CUT TO:

GOP Hopefuls for '08 Breaking from Bush

2005-08-26T08:29:00.000-07:00

Republican senators with White House ambitions have begun to break with President Bush on a variety of issues to prove their independence from the second-term president.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee staked out his own ground on the issue of stem-cell research. Sen. George Allen of Virginia publicly disagreed with Mr. Bush's refusal to meet a second time with anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan.

Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska compared the war in Iraq to the Vietnam War, an analogy that is anathema to Mr. Bush. Sen. John McCain of Arizona has long disagreed with the president's tax cuts and confidence in Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

"As the incumbent president gets into his second term, a lot of people who lust after his job are trying to differentiate themselves -- not so much from him as from each other," said David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union.

"They're trying to define themselves in the public mind in a way that will give them a leg up in the next election," he said. "George Bush doesn't have to run again, so there's less fear of disagreeing with him."

Yet none of these senators has positioned himself as more conservative than the president, a move that might appeal to disaffected sectors of the Republican base.

"It's a real dilemma for these Republican senators," said Democratic strategist Mary Anne Marsh. "They're trying to differentiate themselves from Bush on certain issues. And yet the Republican activists who dominate the nominating process are sticking with Bush on those issues."

Analysts from both parties said Republicans would do well to tap into the biggest sources of discontent among conservative Republicans -- lax immigration laws and excessive federal spending. Although no candidate has taken a prominent stance against the expansion of government under Mr. Bush, a dark horse is strongly challenging the administration on immigration.

Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican, adamantly opposes Mr. Bush's plan to grant legal status to millions of Mexicans who illegally entered the U.S. Although Mr. Tancredo's White House prospects are considered remote, his candidacy could pull the Republican field rightward in the way former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean pulled the Democratic field leftward in last year's primaries.

"Given how far out front he is on immigration, Tancredo could force the entire field to take a tougher stance," Mrs. Marsh said.

Mr. Keene said: "I don't think he's a serious candidate for the nomination, but he may be more serious in his ability to affect the outcome of things than some of the others."

After criticizing the president's immigration policy in 2002, Mr. Tancredo said he was told by Bush adviser Karl Rove "never to darken the doorstep of the White House."

By contrast, the Republican senators who are considered White House contenders have been careful to preserve their overall working relationships with Mr. Bush, even as they disagree with him on individual issues.

The possible exception is Mr. Hagel, who in recent weeks significantly has sharpened his criticism of Mr. Bush's Iraq policy.

"Hagel's mistake is that he's attempting to stake out his ground on foreign and defense policy, whereas most people are going to agree with Bush on these issues," Mr. Keene said. "It may be a political tin ear. Or it may be a desire to get on the tube and get press, because he certainly does that."

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Who? What?

2005-08-24T08:35:00.000-07:00

Report: Bin Laden Injured in Afghanistan Attack

Kabul, 24 August (AKI) - Osama bin Laden has been wounded in Afghanistan, according to two different reports carried by various Islamic websites. Referring to the al-Qaeda leader as Abu Abdullah, the second message, which appeared on Wednesday, said: "Mullah Ahmadi, military leader of the Badr brigades, which form part of the al-Qaeda organisation in Afghanistan, has confirmed that Sheikh Abu Abdullah has been injured in his left leg."

It follows a previous message on several Islamic websites saying the fugitive terrorist leader was injured while taking part in an attack on a Spanish military base in Afghanistan.

The second message relaying the news is titled "Confirmation of the injury of Sheikh Abu Abdullah in the Al-Khulud expedition" and adds other details, specifying that the injury was to the left leg and claiming it was sustained "when the Sheikh went out onto the battlefield to lead the expedition during which the Spanish base was attacked and which was named the Al-Khulud expedition."

"The source has promised to broadcast soon a video of the expedition, which lasted four hours," the message continues, before concluding: "Therefore we ask Allah to heal the Sheikh and make him well again. Don't be miserly in praying for him."

Last week a Spanish helicopter crashed in Afghanistan, killing all 17 military personnel on board. Another helicopter taking part in the same training exercise made an emergency landing following the crash, injuring several other Spanish soldiers. Spain has dispatched additional troops to replace those killed and injured, but there has been no report of a subsequent attack on a Spanish base in Afghanistan.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Robertson: Let's Kill Chavez

2005-08-22T22:13:00.000-07:00

Pat Robertson Calls for Assassination of Chavez

Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club host Pat Robertson ... founder of the Christian Coalition of America has called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez Frias.

In a transcript of his August 22 The 700 Club broadcast Robertson says:

"There was a popular coup that overthrew him [Chavez]. And what did the United States State Department do about it? Virtually nothing. And as a result, within about 48 hours that coup was broken; Chavez was back in power, but we had a chance to move in. He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he's going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent.

You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it.

It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ... and I don't think any oil shipments will stop. But this man is a terrific danger and the United ... this is in our sphere of influence, so we can't let this happen.

We have the Monroe Doctrine, we have other doctrines that we have announced. And without question, this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil, that could hurt us very badly.

We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability.

We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Border 'Security'?

2005-08-22T07:38:00.000-07:00

Security Fears Grow at Southwest Border
With no detention space, crossers released

HARLINGEN, Texas -- In a storefront courthouse in the baking-hot Rio Grande Valley, next to a ''beauty academy" and across from a sleepy coffee shop, US Immigration Judge David Ayala is a study in effortless efficiency. He pulls blue files one by one from a tall stack, announces the name of an undocumented immigrant caught slipping across the US border, and orders the defendant deported.

There are no cries of protest. The defendants are nowhere to be found. Other than the thwack of a stamp and the judge's voice, the only other sound in the tiny courtroom is the quiet hum of an air conditioner, as Ayala goes through the motions before a Department of Homeland Security prosecutor and a reporter.

Unlike undocumented Mexicans, most of whom are quickly returned to their country after they are arrested, almost all non-Mexicans are charged and released in the United States if they do not have a criminal record and are not deemed a security threat. But like this day, few of the immigrants show up to face charges that they entered the country illegally.

When their names are called, 98 percent of all undocumented aliens ordered to appear at Harlingen Immigration Court do not answer. They are weeks into their new lives in all corners of the United States.

The no-show rate, the highest of those for all 53 immigration courts in the country, has deteriorated as undocumented, non-Mexican immigrants have been crossing the border in exponentially increasing numbers, many from known terrorist breeding grounds such as Pakistan.

High-ranking federal officials, including retired Admiral James Loy of the Coast Guard, who served as deputy secretary of Homeland Security until March, have warned Congress that terrorists might exploit the porous border with Mexico to enter the United States, where they can take their chances with immigration officials who often have no choice but to release non-Mexicans.

Such infiltration ''is a concern for us," said Roy Cervantes, the US Border Patrol spokesman in Harlingen.

Nationwide, the number of non-Mexicans who are entering the country illegally is skyrocketing, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Through Aug. 9, for the first 10 months of fiscal 2005, a total of 135,097 non-Mexicans had been apprehended out of 1.02 million undocumented immigrants arrested overall. In all of fiscal 2004, the number of non-Mexicans apprehended was 75,392; in fiscal 2003, the figure was 49,545.

The arrivals are coming from all over the globe, using smugglers in Mexico and the United States to ferry them to river crossings and to guide them along dangerous desert trails in their quest for a better life. The inability of the Border Patrol to stem the tide has provoked a fierce debate about immigration policy and security priorities. The governors of New Mexico, Bill Richardson, and of Arizona, Janet Napolitano, both Democrats, declared states of emergency along their southern borders this month.

Big-business interests are concerned that an aggressive federal crackdown on immigration could affect the estimated 10 million undocumented workers in the United States, and who provide a steady source of low-cost labor.

But many lawmakers from border states and others, such as the Minutemen volunteers who monitor the borders, are sounding an alarm.

''The borders are worse today than they have ever been," said US Representative John Culberson, a Houston Republican who has filed a bill to create an armed volunteer militia that would be supervised by border-state governors. ''There's an absolute invasion going on."

Other observers, such as the executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens, Brent Wilkes, suggest that the outcry against the growing influx of non-Mexican immigrants, many of them from Central and South America, is rooted in racial bias.

''We get concerned when we feel like the security issue is used as a ruse to crack down on Hispanic immigrants who are economic refugees," Wilkes said. ''There's a lot of people playing up the threat of terrorists coming across the Mexican border."

Immigration officials say they are doing the best they can with what they have. But if they do not release most non-Mexican immigrants, federal officials say, the alternative is to detain tens of thousands of them in a time-consuming deportation process whose difficulties are compounded by a shortage of detention space. With 19,500 beds nationwide all filled, the result ''forces us to make some very difficult decisions," said Dean Boyd, a spokesman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement for the Department of Homeland Security.

Nowhere are those decisions more evident than in Harlingen. In the first nine months of fiscal 2005, which ends on Sept. 30, 16,376 undocumented immigrants failed to appear at court. Only 214 of them were Mexican. In fiscal 2004, 9,166 immigrants did not appear, or 88 percent. In fiscal 2003, the no-show number was 4,868, again a national high at 88 percent.

In the sprawling Rio Grande sector, which includes Harlingen and covers 320 miles of the river, 68,438 non-Mexican immigrants from 65 countries have been arrested this fiscal year, Cervantes said. That number amounts to much more than double the 26,437 non-Mexican immigrants who had crossed illegally into this sector for all of fiscal 2004.

In the border city of Brownsville, 25 miles downriver from Harlingen, the Border Patrol chief, Ernesto Castillo, said the 202 agents in his busy station are insufficient to do the job. The agents from Brownsville are averaging about 60 arrests a day, Castillo said, including three whom he watched being detained recently on a patrol of the levee along the Rio Grande.

Two of the immigrants, a married Mexican couple who spoke no English, clutched each other as agents tended to a deep, bloody wound that the 24-year-old woman had suffered by falling in a drainage ditch. The two were returned to Mexico later that day.

Nationwide, the failure-to-appear rate for fiscal 2005 stood at 36 percent on June 30, or 68,634 of the undocumented immigrants who had been arrested.

In fiscal 2004, the 54,261 suspects who did not appear in court included 530 from Pakistan, 206 from Iran, 164 from Jordan, 93 from Iraq, 80 from Yemen, and 29 from Afghanistan, according to Justice Department figures.

Boyd said that undocumented aliens from a ''special-interest" country, a term the government uses to describe a potential base for terrorists, undergo careful screening and are not released until investigators are confident they do not pose a security threat. ''Because someone comes from Pakistan, that doesn't necessarily mean anything," Boyd said. ''It could be a family with children."

However, the numbers of illegal immigrants from such countries are raising questions about the adequacy and consistency of US border protection. ''I think there's a lack of urgency about this in the White House and Congress," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a nonpartisan think tank based in Washington. ''This has the potential to be a really big deal, and there's going to be political hell to pay."

Culberson, the Houston Republican, went further. ''Any day now, we will confront massive truck-bomb explosions in our major cities and catastrophic loss of life inflicted by Middle Eastern terrorists who will laugh at us that they had simply walked across our border and we let them do it," he said.

Under Culberson's plan, which has 50 cosponsors in the House, volunteers from anywhere in the country could join a state's Border Protection Corps and ''use any means and any force authorized by state law to prevent" illegal immigration. Corps members would be subject to background checks for criminal history and mental illness, he said.

Wilkes, of United Latin American Citizens, bitterly criticized the proposal. ''If you give these people any means necessary to make arrests, when the crime the immigrants is committing is a misdemeanor, it's outrageous; it's sick," Wilkes said.

Border Patrol officials, meanwhile, pointed to a recently implemented program, called ''expedited removal," as a success story. Begun in 2004 in Tucson and in Laredo, Texas, the program was expanded in July to target a huge increase in undocumented Brazilians crossing the lower Rio Grande Valley. As a result, Cervantes said, the flow of Brazilians, who had become the largest non-Mexican group entering the area, has been dramatically curbed.

To qualify for ''expedited removal," an undocumented immigrant must not have a criminal past, must not be a juvenile, must not be an asylum seeker, and must have been arrested within 100 miles of the border and 14 days since crossing the boundary, according to Salvador Zamora of US Customs and Border Protection, an arm of the Homeland Security Department.

Since July, 757 Brazilians have been flown back to their country at US expense, the Border Patrol said. Zamora added that the hope is eventually to extend ''expedited removal" along the entire southwestern border.

Meanwhile, the ebb and flow of the immigration battle is evident at the Border Patrol station here, where most of the undocumented, non-Mexican aliens are released to the street after being questioned and given a court notice.

Once outside the station's chain-link fence, many of the immigrants board a shuttle sent from the Harlingen bus station, where they depart for destinations throughout the country, Cervantes said.

''They've been constantly here," said Jose Degollado, who works at the bus depot.

In Brownsville, Castillo shook his head when asked if he had become frustrated by the no-show rate at court. ''Our job," he said, ''is to apply the law."

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

If It Walks Like a Duck...

2005-08-21T09:00:00.000-07:00

GOP Senator Hagel Says Iraq War Looking Like Vietnam

WASHINGTON - A leading Republican senator said Sunday the war in Iraq is looking more like the Vietnam conflict from a generation ago.

Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, who received two Purple Hearts and other military honors for his service in Vietnam, reaffirmed his position that the United States needs to develop a strategy to leave Iraq.

"Stay the course is not a policy," said Hagel, a possible White House contender in 2008. "By any standard, when you analyze 2 1/2 years in Iraq ... we're not winning."

Sen. George Allen, R-Va., another possible candidate for the GOP nomination for president in 2008, said the formation of a constitution guaranteeing basic freedoms would provide a rallying point for Iraqis.

Political leaders in Baghdad were working to complete the draft of the new constitution in time for the Monday night deadline for parliamentary approval.

"The terrorists don't have anything to win the hearts and minds of the people of Iraq. All they care to do is disrupt," said Allen, who appeared with Hagel on ABC's "This Week."

Hagel said more U.S. troops is not the solution.

"We're past that stage now because now we are locked into a bogged-down problem not unsimilar, dissimilar to where we were in Vietnam," Hagel said. "The longer we stay, the more problems we're going to have."

Allen said that unlike the communist-guided North Vietnamese that the U.S. fought, the insurgents in Iraq have no guiding political philosophy or organization. Still, Hagel argued, the similarities are growing.

"What I think the White House does not yet understand — and some of my colleagues — the dam has broke on this policy," Hagel said. "The longer we stay there, the more similarities (to Vietnam) are going to come together."

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Cruising with a Cult

2005-08-21T08:57:00.000-07:00

Cruise Tries to Recruit Oprah to Scientology

YOU could argue that she is the most influential woman in America, not least because her daily television program reaches into the living room of almost every home in the US.

Television insiders insist she can single-handedly turn books into bestsellers and mere celebrities into megastars. But now, glamorous talk show host Oprah Winfrey has become the target of the controversial Church of Scientology.

The campaign is being led by its most famous disciple, 43-year-old Tom Cruise, who is doing everything in his considerable power to convert her to the cultish faith. Cruise recently bought a house two doors away from Oprah in the glamorous suburb of Santa Barbara, California. The two are close friends. Winfrey regularly sings Cruise's praises on her show, and it was there that he chose to make his first public declaration of love for his new fiancee, 26-year-old Katie Holmes, in a toe-curling spectacle.

But the wooing of Oprah Winfrey to the Scientology cause has not been left to Cruise alone.

Fellow Scientologist and Pulp Fiction star John Travolta, 51, whom she also repeatedly favours on her television program, recently presented her with a $700,000 Bentley car for her birthday.

Oprah would be a huge catch for the Scientologists, one internet site announced this week, and you can almost see Cruise's eyes gleaming at the prospect. Another adds: "If Oprah falls into the hands of Scientology, who can tell what influence she might have on the population? The prospect is terrifying."

The Church of Scientology has a controversial reputation. One American judge described its founder, science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, as a pathological liar.

Scientology may not be quite as hip in Hollywood at the moment as Kabbalah, the ultra-fashionable Jewish mystical group beloved of Madonna, but it is regarded by many as being more powerful - and it is clearly on a recruitment drive for another star disciple.

Scientology already counts among its celebrity followers Travolta's actress wife Kelly Preston, former Cheers star Kirstie Alley, Lisa Marie Presley, and Nancy Cartwright - the voice of cartoon character Bart Simpson.

Travolta, who also has a house in Santa Barbara near Winfrey, vehemently denies claims followers of Scientology are brainwashed into blind adherence to its principles.

"That is garbage," Travolta says. "Do you really believe that I would stand for something like that? The courses help me solve my problems. I also attend religious counselling where, with a spiritual guide, I tackle personal problems."

But most of the focus is on the cult's biggest star, Cruise, who now uses his considerable power and influence in Hollywood - not to mention his estimated $US400m fortune - to bring notable new recruits into the Scientology fold.

Founded by the late L. Ron Hubbard in 1955, Scientology is defined by a belief in the power of a person's spirit to clear itself of past painful experiences through self-knowledge and spiritual fulfilment.

This is achieved through intensive counselling. Scientologists believe humans are an exiled race from outer space called Thetans and claim to have eight million followers worldwide (though some critics would argue its true membership is only about 50,000).

Scientology is extremely sensitive to criticism. It uses the vast funds it accrues from members to defend itself vigorously. The church's appetite for rich and influential supporters knows few bounds - Winfrey aside. The TV host is not Cruise's only prey when it comes to wooing the rich, powerful and famous.

Just two years ago, Cruise is believed to have made a determined effort to convince James Packer of the benefits of Scientology, just as he did with his second wife, actress Nicole Kidman, and his subsequent girlfriend, Penelope Cruz. None of those attempts worked, however, which accounts for his current fascination with Oprah.

Cruise is now so in thrall to the Scientologists that he insists his children - and anyone who wants to be close to him - also embrace its bizarre teachings. These include a claim that Scientology can free individuals of the negative views implanted in humans by aliens centuries ago. Indeed, some movie insiders say that Cruise's passion for the cult has grown to such extraordinary proportions in the past year that it now pervades every single part of his life.

On the set of his latest film, War Of The Worlds, Cruise demanded that a Scientology tent - complete with volunteer ministers - should be available at all times to help any sick and injured among the movie's cast and crew.

There are suggestions Scientology lies behind his sudden engagement to the beautiful Katie Holmes.

There's no doubt Holmes has fallen under the spell of the church since meeting Cruise. The young former Dawson's Creek TV star has already announced her conversion to Scientology.

She is also seldom to be seen without her Scientology minder, a shadowy 29-year-old woman called Jessica Feshbach Rodriguez, whose family is one of the church's largest financial donors. Holmes now calls Rodriguez her best friend, even though they have known each other for only a matter of weeks.

Bizarrely, a series of red blotches on Katie Holmes's face, which suddenly appeared after she met Cruise, were alleged by some critics to be the result of a niacin-based detoxification process performed by the Church of Scientology - although this process was officially denied by the organisation.

Holmes says it is ludicrous to suggest that she has been press-ganged into adopting Scientology by her new fiance.

She says: "Tom doesn't put pressure on people. He is the kindest, smartest, most adoring man."

Not everyone is convinced. One US commentator said this week: "Holmes, who was previously a sweet, thoughtful, articulate young woman, now comes across as a zombie." He adds: "It can only be more worrisome for her parents as they see the steady hold Tom Cruise and Scientology have taken of their beloved daughter."

So pervasive is Scientology's influence in Cruise's life that he is believed to have placed the education of his adopted children with Nicole Kidman - Isabella, 12, and Conor, 10 - in the hands of Cass and Marian Cruise, two of his three sisters, who both converted to the religion over a decade ago. They are reported to be placing heavy emphasis on the teachings of Scientology.

Bella Cruise, as his daughter is known, has recently been listed in the Scientology bulletin for completing what it calls the basic course. Like Kidman, Holmes, too, comes from a Catholic family, but Holmes agreed to convert to Scientology - something that Kidman, however, always refused to do.

Actress Penelope Cruz, whom Cruise dated after his separation from Kidman, also took Scientology courses during their three-year relationship, but she, too, declined to convert - which many Hollywood insiders believe was one cause of their break-up.

You can hardly get to speak to Cruise these days without going through a Scientologist, one industry professional claims.

Cruise's third sister, Lee Anne De Vette, another convert to Scientology, has taken charge of his public relations this year, replacing the respected movie industry figure, Pat Kingsley.

A convert to Scientology in 1987 in the wake of his first marriage to actress Mimi Rogers, Cruise claims that its teaching helped him to overcome his dyslexia.

According to members of the group, Cruise has reached the sixth of eight "Operating Thetan" levels and is trusted enough to know almost all the secret truth of the universe. Oprah Winfrey beware.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Just Between Friends

2005-08-18T07:14:00.000-07:00

Border Tension Rises Between US and Mexico

Political tension over illegal immigration and crime along the US-Mexico border worsened this week, as Vicente Fox, Mexico's president, complained of a lack of co-operation from US officials after two US states declared emergencies along their borders with Mexico.

"My call to the US . . . is that instead of signals we make proposals, instead of working each on their own side we work together," Mr Fox said in Mexico's Sonora state, which borders Arizona.

Citing drugs-related violence on the US side of the border, Mr Fox asked: "If all the drugs that cross there arrive in the markets for consumption, what's being done on that side?"

Tony Garza, the US ambassador to Mexico and a friend of President George W. Bush, responded on Tuesday night that violence "from Matamoros to Tijuana" was "destroying the social and economic fabric of our border communities".

"The longer that violence continues, the tougher it becomes for many Americans to talk about Mexicans as our trusted partners with mutual interests," he said in a speech in Denver.

Tension over illegal immigration and border-area violence reached high levels of both governments last week, when Bill Richardson, New Mexico's governor, declared a state of emergency along his state's international border, prompting criticism from Mexico's foreign ministry. Janet Napolitano, Arizona's governor, did the same this week.

Ms Napolitano said that the "flood of unauthorised immigration" had led to hundreds of deaths - which have risen sharply this year - an increase in violent crime, and trespassing that had "damaged vegetation, wildlife and livestock".

Ms Napolitano, a Democrat, also said the US federal government had "failed in its responsibility" to secure the international border, and that Arizona would put $1.5m (€1.2m, £831,000) of its emergency fund towards fighting the problem. She also said the move was part of "close work" on sharing resources and intelligence with Sonora.

An outbreak of severe violence between drug gangs in Nuevo Laredo, on the border with Texas, recently led the US to close its consulate there.

The consulate re-opened last week, despite the assas sination of a city councillor. Mr Garza said he closed the Nuevo Laredo consulate partially to punish Mexico "for its failure to control violence in the region". Mexican politicians described it as an "over-reaction".

Gerónimo Gutiérrez, Mexico's minister for US relations, said: "It's important to differentiate between the specific public security problem in Nuevo Laredo, which is important, and the broader concept of security on the border.

"We should avoid the perception that the border is out of control along all its length."

He told the Financial Times that Mexican and US governments would announce new measures for clamping down on "coyotes", who smuggle migrants across the border, within the next few months.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Our Neighbor's Cooperation (Complicity)

2005-08-18T07:13:00.000-07:00

Mexico Funds Staging Areas for Illegals

The Mexican staging area for illegal aliens that New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson demanded this week be bulldozed is among hundreds of similar sites along the border sponsored and maintained by the Mexican government.

Many of the sites are marked with blue flags and pennants to signal that water is available. Others, such as the Las Chepas site that Mr. Richardson denounced, are a collection of old, mostly abandoned buildings or ranch houses where illegals gather for water and other supplies -- sometimes bartering with smugglers, or "coyotes," for passage north.

Las Chepas, law-enforcement authorities said, also is a center for drug smugglers looking to move marijuana and cocaine into the United States.

Rafael Laveaga, spokesman for the Mexican Embassy in Washington, yesterday said his government "has a duty and obligation by law to protect Mexican citizens at home and abroad."

He said record high temperatures in the desert areas south of New Mexico and Arizona this year had resulted in the death of many illegal aliens.

"We try to spread the word on the dangerous conditions these people will face in the desert, along with reports of historically high temperatures," he said. "What we are doing is part of an effort to prevent those deaths."

Many of the Mexican aid stations are maintained by Grupo Beta, a Mexican governmentfunded humanitarian organization founded in the early 1990s. Driving through the desert regions south of the border in brightly painted orange trucks, Grupo Beta's job is to protect migrants along the border, not arrest them.

In April, Grupo Beta worked with the Mexican military and the Sonora State Preventive Police to move would-be illegal aliens out of the desert areas just south of the U.S. border to locations east and west of Naco, Ariz., to avoid the Minuteman Project volunteers holding a vigil on the border.

A branch of Mexico's National Migration Institute, Grupo Beta also helped pass out fliers warning migrants that the Minuteman volunteers, whom they described as "armed vigilantes," were waiting across the border to hurt them.

In addition to the aid stations, the Mexican government has distributed more than a million copies of a 32-page handbook advising migrants how to cross into the United States. The book, known as "Guia del Migrante Mexicano," or "Guide for the Mexican Migrant," contains tips on avoiding apprehension by U.S. authorities.

Aid stations for illegal aliens also exist in the United States, many of them established and supplied by various humanitarian organizations such as Humane Borders, a Tucson faith-based group that targets illegal aliens who the organization said might otherwise die in the desert.

Humane Borders, established in 2001, has 70 water stations along the U.S. side of the border, each with two 50-gallon tanks next to a 30-foot-mast with a blue flag.

Many are on well-traveled migrant routes. Others have been placed, with permission, on property owned by Pima County, Ariz.; the National Park Service; the Bureau of Land Management; and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Another U.S. group, known as No More Deaths, set up an aid camp last month near Arivaca, Ariz., helping stranded border-crossers with food, water and medical assistance. The Ark of the Covenant camp will remain in operation through September.

The group has received much of its support from Presbyterian churches in Arizona and elsewhere. Last year, 500 volunteers -- including doctors and nurses -- took part in a similar camp. A second camp has been established on the Mexican side of the border, across from Douglas, Ariz., also sponsored by No More Deaths and a Mexican group that operates drug- and alcohol-rehabilitation centers.

More than 110 illegal aliens have died in Arizona's desert this year.

Mr. Richardson, in declaring a state of emergency in four New Mexico counties because of rising immigration, border violence and drug smuggling, called on the Mexican government to bulldoze Las Chepas, across the border from Columbus, N.M.

The state of Chihuahua responded by calling for increased dialogue to improve security in the region, saying it would "offer all the support we can to continue our good relationship with our northern neighbor."

The Mexican Foreign Relations Secretariat said Mr. Richardson's declaration did not "jibe with the spirit of cooperation and understanding" and called for a meeting to promote "appropriate actions."

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

'Able Danger'/Brick Wall

2005-08-17T15:09:00.000-07:00

Officer: 'Able Danger' Stopped from Informing FBI

WASHINGTON - An Army intelligence officer said Wednesday he does not believe the 9/11 commission pressed hard enough for documentation of claims that military intelligence found a U.S.-based terrorist cell that included Mohamed Atta, who turned out to be the leader of the Sept. 11 attacks, prior to the terrorist strikes.

"I don't believe they ever got all the documents, but then again I don't think that they pressed properly to get all of the documents," Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer said on CBS' "The Early Show."

He says he was associated with a small intelligence unit, called "Able Danger," that had identified Atta and three of the other future Sept. 11 hijackers as al-Qaida members by mid-2000.

He said military lawyers stopped the unit from sharing the information with the FBI out of concerns about gathering and sharing information on people in the United States legally.

"What we were trying to do as good soldiers is we saw a threat, we recognized the fact that they were here in the United States and we felt we should do something even when the lawyers said we couldn't," Shaffer said.

"The problem was at the time the Special Operations Command is very secretive, quiet warriors," he said. "They like doing things quietly. I had to respect their wishes, to respect the sanctity of that information. What I tried to do was bring them together with the FBI so they could discuss this and take the appropriate action."

The commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks left the Able Danger claims out of its official report and has since said it did not obtain enough information on the operation to consider it historically significant.

In an interview with Fox News Channel and The New York Times distributed Tuesday evening, Shaffer said the panel was not given all the information his team had gathered.

"I'm told confidently by the person who did move the material over that the 9/11 commission received two briefcase-size containers of documents," Shaffer said in the Fox News report. "I can tell you for a fact that would not be ... one-20th of the information that Able Danger consisted of during the time we spent."

Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, has said the Sept. 11 commission did not adequately investigate the claim that four of the hijackers had been identified more than a year before the attacks.

Former commission chairman Thomas Kean and vice chairman Lee Hamilton said last week that the military official who made the claim had no documentation to back it up.

Shaffer rejected that remark. "Leaving a project targeting al-Qaida as a global threat a year before we were attacked by al-Qaida is equivalent to having an investigation of Pearl Harbor and leaving somehow out the Japanese," he said in the Fox interview.

In the Times account of the interview, Shaffer said he was "at the point of near insubordination over the fact that this was something important, that this was something that should have been pursued" in describing his efforts to get the evidence from the intelligence program to the FBI in 2000 and early 2001.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Terror Plot Probe Grows

2005-08-17T07:14:00.000-07:00

California terror plot goes deeper to prison system

Two men accused of robbery and also suspected of planning a terrorist attack alledgedly wanted to go after an Army event, according to KFI News sources.

Now, a third man has been arrested in the case of the uncovered Muslim terror cell in California.

Law enforcement sources say target lists describe the US Army Association's annual ball at the Westin Hotel in Long Beach. Other targets included synagogues, military facilities and recruiting offices in West Los Angeles and the South Bay.

A high-ranking law enforcement source says Gregory Patterson and Lavar Washington planned to shoot up the recruitment center on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and kill as many officers and civilians as possible. A military recruiting center on Santa Monica Blvd. was supposed to be the target of the attack.

Sources say one of the two men charged in the robberies, Levar Washington, bragged to investigators that a number of men were involved in the gun attack plots.

A Pakistani national, Hamad Samana, was arrested last week in connection with the case. Samana is a Liberal Arts major and member of the Cricket Club in Inglewood, California. His connection to the terror attack plots and his affiliations outside of the country or connections to established terror groups, such as Al Qaeda, are not yet known.

The case has opened a new and troubling front for counter-terrorism officials because of a possible connection to a radical form of Islam practiced by a group called Jamiyyat Ul Islam Is Saheeh, an official said. The group's name translates as The Assembly of Authentic Islam.

While little is known publicly about the JIS, as intelligence officials call it, the group has been around for several years and has a presence at Folsom State Prison, where one of the three men in custody, Levar Haney Washington, 25, served time for assault and robbery, according to law enforcement sources.

Washington and another man, Gregory Vernon Patterson, became suspects in the wider terror investigation after Jihadi literature was discovered in Washington's apartment. The literature outlined efforts to recruit young Muslim African-American men for the "Holy War."

Patterson, who has no criminal record, worked at a duty free gift shop at LAX until early this year.

No one has suggested he was surveying the airport as a possible target, but the fact that he worked at the Tom Bradley International Terminal has raised concerns for counter-terrorism officials because LAX is viewed as one of the state's most likely potential targets.

The two men were originally arrested as suspects in a series of gas station robberies.

KFI News is reporting that the plot may involve up to 13 individuals who are followers of a Muslim inmate inside the prison system in California.

The story is still developing and the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force is now in charge of the investigation.

KFI News is reporting that the investigation is expanding and the plot "goes much deeper."

Over 100 FBI agents are participating in the investigation.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Arizona Declares Border Emergency

2005-08-16T08:33:00.000-07:00

Gov. Janet Napolitano has followed the lead of her New Mexico counterpart

PHOENIX - Gov. Janet Napolitano on Monday declared a state of emergency along Arizona's border with Mexico, freeing up $1.5 million in disaster funds to help border counties combat booming illegal immigration and drug smuggling.

Napolitano criticized the federal government for "moving too slow" on border security, evolving into a hot-button, election-year issue in Arizona and across the country.

"This is a federal responsibility, and they're not meeting it," Napolitano said. "I've just come to the conclusion (that) we've got to do what we can at the state level until the federal government picks up the pace."

Napolitano's announcement came three days after New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson issued a similar declaration, complaining that the federal government has failed to stem growing smuggling-related violence to the east of Arizona, an increasingly popular illegal immigration corridor. Both governors are Democrats.

The money in Arizona is designated for the state's four border counties - Yuma, Pima, Santa Cruz and Cochise - and will be distributed by the Arizona Division of Emergency Management. The $1.5 million is part of $4 million set aside annually for disasters, such as fires or floods.

Politicians and law enforcement officials in those counties said the money is sorely needed. The state is the busiest illegal crossing spot along the entire Southwestern border.

The declaration is the first time Napolitano has tapped the funds for border issues.

And it comes at a time when federal lawmakers, including some from Arizona, and the Bush administration are pushing a series of immigration reform bills and proposals.

Arizona Republican Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl have introduced starkly different bills. Kyl's bill would authorize 10,000 new Border Patrol agents and require millions of undocumented immigrants to return to their home countries after five years. The McCain bill would allow undocumented immigrants to stay in the United States if they pay a fine and participate in a guest-worker program.

The long-running battle over securing the U.S.-Mexican border is expected to be a key issue in next year's midterm elections, both nationally and at the state level.

Arizona border counties will be eligible to apply for state money for a wide range of costs, from repairing border fences to paying for overtime for local law enforcement agencies dealing with smuggling-related crime.

State Rep. Russell Pearce, a Republican, accused Napolitano of bowing to public and political pressure.

"This governor clearly is very good at reading polls," Pearce said. "It's a start, but much more has to be done.... This nation is under siege."

Since Oct. 1, the start of the federal fiscal year, U.S. Border Patrol in the Yuma and Tucson sectors reported more than 510,000 arrests, an average of about 1,616 a day, roughly on par with last year. The Border Patrol has reported a steep increase in assaults on agents patrolling in southern Arizona, including a June 30 shooting by masked gunmen with assault rifles that wounded two agents near Nogales, Ariz.

"For years, we've been dealing with international, federal issues at the border with little or no support from the government. We need resources down here," Santa Cruz County Sheriff Tony Estrada said. "We're the guys in the trenches, on the roads, out in the sticks. For too long, we've been raising little red flags, saying we need help, and nobody's paid attention."

His Sheriff's Department, which patrols about 50 miles of border outside Nogales, has a 31-year-old jail designed for 52 inmates but routinely holds 120. On Monday morning, 52 percent of the inmates were Mexican nationals accused of state or local crimes.

Rancher Larry Vance, 49, has lived in Cochise County in southeastern Arizona for more than 31 years. Illegal-immigration arrests peaked along the Southwestern border and in Arizona during 2000, and Vance reported his property was overrun to the point that he slept only two to three hours a night.

Things quieted down recently, Vance said, particularly since March, when the Border Patrol extended its steel fence farther west, past the boundary of his 20-acre property just north of the border.

"She's 10 years too late," Vance said of Napolitano's declaration. "Politicians don't get it. They still don't get it."

Robert Damon, chairman of the Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors, said more is needed to offset the estimated $3 million that illegal immigration costs the county each year, but "any little bit helps."

Kevin Tunell, Yuma County director of public and legislative affairs, estimated illegal immigration costs the county $5 million to $6 million a year, much on jailing undocumented immigrants. "Illegal immigration has had a phenomenal impact on our yearly budget, so any money that comes to us is always welcomed to help plug the hole in the dike," he said

Yuma County Sheriff Ralph Ogden said he hopes to use some of the money to pay for extra police patrols along the Colorado River that borders Mexico, which has become a haven for thieves who prey on undocumented immigrants.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Problemo?

2005-08-15T19:35:00.000-07:00

Arizona May Declare Border 'Disaster Area'

PHOENIX - Gov. Janet Napolitano may declare border counties a disaster area, following the lead of her New Mexico counterpart.

Napolitano press aide Jeanine L'Ecuyer said Monday the governor's staff is exploring whether an emergency could be declared based not on a natural disaster but because of the problems of crime, human smuggling and property destruction caused by people crossing the international border.

L'Ecuyer said the basic question involves reviewing the legal grounds for making such a declaration. State law permits the governor to declare an emergency in various instances, including cases of "invasions, hostile attacks, riots or insurrections.''

On Friday, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson used similar authorization to declare a disaster in four border counties. That move freed up $750,000 from that state's emergency fund to help pay overtime for state police and sheriff's deputies, with Richardson also promising to provide another $1 million in discretionary dollars.

Cam Hunter, spokeswoman for the Arizona Department of Homeland Security, said this state has $4 million in the fund.

L'Ecuyer said there are a variety of differences between Arizona and New Mexico that might make a disaster declaration here inappropriate. She also said part of the question is whether such a declaration by Napolitano would free up any federal funds.

Pahl Shipley, press aide to Richardson, said his boss is hoping for some federal aid. But Tim Manning, that state's Mexico's homeland security chief, said that would require the state to meet some very specific requirements in federal law.

"It essentially comes down to all available resources at the local and state level have been used,'' he said. Manning said there also is a formula to determine the relative burden of an emergency on the state, computed on a per capita basis.

But Shipley said there also is a political component behind the governor's declaration.

"He is frustrating by the inaction on the federal level and felt like he needed to take action to protect New Mexicans and their property,'' Shipley said. He said Richardson wanted to "send a clear message the governor thought it was an urgent situation.''

The move has had at least some impact: U.S. Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., said Richardson's declaration is more evidence that Congress needs to act soon to enact a comprehensive temporary worker program along with increased sanctions against employers who hired undocumented workers.

"As Arizonans well know, the federal government's inability to control the border has been a crisis for some time,'' Flake said in a prepared statement. "We cannot afford to wait any longer.''

Flake is a co-sponsor of legislation being pushed by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., to set up a new temporary worker program for jobs that require few or no skills. It also seeks unspecified increases in funding for border security.

Manning acknowledged there always has been crime along the border, it appears to have become more frequent - and more violent recently. He said some of that may be due to increased Border Patrol activity in Arizona which is moving some of the problem to the east.

"It's about criminal activity and it's about potential terrorism,'' Manning said. "Our concern right now is for the people down there.''

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Diminished Expectations

2005-08-15T09:12:00.000-07:00

US Lowers Sights on What Can Be Achieved in Iraq

The Bush administration is significantly lowering expectations of what can be achieved in Iraq, recognizing that the United States will have to settle for far less progress than originally envisioned during the transition due to end in four months, according to U.S. officials in Washington and Baghdad.

The United States no longer expects to see a model new democracy, a self-supporting oil industry or a society in which the majority of people are free from serious security or economic challenges, U.S. officials say.

"What we expected to achieve was never realistic given the timetable or what unfolded on the ground," said a senior official involved in policy since the 2003 invasion. "We are in a process of absorbing the factors of the situation we're in and shedding the unreality that dominated at the beginning."

Administration officials still emphasize how much they have achieved despite the chaos that followed the invasion and the escalating insurgency. "Iraqis are taking control of their country, building a free nation that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself. And we're helping Iraqis succeed," President Bush said yesterday in his radio address.

Iraqi officials yesterday struggled to agree on a draft constitution by a deadline of tomorrow so the document can be submitted to a vote in October. The political transition would be completed in December by elections for a permanent government.

But the realities of daily life are a constant reminder of how the initial U.S. ambitions have not been fulfilled in ways that Americans and Iraqis once anticipated. Many of Baghdad's 6 million people go without electricity for days in 120-degree heat. Parents fearful of kidnapping are keeping children indoors.

Barbers post signs saying they do not shave men, after months of barbers being killed by religious extremists. Ethnic or religious-based militias police the northern and southern portions of Iraq. Analysts estimate that in the whole of Iraq, unemployment is 50 percent to 65 percent.

U.S. officials say no turning point forced a reassessment. "It happened rather gradually," said the senior official, triggered by everything from the insurgency to shifting budgets to U.S. personnel changes in Baghdad.

The ferocious debate over a new constitution has particularly driven home the gap between the original U.S. goals and the realities after almost 28 months. The U.S. decision to invade Iraq was justified in part by the goal of establishing a secular and modern Iraq that honors human rights and unites disparate ethnic and religious communities.

But whatever the outcome on specific disputes, the document on which Iraq's future is to be built will require laws to be compliant with Islam. Kurds and Shiites are expecting de facto long-term political privileges. And women's rights will not be as firmly entrenched as Washington has tried to insist, U.S. officials and Iraq analysts say.

"We set out to establish a democracy, but we're slowly realizing we will have some form of Islamic republic," said another U.S. official familiar with policymaking from the beginning, who like some others interviewed would speak candidly only on the condition of anonymity. "That process is being repeated all over."

U.S. officials now acknowledge that they misread the strength of the sentiment among Kurds and Shiites to create a special status. The Shiites' request this month for autonomy to be guaranteed in the constitution stunned the Bush administration, even after more than two years of intense intervention in Iraq's political process, they said.

"We didn't calculate the depths of feeling in both the Kurdish and Shiite communities for a winner-take-all attitude," said Judith S. Yaphe, a former CIA Iraq analyst at the National Defense University.

In the race to meet a sequence of fall deadlines, the process of forging national unity behind the constitution is largely being scrapped, current and former officials involved in the transition said.

"We are definitely cutting corners and lowering our ambitions in democracy building," said Larry Diamond, a Stanford University democracy expert who worked with the U.S. occupation government and wrote the book "Squandered Victory: The American Occupation and the Bungled Effort to Bring Democracy to Iraq."

"Under pressure to get a constitution done, they've lowered their own ambitions in terms of getting a document that is going to be very far-reaching and democratic. We also don't have the time to go through the process we envisioned when we wrote the interim constitution -- to build a democratic culture and consensus through debate over a permanent constitution," he said.

The goal now is to ensure a constitution that can be easily amended later so Iraq can grow into a democracy, U.S. officials say.

On security, the administration originally expected the U.S.-led coalition to be welcomed with rice and rosewater, traditional Arab greetings, with only a limited reaction from loyalists of ousted Iraqi president Saddam Hussein. The surprising scope of the insurgency and influx of foreign fighters has forced Washington to repeatedly lower expectations -- about the time-frame for quelling the insurgency and creating an effective and cohesive Iraqi force capable of stepping in, U.S. officials said.

Killings of members of the Iraqi security force have tripled since January. Iraq's ministry of health estimates that bombings and other attacks have killed 4,000 civilians in Baghdad since Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari's interim government took office April 28.

Last week was the fourth-worst week of the whole war for U.S. military deaths in combat, and August already is the worst month for deaths of members of the National Guard and Reserve.

Attacks on U.S. convoys by insurgents using roadside bombs have doubled over the past year, Army Brig. Gen. Yves Fontaine said Friday. Convoys ferrying food, fuel, water, arms and equipment from Kuwait, Jordan and Turkey are attacked about 30 times a week, Fontaine said.

"There has been a realistic reassessment of what it is possible to achieve in the short term and fashion a partial exit strategy," Yaphe said. "This change is dictated not just by events on the ground but by unrealistic expectations at the start."

Washington now does not expect to fully defeat the insurgency before departing, but instead to diminish it, officials and analysts said. There is also growing talk of turning over security responsibilities to the Iraqi forces even if they are not fully up to original U.S. expectations, in part because they have local legitimacy that U.S. troops often do not.

"We've said we won't leave a day before it's necessary. But necessary is the key word -- necessary for them or for us? When we finally depart, it will probably be for us," a U.S. official said.

Pressed by the cost of fighting an escalating insurgency, U.S. expectations for rebuilding Iraq -- and its $20 billion investment -- have fallen the farthest, current and former officials say.

Pentagon officials originally envisioned Iraq's oil revenue paying many post-invasion expenses. But Iraq, ranked among world leaders behind Saudi Arabia in proven oil reserves, is incapable of producing enough refined fuel amid a car-buying boom that has put an estimated 1 million more vehicles on the road after the invasion. Lines for subsidized cheap gas stretch for miles every day in Baghdad.

Oil production is estimated at 2.22 million barrels a day, short of the goal of 2.5 million. Iraq's pre-war high was 2.67 million barrels a day.

The United States had high hopes of quick, big-budget fixes for the electrical power system that would show Iraqis tangible benefits from the ouster of Hussein. But inadequate training for Iraqi staff, regional rivalries restricting the power flow to Baghdad, inadequate fuel for electrical generators and attacks on the infrastructure have contributed to the worst summer of electrical shortages in the capital.

Water is also a "tough, tough" situation in a desert country, said a U.S. official in Baghdad familiar with reconstruction issues. Pumping stations depend on electricity, and engineers now say the system has hundreds of thousands of leaks.

"The most thoroughly dashed expectation was the ability to build a robust self-sustaining economy. We're nowhere near that. State industries, electricity are all below what they were before we got there," said Wayne White, former head of the State Department's Iraq intelligence team who is now at the Middle East Institute. "The administration says Saddam ran down the country. But most damage was from looting [after the invasion], which took down state industries, large private manufacturing, the national electric" system.

Ironically, White said, the initial ambitions may have complicated the U.S. mission: "In order to get out earlier, expectations are going to have to be lower, even much lower. The higher your expectation, the longer you have to stay. Getting out is going to be a more important consideration than the original goals were. They were unrealistic."

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Covering Up the Coverup Coverup

2005-08-13T08:56:00.000-07:00

9/11 Panel Claims Atta Tip Wasn't 'Sufficiently Credible'

The 9/11 commission yesterday defended its decision to ignore a Navy officer's report that military spies targeted lead hijacker Mohamed Atta more than a year before the attacks — and claimed the Navy man wasn't "sufficiently credible."

The statement from commission chiefs Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton came after a flip-flop, in which the panel's staff first denied and then admitted it was told Pentagon spies had linked Atta to an al Qaeda cell in New York in 2000.

That revelation touched off a firestorm because the Navy officer reportedly said military spies in the top-secret Able Danger program were barred from telling the FBI of their finding — a move that might have caught Atta.

"The [Navy officer] had no documentary evidence and said he had only seen the document briefly some years earlier. He could not describe what information had led to this supposed Atta identification," the commission said.

"The commission's staff concluded that the officer's account was not sufficiently reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation."

A skeptical Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) said the statement does nothing to answer why the Able Danger warning wasn't passed on to the FBI.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Carlsbad Immigration Forum

2005-08-12T09:01:00.000-07:00

Police Check Pro-Illegal Protesters at Immigration Forum

CARLSBAD ---- If not for some 300 local police officers and SWAT teams, Thursday night's town-hall meeting on illegal immigration at Carlsbad High School might have turned out differently than it did.

About 700 people showed up for the forum, titled "The Illegal Immigration Crisis." Only 400 or so were able to enter the building, which soon reached capacity, leaving several-hundred anti-illegal immigration protesters and 300 pro-illegal immigration protesters outside, separated by lines of police.

Protesters against the event included the violent group the "Brown Berets," Muslims protesting Congressman Tom Tancredo and even a contingent of anti-war protesters.

The general theme of Thursday night's speakers was that the government and citizens must do something to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the country.

The more strident of the half-dozen or so speakers was author Madeleine Cosman, who listed a litany of problems caused by illegal immigrants, including everything from a spike in the number of sexual predators in California and an increased homicide rate to an increase in the spread of infectious diseases.

The night's featured speaker was U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colorado, who, like Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist, received a standing ovation. Both have garnered nationwide support in their push for immigration reform.

The Minuteman Project fielded several hundred volunteers in April along the U.S.-Mexican border in Arizona to observe illegal immigrants and report them to the U.S. Border Patrol. The operation drew worldwide media attention. They succeeded in reporting 300 illegal immigrants who were then apprehended by Border Patrol agents.

Tancredo has become one of the leading figures in the fight for stronger enforcement of U.S. immigration laws and protecting the nation's borders.

In his speech, Tancredo charmed the like-minded audience with his sense of humor. Talking about a piece of immigration legislation now working its way through Congress, and sponsored by Sens. Ted Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, and John McCain, R-Arizona, Tancredo said: "I call it the McKennedy bill. I don't have to say anything else, but that it is sponsored by Kennedy and McCain."

The event had been banned at one point by Carlsbad, California, Unified School District Superintendent John Roach, who cited "an unreasonable risk of damage to the facility, equipment or furnishings" that "might jeopardize the security, health and well-being of an audience of the community."

However, facing the threat of legal action, Roach decided late Tuesday to allow the forum about illegal immigration to be held at the Carlsbad Cultural Arts Center because, "I believe the first amendment issue regarding free speech outweighs the concerns I had regarding crowd behavior."

Although Roach's attempt to insinuate that the anti-illegal immigration crowd was the one he had been concerned may instigate violence, it was evident to police, observers and the forum crowd that the group of pro-illegal immigration protesters was the one to watch as they hurled insults and threats at those in attendance. The large police presence obviously stopped that group from escalating incidents of violence as they have done on several occassions.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Terror Threat

2005-08-12T08:58:00.000-07:00

FBI: Al Qaeda May Use Trucks to Attack LA, NYC, Chicago

The FBI has warned police that al-Qaida cells might use fuel trucks as weapons to attack Los Angeles, New York and Chicago, but officials stressed Thursday the warning was based on uncorroborated intelligence.

The warning was distributed Tuesday via a computer network by FBI officials in Los Angeles to law enforcement agencies primarily in California, said FBI spokeswoman Laura Eimiller.

Though intelligence bulletins usually describe how reliable the information is, this one carried no such statement.

The bulletin warned police that terrorists could use fuel tankers in assaults on the three cities. The warning has not been substantiated, according to two law enforcement officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

The intelligence originated from FBI headquarters in Washington.

It was not immediately clear why the bulletin was sent without details on its reliability.

Eimiller noted that FBI officials often notify police of possible threats, regardless of how accurate the information might be.

"Information at all levels is shared with law enforcement," she said.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

'Able Danger' Coverup

2005-08-11T14:54:00.000-07:00

'Able Danger' Intel Could Rewrite 9/11 History

WASHINGTON — The federal commission that probed the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks was told twice about "Able Danger," a military intelligence unit that had identified Mohamed Atta and other hijackers a year before the attacks, a congressman close to the investigation said Wednesday.

Rep. Curt Weldon R-Pa., a champion of integrated intelligence-sharing among U.S. agencies, wrote to the former chairman and vice-chairman of the Sept. 11 commission late Wednesday, telling them that their staff had received two briefings on the military intelligence unit — once in October 2003 and again in July 2004.

Weldon said he was upset by suggestions earlier Wednesday by 9/11 panel members that it had been not been given critical information on Able Danger's capabilities and findings.

"The impetus for this letter is my extreme disappointment in the recent, and false, claim of the 9/11 commission staff that the commission was never given access to any information on Able Danger," Weldon wrote to former Chairman Gov. Thomas Kean and Vice-Chairman Rep. Lee Hamilton "The 9/11 commission staff received not one but two briefings on Able Danger from former team members, yet did not pursue the matter.

"The commission's refusal to investigate Able Danger after being notified of its existence, and its recent efforts to feign ignorance of the project while blaming others for supposedly withholding information on it, brings shame on the commissioners, and is evocative of the worst tendencies in the federal government that the commission worked to expose," Weldon added.

On Wednesday, a source familiar with the Sept. 11 commission — formally known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States — told FOX News that aides who still had security clearances had gone back to the National Archives outside Washington, D.C., to review notes on Atta and any information the U.S. government had on him and his terror cell before the Sept. 11 attacks.

The source acknowledged that the aides were looking for a memo about a briefing given to four staff members by defense intelligence officials during an overseas trip to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia in the fall of 2003.

Staffers apparently did not recall being told of the Able Danger information at that meeting and wanted to double-check their records.

Former commission spokesman Al Felzenberg told The New York Times in Thursday editions that Atta was mentioned to panel investigators during at least one meeting with a military officer. That briefing came in July 2004, less than two weeks before the commission's final report was issued to the public.

Felzenberg said the information about Atta was considered suspect because it didn't jibe with many other findings. For example, the intelligence officer said Atta was in the United States in late 1999, but travel records confirmed that he did not enter the country until late 2000.

"He wasn't brushed off," Felzenberg told The Times about the military officer's briefing. "I'm not aware of anybody being brushed off. The information that he provided us did not mesh with other conclusions that we were drawing."

But Weldon said that argument was not good enough.

"The 9/11 commission took a very high-profile role in critiquing intelligence agencies that refused to listen to outside information. The commissioners very publicly expressed their disapproval of agencies and departments that would not entertain ideas that did not originate in-house," Weldon wrote in his letter Wednesday night.

"Therefore it is no small irony," Weldon pointed out, "that the commission would in the end prove to be guilty of the very same offense when information of potentially critical importance was brought to its attention."

On Thursday, Weldon told FOX News that the military official, who was under cover when he was in Afghanistan for the October 2003 briefing, is certain he told the staffers about Atta at that time.

The military intelligence officer who attended that meeting with staffers "kept notes of that meeting and will testify under oath that he not only told" the staffers about Able Danger's mission, but about Atta.

Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana, told FOX News on Wednesday that if Atta's name had been mentioned in the October 2003 briefing, it would have jumped out at staffers.

He said that the commission did not include the claims by Able Danger in the definitive report of the events leading up to Sept. 11 because it had no "information that the United States government had under surveillance or had any knowledge of Mohamed Atta prior to the attacks.

"It could be a very crucial incident in terms of the lead-up to 9/11. It could reveal flaws in the intelligence sharing or the lack of intelligence that we have not yet focused on," Hamilton said of the military's tracking of Atta and its inability to get domestic intelligence agencies to follow up.

Hamilton told FOX News that the commission team would get to the bottom of the confusion over what the United States knew about Atta and whether it played into the commission's investigation.

"I think the 9/11 commission's obligation at this point is to review our records very, very carefully and make very soon — we hope within the next few days — a complete statement about what happened during our investigation," Hamilton said.

Weldon said that he personally knows five members of the commission and is not attacking the integrity of any of them. He said he discussed the matter with two commissioners who told him they were never briefed about Able Danger.

"I have to ask why. I would hope there was not a deliberate attempt by someone on the 9/11 commission staff to keep this information" from the commissioners, Weldon said, adding "I find no fault right now with the commissioners."

A commission spokesman told FOX News that the panel expected to issue a statement before the end of the week.

Among the most critical facts to be determined, if the information about Atta did exist in 2000, would be who then blocked the intelligence from going to the FBI, which could have tracked down the terror cell.

"Team members believed that the Atta cell in Brooklyn should be subject to closer scrutiny, but somewhere along the food chain of administration bureaucrats and lawyers, a decision was made in late 2000 against passing the information to the FBI," Weldon wrote.

"Fear of tarnishing the commission's legacy cannot be allowed to override the truth. The American people are counting on you not to 'go native' by succumbing to the very temptations your commission was assembled to indict," he added.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Ya Think?

2005-08-11T10:15:00.000-07:00

Illegal Alien Border Agent Remanded

A former Border Patrol agent who is accused of being an illegal immigrant and also is accused of helping to smuggle illegal immigrants into the United States from Mexico has been deemed a flight risk and will be held without bail, a federal judge ruled today.

Magistrate Judge Anthony Battaglia ruled that Oscar Antonio Ortiz, 28, is an illegal immigrant himself, and no amount of bail could ensure his return to court, reports The San Diego Union-Tribune.

Battaglia also said, "the temptation for Ortiz to flee to his Native Mexico is strong."

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

'Bonnie and Clyde'

2005-08-10T13:34:00.000-07:00

Tennessee Cops Hunt for Fugitive Couple

KINGSTON, Tenn. — Authorities continued their search Wednesday for a convicted robber George Hyatte (search) and his wife, who officials say shot and killed a corrections officer outside a Tennessee courthouse the day before.

According to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigations, people from 15 states have called to report possible sightings but so far, none of them have led to the elusive pair.

Police believe the suspects are driving a beige or gold 2000 Chevy Venture.

Hyatte, a maximum security prisoner, was headed back to prison from a court appearance Tuesday in handcuffs and shackles when his wife, Jennifer Hyatte drove up and fired at the two corrections officers escorting her husband, Kingston Police Chief Jim Washam told FOX News.

"Mr. Hyatte hollered 'Shoot him!' She opened up fire on the officers, hitting one in the abdomen," Washam said.

One guard, Wayne "Cotton" Morgan, was killed; the other was not identified.

George Hyatte, an eighth grade dropout, has a long criminal career and has escaped from law enforcement at least five times before this incident, FOX News has learned.

"It was just a 'Bonnie and Clyde'-style shootout," Mark Gywn, director of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation said Wednesday on ABC. "These people are very desperate and don't have anything to lose at this point."

The bloody escape set off an extensive search that Gywn said would continue until the couple is captured.

"We will be looking for them, running leads until we find them," he said.

George Hyatte, 34, was at the courthouse to plead guilty in a deal with prosecutors over an armed robbery charge, Washam said.

His wife is a 31-year-old nurse who had been fired from her job at a prison in Tiptonville after it was suspected she was having a relationship with Hyatte, Corrections Department spokeswoman Amanda Sluss said.

Immediately after the shootout, helicopters circled over this eastern Tennessee town and schools — open for student registration — were locked down.

The Ford Explorer driven by Jennifer Hyatte was later found abandoned with blood on the driver's side, and police think she may have been wounded by a shot fired by the other officer during the attack, Washam said. Authorities believe the pair later switched from the SUV to a van.

Gywn said medical facilities in the area had been contacted and told to notify the police if either of the Hyattes came seeking treatment.

Washam said authorities were preparing murder charges against the couple.

"We do have leads coming in on possible whereabouts, possibly some family members that may be hiding them out. We're trying our best to coordinate those," Washam said. "Right now, we can't say if they had any help."

George Hyatte, two years into a 35-year sentence on robbery and assault charges, "is extremely violent, and he has no care or concern on what he does to anyone," said Rhea County Sheriff's spokesman Jeff Knight.

Witness C. G. Gray said he and his wife were about 50 feet from the prisoners when they heard shots. He said Morgan, who was not wearing a protective vest, never got his gun out of his holster.

Morgan, 56, died at the University of Tennessee Medical Center in Knoxville, about 30 miles east, hospital spokeswoman Lisa McNeal said.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Internet Nitwit

2005-08-09T14:19:00.000-07:00

'Satanist' Dances on Reagan's Grave

A self-proclaimed "Satanist" has visited a web site forum and posted photos of himself dancing on Ronald Reagan's grave and also urinating on Richard Nixon's grave marker draped in an American flag.

The poster, who appeared to be in his mid-20s and used the handle "TheFreakKingdom," claimed to be from San Diego. He claims to have hopped over the protective fence at Reagan's grave.

"Judging from my expression and body language, combined with what little I do remember, this appears to be about the time security guards noticed I had jumped the fence and started jigging over Reagan's rotting corpse (the original plan called for the Electric Slide, and then humping the ground, and then whatever else I could get away with, but security was stricter than we had anticipated)."

Continues the post: "We had to tear a-- out of there and lose security in the parking lot, but we appear to have gotten away scot-free."

The post is signed "Monte."

In discussion on the message board some posters applauded "TheFreakKingdom" for his accomplishment. One poster responded, "That is spectacular." Another poster responded with, "you've made San Diego proud."

Supporters of President Reagan, however, are infuriated.

TheFreakKingdom responded to several posters on the message board thread...

"I opened up my Friday by skipping class, and coerced one of my morally challenged friends in to joining me on a road trip (about 3 hours) to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. Behind the library, on a hill overlooking Simi Valley, is the final resting place of Ronald Reagan's corpse. The pictures, apologies if they are huge."

Several people are attempting to learn if "Monte" can be tracked down and prosecuted. One person who has already contacted authorities has also discovered a website where "Monte" has posted more pictures of presidential grave desecration and even has orchestrated a national contest to see how many of these website members can desecrate the most presidential graves around the country.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Historically Significant Planning

2005-08-08T12:36:00.000-07:00

US Military Develops Homeland War Plan

COLORADO SPRINGS -- The U.S. military has devised its first-ever war plans for guarding against and responding to terrorist attacks in the United States, envisioning 15 potential crisis scenarios and anticipating several simultaneous strikes around the country, according to officers who drafted the plans.

The classified plans, developed here at Northern Command headquarters, outline a variety of possible roles for quick-reaction forces estimated at as many as 3,000 ground troops per attack, a number that could easily grow depending on the extent of the damage and the abilities of civilian response teams.

The possible scenarios range from "low end," relatively modest crowd-control missions to "high-end," full-scale disaster management after catastrophic attacks such as the release of a deadly biological agent or the explosion of a radiological device, several officers said.

Some of the worst-case scenarios involve three attacks at the same time, in keeping with a Pentagon directive earlier this year ordering Northcom, as the command is called, to plan for multiple simultaneous attacks.

The war plans represent a historic shift for the Pentagon, which has been reluctant to become involved in domestic operations and is legally constrained from engaging in law enforcement. Indeed, defense officials continue to stress that they intend for the troops to play largely a supporting role in homeland emergencies, bolstering police, firefighters and other civilian response groups.

But the new plans provide for what several senior officers acknowledged is the likelihood that the military will have to take charge in some situations, especially when dealing with mass-casualty attacks that could quickly overwhelm civilian resources.

"In my estimation, [in the event of] a biological, a chemical or nuclear attack in any of the 50 states, the Department of Defense is best positioned -- of the various eight federal agencies that would be involved -- to take the lead," said Adm. Timothy J. Keating, the head of Northcom, which coordinates military involvement in homeland security operations.

The plans present the Pentagon with a clearer idea of the kinds and numbers of troops and the training that may be required to build a more credible homeland defense force. They come at a time when senior Pentagon officials are engaged in an internal, year-long review of force levels and weapons systems, attempting to balance the heightened requirements of homeland defense against the heavy demands of overseas deployments in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Keating expressed confidence that existing military assets are sufficient to meet homeland security needs. Maj. Gen. Richard J. Rowe, Northcom's chief operations officer, agreed, but he added that "stress points" in some military capabilities probably would result if troops were called on to deal with multiple homeland attacks.

Debate and Analysis

Several people on the staff here and at the Pentagon said in interviews that the debate and analysis within the U.S. government regarding the extent of the homeland threat and the resources necessary to guard against it remain far from resolved.

The command's plans consist of two main documents. One, designated CONPLAN 2002 and consisting of more than 1,000 pages, is said to be a sort of umbrella document that draws together previously issued orders for homeland missions and covers air, sea and land operations. It addresses not only post-attack responses but also prevention and deterrence actions aimed at intercepting threats before they reach the United States.

The other, identified as CONPLAN 0500, deals specifically with managing the consequences of attacks represented by the 15 scenarios.

CONPLAN 2002 has passed a review by the Pentagon's Joint Staff and is due to go soon to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and top aides for further study and approval, the officers said. CONPLAN 0500 is still undergoing final drafting here. (CONPLAN stands for "concept plan" and tends to be an abbreviated version of an OPLAN, or "operations plan," which specifies forces and timelines for movement into a combat zone.)

The plans, like much else about Northcom, mark a new venture by a U.S. military establishment still trying to find its comfort level with the idea of a greater homeland defense role after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Military officers and civilian Pentagon policymakers say they recognize, on one hand, that the armed forces have much to offer not only in numbers of troops but also in experience managing crises and responding to emergencies. On the other hand, they worry that too much involvement in homeland missions would diminish the military's ability to deal with threats abroad.

The Pentagon's new homeland defense strategy, issued in June, emphasized in boldface type that "domestic security is primarily a civilian law enforcement function." Still, it noted the possibility that ground troops might be sent into action on U.S. soil to counter security threats and deal with major emergencies.

"For the Pentagon to acknowledge that it would have to respond to catastrophic attack and needs a plan was a big step," said James Carafano, who follows homeland security issues for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank.

William M. Arkin, a defense specialist who has reported on Northcom's war planning, said the evolution of the Pentagon's thinking reflects the recognition of an obvious gap in civilian resources.

Since Northcom's inception in October 2002, its headquarters staff has grown to about 640 members, making it larger than the Southern Command, which oversees operations in Latin America, but smaller than the regional commands for Europe, the Middle East and the Pacific. A brief tour late last month of Northcom's operations center at Peterson Air Force Base found officers monitoring not only aircraft and ship traffic around the United States but also the Discovery space shuttle mission, the National Scout Jamboree in Virginia, several border surveillance operations and a few forest firefighting efforts.

'Dual-Use' Approach

Pentagon authorities have rejected the idea of creating large standing units dedicated to homeland missions. Instead, they favor a "dual-use" approach, drawing on a common pool of troops trained both for homeland and overseas assignments.

Particular reliance is being placed on the National Guard, which is expanding a network of 22-member civil support teams to all states and forming about a dozen 120-member regional response units. Congress last year also gave the Guard expanded authority under Title 32 of the U.S. Code to perform such homeland missions as securing power plants and other critical facilities.

But the Northcom commander can quickly call on active-duty forces as well. On top of previous powers to send fighter jets into the air, Keating earlier this year gained the authority to dispatch Navy and Coast Guard ships to deal with suspected threats off U.S. coasts. He also has immediate access to four active-duty Army battalions based around the country, officers here said.

Nonetheless, when it comes to ground forces possibly taking a lead role in homeland operations, senior Northcom officers remain reluctant to discuss specifics. Keating said such situations, if they arise, probably would be temporary, with lead responsibility passing back to civilian authorities.

Military exercises code-named Vital Archer, which involve troops in lead roles, are shrouded in secrecy. By contrast, other homeland exercises featuring troops in supporting roles are widely publicized.

Legal Questions

Civil liberties groups have warned that the military's expanded involvement in homeland defense could bump up against the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which restricts the use of troops in domestic law enforcement. But Pentagon authorities have told Congress they see no need to change the law.

According to military lawyers here, the dispatch of ground troops would most likely be justified on the basis of the president's authority under Article 2 of the

"That would be the place we would start from" in making the legal case, said Col. John Gereski, a senior Northcom lawyer.

But Gereski also said he knew of no court test of this legal argument, and Keating left the door open to seeking an amendment of the Posse Comitatus Act.

One potentially tricky area, the admiral said, involves National Guard officers who are put in command of task forces that include active-duty as well as Guard units -- an approach first used last year at the Group of Eight summit in Georgia. Guard troops, acting under state control, are exempt from Posse Comitatus prohibitions.

"It could be a challenge for the commander who's a Guardsman, if we end up in a fairly complex, dynamic scenario," Keating said. He cited a potential situation in which Guard units might begin rounding up people while regular forces could not.

The command's sensitivity to legal issues, Gereski said, is reflected in the unusually large number of lawyers on staff here -- 14 compared with 10 or fewer at other commands. One lawyer serves full time at the command's Combined Intelligence and Fusion Center, which joins military analysts with law enforcement and counterintelligence specialists from such civilian agencies as the FBI, the CIA and the Secret Service.

A senior supervisor at the facility said the staff there does no intelligence collection, only analysis.

He also said the military operates under long-standing rules intended to protect civilian liberties. The rules, for instance, block military access to intelligence information on political dissent or purely criminal activity.

Even so, the center's lawyer is called on periodically to rule on the appropriateness of some kinds of information-sharing. Asked how frequently such cases arise, the supervisor recalled two in the previous 10 days, but he declined to provide specifics.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

ABC Anchor Jennings Dies

2005-08-07T23:33:00.000-07:00

News Anchor Peter Jennings loses battle with Lung Cancer

Aug. 8 — ABC News Anchor Peter Jennings died today at his home in New York City. He was 67. On April 5, Jennings announced he had been diagnosed with lung cancer.

He is survived by his wife, Kayce Freed, his two children, Elizabeth, 25, and Christopher, 23, and his sister, Sarah Jennings.

In announcing Jennings' death to his ABC colleagues, News President David Westin wrote:

"For four decades, Peter has been our colleague, our friend, and our leader in so many ways. None of us will be the same without him.

"As you all know, Peter learned only this spring that the health problem he'd been struggling with was lung cancer. With Kayce, he moved straight into an aggressive chemotherapy treatment. He knew that it was an uphill struggle. But he faced it with realism, courage, and a firm hope that he would be one of the fortunate ones. In the end, he was not.

"We will have many opportunities in the coming hours and days to remember Peter for all that he meant to us all. It cannot be overstated or captured in words alone. But for the moment, the finest tribute we can give is to continue to do the work he loved so much and inspired us to do."

Reported World-Shaping Events

As one of America's most distinguished journalists, Jennings reported many of the pivotal events that have shaped our world. He was in Berlin in the 1960s when the Berlin Wall was going up, and there in the '90s when it came down. He covered the civil rights movement in the southern United States during the 1960s, and the struggle for equality in South Africa during the 1970s and '80s. He was there when the Voting Rights Act was signed in 1965, and on the other side of the world when South Africans voted for the first time. He has worked in every European nation that once was behind the Iron Curtain. He was there when the independent political movement Solidarity was born in a Polish shipyard, and again when Poland's communist leaders were forced from power. And he was in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Romania and throughout the Soviet Union to record first the repression of communism and then its demise. He was one of the first reporters to go to Vietnam in the 1960s, and went back to the killing fields of Cambodia in the 1980s to remind Americans that, unless they did something, the terror would return.

On Dec. 31, 1999, Jennings anchored ABC's Peabody-award winning coverage of Millennium Eve, "ABC 2000." Some 175 million Americans watched the telecast, making it the biggest live global television event ever. "The day belonged to ABC News," wrote The Washington Post, "&with Peter Jennings doing a nearly superhuman job of anchoring." Jennings was the only anchor to appear live for 25 consecutive hours.

Jennings also led ABC's coverage of the Sept. 11 attacks and America's subsequent war on terrorism. He anchored more than 60 hours that week during the network's longest continuous period of news coverage, and was widely praised for providing a reassuring voice during the time of crisis. TV Guide called him "the center of gravity," while the Washington Post wrote, "Jennings, in his shirt sleeves, did a Herculean job of coverage." The coverage earned ABC News Peabody and duPont awards.

Overseas, and at Home

Jennings joined ABC News on Aug. 3, 1964. He served as the anchor of "Peter Jennings with the News" from 1965 to 1967.

He established the first American television news bureau in the Arab world in 1968 when he served as ABC News' bureau chief for Beirut, Lebanon, a position he held for seven years. He helped put ABC News on the map in 1972 with his coverage of the Summer Olympics in Munich, when Arab terrorists took Israeli athletes hostage.

In 1975, Jennings moved to Washington to become the news anchor of ABC's morning program "A.M. America". After a short stint in the mornings, Jennings returned overseas to Rome where he stayed before moving to London to become ABC's Chief Foreign Correspondent. In 1978 he was named the foreign desk anchor for "World News Tonight." He co-anchored the program with Frank Reynolds in Washington, D.C., and Max Robinson in Chicago until 1983.

Jennings was named anchor and senior editor of "World News Tonight" in 1983. In his more than 20 years in the position he was honored with almost every major award given to television journalists.

His extensive domestic and overseas reporting experience was evident in "World News Tonight's" coverage of major crises. He reported from all 50 states and locations around the globe. During the 1991 Gulf War and the 2003 War in Iraq, his knowledge of Middle Eastern affairs brought invaluable perspective to ABC News war in Iraq and the drug trade in Central and South America. The series also tackled important domestic issues such as gun control policy, the politics of abortion, the crisis in funding for the arts and a highly praised chronicle of the accused bombers of Oklahoma City. "Peter Jennings Reporting" earned numerous awards, including the 2004 Edward R. Morrow award for best documentary for "The Kennedy Assassination — Beyond Conspiracy."

Jennings also had a particular interest in broadcasting for the next generation. He did numerous live news specials for children on subjects ranging from growing up in the age of AIDS, to prejudice and its effects on our society. After the events of September 11, and again on the anniversary, he anchored a town hall meeting for children and parents entitled, "Answering Children's Questions."

Jennings was honored with many awards for news reporting, including 16 Emmys, two George Foster Peabody Awards, several Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University Awards and several Overseas Press Club Awards. Most recently, "World News Tonight" was recognized with two consecutive Edward R. Murrow awards for best newscast, based on field reporting done by Jennings on the California wildfires and the transfer of power in Iraq.

Jennings was the author, with Todd Brewster, of the acclaimed New York Times bestseller, "The Century." It featured first-person accounts of the great events of the century. In 1999, he anchored the 12-hour ABC series, "The Century," and ABC's series for The History Channel, "America's Time." He and Brewster also published "In Search of America," a companion book for the 6-part ABC News series.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Report: Former ABC News Anchor Peter Jennings Near Death

2005-08-06T23:38:00.000-07:00

Reliable sources at ABC are reporting Peter Jennings is close to losing his battle against Lung Cancer.

"Yes, I was a smoker until about 20 years ago, and I was weak and I smoked over 9/11" the 66-year-old anchor said on "World News Tonight" when he announced his affliction, his usually mellifluous voice hoarse.

The ABC anchor, who was born in Canada but became a US citizen, said he was suffering from lung cancer in April. He has not made a televised appearance since.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

US Border Agent Is Illegal Alien Smuggler

2005-08-06T07:47:00.000-07:00

At least one border agent hasn't quite fulfilled his job description.

An illegal alien who was a US border agent is charged with smuggling illegal aliens across the US border, reports KFI News in Los Angeles.

28-year-old Oscar Antonio Ortiz submitted a false birth certificate when he applied to become a border agent. The certificate said he was born in Chicago. Ortiz was hired in 2001.

Now the federal government says Ortiz was born in Tijuana and that he smuggled illegal aliens across the border while on duty as a US border agent.

Ortiz was arrested in California on Thursday and is charged with conspiracy to smuggle illegal aliens and with falsly claiming US citizenship.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Bush: 'Guest-Worker' Program Will Benefit Employers

2005-08-05T13:40:00.000-07:00

GRAPEVINE - President Bush told a crowd of state legislators Wednesday that he will push immigration reform as beneficial for U.S. employers as well as foreigners looking for work.

"Immigration reform is going to be an interesting subject when we get back to Washington" in September, said Bush, who plans to spend this month at his Crawford ranch.

He argued that his proposal for a "guest worker" program is good for employers and illegal immigrants who want a mutually beneficial relationship.

"If you are a willing employer (and) you have somebody looking for work and you can't find an American, there ought to be a legal way for you to employ that person," he said. "We'd rather have people coming in with a card that said, 'I'm a legal worker,' than trying to sneak across the border."

The president has proposed a system under which immigrants would be granted worker temporary worker status, after which they would have to leave the United States. Critics have called it a thinly veiled amnesty program. Immigration reform plans have stalled in Congress so far this year, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist recently suggested a GOP push on the issue was more likely to happen next year.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Novak Storms Off CNN Set Over 'Bull****'

2005-08-04T16:20:00.000-07:00

VIDEO

Columnist Robert Novak and Political operative James Carville got into a heated exchange on the CNN show 'Inside Politics' and in front of host Ed Henry Thursday afternoon, culminating with Novak tearing off his studio microphone and storming off the set.

The two were discussing a news story about Katherine Harris, released today, in which Harris accused newspapers of "doctoring photos" of her and adding extra makeup.

In subsequent discussion about Harris' prospects in an upcoming senate election, Novak expressed that anti-establishment candidates tend to sometimes do better than expected. Novak attempted to emphasize that point while being interupted by Carville.

Novak: Just let me finish what I’m going to say James, please I know you hate to hear me —

Carville: He’s got to show these right-wingers that he’s got a back bone, ya know? Wall Street Journal editorial page is watching. You show ‘em you’re tough.

Novak: You know I think that’s bullshit. And I hate that. Just let it go.

The exchange seemed to end at that point but after a moment Novak stood up, removed his microphone and stormed out, leaving Carville alone with Henry.

Henry attempted to act as if nothing had occurred but Carville was visibly angry.

Henry ended the segment by telling viewers he had told Novak in advance he would ask him about the CIA leak case. Henry said CNN hoped to get Novak to answer such questions in future.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Ohio Takes a Hit

2005-08-04T10:32:00.000-07:00

Dead Marines from Columbus-Based Lima Company

BROOK PARK, Ohio -- The U.S. Military has confirmed that nine of 14 Marines killed Wednesday in Iraq were from Lima Company in Columbus.

Fourteen Marines were killed in Iraq by a roadside bomb involving members of the same Ohio-based battalion that lost six Marines two days earlier, a Marine Corps spokesman said. It was the single deadliest roadside bombing of U.S. troops in Iraq.

The Marines were members of the 3rd Battalion, 25th Marines based out of Brook Park, Ohio, outside Cleveland, according to Gunnery Sgt. Brad R. Lauer, public affairs chief with the unit.

The battalion has units in Brook Park, which lost six Marines on Monday, and in Columbus and Akron in Ohio, Moundsville, W.Va., and Buffalo, N.Y.

A makeshift memorial has blossomed outside the Marine Reserve Center in Brook Park.

"Men are dying. They are dying. I just love them all. My heart goes out to their families," said mourner Pat Maffo.

"We're all Marines here, and it takes a special toll on us, because we're such a tight knit community," said USMC Staff Sgt. Paul Clements.

The Marines, assigned to Regimental Combat Team 2, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force (Forward), were killed early Wednesday when their vehicle was hit by an improvised explosive device, the military said. Another Marine was wounded in the attack, which happened outside Haditha, about 140 miles northwest of Baghdad.

The six Marines killed Monday, members of the battalion's Headquarters and Service Company, died northwest of Baghdad while on sniper duty on Monday.

The battalion was activated in January and went to Iraq in March. Before this week's deaths, the unit's Web site listed 25 of its Marines who have been killed this year.

Wednesday's casualties did not include any Marines from the West Virginia company, said Capt. Jeremy Dempsey, an instructor with the company.

Delivery and maintenance trucks on Wednesday morning shuttled in and out of the gates to the Navy and Marine Corps Reserve Center, the headquarters of the battalion's Lima Company in Columbus. Uniformed personnel moved about the facility.

Rep. Deborah Pryce, whose district includes part of Columbus, was notified of the attack, spokesman Rob Nichols said. Such notification is usually an indication that there are casualties from the area.

Unit members in Iraq were under a military-imposed communications blackout to make sure none of the names were disclosed until victims' families were notified. The Marine Corps identified Monday's dead as Sgts. Nathaniel S. Rock of Toronto near Steubenville and David J. Coullard, whose hometown wasn't released; Cpl. Jeffrey A. Boskovitch of North Royalton; and Lance Cpls. Brian P. Montgomery, whose wife lives in Mentor, Daniel N. Deyarmin of Tallmadge and Roger D. Castleberry Jr., whose wife lives in Cedar Park, Texas.

VFW 2505 Commander Jeff Mers said they've adopted Lima Company as one of their own.

"I've been to a number of the funerals," said "It's hard when we're back here enjoying living day-to-day life knowing that they're over there going through what they're going through. It's really hard to put into words, what the families have to go through. We're very fortunate that we have a great support group back here at home. But you just never feel like you can do enough or feel enough for the men overseas."

Boskovitch, 25, was an aspiring police officer who planned to set a wedding date with his girlfriend when he returned home from Iraq this fall.

"We got a lot of e-mail from him," said Paul Boskovitch, who said his nephew joined the Marine Corps in 2000. "He felt he was making a difference there and that the Iraqi people were appreciative of what they were doing. He loved the Marines and he loved his unit."

Rock, 26, spent six years in the Marine Corps after graduating from high school in 1997 and then joined the reserves, said his mother, Adriana Rock. He worked part time as a police officer in Martins Ferry.

Montgomery, 26, joined the Marine Corps in June 2002, and served with his 21-year-old brother, Eric, who will come home for the funeral, said their father, Paul Montgomery.

"The only thing that I keep thinking about was when they deployed in January, (Brian) gave me a big hug and a great big smile and said 'Don't worry Dad, I'll be coming back home."'

Dayarmin and four fellow Marines from the Akron area spoke to Tallmadge middle school students before heading to Iraq, according to Tallmadge Superintendent Vince Frammartino.

Deyarmin, turned 22 years old two days before he was killed, graduated in 2002 from Tallmadge High School, where he played football, his sister Erica, 23, said. He hoped to open a rental property business when he returned from Iraq.

"He believed in his country," Erica Deyarmin said. "He loved being a Marine."

Brook Park Mayor Mark Elliott said the community, home to a Ford Motor Co. plant and crisscrossing highways, has close relationships with the Marines Corps' reserve center and a National Guard armory that also has sent soldiers to Iraq and suffered casualties.

"It's difficult and our thoughts and prayers go out to their families," said Elliott, who displayed in his office a photograph of the city flag flown over the Iraq headquarters of the Brook Park battalion.

According to a Marine Corps spokesman, most of the nine Lima Company members killed today were from outside Franklin County.

"The guys Nate was with were members of his team. He spoke highly of them. They were all from the Cleveland area. I feel just as bad for their families," said Tim Rock, father of clain Sgts. Nathaniel S. Rock.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Bush: This Should Not Be Amnesty

2005-08-03T11:26:00.000-07:00

Bush begins "guest-worker" push at odds with his own rhetoric

In an interview with the Houston Chronicle, President Bush is quoted as saying he is opposed to an amnesty plan for illegal aliens but, at the same time, continued to push his "guest-worker" program... which open-border opponents have called "amnesty in disquise."

At odds with many in his own party, who believe that the president's guest-worker initiative and his administration's policies are those pushing for the most lenient solution and apparently hoping to align a new majority to support his initiative, the president attempted to posture his policy in such a way as to make it appear to be the conservative viewpoint. Although the president's plan has not changed since he first proposed it, and the program he describes is the same one he proposed shortly after his reelection.

The president said he hopes to resolve differences "with members of the Senate who are pushing for a more lenient law for illegal immigrants seeking work in the United States."

"This should not be an amnesty program," the president said in the interview.

Bush's plan would provide temporary visas to guest workers. They would be asked to leave after they apply, and program participants would get no special consideration when they apply for legal residence. The president made no mention of coupling the program with fines or penalties to employers who might continue to hire illegal aliens.

"It's very important for the American people to know immigration reform will be done with a border security initiative that makes it clear to the people that we will do everything we can to stop illegal people from coming into our country," Bush said. Opponents point out that, during the Reagan Administration -- and his amnesty for illegals -- there was also the promise of "border security" that never materialized.

Bush said a well-run guest worker program would help border security by taking pressure off the Border Patrol. If those who wish to enter the country to work can do so legally, he reasoned, fewer will try to infiltrate the border secretly.

Flush from the series of legislative successes last week, the president expressed confidence that he can cut through strong, opposing political feelings on immigration and come out with a bill.

"I think there is broad agreement that the system is not working," Bush said. "It's a very important issue and it's an issue that we've got to get right."

In fact, the president does plan an intense and continual immigration PR campaign to force passage of his guest-worker program and "marginalize" opponents such as the Minutemen.

The campaign is to be called, "Americans for Border and Economic Security" and will be led by former US Reps. Cal Dooley (D-Hanford) and Dick Armey (R-Texas). The chief organizer is one of the capital's most important White House allies: former Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie, who has hosted preliminary meetings at his Washington lobbying firm just blocks from the White House and has been advising the RNC on minority outreach.

The campaign will feature patriotic themes, screenshots of the Statue of Liberty, as well as company spokesmen and immigrants. Corporations and immigration groups are being recruited to finance and participate in the campaign.

In advance of the upcoming push for his guest-worker proposal, Bush has revealed no plan to "secure the border" after his program has begun.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Mexico's Numero Uno!

2005-08-02T11:51:00.000-07:00

Mexico Now Top Supplier of Illegal US Drugs

Mexican drug traffickers have pushed aside their Colombian counterparts and now dominate the U.S. market in the biggest reorganization of the trade since the rise of the Colombian cartels in the 1980s, U.S. officials say.

Mexican groups now are behind much of the cocaine, heroin, marijuana and methamphetamine on U.S. streets, the officials say, with Mexican law enforcement agencies viewed as either too weak or too corrupt to stop them.

Mexico's role as a drug-trafficking hub has been growing for some time, but its grip on the $400-billion-a-year trade has strengthened in recent years. According to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration last month, 92 percent of the cocaine sold in the United States in 2004 came through the U.S.-Mexico border, compared with 77 percent in 2003.

And the Key West-based Joint Interagency Task Force South, which coordinates federal drug interdiction efforts and intelligence, has reported almost 90 percent of the cocaine heading to the U.S. market goes by boat to Mexico or other countries in Central America, and then by land to the U.S. border.

Terror link

The increase has sparked several recent reports by DEA and other U.S. agencies, as well as hearings in both the House and Senate. Congress members, worried that the smuggling networks could be used to sneak in terrorists, are pressing the Bush administration to spend more money on programs to intercept drug shipments before they reach the border.

Officials describe the Mexican cartels as business-savvy, tight-knit family affairs that operate weblike networks of international partnerships. The Colombians cartels controlled the drug trade from its production to its wholesale distribution. The Mexicans tend to focus more on distribution, the business' most lucrative leg.

Anthony Placido, the DEA's top intelligence official told a congressional panel in June that the Mexican gangs have links to groups from Colombia, the Dominican Republic and Jamaica, and ``street gangs, prison gangs, and outlaw motorcycle gangs, who conduct most of the retail and street-level distribution throughout the country.''

The Mexicans don't control the coca or opium poppy crops in South America but are ''taking ownership of [drugs] and beginning to deliver the drug themselves to Mexican distributors in the United States,'' said David Murray, a senior advisor with the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy.

14 'staging areas'

The DEA noted 14 cities as ''staging areas:'' Albuquerque, Brownsville, Dallas, El Paso, Houston, Laredo, Los Angeles, McAllen, Oklahoma City, Phoenix, Tulsa, San Antonio, San Diego and Tucson.

U.S. law enforcement agencies have uncovered over 30 tunnels below the border built by drug traffickers. One congressional aide described them as ``industry-standard tunnels that you would find in a mining operation.''

The Mexicans also offer a more varied menu of drugs than their Colombian counterparts, who traditionally dealt in cocaine and heroin. According to the DEA, Mexico is the second-largest supplier of heroin in the United States after Colombia, and the largest foreign supplier of marijuana.

Mexican gangs also are becoming a major force in the burgeoning methamphetamine trade by setting up production laboratories on both sides of the U.S.-Mexican border. In 2004, a record 3,600 pounds of methamphetamine was seized along the south-west border, a 74 percent rise since 2001, according to DEA figures.

Placido said the administration of President Vicente Fox has had some success in undermining Mexico's traditional drug smuggling cartels and upped its cooperation with its U.S. counterparts. But new traffickers and syndicates have risen in their place.

Officials blame a turf war among Mexican drug cartels for a wave of killings and kidnappings along the Mexican side of the border that prompted the U.S. State Department to issue three travel advisories warning U.S. citizens to stay away, including one on July 26.

Clamping down on the Mexico-U.S. drug traffic is a daunting task because the border is one of the busiest in the world.

U.S. government statistics show that last year 48 million pedestrians, 90 million private vehicles and 4.4 million trucks crossed from Mexico into the United States. Another 1.1 million people were caught trying to cross.

Police corruption

Then there's Mexico's police corruption, which Placido called the ``single largest impediment to seriously impacting the drug trafficking problem in Mexico.''

Congress is taking note of the problem.

Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., who oversees drug issues in the Committee on Government Reform, has warned that the lack of effective border controls could affect ``the smuggling of people, terrorists and weapons.''

Indiana Republican Sen. Richard Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has introduced legislation to improve security cooperation between Mexico the United States and Canada.

At a recent hearing he pointed out that 3,000 illegal migrants caught trying to cross the border last year came from ''nations that have produced or have been associated with terrorist cells'' such as Somalia, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Zetas for You

2005-08-01T16:54:00.000-07:00

Violent Mexican Mercenaries Infiltrate US

As the problem of illegal immigration continues unabated, amid contentious debate from those against allowing the invasion to continue and pro-illegal immigration groups operating with the tacit approval of many in government, the problem has taken a turn for the worse.

Now a renegade band of Mexican military deserters, offering $50,000 bounties for the assassination of US law-enforcement officers, has expanded its base of operations into the United States to protect loads of cocaine and marijuana being brought into America by Mexican smugglers, according to authorities.

The vicious group of deserters, known as the "Zetas," were trained in the United States with US tax dollars as an elite force of anti-drug commandos, but have since signed on as mercenaries for Mexican narcotics traffickers and have recruited an army of followers, many of whom are believed to be operating in Texas, Arizona, California and Florida.

Working mainly for the Gulf Cartel, one of Mexico's most dangerous drug-trafficking organizations, as many as 200 Zeta members are thought to be involved, including former Mexican federal, state and local police. They are suspected in more than 90 deaths of rival gang members and others, including police officers, in the past two years in a violent drug war to control US smuggling routes, which has since spilled over across the border.

The organization's hub, law-enforcement authorities said, is Nuevo Laredo, a border city of 300,000 across from Laredo, Texas. It is the most active port-of-entry along the US-Mexico border, with more than 6,000 trucks crossing daily into Texas, carrying about 40 percent of Mexico's total exports, including, unfortunately, illegal drugs.

Authorities said the Zetas operate over a wide area of the US-Mexico border and are suspected in at least three drug-related slayings in the Dallas area. They said as many as 10 Zeta members are operating inside Texas as Gulf Cartel assassins, seeking to protect nearly $10 million in daily drug transactions.

In March, the Justice Department said the Zetas were involved "in multiple assaults and are believed to have hired criminal gangs" in the Dallas area for contract killings. The department said the organization was spreading from Texas to California and Florida and was establishing drug-trafficking routes it was willing to protect "at any cost."

Just last month, the department issued a new warning to law-enforcement authorities in Arizona and California, urging them to be on the lookout for Zeta members. An intelligence bulletin said a search for new drug-smuggling routes in the two states by the organization could bring new violence to the areas.

The number of assaults on U.S. Border Patrol agents along the 260 miles of US-Mexico border in Arizona known as the Tucson sector has increased dramatically this year, including a May 30 shooting near Nogales, Ariz., in which two agents were seriously wounded during an ambush a mile north of the border.

Their assailants were dressed in black commando-type clothing, used high-powered weapons and hand-held radios to point out the agents' location, and withdrew from the area using military-style cover and concealment tactics to escape back into Mexico.

Santa Cruz County Sheriff Tony Estrada in Nogales said his investigators found commando clothing, food, water and other "sophisticated equipment" at the ambush site.

Since October 1st, the start of the fiscal year, there have been 196 assaults on Border Patrol agents in the Tucson sector, including 24 shootings. During the same period last year, 92 assaults were reported, with five shootings. The sector is the busiest alien- and drug-trafficking corridor in the country.

US intelligence officials have described the Zetas as an expanding gang of mercenaries with intimate knowledge of Mexican drug-trafficking methods and routes. Strategic Forecasting Inc., a security consulting firm that often works with the State and Defense departments, said in a recent report the Zetas had maintained "connections to the Mexican law-enforcement establishment" to gain unfettered access throughout the southern border.

Many of the Zeta leaders belonged to an elite anti-drug paratroop and intelligence battalion known as the Special Air Mobile Force Group, who deserted in 1991 and aligned themselves with drug traffickers.

The on-going situation, regards the Zetas and illegal immigration in general continues to go unaddressed by the administration and by most representatives in government who, in fact, continue to tout "the benefits" of the open-border policies currently being practiced by the federal government.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Intimidation Tactics Aimed at California Minutemen

2005-07-31T23:32:00.000-07:00

KFI radio in Los Angeles reports that the California Minutemen have had a busy week -- the most violent week to date, with threats of more violence to come.

The danger appears to be escalating to include not only drug runners who want the area the Minutemen are guarding cleared for trafficking but also illegal aliens waiting to enter the United States as well as intimidation tactics and death threats from pro-illegal immigration groups.

This week, according to Minutemen, a border patrol agent was severely cut by a sharp rock thrown from the Mexico side of the border.

There have also been numerous death threats. "I'm going kill all of you. The VFW is going to be blown up within a week," one caller claimed in one such threat.

Shots were fired from across the border again on Saturday night but no injuries were reported.

Last weekend, a group of Minutemen reported that two Mexican men near the border, carrying AK-47s, fired several rounds in their direction, as they were guarding the border.

Threats against the Minutemen and promises of continued confrontation have been reported over the past week from several pro-illegal immigration advocacy groups in all states bordering Mexico, where members of the Minuteman Project plan watches.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

The Definition of Treason

2005-07-29T17:58:00.000-07:00

Why the US Government doesn't stop the illegal alien invasion.

Pronunciation: 'trE-z&n

Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English tresoun, from Old French traison, from Latin tradition-, traditio act of handing over, from tradere to hand over, betray -- more at TRAITOR

1 : the betrayal of a trust : TREACHERY

2 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

---

It's an especially sickening and orchestrated plan that is selling out our nation's sovereignty, perpetrated by a cabal of globalists and the big business money men who own our elected officials and, by default, our non-elected officials.

There are several points to the overall plan that would combine the nations of Mexico, the United States and Canada, eliminating the middle class in the US and placing most citizens of all three nations at the same lower living standard while those who own most everything take even more.

Elements of the plan can be seen working separately toward the same goal:

... Allow the flow of illegals to continue unabated.

... Step up the rhetoric about "immigration reform" while stalling its implementation.

... Portray elements and groups in America against illegal immigration as "extreme," "unpatriotic" and "racist."

... Stall enforcement of laws regarding illegal immigration.

... Apply stricter enforcement against legal immigration regards the new "undesirables" in Africa, Asia and Europe.

... Use language concerning "immigration reform" to mask the goal of an outright amnesty for those from south of our border.

... Portray any possible attempt to secure the US border with Mexico as "futile."

... Pass legislation for "free trade" that allows even more illegal immigration and that destroys domestic business and erodes middle class influence.

In fact, it's even broader and worse than the above examples. The president and other elected officials have attempted to paint those trying to stop illegal immigration as "vigilantes" and criminals. Every arm of government, federal, state and even local, has attempted to strong-arm patriots in favor of "oppressed immigrants."

But why? Why would our elected representatives do this in the face of obvious threats to our national security and our economy – especially in the wake of the 911 attacks?

That's easy... the elected representatives do not represent American citizens. They represent the entities that own them in the corporations and, in some cases, higher up, the groups that actually run our country.

This is why the effort to secure our border appears to be "futile" and the government seems "unable" to stop it.

It's all being done by design...

For cheap labor for corporate donors: Big business has enjoyed several years of unabated watering-down of wages and benefits due, mostly, to illegals coming into the United States to "pick fruit." The illegals are also "doing the jobs Americans won't do." These are the jobs that Americans can't do because corporations enjoy hiring the illegal aliens illegally over American citizens in order to pay less wages and benefits.

For additional votes: Obviously illegals, once registered to vote, can vote for the party that helps get more illegals into the United States (both parties in this case), so that they can go to work for the corporations for less wages and benefits.

In order to meld the nations of America, Mexico and Canada into one big country: So that all workers inside the three nations can work for the corporations for less wages and benefits.

This is really the bottom line of the whole enterprise: Money. The individuals selling-out our nation's sovereignty — both elected and influential — are only concerned about this one item. And they aren't keen on the idea of letting something like our country's Constitution get in the way of their profits.

If there is another terror attack, so much the better for those implementing this enterprise. Nothing goes together with creating a two-class, welfare-warfare socialist police state better than the further elimination of individual rights.

The icing on the cake for the globalists inside, behind and in control of the Bush Administration and our other elected officials, is the fact that, regards terrorism, the American people are even asking for further state controls.

The CAFTA agreement, narrowly passed last week, is one aspect of the overall plan to begin eliminating our borders, while watering-down the standard of living for the disappearing middle class. Another aspect is the agreement already reached without public exposure, debate or consideration for the US Constitution.

I refer, of course, to The Council on Foreign Relations plan called, "Building a North American Community."

That's the agreement President George W. Bush was signing on to when he was at his ranch in Crawford Texas with Mexico's El Presidente Vincente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin back in March — the same meeting Bush was at when he referred to the Minuteman patriots as "vigilantes." And... it's the plan behind the other actions, inactions, potential bills and agreements the Bush Administration is involved in regarding illegal immigration.

A thorough reading of this plan — already being implemented without the knowledge (for the most part) or consent of the American people, but also WITH the tacit approval of their elected representatives — spells out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."

"Community" means integrating the United States with the corruption, socialism, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open US borders between the US, Mexico and Canada.

Here are just a few of the jewels in the document:

... Employers can recruit low-paid workers from anywhere in North America. No more "illegal aliens" at all; employers can openly recruit foreigners willing to work for a fraction of US wages.

... Mexican trucks are allowed "unlimited access" to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between US cities.

... A "tested once" principle for pharmaceuticals, by which a product tested in Mexico will automatically be considered to have met US standards.

... The implementation of "the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico." This will put illegal aliens into the US Social Security system.

... US taxpayers are required to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in US colleges.

There is much more to the document. But with this agreement, CAFTA and the attitude regarding illegal aliens and border security by the Bush Administration and our elected representatives, it's easy to see that the elements are all in place for implementation.

Except for one more small detail...

The selling of our national sovereignty and the implementation of a two-class, welfare-warfare socialist police state also needs... an effective PR campaign.

Not to worry... that's being taken care of as well.

Already we are, once again, hearing that Bush "wants an immigration reform package" by the fall. The package he wants is the same one he's been pushing for several years and, especially, since his reelection: An amnesty bill disguised as a "guest-worker" program.

Only this time Bush plans an all-out pro-illegal immigration propaganda campaign to accompany the bill. In this campaign illegal aliens will be portrayed as "victims" of American "racists." The Statue of Liberty and patriotic music will permeate the commercials.

Bush and other conspirators in our government hope this campaign will lead to passage of the amnesty bill. Another sell-out of our national sovereignty, aimed at creating a "border-less North America" by 2010.

It's never really made sense, has it? The fact that we can pave and maintain thousands of miles of Interstate highway but... we "cannot secure our southern border." The fact that we can invade, occupy and "rebuild" a foreign nation but... we are "helpless to stop the invasion of millions of illegal aliens" into our own country. The fact that we can document and tax 300 million American citizens but... we "cannot locate or expel illegal aliens" from our country.

It doesn't make sense.

But President Bush, The Council on Foreign Relations and our other bribe-taking elected officials want you to believe their nonsense anyway.

For that matter... one has to wonder if our best and brightest and most able aren't in Iraq to keep them busy while this treasonous plan is implemented.

Nobody wants to believe that their president, senators and other elected officials might be traitors to The United States of America and its Constitution. But, by definition...

That's exactly what they are.

Bush Keeps Scouts Waiting

2005-07-29T00:19:00.000-07:00

President Bush cancels appearance at tragic jamboree... again

Bowling Green, Virginia -- A gathering of Boy Scouts in Bowling Green, Virginia for a national Jamboree was planned under a cloud, began with a tragedy and continues in misery.

The idea that the Boy Scouts could even hold the Jamboree — held every four years at Fort A.P. Hill — has been the subject of a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union, which contends that the Defense Department's sponsorship violates the First Amendment because the Scouts require members to swear an oath of duty to God.

A federal judge recently ruled that the Pentagon can no longer financially support the event. If the ruling stands, the Boy Scouts of America would have to find another location for their next gathering.

In exchange for getting the use of the Army training base, the Scouts have spent about $20 million on base improvements that include road paving and plumbing upgrades. The Army uses the Jamboree as an opportunity to train its personnel in crowd control, communications and other logistical skills

The Bush Administration has refused to even contest the suit by the ACLU and only the appeal by the Boy Scouts to the ruling stands in the way of removing the organization from all military bases.

Which, after this year, might be okay with most Scouts.

The Jamboree of over 40,000 Scouts experienced tragedy at the very beginning of the event when four Scout leaders, who were erecting a tent, were killed when a tent pole touched a power line.

Killed were Michael J. Shibe, 49, Mike Lacroix, 42, and Ronald H. Bitzer, 58, all of Anchorage, Alaska; and Scott Edward Powell, 57, who had recently moved from Anchorage to Perrysville, Ohio. Shibe had two sons at the Jamboree and Lacroix had one.

The tragedy was witnessed by several Scouts.

The Scouts have been visited by grief counselors and leaders have decided to forge ahead with the jamboree in honor of the victims and their families.

The gathering especially looked forward to a visit from President Bush, in the wake of the tragedy, and the entire gathering endured sweltering temperatures in anticipation of the visit.

The Boy Scouts marched onto the reception field Wednesday singing and plopping down in the grass to wait for President Bush. The more than 40,000 Scouts, volunteers, and leaders attending the event had been standing in the sun about three hours when word came that Bush would not be there until Thursday.

In the interim, hundreds fell ill because of the blistering heat. About 300 people were hospitalized for heat-related illnesses after waiting hours while the scouts in attendance passed through security lines to see Bush.

The visit by the president was again postponed on Thursday.

Boy Scouts of America rescheduled its arena show for Sunday in the hopes that Bush will show up.at the event — less than an hour's drive from the White House.

At the last Jamboree four years ago Bush's trip was also canceled because of "bad weather," in which lightning strikes caused minor injuries to two Scouts. Bush spoke to the group a day later by videotape.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

The Definition of Insanity?

2005-07-28T08:18:00.000-07:00

NASA Grounds Shuttle Flights Over Foam Debris

SPACE CENTER, Houston — NASA said Wednesday it is grounding future shuttle flights because foam debris that brought down Columbia is still a risk — and might have doomed Discovery if the big chunk of broken insulation had come off just a bit earlier and slammed into the spacecraft.

A large chunk of foam flew off Shuttle Discovery's external fuel tank just two minutes after liftoff Tuesday morning. Shuttle managers do not believe it hit the shuttle, posing a threat to the seven astronauts when they return to Earth. But they plan a closer inspection of the spacecraft to be sure.

"You have to admit when you're wrong. We were wrong," said shuttle program manager Bill Parsons. "We need to do some work here, and so we're telling you right now, that the ... foam should not have come off. It came off. We've got to go do something about that."

The loss of a chunk of debris, a vexing problem NASA thought had been fixed, represents a tremendous setback to a space program that has spent 2 1/2 years and over $1 billion trying to make the 20-year-old shuttles safe to fly.

"We wont be able to fly again," until the hazard is removed, Parsons told reporters in a briefing Wednesday evening. "Obviously we have some more work to do."

Parsons said, "Call it luck or whatever, it didn't harm the orbiter." If the foam had broken away earlier in flight, when the atmosphere is thicker, it could have caused catastrophic damage to Discovery.

"We think that would have been really bad, so it's not acceptable," said Parsons' deputy, Wayne Hale.

Engineers believe the foam was 24 to 33 inches long, 10 to 14 inches wide, and just a few inches thick, only somewhat smaller than the chunk that smashed into Columbia's left wing during liftoff in January 2003.

NASA has said all along that Discovery's mission was a test flight designed to check the safety of future shuttle missions. Parsons refused to give up on the spacecraft that was designed in the 1970s.

"We think we can make this vehicle safe for the next flight," he said, declining to judge the long-term impact on the manned space program. "We will determine if it's safe to fly."

Atlantis was supposed to lift off in September, but that mission is now on indefinite hold. Parsons refused to speculate when a shuttle might fly again.

"Until we're ready, we won't go fly again," Parsons said.

In less than 36 hours, the euphoria of what initially looked like a picture-perfect launch on Tuesday evaporated thanks to images shot from just a few of the 100-plus cameras in place to watch for the very problem NASA announced.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

A War by Any Other Name...

2005-07-26T20:16:00.000-07:00

White House Drops 'War on Terror' Slogan

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration has begun downplaying the "war on terror" in favor of "a global struggle against violent extremism," the New York Times reports.

Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the National Press Club that if something is a war "then you think of people in uniform as being the solution."

Myers said that while the military may be in the forefront now the long-term solution is more diplomatic, economic and political.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld used the new terminology at a retirement ceremony Friday for the naval chief of operations. Rumsfeld said the country "wages the global struggle against the enemies of freedom, the enemies of civilization."

Officials told the Times that the new language is a product of meetings of President Bush's top national security advisers.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

Bush Push Aims to Quiet Border Security Advocates

2005-07-26T09:13:00.000-07:00

The White House attempts to build a propaganda machine to court Latinos and marginalize hard-liners.

WASHINGTON — After years of pandering to illegal aliens the Bush Administration is concerned that border security advocates are pushing Latinos away from the Republican Party and that the conservative wing of the Republican party is making inroads against its open-border policies.

The White House has hired political operatives to create a broad coalition of business groups and immigrant advocates to back a plan against the conservative wing of his own party and those groups taking steps to protect the US-Mexico border on their own and without the support of the federal government.

President Bush's push to pacify Americans concerned about national security and exploding illegal immigration has begun with the 2006 elections in mind.

Strategists say Bush's plan will go into action as soon as media focus on a Supreme Court vacancy has passed. The campaign is being planned to coincide with next year's campaigns for the House and Senate, in which Latino voters could be crucial in several states, and to thwart the growing independent effort to curb illegal immigration.

The new campaign is part of a broader White House strategy to forge a majority by drawing more minority voters from those being allowed into the country with the aid of the Mexican government and the tacit approval of the US federal government.

The president's propaganda campaign is aimed at the center of the controversy and will feature a softening of language, patriotic themes and a not-so-subtle attempt to make advocates against the open border policy seem childish and treasonous in their beliefs.

The campaign is to be called, "Americans for Border and Economic Security" and will be led by former U.S. Reps. Cal Dooley (D-Hanford) and Dick Armey (R-Texas). The chief organizer is one of the capital's most important White House allies: former Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie, who has hosted preliminary meetings at his Washington lobbying firm just blocks from the White House and has been advising the RNC on minority outreach.

The effort is designed to help Bush take control of an increasingly contentious debate that has threatened to split the Republican Party.

In January 2004 Bush proposed a guest-worker program that would be open to many illegal immigrants already in the U.S. and to prospective workers abroad. Many since then have recognized this plan as an outright "amnesty" and since that time illegal immigration has increased dramatically, groups of American citizens have sprung up to handle the situation on their own and the president's own party has seen a drop-off in support of Bush's policies.

A guest-worker program is naturally favored by many Latinos, who want to flee poverty-stricken Mexico, and by businesses — many of them major GOP donors — that depend on a steady flow of illegal aliens from Mexico and other countries that enable them to offer lower wages with decreased benefits. The White House effort is aimed at satisfying these groups while pacifying moderates in the Republican party and undecided voters by appearing to promote tougher border security enforcement while, at the same time, giving added weight to Bush's original "guest-worker" proposal.

The latter focus is an attempt to mollify the increasingly vocal bloc of cultural conservatives in the GOP — some in the House leadership — who argue that undocumented workers present a security threat and take jobs that could be filled by Americans.

The issue has presented a quandary for Bush, who backed off his earlier calls for immigration changes after conservatives rebelled. Now, the White House hopes to defuse the situation and also reinvigorate the drive for the guest-worker program — but this time it wants to work in advance to ensure that the president is backed by a broad alliance of business and Hispanic advocacy groups.

There are signs, however, that the administration effort is running into problems even as it begins: Several key business groups are hesitant to join the new coalition, questioning whether the administration can separate itself from the anti-illegal immigration wing of the GOP that is promoting border security. And the party's leading voices favoring stricter limits on immigration, such as Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), remain undaunted — pledging to intensify their efforts.

Coalition organizers say that makes their work all the more timely, coinciding with a burgeoning independent push by border security advocates.

"The politics of the Republican Party isn't going to change by itself. It needs help," said Terry Holt, a spokesman for Bush's 2004 reelection campaign, who works with Gillespie and is recruiting members for the new coalition. "Immigration needs advocates. And if those advocates engage, they can have a profound impact on the issue."

Referring to the Latino vote, which turned out in larger numbers last year for Bush than in his 2000 campaign, Holt added: "There are great opportunities for Republicans, and also dangers if we don't handle this properly."

Holt and Armey, who as House majority leader from 1995 to 2002 unsuccessfully challenged some of his fellow conservatives to soften their opposition to illegal immigration, said the new group's message would seek to isolate and demonize players such as Tancredo, who leads a House caucus that backs stiff border restrictions.

Holt and Armey say that Tancredo has succeeded in dominating the debate because of conservative talk radio and other advocates for limiting the influx of illegal aliens across the border. They hope that, with this new propaganda campaign, they can make inroads against the voices in favor of border security by using an orchestrated effort involving media sound bites and a well-funded media campaign.

"There's two voices right now, and the noisy one is what I call the slam-the-borders crowd," Armey said. "The voice we want to speak with — and the one that will be in unison with President Bush — is the voice that echoes those marvelous words on the Statue of Liberty."

"To me, the Tancredo wing appeals to the more prurient character of our nature," Armey added, purposefully describing the opposition with a word that is defined by "unwholesome interests" and "appealing to an unusual sexual desire."

Organizers of the media and political campaign say the new coalition is patterned after groups formed to press for Bush's overhaul of Social Security and his successful 2003 push for a Medicare prescription drug program — a new aspect of Republican strategy in which corporations and other interest groups are tapped to help move public opinion in favor of a policy initiative.

Corporations and advocacy groups with a direct interest in illegal immigration are being aggressively targeted for membership. Those being courted include Microsoft Corp., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and groups representing academic institutions, restaurants, hotels, landscaping firms, hospitals and nurses.

Organizers say this is the first time an effort has been made to bring these disparate groups together to focus on illegal alien issues.

The Bush Administration plans to charge admission into the pro-illegal immigration coalition for between $50,000 and $250,000 per slot. The proceeds are expected to pay for a political-style campaign for an approach to illegal immigration that combines the promise of heightened border security with a guest-worker program of some sort, creating an environment that the White House believes will be more favorable for Bush to step back in front of the growing controversial issue.

Congressman Tom Tancredo says the administration is simply forging an alliance with business executives who view illegal immigrants as a path to greater profits.

"They know this has nothing to do with Hispanic votes," he said. "They're trying to cover what their real motive is, which is to supply [business] with cheap labor, to not close the spigot of cheap labor…. But they've lost in Congress. They've lost the public. And now they're in damage control."

Tancredo says that Bush is in bad spot politically, caught between public opinion favoring restrictive immigration policies and corporate interests that want looser policies. He said the apparent plans being laid by the new coalition seem to contrast with the message Bush gave to House leaders during a recent White House meeting: that the borders must be secured.

"I think he is trying to figure out a way to triangulate here," Tancredo said.

Corporate supporters of Bush, being courted by the new coalition, expressed disappointment at newly unveiled legislation from Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) that would create a strictly enforced guest-worker program that would require illegal immigrants to leave the country before applying for the chance to work legally. The White House has not endorsed the measure, but business lobbyists fear that Bush may fold to political pressure.

Another measure, sponsored by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), would set looser restrictions and allow undocumented workers to apply for guest-worker status without going home first. The White House has not given its opinion of this proposal either... leery of taking a stand on the issue that might alienate open border activists, its corporate supporters or members of its own political party.

There are about 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States, according to several conservative estimates.

-----------------------------------------------------------
www.newsminute.com

'Pastor Hall'

2005-05-10T05:00:00.000-07:00

N.C. Pastor Accused Of Ousting Members Resigns

WAYNESVILLE, N.C. -- The Baptist pastor accused of running congregants out for not supporting President Bush resigned Tuesday night.

The Rev. Chan Chandler had called a meeting at the East Waynesville Baptist Church but did not announce an agenda.

Congregants of the 100-member church say Chandler endorsed Bush from the pulpit during last year's presidential campaign and said that anyone who planned to vote for Democratic nominee John Kerry needed to "repent or resign."

They say he continued to preach about politics after Bush won re-election. That led to a church gathering last week in which the nine members say they were ousted.

‘Dear God’

2005-05-09T05:00:00.000-07:00

In the “you think you’ve seen everything” department...

It’s bad enough that, after barely winning two national elections, George W. Bush behaves as if he has a “mandate” to govern the way he has (further dividing the two major sides... instead of attempting to bring people together) Now we have this from North Carolina:

Democrats voted out of North Carolina church weigh next move.

Upon reading the story, you will see that several members of a Baptist church have been kicked out of their congregation because they are suspected of not voting for President Bush in the last election.

It’s always bad for people when they attempt to get between God and Dubya.

As we know all too well from talking politics with our “conservative-Christian” countrymen, who support Bush blindly... dissenting opinions are not allowed.

Even though Bush is no “conservative” and is hardly “Christian” in any of his actions some of the blinded have the advanced disease rather bad...

As does “Pastor” Chan Chandler of the East Waynesville Baptist Church in North Carolina, who has been pushing for an anti-Bush purge of his congregation since before the last election (also barely won by President Bush).

Naturally — after making this decision and ousting the members — there has been no attempt by the good pastor to explain any of his actions either to his own congregation or the media, which has thankfully taken an interest in this act of hypocrisy.

Nope. God has spoken on the matter.

This is not only typical of the “do as I say, not as I do” mind set found amongst Christians today it is also typical of what these pompous asses and so-called “conservatives” do when they get into positions with a bit of authority.

As Bush not only talks to God but also channels and speaks directly for God through his governing of our nation... so does Pastor Chan Chandler talk to God and act directly upon God’s authority against those less righteous than himself in his congregation.

As we’ve learned about phonies and zealots like these, they resemble the character Frank Burns from the sitcom M*A*S*H... always knowing what is right for their lessers while also not having to live up to their expectations regards everyone else (rank hath its privileges); Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggert... Jim Jones.

This guy probably has so many skeletons in his own closet that, when the door is opened, one is covered in a large pile of bones.

It’s an awesome responsibility to know what God wants. Just imagine: Having to make these kinds of decisions for people who don’t know any better.

The good news for the self-righteous is that, if anything ever goes wrong with their decisions over the lives of other people (and it almost always does), they can simply say, “It’s God’s Will.”

Tough to be God these days, I would imagine... evidenced by the small margin of victory for his candidate, a sitting president in war time, in the last election (the smallest margin of victory since Woodrow Wilson). God doesn't have near enough “conservative Christian” do-gooders to be able to punish all the ones who deserve it.

Thankfully, however, God has Dubya and people like Pastor Chandler to carry some of the extra burden regards these sorts of righteous and otherwise Godly duties.

It’s tough for Dubya and the good pastor to be all-knowing servants of God. They HAVE to teach us heathens to do things the right way or else suffer at their hands... on God's authority, of course. The pressure can be intense, as the pastor is finding out.

But that’s okay with Pastor Chandler. He doesn’t mind. He is as righteous as the focus of his worship: President George W. Bush.

‘English as a Second Language’

2005-05-06T05:00:00.000-07:00

I understand Jorge Bush is going on another European excursion. While it’s always nice to have him out of the country one wishes they would just keep him. But, unfortunately... they don’t want him.

That’s a shame. Although Europeans are not Bush’s favorite sort of foreigners he does like foreigners better than he likes his own fellow Americans.

Perhaps it’s a language thing. Bush speaks Spanish but I haven’t heard he speaks French or German all that well. We DO know he has a passion for Farsi. Although I haven’t noticed he speaks that language.

He does say “religion of peace” a lot. Maybe that’s English our Muslim friends understand.

We know that he doesn’t speak American English — as he would say — “too good.”

For years, many of us simply believed he was just bad at expressing himself in English. But, it’s now starting to appear that he really isn’t all that interested in the language.

He’s so bored with Americans and their language that he has even made up some of his own words; “strategery,” “resignate,” “subliminable,” etc.

Perhaps Bush’s favorite language is Spanish. Jorge likes Spanish so much that he is inviting everyone who speaks the language into our country and encouraging more to come here illegally so they can speak it in this country.

El Presidente Jorge Boosh never passes a chance to speak Spanish to an audience. I know he does so in English but, since I can’t speak Spanish, I wonder if he is always inviting more lettuce pickers into the United States?

“Come one, come all... all lettuce’e pickers’e to Aztlan for free medical care’e.”

How do you say “lettuce picker” in Spanish?

“How do you say, in Spanish, “20 million lettuce pickers”?

Well... Jorge DOES know how to say “vigilante” in English. Or, is that a Spanish word?

Maybe the reason the economy isn’t working for Americans who speak English is because of their stubbornness about learning Spanish and Farsi.

It’s just a theory.

I’m sorry Jorge is bored with Americans and the English language.

But, then, I’m kind of bored with his apathy about it all.

Sometimes I just wish Jorge liked our language as much as he does the others. I could forgive him for speaking it badly if he were at least trying.

If the first casualty in war is “truth,” we know — after five years with this guy — that the first casualty in politics is “language.” Although I thought that meant the WAY English is spoken. I didn’t think it meant ANOTHER language altogether.

I sure do hope that in the next election we get somebody who likes to speak English. Wouldn’t it be nice if the next president liked Americans more than other nationalities?

What a refreshing change that would be.

'Happy Birthday to Me'

2005-05-05T05:00:00.000-07:00

It’s been a longstanding joke in the house that I always cut my own age by a few years and always add a few years to Michelle’s (she is four years older than me, you see).

So, when I turned 45 on Wednesday, I announced that I was really turning 42. In my math, this would make Michelle almost 55.

As for the children, I always mention that they are one year younger than they actually are on their birthdays. This always drives them crazy.

So, the family decided to seize the joke for themselves yesterday and got me a birthday cake that said “Happy 42nd.” Although, I suppose, it would have been a better joke if they had upped my actual age by a few years.

But at least my family has a sense of humor about things.

For myself... I spent the day watching movies on my new computer (I recently learned I could do that) and drinking Heinekens, not necessarily in that order of priority.

The family decided to give me the one thing I’ve been begging for over the years: A day of peace and quiet.

It was nice. It was also everything I’ve always dreamed it might be.

But... that’s all over now.

If I don’t forget how old I actually am — or die of old age before my next birthday — maybe they’ll let me have another day like that next year...

NAW!

'Show Boat'

2005-05-03T05:00:00.000-07:00

After another long absence another show has been produced. It’s really been aggravating not being able to do the show and stay on the schedule I want to. I don’t know if I’m past this problem now... but I’m hoping.

The new show is available HERE

One feature, which is good stand-alone entertainment, is this song by David Ippolito, “The Guitar Man from Central Park.” Jesusland is great songwriting, highly entertaining and very funny. I encourage you to check out just this song if you don’t have time to listen to my whole diatribe.

PS: I apologize to all those who wrote in requesting that I not produce any more shows. The temptation was just too great.

‘Runaway Bride’

2005-05-02T05:00:00.000-07:00

It was marvelous television.

I got up early Saturday morning trying to accomplish producing the audio show and, instead, ended up following the saga of one Jennifer Wilbanks, aka, “Southern Belle, aka, “The Runaway Bride,” aka, whack-job.

Like millions of others, for the four previous days, I had followed the tragic-appearing story of the woman who was about to be married, in a grand and opulent ceremony, but had mysteriously disappeared while out jogging.

I usually follow these types of stories. Like usual, I watched the police press conferences, I traded opinions and speculation with others on my favorite message board, I prayed for the grief-stricken family and the woman’s safe return, I suspiciously eyed the groom.

At the scene of the incident police helicopters flew about, detectives searched for clues, dogs sniffed for a trail, searchers looked for a body and the local waters were dragged.

All of these familiar and horrid circumstances — for her family, me and millions of others across the country — turned into a sense of relief early on Saturday, as it was learned that Jennifer had been found safe in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The network coverage was intensive and the atmosphere amongst the media, family and elsewhere was jubilant. A tragedy had been averted. There was no body discovered hidden under some brush, in a shallow grave or floating in the river. This would not be the sort of case that we’ve become all too familiar with.

Not at all.

Upon her contact with the police and family we learned, from Jennifer, that she had been kidnapped while jogging. The perps had been a Mexican man and a white woman who had grabbed her, cut her hair and thrown her into a blue van... letting her go only after they had traveled to New Mexico (over four days) where they dumped her off at an Albuquerque 7-11.

But, the good news was she was safe. And, for an all-too-brief period of time... that was ALL that mattered.

The family, back in Georgia, invited the press into their home, declared that the “wedding is on” and invited the whole town to the ceremony. Several of Jennifer’s 14 bridesmaids-to-be gushed into microphones shoved at their faces.

Back inside the family’s home dozens of Jennifer’s relatives watched the network coverage, along with the media, while the nation anticipated the FBI press conference from Albuquerque on Jennifer and awaited more details about her harrowing experience.

That’s when, during the press conference, the FBI announced Jennifer had admitted to them that she made the whole story up, and that she had disappeared on her own and had run away because of the pressure of the impending wedding ceremony.

Jennifer’s family members and friends were suddenly stifled when the microphones were shoved at their faces, the network anchors were also mostly shocked into silence after the news was learned. Reporters at the scene stumbled and mumbled as the coverage continued and cameras rolled with them not in command of their next utterances.

A heavy and relentless downpour began suddenly in Georgia, as if to clarify the sudden shift in mood. Nobody ran for cover in the rain. They just meandered about with shocked looks on their faces.

It was riveting television.

Later, we were able to see Jennifer being escorted through the Albuquerque airport, her face covered in a Juicy Fruit-colored blanket and a gaggle of reporters and cameras following her to the plane for her first-class ride back to Georgia.

Turns out Jennifer had gone “jogging,” cut her own hair to throw everyone off and change her appearance, while she hopped onto a Greyhound bus for Las Vegas. When she began to run low on cash she had gone to Albuquerque, found a payphone at a 7-11 and made her thrilling 911 phone call.

Having been raised in the South... I’ve met Jennifer many times over in the form of friends, family and acquaintances. When Southern women are raised up spoiled and indulged the way Jennifer obviously has been... they can be truly destructive individuals.

Jennifer — in a fit of selfish behavior — managed to cost local, state and federal agencies thousands of man-hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars. She cost the businesses who locked up to search for her many dollars in revenue. She cost her wedding guests — invited to attend the overblown extravaganza — their work hours, vacations, plane tickets and the expense of their accommodations. She cost 14 bridesmaids and 14 groomsmen the expense of their costumes. She cost her family and millions of others untold grief, doubt, worry and dread. She cost her parents whatever it costs to put on a wedding with 600 guests, an expansive cake, limos, a band, catering, the facilities, etc.

For some reason, Southern families always ignore and excuse this eccentric behavior. Southern men not only tolerate this Southern Belle crap... they actually admire it, protect it and even marry it.

So... there’s no doubt in my mind that the groom, John Mason — who was suspected as a “killer” and made to look the fool on nationwide television during Jennifer’s trip to Vegas — will STILL marry the spoiled brat.

The apologists out there are already spinning Jennifer as the “victim.” She will, no doubt, be portrayed as having some sort of disorder (used to be called “spoiled”) that will excuse the same sort of behavior by others.

She’ll end up on Oprah, where everyone in the audience will “feel her pain.”

No doubt there will be interviews, a book and a TV movie deal.

Jennifer’s act of destructive and self-indulgent behavior will be the gift that keeps on giving... and costing.

I’ve always thought the reason no foreign armies ever invade the United States was because everyone here is armed to the teeth.

But, maybe, it’s because of the damage one single spoiled American woman can cause.

'Pieces of April'

2005-04-28T05:00:00.000-07:00

April has always been a volatile month in our household. I’m not sure why that is.

I quit working for David Horowitz in disgust during April a few years back (after I stopped receiving payment). I believe it was also in April I got the ultimate screw job from Christopher Ruddy, while slaving for him. I got canned from my last radio job during April back in the last century.

April has always been a bellwether month for me and the family. For some reason things just happen during April.

This April hasn’t been any different.

Not everything is always bad... Michelle and I celebrated our 15th wedding anniversary this month. The coupon site has taken off in earnest. Although Michelle got canned from her job this month it came at a good time because we needed her home for the business.

So... another volatile April it is.

Perhaps April signifies change in seasons and in dispositions. Although I’m not sure why God has decided it should.

Maybe God doesn’t decide this at all. Maybe it’s just that, as the last of the snow melts, people become more active again and their behavior causes the volatility... as they try to make up for the missed winter months.

I think it's somewhat significant that I saw my first fly yesterday. The only fly in the house and it got right in my face as if to say, “we’re back... it’s April!” The flies will be out in force soon, as there will be no more frosts to discourage them.

April is also the month the car battery begins to die, because the temps waver from very cold to lukewarm every night. It’ll be 30 degrees on some nights and 80 degrees later in the day. After a harsh winter, the darned battery just can’t take it.

Every April Tom across the street starts cutting/vacuuming the grass in his teeny-tiny front yard for about two hours each week. This would be perfectly normal behavior except that he always does this at 9pm.

April certifies that I’ll be back down by the river soon, allowing the trout to pass me by. We’ll be back out on the bikes too, riding through the park, dodging the Mexican gangs.

April is also our signal that heat is on the way. It gets ridiculously hot here in Pueblo during the summer. April is sort of like the gateway to hell.

So we’ve had our month of volatility and change. We can say “buh-bye” to April now.

Buh-bye, April.

We won’t have to see your sorry ass for another year.

"Man of God"

2005-04-27T05:00:00.000-07:00

Recently, I registered at a website that ordains ministers.

I am now an ordained minister (I prefer “pastor”).

It was quite easy to do... I just put my name, address and email into the template and also included my “Statement of Faith.”

I don’t have a problem with how contrived people might think this is. I now have the cards, Ids and credentials to perform weddings, officiate at funerals and get past security at prisons.

I’m not sure about it but I think I can also damn people to hell if I want (don’t worry, though... unless you piss me off I won’t do this).

My son, Lawrence, is especially ticked off at me. He’s absolutely incredulous about my becoming a pastor, as if it has confounded his tactics against my authority as his father and given me some extra power he is not prepared to contend with...

“You can’t just go to a web site and become an ordained minister!”

Used to be I could just threaten to take something of his away for misbehaving. Now I can threaten him with God too.

He is not amused.

Just so you don’t worry, I will not let my becoming a pastor change me in the least. I won’t be like what sadly passes for church leadership today.

I won’t...

Excuse shitty behavior by people in my flock.

Tell anyone “if it feels good, do it.”

Treat God like an under-paid bellhop at a seedy Cleveland hotel.

Deny donations of bread for the poor by people who are not “members” of my church.

Deny donations of bread TO the poor because they are not members of my church.

Claim I have the power to heal and that if it doesn’t work you “don’t have enough faith.”

Proclaim Jesus “went to hell” after the crucifixion to grab some keys or something.

Go on TV to ask for donations to get trucks to deliver free potatoes to starving people knowing damn well that I don’t have “free potatoes.”

Start a university.

Assert that if I don’t get a certain dollar amount of donations by the end of the month I’ll die.

Purchase a personal jet.

Allow my wife to cake heavy makeup onto her face.

Incorporate.

Hang out with the Crouches.

Hang out with phony “Christians” like George W. Bush.

Say something God must hate like “it’s God’s Will” when somebody does something horrid to somebody else.

Dress like a cheap, mafia hood or a sleazy New Orleans whorehouse pimp.

Expect people to fall down backwards when I wave my hand.

Sell out my congregation or denomination to some scheme by a phony Christian in the White House in exchange for tax dollars.

Tell anyone who has something bad happen to them that they “must have done something wrong” to God.

Speak as if I know for sure exactly what God has planned.

In fact, if I do anything it will be with the thought in mind that I should not do anything the same way the ones who pass for “church leadership” do things.

In fact... just about ANYTHING they do at all.

It’s too bad my son doesn’t like me being a pastor. I think I’ll be darned good at it.

If the current church leadership doesn’t like what I have to say about things, well...

They can go to hell!

"Bad Girls Shows Go to Hell"

2005-04-26T05:00:00.000-07:00

Dear TV Land Guys,

I don’t watch prime-time network television. Although I’m quite proud of that the consequence has always been that I can sometimes miss entire sitcom runs; I never saw one single Cheers episode while it was running but it is now one of my favorites in syndication, Wings is another one I missed in prime-time but I now watch it whenever I can in syndication, on and on.

There are also other sitcoms I remember as a child that I can still watch... All in the Family, Bewitched, The Dick Van Dyke Show.

The reason I have been able to see all of these shows has been because of TV Land. The steadiness and consistency of your older series runs has afforded me many hours of enjoyment in seeing these classic shows.

TV Land is a fascinating concept, continually offering television viewing that cannot be found elsewhere, a focused experiment that stays true to its ideals through consistency and theme-oriented programming... this theme being that TV Land runs syndicated and older shows in a fresh way and does not deviate from this philosophy.

Whomever came up with the idea is a programming genius.

But this programming genius must not be on the executive board any longer, as there has been a fundamental and drastic change in programming that not only deviates from what brought TV Land success in the first place but is also not at all in line with what viewers have always turned to TV Land for.

In fact... if many viewers are like me they are pissed off.

Somebody has convinced everyone else in that plush room you all sit in, while deciding what it is us peons want to see, that it would be a great idea to flood TV Land’s airwaves and infiltrate the other programming that has always been the mainstay of your target audience with... something called “Chasing Farrah” (spits for effect).

“Chasing Farrah,” we’ve learned over and over the past few months, is a show where a couple of unfortunates follow Farrah Fawcet-Majors-O’Neal-Whatever around with a camera filming everything interesting that happens... only nothing really interesting ever happens.

To the end of presenting “Chasing Farrah,” your network has run promos in every stop-set months prior to the debut of this horrid show and in what seems like every stop-set since the show began. Other shows on TV Land have been pre-empted in order for this “reality” show to be re-run over and over and over again.

Now... I understand that the concept of the network is to run the same shows over and over but this one has got to go. Farrah was a great poster back in the 70s and you should probably even run Charlie’s Angels as much as you can for those who remember her fondly (I hate that show, btw).

I also understand that “reality” shows are popular right now and it’s tempting to not want to dive in. I’m sure you guys DID discuss it...

“Yeah... they’ll love it because Farrah is from the 70s and they’ll want to see her being an asshole to normal people.”

“We’ve got to dive into this reality market. As we can see in this chart...”

“Okay. We’ll go with it. Goober... you’re in charge of the project.”

The problem for your network is that this isn’t what we tuned into you for in the first place. Nobody wants to be reminded by Farrah of how old they are, as they watch this has-been flit about from place to place, her looks long gone, her once-beautiful smile replaced by the obvious set of manufactured choppers.

If the idea is to run a “reality” show, perhaps, for me, there’s way too much reality involved.

The person who sold your network on this turkey of a show should be fired and banished to MTV, where he/she can program for the ones this sort of show is aimed at; only that still shouldn’t be Farrah... maybe Carrot Top or something.

One last note: If All in the Family, Cheers or Three’s Company get bumped much more for “Chasing Farrah” and you keep running those stupid promos, inevitably preceded by that redundant and tacky ComCast spot with Harriet and that awful singing “we thank you Harriet... Harriet,” you will not only turn off this viewer but, also, viewers like my daughter. She’s only 12 and wasn’t around for Three’s Company. She loves that show and when she sees Farrah in its place she always has the same response... “Awwww.”

Get it together, turkeys.

Sincerely,

Kerry Fox, old fart

‘The Patriot’

2005-04-08T05:00:00.000-07:00

Each month 30,000-plus illegal aliens sneak across our southern border in violation of federal laws.

Each year it costs the United States billions of dollars to incarcerate the ones who subsequently break other laws.

Each year hospitals in cities all along our southern border are overcrowded and bankrupted under the shear weight of illegals who cross the border or stay for the sole purpose of getting free health care.

Each year additions to our country’s welfare roles grows leaps and bounds, from pregnant illegals who cross the border then have their babies here and those who establish themselves in this country with the aid of the federal government.

Each year — and especially the past several years — jobs for American workers have decreased and benefits offered by employers have decreased do to the hiring of illegals by American companies, with a wink from the federal government.

Each year the restrictions on legal immigration become tighter for those coming from any other country but Mexico. Enforcement also becomes more strident each year against the legal immigrants at the behest of and in favor of the Mexican government.

Estimates of illegals now in the United States range anywhere from 10 to 30 million, with our federal government turning a blind eye to the situation and with our president even considering an amnesty for these lawbreakers under a PC, feel good renaming of the term “amnesty.”

In response to all of these statistics and detrimental and unfortunate facts President Bush has...

Said it is “not possible” to guard our southern border.

Discouraged enforcement of the federal law against illegal immigration and, in fact, has proposed legislation to excuse the crimes.

Increased enforcement and further restricted legal immigration from nations other than Mexico.

Encouraged more illegal immigration by defending the lawbreakers in speeches.

Insulted the American people who have repeatedly asked Bush to enforce our immigration laws by calling them “bigots.”

Promised to secure our southern border and then shifted monies and personnel away from the effort.

Spoken up ardently against and used the power of his office to politically intimidate those in the federal government who want the border secure.

Referred to American citizens who are voluntarily guarding the border in Arizona as “vigilantes.”

Conspired with Mexico’s president, Vincente Fox, to encourage, allow and, eventually, legalize the invasion.

Sent federal agents to shadow American volunteers in an attempt to intimidate these patriots.

Ignored the presence of Mexican troops currently at our border to help illegals find crossing places around the American volunteers (an act of war for any other country).

There are some who argue that all of these actions and inactions by an American president — especially in the aftermath of 911 — is simply dangerous and could allow another terrorist attack.

This is true... it can. And if the invasion continues unabated, as the president desires... it WILL.

But there are also those of us who realize that this behavior by the president and the federal government is an act of “treason” toward the ends of increasing profits for American corporations and, as our federal government is concerned, to achieve the watering-down of our culture and heritage as it is purposefully integrated with that of the failed culture and nation of Mexico.

The fact is that both claims are true. There is nothing good at all about millions of lawbreakers streaming into our country, a high percentage of whom commit other criminal acts once here.

Criminals from Mexico are robbing our banks, killing our citizens and molesting and murdering our children so the president’s buddies can reap extra profits.

The detriments are a clear and present danger to our national security, our citizens’ safety, our heritage, our language, culture, values, traditions and the health of our economy.

There are few cities and towns across the nation that have not been affected adversely by this on-going criminal enterprise between our federal government, the government of Mexico and the corporations for whom Bush works surreptitiously.

The president’s posture on this — no other word describes it accurately — “invasion” is a violation of his oath of office, a disservice to the American people and, in my humble opinion, treason against his own country... which he was elected and sworn to protect against “enemies foreign and domestic.”

At this moment, in Arizona (a weak point in our national defense, allowed and aided by President Bush), American volunteers have gathered to continue a physical presence that is slowing down the illegal crossings.

These true American patriots recognize the problem, care about their nation and are actively doing what they can to stop the invasion, in the absence of meaningful leadership. Meanwhile, there can be no doubt about with whom the American president continues to side: Non-Americans.

The president has said that “we cannot guard our border.” At the same time, he has claimed that we CAN guard the nation of Iraq. It is not so much that we are able or unable to do one or the other, the sad fact is that President Bush is WILLING to do one INSTEAD of the other.

Right now, a few hundred American citizen volunteers are proving this traitor to be the disingenuous liar he is and, likely, always will be.

The Minute Men guarding our border, where the American president will not, are deserving of our prayers, our praise, our respect, our aid and our contributions.

Please do what you can to help.

Nothing less than our nation's security, our sovereignty and the health, safety and future of our children depends on this.

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek not your council nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." --Samuel Adams

‘Neighbors’

2005-04-07T05:00:00.000-07:00

What the hell's the matter with people?

I used to think that my experiences were just a matter of logistics... "people around this town," "live someplace where they have decent people," etc. But the more I see, the more I believe that there is something seriously wrong.

How hard is it to know how to behave anyway? All anybody has to do is watch a couple of John Wayne movies. John Wayne never lied or behaved like a chicken shit. John Wayne was always motivated to do whatever the right thing was.

I miss John Wayne.

In my neighborhood, I'm surrounded by chicken shits. Not one single time has any "neighbor" of ours — in four years — approached us with a problem, concerning our children or anything else. What they do is wait until we aren't looking and approach our children with the problem...

"You'd better tell your parents to tell you to stop that."

Mostly, if the neighbors have a problem about something, they will simply act upon it, in a chicken shit sort of way, without talking to us or the children.

For instance, about eight months ago, when the people next door were moving out, the children grabbed a bunch of junk from around that house, dragged it across the street to the vacant lot and build something resembling a "clubhouse."

If you have children you know this is perfectly normal behavior. I surmised that they were doing nothing that was dangerous or intrusive to anyone else and told them to make sure they didn't scatter the stuff around. No other neighbors said a word to me, even though everyone saw what they were doing.

Naturally, since none of the other neighbors own that lot, I thought nobody minded.

Kid stuff, right?

Across the street from us lives a very nice woman, her two grown daughters and... her incredibly asshole, unfriendly, self-centered and chicken shit husband, Tom.

Since winter ended he has been out in his yard a lot more, raking, vaccumming and snipping at the grass in his front yard constantly. This has always struck me as odd because his front lawn is about the size of an extra-large bathroom. Yet he uses a variety of tools and spends many hours on its care.

Now, Tom doesn't own the vacant lot next to his house, he's never complained about the children playing there and he never has spoken to me about the kids' clubhouse. But, yesterday, while he knew the kids were inside busy with schoolwork, he dragged some of the junk from the lot — including some drywall — and tossed it into our driveway, breaking drywall all over the place.

Total chicken shit, right?

We aren't talking about a young punk who thinks he owns the neighborhood. This is an older, retired guy on disability, who spends most of his time primping his teeny, tiny front yard, grunting if you say "hello," and making drug deals with his buddies employing the marijuana plants he thinks he is hiding in his backyard...
which he apparently believes are obscured by the tremendouly tall trees at the front fence.

Perhaps the kids' clubhouse is too close to his secret garden at harvest time or something. The kids tell me they can see the plants and that Tom, every now and again, snips them and then hands baggies to people in his front yard.

Whatever.

I learned a couple of years ago that talking to Tom is a complete waste of time... totally different wavelength there. Attempt to talk to Tom and the word "disability" takes on a whole new connotation.

Earlier this year, LA tried to sell him some Boy Scout popcorn and Tom actually answered the door with a joint in his hand.

"The guy in the alley" is another chicken shit. He lives across the alley with his ugly and nasty-nice wife, who looks as though she was beaten as a small child. I say this only because this activity is usually a systemic family thing, handed down from parent to child, and we can sometimes hear their only daughter begging for mercy and also hear the mother whipping her.

We had to stop letting the children play in the backyard because "Lurko," as the children call him, patrols the alley as if it is his own personal domain. Whenever he sees me or my wife he shrinks into the confines of his house or the bushes in his backyard.

He's never attempted to talk to my wife or I about any problem he has, as a grown man might do, real or imagined, concerning the children, the dog or what he perceives to be his own private alleyway.

But he has approached the children on several occassions and taunted them while he tosses handfuls of dirt at our Beagle, Pearl. I usually find out after the fact and when he has slinked away back to his hole.

He even did this once with another grownup at his side, which prompted me to call the police for advice. The children will watch, aghast, at the actions of this "grown man" and he will say brave things to them like "Yeah? You got something to say about it?"

Because the police say one never knows what a cowardly maniac might do they advised me to avoid confrontation and contact them the next time something like this happens. I instructed the children not to play in the backyard.

"Lurko" usually becomes more active in the spring and summer, so I imagine that, like Tom, he will be out and about again soon and a confrontation involving the police is only a matter of time.

I blame "Lurko" for his pompous attitude, his cowardice and his chicken shit assaults but I can't really blame him for hanging out in the alley. I think I would do the same if I were living with that horrid and shrewish wife of his (we hear him getting balled out by the wife on occassion).

In the meantime, I scan the state molester pages on the Internet every day looking for his photo.

The other neighbors are unfriendly and cloistered people who, apparently, don't like us either. But, they mostly leave us alone and, if they DO have a problem, they are too cowardly and immature to say anything.

These people are not just grownups but also older people, mostly without children, who SHOULD know how to behave and know that decent behavior is based upon manners and maturity. So, if we have done things to them, I'm comfortable that whatever it is we've done is more responsible and mature than their reactions to the offenses.

I don't know what's wrong with society. But I don't believe it to be "logistics" anymore. I think we'd run into facimiles of these creatures anywhere we go.

Every now and again, I dream of a place where our children can play safely... a place where if someone has a problem they might mention it in a friendly way and ask us to correct it. In this place I dream about grownups will watch out for everyone's children and talk to the other parents to correct behavioral problems.

The problem for us here is that our children are more mature than any of the "neighbors" and it is the neighbors who have the behavioral problems.

I miss the hell out of John Wayne.

‘In the Bedroom’

2005-04-06T05:00:00.000-07:00

My wife and I celebrate our 15th wedding anniversary on the 11th. This past week I moved all of my belongings out of our bedroom.

“Trouble in paradise?”

“Desiring of a parole hearing more than you are looking forward to your anniversary?”

No. None of that.

There just isn’t any room for any of my stuff. The coupon business has moved me aside.

It’s a good thing too. Nothing of mine was safe in my bedroom anymore anyway. My things ended up being buried underneath the containers of coupon inserts and tossed around by the family if it got in their way.

Since my wife is in charge of keeping track of inventory, naturally all of the coupon orders are clipped and assembled near her computer... and that atrocity of piles and stacks of paper she refers to as her “desk.”

This “desk” of hers also overflows onto the bed behind her, then onto my side of the bed. I often have to wait while things are removed in order to lay down.

I stopped calling it “the bedroom” weeks ago and now refer to it as “the bedlam.”

I now even do a careful check of the bed before laying down, if I’m brave enough to enter, as I plopped down on a pair of scissors not long ago.

Shards of paper, the remnants of the outer layers of coupons from the inserts, now cover the floor. The things are everywhere. They stick especially well to socks and are being tracked throughout the house. I even saw some sticking to the dog’s butt, recently, when she got up from one spot to go lay down in another (why do dogs do that, by the way?).

Since there are inserts and coupons and kids and clippings and dogs in my bedroom most of the day, I’ve taken to staying at my computer in the living room longer. But it’s not quiet or calm out here either. I can hear the others right now, bickering over which coupon to clip for whichever order they are working on.

Whenever Michelle gets an email she hollers, “INCOMING!” Then, a moment later, “we got another order!”

Yes. I AM grateful and thankful for the success this business of ours is having. The whole thing is just a change in lifestyle, and change as drastic as this is not always easy for me.

The business has been going so well lately that even though Michelle might be canned from her full-time job this week (the company has been gradually moving operations to India)... we aren’t even worried about it.

I suppose if we are going to change direction to working from home and supporting ourselves with our own business we might as well do the Full Monty right away.

So, in this, we are quite fortunate. But when Michelle is able (or forced) to work at home full-time I imagine things will get even nuttier.

There IS an extra couch downstairs...

Hmmmm...

‘Elmer Gantry’

2005-04-05T05:00:00.000-07:00

"Christian" George W. Bush loads water for
supporters while Terri Schiavo dehydrates.

Where is “Christian” George W. Bush? For that matter, where is “conservative” George W. Bush?

If you have Christian and conservative leanings, as I do, these are apt questions these days. But, then, they’ve been apt questions for years now.

Frankly, I don’t see what it is the liberals have to complain about with this “Christian-conservative” president. He doesn’t do anything “Christian” and he has yet to do anything that can be called “conservative.”

You can add the word “patriot” to that list because George W. Bush is certainly no patriot.

“Christian”?

Well, like the great “healer” Benny Hinn, Bush talks a good game. The problem is that Bush insults and punishes Christians before anyone else.

It was Bush who was praising Islam as “a religion of peace” even while thousands were buried and incinerated inside the smoldering ruins of the Twin Towers.

If George W. Bush has spoken out even once about the removal of God and His word from our public institutions, the courts and public schools and their events, or even defended the Boy Scouts against the ones who would destroy that organization... I certainly missed it.

It is Bush who “values life” but NEVER speaks up about abortion much less acts on it.

It is Bush who calls himself a “Christian,” speaks to God each day and, then, decides to enable the public education system to combat Christian homeschoolers and their parents behind the weight of the federal government.

It is Bush who postured about erring “on the side of life” but, then, talked of “legalities” when a handicapped woman was starved to death by judges and legislators who also call themselves “Christian-conservatives.” It is George W. Bush who, as Texas governor, signed a state bill allowing the unplugging and murder of hospital patients who could not afford to pay their bills.

“Conservative”?

The notion is laughable on its face.

Rhetoric to his supporters aside... George W. Bush is simply the least conservative president we’ve ever had, next to Franklin Delano Roosevelt; he’s never vetoed one single bill, much less one single spending bill. He’s created additional departments, increased spending across the board for all our bureaucratic monsters and enlarged the deficit, both on trade and regards federal revenue.

He’s further empowered the federal government against American citizens, stripped Constitutional rights away from the people he serves and given additional powers to federal agencies on rights of seizure while halting civil rights for citizens in the process.

Divided down to brass tax — especially considering his policies on trade, employment and border security (which will, ultimately, give access to a terrorist attack) — George W. Bush has given aide and comfort to the enemy.

This is the definition of “conservative”?

“Patriot”?

In taking a break from his rhetoric about trade, with which he sides against American workers, in favor of foreign countries that use child and slave labor (policies still in an accelerated mode), Bush — at this moment — is also siding against American citizens and with another country over an American federal law he fails to acknowledge, much less enforce... as is his sworn duty.

With a wink from our own federal government, the neighboring despotic and failed nation of Mexico is in the process of invading our country. That nation has condoned, encouraged and expedited this invasion with all its governmental authority and has also parked troops at our border to back up this invasion and intimidate our citizens (an act of war).

American citizens have rallied on their own to aid landowners at the border, enforce the law Bush refuses to enforce and stop illegals from crossing. But, “patriot” Bush goes on television and refers to his fellow citizens as “vigilantes.”

Forget about “charity begins at home.” Bush is no “patriot.” He’ll side against Americans on any front and with any dictatorship, kingdom, theocracy or communist country against his own country and contrary to the oath he has sworn to uphold.

He does this with every action he takes. Bush has never — not one single time — found it within the scope of his sworn oath to side with American workers, citizens, Christians, handicapped people, homeschooled children, seniors, our national sovereignty, our Constitution, our culture or ANY traditional American entity and identity.

In fact... he has done the polar opposite in each instance, with a lie on his lips, his purported Constitutional beliefs on the back burner and — after a personal audience with the Almighty — with twisted logic and rhetoric straight from the pit of Hell.

Just as a bible, silk suit and a request for tithing doesn’t make the phony Christian and snake oil salesman Benny Hinn a pastor, who speaks the “word of God,” the deceptive language and politically-correct sugar-coating of actions contrary to his stated positions and that of his own political party doesn’t make George W. Bush anything he pretends to be.

Yet, unfortunately — even though there is some evidence that true Christians, conservatives and patriots are catching on to the act — like the ones “healed” by Benny Hinn, who fall down backwards when the good pastor waves his hand, many so-called “Christians” and “conservatives” still buy into Bush’s rhetoric on what they claim as their beliefs.

God bless the United States of America...

“TOUCH!”

‘Murder by Death’

2005-03-28T06:00:00.000-07:00

The hours have ticked away.

No judge will consider the new evidence. The courts have rejected all appeals. There has been no last-minute action by the governor. Those about to carry out the execution talk coldly of “due process.” Last rites have been given. The appointed hour draws nigh.

Sounds like one of those movies where the convict, sentenced to die, is waiting for his sentence to be carried out... and the lawyer, the nun and several office staff are working frantically to persuade someone — anyone — to allow their client to live.

‘Dead Man Walking’... that’s the one.

That movie was based upon a true story.

The convict that movie was about, Matthew Poncelet, played by Sean Penn, actually deserved to die for what he had done: rape and murder. At the end of that story the convict was put to death by lethal injection in a fairly short period of time, while the nun cried and his family lamented.

Those opposing execution staged rallies outside of the prison, lighting candles and holding placards proclaiming the inhumanity of the spectacle.

We see this sort of thing every time we put a convicted criminal to death in this country.

Can you imagine the outrage we would see if the sentencing judge had ordered Mr. Poncelet be “denied food and water” until his “death process” was completed? I imagine the networks and the special interest groups would be shouting at the top of their lungs.

The politicians against the death penalty would step up to piles of microphones talking about “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Although I support the death penalty for people who callously take the lives of others I believe that, in the case of a convicted murderer being starved and dehydrated to death, I’d have to side with the protesters on that one.

And, no, I do not believe Terri Schiavo should be put to death by lethal injection. She is NOT Matthew Poncelet. She has hurt no one. I suspect, however, that after the shock of this starvation death finally hits people there WILL be talk of doing this in the future “humanely.” That’s the slippery slop we’ve just begun.

Except for the people who are scared about the precedent the murder of Terri Schiavo represents; a shamefully small number of Christians, families with handicapped children and those who believe food and water is not life by “artificial means,” there is no outcry from the special interest groups.

The politicians, the Christian Church, the special interest groups, those against the death penalty, those against treating animals inhumanely, the nuns and those without handicapped relatives are either FOR the death of Terri Schiavo or have decided to remain on the sidelines.

She will die at any time and then be immediately cremated and her ashes interred several states away from her family in Pennsylvania. Terri’s family may or may not be allowed to attend Terri’s funeral.

Terri’s family can only watch and do nothing to help her... reduced to being strip searched when they are allowed to see her in her last moments and reduced to begging the pontificating, fence post-sitting and phony “Christian” governor to live up to his own convictions about life.

Many anti-death penalty advocates have been heard to say, “I am ashamed to live in a country that puts people to death!”

Now that our country is legally torturing people to death by denying them food and water — non-criminals, non-murderers — I have to say that I know exactly how they feel.

?

2005-03-27T06:00:00.000-07:00

I have no idea what this is about but... it’s funny as hell.

Just thought I’d share this one.

‘A Life Less Ordinary’

2005-03-21T06:00:00.000-07:00

It’s difficult for me to recall a more divisive and passionate issue to come along, in recent years, as with the situation regarding a handicapped woman named Terri Schiavo.

On this issue I’ve heard and seen just about every remark and sort of behavior. Lately, although it isn’t really political, the issue has been politicized to boot as it becomes more prominent on the television and as the case reaches its conclusion.

While there is passion on both sides, for me it’s a matter of evaluating several facets of the young woman’s condition and wishes and the actions and motives of her husband, family and medical experts.

This in and of itself isn’t easy to do as most associated with the case disagree with each other over these facts.

The main argument is not immediately “life” or “death”... it’s whether or not Mrs. Shiavo is being kept alive by “artificial” means, via a feeding tube.

She is not being helped to breath, as she would be with a respirator. She is not “brain dead,” where her body is not even giving the simple commands necessary to sustain her life.

This is my first question up front: Can food and water — sustenance — be classified as “artificial”? If it can be classified this way, we are all in trouble as we ALL are being kept alive by “artificial” means.

In fact: To hear the feeding itself described as “artificial” is scary. Further... it has been documented, regards Terri Shiavo, that the feeding tube is in place only because she has not been trained to feed herself and because it saves time for those who care for her.

So the core issue, to me, is moot. Food and water is not “artificial” to Terri anymore than it is “artificial” to the rest of us. The only problem is that she either cannot do this on her own or has not been trained to do so.

Which leads us to another aspect of the argument...

“What about Terri’s quality of life?”

The quality of her life is not something most of us would want, either for ourselves or for her.

Babies are aborted with their possible “quality of life” in peoples’ minds. There is no doubt that, as judged against individual standards, many people — should they be allowed to live — would not have what we, as individuals, decide is a decent “quality of life.”

But where do we draw the line on this? At what point is it our decision to decide whether or not others should live or die because they may not have what we perceive to be a decent “quality of life”? Is this any human being’s decision in the first place?

Would you agree that many villages in Africa, for instance, have a substandard “quality of life”? Should we, perhaps, nuke these villages to spare them this substandard quality of life, in order to save starving children and warring tribes from a life we would not want to live?

Obviously Terri Schiavo’s life is not of the quality we would desire or encourage. But she is where she is do to an act of God (or, if you believe some... an act by her “husband”). None of us caused this but it likely isn’t within our purview to decide to end it because of our own thoughts on the quality of her life.

Which leads us to another aspect of the argument...

What does Terri want? What does her family want? What are her “husband’s” motivations on this?

It seems to me that if Terri did not want to live her family might know it. Personally, I’d feel better if her husband and family agreed on any of this. But they do not. This, of course, precludes anyone deciding her wishes positively one way or the other.

Her family wants her to live. Her husband does not. Both sides claim they “love her.”

Therein lies another fact in the matter: The “husband” who loves her but wants her to die, the husband who lives with another woman and has children with that woman, the husband who refuses medical treatments and training for Terri and has custody of Terri but refuses her blood relatives decision-making powers about her future, the husband who hasn’t been a “husband” for many years and spitefully dismisses the wishes of her immediate family.

The more one studies Michael Schiavo, the more odious the man becomes and the more suspect his motives appear. We have only his word and hearsay on Terri’s wishes about her “quality of life”... something he remembered after eight years and after some checks were cashed.

Michael Schiavo’s motives and actions over all these years should not only be considered in any judgment on the situation they should held up to scrutiny against the matter of Terri’s life and death. Regardless of cut and dried law the family’s wishes should certainly be considered by him and the courts. His actions should be considered as well. But they have not been.

Which leads us to another aspect of the argument...

Our Constitution notes everyone’s right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Notice that “life’ comes first.

The argument made by those wishing to starve Terri to death is that “she has had her day in court,” there has been “due process” and “what about states rights?”

Obviously, the fact that Congress has become involved could have ramifications on its own. But, the fact that the State of Florida’s “due process” has led to an argument and decision in favor of starving a person to death — who does not live by artificial means — has ramifications far deeper than the matter of “states rights.”

There is a gigantic hole in Florida’s “due process” when the state can justify killing individual citizens by denying them food and water regardless of their conditions.

And, in fact — according to the proclamations, words and deeds of our Founding Fathers — the MAIN purpose of the federal government is NOT “states right” or “due process” but to “protect individual liberties.” We should be glad that the federal government has taken an action for the purpose of protecting one citizen.

Perhaps our Republic is not completely dead just yet.

Since this matter DOES have some questions to it as to what Terri’s wishes truly were and questions about the results of treatments she has not received and sharp divisions and possible motives of those who know and ACTUALLY love her... life should be regarded with more than a casual dismissal over “due process” and the odious motives of her legal guardian and “husband.”

I rarely agree with the republicans and the president. But, in this case, they have done the correct thing. Where there is a question — and in this one there are many — life should be protected.

This is a sad story in either direction. But the real family’s wishes should be respected.

Food and water is not “artificial.” A dangerous precedent is set if this becomes the definition of “artificial.”

Whether you agree or disagree with either side on this issue... say a prayer for Terri Schiavo and for this tragedy to be decided in favor of justice, and against the motives of those who would politicize it.

The life you save just may be your own.

‘Odd Jobs’

2005-03-01T06:00:00.000-07:00

A recent survey of workers shows Americans are less satisfied with their jobs over 10 years ago.

There’s a shocker, huh?

“Compared to a decade ago, job satisfaction has declined among all types of workers, but the drop varies by age and income. The biggest decline in on-the-job happiness was among workers earning $25,000 to $35,000 and among workers between the ages of 35 to 44.”

The survey shows that most of this dissatisfaction has occurred since… guess when… the Bush Administration has been running the country.

This is not unusual at all when you consider that the Bush Administration’s goals are directly opposed to making things better for workers and, instead, are more in tune toward enhancing profits for corporations at the expense of American workers.

This has been accomplished, over the years, in a variety of ways:

The importation of foreign workers, both legally and illegally (mostly illegally), so as to create an artificially higher worker base which allows corporations to offer less pay and benefits.

Laws against citizens and in favor of corporations, as with the federal government forbidding the purchase of cheaper drugs in Canada.

The constant assault against the 40-hour workweek, which also allows corporations to reduce pay and benefits.

Tax breaks, benefits and welfare for corporations, which allows them to move jobs overseas and exploit slave labor.

Criminal and unfair trade agreements, which remove jobs from our economy and run smaller companies out of business.

The list of the Bush Administration’s “accomplishments” is absolutely endless. The one qualifier for every action the Bush Administration takes is that it MUST benefit corporations at the expense of American workers.

It’s really no wonder at all that people are dissatisfied with their jobs… they haven’t much opportunity with which to compete and survive.

A rising tide is supposed to “lift all boats.” But, the “great economy” that was promised by this administration has not occurred and the jobs and opportunities it promised has been little more than a trickle against a rising tide of corporate profiteering and competition against cheaper labor.

“Workers are generally content with their commutes to work and the relationships with co-workers. But they voice substantial discontent with their companies' bonus plans, promotion policies, health plans and pension benefits. Only about one in three said they are satisfied with their pay.”

One can look all around and see the results of the Bush Administration’s policies; countless thousands of workers with degrees who are working menial labor jobs, thousands of new “temp” workers, outsourced from their factories which are now located in foreign countries, career-minded folks who work several part-time jobs to compensate for the full-time jobs being given to foreign workers for less pay.

The list is endless.

Consistently, with the Bush Administration’s policies, there have been less and less jobs available for more and more numbers of workers. The corporations are cashing-in on their presidential-backed bonanza.

We always hear the same things from the Bush Administration; “workers need to ‘re-train,’” “the jobs are located in different areas of the country now,” “the boom is coming.”

All of this is pure crappola.

The truth is that people will work more and more for less and less, as long as this stooge is president… up to and including the point of slave labor if this president is allowed to continue running the country in favor of corporations and against the country’s citizens.

What the Bush Administration never addresses is the displacement of people and their children. But, how could they? They obviously don’t care.

While we are being told to “re-educate” ourselves and lied to about how foreign workers and illegal aliens are “only coming here to do the jobs Americans won’t do”… while the outsourcing and corporate profiteering is taking place and people are being told to “move for jobs,” REAL people are being displaced and REAL families are suffering RIGHT NOW.

The Bush Administration does not acknowledge that people have homes they will lose and relatives that cannot be left behind, that working people cannot an afford to wander around the country to find the jobs the administration claims it is creating but isn’t.

To hell with health insurance. This administration isn’t even concerned with a living wage.

Meanwhile, the movement of jobs outside the country continues, the profiteering goes on and the importation of cheaper workers proceeds unabated.

There is no truth about anything in this administration. There is no patriotism or loyalty to American workers. There is no empathy or compassion toward American citizens.

There is only a naked and a decided un-Christian greed.

And…

There is at least one job many Americans will increasingly be dissatisfied with.

‘Butterflies Are Free’

2005-02-28T06:00:00.000-07:00

There I was… in a good writing routine for several months and thinking I could keep it up forever.

But, sometimes, life gives us twists and turns from left-field and our plans change accordingly.

I told you about our car issue and the District 60 issue we were facing before. But, there has also been some good news…

We got our car issue settled and are now mobile again. District 60, through their crookedness and incompetence, is in full retreat.

At the same time my wife’s coupon-clipping service, Frugal and Free, has taken off suddenly. I’d like to say it was through my marketing genius but it was really a by-product of my feeble attempts at marketing… with a lot of aid from the man upstairs.

In any event, the site is now getting many targeted hits and Michelle is receiving a steady stream of orders.

The coupon madness has kept me very busy over the past week, and I’ve had time for little else except html, additional marketing and even clipping the coupons for orders… all of this through the afore-mentioned trials with the Bush-Mobile and having to deal with the gnarly little centipedes at our local school district.

None of this did I expect.

Before the site’s sudden success I had mentioned here and to my wife and son that, perhaps, we should be hoping George W. Bush won re-election, as there would be more people needing to use grocery coupons.

I hadn’t realized how prophetic that statement might be.

The other day, in the midst of additional hits and orders, with the entire household now working for the site, I reminded my son of what I had said before… to which he remarked, “Well… at least Bush is good for something.”

Out of the mouths of babes…

It’s been a long two weeks; car problems, paperwork games with the school district, some business success and even some computer problems.

But…

I’m a methodical sort and always manage to work additional tasks into my safe little routines. I go chaotic a bit when those things from left-field come flying at me but I usually recover enough to leave the things I enjoy in place — and I enjoy writing on this blog very much.

So, as for posting and the audio show… I’m back in the saddle again. My horse is even looking a bit better than that nag the president had me riding before.

As for anything resembling “fate” or “dumb luck”… I give God the credit for that. I also give God the credit for my marketing genius and for us being able to battle the dark forces aimed against our family.

The president gets credit for making the economy ripe enough to launch Michelle’s coupon site.

‘The Longest Day’

2005-02-18T06:00:00.000-07:00

Over the years my wife and I have made jokes about being “under assault” from the dark forces of evil (i.e. Satan). This is how we’ve explained to ourselves a series of unfortunate instances. We’re not religious fanatics or anything but this is how we’ve explained these things to ourselves.

After this past week I’m not so sure we were far off the mark in that analysis.

We’ve all had them… a series of challenging events that tests our faith and, in most cases, reveals the true characters of those around us… either for good or bad.

At my last entry I mentioned the problems and potential problems my wife and I were having with our local school district, Colorado’s District 60. Shortly after I posted that entry the kids and I hopped into the Bush Mobile and headed off to fetch Michelle from work.

As we were passing through the Pueblo Community College I heard a barreling-type noise coming from the engine. The headlights began to flicker and the engine sputtered. As the Bush Mobile went dead we drifted off to the shoulder. The children and I were too shocked to say anything for a few moments as the weight of the event hit us.

Our only vehicle — a 1988 Plymouth Grande Voyager — had decided to park along the street at the college at 6:25pm on Friday evening.

Having no cell phone (mostly because nobody ever calls us) we could only walk the half-mile back to the house and wait for Michelle’s “where are you?” phone call. Michelle ended up taking a cab home.

I suspected that the Bush Mobile’s alternator had conked out. But, absolutely nobody does anything on the weekends in Pueblo and we were short on cash with a week or so to go before Michelle’s payday and our income-tax refund. We weren’t sure we could even get the van towed off the campus before the campus security people and the Pueblo City Police decided to remove it themselves.

Early on Saturday I tried to contact the college campus’ security but couldn’t get hold of anyone. I called the city police, explained the problem and learned that I would have 72-hours to retrieve the van after it was “red-tagged.” Naturally, since I had no idea when we could afford a tow, my mission was to delay the tagging of the van for as long as possible.

In the meantime — if we wanted or needed anything at all — we would have to hike over a mile to get it or call a cab. Michelle would need to get to work and back by cab for the duration.

It’s that old capitalistic principle: “The less you have, the more you pay.”

LA’s upcoming Boy Scout camping trip was questionable as there might not be a way to get him across town to the pre-camp meeting place. Sheyanne was also anticipating her piano-lesson recital and could miss that if we could not afford taxi fare. Not to mention, since cash was low, Michelle’s job could be in jeopardy if she had trouble getting to work.

All of this was powerful and stressful stuff.

We live in town but there isn’t a grocery store or much of anything anywhere close. The only business that is close is an auto-repair shop two blocks from the house. But that isn’t open on weekends.

Our only “family” in town is Michelle’s useless brother, who causes more trouble in troubling situations and who hasn’t even spoken to Michelle for over two years because she had the nerve to question his behavior in front of our children. We know a few other people but not well enough to ask for transportation favors.

Over the past several months Michelle has become “friends” with another avid coupon lady in town… or so Michelle thought. We are naturally independent — and rarely impose on others — but Michelle did tell this lady “friend” that we had a problem with our van and were without transportation. All Michelle asked her was whether she’d be willing to pick up a can of coffee and a loaf of bread for us in her couponing travels, if we paid her when she dropped it off.

But, sadly, the lady simply ignored the request and topped that off by calling several times — totally oblivious to Michelle’s situation — to ask Michelle if she knew of any “deals” at the stores.

God bless her… Michelle remained polite through it all — even after she walked across the street from work, after her shift, to get a couple of things we needed at 7-11 (with our fledgling PayPal card) before she then called a cab to bring her home, only to get a call from this nitwit asking about “deals” and bragging about her own couponing conquests.

So we languished in our money and transportation fears over the weekend.

Saturday afternoon, to delay anyone else but me getting the van towed away, the children and I walked down to the college campus to visit with security.

After stopping by four or five of the campus buildings it became evident that finding the security people would be a trick, as there was no legend, map or directions to a “security” office anywhere.

We asked the few people we encountered but they didn’t know anything. Finally, a campus security car was spotted and we went to that building. A dubious-looking gentleman standing outside the building took us up two flights of stairs to another man wearing a badge and standing in front of a large conference room.

This man informed us that he was “security,” but not for the college. He was providing security for the “Pow Wow” in progress at the room we found ourselves at. I explained the van situation and “Edward” whipped out a cell phone and started calling for another guy named Marty, who was the guy Edward said was in charge of campus security.

While Edward was trying to reach Marty we noticed many Native-Americans entering the conference room around us dressed in full garb and headdress. We then heard drums and saw several of the Indians take the stage and begin dancing.

For some reason Matthew was uncomfortable around the Native-Americans and started crying. He wanted to “go home” (After the “Pow Wow” we walked a mile to Pizza Hut — and past an Hispanic youth gang — where we got Matthew a mini-pizza with a certificate he had earned in Reading last month. This made him much happier).

Edward never heard from Marty. But another guy called him back and told him to tell us to put a note in the window of the van.

Edward asked me if I would tow the van on Monday. I said “sure.” Although I had no idea if I could pull that off without any cash.

I left the college campus unsure whether I had bought some time or alerted some guy on a cell phone named Marty that he could call the police on us if the van was not gone by Monday afternoon.

Sunday came and went with much less excitement and possibilities than we had on Saturday. An inventory of supplies for the coming week revealed that we had plenty of stuff in the house because of Michelle’s couponing… only we didn’t have staples like milk, coffee, meat and bread. We also had no immediate prospects of securing these staples, except by taxi.

The coming week was chock-full of disturbing possibilities: What if the van’s problem was fatal? What if nobody would tow it and bill us? What if the repairs were more than Michelle’s next check? What if the tax-refund didn’t show up soon? What would happen if the repairs were done before we had any money? How the heck would we get groceries? What stupid, callous, crooked and impersonal thing would District 60 do next?

Uncertain of anything and at the mercy of fate we steadied ourselves for just about any possibility.

Michelle took a cab to work on Monday, as I stopped all activity to deal with the van issue and fend off the District 60 people… who were expecting their paperwork back no later than Monday.

After Michelle left for work, via taxi, on Monday morning, I decided to email Matthew’s school, Branson Online, to explain my stance regarding the questionable District 60 paperwork. That’s when I started having a computer problem. I’m still not sure what went wrong but the ancient Dell began refusing to load anything.

Monday is when we get a weekly call from Matthew’s teacher. So I spilled my guts to her about the paperwork and she contacted the other workers at Branson who were running Matthew’s evaluation.

In between calls I contacted a man named Dennis down the street at the auto-repair shop and told him of the problem. That’s when we got our first break. Dennis said the problem sounded like the alternator to him too but he couldn’t be sure of course until he took a look at it. He said he would retrieve the van and bill us for it.

This was a huge blessing.

The lady at Branson Online called me later in the day and sided with me against the District 60 people. I was given her permission to refuse the “questionnaire” form and any questions on it.

On Tuesday Michelle again took a cab to work. My computer miraculously began to work normally again. LA spotted the van at the auto-repair place (a relief). I received a call from the District 60 social worker who wanted the “questionnaire” back. I told him nothing about Branson’s decision and stalled him on delivery of the paperwork (the less they know, the less trouble they can cause).

On Wednesday I got brave and called Dennis at the auto-repair shop. The repairs would be less than Michelle’s paycheck on Friday. Although the cost would be about twice the van’s blue book value and would also leave us with about $27 survival money for the next two weeks, unless more miracles were forthcoming.

On Thursday I got another call from the District 60 social worker. He “related” to our transportation problem but wanted the paperwork back. I told him I would get to it when I could but that I wasn’t planning to take a taxi to deliver it. Fortunately, in District 60, one bureaucrat doesn’t know what the other is doing and this guy, Rudy, retreated when he discovered I knew more about Matthew’s evaluation process than he did.

Actually… Thursday would see most of the forces of darkness begin to retreat, as we battled against their attempts to rub us out. Michelle had Thursday and Friday off and, after checking our bank account online every 20-minutes or so for the tax-refund, she discovered a $300 mistake in our favor.

Dennis called to tell us the van was repaired and that we could come get it and pay for it on Friday (is that incredible or what?). Michelle also heard from an email friend outside of town who had a newer van we might be able to purchase with part of our income-tax refund.

We celebrated Thursday night by ordering pizza and hot wings. Michelle drove the Bush Mobile to the store to acquire milk, coffee and bread (and, yes… a cheap 12-pack).

This morning, before I went down the street to pay Dennis for the car repair, I checked the online bank account and discovered the refund had arrived.

We will travel to the Mexican restaurant for our annual tax-refund dinner.

As much as Michelle and I are convinced there are dark and oppressive forces that attack the mind, body and spirit, we are also convinced that there are forces for good.

We’ve seen it ourselves over this past week and in other situations.

This has been a long and stressful week. That’s why there have been no articles or an audio show.

But, I am much better now. I’m back in a position to cause trouble again.

I think I’ll make District 60 wait a while longer for their abbreviated paperwork.

‘Back to School’

2005-02-11T06:00:00.000-07:00

Homeschooling is tough but the public school system was outright ridiculous sometimes… at least it was to our family.

We still have had to deal with District 60 in Pueblo to a certain extent; we still have the older two children privately evaluated each year and turn in the results to the district every other year as required.

Where my youngest, Matthew, who is Down Syndrome, is concerned we haven’t had to deal with the district at all the past several years and haven’t had to report to them because Matthew is in a charter set-up with a school called “Branson Online.”

There is some backstory here; when Matthew was at a public school, here in Colorado’s District 60, a few years ago, he was coming home with many glowing progress reports from his teachers. What we noticed, after a while, was that Matthew could not duplicate the work he was bringing home completed.

To make a long story shorter we determined, over time, that the progress was being forged and — rather than continue to deal with the people involved — we pulled him out of the school. Our other two children were being homeschooled anyway, and Matthew wanted to be at home with the rest of us (he’s learning quite well now, by the way).

In transferring Matthew over to Branson Online we stumbled across a District 60 file where it was revealed that Matthew’s former teacher, principal and a couple of social workers had held an “IEP” meeting behind our backs… a big-time no-no, where they agreed (and we agreed by their proxy) to waive Matthew’s funding for services through the district — something he is entitled to by law. My wife and I were referred to in the paperwork — without ever being notified before or afterward — as “not in attendance.”

Rather than allow this to go unchallenged on the record we pushed the issue and forced the district to allow the record be amended. Subsequently all of those involved in the IEP meeting, the forging, the lack of compliance with federal law and the lying were reprimanded and the school lost its Special Ed contract.

This week Branson Online has set up a series of evaluations with District 60 personnel (where they merely act as facilitators), in order to prepare for their next LEGAL IEP meeting with my wife and I.

I wasn’t sure what to expect from the people at District 60. I do not trust them and they aren’t used to this process (we’ve learned that they resent it actually), as it is a new way to educate children. They certainly aren’t happy about providing this legally-mandated service to something like Branson, which is an entity they do not control.

But I’m sure Matthew’s folder at the district now has a big red check mark on it and they have, for the most part, been cooperative and friendly.

District 60 is only a participant in this process as a “facilitator” and NOT as an actual decision-maker that has a say in the IEP process. But, apparently, they could not leave it at that alone.

Tucked away inside the federal paperwork they gave me today was a “questionnaire” from District 60 itself. This paperwork is not part of the process of this current evaluation, plays no part in the upcoming IEP and, in fact, asks no questions at all that pertain to Matthew’s ability.

There isn’t any reason whatsoever for them to need this information or ask us to provide it. In my humble, yet experienced, opinion filling out this District 60 form is to give tacit acknowledgment that they have any say in our lives AT ALL.

The questions on this form preclude the notion that there is a “problem” with Matthew’s home environment and acts as an information-gathering tool toward a “determination.”

My concern is that, after filling out this form, we’ll find ourselves at a “hearing” next… that is, if they invite us to be there.

In the form (disguised as a “health history” record) they ask about everything in our personal life; our ethnicity, who our friends are, our friends’ ethnicity and THEIR level of education, home addresses and phone numbers, the same about all our relatives, “previous marriages” (if any) and the ethnicity, names, numbers and addresses of former spouses, our methods of discipline for all our children in the household, detailed information about how we educate and discipline our other two children… absolutely nothing that pertains to Matthew’s medical history or his ability in his current curriculum.

We’re not supposed to be smart enough to understand that the form is not only an invasion of our privacy but is aimed at the privacy of everyone we know. There is only one reason anyone would want information about friends and family: To attempt to find something “wrong”… anything at all.

At first, after looking through the paperwork, I was perplexed by the sort of information Branson and the federal government thought it needed. Then I saw the District 60 stamp and the “Social” department the form originated from… a cabal of crooked District 60 social workers whose purview Matthew is not under.

The workers I saw today were a bit disappointed I did not fill everything out right away. That's too bad. After a quick glance at the paperwork they appeared to be drooling over I preferred to consult with the one person whom I trust more than anyone: My wife. So they, hesitantly, “allowed” me to take the paperwork home.

Several years have gone by since our problems with the district but, apparently, there is someone in the district who holds a grudge. My feeling is that they want us to complete this form — which has no bearing on this IEP evaluation process — in the hopes that we might provide a nugget of detail that they feel they could use against us, inserting themselves into the process and our lives.

The form may very well be redundant information gathering and may even be benign. But something (I believe the hair standing up on the back of my neck) has signaled a warning sign.

As of this writing my wife has not yet seen the form. In the belief that my assessment of this “stealth form” could be mistaken and sourced in both my natural and well-earned paranoia (courtesy of District 60 itself)… I’m going to simply give the paperwork to Michelle and see what happens.

I’ve employed this system of checks and balances before and it has never failed me.

Michelle is at the point where she trusts the public school system — and the district especially — even less than I do. She’s pretty smart too. My guess is that she will notice the same problems I have. That’s how I’ll know my instincts are the right ones.

I suspect that we will not provide this sort of information to the same people we could not trust to educate Matthew or even tell the truth to their own superiors, the state and the federal government.

I’ve written about all this before. I’ve also had responses from people who say good things about the public education system and have expressed shock at what happened to us.

I understand that our experience with District 60 in Colorado is, mostly, an aberration…

I just don’t want them to be our aberration.

Update: After she looked over the form from District 60 Michelle’s response was “they can suck eggs!”

Ah… instincts.

‘Callous Sentiment’

2005-02-09T06:00:00.000-07:00

Every slight decrease in the number of jobless claims, during the past several years, is heralded by the administration as “progress.”

What isn’t taken into account — ever — are the facts that many people have even stopped looking for work as their unemployment insurance runs out, that the few jobs created (always woefully short from month to month of the number of people entering the job force) and that the “new jobs” are, for the most part, part-time and for less pay.

For all of this we have several practices to thank; the outsourcing of good jobs and the moving of American factories to foreign countries, where slave labor is practiced, the importation of foreign workers who work for much less, partially subsidized by the federal government, and the growing invasion of illegal aliens, who are hired illegally and work for less pay and benefits… a practice the Bush Administration wants to make “legal” (not that the illegality of the current situation is enforced by the administration… it isn’t).

While we wait for American corporations to begin “trickling down” their good fortune — and unprecedented profits — by increasing job starts and opening new factories and such many who had decent jobs in industries before Bush are desperately settling for newer and part-time jobs for close to minimum wage and no benefits. Many with degrees are working in several of these types of jobs just to make ends meet… if they can find them at all.

The essence of the problem, to be sure, is a decided greed by corporations, via the Bush Administration which acts simply as a conduit for their self-interests, but there is also another attitude at work…

“Callousness.”

At the same time the administration supports, aids and enables corporations against American workers, while espousing theories on “job creation” and a purported belief that uninhibited companies will “trickle down” their profits to the economy, it also talks about “retraining” and “further education” where jobs have been outsourced, eliminated or have simply disappeared.

When entire small towns are thrown out of work and those who have trained in various fields are met with closed factories and relocated industries — because of Bush Administration policy — the administration stammers that these folks need to “re-educate” themselves for the “global economy.”

Not only does the Bush Administration help the corporations outsource American factories and jobs and further aid the elimination of decent-paying jobs, with the aid of cheap foreign labor, in the name of corporate profits and “trickle down” economics, but it also callously insinuates that the result is the blame of the American workers themselves who, somehow, chose the wrong degree or industry on which to build a career.

But, the callousness goes even further…

While times are good for corporations and the executives who decide how millions will live, as they have their proxy in this administration, the Bush people are pleased about it all and display their pomposity directly toward the workers… who attempt to help themselves but find their options increasingly limited.

It was only one incident of many such displays of this arrogant and disgusting attitude toward the people he purports to represent, from someone who is supposed to be concerned about the plight of people affected by his policies but cannot be because of his lack of empathy and a decided callousness…

Last Friday President Bush — who represents the American people and, in fact, “loves” them — was promoting his “two Social Securities” plan with “regular” citizens in Omaha, Nebraska, President Bush walked into one of his often awkward and unscripted moments in which he stated that carrying three jobs at a time is “uniquely American” (supporting a family with one income and then two full-time incomes used to be “uniquely American”).

While talking with audience participants, the president met Mary Mornin, a woman in her late fifties who told the president she was a divorced mother of three, including a “mentally challenged” son.

The President comforted Mornin on the state of Social Security, stating that “the promises made will be kept by the government.”

But without prompting Mornin began to elaborate on her life circumstances and the following exchange occurred…

MS. MORNIN: That's good, because I work three jobs and I feel like I contribute.

THE PRESIDENT: You work three jobs?

MS. MORNIN: Three jobs, yes.

THE PRESIDENT: Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that. (Applause.) Get any sleep? (Laughter.)

Naturally, the president did not follow up on this exchange. In fact, he sounded pleased (hence his joke about “sleep”). Was Ms. Mornin working three full-time jobs or three of the president’s new part-time jobs? Why was she working three jobs at all? Could it be because two were not enough to make ends meet? Were benefits included in any of these jobs?

Has the president himself ever been in a situation like this where he was required to be “uniquely American”?

Not likely.

This is simply typical of the callousness of the Bush team about American workers in positions of disadvantage because of greed by Bush’s buddies in industry.

Is Ms. Mornin — and millions like her — a beneficiary of Bush’s “trickle down” way of thinking, or is Ms. Mornin — like millions of others — being “trickled on”?

I know several people like Ms. Mornin, who work hard trying to keep these new and disposable jobs in this new “global economy.” I know others who work right alongside people like Ms. Mornin… people with degrees in industries long gone to China and outsourced to India… people who take these rare and new part-time jobs for well below what it cost to obtain their degrees in the first place, if they can find the jobs at all.

These same people aren’t laughing about any of this. They are struggling to find their own slice of things “uniquely American.”

There was a time when one American full-time job could support a family. Over the past 25-30 years that changed into two full-time incomes per household supporting an American family.

As we are seeing this slip away — especially during the Bush years — we are learning that those two full-time incomes were actually a luxury, as they are being replaced, in a variety of creative ways, by new part-time jobs for less pay and no benefits by Bush’s like-minded, greedy and callous buddies in American business.

And… as we can plainly see from this uniquely “un-American” attitude…

We can expect more “trickling.”

‘Walk the Talk’

2005-02-08T06:00:00.000-07:00

With the presentation of President Bush’s latest budget one thing is clear: It’s no longer useful to be a “fiscal conservative.” The term is moot.

When a “conservative” president comes up with a $2.6-trillion budget — a budget more than one-third bigger than the budget he inherited four years before — without batting an eyelash… the word “conservative” doesn’t mean a thing anymore.

With the past four years of unprecedented spending, by this administration, and this new budget, the pretensions should be dropped entirely.

The two parties running our government both believe in big spending… they simply disagree on how the money should be spent; the Republicans believe that services should be cut and that the money should be spent on wars and social change in foreign nations, while giving corporations every break possible against American workers, and the Democrats believe that the money should be spent on human services in this country and nanny-like structures of control.

We’ve seen this sort of budgeting from “conservatives” before… during Reagan’s presidency. We are even hearing similar stories, from “conservatives,” about why the deficit is growing, the budget is increasing and some services are being cut.

The theory has been and is once again this: If the president operates the budget at a deficit and spends more money then he can also guide the government toward reducing itself in size by cutting programs and whole departments.

In other words, we can cut the government by increasing the size of it.

Ingenious, right?

Well… perhaps it would be if it were true.

The problem is that, during Reagan’s presidency, when this same sort of “voodoo economics” was practiced the deficit continued to grow, departments went untouched and the budget got out of control, ending up with Reagan growing the government by one-third overall.

And Reagan DID veto spending bills!

Bush is the first president since Martin Van Buren to spend an entire term in the White House without vetoing a single bill. In his latest budget bill Bush has slightly cut the cost of some services while INCREASING the budget.

George W. Bush is no Ronald Reagan. Bush doesn’t even employ the rhetoric against a growing government that Reagan did. Bush doesn’t combat any sort of spending on the government’s part as “wasteful” or “unnecessary.” Bush signs every single increase in spending and, in fact, proposes even more spending.

Keep in mind that Bush’s $2.6-trillion budget is a “proposed” budget. When the budget is debated by those in the House and Senate the chances are that it will actually increase in size, with any number of additional spending measures attached. Bush’s history shows us he will sign it.

George W. Bush is not a “conservative,” fiscally or socially. The description of him by conservatives as being a “conservative” continues to drive this writer nuts.

Bush’s latest budget promises to “cut the deficit in half by 2009.” We should remember that there was not a deficit but a surplus when Bush took office. We should also remember that Bush promised his tax cuts would “reduce the deficit” he created “by half” in his first term. We should also remember his reasoning on how this would be accomplished: that the tax cuts would lead to job growth… something we are still waiting on from one month to the next for going on five years now.

The very idea that “conservatives” are in control of anything is absurd on its face.

President Bush is not only a big-spender when it comes to handling tax money but he’s a destructive and reckless big-spender in that he doesn’t even support helping Americans with the spending.

Charity doesn’t begin at home with this guy… it begins in India, China, Afghanistan, Mexico, Iraq and “Palestine.” Sadly, it ends with Cheney and Halliburton and other buddies running the corporations (and the government by proxy) that are ruining any chance of reducing government growth and reigning-in the deficit while also ruining Americans’ chances at leaving a responsible, fiscal legacy to their children.

Support the president all the way. Holler in favor of everything he does while in office. That’s okay with me. You’re entitled to do this.

Call what President Bush does anything you want to call it…

Just, please, I beg you… don’t call it “conservative.”

‘Born to Win’

2005-02-07T06:00:00.000-07:00

‘Sweet Liberty’

2005-02-04T06:00:00.000-07:00

As covered here, over the months, I’ve mentioned that there are differences between what a “conservative” is today and what the term used to mean.

“Conservative” used to mean that a person was for DECREASED government spending and LESS government control. But this is no longer applicable to what “conservatives” and their major party — the Republican Party — say “conservatism” is now days.

These days, “conservatives” support larger government and more control over people. They support larger government in every spending bill they pass and they support control in every law that President Bush signs.

They have their reasons to be sure… but this is what they do.

Therein lies the only distinction between the two major political parties, in modern times, as they govern after being elected: The Republicans support government growth and control in favor of business and to the detriment of the people and Democrats favor larger government and control in favor of people and, mostly, to the detriment of big business.

In campaign rhetoric both philosophies sound worlds apart. In practice they are quite similar in that they both grow and further empower the government. Only one of the parties’ philosophies has any merit, and that is the philosophy of the Democrats… as they are the only ones who want to spend money to benefit the people they serve.

But, in the end, even their efforts are destructive as more tax dollars are used to help less and less people.

In reality both philosophies are destructive, as a growing federal government that spends, eats and wastes more and more tax dollars each year can only serve to further entrench itself in the lives of citizens as it hungers for more money to spend and more control in order to tax and spend it.

The Founding Fathers knew this about government. They put our Constitution into place not as a starting point for a government that needed to grow but as a limit on what the government was allowed and not allowed to do.

The government they established — in no way whatsoever — resembles the government we have today. This is not because of an intended “natural growth” of our government desired by the Founding Fathers but because of an unintended, destructive and greedy grab for power BY the people who run our government.

The fear of this tendency by the federal government was warned about before and during the establishment of our Constitution and observed in practice, by the Founding Fathers, after they established the Constitution and before they passed on…

“They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

“[D]emocracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy, such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man's life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable cruelty of one or a very few.”
John Adams, An Essay on Man's Lust for Power, August 29, 1763

“But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”
John Adams, letter to Abigail Adams, July 17, 1775

(For the record… I disagree with Mr. Adams on this one).

“That, as a republic is the best of governments, so that particular arrangements of the powers of society, or, in other words, that form of government which is best contrived to secure an impartial and exact execution of the laws, is the best of republics.”
John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776

“All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree.”
James Madison, speech at the Constitutional Convention, July 11, 1787

“An elective despotism was not the government we fought for; but one in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among the several bodies of magistracy as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.”
James Madison, Federalist No. 58, 1788

“For the same reason that the members of the State legislatures will be unlikely to attach themselves sufficiently to national objects, the members of the federal legislature will be likely to attach themselves too much to local objects.”
James Madison, Federalist No. 47, February 1, 1788

“One hundred and seventy-three despots would surely be as oppressive as one.”
James Madison, Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788

“There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
James Madison, speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 16, 1788

“Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”
John Adams, letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814

“At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account.”
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Monsieur A. Coray, Oct 31, 1823

(Although Jefferson was citing one example about the judiciary… his words are prophetic with respect to all branches of government today)

“The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.”
James Madison, speech in the Virginia constitutional convention, Dec 2, 1829

Notice the distinction, in these quotes, on the type of government the Founding Fathers themselves say they created and compare that with what modern-day politicians say we have now: A “republic”… as opposed to a “democracy.”

The Founding Fathers considered “democracy” as a possible form of government at the establishment of the Constitution. The thought of it was dismissed entirely by them all, as they held that form of government beneath contempt.

The Founding Fathers understood that democracies — by their very nature — only grow and consume more of the country’s wealth, while constantly plying more control from the people they govern until they ultimately collapse.

This is not understood by most people. But… it was understood by the people who established this country in the first place. What we have today is exactly the government the Founding Fathers did not want and also feared might come about.

So… our “Republic” is gone and now we have this ever-growing and always greedy “democracy” government that the Founding Fathers feared and attempted to avoid.

But, can we ever once again place government back into the limits established in our Founding Fathers’ Constitution? Several of the Founding Fathers did not think so.

Is it possible to change this monster with the help of the Republican and Democratic parties? Can these parties be “changed from within,” as so many who belong to them claim they can be.

Not likely.

I refer you to one man who tried: Ronald Reagan.

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

“No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!”

“To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last - but eat you he will.”

Reagan — by word and deed — DID attempt to change things from the inside. But, sadly, it didn’t take.

Since the two major parties are the ones that grew the monster in the first place and are now thoroughly entrenched and corrupted they cannot be trusted to bring about the needed change.

The platforms of both the Republic Party and the Democratic Party hold admirable and, in fact, valuable ideals which should be practiced. But, in practice, neither political party has anything in common with its own supporters and BOTH are at odds with their own rhetoric.

As we’ve been warned before, “power corrupts” and “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” This is where we are today… with two powerfully-entrenched political parties that not only do not have the courage of their convictions but no convictions with which to have any courage.

Competition and change is necessary. This can come about only if people realize what was intended by the Founders, how far removed we are from these principles and also what is at stake if nothing changes.

The only way to create change, at this point, is with other political parties… ones that would return us to a republic and Constitutional government and turn us away — by word and deed — away from this “democracy” the politicians in control continue to feed and empower… the very government the Founding Fathers dreaded might come about — with politicians who claim to uphold the ideals the Founding Fathers set forth.

To be sure… the two major parties are a central part of the problem in government today.

But… if you are one of their adherents who believes that either party can be changed from the inside, or believes these parties may change themselves, or if you claim “when a new party comes along that starts getting enough votes, I’ll join,” while at the same time acknowledging the obvious problems in the system to date…

Then YOU are a bigger part of the problem.

(Recommended reading: Libertarian Party Platform, Constitution Party Platform, America First Party Platform)

‘Ferris Bueller’s Day Off’

2005-02-03T18:00:00.000-07:00

I’m home all the time with the children. So… I kind of count on a reprieve every now and again. No reprieve would be “slavery,” wouldn’t it?

I don’t do things like I tried to do today all the time. But, every now and again, when Michelle is home for the day… the temptation is too great.

Since Michelle has two days off this week, so we can do taxes (yay), and I also have to begin assembling Matthew’s paperwork for the month to send to his teacher on Friday, Thursday became the perfect day to play… The Game.

I started playing the game last night, after Michelle got home from work.

Since I’m the obsessive sort, when I’m in a mood like this, I have to have something else to… well… obsess with. For this I chose John Madden 2004 (we don’t have the latest version). I have been playing this version of the game only a short while and have not yet mastered it.

Last night I could not get the New England Patriots past the damn Miami Dolphins. Tom Brady kept getting intercepted and then Miami would run that doper Ricky Williams for a touchdown.

But… I kept saving the game every time I made a bit of progress and also started over if something disastrous occurred (yes, I’m aware this is “cheating”).

Every time I’d score I’d change channels to catch a bit of the president’s speech…

“Social Security”… “disaster”… “Social Security”… “Bwahahaha”

Click.

“4th down and 53 to go for the New England Patriots, John.”

Finally, with the aide of creative cheating, I had the Pats up 30 to 10 late in the third quarter. So, I saved the game and relaxed for the remainder of Bush’s speech…

“Iraq”… “Iraq”… “Iraqi people”… “Iraqi people”… “Iraq”

“Zzzzzzz.”

Usually, when I get up, I head straight for the computer but this morning I blew off the article, the audio show prep, the Frugal and Free marketing and the laundry and headed straight for the PlayStation.

After banging on the almost four-year-old machine and cussing at it for a while the game finally uploaded.

I was shocked to discover that my game-save had been tampered with (the kids used the machine after Bush put me to sleep). The Pats were no longer leading 30 to 10. I was forced to play the Dolphins again.

No matter how much I cheated… they kept running Ricky Williams and kicking my butt. Brady kept getting intercepted.

Finally, I simulated the game in the hopes the Pats could win that way. But, they lost 43 to 3. I sucked it up and moved on to the next game.

During a first-half ass-kicking at the hands of the mighty Cleveland Browns — and more Brady interceptions — Matthew got up, so I started him at his computer with his schoolwork.

I hollered instructions to him between plays.

After a while the other two children got up. My game play was beginning to suffer even more, so I told the kids to “check on Mom.” Naturally, they woke her up and I was able to keep playing.

In the 3rd quarter of the Browns game we discovered that Matthew’s printer was out of ink and could not, therefore, be used to print off his worksheets. I had LA “tell Mom” and, so, Michelle started printing Matthew’s schoolwork from her computer and printer over coffee… while LA instructed her on which courses to click.

I told Matthew to take a break. Naturally, he went to my bedroom to see Michelle, leaving me alone with the Pats in the Living Room.

Meanwhile, back at the PlayStation, after the distractions had ended and after my humiliating loss to the Browns, I began to make some progress. I creamed the Broncos, Cowboys and Colts in short order and barely got past the Texans.

I went from being 4-3 to 8-3. The Super Bowl was not out of reach.

I could hear Michelle and LA arguing over Matthew’s schoolwork in the bedroom. I was hoping everyone would keep each other and Matthew busy while I marched to the Super Bowl. But, I guess the bickering and screeching I heard from the bedroom made me a bit overconfident that Michelle was too distracted to interfere with my game-play.

Like my opening drive against the Jags… it wasn't meant to last.

There were too many conflicting priorities building to a crescendo… not the least of which was Michelle’s wrath; Matthew wanted to watch TV in my room instead of doing schoolwork, LA wanted to get to Matthew’s computer but was bogged down with his brother's paperwork, Sheyanne was complaining of an upset stomach, I wanted to goof off and Michelle… well… she actually was trying to do Frugal and Free coupon work in between printing schoolwork pages, while fending off me and the kids.

I’m not sure what she had to complain about though; I had let her sleep-in for over a half-hour before I sent the kids to wake her up so she could make coffee.

I have to hand it to her though… she pulled things together better than I did against the other teams in the Pats' own division.

At any rate, after she had a pot of coffee and finally got to the end of printing Matthew's schoolwork (slightly more than a quarter of a season in Maddenland), Michelle started to wise up to the situation. She began to give me that rapid-fire “honey-do” stuff (you married guys know what I mean).

She began to rifle off a litany of things I was neglecting; laundry, a letter to Branson Online to get Matthew out of CSAP tests for the year, etc. Madden 2004 began to stay on “pause” more and more as Michelle counter-punched.

When I had barely gotten the first “honey-do” or two out of the way (scowling demands, actually) she hit me with a biggie… kind of like an uppercut after a great jab. It seems she had received several 10 cent orders from customers on Frugal and Free.

When customers do that she loses 70 cents per order.

Can't have that. Noooo.

This task, of course, could not wait until the end of the game against the Jags… so I was instructed to change all the pages at Frugal and Free to reflect her new policy of $1 minimum orders.

At that point… my march to the Super Bowl ended and I was forced to save the game and turn off the PlayStation.

Like I said, I don’t do this all the time… but I HAVE been doing this for a long time. I thought my game play was sharper than how I was able to perform today.

No. Not Madden 2004…

The other game.

‘Dollar Mambo’

2005-02-02T06:00:00.000-07:00

Conservatives everywhere have reason to celebrate… the president’s economic plan is working!

In fact, month after month, report after report, the numbers are showing consistency. Consistency is not what is needed, of course… “growth” is what is required, but we can all be ecstatic that the numbers are at least “consistent,” right?

Yay!

Employers announced fewer layoffs in January than they had in the previous four months, according to a job placement firm that tracks the staff cuts.

Phenomenal news! Whoo hoo!

The report shows 92,351 job cuts in January, the first time the total was below the 100,000 level since August, when 74,150 cuts were announced. The survey also showed more hiring announcements by employers in January, with the month seeing plans to add 29,832 jobs, up 40 percent from 21,262 in December.

So January’s numbers only show a loss of 62,519 jobs!

This means that the Bush Administration was right all along; outsourcing jobs IS good, the president’s tax cuts ARE working, foreign workers and illegal immigrants DO boost business, corporate greed and the closing of factories in this country DOES help the economy.

What else could we possibly conclude?

If these numbers hold firm it could also mean that the corporations have squeezed every dime possible from the American workers and consumers and could mean a reversal of the trend in the loss of jobs.

I’m tearing up here.

But, of course, we cannot allow the upward trend to begin until we’ve helped corporations and what’s left of American-based companies squeeze, as one would squeeze blood from a turnip, every last dime possible from the American workforce and the American consumer.

To this end… I have a few suggestions…

I just want to help get this recovery going, okay?

The president is giving his State of the Union speech tonight, right?

I’m emailing the following proposals to the president. Perhaps he can incorporate (sorry) these corporation-aiding suggestions into his speech. I mean… the report’s numbers DO suggest that corporations are reaching the boundaries of profiteering, with the aid of the Bush Administration. Much more is needed now…

The Corporate Zero Initiative

As we all know, corporations pay way too much in taxes, necessitating them to hire attorneys to find loopholes and place money in offshore accounts and such. This is ridiculous. Corporate taxes should be eliminated completely. All that needs to be done is increase the federal debt an additional two times a year to make up some of the difference. What the hell? We aren’t paying for that anyway… our children are!

The No Pencil and Pen Left Behind Act

It’s well known that worthless and expendable American employees steal pencils and pens from companies at an incredible rate. What’s needed is an expanded law, beyond prosecution… one that empowers the helpless corporations. Let’s also make it legal for corporations to seize employee assets (should they have any) times 20 in punitive penalties. This law will not generate a huge some of money. But, along with the other proposals here, it WILL aid the squeezing of every dime possible.

The “Who Needs a Vacation’ Act

Pesky federal laws require employers to provide idiot workers with vacation time. This has always been inconvenient for companies. This situation has required companies and corporations to hire additional lawyers to try and circumvent these laws, much the way they have had to do so concerning health benefits. Let’s strip this hindrance to profits by eliminating these laws in favor of corporations. After all… companies know what their employees need, right?

The Corporate Parking Profit Law

Companies across the country are, in some cases, required to provide a parking area for their employees. This is completely unfair. Let’s allow corporations and companies to charge their employees for this. We can further aid the corporations by placing no limit on this method of income.

The Corporate Benefit Lotto

One thing corporations suffer from is the fact that they do not have a concentrated effort behind their profiteering. A mandatory and federally-controlled benefit lotto could bind them together against the worthless workers. Employees are required to buy at least five $10 tickets per pay period. One lucky worker is chosen to receive free medical benefits for the month (less a $500 deductible). The feds (the house) rake 10 percent of the proceeds off the top and the companies split the rest.

Of course, the above proposals would work best if coupled with the continuing effort to outsource American jobs and the continued importation of foreign workers.

The raising of prices for basic needs, in areas where one company has a monopoly, i.e., gas and electric, can help some. The further cutting of portions on products, along with an across-the-board raising of prices can help as well.

But, in order for Bush’s economic plan to work properly, less hindrances to corporations and more laws favoring them is what is really needed at this point.

Every little bits helps, you know.

At any rate… I’m excited about the continuing progress of the economy.

With Bush’s economic agenda moving full steam…

That “recovery” should be coming any time now.

‘Punch-Drunk Love’

2005-02-01T06:00:00.000-07:00

I’m fascinated when George W. Bush talks about his “love” of the “American people.”

There isn’t anything President Bush won’t do for the American people… right?

Most people don’t doubt this is true. Certainly most Bush supporters don’t doubt this.

I feel bad about it. But… I doubt it big time.

I haven’t seen President Bush do one, single thing for the “American people” in his entire presidency, although he talks about them with such reverence and affection.

What I’ve seen — especially — is President Bush doing things, mostly, for NON-Americans… at the EXPENSE of the “American people.”

Perhaps you’ve had occasion to call tech support for your computer or computer program lately. If so, you’ve likely ended up talking to someone in another country. Chances are that country was India.

This is because companies now get tax breaks for outsourcing jobs that were once located here to other countries. These product phone support jobs mostly are going to the country of India.

I like how the companies make them use American-sounding names like “David” or “Rebecca.” Likely we couldn’t pronounce their real names any more than they could communicate in English.

Another aspect of these outsourced jobs is the companies that are shipping in immigrants to replace American workers HERE IN AMERICA… something also being done with tax breaks and logistical and legal support from the Bush Administration. Hospitals are laying off American nurses and support staff in favor of these corporate-backed foreign workers to save several dollars per hour on employees.

President Bush sure does love Americans, huh? He loves them so much that we are spending billions to pump up the economy in Iraq and spending billions for public schools, hospitals, police and firefighters there. Meanwhile we are cutting these vital services in America.

President Bush has also demonstrated his “love” of the American people by creating lopsided trade deals with China, which has thrown many Americans out of work and caused businesses to shut down here.

Then there is the proposed “guest-worker” initiative. Bush is demonstrating his “love” of the American people by making illegal immigrants “legal,” allowing them to work in the US for far below the going wages for jobs and throwing Americans out of work and causing them to lose benefits.

But President Bush’s “love” of the American people extends much further; he has shown much respect for the American people and his protection of the Constitution — something he has sworn before God to protect — by increasing the power of the federal government over their daily lives.

Symbolism is everything to President Bush.

This past week we learned that Bush “loves” the American people so much that he will now outsource the building of the presidential helicopter fleet to the Anglo-Italian helicopter maker AgustaWestland, dealing a blow to American builder Sikorsky, which has flown the president since 1957. The move will likely cause more layoffs for Bush’s “beloved” American brethren.

Rest assured that, when he isn’t encouraging the outsourcing of American jobs or pouring billions into the economies of other countries, our great president is doing everything he can at home to show his “love” of the American people… like outlawing the procurement of cheaper drugs across the northern border (I guess that “global economy” doesn’t necessarily work both ways, huh?), or using federal agents to stop landowners from protecting their own property from illegal aliens along the southern border.

President Bush sure does “love” the American people. Tomorrow night he will lay out his plans on how he will “love” us for the next year or so.

I never thought I’d feel this way about “love”…

But, I sure wish he’d love us a little less.

‘Time Bomb’

2005-01-27T06:00:00.000-07:00

The biggest travesty in President Bush’s “war on terror” (besides his infatuation with Iraq) is that the true terrorists — not just the ones who are terrorists naturally but those who actually attacked or helped attack our country — are getting away with it.

In the “war on terror” just how high up on the priority list was Saddam Hussein and Iraq? Did anyone read a history book on the region? Did anyone care?

Are we truly fighting a “war on terror”?

North Korea, for instance (part of the “Axis of Evil”), which went nuclear on President Bush’s watch, continues making nuke bombs without much more than lip service from the administration. There is much speculation — justifiably — that the lunatic who runs the country might sell some of these nukes to terror organizations.

Most of the 911 hijackers were Saudi Arabian and that “kingdom” continues its support and financing for terror while, every now and again, shooting or “catching” some of its own citizens to appease Bush. We call Saudi Arabia an “ally.” But by its actions, rhetoric and deeds… whose “ally” are they?

And… let’s not forget Osama, the head guy responsible for the 911 attacks. Everyone knows he is in western Pakistan but the Pakistani government (a military dictatorship and “close friend” of the United States) continues to play hide-and-seek on capturing him every time we declare “we are on the hunt.”

The nation terror-state of Iran, next to Saudi Arabia’s funding, is the worst of the terror lot. Iran is not only connected to many prolific terror organizations but actually supplies many foot soldiers and “martyrs” for the cause, as they are now able to do in Iraq.

Upon US investigation it was Iran that turned out to be the terror state that facilitated much of the 911 plotting. It is Iran that has declared the “destruction of Israel” to be one of its prime objectives. It is Iran that continues to aid the insurgents in Iraq to undermine our efforts there.

And… it is Iran that now has a nuclear program, with which it hopes to further destabilize the region by producing nuclear weapons to put on top of all those long-range missiles they’ve tested over the years.

In comparison to Iran… Saddam Hussein and Iraq were minor players in the terrorism game, as many knew beforehand and many have learned since (although Bush hasn’t). Now we have to accomplish two goals where one might have sufficed before.

But, it really isn’t that simple. We are now involved in a high-wire act without much of a net on which to land if we fall. We have uncorked the genie from the bottle, so to speak.

Iraq also has a history and volatility that only those ignorant of history could dismiss. Cobbled together by the British after WWI Iraq has only remained a “country” by tight-fisted control. This is because the three cultures that inhabit this “country” are all religiously and diametrically opposed to each other. There is no worse place on Earth to attempt to build a “democracy.”

But nobody in America has been told this information.

President Bush has actually convinced many Americans that there is an “Iraqi people.” There isn’t. What is really true is that there is an Arab and Sunni Muslim population that hates the ethnically Persian and Shia population and that BOTH of these populations hate the Kurdish population. All three of these populations are heavily armed.

Add to this mess both Turkey and Iran who not only are against any sort of autonomy for the Kurds (because both countries have a chunk of what used to be “Kurdistan”) and that both Turkey and Iran are wary of each other… and you’ve not got a “democracy” but the beginnings of a region-wide conflict that can only be resolved by much bloodshed, and which likely will not be resolved in a good way.

We are not actually helping the “Iraqi people” build a “democracy.” What we are really doing is trying to create an “Iraqi people.”

Suffice to say that President Bush has not fought a “war on terror” in Iraq but has poured gasoline (pun intended) onto a fragile storehouse of fireworks and then… given matches to all involved.

And… how’s that “war on terror” going anyway?

Since before and after President Bush’s inaugural address many have noted the change in rhetoric from the administration. The words “terror” and “terrorists” have been toned down and words like “tyranny” and “freedom” have been substituted… especially in the inaugural speech.

Since Iran is inching closer to actually producing the nuclear weapons it desires to have many have concluded that the change in rhetoric from the White House is designed with Iran in mind.

In fact, Dick Cheney mentioned this past week that, perhaps, Israel might take matters into its own hands concerning Iran… much the way it did when Iraq built (with the help of the French) its own nuclear power plant with weapons-grade plutonium being the goal.

What cannot be denied by anyone is that someone will have to deal with the terror-state of Iran sooner rather than later, ‘lest they produce their first nuclear bomb.

The Israelis may need to do so themselves (the only nation that has ever truly fought a “war on terror”), although this effort will, no doubt, be trickier than the Iraq nuke plant because the Iranians have built much of the project underground, near residential areas and also scattered it over a wide area.

Perhaps the Israelis can take out Iran’s nuke project with the aid of the United States but there is a drawback there; a joint US-Israeli effort would draw the condemnation and ire of the entire world and possibly set off a wider conflict.

None of this, however, would be the problem it is if we weren’t in Iraq, an effort which, if anything, has actually done more to set back the goals established in our “war on terror” and bog down our resources in order to “locate weapons of mass destruction,” “fight terrorism,” “free the Iraqi people,” or “establish a democracy in the Middle East,” take your pick.

We could continue to thump our chests, sacrifice our troops and believe, as the administration wants us to believe, that our efforts in Iraq are “fighting terrorism” or “putting the terrorists on the run” but this is ridiculous. What we are actually doing is setting the stage for the Full Monty in a region-wide conflict and enabling the terrorists.

Meanwhile…

Iran, Saudi Arabia — and every terror organization they support — North Korea, Syria (also meddling in Iraq) and Osama’s Al Qaeda continue their efforts collectively and separately while we attempt (lately) to “establish a democracy” with the separate, tribal and historically violent theocracies in Iraq.

As many say, “taking out Saddam was good.” This is true, although it should have been done much earlier, separate from the “war on terror” and with the regional consequences in mind.

It’s a real shame that the American people are susceptible to and influenced by simplistic themes and sell-lines. It’s a crime that the Bush Administration has fed that bad habit with deception and an ignorance of the facts to further whatever its motives are in the “nation” of Iraq.

Actually, we haven’t “taken out” the real terrorists at all. In fact, we are “allied” with a couple of them and have not confronted others. Where we have done some good is in Afghanistan. But even that country’s progress is on the backburner as the Iraq quagmire escalates and threatens to grow larger.

The reasons the administration gave and is giving for invading Iraq have changed so many times we are now several spaces removed from anything resembling a “war on terror.”

Where our national security was concerned — and should have been our ONLY and selfish concern after 911 — we are now allowing the true and most dangerous of the terrorists and terror-supporting countries to continue plotting against us while we are off-track nation-building in Iraq.

Bush said of all nations, concerning the neglected “war on terror,” “You are either with us or against us.” But what has actually been his practice is that countries can choose to be BOTH.

After the coming multi-nation conflict and the inevitable failure of “democracy” in Iraq the main players in terrorism will have advanced their capabilities (unless Israel helps against Iran) and we will have sacrificed much treasure in a horrid and nasty place that should have been the least of priorities in our “war on terror.”

This effort in Iraq — whatever the real reason or goal — may ultimately prove itself to be one of the biggest and most dangerous blunders in American history.

Call it whatever you want to… a “war on terror,” “freedom for the Iraqi people,” a “democracy.” Call the Iraq experiment whatever you desire in the face of those who call it what it actually is: A “quagmire.”

As Dick Cheney enjoys saying…

“You can put lipstick on a pig… but it’s still a pig.”

‘Dirty Money’

2005-01-26T06:00:00.000-07:00

Well… it’s official. I now have 2nd thoughts about slamming Bush so much in my writing.

If only I were syndicated… I might have been able to secure some funding from the Bush Administration for writing things in support of its policies. Imagine if I were syndicated AND actually supported any of the administration’s policies.

I could make a killing.

If I also did not have a face for radio I could go on television and sway my dedicated readership toward the president’s point of view on an issue and claim thousands in federal tax dollars from the Bush team.

But, then, while I DO have opinions, I don’t have the best head on money matters. I’d also probably do something stupid and let my principles get in the way of supporting the president’s policy. So… I wouldn’t ever get to be on the secret payroll in the first place.

You may remember that, a few weeks back, it was discovered that syndicated columnist Armstrong Williams was paid $240,000 to promote the president’s No Child Left Behind law by the Department of Education. Mr. Williams wrote in support of the law and went on television to pontificate in support of the law.

Unbeknownst to any of his dedicated readers (and most everyone else) Mr. Williams was being paid directly by the Department of Education for doing so — with your tax dollars — and in addition to his salary from the syndication and papers he writes for.

Mr. Williams subsequently apologized and said he “regrets” the decision. He kept the money but not his newspaper column.

For some reason what Williams did is considered “unethical” by those in his trade but, at the same time, nothing he did or anything the administration did is considered to be “illegal.”

The whole story seemed to die down a bit after a week or so. But, now… it’s happened again.

Now it’s been discovered, uncovered… revealed… that syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher, who repeatedly defended President Bush's push for a $300 million initiative encouraging marriage as a way of strengthening families, was paid $21,500 in a contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to help promote the president's proposal.

This is an unseemly practice by the administration (one of many). Not even taking into account the sleazeball columnists who take money behind the backs of their readers to promote items on the president’s agenda, while feigning an educated objectivity.

Let’s forget about them for a moment.

These are YOUR tax dollars going toward this underhanded effort by the administration… which can’t seem to accomplish anything at all unless it is based on a lie, a deception, or a stacked deck of some kind.

One wonders if the scandal goes even deeper; have newspapers been paid directly by the administration to write slanted stories aimed at enhancing the Bush team’s prospects on other issues?

How many other columnists, journalists, editorial desks and television anchor chairs have been paid off with your tax dollars to influence the masses toward favoring other Bush initiatives?

Will we find out next that Shepard Smith or John Gibson have favored the president’s proposals in stories they cover because they are being paid secretly by one of the departments in Bush’s cabinet?

Further: Will this “unethical” practice, concerning columnists who shilled for the Bush Administration, be covered up by others in the media and also on the president’s secret payroll?

One certainly gets the feeling that there is more to this one. One columnist taking secret payments may be an “oops,” two columnists taking payoffs from two seperate departments in Bush's cabinet is “intriguing,” but if one more two-faced liar falls out of the woodwork, taking under-the-table payments from a department in the federal government… although the situation is wrong, crooked and unethical, if not illegal… that’s a pattern and a scandal.

The attitude of this administration is just disgusting; something can be wrong but as long as they cannot be pinned on a legality… it's A-OK. They can also stand by while their shills are appropriately excoriated by the people and press and do nothing to those who instigated the scandal and helped commit the wrong.

So far nobody in the administration responsible for this outrage has been reprimanded or fired. If that continues we could also make the leap that this is policy inside the Bush Administration and not just “rogue” fanatics in the various departments. We would also, then, be correct in suspecting there are many other columnists out there doing the same things right now.

Keep a wary eye on your favorite right-wing columnist, reporter or editor.

That enthusiasm, in support of the president’s policies, may be for reasons other than just mere agreement.

‘Money Train’

2005-01-25T06:00:00.000-07:00

President Bush continues to be touted as a “conservative” president. Yet he continues to spend more taxpayer money than all liberal and conservative presidents combined.

President Bush has never met a spending bill he did not like. He has passed every Republican and Democrat bill ever presented to him. He has not used his veto pen one single time since becoming president.

The president continues to operate the budget, year after year, at a deficit and has presented no plan to reduce the budget deficit.

And it isn’t as if he is signing one liberal Democrat spending bill after the other, although he is signing those too, he is signing one liberal REPUBLICAN bill after the other.

We’ve heard a myriad of excuses about the spending; “it’s war time,” etc. The “war time” excuse would make some sense if the money was being spent on the right things. But, it isn’t.

For instance: President Bush made a big to-do over the $87 Billion for the Emergency Iraq Appropriations Bill the year before last. While campaigning against Senator John Kerry (and the Senator’s vote against the bill) Bush and his minions mentioned numerous times that Kerry had voted against supplies for our troops.

“John Kerry voted against body armor for US troops in Iraq.”

“John Kerry voted against armor for military vehicles in Iraq.”

Just in case nobody remembers this: THE BILL PASSED ANYWAY.

Are our troops supplied with body armor in Iraq? No… families and support groups are still gathering money, buying the body armor and sending it to loved ones in Iraq.

Do the military vehicles our troops use have the necessary armor to guard against roadside bombs? No. Donald Rumsfeld told everyone that the Pentagon was “doing everything possible” to catch up on armoring the vehicles… although the Pentagon really wasn’t. Only when the press heat got to be too much did the Pentagon actually step up the process.

Roadside bombs against our troops continues to claim the highest number of casualties.

But President Bush’s spending habits are certainly not limited to the boondoggle in Iraq. The president will sign any bill that crosses his desk, regardless of price and ignorant of affect and deficits.

Pork has always been a problem in spending bills. But this president is especially reckless when it comes to these kind of expenditures… and the word is out in the House and the Senate that THIS president is an especially easy mark.

Despite soaring deficits, lawmakers from both parties who approved a $388 billion spending package late last year set plenty of money aside for “pork for voters” initiatives including things like doling out $4 million for an Alabama fertilizer development center, $1 million each for a Norwegian American Foundation in Seattle and a "Wild American Shrimp Initiative," which has been dubbed “the no shrimp left behind act.”

Actually, all of this would be humorous if it wasn’t so damaging, offensive and irresponsible.

Other pork projects include…

$335,000 to protect North Dakota's sunflowers from blackbirds.

$2.3 million for an animal waste management research lab in Bowling Green, Kentucky.

$50,000 to control wild hogs in Missouri.

$443,000 to develop salmon-fortified baby food.

These are but a few items that are referred to as “pork.” Actually, every bill that’s ever passed has some of these items tacked on in the process before it is signed by the pen-happy Bush.

The list is endless.

And, so, here we go again. The president now wants another $80 Billion for the Iraq boondoggle and on-going disaster. Congress will rush something through their processes, tack on any number of pork items to the bill, send it up to Bush and… he will sign it sight unseen with his dripping pen.

Will our soldiers in combat see the results of any of this additional spending? I doubt it.

But, somebody at Halliburton sure will.

And — almost certainly — a “rat conservatory” somewhere will grab $6 million or so for the study of the affects of rodent excrement on the disposition of the Mynah bird.

‘Talk Radio’

2005-01-24T06:00:00.000-07:00

Shameless plug time!

If you visit regularly you’ll notice the associate links have changed somewhat in the profile area. The new addition is a link to a new page being put together by Hal from OEJrants.

Hal and I go way back. We’ve never met in person but we have been involved in several Internet projects over the years and have become good friends, while railing against the hypocrisies of our times.

The new link, “Kerry Fox Live,” and associated audio “show” has several purposes; firstly… to provide entertainment and also allow for some fun.

Another purpose would be to highlight the issues in the news each day and take a humorous swipe at them, while, hopefully, getting people to think a bit more about these very important issues.

To this end, at the Kerry Fox Live site, Hal has also set up a Message Board. We invite those of all political persuasions to stop by, register and leave their pontifications, opinions, diatribes, rants, railings and articles at the board. And, yes, you can also shamelessly promote your own blog, conservative, liberal, moderate or monarchy-oriented.

If any of this is for anything at all… it is to inspire, encourage, aid and abet and also provoke discussion.

This is what we are aiming for.

The only caveat to any of this — as is my plea always — is that everyone participate politely. Everyone of every political stripe, in this country, is entitled to their opinion. When this is gone there is no country, no Americans and no patriots any longer… only those in power and those who can out-holler the other point of view.

It’s approaching 10 years since I left my radio career behind. I don’t miss the business at all; it was rare indeed that it was ever any fun. This was due to the fact that the industry had more than its share of con artists, salesmen and game players. I love politics but I was never any good at playing politics in radio.

Sadly, from my perspective, the industry rarely focused on what it was supposed to provide: Entertainment. Since someone can only provide entertainment when they are having fun this aspect of the industry was always tough to handle when the politics were flying.

I finally got the hint that I had stayed too long in the business after I was canned from my last job… my third 104.1FM Oldies job in a row (I could not have accomplished this if I had tried to).

In fact, by that time, I was actually grateful to the ones who canned me. I remember thanking them profusely while they stood there with blank stares on their faces.

So here I am essentially doing a radio show now on the Internet… and having a bit of fun for the first time in a very long time. I hope you give us a listen and provide your feedback and maybe even participate in the show and message board.

This whole endeavor, by the way, is due to one person and one person only, Hal from OEJrants. It is Hal who has secured the web space, created the new page and provided all of the tools.

As we get the ball rolling, so to speak, we will be adding many more features. We hope to have the phone hook-up soon and also provide other ways of getting more participants involved.

None of what we are attempting to do is really new to the Internet, in my opinion, nor are we breaking new ground in technology. But, if everything works the way we hope, perhaps the tone of dialogue might change just a little bit and…

We just might have some fun in the process.

‘Oh, God!’

2005-01-21T06:00:00.000-07:00

The more news I read the more I become convinced of why it is President Bush gets away with the things that he does.

For four years now George W. Bush has been able to frustrate the Democrats who oppose him and those of us in the third parties who recognize the problems, both Constitutional and fiscal, inherent in all of the Bush Administration’s activities.

I knew that there HAD to be some reason that Bush would say one thing then do another, while his legions of adoring fans cheered the entire way.

Now I think I know why all of this happens: Because God is on his side.

This has always been one of the possibilities. The Republicans — especially the “Christian” Republicans — have been telling us this for years. Bush himself has even said he prays to God before making decisions. Heck, Bush even dissed his own father’s advice on Iraq and said he listens to a “higher father” when making these very important decisions.

Now, the Reverend Billy Graham says he believes God had a hand in Bush's re-election.

Has to be, right?

“Their next four years are hidden from us, but they are not hidden from you,” said the 86-year-old evangelist to the president. “You know the challenges and opportunities they will face. Give them a clear mind, a warm heart, calmness in the midst of turmoil, reassurance in times of discouragement and your presence always.”

I don’t know about you but this sure sounds to me like something God would have said to Moses (I DO know that in the film “The Ten Commandments” Charlton Heston played the part of Moses AND doubled as the voice of God. Maybe there is a hint buried in there somewhere).

So… it turns out that the real reason we have had to endure and will have to endure President Bush IS because God has endorsed his presidency and all of his actions.

This can no longer be denied.

I guess I'm just a tad shocked that God turned out to be so freaking mean-spirited. But, again, I suppose this feeling is just my bitterness at discovering that God and the bible are the exclusive property of those who support Bush. It's only natural I'd lash out this way after being disowned by God like this.

I thought God might have been more compassionate toward people. But, it turns out that God is a Republican.

I kind of pictured God as someone who cared about people needing medical supplies or care. I thought that, perhaps, God would have desired people to be free and supported the principles in something like our Constitution but it turns out that God is for the Patriot Act. I would never have thought that God would allow the doctrines of independent churches to be under the influence of the federal government. But, He actually supports this.

I’ve been operating under the assumption for years that God wanted His followers to be free of government influence over their lives but I was simply wrong about that.

Who would have thought that God would be against the 40-hour workweek or overtime?

Who knew that God wanted increased deficit spending? I’m sure I read it somewhere in the bible that God wanted people to pay their debts and remain solvent. But, I must be wrong about that too.

I’m sure I also read somewhere to be wary of false prophets and those proclaiming divine connections to God himself but, you see, I must have been mistaken about that as well.

Since I’m now convinced that God is on the side of the Republicans it is also now evident to me what it is God values most of all: Money. More specifically: Money for corporations. I would not have known this by simply reading the bible. I was wrong about God on that one too.

Lately, I’m even more surprised about God. Who would have thought that God would want His people to be at the mercy of corporations selling dangerous products and would be supportive of doctors committing malpractice and getting away with it?

What worries and confuses me most of all is, since I’m not a Republican, does this mean that I can’t go to Heaven either?

If I try to get through the Pearly Gates in the afterlife will they tell me that, because I care about people and civil rights and don’t support pre-emptive foreign military adventures, I can’t pass through?

I’ve read my bible over the years. I’ve read and re-read the New Testament. How could I have gotten things so wrong? I missed the passage where it says, “Thou art damned if thou doth not support self-righteous demigods with pretensions of conservatism.”

I can’t believe I would have missed a passage like that.

Who would have thought that me and God would be so opposed on the issues?

God… why hath thou forsaken me?

‘America, America’

2005-01-20T06:00:00.000-07:00

During the campaign for president I took my kids to the John Kerry rally here in Pueblo, as he was the only one who stopped here. The kids had a great time and have since begun an interest in the election process.

I consider it my responsibility to instill this in them. Too many adults these days — much less children — have little or no interest in this vital function and, therefore, no stake in the outcome because of it.

They get what they get. And, most of the time, what they get isn’t good.

But, I’m glad my children are interested and I’m thrilled that they are now asking questions about it all.

This week the History Channel has been running a special on all of the presidents. I’ve forced my children to watch that as well. I’ve also been pleasantly surprised that they seem interested in this.

The children know that I am not a Bush supporter. So they also asked me if I would be watching today’s Inaugural ceremonies. They were surprised to learn that not only would I be watching… but that they would be watching as well.

Their interest in the election process may not have transferred over to a love of history just yet. But I’ve explained to them that they should watch because they are also a part of this history. It affects them.

At any rate, as I’ve explained to the children, acrimony will return soon enough to politics but today is a special day… even if your candidate is not the one taking the oath of office on the north lawn.

Today is a day we celebrate being Americans… and there are no politics on this day. Granted, it’s only one day but it’s a special one. There aren’t many countries where the election process occurs and there sure aren’t many countries where an event like this is held every fours years whether we inaugurate a new president or the same one for another term.

In fact… in most places an event like this is held at the point of a gun and under the cover of darkness.

In America we hold this event in the daylight, FOR and WITH the people. It’s beautiful no matter who is taking the oath.

Take heart America. Some traditions are still in place. There is always time for politics.

But… not today.

‘True Grit’

2005-01-18T06:00:00.000-07:00

In the November elections Colorado voters passed a new tax on cigarettes (60¢ per pack), making my habit of smoking cigarettes completely unaffordable.

I’ve spent the past two days attempting to quit smoking, eating everything in the house and trying not to murder my children. So I have not been able to stay on top of blog things for the last day or so.

If you’ve ever quit you know the only way to do it is to go “cold turkey.” This is what I am trying to do. While quitting cold turkey, there isn’t much a person is good for to other people except to stay away from. So my posts may be even less coherent than normal.

I’ve had a lifelong battle with cigarettes. I’ve quit smoking before. The first time I quit I managed to stay off of them for five years, the 2nd time two years.

My reasons for quitting the first two times had nothing to do with money and everything to do with health. This time is different. I don’t want the state of Colorado to get one more penny from me than they would have coming otherwise.

Although, at first, many would say they wanted this new tax to try and keep people from smoking — and my quitting would demonstrate this to be working — this is a lie. They simply want to gouge people who are addicted to cigarettes.

I hope to prove the old conservative adage that if you tax something you get less of it and if you don’t tax something you get more of it. I also hope to get healthier in the process.

The state of Colorado can simply go to hell. The bastards.

So, bear with me the next couple of days and, please, wish me well in this attempt.

I pity the poor SOB who annoys me the next couple of days. I feel like I could rip the heart out of a rhinoceros.

‘From the Earth to the Moon’

2005-01-17T06:00:00.000-07:00

I don’t usually write about matters of science (not one of my better subjects). But, what I and countless thousands of others are witnessing — beginning late yesterday — is exciting even for me and just may be rather significant.

Photos from the 705-pound probe “Huygens,” now on the surface of the Saturn moon Titan, show a pale orange surface covered by a thin haze of methane and what appears to be a methane sea complete with islands and a mist-shrouded coastline.

The $3.3 billion Cassini-Huygens mission — a joint effort of NASA, the European Space Agency and the Italian space agency — was launched on Oct. 15, 1997, from Cape Canaveral, Fla., to study Saturn, its spectacular rings and many moons.

What the photos that the Huygens probe showed in its descent onto Titan is that, unlike Mars, which we learned is mostly rust and rock, the Titan moon has liquid flowing on its surface… which space officials say is either “liquid methane, or hydrocarbons that settled out of the haze” that envelops Titan.

The photos actually look strikingly similar to coastlines here on Earth (above photo looks like the California coastline), featuring what even looks like a river delta and rounded rocks in a seabed that bear a resemblance to any area along the Colorado River here on this planet. In fact, in one close-up shot of the rocks in the bed there even appears to be free-flowing liquid (below).

Also in the top photo, there is what looks like a canal leading down to the seabed and the distinguished coastline (no 7-11 spotted, however).

The photos are that stunning.

Don’t pack your bags for the Titan colony just yet… scientists say these photos only show something that is “similar to a young Earth” and that by studying Titan it could give us clues as to how life arose here.

But, the significant part of this discovery is that Titan is now the only other planet/moon known to have free-flowing liquid.

One shot taken from an altitude of 10 miles showed dark lines that suggested stream beds carved by liquid flowing into a dark area suspected to be a sea of liquid methane — with light areas in the dark that could be islands.

Over the next couple of days the pictures will be more plentiful and better refined. The ones so far have been breathtaking.

I suppose the photos could be more interesting…

Especially if there is something staring back at us in one of them.

‘School for Seduction’

2005-01-14T06:00:00.000-07:00

Where will you be on “We Are Family Day,” this March 11th?

Will you be with your family? Will you spend the day with your children? Will you invite family and friends over to the house for barbequed chicken, hot dogs and hamburgers? Will the Mrs. make her famous pizza-flavored potato salad?

Or… will you be indifferent to “We Are Family Day” while your children are in one of 61,000 lucky schools nationwide, private and public, celebrating this glorious day without your concern?

Wouldn’t it just be terrible if you missed out on “We Are Family Day”?

I mean… it’s all about “families,” right?

Well, not exactly.

“What is ‘We Are Family Day’?”

On March 11th grammar schools across the nation will stop teaching reading, writing and arithmetic (if they are actually doing this in the first place) and will hold a program teaching “gay tolerance.”

The program includes a video on “gay acceptance,” featuring SpongeBob SquarePants and Barney the dinosaur. Materials provided by the “We Are Family Foundation” include comprehensive lesson plans for teachers.

Discussion on homosexuality will be encouraged for all students and children will be asked to visit the foundation’s website to take a “tolerance pledge,” which includes sexual orientation.

The distribution of the video is being sponsored by FedEx and will coincide with the video's broadcast March 11 on Nickelodeon, PBS, and the Disney Channel in celebration of the proposed “National We Are Family Day.”

No children’s TV character will be left behind in the effort. Characters appearing in the video are from award-winning shows including “Arthur,” “Barney,” “Bear in the Big Blue House,” “Between the Lions,” “Blue's Clues, Bob the Builder,” “The Book of Pooh,” “Clifford the Big Red Dog,” “Dora the Explorer,” “Jimmy Neutron,” “JoJo's Circus,” “Kim Possible,” “Lilo & Stitch: The Series,” “Little Mermaid,” “Madeline,” “The Magic School Bus,” “The Muppet Show,” “The Proud Family,” “Rugrats,” “Sesame Street,” “SpongeBob SquarePants,” and “Zoom.”

The video also features cameo appearances by entertainers Bill Cosby, Diana Ross and Whoopi Goldberg.

How come we can’t get this sort of comprehensive effort in schools for reading, writing and arithmetic?

Now, here we go again. The word “tolerance” pops up like a stubborn weed in the middle of the lawn. Not only is the weed there, obstructing an otherwise well-kept yard, but the PC police will not allow you to mow it down.

How can anybody be against “tolerance,” unless they are… (gasp), “intolerant,” right? If you are against this program in public and private schools you must be a… (gasp), “homophobe,” right?

For me the issue is one of common sense and has nothing to do with “intolerance.”

Our schools are churning out students who cannot read, write or add and subtract. But these same yahoos that can’t teach Johnny (or Juan, depending upon your city's demographics) anything useful in life are going to teach “tolerance” to grammar school kids in furtherance of Gay Awareness.

I’m all for “tolerance” regarding anyone except criminals but schools should not be the place where sexual orientation is preached or discussed. Shouldn’t all of this be between parents and their children and, if need be, a decent therapist?

Shouldn’t teachers be teaching other things?

What about the kids themselves? Is there a desperate need for this info in Kindergarten-sixth grade? Is the idea of “intolerance” foremost in their minds?

I don’t know about you but when I was in these grades my biggest problem was which side would want me at recess for “tackle the man with the ball.” I was also fond of sweet-tarts and was always concerned about whether I’d have enough change for a steady supply.

I didn’t have a clue what “sexual orientation” was so I wasn’t “intolerant” about it. I was VERY intolerant of my 5th-grade English teacher, Mrs. McMickle, who forced me to write hundreds of lines at a time for challenging her instruction about sentence elements (who cares about “dangling participles”?).

Maybe times have changed since I was in school. Maybe there ARE tens of thousands of gay students being intolerated and homophobied… I don’t know.

Maybe there are thousands of children in our schools who are gay and don’t know it yet and they need the teachers to show them how to be gay the right way. Maybe teachers who can’t teach children anything else CAN properly instruct them on “sexual orientation.”

But, I kind of doubt that.

I’m fairly sure Mrs. McMickle wouldn’t have handled it well.

So, what will you do on “We Are Family Day,” on March 11th?

Well, I’d suggest you keep the kids home, play hooky from work and have a nice barbeque.

‘Something to Talk About’

2005-01-13T06:00:00.000-07:00

Perhaps you remember the language. I’ll be darned if I can find anyone supporting the Iraq War who remembers it. But, then, maybe they don’t want to remember it.

The language went like this: “Weapons of mass destruction,” “vital national security interests,” “gathering threat.”

In heavy rotation, especially, was the phrase “weapons of mass destruction.”

I mean… it wasn’t like we heard this for a couple of months until we got sick of it.

No.

We heard this crappola for well over a year until we heard it in our sleep and every time we turned on the news channel or when we tried to watch local newscasts for the weather report.

“Slight chance of snow showers over the weekend with an increasing chance of WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.”

On and on it went, day after day, week after week, month after month, from one administration official to the other, from one news show and from one pundit to the next, through public debate, through the House of Representatives, to the Senate, then through the UN.

Leading the way in this “Mass Destruction of the English Language” was the “president of mass destruction”… George W. Bush. He said “weapons of mass destruction” so much it almost detracted from his other favorite utterance, “Iraq.”

But then Dubya did something brilliant… he put “weapons of mass destruction” and “Iraq” together. He started doing this with such regularity that, at times, it seemed more like a contest…

“Gee, how many times can I say each of these in every speech I make?”

After a few months of repeatedly hearing the phrase “weapons of mass destruction” everywhere I turned I mentioned to my wife that no matter how he played at posturing — or even whether any of his demands would be met or not — it seemed to me that Bush had made his mind up to invade Iraq. What I saw him doing then was attempting to persuade the rest of us (or lull us to sleep).

“weaponsofmassdestruction weaponsofmassdestruction weaponsofmassdestruction weaponsofmassdestruction weaponsofmassdestruction weaponsofmassdestruction weaponsofmassdestruction weaponsofmassdestruction”

Bush kept at it. On and on he went with “weapons of mass destruction” day after endless day until, ultimately, Congress, the pundits and a majority of those polled in the United States said, “Okay, okay, Dubya… you win! Invade the sucker!”

So… he did.

After the looting… um, er… “liberation” of Baghdad, mysteriously, we started to hear less about “weapons of mass destruction.” Everyone was so tired of hearing it being said (and thoroughly convinced Saddam was the one who attacked us on 911) nobody really noticed the gradual retirement of the phrase.

For the most part the public was already convinced (i.e. “brainwashed”) that the weapons were there. Even upon our troops’ approach to Baghdad Dick Cheney had said, “It’s only a matter of time. We know where they are.”

But the big moment never came. We started to hear a new phrase from the administration, “freedom for the Iraqi people.” Only that phrase didn’t really catch on with the same effect as “weapons of mass destruction.” It didn't even catch on with the Iraqi people themselves.

As the months passed and we began losing troops every day — and as the chemical, biological and nuclear weapons went undiscovered — it was almost like the administration had run out of steam in its rhetoric. They needed something fresh. Since no such weapons were being found they then needed people to forget about “weapons of mass destruction.”

Eureka!

Some genius in the administration (possibly Bush himself) came up with, “democracy in Iraq.”

That did the trick!

So, as the months have passed and two years have turned, while the daily death toll has mounted, with triple the number in injuries, the administration has been saying this new phrase over and over and… over again.

The new phrase and focus has worked so effectively that hardly anyone noticed when the administration officially concluded (unsuccessfully) its search for “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq.

My theory is that — even though it was Bush’s reason for invading Iraq — people don’t care because they are simply sick of the phrase “weapons of mass destruction.” Either that or Bush said the phrase so many times together with the word “Iraq” that they are now synonymous in the public’s mind and, therefore, it is conclusive.

The Bush team has been using the newer phrase “democracy in Iraq” for about a year now. We’ve lost many troops in the interim. An “insurgency” has grown. Both the installed Prime Minister and President of Iraq have expressed fears and doubts publicly about the upcoming elections. Bush himself has declared that “14 out of 18 provinces are safe” (Weeeee!)

My guess is that if things continue to go badly in Iraq the Bush Administration might need a new phrase soon.

I wonder what the life of a high-profile political phrase really is… one, maybe two years? Maybe it depends on how well the action the phrase is associated with is going.

“Paging the president’s catch-phrase meister!”

‘See My Lawyer’

2005-01-12T06:00:00.000-07:00

Couldn’t help noticing this story this morning: Apparently, two older men waiting in line to get into court were arrested for exchanging lawyer jokes.

Men Arrested for Telling Lawyer Jokes While Waiting at Court.

Seems there was a lawyer in the line as well and he overheard the two men and had them arrested for “disorderly conduct.”

There’s an old saying that “everybody hates lawyers… until they need one.”

The saying, of course, was made up by lawyers themselves and contains an element of truth… as do most utterances by lawyers.

My family has always been chock-full of lawyers, going back for over a century on my Mom’s side. They can be a pain in the ass and they can also come in quite handy.

Although I was encouraged to become a lawyer myself I never really wanted to. At this stage of my life, I’m not certain if that instinct made me noble or is the reason for my poverty.

Oh well… too late now.

Being related to lawyers and being around them a lot, I’ve been exposed to many lawyer jokes — many from lawyers themselves. At the risk of being arrested, here are some good ones…

"How do you tell if a lawyer is lying? His lips are moving."

“What is a criminal lawyer? Redundant.”

“Why don't sharks eat lawyers? Professional courtesy.”

“Mommy, do they bury two people in the same grave?"
“No dear, why do you ask?”
“Because this tombstone says, 'Here lies a good man and a lawyer.’”

“Client: "How much do you charge to answer three questions?
Attorney: $500.
Client: Whoa! That's a bit high, isn't it?
Attorney: No. What's your third question?"

“What's brown and black and looks good on an attorney? A doberman.”

“What’s the difference between a lawyer and a catfish? One’s a scum-sucking bottom-dweller and the other one is a fish.”

“What happens if you give a lawyer Viagra? He gets taller.”

“What’s the difference between a tragedy and a damn shame? A tragedy is when a busload of lawyers goes over a cliff, and a damn shame is if a couple seats are empty.”

“Why do lawyers wear neckties? To keep their foreskins from flying up over their heads.”

“Why did New York end up with all the lawyers, and New Jersey with all the toxic waste dumps? New Jersey got first pick.”

“What do you call a lawyer who finishes last in his class? Your Honor.”

“What's the difference between a female lawyer and a pit bull? Lipstick.”

“Why are lawyers buried in graves that are twelve feet deep? Because deep down, they're really not all that bad.”

“What do you call 20 lawyers skydiving? SKEET.”

“How is a lawyer like a Slinky? Neither one is good for much, but it's still fun to watch one tumble down the stairs.”

“What do you call a lawyer with his hands in his own pockets? Unemployed.”

“What's the difference between a snake and a lawyer laying in the road run over? Skid marks leading up to the snake.”

I don’t know how much trouble those two guys will be in for telling one or two lawyer jokes but if any lawyers read this post…

… I may need an attorney.

‘Ham & Cheese’

2005-01-11T06:00:00.000-07:00

The sports pundits are calling what Minnesota Vikings wide receiver Randy Moss did in Green Bay last weekend a “simulated mooning.” But what Moss actually did was “simulate” defecating on the Packers fans in the end zone after scoring a touchdown and then “simulate” wiping his butt on the goal post.

When Moss wasn’t “simulating” he could be seen on the Vikings’ sideline standing on top of the players’ bench holding his helmet, steam coming out of his nostrils, his four-and-a-half foot tall fro waving in the breeze, hollering at Packers fans to “look at the mother-f***ing scoreboard.”

He looked like Buckwheat’s bad uncle whacked out on cocaine.

Times sure have changed.

Perhaps I should apologize to you young people right away; I’m one of those old fuddy-duddies who remembers the way things used to be and mourns the demise of these things.

I actually remember a time when there was no celebrating or dances in the end zone. I remember the first time I saw anything like that: It was in 1974 when Billy “White Shoes” Johnson (one of the good guys), as a rookie, did something called “The Funky Chicken” in the end zone after scoring a touchdown for the Houston Oilers.

It was innocent enough and everyone thought it was funny. Johnson sparked a generation of imitators, all of whom had their own touchdown celebration dances.

While the celebratory dances of Johnson’s generation were something new to football fans nobody ever suggested that Johnson and the others were not team players otherwise.

This cannot be said of some players today. Players like Randy Moss and Terrell Owens not only taunt opposing fans and players with their celebrations but also speak out against their own coaching staffs and criticize anything that does not give them the opportunity to do more taunting dances in the end zone.

For instance, before the Vikings-Packers game Moss actually was on television talking about his coach negatively. A week earlier, in an embarrassing loss to the Washington Redskins, Moss left the field early and headed to the locker room.

The most enduring image for me this past season was Terrell Owens following his quarterback Donovan McNabb up and down the sidelines, during a game, hollering at him for not throwing more passes in his direction.

Owens himself has been in trouble for taunting after scoring a touchdown and being openly critical of his coaches and teammates… especially while he was playing in San Francisco.

Owens is a talented receiver to be sure, as is Moss, but the 49ers — learning that no one is so talented as to be above the team — finally got enough of Owens’ antics and traded his problematic butt to a more appropriate venue in Philly.

Now, this weekend, the Minnesota Vikings will play the Philadelphia Eagles in the NFC Divisional Playoff game. The shame for me is that both teams can’t lose. I suppose I can hope and pray that they go into triple-overtime and clobber the living hell out of each other but that might be too much to hope for.

If Randy Moss is healthy (he has a problem with his foot, as well as with his attitude, ego and hair) there is a good chance there may be a riot if he does something stupid in front of the Philly fans, as they are as disgusting a lot as there is in the NFL.

The last I heard was that Terrell Owens was not completely healthy either, so I haven’t heard if he will play or not (I think not). If both play in this game we could witness the nastiest display in football history (actually, Moss is capable of pulling this off alone).

I’m not sure when things changed. And, no, I don’t blame Billy “White Shoes” Johnson for starting it all. The celebratory dance may have been his invention but he didn’t start this young punk syndrome prevalent in sports today.

Mr. Johnson was a clean, fun and good-natured team player. He still stays in great shape and works with younger players, teaching them sportsmanship.

Another one of the good guys, from that same era, was a player named Rick Upchurch. He did celebratory dances too, while playing for the Denver Broncos. He lives here in Pueblo now and runs a Christian football camp for young people called “Rare Breed” (which my kids attend). I’ve never met Mr. Upchurch but I’m suspecting he is appalled by the antics on the field today.

Yes. Times have changed.

Where we once had the “Funky Chicken” we now have the “Simulated Butt-Wipe.”

Yeah… I miss Billy “White Shoes” Johnson and the times of teams and players and the absence of oversized egos.

So… call me an old fuddy-duddy.

I know times have changed, from team sports to individual selfishness, but it isn’t a good change. I’m also not sure when and how things changed. I suspect that neither Mr. Johnson or Mr. Upchurch know the answer either.

I know that many excuse this imbecilic and juvenile behavior that is practiced on the television and seen by young people everywhere. But I long for the time when players were more responsible toward their youngest fans and displayed true sportsmanship in front of large crowds.

“Mr. Johnson… Mr. Upchurch… please pick up the white courtesy phone. We need you.”

‘Dear Mexico’

2005-01-10T06:00:00.000-07:00

The government of Mexico has issued a new brochure, aimed at helping its citizens survive illegal entry into the United States and showing them how to live in our country as “undocumented immigrants” (illegal aliens).

The color primer, published by Mexico's foreign ministry, gives would-be migrants tips including how to swim across the Rio Grande and avoid detection in the United States. It also sets out their legal rights on detention.

The government of Mexico denies that the booklet is a “how-to” manual for one-million or more Mexicans who attempt the illegal crossing each year.

I have obtained this booklet and have posted it below (with text and translation) for your inspection.

You be the judge…

Ponga en la espera para la cubierta de la oscuridad. Las patrullas de Gringo son pocas y lejos en medio. ¿Pero por qué ocasiones de la toma, huh? El objeto de este manual es conseguir a todos los campesinos de México del país con seguridad. Lea y aprenda.

(Lay in wait for the cover of darkness. Gringo patrols are few and far between. But why take chances, huh? The object of this manual is to get all of Mexico’s peasants out of the country safely. Read and learn.)

Según lo aconsejado para sus millones de campesinos sin valor, el gobierno oficial de México le aconseja hacer furtivamente en los Estados Unidos bajo cubierta de la oscuridad… véase la foto. Las mujeres deben seguir a los hombres en cuanto a observan su zona. ¡Ahora, prisa, prisa!

(As advised for its millions of worthless peasants, the official Government of Mexico advises you sneak into the United States under the cover of darkness… see photo. The women should follow the men as to observe their tract. Now, hurry, hurry!)

Haga que sus mujeres hacen todo el trabajo. Ordénelos diluir cualquier mercancía que usted esté llevando en los jarros del agua para evitar la detección. Fuércelos llevar sus fuentes. No permita que se quejen. Caminata rápidamente en los Estados Unidos y hacia donde viven sus parientes desapercibido. Póngase en cuclillas en el desierto siempre que se observen los vehículos del gringo.

(Make your women do all the work. Order them to dilute any merchandise you are carrying into the water jugs to avoid detection. Force them to carry your supplies. Do not allow them to complain. Walk quickly into the United States and toward where your relatives live undetected. Squat in the desert whenever Gringo vehicles are observed.)

Si usted está utilizando NAFTA para entrar en el país, para pagar apagado su guía inmediatamente y para seguir las reglas indicaron arriba. Deje el más débil entre usted al dado en el desierto. Excepto sus fuentes para las que esta' lo más mejor posible capaces de terminar el viaje. ¡Prisa, prisa!

(If you are using NAFTA to enter the country, pay off your guide immediately and follow the rules stated above. Leave the weakest among you to die in the desert. Save your supplies for the ones best able to complete the journey. Hurry, hurry!)

Una vez con seguridad en el hogar de sus primos del y los amigos en los Estados Unidos, es importante entender varias cosas sobre el Gringos. Aman oírse que hablarlos y creer están actuando benevolently cuando ayudan a nuestra gente. Déjelos ramble sobre las reglas cuando usted coloca a sus niños en escuela. Cabecee siempre como si usted los entienda. Pero, no es importante que usted entiende realmente. Usted puede volver a enviar siempre e incluso desdeñar el Gringos. Esto se permite y es una práctica aceptada. Sea seguro insistir que todas sus instrucciones a usted estén traducidas. Es asombroso pero harán realmente esto para usted. Gringos no es muy brillante. Recuerde, nosotros tienen el forro siempre del presidente de Gringo, George W. Bush.

(Once safely in the home of your cousins and friends in the United States, it is important to understand several things about the Gringos. They love to hear themselves talk and believe they are acting benevolently when they aid our people. Let them ramble about the rules when you place your children in school. Always nod as if you understand them. But, it is not important that you actually understand. You can always resent and even despise the Gringos. This is allowed and is an accepted practice. Be sure to insist that all of their instructions to you be translated. It’s amazing but they will actually do this for you. Gringos are not very bright. Remember, we have the backing always of the Gringo president, George W. Bush.)

De vez en cuando, usted puede ser acercado por los funcionarios de la inmigración de Estados Unidos. Esto no es una preocupación importante, pues los sobornan fácilmente. Las familias deben poder reunir sus recursos para esta actividad. Esta es la razón por la cual el gobierno oficial de México aconseja que sea el mejor vivir comunal.

(Occasionally, you may be approached by United States immigration officials. This is not a major concern, as they are easily bribed. Families must be able to pool their resources for this activity. This is why the Official Government of Mexico advises that it is best to live communally.)

Establecido una vez en los Estados Unidos es importante que usted ayuda en la inmigración de otros campesinos sin valor tales como se. Se cerciora de esta gente seguir las mismas reglas que usted lo hizo.

(Once established in the United States it is important that you aid in the immigration of other worthless peasants such as yourself. Make sure these people follow the same rules as you did.)

Mucho trabajo en los primeros días dentro de los Estados Unidos incluirá la acopio de la documentación falsa necesaria para probarle que sea elegible para el trabajo. Para esto hay una red ancha de los campesinos del compañero listos ayudarle para un honorario nominal.

(Much work in the first days inside the United States will include gathering the necessary false documentation to prove you are eligible for work. For this there is a wide network of fellow peasants ready to help you for a nominal fee.)

Mucho del esfuerzo detrás de la tentativa de los campesinos de establecer Azltan es ofensivo en naturaleza. Sea bandera de cierto usted México de la exhibición, eso que usted parquea irregularmente y que juega su música nativa en alta voz, pues pone el Gringos en la defensiva. Mientras que el Gringos asqueroso se preocupa de todo el esto, tenga su toma de los niños algo que pertenece a ellos.

(Much of the effort behind the peasants’ attempt to establish Aztlan is offensive in nature. Be certain you display Mexico’s flag, that you park erratically and play your native music loudly, as it puts the Gringos on the defensive. While the filthy Gringos are worried about all of this, have your children take something that belongs to them.)

Hay ciertas situaciones que usted puede encontrar; cuando es parado por el policía de Gringo y sin la identificación y el seguro apropiados... ¡cFuncionamiento! También, cuando es enfrentado por un Gringo sea seguro tener muchos otros campesinos con usted.

(There are certain situations you may encounter; when stopped by Gringo police and without proper identification and insurance… RUN! Also, when confronted by a Gringo be sure to have many other peasants with you.)

Muchas cosas son consideradas aceptables por el Gringos en su vida en haber conquistado con todo pronto ser regiones liberadas. También, hay muchas opciones; si usted teme usted está a punto de ser deportado, pulsa a su mujer en la presencia de otras. Esto asegurará que usted es incarcerated dentro de los Estados Unidos. Esto es preferible pues el gobierno oficial de México no repatriará a campesinos encarcelados y no quisiera que se volvieran. Asimismo, el Gringos dar a su familia muchas ventajas y continuará seguramente permitiendo que vivan en el país. Si, sin embargo, viene ese día triste cuando las autoridades de la inmigración le enfrentan en su hogar, no se desespere. Repita simplemente las instrucciones en este manual.

(Many things are considered acceptable by the Gringos in your life in the conquered yet soon to be liberated regions. As well, there are many options; if you fear you are about to be deported, strike your woman in the presence of others. This will insure that you are incarcerated inside the United States. This is preferable as the Official Government of Mexico will not repatriate imprisoned peasants and does not want them to come back. Likewise, the Gringos will be certain to give your family many benefits and continue to allow them to live in the country. If, however, that sad day comes when immigration authorities confront you at your home, do not despair. Simply repeat the instructions in this manual.)

EL EXTREMO

(THE END)

‘Break the News’

2005-01-07T06:00:00.000-07:00

Someone high up in the food chain must be getting nervous about our operation in Iraq.

President Bush is “sending retired four-star Army General Gary E. Luck to Iraq next week to conduct an unusual ‘open-ended’ review of the military's entire Iraq policy, including troop levels, training programs for Iraqi security forces and the strategy for fighting the insurgency,” according to this story.

The move is seen — justifiably — as a sign the war is not going well and also seen as a move that is way too little and far too late.

The news came after another “bad day” (as Donald Rumsfeld describes them). Nine US troops were lost on Thursday… seven in one incident alone.

In still more bad news yesterday it was also learned that the Pentagon is planning an even greater extension on tours of duty for National Guard and reserve troops. So the ones who are there will stay longer and the ones about to go will have to plan on their lives being disrupted for an even greater length of time… with as many 2-year stretches as is deemed necessary by the gurus running the debacle.

Not that anyone in the National Guard should be worried about their job back at home… Bush will be shipping in lots of illegal aliens to take their place.

I’m constantly told of all the “good news” that is being lost in the media shuffle about Iraq, without many examples being supplied. Also, there is the mantra by many that the increasing deaths of our troops are “miniscule” compared to, say, traffic fatalities in the US or regards the murder rate in some cities.

Some who support this ridiculous war are also comparing the number of deaths and injuries to Vietnam, as if this is supposed to make the war more reasonable, as if we are talking about numbers and not people.

These arguments can only serve to remind us that we are dealing with a reverse “mini-Vietnam” in Iraq. In Vietnam the decision had been made that there would be no plan to win the war (which was “winnable”). In Iraq… there was no plan to win the peace, aside from all the Iraqis throwing flowers at our soldiers’ feet (we hadn’t expected a war beyond the first month). There is yet to be seen any evidence that the war in Iraq is “winnable.”

After Iraqis “stepping forward” did not happen (except to loot everything not nailed down in Baghdad) we began to hear about ambitious plans, by the administration, to help the Iraqis “establish a democracy” in the Middle East.

Now this is not going very well, as our troops continue to be blown to smithereens and the Iraqis who are “stepping forward” are being gunned down, blown up and found dead in Iraqi fields. The surrounding countries continue to finance the insurgency and continue to supply the insurgency with fresh martyrs (Saudi Arabia gets a pass because of its oil).

Now, instead of a “democracy” we are only buying time as we are caught in the middle of an escalating insurgency, with the popular support of the people, and are only a half-step ahead of the coming civil war… which anybody with a knowledge of the history of the region knew would come after Saddam’s removal.

With the arrival of this former-general, to “assess” the situation once again, it is clear that, with respect to the strategy, in an operation that Bush keeps glowing positively about… the administration is really winging things.

Anyone who does not buy the “democracy” angle or the “freedom for the Iraqi people” angle — or who recognizes that the on-going insurgency has the popular support of the people — is pooh-poohed as “negative” or “pessimistic” and told once again that our troops are sacrificing themselves to keep the homeland safe (which is preposterous considering we aren’t doing what we should to guard things here at home).

Again, this morning, the president was on the tube expressing his delusion that everything is going just swell in Iraq. He talked of establishing a “democracy” again. He mentioned that “14 out of 18 provinces are secure.”

This is an interesting statement. Three out of the four are in the Baghdad area and include nearly half of the Iraqi population, as well our tactical command and control.

Nobody supporting the war likely remembers this (nor wants to) but about 8 months ago Bush was talking about 15 out of 18 provinces” being “secure.”

This is progress?

And… the hits just keep on coming.

‘Touch of Evil’

2005-01-06T06:00:00.000-07:00

Stunning news out of Texas…

The conviction of Andrea Yates, the woman who drowned all five of her children in the bath tub, has been overturned because — and you may not actually believe this — “psychiatrist Park Dietz was wrong when he said he consulted on an episode of the TV show ‘Law and Order’ involving a woman found innocent by reason of insanity for drowning her children.”

In other words… the conviction has been overturned because Yates DID NOT watch a TV episode that DID NOT exist.

I’m having a hard time understanding how this is even a factor; the woman confessed to drowning her children. She was happy about it! All the evidence also points to the fact that she did it. But, because she didn’t watch a TV program…

Okay, okay. The news is rather fresh. Perhaps we don’t know all the details about this decision yet. What we do know is terrifying…

Andrea Yates, who called herself “Fertile Myrtle,” after she bore five children over eight years, began to suffer from what was diagnosed as a “major depressive disorder” for which she was prescribed antidepressants.

Under pressure to have more children from her idiot husband Rusty, after a couple of suicide attempts and after coming under the influence of a traveling preacher named Michael Woroniecki, who told her "the role of women is derived from the sin of Eve and that bad mothers who are going to hell create bad children who will go to hell," Yates decided she would “save” her children from Hell by… killing them all.

This is according to Yates herself…

Andrea filled the tub with water and systematically drowned the three youngest boys, then placed them on her bed and covered them. Her youngest, Mary, was left floating in the tub.

The last child alive was the first born, seven-year-old Noah. He asked his mother what was wrong with Mary, then turned and ran away. Andrea caught up with him and as he screamed, she dragged him and forced him into the tub next to Mary's floating body. He fought desperately, coming up for air twice, but Andrea held him down until he was dead. Leaving Noah in the tub, she brought Mary to the bed and laid her in the arms of her brothers.

During Andrea's confession she explained her actions by saying that she wasn't a good mother and that the children were "not developing correctly" and she needed to be punished.

Now we get to the part of American jurisprudence where, when someone murders another, we determine if they did so because they are “insane” or not. You see, if someone murders because they are “insane” they can get out of most of the punishment. If they are not “insane” then they must pay the price.

The general philosophy behind this determination is whether or nor the perpetrator knew what he or she was doing and whether or not that person meant to kill someone. With Yates, there was no doubt about this; she confessed and told authorities she knew what she was doing and meant to kill her children.

But, as we see with the Yates case, a murderer can still get out of a fix even when they are determined to not be insane. The reason can even be something as lame as they did not watch a television show that never aired.

There is always the basic question of what good it ever does to determine if someone is insane or not, if they have killed and may kill again. Can a woman who killed her five children, insane or not, be “rehabilitated” and contribute to society?

During her trial and conviction Yates garnered support from every women’s group in the country. Most wanted her committed for a few years with a chance for release. Some wanted her to be let go outright.

As it stands now the Texas authorities can retry her for the original three murders (they did not go forward on two in case of something like this). Andrea Yates will likely not ever be free. But the possibility exists.

Did she kill all of her children? Yes. Is she or was she insane? Not according to her original conviction. Does it matter? Should she be released?

As a devoted fan of ‘Law & Order,’ I don’t have to wonder what Lenny Brisco would say.

‘Out of Control’

2005-01-05T06:00:00.000-07:00

Early on in George W. Bush’s presidency I found several of his positions odd for a “conservative” president.

First… “conservatism” should be put into its proper context… isn’t “conservatism” supposed to be the idea that “people are responsible for their own lives” and that the government “shouldn’t be the nanny”? Hasn’t the idea of “conservatism” been to slow down or even decrease federal expansion? Under the “conservative” banner isn’t the federal government supposed to have LESS control over peoples’ lives?

What about the basic ingredients of the “Christian-conservative” philosophy? Aren’t they supposed to be FOR people and AGAINST government and special interests? Aren’t they supposed to be obvious and common sense positions?

Well, these were the assumptions I was operating on, thinking what I had always understood “conservatism” to be.

I had had my doubts about Bush all along. For instance, it had been discouraging to see the “Christian” and “conservative” Bush people attack, smear and discredit John McCain in the primaries… in the name of “Christianity” and “conservatism.”

Even though I have always believed that an un-Christian act should not be committed in furtherance of “Christian” beliefs I was assured by several Christian Bushbots after he was barely elected that Bush was actually a “Christian conservative.”

What’s the saying… “believe me and not your lying eyes”?

But, for my lying eyes, with Bush, strange things kept happening. After a while a pattern emerged.

The pattern is this: “Control” then “Profit for Corporations.” Everything the Bush Administration does fits one or both of these profiles.

On the “control” side Bush put forth his “religious initiative.” It didn’t take a rocket scientist to see that many religions could be influenced by government funds much the way the individual states have been corrupted.

With Bush’s “religious initiative” — in the name of “charity” — churches can now be coaxed into changing their doctrines regarding a variety of social issues in order to qualify for government funds. Even if “conservatives” trust Bush with this program — and I don’t believe they should — they certainly will not be able to trust others who might be president someday.

In any event this program does not allow churches and charities to rely on themselves but puts government directly into the mix and, therefore, in control. The program is also an expansion of the federal government and NOT “conservative.”

Another issue that encompassed both “control” and “profit” was the one regarding medicines from Canada. Desperate seniors who needed to pay for medical supplies AND pay for living expenses were getting their drugs from Canada, which bought them directly from American companies and then subsidized the drugs through their government.

In other words… the drugs were the same ones they would be buying in America but the cost was infinitely less than people would pay here. There wouldn’t have been anything wrong with that unless somebody wanted to control it for their own selfish reasons.

And… someone did.

Bush put a stop to this in a variety of ways; he criminalized those who were selling the Canadian (American) drugs to seniors in this country, he further beefed up the security on the Canadian border (while lessening this on the southern border), and got laws passed regarding the sale of Canadian drugs to Americans.

He also began a campaign of fear aimed at seniors, through the Department of Health and Human Services, with scary phrases like “unsafe drugs” and “contamination” — concerning drugs made by American companies and also available in America but for higher prices.

The only outcome, of course, was that seniors were forced to buy the same drugs for higher prices made by Bush’s donors at American companies…

… “control” then “profit for corporations.”

The on-going illegal alien/national security/lower wages issue is one that is nakedly increasing profits for corporations. Bush continues to say the illegals are here to “do the jobs Americans will not do.” But, they are flooding the American job market and causing decreased wages and benefits for American workers and increased profits for corporations.

Bush not only wants to legalize this practice but also enhance it.

Bush’s new “amnesty” initiative, which he calls a “guest worker” initiative but which allows illegals to come here and stay indefinitely, would allow corporations to actually advertise outside of the country for workers.

The new saying should be “they are here to do the jobs Americans aren’t allowed to do.”

The middle class, a living wage and national security aside, it isn’t hard to imagine what this treasonous plan will do: It will further erode the standard of living for American workers, put control and the law on the side of corporations and encourage even more illegal aliens to come into the country.

Again… “Control” then “Profit for Corporations.”

There are many other issues Bush has decided the past few years besides these, all of them fitting one or both of the profiles; tax breaks for companies that outsource American jobs, the dissolution of the 40-hour workweek … which also follow the pattern of benefiting corporations to the detriment of American citizens.

But, let’s digest his future plans…

Now that we are stuck with Bush for another four years we are already hearing his new ideas for us. The latest one in the news this week is… “frivolous lawsuits.”

In his rhetoric, Bush is tying “frivolous lawsuits” directly into the healthcare industry, with which millions of Americans are desperately searching for answers. But what his plan actually entails is a limitation upon American citizens and their rights to sue (guess what?)… any corporation for whatever reason.

To be sure… there ARE “frivolous lawsuits.” But what about people who have actually been injured by a company’s negligence, defective products and quacky doctors? It won’t matter if Bush gets his way. Again, there will be one entity benefiting from Bush’s plan… his buds in corporations.

Companies and corporations should not be penalized or inhibited by the federal government. But it’s not the president’s job to enrich them by penalizing and inhibiting American citizens. In fact, the president isn’t supposed to do anything BUT look out for American citizens.

“Control” then “Profit for Corporations.”

Sadly, this is what motivates President Bush in ALL situations and on ALL issues.

Check for yourself and see if this pattern is not applied to absolutely any action by this administration.

It isn’t “Christian,” it isn’t “conservative” and … it ain’t pretty.

‘A Moment of Clarity’

2005-01-04T06:00:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I had one of those “moments of clarity” you’ve heard about (when something is realized in its full context). I’ve had these moments before, as I’m sure you have. At these moments we pause and stare into space… the full impact of the moment no longer too abstract to comprehend as we face the affect, overwhelmed.

I remember once standing in the grammar school cafeteria, in the evening, as coaches were choosing kids for the Bantam League Football teams. I had a moment of clarity then too when I realized I was to be the last kid chosen.

Another time was when my oldest son was born and all of a sudden I realized that my life would be completely changed (how this didn’t occur to me beforehand… I have no idea).

So… what was the big moment yesterday?

Yesterday, while I was doing html for the wife’s web site (a brain drain), the kids were goofing in the kitchen. Over the holidays, my wife had procured — in one of her many coupons deals — a giant sausage.

Now, the children have been attacking this sausage over the past week or so, with my youngest, Matthew (a sausage freak), getting by far the most of it. But, yesterday, the sausage was no longer “giant,” and had been reduced to one large hub.

Naturally, this caused dissention.

My older two, LA and Sheyanne, had been experimenting with the remaining sausage in the microwave. They especially liked that the sausage sizzled afterward (a non-child will likely clean the inside of the micro-wave). The experiment also produced grease on the plate, which they immediately gave to the dog, which caused the dog to start barfing… necessitating her expulsion to the backyard.

Matthew had been sneaking into the kitchen and swiping slices of sausage, which, of course, caused the others to complain. This all went on for a while. In between html fields with my wife’s coupon entries, when I could no longer take the commotion, I hollered…

“LEAVE THE SAUSAGE ALONE!”

That’s when I started staring into space in my “moment of clarity.”

Why is this a big deal?

When was the last time you had to stop working at something to holler out “LEAVE THE SAUSAGE ALONE!”? When did you ever have to utter this sentence at all?

Unless you have children and giant sausages you’ve NEVER had to say something so damned stupid.

What’s more… the children did not leave the sausage alone. When they noticed me simply sitting at the desk staring into space they went back to slicing, micro-waving and bickering.

While I had my “moment of clarity,” I could only think of all the idiotic phrases I’ve uttered, over the years, since the children came (and you thought I was new to this only in articles).

For instance, I’ve probably said “stop it” several-hundred-thousand times in 14 years.

“Stop it” is probably the most common parental utterance. We say it a lot. We say it in movie theatres. We say it at the grocery store. We say it in crowds and when everyone is looking. Say “stop it” to the children and it rarely has an effect. Say it in a crowd of people and heads turn. I have to say “stop it” many times each day. I’ve said it already today and the kids aren’t even up yet.

Even though it doesn’t do much good to say “stop it” to children parents say it anyway. It’s like an automatic reflex or something.

The only thing that ever changes with “stop it” is the inflection; “stop it”… “Stop it!”… “STOP IT!” Sometimes parents say it rapid fire like, “stop it, stop it, stop it!” and it takes a few moments to be alright again.

I said “stop it” once in my sleep and, for several weeks, Michelle and I slept left-to-right.

I was in a department store with the children once, shopping for clothes (for myself that time). I was the only one who could be seen above the racks by half a dozen other shoppers. I knew what I was doing. I was trying to get my kids’ hands off all the clothes and had to say “stop it” repeatedly, while wrestling with their hands. What everyone else saw was this grown man saying “stop it” to himself and doing something with his hands below his waist.

Another idiotic phrase in the parental vernacular — and I’m sure parents of more than one child can back me up on this — is “quit fighting.” Not that I am a Henry Kissinger or anything but I say “quit fighting” every day or so. I’ve said “quit fighting” so many times it does not have the desired effect. So I guess I’m as useful toward stopping a fight as Henry was.

There are many common and idiotic things I’ve had to say over the “years of children” but the most ridiculous lines are the ones regarding special circumstances.

For instance — thank God only once — I had to say, “Put the shit back in the toilet!”

“Dammit! Get your sister’s Barbie out of the tree!”

“You cannot go outside without pants!” (actually, I've said this one more than a few times).

“Leave the sausage alone!” Astounding that anybody has to say such a thing. Yes. Believe it or not this was a defining moment.

Other people are promoted to company president for their “moments,” others win gold medals or rescue hundreds from a fire… they are elected to political office, they are retired to the Hall of Fame or they save B-Company in a firefight.

My life is clarified when I say, “Leave the sausage alone!”

So, I’ve reflected on all the nitwit things I’ve had to say to the children.

These things are not always declarations. Many idiotic utterances from all parents are phrased like questions…

“Why did you cut the eyebrows off ALL the stuffed animals?”

“Didn’t you realize that you cannot cook Play-Do?”

“Didn’t Mom teach you to put the butter on AFTER the bread is toasted?”

I should mention that the only response you hear to any question you might ask your child is “I don’t know.”

But… that’s a whole other article.