The Mainstream Media is Getting It Wrong Again: They Underestimate Conservative Turnout on Election Day

The word out in the media is that they're laughing at the GOP vice presidential nominee and consider it a joke.

GOOD.

Considering the outcomes of the last two Presidential elections, one would have thought that they had learned their lesson. Guess not. They're ignoring the effect that Governor Palin is already having on conservative voters, who have already proven that when they turn out in large numbers, their candidate wins the election.

There's some pretty silly articles out there put on by liberal pundits who have no clue as to what kind of strategy McCain is employing, including this one. The Politico article is one of the more clueless ones that I've seen so far.

It's still too early to tell if Governor Palin will be able to draw out conservatives who were sitting on the fence, waiting to see how things turn out before deciding to go vote on Election Day. But if she's successful and enough attention is turned onto Obama's time in the Senate and his super-liberal positions, the Democrats could be in deep trouble, considering that there's a statistical dead-heat going on in the polls.

The entire election will hinge on whether the conservatives turn out in force, and carry as few as two swing states that are leaning toward Obama at the current time. There's still two full months and change before Election Day, and it could go either way. But the MSM is underestimating the conservative turnout and overestimating the Democratic turnout, as they have over and over again. It'll be funny if they're dead wrong--again.

The conservatives are better at turning out voters than the Democrats and "rock the vote" are. When will the media be on the same page as reality?

Gustav Threatens New Orleans: We're About to Find Out if Recovery Money Was Wasted

Hurricane Gustav is approaching New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, and we're about to find out if billions spent on Katrina recovery was worth it, or if the money went into a sinking money pit that matches the sinking bowl that New Orleans sits in.

FEMA, Louisiana's state government and New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin have a chance to prove that they've improved their plans in their response to the approaching threat.

The Army Corps of Engineers reports that their improvements to the levee system around New Orleans and in southern Louisiana are 20% complete. Uh oh. And parts of the city remain nine feet below sea level and continue to sink.

People who are choosing to stay in the strike zone need to reconsider TODAY and leave TODAY. By mid-morning tomorrow, it will be too late.

McCain's VP Choice is a Good One: Experience Remains an Issue in McCain vs. Obama Race

John McCain selected Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate. It's a good choice, and an unexpected one. The smart money was on Romney as McCain's VP candidate, but McCain went with another Republican--and a conservative one--who has taken on her own state party in an attempt to straighten Alaska out.

I view her as an ideal citizen-politician who isn't part of the Washington crowd, who isn't afraid to take on her own party and will tell it like it is.

More importantly, she counts herself as an opponent of abortion and has gotten good reviews from conservative leaders. I like the choice.

Obama is trying to say that experience is no longer an issue between the candidates, but it actually still is. The main event is still Obama vs. McCain, not Obama vs. Palin. Obama or McCain will be running the country in 2009; that hasn't changed, so experience is still on the table.

Democratic Convention Was All Giltz, No Substance: Temple of Obama Was Ridiculous

The Democrats sure know how to put on a glitzy party, that's for sure, but their convention was all glitz, and no substance. They failed to astonish anyone with bold new initiatives, and was nothing short of a full-scale victim pity party.

And there was Bill Clinton retelling old lies and rewriting history...again. All one has to do is look at the first quarter of 2001's growth rate to tell the story of record surpluses and economic growth: the economy grew backwards at a rate of -.49%. He handed off an economy with decreased GDP to George W. Bush. His surpluses were already on the way out the door while Clinton was still in office.

I wasn't impressed with the rhetoric. All I heard was "poor us, poor us." They delivered on the "why" but not on the "how" except in the most generic terms possible. "Obama has the experience to put people back to work!" How, exactly?

And the Temple of Obama thing on the last night was utterly ridiculous; it's cannon fodder for the opposition, who has already taken great advantage of how it looked, even before the One even appeared on the stage. And when he did take the stage, he announced nothing new, other than some new criticisms of McCain.

For all that trouble, Obama got a six point bounce in the polls, which is considered a moderate outcome. The candidate who gets the bigger bounce in the polls following the respective conventions usually wins the election. In 2004, Bush got a 15 point bounce, Kerry got a five point bounce. Kerry was also dealing (ineffectually) with the Swift Boat ads, which came on the heels of the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

I took more enjoyment out of watching MSNBC with it's on-air personality conflicts. THAT was more interesting watching than the Democratic Convention.

I wonder if the networks will monitor the GOP convention next week as closely as they did Obama's. I seriously doubt it. And I also wonder if the GOP convention will be as generic as the Democratic one was. We'll see.

Did Hillary Mean It? WHO CARES?

I've got a few things to say about this recent body language/speech analysis that the networks seem to be indulging in when analyzing a political speech.

I don't put a lot of stock in over-analyzing a political speech, and I think that the networks are doing precisely that. And they're missing the point. What percentage of political speech made by a politician is actually meant?

The real answer might shock some of the pundits.

Regarding Hillary's "concession" speech, she just got her ass kicked in the delegate count, and for the sake of her party's unity, she gave the speech that people on her side needed to hear. THAT'S ALL IT WAS! And if anyone missed it, she said this between the lines: "Hope Obama loses so I can run again in 2012."

That's the headline, CBS. "Did she mean it?" WHO CARES!

As far as the side I'm on, I'm not on hers, and I will campaign against her again when she runs in 2012.

NO to McCain-Lieberman: Conservatives WON'T Stand For It

There's a big rumor going around that John McCain has chosen independent Joe Lieberman as his running mate. I hope that this rumor is false; I know I'm not alone in saying that I wouldn't vote for this ticket, regardless of whether Obama is going to win it or not.

I like Joe Lieberman, but his voting record is straight-liberal, except in national security.

McCain needs to really choose carefully. His values-voters are hanging in the balance.

MSNBC Talking Heads Feuding More Than Usual: Democratic Convention Acts Like a Pressure-Relief Valve

For some time I've been watching the Bill O'Reilly (FoxNews) vs. Keith Olbermann (MSNBC) feud as the two personalities took potshots at one another on their respective shows.

But I didn't see the on-air Joe Scarborough vs. David Schuster spat or Keith Olbermann open-mike commentary during a Scarborough report during last night's Democratic National Convention. It's facinating that these kinds of eruptions happen during live coverage of an event, or even in the studios themselves. The Geraldo Riviera vs. Bill O'Reilly confrontation last year was pretty wild, too.

Will MSNBC react to this exchange, or will they waffle and let things stand?

If Hollywood Wants Obama to Win, They Need to Shut Up About McCain

It occurs to me that the more Hollywood talks politics, the more the right gets fired up. So it stands to reason, that if they want their "chosen one" Obama to win, they need to shut up about McCain and keep making movies. In fact, the less we hear from Hollywood, so much the better.

If they want to use the power of their celebrity to promote a cause, that's one thing. But everyone saw what happened when McCain ran his "Celebrity" ad and use Britney Spears and Paris Hilton in it: Obama's numbers began to slide and haven't recovered. He'll have a bump in the numbers next week due to the Democratic Convention starting tomorrow, and all eyes will be on Obama.

The week after, the GOP has their turn. Then I fully expect one of the most negative campaigns in American political history to begin.

But with the success of McCain's "Celebrity" ad, Hollywood should take note that most common folks don't care about their opinions. They'll wind up hurting Obama instead of McCain if they trash-talk McCain.

Full-Circle: DNC Restores Votes Stolen From Michigan and Florida

The primary voting drama that happened between Florida, Michigan and the Democratic National Committee has come full-circle. As had been hoped, the DNC restored full-strength voting rights to Michigan and Florida at the request of Barack Obama.

They had stripped the two states of all their delegates to this week's Democratic National Convention in Denver as both states had primary elections prior to Super Tuesday. After much screaming, both states had half-strength votes restored to them in May, and full-strength votes restored as of today.

Finally, some common sense coming out of the DNC. Those voting rights should never have been taken away in the first place; their own rules say that those states who have pre-Super Tuesday elections will be penalized with a 50% loss of voting delegates, not 100%.

Is candidate "undecided" from Michigan going to be represented at the DNC too? That was one of the more ridiculous things to come out of the election in Michigan. They should have kept all the names on the ballot, like they did in Florida, instead of taking them off and putting "undecided" on there.

Well, we just completed sixteen days of Olympics on TV. Now we'll have eight full days of hot air coming from Denver and St. Paul over the next two weeks. THERE'S a global warming catastrophe! Everyone had better go out and buy carbon credits so that the temperature of the planet doesn't go through the roof during the conventions!

While everyone's out purchasing their carbon credits, I also have a bridge in Brooklyn that I'd like to sell you....

IOC Needs to Clean Up It's Act: Beijing Selection Was a Costly Mistake and Set the Cause of Human Rights in China Back Decades

The International Olympic Committee considers the Beijing Games a back-slapping success, but given what it's done to the cause of human rights in China, they should be mollified. Yes, the on-field games were a tremendous success. But at what cost?

They've set back human rights in China for decades!

The Chinese government forcibly relocated hundreds of thousands of people who used to live where the Olympic venues now sit, placed political dissenters under arrest in the weeks before the Olympics, threatened gatherings of more than five people with arrest for fear of public protests in full view of the Olympics and TV cameras, arrested foreign protesters, set up "protest areas" and then arrested applicants who dared to apply for permission to protest in those areas.

The press reported this story on a pair of elderly Chinese women whose house was demolished. When they applied for permission to protest in the "protest area" they were arrested and charged with "disturbing public order" and sentenced to one year in a labor camp to re-education.

And we won't even discuss Tibet, whose "appearance" in the Opening Ceremonies was faked by the Chinese authorities.

The only ones to do their parts were the athletes, who I won't criticize. I'll be happier to see them in London in 2012.

Shame on you, IOC! Develop a backbone, please, and don't award the Olympics to totalitarian regimes that do this kind of thing to their own people.

Joe Biden is Obama's Choice: Will Hillary's Voters Stand for This?

Joe Biden was announced as Obama's choice to be his running mate yesterday, and it's an interesting choice. I thought he'd go with Hillary Clinton to keep her voters from going over to John McCain on Election Day. I don't think they're going to go for this. There's a lot of grumbling going on.

It'll also be interesting to see if Obama's people can keep Senator Biden from going "off the reservation" and speaking his mind and getting into trouble again.

In any case, I'm not voting for the ticket. They're too far to the left for my taste.

Presidential Signing Statements: President Bush Has Exceeded His Authority

In the history of the U.S. presidency, every President since George Washington has added comments to bills that they just signed; in many instances, it's to thank people who were instrumental in passing the legislation through the House and Senate; other times it's to voice displeasure with parts of the bill, or why they're supporting it, or other reasons.

President Bush has done something new.

In his presidential signing statements, he announces which parts of the bill he won't enforce. On a bill he just signed. What is the point in signing a bill if he isn't going to enforce it in it's entirety? Why didn't he veto it instead?

But that's not the worst of it. He's done this 500 times now, citing his interpretation of the Constitution and "national security." Since he's been so busy shredding parts of the Constitution that he doesn't like, perhaps he needs to re-read Article I Section 7.

The long and the short of Article I, Section 7: if the President signs a bill, it becomes law, and the President's branch of government oversees it's execution.

These 500 signing statements have impacted nearly 750 laws in all.

And it nearly equals the number of signing statements by all his predecessors--combined.

Every President has had legislation come across his desk that he didn't like, but forty-two of them were big enough to tell Congress to publicly "stick it where the sun don't shine" by vetoing an objectionable bill and forcing Congress to try an override, or signing it and living with it. But President Bush and his obsession with national security and secrecy decided to not enforce parts of dozens of laws, behind closed doors and out of the spotlight.

He should have been vetoing bills left and right, and if Congress overrode a bill he considered "unconstitutional" or imposing on presidential power, he should have filed suit in court.

This is nothing short of an all-out assault on the separation of powers. I don't like it, and some major judicial reviews need to happen to shrink presidential powers back to a more reasonable level.

The current administration is lucky that we're not midway through their term in office; Congress might have taken these five hundred presidential signing statements and turn them into parts of articles of impeachment. I don't know how the government will deal with this now, if at all.

I think after the Bush Administration leaves office, the full extent of what they've been doing will come into the light, and we'll be shocked beyond belief at what's been really going on. I'm more disappointed in this Administration than I was in the last one. I don't make that statement lightly.

What a mess.

Veepstakes: AKA Ho-Hum

I'm not waiting for Obama's VP pick to be rolled out, like the media, who don't seem to know what to do with themselves. If John McCain was introduced as his running mate, THEN I'd sit up and take notice.

More ho-hum from Camp Obama.

And the press can't get enough of it. Bleah!

NASA Retirement of Space Shuttle Program May Not Happen: Political Trouble With Russia May Require Shuttle Fleet to Remain in Service

The way that the rhetoric has been flowing between Russia and the West, and Washington in particular, future joint space programs with the Russians may be in jeopardy, which may impact on NASA's retirement of the space shuttle fleet in 2010.

Hopefully this is a momentary glitch in U.S./Russian relations, but if some kind of "new" Cold War starts up again, and relations between the two countries go downhill on a long-term basis, it's difficult to see the Russian and American space agencies continuing to cooperate. It's amazing how much impact a small nation can have on the relations between two big ones.

NASA is currently set to retire the space shuttle in 2010, relying on the Russian Soyuz rockets to resupply the International Space Station (ISS) with supplies and personnel until the new Orion shuttle comes on-line in 2014 or 2015. But with today's crash of the Orion mock-up, it shows that NASA still has a ways to go. (Video here)

But what if the Russians decide not to allow Americans in their Soyuz capsules? NASA may have to extend the life of the shuttle program to keep America in space, which increases the risk every time the shuttle is put through a blast-off, and atmospheric re-entry. Those birds aren't getting any younger. And they haven't been able to fix the foam problem which doomed Columbia.

Hopefully the political problems being batted around between Washington and Moscow won't translate over to the scientific community as well. The international community has invested too much into the ISS and other programs for it to fall apart now.

"Reform Michigan Government Now" Ballot Initiative Is Out the Window

A three-judge panel ordered election officials to keep the huge Michigan constitutional re-write off November's ballot.

They said it was too broad, and more worthy of a constitutional convention. Ballot initiatives need to be easy to understand, and this initiative was anything but that. It would have re-written thirty sections of the Michigan constitution, with no opportunity to vote 'yes' on some of the proposals, and 'no' on others.

This is a very good decision.

I do think that some of the ideas should be voted on, but each with their own individual ballot proposals.

China Cheated at Gymnastics: Some Chinese Athletes Are Not Old Enough to Compete

China's Deng Linlin compared to 16-year old U.S. gold medal winner Shawn Johnson. There is no way that the child being held in the photo at left is 16 years old. Johnson is what a 16-year-old SHOULD look like, with adult teeth.

Georgia and Russia Are Both to Blame for Their War: Both Sides Targeted Civilians

You know, as bad as Russia's behavior has been in the last two weeks with their use of disproportionate force against Georgia, Georgia is also to blame for the current state of affairs.

The Georgians attacked civilians in South Ossetia first, starting with their rocket bombardment of Tskhinvali, followed up by a ground offensive. They used a sledge hammer to kill a mosquito, which gave the Russians all the reason that they needed to wage a war of aggression and occupation against Georgia.

So while we're screaming at the Russians to get the hell out of Georgia, we should also be condemning Georgia for it's conduct before the Russian "intervention." If Russia is being accused of using disproportionate levels of force, the Georgians have also done the same thing in South Ossetia. They went into South Ossetia to stop separatist forces from shelling Georgians on both sides of the border; it should have stopped there, but they turned a minor border skirmish into a major international conflict.

I think the U.N. needs to conduct two investigations to determine if war crimes were committed: the first one is to determine if Russia's invasion and occupation of Georgia violated the rules of war, and the second one is to determine if the Georgians did the same thing in South Ossetia during their bombardment of Tskhinvali. Everything needs to be looked at.

Both Russia and Georgia are signees of the Geneva Conventions; both are bound to not to deliberately target civilians in a war, whether declared or undeclared. This is considered a grave breach of the Geneva Convention. Neither side went out of their way to insure that civilians weren't getting hurt. In fact, both sides targeted civilians, both inside and outside the zone of conflict.

And before NATO membership is offered to Georgia, they need to be reminded that they have a responsibility to safeguard civilians in the conflict zone.

Who's In Command of the Russian Army?

Who's in charge of the Russian Army? The President of Russia, or the Prime Minister?

According to the Russian Constitution of 1993, the President of Russia is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the Russian Federation. By Russian federal law, the Prime Minister of Russia has the power to:

• determine the basic guidelines of the Government activity;
• present proposals to the President on the structure and functions of the central institutions of the executive branch (e.g. ministries and federal agencies);
• nominate the vice prime ministers, federal ministers and other officers and presents them to the President;
• represent the government as an institution in foreign relations and inside the country;
• head the sessions of the Government and its Presidium and has the right of decisive vote;
• sign the decrees and executive orders of the government;
• He also informs the President about the Government activities on a regular ongoing basis.
  

The Prime Minister does not have the power to command the Russian Army, except as acting President.

But when Vladimir Putin stepped down as President of Russia and accepted the post of Prime Minister, many analysts expected the new President to be a figurehead, while Putin was the power behind the throne. The former KGB man was expected to remain the most powerful political figure in Russia.

And when the Russians stormed into South Ossetia and another breakaway province, and then invaded Georgia proper, Russia's president was nowhere to be seen. Vladimir Putin was in Beijing for the Olympic Opening Ceremonies, then flew directly to the battlefield to take charge there.

Western military analysts were astonished that the Russians could summon an army out of nowhere and move it across the border IN FORCE within hours. They concluded that Putin had been planning this invasion for many years and had positioned Russian armor, aircraft and troops near the border so that they could move fast once the go order was given. Who finally gave that order?

Then there's the cease-fire. The President of Russia signed the EU-brokered cease-fire with Georgia, but the Russians are still moving south toward Tblisi and have been sighted digging in and fortifying their positions. It's unknown if Russia will exit from Georgian territory as they've agreed to and in what timeframe. The reason: Vladimir Putin. He's ignoring the piece of paper that his "leader" and the Georgian President both signed.

Russia controls 1/3 of Georgia right now and have effectively cut the country in half. It's a huge mess that's going to get a lot worse, especially if Russia attacks Ukraine next, or the Russians renege on their pledge to withdraw.

What will the West do to stop Russia? What can they do?

Ridge: GOP Will Accept Pro-Choice VP Pick

Former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge has been going around saying that the GOP will accept a pro-choice candidate for the VP position with John McCain.

Oh, that's what he thinks.

If Ridge is right, and McCain does choose a pro-choice running mate, that will be the deciding factor for many conservatives who will not equivocate on this point. It doesn't matter if the candidate defers to McCain, who is pro-life. If President McCain suddenly keels over and is incapacitated or dies, all of a sudden we have a pro-choice Republican running things. That's not acceptable.

Values voters will not support this idea at all. They will stay home on Election Day, or vote for someone else who is solidly pro-life.

If McCain Chooses a Pro-Choice VP, I Definitely Will Vote 3rd Party

Rumors have surfaced that John McCain is thinking about a pro-choice candidate. If he dares to go down that course, he will lose whatever Conservative support he's managed to cobble together in recent months.

I sure as hell won't vote for him if he does this. Right now there's a possibility that I might vote for him to stop Obama, but I will not vote for any pro-choice candidate on any level, under any circumstances.

He really needs to choose carefully and decide which base he wants to rely upon.

Russia's Eaten Georgia Alive; Ukraine Should be Worried Too

Russia is continuing to eat Georgia alive, and Ukraine may be on the menu as well.

The Russians have never liked sharing military facilities or navy assets with the Ukrainians, and now that they're continuing their invasion of Georgia, Ukraine may want to beef up it's military.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, their vaunted Black Sea Fleet split between Russia and Ukraine; both fleets were stationed at Sevastopol, which is now Ukrainian territory. Ukraine leased the base to Russia until 2017, but has indicated that the Russians will have to leave Sevastopol once the lease expires.

Tensions between the two fleets have always been there; the sailors from both fleets have gotten into huge fights on shore when in proximity to one another. And since the Russians deployed units of their fleet to blockade Georgia, the Ukrainians have said that they may not allow the Russian warships to return to Sevastopol.

When the Ukrainians began making noise about not renewing the lease in 2017, the Russians began building a new Navy base at Novorossiysk.

And with the announcement that Ukraine is requiring 72 hours notice for the Russian fleet and military personnel/equipment to enter and leave Ukrainian territory, tensions will be higher than ever; and since the Russian Army is already on the move, Ukraine has every right to be worried about what/who Russia's next target will be.

If Russia does attack Ukraine, it will be the largest army in Europe against the 2nd largest army, not the largest army against one of Europe's smallest armies.

When will the Russians stop?

Are We Really Surprised That the Chinese Government Engaged in Deception at Opening Ceremonies?

People seem surprised that the Chinese government used computer graphics and lip synching at the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics. They really shouldn't be. And we shouldn't be surprised when more such revelations come to light.

China's Communist Party are well-known as masters of propaganda; they regularly pull this type of stunt on their own people.

Anything that interfered/diminished the grand spectacle of the opening ceremonies were considered to be unacceptable by the Chinese government were altered:

• Replacing a Chinese child with buck teeth (and a beautiful singing voice) to a "cuter" little Chinese girl who lip-synched the song were considered necessary by the Chinese government.
• Computer-generated fireworks that were inserted into live coverage of the fireworks taking place in Beijing.
• Recruiting people off the streets to come in and fill the seats of Olympic venues so that it looks like the Olympics are being well-attended, to present an image of a unified and supportive Chinese nation.
• Training spectators on how to coordinate their cheers, what they are supposed to sound like, when they are supposed to clap, and all the other things that spectators do at a sporting event.

This is nothing new to the Chinese government; and don't be surprised when the closing ceremonies have a lot of the same alterations and omissions that the rest of the Beijing Olympics have.

In spite of all this, the Olympics seem to be going well so far. Athletes are winning medals, nations are cheering their champions, and some great stories have come out of the Olympics. Let's hope this continues.

Russia's Attack on Georgia: When Will They Stop?

The former Soviet state of Georgia has been making moves toward re-establishing peace since war broke out two days ago, but Russia seems to be ignoring them, continuing their large-scale offensive against the Georgian military and state. Georgia pulled their troops out of the South Ossetian capitol and offered a cease-fire, but Russia rejected it and unleashed it's air force, sending fighters and bombers over the border to attack targets all over Georgia, and not just in South Ossetia.

In addition, the Russians have employed the use of ballistic missiles with non-nuclear warheads. The United States hasn't used a ballistic missile in Iraq or Afghanistan; it was thought the use of those weapons would alarm the Russians. In addition, the sheer collatoral damage caused by the impact of a ballistic missile would be unpaletable.

The question I have is this: if Georgia pulls completely out of South Ossetia, will the Russians stop, or will their offensive continue against Georgia? Russia claims that they aren't out to get Georgia, but if they achieve their stated goals and absorb South Ossetia into Russia, but keep advancing their army through Georgia and continue the bombing far from the actual combat zone, when WILL they stop? After they've occupied all of Georgia?

And will Georgia begin attacking targets inside Russia itself? So far their military has been in action on their own territory, including inside South Ossetia (which isn't part of Russia unless Georgia and Russia agree that it is). And since the Russians have invaded, Georgia seems to be focused on defensive action, but if this thing doesn't stop soon, that may change and Russia will tear Georgia apart, limb from limb.

The possibility of a Georgian military victory against the Russians is remote (wouldn't it be something if Georgia was able to defeat the Russians?), and the longer it goes on, the worse off Georgia is going to be. Forget about the U.N. Security Council; Russia is facing down the other 14 members with their super-veto (that is also enjoyed by China, France, Great Britain and the United States).

Hopefully one of the peace delegations being sent to Russia and Georgia will get the two sides to compromise and to get the Russians to back off of their disproportionate military response.

Kilpatrick MUST Go: He's an Embarassment to Detroit, and to the Entire State as Well

Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick spent a night in jail for violating his bond with an unauthorized trip to Windsor last week. The judge had expressly warned him not to return to his courtroom with new problems, but there sat the Mayor of Detroit again. The judge's action was correct; he had to preserve the integrity of the court system and treated Kilpatrick the same as everyone else.

He's an embarrassment to the entire state, and not just the City of Detroit. It was really embarrassing to see the Mayor in handcuffs in European newspapers as well as others around the world. This is the type of publicity that we don't need.

For the good of his city and his state, Mayor Kilpatrick should resign immediately. He's lied under oath, assaulted a deputy sheriff and violated his bond. He's already facing eight felony counts; Attorney General Mike Cox is expected to announce additional felony charges for the Mayor's attack on the deputy.

Governor Granholm should accelerate her hearing on whether she should remove Kilpatrick from office, as provided for in the city charter. There isn't a moment to lose.

Another Incident with the Mexican Army on U.S. Soil: Mexican Solidiers Point Rifles at Border Patrol

There was another border incident Sunday night; two Mexican soldiers crossed into Arizona and held a U.S. Border Patrol agent at gunpoint until BP reinforcements moved in to assist. They then withdrew into Mexican territory without further incident.

This may have been an accidental encounter; BP agents have sometimes accidentally crossed into Mexico, and Mexican army soldiers (or drug smugglers dressed up as soldiers) have crossed into the U.S. over two hundred times.

In the age of GPS, it seems strange that government agents from both sides don't realize when they're either approaching the border, are on it, or have gone over it.

But in any case, Mexican drug smugglers are using heavy weapons and equipment to get our BP and local law enforcement officials to stay away from their drug shipments. This was the reason for moving our military closer to the border to assist the Border Patrol when they're heavily outgunned by Mexican drug smugglers.

Authorities are right to believe that things will turn violent. They inevitably will; will we take the necessary steps to insure that our people have what they need to turned back these armed infiltrations of our border areas? Or will things keep getting swept under the carpet?

Air Problems Persist in Beijing: Athletes Are Going to Have Problems

The Chinese government waited too long to start cutting pollution to improve air quality for the Olympics, and with the Opening Ceremonies set for tomorrow, many athletes are going to have problems.

I'm afraid that our athletes will come back from China with major health problems.

I hope that if air conditions are bad, they cancel some of the distance events and not bow to Chinese pressure to run the events regardless of what's in the air and how bad it gets. It's the responsible thing to do. Hopefully any air problems our athletes encounter will be minor and they won't develop lung conditions that will have to be dealt with in the months and years after the Beijing Games.

We're seeing the downside of heavy industrialization playing out before our eyes.

Tire Talk: Obama's Gas-Saving Strategy Will Cause People to Overinflate Their Tires if They Aren't Careful

I've been listening to the current political chatter about inflating our tires to save on gas; some people are going to inflate their tires to the maximum limit and have blowouts. Obama's making an error.

According to those in the know, he needs to add a disclaimer to his "advice" for saving fuel that the PSI printed on the side of the tire means that's the tire's maximum rating when the tires are hot. Air pressure increases as the tire heats up, so the secret is to inflate the tires to under the limit so that when the tire gets hot it doesn't go over the printed limit.

I'm no mechanic, but I've read enough to know that cold weather will drop the air pressure in tires, so more air might need to be added during winter months; in hot weather, the PSI will increase due to the heat so less air is needed.

It's amazing what becomes politicized in an election year. Tire pressure of all things...

Reform Michigan Government Now Initiative is Too Broad: Each Proposal Should Be Voted on Separately

I am coming out in opposition to the Reform Michigan Government Now Initiative, which is a ballot proposal that will make approximately thirty changes to the Michigan Constitution.

All of these changes should be voted on one at a time, and not in one huge ballot proposal, and not to the benefit of one political party over another. Here is the list of changes that this clunky creation is proposing:

(from the Reform Michigan Government Now Initiative website)

Reforming the Legislative Branch

• Legislators’ benefits after leaving office to be the same as retired state employees
• Stop the revolving door between the Legislature and lobbying by enacting a two-year lobbying ban — the toughest in the nation
• Require annual public disclosure of income and assets by all legislators
• Roll back the 38 percent increase lawmakers gave themselves in 2002
• Reduce the Senate from 38 members to 28 and the House from 110 members to 82
• Reform redistricting by appointing a bipartisan panel to set legislative districts
  
  

Reforming the Judicial Branch

• Judicial benefits after leaving office to be the same as retired state employees
• Reduce judicial salaries by 15 percent
• Toughen disciplinary and conflict of interest requirements
• Require annual public disclosure of income and assets for all judges and justices
• Add 10 judges to the lower courts and reduce the number of Supreme Court Justices from seven to five justices and the Court of Appeals from 28 to 21 judges

Reforming the Executive Branch

• Benefits after leaving office for the four statewide elected officials (governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general and secretary of state) to be the same as retired state employees
• Reduce the salaries of the four statewide elected officials by 25 percent
• Stop the revolving door between the executive branch and lobbying by enacting a two-year lobbying ban — the toughest in the nation
• Require annual public disclosure of income and assets for the four statewide elected officials
• Reduce the constitutional cap on the number of state government departments from 20 to 18 and cut hundreds of state boards and commissions
  

Reforming Elections

• Strengthen the ban on illegal aliens’ ability to register and vote
• Make the Bureau of Elections independent of partisanship
• Allow no-reason absentee voting
• Require post-election audits of election procedures
• Require paper trails for all voting systems
• Ban election officials like the secretary of state and local clerks from taking on campaign roles in elections they’re overseeing
• Enact anti-fraud measures to protect the integrity of Michigan’s election process

I like a number of these proposals, but am opposed to others, such as the reduction of the number of judges. There is already a huge backlog in cases on all levels, and they should be increasing the number of judges to deal with it, not reducing them. And no one party should benefit from all these changes.

This ballot proposal is too huge for a single question on the ballot. And here's what voters will see when they go to vote. If they want to make major changes like this all at once, they should call for a constitutional convention.

I want to vote yes on a number of these changes and no on others, but I can't. Voters are being forced to choose all or nothing. So I vote to throw this ballot out and break it up so voters can see what they're getting themselves into without being confused by a huge ballot proposal that has good and bad ideas in it.

This is a very bad model of a ballot initiative that shouldn't be used again.

No New Presidential Politics Posts Here for a While

I haven't been writing about either Obama or McCain or anything else over here as of late.

I am so turned off by both candidates that I have been staying away from commenting on the 2008 Presidential Election. As far as the election itself, it's a question of whether I vote for McCain, or vote for a worthy 3rd party candidate. If it looks like it's going to be very close, I won't waste my vote; stopping Obama is more important than my disillusionment with McCain.

I'm going with issues related to the current Administration and local politics for the time being, unless something really strange happens in the current campaign. Maybe after the conventions the choice will become clearer.