smoke and then rehiring them after he's done.

When I visited Ohio last month, I spoke with a friend of mine about getting his concealed handgun permit. He told me that he'd probably wait a while before applying for a permit. I was a little taken aback, and asked him to explain his reservations. Quite plainly, he told me that it was a shitty law. He said that the way the law is written, you have to jump through too many hoops and obey too many nuances. And if you step out of line just once, you get hit pretty hard. He said that even a simple violation of one of the many nuances in the law could mean that you lose your firearm's rights forever. At the time, I thought he was a bit paranoid, but now I'm starting to wonder.

Ohio's concealed carry law indeed appears to be suffering from growing pains. In Shelby County, Sheriff Kevin O'Leary released a bunch of confidential information about permit holders to the news media. The media promptly published people's names and home addresses in the local newspaper. In doing so, both committed a felony.

You see, when concealed carry was being debated in the legislature, Ohio Governor Bob Taft demanded some concessions. One such concession was that the names of permit holders not be kept secret. He demanded that the news media be allowed access to the lists of concealed handgun permit holders. The provision effectively put cops in between a rock and a hard place.

On the one hand, local Sheriffs are met with a huge demand to process concealed handgun applications in a timely manner. On the other hand, they've got big media liberals hammering them for personal information about just who is being granted permits. Although the law clearly states Sheriffs are to provide the "county of residence", the Shelby County Sheriff took that to mean "local address". Now, I don't know about you but if I was filling out a form and it asked for my "county of residence", I'd name the county in which I reside. I certainly wouldn't fill in the blank with my complete home address. In doing so the Sheriff, perhaps unwittingly, committed a fifth degree felony. He claims it was just a misunderstanding, and I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. If a stern warning changes the way he handles future requests for information, I don't see the need to ruin a good policeman's career. Although the county has appointed a special prosecutor to investigate the matter, the chances are pretty good that they'll take care of their own and nothing will happen to the Sheriff O'Leary.

But then comes the double standard. Just one county over in Montgomery County, Douglas Lyons mistakenly tried to carry his pistol into a court house. He had a permit, but carrying guns in court is illegal. In fact, under the new concealed carry law, it's a fifth degree felony. He claims it was just a misunderstanding, and I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. If a stern warning changes the way he carries his firearm in the future, I don't see the need to take away a good citizen's firearm's rights.

County police, on the other hand, don't really see it that way. OFCC reports that local "Law enforcement officials say permit owners need to be careful about where they carry concealed weapons. They said gun owners are aware of what the law is and that there will be no warnings, but arrests." Montgomery County officials think that there is no room for tolerance, and they are prepared to throw the book at Lyons. Should we also presume that if their sheriff (and news media) violated Ohio's concealed handgun statute like Shelby County Sheriff O'Leary did, they would be just as zealous in their prosecution? I have my doubts. It sounds an awful lot like another case of 'rules for you but not us'.

Remember all the bitching and moaning how much the war in Iraq is costing? Democrats like John Kerry, who voted for the $87 billion before he voted against it, suddenly became fiscal conservatives when it came to spending taxpayer dollars on military spending. This year when Bush asked for more funds for the military, there was even more whining.

Yesterday, the highly politicized Senate approved adding 20,000 U.S. troops to the U.S. army by a vote of 93-4. John Kerry, consistent with the past two years, missed the vote.

James Taranto points out this piece of anti-gun media bias:

"In a direct challenge to federal limits on political advocacy, the National Rifle Association plans to begin broadcasting a daily radio program on Thursday to provide news and pro-gun commentary to 400,000 listeners," the New York Times reports.

In a direct challenge to federal limits on political advocacy, the New York Times Co. plans to continue publishing a daily newspaper to provide news and antigun commentary to 1.1 million readers.

To the New York Times, supporting the Second Amendment of the Constitution is considered challenging the "federal limits on political advocacy", but supporting the repeal of the Second Amendment is not. The fundamental question is what makes a media company.

The NRA considers themselves a media company with a pro-gun slant. They offer news and opinion just like any other media company, and should be free to endorse a candidate for office. The major difference is that the New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Chicago Tribune and a dozen other national media outlets who are free to endorse political candidates, are routinely and consistantly anti-gun. Lashing out at the NRA is their way of crushing dessent.

The European community is looking for ways to censor "hate speech" on the web. Thank God our country's founders had the forsight to protect our freedom of expression.

Experts gathered in Paris on Wednesday seeking a common approach to combating racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic propaganda on the Internet, believed to be a chief factor in rising numbers of hate crimes.

Officials from more than 60 countries were attending the two-day conference aimed at finding ways to keep racist information off the Web without compromising free speech and freedom of expression.

Now I dislike "hate speech" and racism as much as the next guy. But the European approach to the problem is backwards. "Hate speech" doesn't cause crime, it's the asshole who pulls the trigger that commits the murder. No matter what the motive, the victim is just as dead.

I guess the major problem with limiting speech is that these Euroweenies don't know where to draw the line. In this day and age where people are so hypersensative and easily offended, almost anything can be twisted so that it classifies as "hate speech". If I say that I hate France, am I committing a crime or just exercising sound judgement? If someone reads that and says "Yeah, I hate them too, I'm gonna go kill a bunch of Frenchies", don't blame me. Blame the guy that commits the crime.

Plus they're always trying to elevate "hate crimes" to some sort of special status. As if killing a person for the $100 in his pocket is not quite as bad as killing him because he's French. Dead is dead, and if you kill someone, should do the time. (Actually, I think you should be hanged from the neck until dead, but we know the Euros won't go for that.) But piling on extra punishment because the killer harbored some special contempt for the guy he was killing is dumb. Furthermore, it cheapens your average, everyday, murdering for drugs or money predator. When it comes to sociopathic predators, I say kill them all. They are all equally worthless.

Fox News finally responded to my email about their recent web redesign. Although my email was entitled "WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?" they apparently think I was offering them praise.

Thanks for writing. We want to let you know that we care about our readers and always try to listen to what you have to say.

We have read each and every email regarding our recent site redesign. We have listened to your suggestions and feedback, and have made some modifications to our recent redesign addressing your specific concerns. We have lightened the color scheme, added many more headlines throughout the home page, and made some alterations that should make finding stories and videos easier.

We were heartened to hear that the new site navigation made it easier for users to traverse Foxnews.com and find sections previously undiscovered by many of our readers. We believe this new navigation menu allows you to get faster access to more content than ever before.

Please keep the feedback coming and thank you again.

FOXNews.com

As far as I'm concerned they're done. Most of their offerings were AP and Reuters stories any way. My main reason for still going there was that I liked their layout. Now that they've scrapped that, and apparently have no intention of fixing it, I'm not going back.

San Francisco recently ended the practice of giving cash to the homeless urban outdoorsmen, and it's having astounding results.

Under the new guidelines, homeless people who were getting as much as $410 a month now have a choice of accepting housing and getting a check for as little as $59 -- or keep living on the street and still getting a check for as little as $59.

City records show that the number of homeless people getting cash assistance fell from 2,138 at the start of May to 1,769 as of June 1.

Apparently when the city stopped handing out "free" money, people who weren't really homeless to begin with stopped asking for assistance. While many San Francisco liberals were shocked by the revelation, Mayor Gavin Newsom wasn't surprised. Alameda County tried the same thing years ago.

With the change, there was no incentive for anyone who wasn't actually homeless to claim otherwise.

Throw in a get-tough policy that included follow-up calls to make sure recipients were keeping up with their treatment programs, and Alameda County saw its homeless cash assistance numbers drop from 2,000 to 200.

Apparently they all moved to San Francisco.

Does anyone else think this is too funny?

After 50 hours, University of Maryland student Aaron Kraus believes he's met his goal: bringing public attention to the issue of the state's college tuition hikes.

The 21-year-old senior publicly broke his 50-hour hunger strike at the state capital when he bit into a roast beef hoagie at noon.

"I thought this would be a perfect metaphor for higher education in Maryland," Kraus said of his hunger strike in an earlier interview. "We're trying to get legislators thinking about how this impacts our generation."

50 hours?? This guy skips 6 whole meals and he has the nerve to call it a hunger strike. In contrast, Ghandi's hunger strike lasted 21 days.

Cash strapped D.C. decides they want to woo the Montreal Expos, and declares they are ready to finance a new baseball stadium with 100% public money. Area business leaders agreed to help by absorbing a $9 Million tax hike during a meeting last year. This year (surprise!) D.C. tells them their tax hike will be more like $18 to $20 million. That's more than double the original estimate.

If they sign on to support this, my bet is that the figure will double again before the stadium is completed.

Also, keep in mind that companies do not pay taxes; they collect them. All these extra taxes eventually wind up being paid by the customer, the employee, or the shareholder. (Probably all three.)

If you're going to steal cell phones, you probably ought not pick the U.S. Presidential First Daughter as your intended victim.

The 22-year-old [Jenna] Bush was sitting at a hotel terrace when two men tried to steal a cell phone on a nearby table. Law said it wasn't clear to whom the cell phone belonged, but Bush's bodyguards reacted immediately.

One secret service agent punched one of the suspects in the mouth, [embassy spokesman John] Law said, adding that he had no other details of the altercation.

Five bucks says the would-be thief sues the U.S. government over this agent's unilateral action.

Iran is apparently upping the ante and moving troops into position to invade Iraq if our boys leave early. I think Phelps puts it best: "Six days, bitch"

Anyone for some more preemption? As for the number of Iranian troops, it appears to be pretty small. Commenters on the Command Post, aren't too impressed.

...the deployment is either part of a larger operation, or else is intended to send a signal, in this case, an extended middle finger. Extending that finger in the time leading up to a fight may feel good, but the minute hostilities ensue, it is liable to be snapped off. -- jeffers

...Qualitatively, the U.S. Army and the British are much more lethal in terms of firepower, training, mobility, etc. The Iranian army has nothing that can take out a Bradley. A Bradley, not to mention an M1, can take out anything in their inventory. Give up the airpower and it is still not a fair fight, even if we chose to use a like-size force against them. -- dwc

I agree. Plus our air power would cut them to ribbons. If they move in after we leave, it's doubtful they could even secure Iraq. But it should send a very clear message to the Iraqis and the Coalition Forces. The U.S. shouldn't pull out until Iraq has the means to defend itself.

Can you imaging a politician telling a grocer he has to hand out food for free? Would you vote for a candidate who promised to force construction workers to build you a "free" house? Why then, do people get all excited when politicians promise to give out "free" health care?

"In a Kerry administration, we will stop being the only advanced nation in the world which fails to understand that health care is not a privilege for the elected and the connected and the wealthy, it is a right for every American," [John Kerry] said.

As Neal Boortz points out, you cannot divine a right from someone else's trade.

If you claim medical care as a right, then you are claiming a right to someone's time or property. In either case, you are making a claim to a portion of that person's life. You cannot obtain medical care without someone either spending time on you or supplying you with some sort of product, be it drugs or medical devices. If you're claiming a right to a medical practitioner's time, then you are claiming a right to that portion of his life. If you are claiming a right to some drug or medical equipment, then you are claiming a right to whatever portion of someone's life they spent acquiring or creating that product. Any way you cut it, your claim of a right to health care is a message to someone else that you own a portion of their very existence.

There is no such thing as a right that takes something away from someone else. If you look at our Bill of Rights, not one denies someone of life, liberty, or property. But the "right" to "free health care" must tax someone. As economists point out, there are no free lunches. And when you start claiming a "right" to a service or product that someone else works hard to provide, where do you draw the line.

If you have a right to health care, why not a right to a home? Why not a right to a warm coat in winter? Why not a right to groceries? Apparently health care should be a right because you might die without it. If that's the case, then food should certainly be a right because you're flat-out going to die without it.

I hate to break it to you, but you are going to die with or without health care.

Alaska put a sin tax on cigarettes, and [surprise] smokes are being bootlegged in from the outside. Given their proximity to Russia some of them are being brought in from across the strait.

Cigarettes are taxed a dollar a pack in Alaska. Residents can legally order cigarettes over the Internet but are required by state law to get a license from the Revenue Department first and purchase Alaska tax stamps for every pack of smokes they bring in, according to Johanna Bales, who manages the state's tobacco tax program.

The intent of the stamp is to ensure that importers pay the state tax, Bales said.

The shopkeeper in Marshall had neither a license nor stamps, according to troopers.

The cigarette packs he was selling also lacked the required surgeon general's warning, Bales said.

"Even if they had a tax stamp on them, it's illegal to put a tax stamp on them" without that health warning, she said.

Gasp! No health warning! I bet a bunch of naive non-smokers lit up not realizing the negative health effects. It's a good thing these guys were caught. People could have been killed.

Hat tip to reader Tom Scott.

CBS is mandating that radio affiliates carry Bill Clinton's book special, reports Matt Drudge.

Each and every one of CBS's news and talk stations will be required to take the Clinton book radio special, now scheduled for next 6 PM ET Thursday -- whether local programming management wants it or not!

"It's going to be like one big commercial for the book! Why didn't Mr. Clinton's publisher just buy an hour," one angry executive for a CBS news station said late Monday. "This is not news, this is marketing. I already feel dirty!"

This isn't the first time CBS has run advertisements for books being released. As I noted before, this is the same CBS who ran infomercials for Viacom books by Dick Clarke and Bob Woodward on their flagship 60 Minutes news program. Also, don't forget that this is the same news agency that tried to lure Jessica Lynch to CBS by offering her all sorts of entertainment and book deals.

Clinton's book will also get a CBS exclusive on 60 Minutes this weekend. In the promo, CBS notes:

Like Bob Woodward's "Plan of Attack" and Richard Clarke's "Against All Enemies," Mr. Clinton's book will likely make its way into the presidential campaign, especially if the former president defends his record on fighting terrorism.

Defending his record? I guess that means Democrats and their lackeys at CBS will be attacking it.

I'll admit that Republican calls for Kerry to resign his Senate seat are a bit selfish. Filling that seat with a Republican candidate would help them out in the Senate. (until next year, any way) But the citizens of Massachussets do have an honest beef about Kerry's voting record, or lack thereof.

Of the 112 Senate votes this year, Kerry has voted just 14 times...

One of Kerry's missed votes was an extension of unemployment benefits. That was a bill supported by Democrats, which missed passage by Kerry's single missed vote. But if Senate Republicans were really all that concerned about Kerry's missed votes, they'd have the courage to dock his pay under Senate rules. But despite Kerry's missing 292 votes (or 64%) last year, the Senate Secretary has refused to enforce the law against Kerry.

The ones who really should be upset at Kerry are the voters of Massachussets. They've been paying his salary now for 2 years, and he hasn't done any work.

A judge actually ordered protesters to get a job.

With the Reagan funeral over, the media is back to hammering away at Bush about the Abu Ghraib prison kerfuffle. After prison abuses came to light, Bush offered to tear down the prison, but Iraqis don't want that to happen.

Interim Iraqi President Ghazi Yawar on Sunday said he had no plans to destroy the Abu Ghraib prison despite an offer by President Bush to tear down the jail where U.S. troops abused inmates.

Asked if he would tear down the prison, Yawar told ABC's "This Week," "No. Why? It's a prison that we spent more than $100 million building."

Hmm. Could it be that this is a bigger deal with the American media than with the Iraqi people?

Spoons asks, "Why isn't this a bigger story"

The United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before, during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003.

I've noticed several recent interviews with Administration officials, whereby they give reporters a pass. Most recently Secretary of State Powell was being interviewed and the reporter matter of factly stated that WMD had not been found in Iraq. That is despite the confirmed discovery of sarin gas, a weapon of mass destruction, in Iraq. Is the Administration content with allowing misinformation to be spread, or are they saving something big for closer to the election?

The Commonwealth of Virginia will begin public service announcements with messages like "Isn't she a little young?" and "Sex with a minor, don't go there". The advertisements will appear on billboards, posters, coasters and napkins in bars, restaurants and stores in five Virginia cities reports the AP.

As a Virginia citizen and native, this seems pretty embarrasing. Should we really have to tell this to people? It could be worse, we could be like West Virginia where a new ad campaign will post messages to discourage running moonshine and having sex with your cousin.

In the "under God" pledge ruling, the Supreme Court ultimately decided 8 to 0, that the parent Michael Nedow did not have a legal standing in the case because he does not have sole custody of his daughter. Although they didn't rule on the Constitutionality of the case, I want to point out that three justices; Rehnquist, Thomas, and O'Connor, wanted to rule on the Constitutionality any way. They felt that Nedow's argument that the phrase "under God" violated his daughter's First Amendment protections didn't pass muster.

"To give the parent of such a child a sort of 'heckler's veto' over a patriotic ceremony willingly participated in by other students, simply because the Pledge of Allegiance contains the descriptive phrase 'under God,' is an unwarranted extension of the establishment clause, an extension which would have the unfortunate effect of prohibiting a commendable patriotic observance," Rehnquist wrote.

I caught Nedow's interview on Hannity's radio show on the way home from work. He seemed very argumentative and kept throwing up hypothetical arguments about Jesus and the establishment of Christianity as a national religion. He never once offered any convincing evidence to support his claims. If he made a similar argument in front of the SCOTUS, he should be thankful they opted not to rule on the Constitutionality.

Does anyone else find Fox News' new website design a tad bit, um, busy. And verrrry sloooow. And despite the new design, they still (search) insist on (search) inserting (search) into all their (search) web pages because they cannot figure out how to use the hyperlink tag.

Whoever came up with the design, I say hang 'em and pull his pants down to set an example.

Tazteck notes:

According to a South Korean report, North Korea has tested an intercontinental ballistic missile engine capable of hitting the United States.

I'm sure this will be played over and over again this week in the American media, bolstering Bush's claim for a much needed missile defense system.

Habitual crackhead and former prison inmate Marion Barry is running for City Council in D.C. again. The former mayor is running for the seat in Ward 8, which represents Southeast D.C. (affectionately known as 'the hood')

Barry, 68, announced his new comeback effort before a crowd of about 30 supporters outside his campaign headquarters. Many of those on hand still called him "mayor."

During his third term as mayor, Barry was caught on an FBI video smoking crack cocaine in January 1990. He was convicted seven months later of misdemeanor drug possession in another incident, and sentenced to six months in prison.

After his release in April 1992, Barry ran for the Ward 8 Council seat and won. That helped propel him to a fourth term as mayor in 1994. Barry said Saturday he has no aspirations to try for a fifth term -- although he added never to say never.

Barry had considered a run for council in 2002 but dropped those plans after U.S. Park Police said they found small amounts of marijuana and crack in his car.

Five bucks says he wins. Oh, and for those that are wondering, Barry is running as a Democrat.

Paul Jacob notes that Canadians are becoming disenchanted with "free" health care. While some of our seniors look to Canada for deeply discounted drugs, more and more Canadians are coming down here to take advantage of our private medical system.

In Canada, on the other hand, it's pretty much government through and through. Though "free medicine" sounds great, its implementation has led to more than a few problems. For something "free," it comes with a high price tag: Canadians pay for the service in extremely high taxes. Worse yet, Canadian patients are often forced to be extraordinarily patient, even at the cost of their health.

If you need a test, getting it in Canada is not the speedy thing it is in America. There's usually a lag. This applies to treatments, too, especially the older you get.

In his book Code Blue, medical student David Gratzer reported that Canadians wait for radiation therapy three to four times longer than Americans do. The average wait for an MRI scan stretches almost to half a year, while Americans wait three days. Only a fifth of Canadians diagnosed with cancer can see a specialist within four weeks.

In America we have a huge taxpayer subsidized medicare system, but it's supplimented by a large scale private system. If you don't like the quality of your health care, you are always free to pay a little more for something better. But nations like Canada and Great Britain, where the government is calling the shots, there is no choice at all. Unless you are politically connected or can afford to travel out of the country, you're pretty much stuck with what you got.

A 23-acre lake in Missouri just up and disappeared. Geologists say the culprit is a giant underground sinkhole, but I want to know how long before enviroweenies blame it on "global warming"? (or George Bush?)

I'm taking a long weekend and will be out of town on Friday. You can look for site updates between now and Monday, but you probably won't find any.

Kim is having trouble maintaining his composure. Apparently the network news hacks are fed up with the wall to wall Reagan coverage, and are anxious to get back to obsessing about Abu Gharib and the Iraq "quagmire".

President Reagan's State funeral hadn't even finished, when those Lefty churls Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings were bitching and moaning about "too much Reagan".

Here's Rather:
"Even though everybody is respectful and wants to pay homage to the president, life does go on," Rather told the Philadelphia Inquirer.

"There is other news, like the reality of Iraq," said the CBS Evening News anchor. "It got very short shrift this weekend."

"Once the herd starts moving in one direction, it's very hard to turn it, even slightly," Rather said. "Nationally, the herd has grown tremendously." Oh yeah -- sorry to distract you from your "quagmire" obsession, Danny boy. You bastard. Shut your fucking mouth.

Brokaw and Jennings are in there too.

When it comes to nominating federal judges, the Constitution is quite clear. For the nomination process, it says the President "shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate". A normal person would take this to mean that the President nominates the judges. The Senate role is secondary in that they provide advice and/or approval of the nominations. However, according to Ted Kennedy and other democrats, this means that the Senate has the power to keep appointments tied up in permanent debate. If the Senate refuses to vote, or cannot reach a 60 vote majority to suspend debate, the appointment process grinds to a halt. In Teddy Kennedy's mind, this is perfectly fine.

But the Constitution also says something else. It gives the President the "Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session." President Bush recently took advantage of this provision by appointing Judge William Pryor while the Senate was in recess. Kennedy is fighting the appointment -- in court.

"The Recess Appointments Clause ... authorizes the president to act in an exceptional manner when Congress's absence prevents it from performing its constitutional functions. It should therefore be construed to apply narrowly to an actual inter-session 'recess,'" Kennedy's lawyers wrote.

"Otherwise, the president will be able to aggrandize his power at the expense of the Senate by invoking an exceptional power - conferred upon him only for the rare situations in which the Senate cannot give advice and consent - and using it during brief Senate adjournments in which there is no such emergency need," the request argues.

A little over a year ago, Senate Judiciary Committee member Chuck Schumer aggradized his power by suggesting that if the President didn't like the Democrat's obstruction tactics, he should abdicate his power to make judicial appointments directly to the Senate.

Schumer suggested setting up bipartisan nomination commissions in each state that would recommend a judicial candidate to the president for each empty judgeship. "It's our best hope for breaking the vicious cycle," Schumer said.

Maybe Bush should have sued him.

"In truth, Ronald Reagan was never as popular as he is being presented to be with Americans. As president, [he] was never even as popular as Bill Clinton during the period of Clinton's impeachment." -- Slate Magazine's Eric Alterman, who apparently has started smoking crack.

Newsmax sets Alterman straight, however, not that he's really listening:

Clinton, for instance, never won more than 49 percent of the vote, managing that feat in 1996. And he probably never would have been president at all without Ross Perot acting as a Republican spoiler in 1992, when Clinton squeaked in with just 43 percent of the vote.

Reagan, on the other hand, trounced his two Democratic opponents in 44- and 49-state landslides.

In fact, no president in U.S. history has ever gotten more votes than Reagan did in 1984, despite the fact that the nation's population has grown by more than 30 million in the last 20 years.

These are the same people that argued Bush shouldn't be president because he didn't get 50% or more of the "popular vote". (As if we've ever elected presidents that way.) Bush can't push his agenda because there's no mandate from the voters, they cried. Nevermind that he got more votes than Clinton.

The claim that Clinton was more popular is just silly. But I'm glad he said it, because this slam is just classic.

Charles Hill can't find the passage in the Constitution that prohibits worship in our rivers and streams.

I don't have kids, but I still think this is one of the scariest things I've seen in a while.

In February, 12-year-old Daniel began displaying some symptoms that his father suspected were related to the use of Ritalin.

"He was losing weight, wasn't sleeping, wasn't eating," Taylor told ABC News affiliate KOAT-TV in New Mexico. "[He] just wasn't Daniel."

So Taylor took Daniel off Ritalin, against his doctor's wishes. And though Taylor noticed Daniel was sleeping better and his appetite had returned, his teachers complained about the return of his disruptive behavior. Daniel seemed unable to sit still and was inattentive. His teachers ultimately learned that he was no longer taking Ritalin.

School officials reported Daniel's parents to New Mexico's Department of Children, Youth and Families. Then a detective and social worker made a home visit.

"The detective told me if I did not medicate my son, I would be arrested for child abuse and neglect," Taylor said. [...]

"People can be charged with child abuse, child neglect or various other crimes involving a child," he said.

It's bad enough that government schools are coercing parents into drugging their kids. At least then you have a choice of private school or home schooling. But now they're making house calls and telling parents they can face criminal charges for keeping their kids off mind altering drugs.

As if you needed another reason to hate the French, now they're picking on beloved SUVs. The "Greens" took over the Paris city council, and now they hope to ban SUVs from the city. Opponents claim that they don't have the legal standing to implement such a ban, but that won't stop them from trying.

"You have to wonder why people want to drive around in SUVs," Baupin, a Greens party member, said on Europe 1 radio.

"We have no interest in having SUVs in the city. They're dangerous to others and take up too much space." [...]

"Our idea is to limit the circulation of the most polluting vehicles," he said. "That means SUVs and lots of other vehicles that don't meet European pollution standards."

It won't be long before some U.S. city tries this. My money's on San Francisco or Seattle.

In New Zealand, urbanites are moving out into the country to get away from the hustle bustle of city life. But then there's the problem of all those country folk and their smelly cows and loud tractors.

A farmer left his herd in a paddock one night, they say. In the morning they were gone. The lifestyler next door had moved them to another paddock because he was having a barbecue that night and the smell of cows ruined the ambience.

Lifestyle block owners are complaining of noise, smells and activity of animals and machinery. So much so that the Franklin District Council is striving to keep lifestylers and commercial farmers apart.

The problem, says Mayor Heather Maloney, is that "people on lifestyle blocks don't understand noise in the country. They cannot understand why someone should need to start a tractor at 5.30 in the morning".

Franklin farmers leader Wendy Clark has heard the talk at meetings.

"There was a woman who rang a farmer about being woken early. She had a responsible position in the city, she said. 'Couldn't you milk your cows a bit later?' "

I am going to Las Vegas over Labor Day weekend to attend a wedding, and am in need of some female companionship.

FREE VEGAS VACATION OFFER 2004 - Applications are being accepted from attractive young women (ages 18 to 35 38) who would like to accompany me on an all expenses paid trip to Las Vegas for Labor Day Weekend 2004. Airfare¹, transportation, hotel², meals³, and all drinks⁴ will be provided in exchange for short-lived but frequent sexual favors⁵. Applicants must be over 18, and be able to travel. If you are interested in applying, please submit nude photos of yourself, a photocopy of your passport or drivers license, and results from a recent  HIV test to: freevacation AT ravnwood DOT com

Terms and conditions:
-Offer void where prohibited by law.
-I reserve the right to refuse travel and services to anyone, at any time, for any reason.
-Since there is always the possibility the bride and groom will get cold feet and back out, there is a remote possibility that we will not end up going.
-Photo submissions will not be returned, may be shared with friends, and/or posted on the internet.

1 - Must be willing to fly steerage or luggage class.  You may be asked to ride in a suitcase, packing crate, animal holding pen, or asked to hold your breath for up to 9 hours.
2 - Must be willing to share a bed, and sleep in the wet spot.
3 - Meals will be served at least once per day, and may have little sustenance or nutritional value.
4 - Drinks will be very alcoholic and very plentiful.
5 - Sexual favors typically last from 2 to 27 minutes, and may involve animals, midgets, or leather bindings.

If you ask me, Ammoday doesn't come often enough. If you haven't heard of ammoday, the premise is to defray the effectiveness of stupid shit like this.

Assemblyman Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-Los Angeles) is back with another bill to infringe upon the rights of legal gun owners.

You may recall that last year he had AB 992, which proposed a 10-cent tax per bullet on the sale of ammunition in California. This was soundly defeated. His new bill (AB 2858) would exempt people with a valid hunting license, but the fees would still apply to law-abiding target shooters who do not hunt.

The new bill would impose a 10 percent fee on all ammunition and a 5 percent fee on all handguns sold in California, in order to establish a "Firearm Victims Reimbursement Fund."

I guess the assumption is that buy buying a gun or ammuntion for your gun, you are contributing to gun violence and should be taxed accordingly. An analogous situation would be taxing all car owners for automobile 'accidents'. Since there are no true auto accidents (someone is invariably always at fault), it would be safe to say that by owning and operating an automobile, you are contributing to automobile accident victims. Perhaps California should add a 10% gas tax and 5% tax on the cost of new vehicles. (That should have the expected results on their economy.)

Of course, in reality it's all bunk. In California, it's already illegal to sell ammunition to criminals, so the only people affected are those who would obey the law any way. Combine this with their thumbprint efforts, and what you end up with is a hostile environment for legal retail sales of ammunition. It essentially becomes a total ban. (Which is really the whole idea.)

A black market of bootlegged ammunition is a near certainty, and once you have that all regulation efforts are in vain. On the black market, you can no longer control whether or not ammunition is sold to convicted felons or minors or anyone.

There is such a thing as too much regulation, and when you reach that point, otherwise law abiding citizens will feel much less compelled to obey the law. If you think in terms of alcohol prohibition, the ban actually made it more difficult to regulate the consumption of an already heavily regulated product and instead fostered so much law breaking that all regulation was rendered ineffective.

In the simplest of terms, the more California tightens their grip, the more California gun owners will slip through their fingers.

There's a reason I don't watch MTV. Part of it has something to do with my not caring to see poor white trash rappers showing their ass.

From the American Spectator (second item):

Give some Democrats credit: many of the comments released by party factotums on the death of President Ronald Reagan at least attempted to be gracious. But, while some of the words may have been magnanimous, the actions of some Democrats was not.

In California, according to a Democratic House leadership staffer, Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi's office refused until late in the day West Coast time to prepare any remarks by the leader on the passing of the President.

"A call went out around mid-day on the East Coast that Reagan might be in serious condition, and that party leaders should be ready. But Pelosi's people basically said they couldn't' be bothered. [Democratic whip] Steny Hoyer had to get them in line. We got the impression they just didn't want to say anything that would be construed as supportive of a Republican."

Pelosi's office also nixed sending flowers to the funeral home where the president's body was being prepared for burial.

Back in Washington, staffers at the Democratic National Committee stopped a couple of interns who were lowering the flags to half mast outside their headquarters.

"The interns were just doing what they thought was right," says a DNC staffer, who heard about the incident. "But somebody a bit more senior told them not to lower the flags until they absolutely had to, I guess when President Bush announced that all flags should be lowered. There was only an hour's difference. It was pretty petty, but that's how bad things have gotten around here."

Apologies are getting so cliche, I'm surprised the PC movement hasn't died out by now. One of the latest apologies comes from Head Football Coach Bill Parcels, for his reference to the 1941 sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. (emphasis mine)

Bill Parcells apologized Monday for calling the surprise plays used in practice "Jap plays," saying the remark was inappropriate.

The Dallas Cowboys coach was talking to reporters at the team's minicamp about how his quarterbacks coach and defensive coordinator try to outdo each other when he made the comment, an apparent reference to Japan's 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor.

"You've got to keep an eye on those two, because they're going to try to get the upper hand," Parcells said about Sean Payton and Mike Zimmer. "Mike wants the defense to do well, and Sean, he's going to have a few ... no disrespect for the Orientals, but what we call Jap plays. OK, surprise things."

Akira Kuboshima, the editor of Japan's American Football Magazine who was in the room, said he wasn't offended but believed some people would be. He also said he was surprised more by the reaction of other reporters than the comment.

This is the phenomenon whereby people aren't actually offended for themselves, but instead are offended for other people. Whether or not the other people take offense doesn't matter very much. It's a nervous disorder, really, most often experienced by liberals who seem to be unable to just roll their eyes or shake their head when they hear something distasteful. Scientists theorize that the cause of the disorder stems from a thinning of the epidermis. Adverse reactions are said to be most severe when offending remarks come from Republicans, whereby the only cure is resignations by the offending party. If the offending party is politically neutral, apologies will usually do the trick, while remarks from Democrats seem to elicit no negative reaction what-so-ever.

Today is election day in Virginia, and I voted in the Democrat Primary election this morning. I am not a registered Democrat, but then again, neither is anyone else. (There is no party registration in Virginia.) Living in Virginia's 8th District means that I have to hang my head in shame every time James 'Blame the J-E-W-S' Moran opens his big fat mouth. I don't know much about the challenger, Andy Rosenberg, except that he's not likely to be as anti-semitic as Moran. Still, I was compelled to brave the high school parking lot during rush hour, and wade through countless teenagers rushing off to class, just to cast my vote against Moran. The ballot might as well have said:

[ ] Moran
[ ] Not Moran

Driving in to work I heard one of Moran's supporters on the radio. He was being interviewed after just having cast his vote for the incumbent. When asked about the allegations being made against Moran, the voter whined about the smear campaign that Rosenberg was waging, and said something like: "It ticks me off when someone makes a slur and has nothing to back it up." Of course, Rosenberg wasn't the one making the allegations. It was Moran's own aide and former pollster making the accusations, and Rosenberg simply highlighted the Washington Post article, which gave the details:

However, Moran is a wounded giant, stung most recently by the accusation of his longtime aide and pollster, Alan Secrest, that Moran made an anti-Semitic remark in a campaign meeting March 18. Secrest did not disclose what Moran said, and Moran denied making any anti-Semitic statement.

Rosenberg is challenging Moran, not because of his voting record, but because of the constant embarrassment that Moran is causing to Virginia and the Democrat Party. According to Moran, it's never his fault, but the weblog Morantics has the laundry list of his latest bumblings.

# Moran accused of anti-Semitic remarks. (June '04)
# Moran kicks military vets out of his office. (April '04)
# Moran's aide tries to deny remarks about Jews. (April '04)
# Moran flip-flops on baseball stadium. (July '03)
# Moran attacks priest after Mass. (May '03)
# Moran attacks Jewish community on Iraq. (Mar. '03)

And this is just in the last year. And don't forget Marc Fisher's article in the Washington Post.

Challenging Moran should be the easiest job in America. After all, this is the congressman who -- you'll need a deep breath to make it to the end of this sentence -- grabbed an 8-year-old boy in a parking lot because Moran thought the kid had threatened him; borrowed $25,000 from a drug company lobbyist five days before agreeing to co-sponsor a bill that would help that lobbyist's client; took a $447,000 loan from a credit company four days before signing on to legislation that the company was pushing; got into a shoving match on the House floor with one colleague; threatened to punch another congressman in the nose; and just last year told an audience that there'd be no war against Iraq without the support of the Jewish community. Whew.

We should find out how easy it is or isn't, today.

UPDATE: Augh. Moran wins 59-41.

Back when I first started making this a regular thing, I had this to say about solicitations:

While I have no plans to quit publishing and maintaining my weblog, I want the freedom to just say "screw it" one day and chuck the whole thing. Had I accepted $20, $10, $5 or even $1 donations from readers, I would feel ever so guilty about packing it in one day. I'd feel as though I were somehow indebted to those loyal readers. Second, I feel this would also obligate me to be entertaining. While I try to be somewhat amusing, (sometimes with miserable results) I don't want anyone paying me any money, and not feeling they got value for what they paid for. So, by refusing donations I have the freedom to be both boring, and lazy.

Now it looks like Spoons is justifying my remarks.

Every month the media runs another poll and harps on how far President Bush's approval ratings have dropped. At 50%, Bush's approval rating is the lowest it has ever been, they say. As Rich Tucker points out, perhaps these people shouldn't be throwing so many stones.

There's panic at TV networks across the country. Or at least, there should be.

An annual Gallup poll shows that only 30 percent of Americans have confidence in television news. The same 30 percent express confidence in newspapers. That puts these journalistic institutions near the bottom of the survey, behind the military (75 percent confidence), organized religion (53 percent) and even the criminal-justice system (34 percent).

I wonder why this poll isn't getting too much exposure? Tucker goes on to examine a Washington Post Bush hit-piece that I covered here last week.

Staff writers Dana Milbank and Jim VandeHei hammered out some 2,000 words accusing the administration of, basically, practicing politics. That is, running negative campaign ads. [...]

The May 31 story goes on to accuse Vice President Cheney of "stretching the truth." Cheney had said that in Kerry's view, "opposing terrorism is far less of a military operation and more of a law enforcement operation." But "Kerry did not say what Cheney attributes to him," Milbank and VandeHei claim.

Oh? Again, they need to read their own paper. "I will use our military when necessary, but [the war on terrorism] is not primarily a military operation," the Post quoted Kerry as saying on April 19, after the senator appeared on "Meet The Press." "It's an intelligence-gathering, law-enforcement, public-diplomacy effort." It's not Cheney who's stretching the truth here.

It's a typical playbook. Tell the lies you want to be heard on page 1-A, then run the corrections on page 16-F.

Joanne Jacobs takes a look at the lessons being learned in our government's schools. Keep in mind, these educators are constantly bitching and moaning that the reason kids aren't learning anything is because schools and teachers don't have enough of our money to spend.

American students learn how World War II affected Japanese-Americans, blacks and women, but not much about the actual war, writes Jay Mathews in the Washington Post. Students tend to learn social history but not military history.

Tiffany Charles got a B in history last year at her Montgomery County high school, but she is not sure what year World War II ended. She cannot name a single general or battle, or the man who was president during the most dramatic hours of the 20th century. [...]

The Post interviewed 76 teenagers. Two-thirds knew Japanese Americans had been interned during World War II. Only one-third could name a single World War II general; half could name a World War II battle.

It's not just bad history lessons our kids are being taught. They're getting a pass on personal responsibility too. Give an assist to the parents and the school board for this one.

Students at a Chicago high school were warned they'd have to sit out prom if they let detentions pile up. Fifteen of 180 students ignored the warning. But they went anyhow. From the Chicago Sun-Times:

Jones College Prep Principal Don Fraynd thought he was giving his students a valued lesson in responsibility when he barred 15 seniors who had racked up anywhere from 50 to 300 unserved detentions each from prom.

What he got was a lesson in politics, when the students held a protest, their parents blitzed the Board of Education with complaints, and the board reversed him, allowing the chronically late and class cutters to go to the ball. [...]

"Everybody was upset because they spent all their money getting suits and limos and all of that," said Remon Miller, 18, who said he had 302 after-school detentions and 102 Saturday detentions to serve.

The kid was allowed to ignore 404 detentions! No wonder he thought the warning was meaningless. And, thanks to the school board, he was right.

When I was in school, you could bring a knife or scissors without any problem, but if you ignored detention you got in-school suspension. If you ignored your suspension, you were sent home. If you came back before your time was up, you were arrested for trespassing.

My how times have changed. Just think, these kids will be running our country one day.

"i don't care what killed him, alzhiemers or the black plague, i'm glad he's dead and i don't care how many times i'm scolded or chastised for it. the day he took office was the most depressing day of my life, and i swore, that on the day he died, i'd drink a toast of celebration and figuratively piss on his grave" -- Self-professed "Democrats" on DemocraticUnderground.com.

"As forgetful and irresponsible as he was, he forgot to take his worst works to the grave. He, who never should have been born, has died." -- Cuban dictator Fidel Castro's communist-run radio station, showing there was no love lost for President Ronald Reagan.

The First Lady of gun banning, Senator Dianne Feinstein (who incidentally has armed security and carries a gun in her purse) has introduced Senate Bill 2498, to reauthorize the Clinton Gun Ban. The NRA reports that the bill could come up for a Senate vote at any time. Pro-freedom groups like Gunowners of America have been watching the Senator closely, knowing that she is running out of time to get the ban passed before the Senate breaks for summer recess.

And so the process begins. Keep in mind that the Senate was already able to pass this once this year.

Stewart Mandel says that even though Virginia Tech has "upgraded" to the ACC (if you can call America's best basketball conference an upgrade), their football bandwagon will have quite a bit of room on it after it's last three seasons.

For political reasons, University of Virginia president John Casteen staked his expansion vote to the inclusion of his in-state rival. The good news, the ACC felt, was that it was getting a budding football powerhouse.

After last season, however, you'd be hard-pressed to find many observers still willing to throw Tech into that category. The Hokies, therefore, enter 2004 with something to prove: that they can still compete with the big boys.

You can call the decision political if you want, but I view it more as financial. Contrary to what Mandel and other sports writers like to believe, state colleges are not exactly separate entities. Both Virginia Tech and the University of Virginia are run by the same people and funded by the same taxpayers. Quite frankly, state officials weren't too thrilled with Tech being left behind in the Big East. With the Big East's TV contracts and BCS affiliation in flux, doing so could have cost the Commonwealth of Virginia millions of dollars a year. State officials simply used their ACC influence (their University of Virginia vote) as a bargaining chip, and rightly so. I would hope that Virginia Tech would have done the same thing for UVA. Sure, they're in-state rivals, but there is still a level of co-dependence between them.

I'm not so sure that the pre-2004 ACC was any tougher than the Big East. But even if Virginia Tech's bandwagon does suffer because of their membership in the new and improved ACC-super conference, so what? The real fans will still be there. I remember the days when Tech sucked. They didn't just suck, they sucked bad. I attended every home football game when Tech was 2-8-1. I sat in the stands while the Chokies blew a 42-21 fourth quarter lead to the mighty Scarlet Knights of Rutgers. (We lost 50-49). I remember the embarrasing homecoming loss to Temple. Temple! I remember when we cheered for first downs and called for Frank Beamer to be fired. (The same Frank Beamer who has deservedly joined the ranks of the million dollar coaches club.)

Of course I'm hoping that we never get that bad again, but if it happens, so what. None of that matters to me. Like a mother who loves her son no matter how ugly, rotten, or stinky he becomes, I will love them just the same. Whether they go 11-0 or 0-11, I am a permanent fixture on the Virginia Tech bandwagon. If I have more legroom and a better view this year, that's fine with me.

David Hasselhoff was arrested for DUI. The Staff Writers of Ravenwood's Universe have obtained his mugshot, and let me tell you, it's not a pretty sight.

World Net Daily points out that there are still plenty of anti-Regean folks out there, and they're making themselves heard in the most tasteless fashion.

Neal Boortz makes an interesting observation:

You might have thought with the 60th anniversary of D-Day coinciding with the news coverage of Ronald Reagan's passing, that the media had briefly set aside their Abu Ghraib obsession. Of course not. Examples are not hard to find, but here's just a few:

* The Seattle Times: "The picture of the six Marines raising the flag on Mount Suribachi, the most-reproduced image in the history of war photography, was evoked again by Tom Franklin's photograph of firemen raising a flag atop the rubble of New York's Twin Towers after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "It said, 'Look, we're the same people who won that war, and we're going to survive this too,' " said Buell. "It crossed generations." Then came Abu Ghraib.

* USA Today: "I am alive today thanks to the Americans and the English," says Marcellin, a French Jew who spent three years hiding from the Nazis in the South of France. His gratitude has not faded since June 6, 1944, when Allied forces stormed the beaches of Normandy to drive out the Germans. What about the war in Iraq? "America may be right, it may be wrong," he says. The abuse of prisoners at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison? "The French did the same thing in the war with Algeria."

* The LA Times: "In both Italy and France, Bush found himself on the defensive over the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad"

Neal also predicts that it won't be long until someone in the press says something like "Having suffered from the effects of Alzheimer's disease for the last decade, Reagan was unaware of the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib."

Kevin Baker really captures John Kerry.

This is truly a bizarre story. This bulldozer guy must have been a long lost member of the A-Team. My only comment is on the reporting.

An angry citizen with a grudge against City Hall and the local newspaper was found dead Saturday morning in his home-made armored tank after a destructive rampage that turned parts of downtown Granby into rubble heaps Friday -- but injured no one except the perpetrator. [...]

Police found two semiautomatic machine guns, a .223-caliber rifle and two handguns in the vehicle. All those weapons are legal in Colorado.

There is no such thing as a semiautomatic machine gun. It's more of a nitpick really, although this dictionary definition is apropos.

machine gun noun [C]
an automatic gun which can fire a lot of bullets one after the other very quickly:
Several journalists were caught in machine-gun fire.

I cannot help but smile at that. Throw some lawyers into the fray and you have the makings of a good story.

On a different note, for excellent analysis of this nutcase with a bulldozer, check out what Matthew has to offer.

This person was certainly angry and frustrated by his interactions with government. But he wasn't homicidal. He wasn't out to hurt anyone. He was just pissed off at his government.

Worse, he's not the only one to have this idea. Others have done similar things; in fact, it's happening more and more often. Why? What does it mean? Some would have you believe that these incidents are just common criminals, engaging in an orgy of destruction. And on one level, maybe that's true. But there's another level to consider.

Low-tech mining operations have long used birds -- traditionally, canaries -- as a means to detect problems in the mine that aren't readily visible. Because the birds are smaller and have a much more rapid metabolism than humans, problems with the air in the mine shaft -- such as lack of oxygen, or poison gas -- would affect the bird much faster than it would affect any of the humans. This would give the miners time to sound an alarm and get back to the surface before they, too, died. The death of the canary served as a warning to everyone else.

Each time we have an incident like this, I can't help but think of those canaries.

Even if the canaries are indeed dying, which way should we run? And to where?

Fox (search) News, the propaganda arm of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, is trying in vain to dispel the myth that the rich aren't paying their fair share of taxes. A look at who pays what shows that upper income earners aren't only paying more than everyone else, after the last several rounds of tax cuts, they're paying a higher percentage of total taxes. That's easy enough to explain, considering that lower income earners got larger reductions in their tax rates. Why then, are tax and spend politicians still singing the same old song? Gail Buckner explains:

Hey, I understand why politicians make a scapegoat out of The Rich -- this group can't be defined by race, gender, lifestyle, or any other convenient demographic characteristic. Besides, are The Rich actually going to unite and take a stand? Can you just see a thousand well-dressed individuals holding a press conference on the steps of the U.S. Capitol to proclaim, "We're rich and we think it's unfair that we pay a larger portion of income taxes?"

In other words, it's safe to pick on The Rich because: 1) they're easy to resent; and 2) they're not going to defend themselves.

They are very easy to resent. Envy is a powerful emotion, and if you watch any Survivor-type game show where money is involved, you'll see that in full force.

Remember the media hoopla surrounding ballistic fingerprinting? Proponents argued that a database of ballistic "fingerprints" would help police solve crimes. They would be able to track crimes to specific guns and thus nab the bad guy. Aside from the usual suspects of gun grabbers, the technology's biggest cheerleaders were the media and the companies that sold the technology. Both New York State and Maryland took the bait and required that all new guns sold in the state be entered into the database.

After more than three years and millions of dollars, not a single crime has been solved. Maryland's database has had only 6 "hits", while New York's has not had any. Of course the proponents aren't swayed.

Proponents of ballistic databases say New York's system is still relatively young and that it could take years before new, legally purchased guns are used in crimes.

That would tend to imply that people that legally purchase their guns are not using them in crimes. We have to wait for the guns to be stolen or resold first, and then used in a crime. Of course, what good would the database be, if you cannot track the gun back to a specific person? Well, as opponents of the database have routinely pointed out, it serves as the perfect stepping stone to a gun registry and eventual confiscation.

Supporters of the technology, including Eric Gorovitz of The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Ownership, are blaming other states. If the database was national, or all the other states had a registry, he claims it would be a resounding success.

New York spends $1.5 Million a year on the ineffective technology, and Maryland has poured millions into their database. That's millions of dollars they aren't spending on real law enforcement.

There are less black students attending Berkeley, and university officials and students are worried over how to fix it.

The fall enrollment figures came about six months after John Moores, chairman of UC's governing Board of Regents, issued a report saying Berkeley turned away thousands of students who aced the SAT but accepted hundreds -- many of whom were black or Hispanic -- with low scores.

After Moores wrote an opinion column in April saying UC policies victimized students, his fellow regents slapped him with a rare public censure. Regents also reaffirmed their commitment to UC's "comprehensive review" admissions, which don't consider race but do look at social factors, such as overcoming poverty, as well as grades and scores.

There was a 10% drop in applications from black students, and despite factoring in "social" factors, there was still a 30% drop in the number of blacks admitted.

Sunday is the 60th Anniversary of the WWII D-Day invasion. It should be a time to remember those that gave their lives to save Europe, Asia, and the World.

I think that when people think of World War II, they don't fully realize the scope of the war. It was a war that compares to no other in history. Just think about these facts (which I refuse to call trivia):

• It is called a World War, because it literally affected every corner of the globe.

• Tens of millions of people gave up civilian life to defend civilization as we know it.

• About 12 Million Americans served in World War II. About 400,000 never made it home. (Compare this to the 130,000 we have serving in Iraq, with about 600 casualties.)

• D-Day alone required the mobilization of more than 1 million Allied ground troops.

• Russia lost nearly 30 million civilian and military souls.

• Most private factories ceased normal production and began producing weapons and equipment for war. (You ever drive a 1943 Ford? If so, it's probably olive drab.)

• Many of those factories were packed with women, who were relatively new to the work force.

• Women took on untraditional roles working in steel mills, factories, and as mechanics.

• Women also joined the war effort taking on roles such as nurses, pilots, mechanics, and radio operators.

• Civilians back home were required to ration food and domestic goods because the war effort was using so many of our natural resources.

• To fund the war effort, much of people's discretionary income was voluntarily given back to the government in exchange for war bonds.

• The U.S. started the war with only 8 aircraft carriers.

• More than 100 carriers of different types were built during the war, and nearly 100 were still in commission at the end of the war. There were others still being built whose production had to be cancelled.

When you think of how the war impacted everyone's daily lives, the size and scope of the war seem unimaginable.

(Image via National D-Day Memorial in Bedford, Virginia.)

A moment of silence, for the passing of the Gipper.

If geeks had a king, this guy would be it.

(Link via Spoons)

Let's check in on the jobs situation. If you remember, Bush's promise of 2.6 Million jobs in 2004 caused a lot of liberals to balk. Last month, I pointed out that we were right on schedule for 2.6 Million. Let's see where we stand this month.

U.S. employers hired almost a quarter-million new workers in May, swelling payrolls by nearly 1.2 million for the year so far in a jobs market steadily gaining steam ahead of November's presidential election.

I'll whip out the old calculator and extrapolate. 1,200,000 divided by 5 is 240,000. Multiply that by 12, and you get: 2,880,000. Much to the chagrin of liberals, it looks like Bush might actually beat his 2.6 Million figure. As Taranto points out, he's even beating Kerry's 10 Million jobs in 4 years figure.

Geek with a .45 reports that birthday cupcakes and all the evil that usually accompanies them have been officially banned from school. Knowing that, I'm sure parents will sleep better.

Web site traffic decreased over last month. There were also less posts in May; 107 compared to 117 posts in April. Between the holiday, and losing two days worth of stats for switching hosting providers, it was expected.

Month	Unique visitors	Number of visits	Pages	Hits	Bandwidth
Jan 2004	15984	26115	55065	446704	2.51 GB
Feb 2004	46434	61172	150236	718818	4.83 GB
Mar 2004	18472	30400	83457	420589	2.50 GB
Apr 2004	18796	31268	89580	452564	2.87 GB
May 2004	15208	26341	82241	387934	2.70 GB

Have you ever wondered why your $30 telephone service ends up costing you more than $50 by the time all the taxes are factored in? Well, here's part of the reason.

Atlanta Public Schools' stockpile of unused computer electronics totals at least $4.5 million --- about $1.1 million more than previously known. [...]

The equipment, purchased by APS under the national E-rate program, included more than 25 sets of sophisticated switching devices used to route Internet traffic through cyberspace. Atlanta purchased that type of switch in 1999 but replaced it with more sophisticated components during the next two years. [...]

The newspaper's investigation found that Atlanta bought more equipment than it needed, routinely overpaid for goods and services and could not account for some equipment on funding requests. [...]

In response to the article, APS divided equipment purchased with E-rate money into two rooms: one full of equipment that may yet be installed in schools and another with older, obsolete gear. [that was never even used]

The newer equipment includes 31 switching devices manufactured by Cisco Systems, each costing as much as $100,000, neatly stacked against a wall. The switches are among Cisco's most sophisticated networking hardware. With modifications, a single switch is powerful enough to run a small school district's network.

Seven of the switches were in unopened cartons with labels showing shipping dates between May 2000 and September 2001. E-rate ruless require school districts to install equipment in the year it is purchased and in the school for which it was approved.

Officials still don't know how to dispose of the older equipment. The older switching devices cost about $65,000 each five years ago, but it is unclear how much they might be worth now. Three years ago, APS traded in similar components for credits of $7,500 to $30,000 per device against the purchase of newer equipment.

E-rate pays up to 90 percent of equipment costs needed to bring Internet access to classrooms and libraries. The program is financed by a monthly fee collected from telephone customers.

This is much more common than you think. Government budgets are inflexible and usually months behind schedule. And of course if all the money is not used, it doesn't roll over to the next year. Like goldfish who don't know when their next meal might come, public institutions of all kinds are prone to buying equipment just for the sake of buying equipment. For IT equipment, that means that more often than not, warranties expire on the shelf, and obsolescence sets in very quickly.

"Their idea of equal rights is the American flag and the Confederate swastika flying side by side. They've written a new constitution for Iraq and ignore the Constitution here at home. They draw their most rabid supporters from the Taliban wing of American politics. Now they want to write bigotry back into the Constitution." -- Julian Bond, Chairman on the non-profit and supposedly 'non-partisan' NAACP, claiming that Republicans are the enemy of the black man.

If you read Best of the Web, I hope you picked up on this one.

In response to one of President Bush's speeches, CNN offers this as part of a lesson plan for students.

Next, have students define the term "rhetoric" and discus how words can be used as "weapons" and to sway political opinion. ...have students discuss how Bush is using words as weapons and what he hopes will be gained by his rhetoric.

Sound familiar? Check out this one from November 2002.

Have students define the term "rhetoric" and discus how words can be used as "weapons" to sway political opinion. ... Discuss how bin Laden is using words as weapons, and what he hopes will be gained by his rhetoric.

This must be their way of being fair and balanced.

I never would have thought that the tiny town of Mansfield would have been featured in the Washington Post. My cousin works at Manci (Mansfield Correctional Institute) which is featured in the article. My other cousin used to work there, but has since moved on to bigger and better things.

I would also note that in addition to Shawshank Redemption, scenes from Air Force One were also filmed there.

World Net Daily reports that a communist museum in Vietnam has an exhibit honoring the presumptive Democrat nominee for President, John Kerry. The exhibit resides in a section of the museum honoring anti-war protestors, and shows a photo of Kerry meeting with the general secretary of the Communist Party, Comrade Do Muoi.

[Jeffrey M. Epstein of Vietnam Vets for the Truth] said the display photograph's "unquestionable significance lies in its placement in the American protesters' section of the War Crimes Museum" in Ho Chi Minh City, the former Saigon.

"The Vietnamese communists clearly recognize John Kerry's contributions to their victory," he said. "This find can be compared to the discovery of a painting of Neville Chamberlain hanging in a place of honor in Hitler's Eagle's Nest in 1945."

I'm not saying that Hanoi John is a communist himself, but if you judge a man by the company he keeps, this doesn't bode well.

If you live near an urban city, you've undoubtedly heard of emissions testing for vehicles. That's where state or local governments tax you about $25 a year to tell you that your 2003 Volvo doesn't belch pollutants like a 1970 Chevy Nova. The movement, I'm pretty sure, was spearheaded by California.

Well, now some California lawmakers are planning on doing emissions testing (of sorts) on people. The mental images are frightening.

California lawmakers are considering a bill that wades deep into the national debate over biomonitoring - and asks chemical manufacturers and distributors to pay for it.

Biomonitoring is an emerging science that analyzes human blood, breast milk and urine for trace amounts of pollutants, from lead and mercury to a host of industrial chemicals with unpronounceable names. After decades of testing soil, water, air and food, scientists now are scrutinizing pollution in people, cataloging chemicals that take up residence in fat cells and body fluids in hopes of establishing links to cancer and other diseases.

Of course, like all other taxes, fees, and unfunded mandates, corporations will not be footing the bill. Those costs, like all other costs, are borne by the people: the customers, the employees, or the shareholders.

The AP reports that some girls are complaining about the current fashions which leave little to the imagination.

During a recent shopping trip to Nordstrom, 11-year-old Ella Gunderson became frustrated with all the low-cut hip-huggers and skintight tops.

So she wrote to the Seattle-based chain's executives.

"I see all of these girls who walk around with pants that show their belly button and underwear," she wrote. "Your clearks (sic) sugjest (sic) that there is only one look. If that is true, then girls are suppost (sic) to walk around half naked."

Nordstrom executives wrote back and promised Ella the company would try to provide a variety of fashions for youngsters.

The shy, bespectacled redhead has since become an instant media darling, appearing on national television over the past two weeks to promote modest fashions instead of the saucy looks popularized by the likes of Britney Spears.

I took a quick poll of the staff writers, and came back with the unanimous conclusion that Ella needs to spend more time on her spelling lesson and less time bugging retail executives over trivial subjects like women's fashion. If women want to wear low cut, revealing clothing Ella has no business telling them to do otherwise. We think that cute women walking around in scantily clad clothing can only make the world a better place. If Ella doesn't want to participate, that's her choice.

[Male chauvinist pig alert] However, if she ever wants to attract boys, she'd better either learn how to cook, or start putting out. The whiny feminist attitude surely isn't going to cut it.

GOA advises that Senator Dianne "gun in her purse" Feinstein is laying in wait to strike. They allege that she will try to attach an amendment to reauthorize or strengthen the so-called Assault Weapons Ban (which regulates 'scary looking' guns) to a piece of unrelated legislation. The last time she offered it up as an amendment, it passed 52-47.

Conservative Canadians are hoping to restore some sanity to the country when it comes to gun control and crime control.

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper laid out his law and order platform Tuesday, vowing to scrap the problem-plagued gun registry and crack down hard on criminals by getting rid of the faint hope clause that allows offenders serving a life sentence to apply for parole after 15 years.

Harper said he will be able to pay for his plan by cancelling the billion-dollar gun registry because the move would free up between $25 million and $100 million each year.

Keep in mind that the gun registry was only supposed to cost $2 Million. That estimate has been revised, and the registry is now said to cost $1 Billion by the end of 2004. That the conservatives already have the money earmarked for future spending isn't very comforting, but at least they aren't throwing it away on a registration database that several Canadian provinces have said they will not even enforce. Spending the money on keeping lifers behind bars sounds like a wonderful idea. Lets hope the Canadian voters are smart enough to support it.

No, it's not a creative way to settle a divorce.

So, what can you do when a crane falls on your house and cuts it in half? For starters, I wouldn't pay the contractor the money they had the nerve to ask for.

While this is a truly tragic story, I cannot help but notice something. The entire story is quoted below. See if you can figure out what's missing.

Toddler run over by SUV in parking lot dies

A child was killed Monday when he was hit by a vehicle outside a shopping mall in Lake Jackson.

A LifeFlight helicopter crew flew the 1-year-old boy to Memorial Hermann Hospital, where he died soon after arriving, hospital officials said.

The accident happened about 2:30 p.m. outside the Chuck E Cheese's restaurant at Brazos Mall on Texas 332 after the child's 17-year-old father, a Holiday Lakes man, removed the boy from the vehicle and stood him in the parking lot, police said. The child ran away from his father and went behind another vehicle as it was backing out of a parking space, said Lake Jackson police Sgt. Keith Traylor.

The vehicle, a GMC Jimmy, ran over the child, who suffered closed injuries to his head, chest and abdomen.

Apparently there was no driver and the SUV acted on it's own. It must have been laying in wait for some unsuspecting victim to run behind it.

The San Diego Union-Tribune claims that redistricting is tantamount to rigging elections.

California lawmakers are always bitching and moaning about the economic performance of their state. California always seems to suffer from higher rates of unemployment and huge budget deficits, and hapless legislators can't seem to figure out why. Well, here's evidence that someone needs to beat them with the cluebat.

In a weeklong blur of activity, the houses of the Democrat-controlled Legislature passed bills that would raise the minimum wage to one of the nation's highest levels; hit chemical companies with a fee to pay for new programs; keep it easy for employees to sue their bosses for workplace violations; and require the recycling of cell phones and fluorescent lamps.

All, business interests said, make it harder to do business in a state that's already one of the nation's most expensive, while Democratic Party leaders called that just "the same old misinformation."

Democrat lawmakers continue to set up a hostile business environment in California, and then bitch when companies move jobs out of California or overseas. Worse yet, when their policies result in higher unemployment, lower tax revenues, and record budget shortfalls, they have the audacity to claime it's not their fault.

TSA may be going away, but not if the Democrats get their way. It should be interesting to watch the Democrats howl over losing federalization of the airport security screeners. They think there's no problem that can't be solved by throwing more of our tax dollars at it. Frank Lautenberg, the 142 year old junior senator from New Jersey has already claimed, "We will not go back to the days of private screeners."

The way the law was written, airports will be permitted to contract private screeners rather than TSA employees starting this November. Look for democrats to take a protectionist approach, and try to prevent airports from exercising their right to choose.

Kim has the news you almost never hear about. Apparently troops from the Great Satan are actually helping folks out. I can see the anti-American spin now. "Local man crushed to death by supplies dropped from U.S. helicoptor. Calls for Rumsfeld to resign."

"I place my trust in the multilateralism of Democratic candidate John Kerry. And in any event, I think that the whole world should vote on 2 November because so much depends on the outcome of that vote." -- Former U.N. Weapons Inspector Hans Blix, expressing his support for John Kerry.

Despite the discovery of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq last month, Blix still makes claims to the contrary. Then again, he also says that Iraqis were better off under Saddam Hussein than being free.

This is something that anyone apathetic about the so-called "Assault Weapons Ban" should be required to read.

The features that flagged these guns as intolerable, such as bayonet mounts and folding stocks, are features that have nothing to do with their killing power. The ban is the moral equivalent of banning red cars because they look too fast.

Some gun-control supporters acknowledge as much. Tom Diaz of the Violence Policy Center said earlier this year, "If the existing assault weapons ban expires, I personally do not believe it will make one whit of difference in terms of our objective, which is reducing death and injury and getting a particularly lethal class of firearms off the streets." The VPC now says a broader ban is needed.

Why? Because "gun makers have easily evaded the law by making slight, cosmetic changes to banned guns and continued their sale unimpeded." But if you ban red cars and automakers increase their output of maroon ones, that's not evading the law - that's complying with the law.

Firearms manufacturers have eliminated the features that made their weapons unacceptable, and now the critics complain that the weapons are still unacceptable. So why did they worry about those features to begin with? And why expand the ban to get rid of these semiautomatics while allowing others that perform identically?

The VPC claims that one out of five police officers killed in the line of duty in recent years was shot with an assault weapon. But this includes "assault weapons" that were not banned by the 1994 law, which suggests a conveniently elastic definition. The organization concludes that the persistence of these guns in police shootings proves the need for a more extensive law. In reality, it suggests that no ban will matter much.

The problem is that proponents of gun bans don't argue with logic. They intentionally feed on people's ignorance about firearms. The only way they've been able to advance their agenda is by intentionally deceiving voters about the difference between the guns that actually are banned, and the guns that people think are being banned. A good example of this is CNN's intentional deception of showing automatic firearms every time they talk about extending the Clinton Gun Ban (which doesn't regulate automatics).

Network news magazines like 60 Minutes and Dateline are finally facing criticism for hawking their own entertainment wares as news. CBS has the nerve to criticize Dateline for giving massive amounts of coverage to NBC shows such as the Apprentice, Frasier, and Friends. This is the same CBS who ran infomercials for Viacom books by Dick Clarke and Bob Woodward on their flagship 60 Minutes news program. Also, don't forget that this is the same news agency that tried to lure Jessica Lynch to CBS by offering her all sorts of entertainment and book deals.

The liberal rag, The Washington Post, is stumping for John Kerry and giving him some free advertising. WaPo sets the tone from the very beginning, by describing Bush's attacks on Kerry as "unprecedented negativity" in what they call "a typical week in the life of the Bush reelection machine." How something is both "unprecedented" and "typical" at the same time, they fail to explain. But make no mistake, they are clearly in support of Kerry. Can you imagine them running this article if the roles were reversed?

Scholars and political strategists say the ferocious Bush assault on Kerry this spring has been extraordinary, both for the volume of attacks and for the liberties the president and his campaign have taken with the facts. Though stretching the truth is hardly new in a political campaign, they say the volume of negative charges is unprecedented -- both in speeches and in advertising.

Three-quarters of the ads aired by Bush's campaign have been attacks on Kerry. Bush so far has aired 49,050 negative ads in the top 100 markets, or 75 percent of his advertising. Kerry has run 13,336 negative ads -- or 27 percent of his total. The figures were compiled by The Washington Post using data from the Campaign Media Analysis Group of the top 100 U.S. markets. Both campaigns said the figures are accurate.

Of course the Post's figures appear to only include political speeches and paid advertising. They make no mention of the volumes of unpaid advertising Kerry is receiving from major media (like WaPo), non-profit 527 groups like Moveon.org, and anti-Bush hacks like Michael Moore, all of whom have made it their mission in life to see that Bush loses in November. The Post does point out that Kerry has made some exaggerations of his own, but claims that it doesn't compare to the volume of Bush's "untruths".

Then again, the primary calendar may be skewing their results.

The attacks have started unusually early -- even considering the accelerated primary calendar -- in part because Bush was responding to a slew of attacks on his record during the Democratic primaries, in which the rivals criticized him more than one another.

None of these primary attacks, apparently, are counted in Kerry's figures.

In trying to deflect some of the criticism against Kerry, they even try to compare his record to that of Dick Cheney, who isn't even a candidate for President.

It is true Kerry has voted numerous times to eliminate weapons systems and opposed the 1991 Iraq war. But Cheney voted against many of those same weapons systems, and Kerry has voted for several defense increases, especially in recent years.

I can hardly wait for the Kerry-Cheney debates.

CNN gives evidence for why the entire government of Chicago should be rounded up and thrown in jail, and then that jail thrown into Lake Michigan. Chicago's Millennium project, which was supposed to celebrate the year 2000, is set to finally open this um... July. The project, which turned into a jobs program for friends of the establishment, is only 4 years late and 200% over budget.

But the park has been beset by years of construction delays and cost overruns. It was initially budgeted at $150 million -- less than one-third its actual cost -- and was to open in 2000 as part of the city's millennium celebration.

The Chicago Tribune blames, among other things, Mayor Daley's cronyism. Daley if you remember, is the same dickhead who unilaterally decided to bulldoze the Meigs Field airport to turn it into a city park, at the request of his wife. ("Boss Jr." tried to justify the vandalism under the guise of homeland security, but the fact that they destroyed the runway at 2 AM pretty much says it all.)

The liberal rag, Atlanta Journal Constitution, needs to fire whoever is in charge of their website. Unless of course they are trying to drive people away. Any link you click on their main page will divert you to their obtrusive registration scheme. Once you fill out your name and email address, you need to provide all sorts of details about yourself. You also need to let them know what your interests are, so that they can spam you with stuff you might actually buy.

Don't bother with the old fake email address trick either, because you have to confirm the registration. I'd say your best bet is to sign up with the email address of the editor in chief. That way maybe he'll get all the spam.

Lucky me, after I did all this and finally got to the article I wanted to read, their advertising banner crashed my web browser and took out all the other browser windows I had open.