Senator Talks Up Fairness Doctrine Again: Assault on First Amendment Set to Begin

Senator Shumer is talking about the Fairness Doctrine again, setting the stage for the Democrats to begin their legalized assault on the First Amendment.

He was on Fox News on Tuesday and did a word play on Fox's own motto: fair and balanced. He said that the Fairness Doctrine would bring fairness and balance to the AM dial, balancing conservative shows with liberal ones.

Let's be frank.

Liberal talk shows are money-losing propositions for radio stations, while the conservative ones rake in the cash, and have tremendous staying power. Why should the radio stations be forced into such a money-losing proposition by carrying liberal talk-radio on an equal footing with the conservative ones?

Conservatives are afraid that since liberal shows are money-losers, that they would cut back on conservative shows as well in order to avoid the flak and fines that the FCC would be required to impose, as well as limit the damage to their bottom lines that liberal programming would bring.

Senator Schumer also said that those who opposed the Fairness Doctrine also wanted to limit the amount of pornography on the air. His argument makes no sense from a literal standpoint. Pornography isn't seen on radio.

And he's made no argument for more of a conservative viewpoint on TV news stations, such as CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, or NBC, or more liberal viewpoints on Fox News. Senator Shumer and his friends have targeted radio exclusively. That fact alone makes the Fairness Doctrine unfair.

Conservatives Should Declare Independence from the GOP: They'd Do Better With Their Own Party

I think the time has come for the conservatives to break with the GOP. They're Democratic-Republicans anyways!

The Republicans lost because they tried to out-Democrat the Democrats. And then they became the Democrats, spending money that isn't theirs, and not agreeing with anyone (including themselves) on anything. And they tried to push the conservatives out of the way in the process.

Being a conservative is about taking a stand, and living by it, not changing a stand when the wind of public opinion starts to blow in a different direction. All one has to do is look at the global warming hubris and how McCain embraced it to win over Democratic supporters.

And now we see the consequences of trying to out-Democrat the Democrats: the GOP's butt is in a sling, the result of voter dissatisfaction with Democratic-Republicans.

Will the moderates in the GOP learn?

Democrats Should Keep Their 15% Approval Rating in Mind: With Fewer Republicans Around, They're in the Hot Seat

Before they get too carried away, the Democrats need to keep their approval rating in mind. As of a CBS poll from last week, Congressional job approval stands at 15%, which is half of what President Bush's is.

And with fewer Republicans around to blame, and a Democrat preparing to move into the White House on January 20th, the Dems will be squarely in the hot seat.

It will be interesting to see if they succumb to the same pressure that the Republicans did, with one-party in control of the Congress and the White House.

If anything, the Democrats are even more vulnerable, as their party is a sewn-together coalition of competing factions. There's a few triggers that we've already seen will cause the Democratic Party to splinter; remember when Pelosi and Reid decided to knuckle under to President Bush and his war budget last year? The anti-war Democrats nearly rioted in the aisles.

We'll see how this goes.

Status of Forces Agreement With Iraq Needs to be Delayed: New Administration Doesn't Need Their Hands Bound

I think that the Iraqi and U.S. governments should put off agreeing to any Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) until after January 20th, when President Obama takes office and his intentions are made clear. There's no point in making an agreement like this if the Obama Administration will be withdrawing troops on a large scale, as he suggested during the campaign.

With the current mandate set to expire on December 31st, our troops will be required to suspend military operations in Iraq and return to their bases throughout Iraq. There is a need for U.S. troops to be able to defend themselves if their bases are attacked; I think it would be a good idea for both governments to extend the current mandate to mid-March, until the new U.S. government is in place and both governments can meet can plot out what the next 16-20 months will look like.

Why sign a SOFA with Iraq if our forces will be gone in 16-20 months?

WSJ Says Treatment of Bush Was "Disgraceful": Administration's Shredding of Constitution Was MORE Disgraceful

I'm at odds with the Wall Street Journal's op-ed piece on how President Bush was treated during the campaign of the last two years.

Frankly, I'm not concerned with what our enemies overseas are thinking. I'm much more concerned about the damage done to our Constitution in the name of national security that this Administration and this President have allowed to occur.

Indefinite detention of people? No habeas corpus? Star chamber justice? Not being allowed to confront their accusers? No trial by jury? No attorneys? No independent judicial review of the cases and sentences? Illegal evidence is allowed? A majority vote to decide guilt, and not a unanimous vote? Torture?

No, the Constitution of the United States is the SUPREME law of the land, and cannot be altered by lesser laws like the Patriot Act or the Military Commission Act of 2006. It's protections cannot be changed until the Constitution is properly amended and voted on as outlined in the Constitution itself. That has NOT happened.

It's true that the country hasn't been attacked since 9/11, but that's because it's easier for terrorists to shoot at American soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq, rather than trying to infiltrate over here and risk getting caught before being able to do any damage. And our soldiers are more than happy to return the favor and fire back.

I am in complete disagreement with the Wall Street Journal on this issue. The other issues quoted in the article are trivial, compared to the damage that President Bush has done and received criticism on, and rightfully so.

Michigan's Proposal 1 and Proposal 2 are ABOMINATIONS: I Despise Both of Them

Michigan voted to become a safe haven for growing pot, in the ugliest case of drug-fiendish group-think that I have ever seen.

Who will be authorized to grow medical marijuana? My drug-fiend neighbors? The local supermarket? And what's to stop criminal elements from registering as growers and engaging in criminal enterprise as well as supplying "medical" pot?

Will it come across state borders, in violation of federal laws? And which laws will trump the other laws? Federal anti-drug laws, or state ones?

I'll be the first one to admit that I absolutely despise Proposal 1, and am very perturbed that so many voters were hoodwinked into voting 'yes' on this proposal.

As for Proposal 2, I voted against this as well on religious grounds. In addition, by the ballot's own language, it will use embryos that are unsuitable for implantation, which means that they're using defective embryos, and will require taxpayers to pay for faulty research. This is a waste of money, as well as being morally objectionable.

It also closes the door on preventing future research along similar lines, which I object to as well. I'm no fan of Prop 2, but realize that this will be harder to reverse than Prop 1, which I will continue to rail against.

What a revolting turn of events!

Obama Wins; Definitely Not a Reagan Landslide, But More Than Enough to Beat McCain

Barack Obama made history, becoming the first African-American man to become President of the United States. It wasn't quite a Reagan-style landslide, but was still more than enough to put McCain away. Congratulations to the President-elect.

I'm more unhappy about Michigan's Prop 1 and 2 right now than I am about the race for the White House. I've been on record as not being happy with either candidate, but we have a new President, and without all the legal dramas of 2000. For that, I am grateful.

We'll see how President-elect Obama does. I'm looking forward to a lot of new source material in the next four years, especially if his Socialist views begin to take the shape of policy.

For now, he has a lot of work to do in order to straighten out the economy.

It Will Be Over Tomorrow; We Will Have a New President

As the rest of the country gets ready to vote starting in a little over eight hours from now, I still have mixed feelings on the candidates.

They are not the best that their respective parties have to offer, and we're going to be stuck with one of them for the next four years, assuming they stay healthy.

McCain has made too many compromises over his career to be called a real conservative. Obama is too young and inexperienced and is too far over to the left; he's going to be forced to move to the right in order to govern if he wins tomorrow.

I don't think that the polls are correct in their blowout predictions either.

They've gotten the last two Presidential elections wrong with their polling data, both before and during Election Day. The problem is that the media and the pollsters continually underestimate the turnout on the Republican side, while overestimating the Democratic turnout on Election Day. And they never seem to learn from their mistakes.

And when the polls do not match the election results, they start screaming about voter suppression and start looking for victims. They don't seem to understand that many people don't want to tell who they actually voted for. I'd tell a pollster that I wrote in Mickey Mouse, just to throw their numbers off. It's none of their business!

It'll be interesting to see if any coal states predicted to go to Obama flip to McCain. Very few of the networks carried the Obama/coal industry story.

I will be watching the results tomorrow night with great interest.

Newspaper Covers Up Obama Statements on Killing the Coal Industry to Keep Coal-Producing States in His Column

The October Surprise came in November, and might well change the complexion of the race for the White House.

The surprise was a statement by Barack Obama, made in January of this year, about the coal industry to the San Francisco Chronicler. Obama said, in the recording, that the companies could try to build all the coal-fired plants that they want, but they could only do it in a way that would bankrupt the coal industry if he had his way.

Really? And when was he going to tell the twenty-seven coal-producing states that little bit of information? And when was he going to explain that to the ten largest coal-producing states:Montana, Illinois, Wyoming, West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Colorado, Texas and Indiana?

And here's why the Chronicler withheld the information about their preferred candidate:




Many of the undecided/"leaning Obama" and "marginally McCain" states also have a sizable portion of their economies built around coal production, with thousands of voters depending on the coal mines for their livelihoods.

For this supposedly "huge" lead that Obama has on McCain, the race is still in the air and could go in a number of directions OTHER than the way that the media PREFERS.

I think it's going to be a lot closer than ANYONE thinks.

ATF Breaks Up Skinhead Ring That Wanted to Go After Obama; This is a Small Taste of Things to Come

The government announced today that it was charging two skinheads with plotting to kill Senator Obama and dozens of others in a blaze of hatred and gunfire. It's likely that this is the tip of the iceberg, and other plots are being planned.

The skinheads fully expected to be killed in the attempt to gun down Obama in a drive-by suicide attack. Luckily they were stopped before they could carry out this plot.

I hope that, regardless of the way the election goes, that the President stays alive and healthy for the entire term.

Fairness Doctrine is Fair in Name Only: It is Legalized Assault on First Amendment

With the Barak Obama/John McCain thing nearly over, Democrats in Congress are turning up the rhetoric to restore the Fairness Doctrine to push conservatives off the AM dial.

It's fair in name only. It will target only conservatives as they hold the lion's share of the market, and will ignore the smaller--and just as provocative--leftists and others who make just as many damning statements on their programs as Limbaugh, Savage and Hannity do.

And with the dawn of the internet, it's also unnecessary.

Liberal programs don't do well on the radio, as the Air America Radio experience showed us. But commentators like Rush Limbaugh rake in the dough because they understand marketing and advertising, which was the primary reason that Air America went under. They didn't follow a conventional business model that Limbaugh and the other successful opposition programs do.

All talk of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine should be shelved permanently.

OPEC Calls Emergency Meeting: What, They Didn't Make Enough Money When Oil Was $147 a Barrel??!

OPEC is calling an emergency meeting of the cartel next week to discuss solutions to the falling oil prices. It's dropped more than 50% (to it's ACTUAL price in my opinion) since hitting $147 a barrel earlier this year.

How many trillions did they make when oil was $147 a barrel?

What? What? $3.9 trillion at current production rate of 27 million barrels a day? And that's for ONE day??!

So what are they yelling about now? From the Jakarta Post on September 10th: OPEC President Chakib Khelil's comments, however, indicate that most members would rather accept less-costly crude than cut back and risk renewing the market turmoil that in recent months set one price record after another.

They sure aren't complaining about the size of their bank accounts from said record prices. And if we don't trust what our own oil executives are saying about how much they spend on R&D with regards to justifying high fuel prices, we sure can't trust anything that OPEC says about oil prices either.

They can make due with $68 a barrel.

Horrific Nebraska Child-Abandonment Law Needs to be Repealed NOW: Seventeen Kids Abandoned So Far

Back on September 25th, I wrote about the new Nebraska law that allows parents to abandon kids at local hospitals up to the age of 17, and not just infants. A father had just dropped off nine kids at a Nebraska hospital, and I predicted that the floodgates were open.

A blind man could have seen this one coming; Nebraska legislators have decided to hold a hearing on the new law after parents began dropping off their teenagers in increasing numbers. And for the first time since this abomination became law, parents are starting to drive in from neighboring states to abandon their kids in Nebraska too.

Who's the IDIOT or group of IDIOTS who came up with this STUPID plan? What were they thinking was going to happen? And how many kids are going to suffer devastating mental issues from being abandoned like garbage at a dump by their parents/guardians?

Yes, there's only 17 kids who have been abandoned since this law came into effect, but it's 17 new child placement cases, which is far too many. According to Nebraska officials, none of the kids were in life-threatening situations at home. The older kids said during interviews with child welfare experts that they had frustrated parents trying to deal with the issues normally associated with raising kids, and teenagers in particular and gave up.

This law is draconian, and I hope that the Nebraska legislature reverses a terrible mistake and takes care of the kids that it is partially responsible for orphaning. And it takes steps to strengthen their family and child welfare programs so the parents have more choices than abandoning their families to the state.

Voting for #2: My Choice is Already Made

I voted absentee today and dropped it in the mail with mixed feelings on the matter.

And for the first time, I didn't vote for the headliner on the ticket; I voted for the #2 slot this time around, because I think there's a distinct possibility that the VP nominee on the ticket will be President sometime before the end of the new Administration.

Our country still has a problem with violent racism, and I think that some redneck will inevitably take a shot at Obama. We'll almost certainly see a surge in racial hate groups, especially with the economy in the shape it's in now if Obama is elected President. They'll blame him for their not being able to hold jobs; and whatever excuse that they can come up with to go after him. And we'll have a problem with domestic terrorism as well as international terrorism.

And McCain's age is something to be concerned with. We know that the person who is the President ages a lot faster than normal, due to the heavy work schedule, stress and other issues. McCain is 72 now, with a history of heart trouble. That's an issue.

I hope that both stay alive and healthy, whether they are elected in November or not.

But for my vote, I was thinking about a possible President Biden or President Palin running the country. Biden has too many liberal votes and causes to his name for my taste, and I wish Palin had a little more experience on the political side of things. But ultimately I voted for the candidate who best matched my social views.

We also know that the President will surround himself or herself with the best economic advisers that can be found, so they don't necessarily need to be an expert on the economy themselves, so long as the advisers are expert's experts on the topic.

It's a bonus if the President does have experience in the business world, but what they have to be able to do is comprehend it, and then communicate it in a way that makes sense to the public.

The same thing can be said about every aspect of the Presidency; hopefully the President will chose wise advisers.

Stock Market Continues Adjustment: $700 Billion Mistake Didn't Make a Dent

I wrote on September 28th the following: No $700 billion ever made can stop a crash of a financial system that people have lost their trust in and believe is unstable.

And today's stock market results bear that out: the Dow was down over 800 points today before the market underwent a last-minute rally, which allowed the Dow to close down 300+ points instead of the 800 points that looked likely as the clock ran out.

The problem now is that the global markets are crashing as well. A lot of Western countries do not have an FDIC to safeguard their deposits as we do, and when a government rushes in to save a bank, it has adverse effects on their own stock markets, which are also tied into Wall Street. And investors are panic selling, because they believe that the financial system is weak and unstable.

Welcome to the dark side of globalization.

Is it too late to revoke the bailout? If it isn't going to work, then they should not proceed with it at all.

This has been the strangest bill in quite a while; the size of it is HUGE; Wall Street didn't want it, the politicians say they didn't want it but attached $150 billion in pork to buy off their colleagues to vote for it, Wall Street put it's reaction on public display by losing hundreds of points on the days that the House and Senate voted on this bill; then they said it probably wasn't the fix that was needed. Then Wall Street lost hundreds of points more over worry that the money won't come fast enough. And the taxpayer's on the hook for the entire $850 billion package with little to no hope for a return.

The entire mess should be repealed and re-thought; throwing money away like this is UTTER stupidity!

Now the States Want Handouts Too: California and Massachusetts Put in Their Wish Lists

Well, well, well.

Now the states are lining up for handouts too, wanting the same kind of deal that Wall Street got. Two states--California and Massachusetts--want money as well.

The floodgates are now open; where will this end? And how many states will try to climb on this gravy train?

And I oppose bailing out the states. They should not be treated like banks; they need to make cuts to their budgets so they can operate within their means, just as the federal government must as well. The states need to start lowballing their expectations for monthly income so that they can budget responsibly.

All bills and debts eventually come due, and yet everybody wants the federal government to pay for everything, in the here and now. WE CAN'T AFFORD IT:

The Gross National Debt

Eventually the time will come where the federal government will have to crash it's own budget to pay what it owes to foreign banks; it's going to be really ugly when it does. This is no way to run a government.

This gravy train shouldn't leave the station or see the light of day. The states are responsible for their OWN budgets.

$700 Billion Bailout/Mistake is Actually $850 Billion With Vote Buyoffs

The $700 bailout of Wall Street's Folly will actually be $850 billion with the bribes paid out to members of Congress to change their votes from "nay" to "yay."

Here is the list of pork that was added to the bill:

• $100 million for the construction of a race track.
• $49 million to spread the taxes out from the Exxon Valdez oil spill disaster over three years.
• $239 million payout to fishermen who suffered losses during the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
• $3.3 billion for a "Secure rural schools and community self-determination program."
• $3.3 billion in tax cuts for people who don't pay state taxes.
• $478 million for Hollywood.
• $148 million for wool subsidies.
• $33 million for development costs to American Samoa.
• $10 million for a fringe benefit to employers whose employees ride their bicycles to work.
• $322 million for manufacturers of efficient appliances--not for people who buy them!
• $192 million for rum duties. The pirates will be very happy about this provision.
• $2 million for production of wooden arrows for children.

The provisions listed above are the most objectionable ones (in my opinion) in the entire objectionable bill; here is the complete list as compiled by the Taxpayers for Common Sense watchdog group.

House Passes Senate Version of $700 Billion Mistake: Wall Street's Folly is Now Washington's Folly Too

The House rushed through passage of the $700 billion bailout bill, and President Bush hurriedly signed it, clearing the way for this new chapter of the fiasco to proceed.

And Wall Street didn't even bat an eye. When the Senate passed the bill, Wall Street rewarded it with a 350 point loss. When the House and the Administration did their thing today, Wall Street yawned, turned over and lost another 157 points.

Why?

Because now they don't think that this was the right thing to do. Thanks a lot, guys.

In the meantime, here is the complete list of Representatives who changed their vote:

Republican Representatives: Alexander, Barrett, Biggert, Boustany, Buchanan, Coble, Conaway, Dent, Fallin, Frelinghuysen, Gerlach, Hoesktra, Knollenberg, Kuhl, Myrick, Ramstad, Ros-Lehtinen, Schmidt, Shadegg, Shuster, Sullivan, Terry, Thornberry, Tiberi, and Wamp. One note: Welling didn't vote for the first time in his tenure.

Democratic Representatives: Abercrombie, Baca, Berkley, Braley, Carson, Cleaver, Cuellar, Cummings, Edwards (MD), Giffords, Green, Hirono, Jackson (IL), Jackson-Lee, Kilpatrick, Lee, Lewis (GA), Mitchell, Ortiz, Pascrell, Pastor, Rush, Schiff, Scott (GA), Solis, Sutton, Thompson(CA), Tierney, Watson, Welch (VT), Woolsey, Wu, and Yarmuth.

One important note: Jim McDermitt (D-WA) was the sole Representative to switch his 'yea' vote to 'nay' the second time around.

I don't think any of the Representatives listed above or any of their colleagues that voted 'yea' for this bill should be returned to Congress for another term by their constituents.

This is a huge and costly mistake. It should have been a $700 billion loan, not a freebie.

Time for some incumbents to be turned out of office. Specifically, 75 senators and 263 Representatives.

And we've only seen the beginning of this bailout. Now everyone will want one too.

House Did the Right Thing in Voting Down $700 Billion Mistake-In-Progress: Yesterday's Massive Stock Market Sell-Off Looks Silly Today

Yesterday's rejection of the $700 billion bailout plan of Wall Street's Folly by the House of Representatives was exactly what was needed. The vote SHOULD have been 435-0 against the plan, but some badly misguided Representatives were not on the side of the American taxpayer.

And yesterday's knee-jerk reaction on Wall Street was sheer panic, nothing more. They badly overreacted to a very bad plan that even Wall Street is lukewarm about, as evidenced by today's stock market results. The Dow Jones Industrial Average recovered 485 points of the 777 points that they lost yesterday. The way that it goes up and down, they could make that back within a day or two.

I REALLY enjoyed Speaker Pelosi's pre-vote speech. I could just see the votes flying straight out the window and into the nearest toilet. Nice job, Speaker Pelosi. Yesterday's vote was symbolic of both her speakership and of Democratic control of Congress. More from the do-nothing majority party.

Now, Congress should offer to LOAN Wall Street $700 billion, in exchange for certain concessions on the part of companies that accept the lifeline: a large share of their profits go back to repaying the taxpayer, in addition to repayment plans to the U.S. treasury, and so forth. And they can NEVER leverage mortgages again, and can only borrow a percentage of their total net worth, not thirty times their total net worth.

THAT'S fair to the taxpayer, and will allow the companies to survive. And if a company goes under, the proceeds from the sale of assets of the company go to reimbursing the U.S. treasury.

NO corporate handouts, Congress.

Foreclosed Property, Former Owners and New Owners: Who's to Blame More?

I was reading this Fox News story about a former homeowner stalking the family who bought his foreclosed home.

It started when the former homeowner couldn't keep up on his $532 a month mortgage payments and lost his home. He filed a legal appeal just before the auction was set to begin, then showed up at the auction to try to stop the sale. He was unsuccessful, and a developer bought the property, who then sold it to the current family.

And since then he's allegedly been stalking the family and has been charged numerous times with assault on the original investor, and trespassing against the current homeowners. And every time the charges were dropped because it was ruled that he was incompetent to stand trial, leaving him free to harass the family to the breaking point. It has been going on for eight years now.

And the family recently gave up, moving out of the house and losing much of their investment.

What a sad story. The legal system won't prosecute the guy, won't institutionalize him and won't intervene to keep this family safe. It isn't their fault that the original homeowner lost the house.

The former homeowner is a serial stalker and needs to be dealt with by those who have the power to get him some help. Someone needs to take some responsibility down there.

Wall Street is Putting WAY Too Much Faith on This Rescue: Government Needs A More Viable Plan

Wall Street needs to settle down.

They're putting WAY too much faith on one flawed plan, and if it gets delayed or doesn't happen, they need to be open to other alternatives before flying off the handle.

No $700 billion ever made can stop a crash of a financial system that people have lost their trust in and believe is unstable. The stock market IS overvalued by at least 1/3. It will be unfortunate if the inevitable adjustment comes in a short amount of time; it would be better if it was staggered over a decade or so, rather than in one week, as some business analysts are predicting.

It WON'T be the end of the world.

But I repeat my opposition to putting the taxpayers on the hook for Wall Street's Folly. They are expecting something for nothing, and that isn't right.

The mortgage meltdown is a separate problem from the leverage meltdown, and they are trying to fix one while ignoring the other. Leveraging should be outlawed and taken off the table permanently, so we never get into this kind of situation again. The people who authorized these kinds of shady financial dealings need to be in jail.

And I'm glad that the FBI is looking at the worst offenders to see if some kind of fraud was going on.

Surprise, Surprise: Obama Says He Should Get Credit for Curing Wall Street Folly: Since When?

Barack Obama blasted John McCain again, saying that McCain didn't do anything to deserve credit for the $700 billion mistake-in-progress plan, while he did.

Yeah, right.

Last time I checked, Obama scurried his butt out of Washington first. He also didn't want to even be in Washington (which I think was a smart initial move.) McCain stuck around, then left Washington to go to Friday's debate, then turned around and came back to Washington to confer with his GOP colleagues. Obama belatedly returned.

Obama said he deserved credit for making sure that there were taxpayer protections in the plan, but the fact is that his Democratic colleagues and many Republicans were calling for the same things long before Obama even realized that it was going to be a campaign issue.

Both candidates were equally ineffective and should have stayed out of Washington to begin with. Obama's statements are highly hypocritical.

And the "plan" that they came up with is not much of one.

On to Palin vs. Biden. Hopefully they have more of a pulse than their bosses did during Friday's debate.

Wall Street Should Fend for Itself: They Made That Bed, Now They Should Sleep in It

I am now opposed to bailing Wall Street out of it's "toxic debt" problem that it alone is responsible for. The American taxpayer should NOT be made to pay for Wall Street's Folly, beyond what has already been agreed to.

In my opinion, the bailouts of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG and Bear Sterns were correct, because of their interconnecting relationships to the U.S. and global currency markets. The damage from the collapse of those companies would not have been confined to Wall Street. Lehman Brothers was not bailed out because it was self-contained, as many of the other companies who stand to benefit from this $700 billion mistake-in-progress are.

The standard that the Bush Administration followed before should be the standard that is used now in deciding which companies to save, and which ones to allow to go by the wayside.

The other companies who have "toxic debt" need to get on a payment plan and pay off their debt. If the government wants to help, they should negotiate and set a fair interest rate with the creditors, which will allow the companies to clean up their own friggin' mess. People have to do the same thing; why should it be different for a company that goes into deep debt?

This is entirely appropriate for a system that cheers when blue-collar workers lose their jobs and pensions, while the system sees it's stock value soar. Why then, should blue collar taxpayers be stuck with the company's bill?

SHAME on Wall Street!

And the government needs to come up with a better plan.

Presidential Candidates Need to Get the Hell Out of Dodge: Their Presence at White House Didn't Help Matters

Talks aimed at alleviating the U.S. financial crisis ended in failure, with both sides blaming the other. And the presence of the presidential candidates didn't aid the summit in finding a solution to Wall Street's Folly.

They need to get OUT of Washington and put some distance between themselves and the ongoing fiasco at the White House. And McCain needs to get it in gear and quit wasting time on pointless political gestures. He needs to show up at that debate tomorrow night and give Obama what-for, or risk becoming a has-been former presidential candidate.

What a stupid stunt!

Nebraska Needs to Change It's "Safe Haven" Law: Dad Drops Off NINE Children at Hospital

Nebraska has the most liberal "safe haven" law in the country, and there are some major problems happening as a result.

"Safe haven" laws are laws that allow for mothers to drop off infants at hospitals, fire departments, police departments and government offices. Most of the states have them, but Nebraska went much further than all of them.

They allow children up to age 17 to be dropped off, and not just infants.

And a Nebraska dad did just that, dropping off nine kids between the ages of one and seventeen at an emergency room late Wednesday night. What a horrifying story! Nebraska needs to strengthen it's child welfare system and work to keep the families together, not allow parents to discard their families that they were responsible for creating.

Now that word of this is spreading, they may have a HUGE problem on their hands when others start doing the same thing. What were the legislators down there thinking?

Congress is Asking Administration All the Right Questions: $700 Billion Bailout is Unbelievable

Democrats and conservative Republicans in Congress appear to be asking all the right questions about the Administration's plan to take over all of the "toxic debt" that Wall Street ran up.

The Secretary of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Chairman appeared before Congress for a second day to push through the Bush Administration's bail-out plan. Congress gave the two a frosty reception again and started right in on the proposal, asking for modifications to the plan. And it appears that there has been a tiny bit of progress.

The Democratic position is that the plan should also help common people who are struggling with their mortgages and are in danger of foreclosure. They want to change the bankruptcy laws of the nation so that struggling homeowners can be thrown a lifeline too and restructure their mortgages.

Conservative Republicans think that this plan is financial socialism, which they don't agree with and won't support. They want everyone to stop and think this thing through before enacting a bad plan that gets rushed through just because the Administration wants it.

One of the committee members asked if it was possible to give Wall Street a fraction of what was asked for in the plan: $150 billion instead of $700 billion, with the possibility of the Administration coming back and asking for more. They got a big "NO!"

I'm still not convinced. I think that $700 billion is just the start and they'll come back and ask for another $500-$750 billion in six months. We can't afford that!

U.S. Navy Should Escort Russian Ships into Venezuelan Waters

It would be really funny if the entire U.S. Atlantic Fleet sortied and rendezvoused with the four Russian Navy ships heading to Venezuela and provided close escort for the Russians into Venezuelan waters.

The little commie runt in Venezuela would be SCREAMING his head off, wouldn't he?

Government Needs to Take Steps to Ensure That Current Wall Street Trouble Doesn't Happen Again

I've been holding off commenting on the current Wall Street crisis until I could understand what was happening and why. Here's how it breaks down:

1. People wanted to buy houses that were too expensive for them.
2. Mortgage companies wanted people to buy expensive houses too.
3. Banks lowered their standards to a point that people didn't even have to show that they had a job or could afford the monthly payments.
4. People got the loans and "bought" their houses with a mortgage.
   
5. Investment banks used a system referred to as "leveraging", which means that they borrowed money from other banks and countries to buy up the mortgages so that they would receive the income from the borrower. Since the interest rate on the mortgage was higher than the interest rate on the loan that the investment bank took out to purchase the mortgage, a profit would be made by the investment bank.
6. Some banks kept borrowing money to buy up more mortgages and make more money. Several of the big banks accumulated debt more than thirty times their TOTAL value.
7. Housing collapse began; people began to default on their mortgages.
8. So many people defaulted that the banks couldn't pay back their own debts that they had accumulated.
9. "Toxic debt" was the term coined to describe the debts that the investment banks accumulated to buy up mortgages.
10. On Friday, President Bush announced that the government would buy up the "toxic debt" to shore up the faltering financial sector. The U.S. taxpayer gets stuck with the trillion-dollar bailout. Some people need to go to JAIL.
    

That's it in a nutshell.

And I am not in favor of this move until we're told EXACTLY how much this is going to cost.

There's plenty of blame to go around:

• People shouldn't have taken out loans that were beyond their ability to pay back.
• The banks should NEVER have allowed these loans to be authorized.
• The government should NEVER have eased the leverage restrictions that were in place until the late 1990s. This was a total screw-up.
• Both parties are to blame as well. The party that SHOULD have seen this crisis coming DIDN'T, and the party that did didn't do ANYTHING about it.
  
• In addition, the Fed should have done much more to keep the dollar strong, which is their MANDATE.
• The government should have been cutting expenses at the same rate as their tax cuts. $1 of tax cuts should have translated into at least $1 of spending cuts. They should have been cutting our $10 trillion debt load up to a week ago, before committing the government to an additional $1.5 trillion (minimum) that they've taken up to save Fannie May, Freddie Mac, and all the banks that have failed in 2008. Put another way, this week has been the most expensive government spending surge in HISTORY.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has spent $600 billion in 2008. It has $30 to $45 billion left in reserves, which is approaching the minimum mandated by federal law. What happens if another 10-20 banks go under and they each have $3 billion in covered deposits?

Who's leveraging the GOVERNMENT??!

Pakistan Claims to Have Opened Fire on U.S. Choppers: Conflicting Accounts

Here's the conflicting versions of an "incident" involving U.S., Pakistani and tribal forces:

Pakistan security force: "Pakistani forces and local tribesmen opened fire on two U.S. helicopters who attempted to land along the Pakistan/Afghanistan border on the Pakistani side. The helicopters fled back across the border to Afghanistan."

Pakistan Foreign Ministry: "Local tribesmen opened fire on two U.S. helicopters escorted by U.S. gunships who attempted to land along the Pakistan/Afghanistan border on the Pakistani side. Pakistani security forces were not involved. The helicopters fled back across the border to Afghanistan."

Pakistani Army: "We deny it. Our border wasn't violated. But we did hear shooting in the area. We don't know where the firing was directed."

Tribesmen: "We saw that U.S. forces were gathering across the border, so thousands of tribesmen who were upset that the U.S. came in on September 3rd and killed twenty civilians gathered and were guarding the area. Good thing the U.S. left, otherwise the people were ready to give them the welcome that they deserved."

Pentagon spokesman: "The incident described by Pakistan didn't happen."

It seems like everyone has a version of what did or didn't happen.

It's probable that someone with an itchy trigger finger in the village got spooked, and everyone joined in the firing, without having a real target in sight. Once the firing stopped, someone claimed that U.S. helicopters had tried to land, and that's how the story spread.

I'm inclined to go with the Pakistani Army and Pentagon explanations. What a confusing story.

No American Candidates Should be Anywhere Near UN Next Week: Opening Session Being Attended by World Leaders

I'm not too happy to hear that the GOP ticket is planning on sending Sarah Palin to the U.N. to meet world leaders to build her foreign policy experience. That is precisely the WRONG thing to do; it's no better than Obama's grandstanding overseas a couple of months ago.

They need to reconsider this move. If McCain/Palin wins in November, she can build up her experience by attending funerals of foreign leaders and dignitaries, and acting as the President's representative while overseas.

This could backfire as badly as Obama's bungled overseas trip. I don't think they want to go there. Both tickets should avoid the UN like the plague!

Pakistan Orders It's Army to Open Fire on American Troops on Strike Missions Into Pakistani Territory: American Side Needs to Back Off

Pakistan is getting fed up with American troops crossing the border into their territory to destroy Taliban and al-Qaeda targets and has ordered it's army to open fire on American and coalition forces that they encounter inside Pakistan. This is not a healthy turn of events.

An American admiral went to Pakistan to talk to their new government about smoothing things over, but each time an American strike happens inside Pakistan and civilians get killed by American bombs and missiles, it destabilizes Pakistan's fragile government and increases the risk of an anti-American government coming to power in Islamabad. This is not a good way of keeping Pakistan on our side.

I don't think this is a correct course of action to take; we don't need to get into a shooting war with Pakistan over this. I think President Bush and the Pentagon need to decide if Pakistan is still our ally or if it's a nation that we intend to invade next. We're not acting like good friends to Pakistan.

No good can come of this.

When Is That Little Commie Runt in Venezuela Going to Get Indicted on Drug Charges?

The U.S., Venezuela and Bolivia are engaged in expelling one another's ambassadors; the U.S. has also frozen the assets of two Venezuelans who are engaged in drug dealing to raise money for FARC rebels in Columbia.

Screw that!

When will U.S. courts indict President Chavez on drug dealing charges? Forget about the lackeys, go for the head of the snake itself, and charge him as Manuel Noriega was. Better yet, get INTERPOL involved, as Chavez ordered his people to sell drugs for FARC, which he supports. That's grounds for INTERPOL involvement.

Further, Columbia, the U.S. and Venezuela are all signatories to the INTERPOL agreement. If the U.S. wants to isolate the Mouth of the South, this is a good way to do so, until Columbia's people get tired of Chavez and throw him out of office themselves.

Some People Need to CHILL: They're Creating the Very Gas Shortage That They're Afraid Of

There's been a great deal of rumor-mongering going on today, and it's created a self-fulfilling prophecy.

People are afraid that gas will hit $5 or $6 a gallon overnight; what a bunch of BULLSHIT! That wouldn't have happened, but since so many people went out and panic-bought fuel today, they're creating the very shortage that they're afraid of. And now there's a possibility that gas will hit $5 in the coming days and weeks because of the panic buying AND the potential disruption, which probably wouldn't have been so bad on it's own.

According to WLNS, the police had to be called to at least one gas station in the Lansing area today, to break up fights between drivers. State officials are telling everyone to follow their normal routines when it comes to fill-ups as it will minimize any ACTUAL disruptions in the fuel supply from Hurricane Ike.

People need to remember that as demand exceeds supply, the price will increase. If the hurricane tears up oil production and disrupts the supply, that's one thing. But for us to panic-buy and reduce the available supply faster than it can be replenished, and the price skyrockets as a result--without the price gouging factor--then we've shot ourselves in the a$$.

Shame, shame.

Who Cares What Bolivia Does? They Need Us More Than We Need Them

Regarding the Bolivian expulsion of our ambassador: WHO CARES?

They need us more than we need them. Let them throw our entire embassy out while their country goes to pieces, as it's currently doing.

The State Department can cut their budget accordingly and save the money that would be wasted on Bolivia's current government. They won't even be there in a couple of months! Their own people seem to be showing them the door.

Good riddance!

Foreign Governments Need to Stay the Hell Out of Our Business: We'll Elect Our Own President, Thank You Very Much

80% of the world wants Obama in the White House? Too bad; there might well be a lot of disappointed people around the world once AMERICANS have their say at the polls on November 4th. Americans don't like foreigners messing with OUR elections.

And what is with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown endorsing Obama and Obama's proposals that Obama withdrew his support from last month? I respect the Prime Minister, but not when it comes to OUR elections. He ought to get his OWN house into order before telling us how to run ours.

And speaking of elections, why won't he allow a general election in Britain? Is it because Labor's run out of gas and the Conservatives lead by David Cameron are taking seats away from his party in local elections across Britain? This man has some nerve endorsing Obama when he won't allow a general election in his own country.

And as predicted, Obama didn't earn any votes over here with his grand trip overseas, in which he WAS grandstanding. Shame, shame. Pandering to an overseas audience before he's even elected.

International community, keep your opinions to yourselves because we AREN'T interested. Run your own elections, and let us run ours.

Conyers Says She's Ready to Lead Detroit City Council: I Think Not

President Pro Tempore Monica Conyers says she's ready to lead the Detroit City Council once Council President Ken Cockrel becomes acting Mayor of Detroit.

YEAH, RIGHT.





She called Cockran "Shrek" in the above exchange. She was more concerned about being disrespected and was extremely rude herself.

Her temper will get the best of her and she'll turn the city council meetings into a bigger farce than they are now. And that's assuming that she comes out of the FBI investigation of the council in the clear.

Here's more of her fine leadership qualities on display:

• Yesterday she ran away from the press after calling them "evil" and requested an escort past them.
• During the Democratic National Convention she called the Denver police to moderate a dispute between her, her staff and the hotel that she was staying at. Calling the police for something like THAT?
• She threatened to shoot one of outgoing Mayor Kilpatrick's aides at a pension meeting and then threatened to have her four brothers "whup his a$$."

She's promised to behave, but given the type of politics that goes on at the City Council meetings, will she be able to keep order and stay in order?

Woodward Makes Brief Mention of New Technique for Tracking Terror Leaders: Media Should STAY OFF This Part of the Story

Bob Woodward's new book makes mention of a new system of tracking and targeting terrorist leaders in Iraq and Afghanistan that the military is taking great advantage of. But when questioned about it in an interview, Woodward declined to explain further.

Smart move, Bob. I hope the media follows his example and leaves this part of the story alone. Whatever the military is doing, it's working.

The last time that the press revealed that the military was able to track al-Qaeda's use of particular electronic devices, the group stopped using them, which made the system useless and lead to more American lives being lost on the battlefield. We don't want a repeat of that experience.

If there are any reporters out there who already know the details about this "system" that Woodward mentions, ZIP IT. Don't take another tool out of the hands of the military.

Detroit's Mayoral Nightmare Ends: Kilpatrick Pleads Guilty and Resigns

Detroit's long nightmare is finally over. Mayor Kilpatrick plead guilty to two counts of obstruction of justice, will resign, serve 120 days in jail, and will have probation for five years. In addition he will lose his law license, forfeit his pension and will repay the city $1 million.

The scandal has made international headlines for months and was a huge embarrassment to the city and to the entire state of Michigan. Today's developments are also generating international headlines.

Now they have to sort out the City Council down there. Several members are under FBI investigation for corruption and may be in big trouble.

Kilpatrick's resignation will go into effect in two weeks; the city council president will assume control of the city as Detroit's 61st mayor the next day; hopefully he cleans house.

GOP Platform Looks Good; Few Items of Concern

The 2008 GOP platform is now complete and is available on their web site. They have a lot of good stuff in it, not the least of which are:

• Support for the First Amendment right of association that protects the Boy Scouts of America and other similar organizations who are under attack from liberals.
• Support for appointing judges with a strict view of the Constitution to the federal bench and not political activists who believe in the "living document" crap.
• Support for the 2nd Amendment to keep and bear arms.
• Support for human rights, religious freedom and economic freedom overseas.
• A strong pro-life stance in the abortion debate.
• A commitment to maintain our friendship with Israel.
• Calls for an end to earmarking.
• Calls for a balanced budget amendment, except during times of war.
• A ban on human cloning and stem cell research which involves the destruction of embryonic human life, and the creation of human embryos for research purposes.
  
• A massive expansion of stem-cell research in those areas that do not involve the destruction of embryonic human life.
• Preserving property rights.
  

I'm not in full agreement with everything in their platform.

• They still refuse to recognize habeas corpus as a right as described in the United Nations charter and is an international right, not just an American one.
• They're maintaining their support of the death penalty as a party.
• I also don't believe that the Republicans will stop runaway government spending. The moderates who hold a majority in the party will keep spending and expanding the debt unless conservatives get in control of the party. THEN we'll see dramatic reductions. Not before.
• Global warming hubris. Where exactly does the science end and the politics begin?
  

They're also debating the 2012 primary system. Looks like two states will again enjoy primacy at the expense of all others; I had hoped they would get rid of this unfair system after two states--Michigan and Florida--rebelled against this system for the 2008 primary season. I think every state in the union needs to follow Michigan's and Florida's example and hold their primaries early in 2012. This issue needs to be forced; both parties are reluctant to go there.

Here's the platform.

DailyKos's Lies Exposed: Backpedals on Story that Governor Palin's Fifth Child Was Actually Her Grandchild

Slam dunk story...ultra-liberal blog site DailyKos tried to spread a vicious lie that Governor Sarah Palin's fifth child was not hers, that the child was actually her daughter's.

So the Palin family fired back, announcing that the daughter is five months pregnant right now, which blows the DailyKos story clear out of the water. They've already eliminated their original post in shame, posting the announcement of the daughter's pregnancy, with the tagline that the candidate "was SO not vetted" by the McCain camp.

That also isn't true; McCain knew about it already; confirmation came from a McCain aide before the Palins issued a joint press release.

I'm SO enjoying watching DailyKos squirm...

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.

Rebate Checks Round 2: Bad Idea

There is a possibility of another round of rebate checks from the government to stimulate the economy. I disagree with this kind of thinking due to the fact that the feds will have to borrow tens of billions of dollars to pay for the package, just as they did earlier this year. In fact, they had to borrow $191 billion.

Going further into debt to China and other international lenders is a TERRIBLE idea, and I renew my objections to it. This proposal should not see the light of day.

No government should spend more money than it takes in. There's a reason that the economy is in the condition that it's in: we are $10 trillion in debt, our dollars are devaluing on the international market, which is also helping to drive up the price of fuel, which is driving up the cost of everything else.

This is NUTS, and we have to put our collective foot down somewhere to break this vicious cycle.

Conservatives Have it Wrong on Two Key Issues: the Death Penalty and Habeas Corpus

I am again at odds with mainstream conservatism over two stands that they've decided to continue this election year. And I'm not sure how this will affect my vote in the fall.

The first issue is the death penalty. When the Supreme Court ruled--correctly--on the proportionality of the death penalty to heinous crimes (such as the child rape case) where the victim survives, the conservatives loudly denounced the decision and blasted the majority opinion.

The holier-than-thou attitude toward employing the death penalty that has been coming from conservatives is wearing more than a little thin. At the very least, they should be denouncing the error-riddled death penalty system and leading the charge to investigate every case to make certain that they are going to execute the right person for the right crime. DNA evidence is responsible for clearing at least one death row inmate every month. Until this evidence is considered, there should be a moratorium on executions across the country.

The other problem I see with the conservative movement is the unwillingness to extend the Writ of Habeas Corpus to captured enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay and other U.S. military prisons around the world.

The media wrote that the Supreme Court "granted" the writ to Gitmo detainees. How can they "grant" the writ to detainees when they already have habeas corpus rights as determined by international law? The American and British governments made sure that it was written into the United Nations charter back in 1948.

Habeas Corpus (the right to challenge unlawful detention and petition for relief) is not just an American custom, as some people seem to think. If a detainee is a citizen of a UN signatory nation, then they have habeas corpus automatically. They don't need to be American citizens to have that basic human right. But the U.S. government has systematically ignored this little point.

What concerns me is the fact that a government that is unwilling to extend basic human rights to non-citizens is only a few steps away from engaging in this kind of conduct against it's own people too. All one has to do is look at what happened to Japanese-Americans during World War II to see that this has already happened in our history.

And the conservatives were braying like elephants when the Supreme Court decided in favor of making sure that the government follows the rules which it is bound to follow, both within the framework of our own Constitution, and with the United Nations charter.

I can't ignore either of these issues in the fall.