Calblog

Rooster needs a home

One of our baby chicks grew up to be a rooster. He a bantam white silkie and ADORABLE. He does grow at the crack of dawn though. Neighbors haven't complained yet. I'd like to find him a home before they do. Contrary to rumors that bantams don't have full crow, this boy does and he's only 4 months old. I have darkened the coop some and kept him quiet an hour longer but he has got to find a home where neighbors don't mind.

No comment

Al Gore gives John Kerry debate advice.

X-Prize Flight

We watched the flight on TV. I'm toying with the idea of a family day trip out to the Mojave Spaceport but I can just hear the disappointment of the kids who don't share our interest in space. Their disinterest seems common among their peer group here. I hope the X-Prize sparks the same curiousity about space that the Apollo program did for my generation.

The Freedom to Criticize Johnny Cochran

Eugene Volokh has an insightful analysis on a case that was just granted cert by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Your humble blogger happens to share Volokh's prediction concerning the ultimate outcome of this case.

What Volokh fails to provide you are some of the rather interesting details concerning the back-story of this case.

Maybe the pending news of the Supreme Court's cert decision is what drove Cochran to the hospital.

This case is living proof that certain lawyers often get the clients that they deserve...

The End of Cable?

Long ago, I mentioned my ability to capture HDTV Over The Air(OTA) Broadcast Signals with an indoor antenna. Now about 4 months later, I'm still happy to say I'm receiving broadcasts in HD, and let me tell you...Football in HDTV is amazing...Scary at times (people look a lot more flawed), but Amazing!

If you didn't believe me before, now a technology writer for MSNBC is writing about getting HDTV over the air. I quote for your amusement "Over-the-air HDTV is amazing when you see it. There is no snow, ghosts or shadows. Either you zero in on the signal and have perfect video – or you receive nothing at all. The picture quality is so good it even fooled two cable installers in my home. They had to physically watch the antenna move before they believed that they were watching over-the-air HD television."

One of the interesting things about HDTV OTA is that multiple channels can be broadcast in a single FCC bandwidth range. (In English) So, when I get PBS (UHF Channel 53) I get PBS-1, PBS-2, PBS-3, and PBS-4. For ABC (UHF Channel 61), I get ABC-1, the regular local channel and ABC-2, (ABC News Now), with any luck 2 years down the road FOX will Multicast Fox News Channel, and NBC multicast CNBC. Maybe it'll never happen, but I can dream. As more people discover this more, I think more people will move away from traditional cable, and companies will decide to broadcast.


Oh by the way, the Terk antenna mentioned in the article does work, but you can find cheaper antennas that work as well or better pretty easily. Additionally if you want to see what channels you can easily receive over the air, the best site for that is www.antennaweb.org.

Freedom to Sprawl

Long ago, I touched on the corrolation of gas prices to personal freedom, and briefly referred to hideous anti-Sprawl policies. I will begin by stating, (although this will likely come back to haunt me when I someday run for office), I love Sprawl.

Megan McArdle and Tyler Cowen have excellent things to say about the push environmentalists are making to eliminate or reduce sprawl and get us to walk everywhere. I would include likely bogus studies about how unhealthy the suburbs are.

They both refer to an article in the NY Times Magazine, which I highly recommend, about roads and the automobile. At one point the article states "It was only later, in the middle of the 20th century, that urban planning became a bureaucratized profession with sweeping ambitions, like the ''urban renewal'' projects of the 1960's and 70's that mostly served to hasten the urbanites' flight to suburbs. Now that the planners have followed them to suburban counties, Americans are heading to smaller communities in the exurbs. Their idea of the Radiant City is one that radiates beyond the reach of the master planners."

I couldn't have said it any better. I strongly disliked living in the city, and the only thing I dislike about living in the exurbs is the fact that radical enviromentalists make it impossible to build more roads. Every evening I come home, I look around and I love where I live. Sprawl is about freedom, the freedom to live where you want in a house you can afford with a decent size yard. And quite frankly it was Sprawl when those who are 70 now first moved to Marin and Moraga at 25, it was Sprawl when those who are 40 now moved to Walnut Creek and Pleasanton at 25, and it is Sprawl now when those who are 25 move to Brentwood and Tracy. Until personal freedoms are taken away people will Sprawl, and good for them. Most people want what the sub and exurbs have to offer in a place to live. The only question is, Will people be allowed to live where they choose?

A long last year...

As some of you may know, I'm currently a 3L at a law school in Northern California. I've been noticing though, that this year has been more difficult, much more difficult, for me than the past 2. It's not so much the work or the material. I think it's that I feel tired after every class. This may be partly related to the long commute, although, I doubt it. A significant part of it, is having tasted freedom only to return to a final year of school. I think the largest cause of my stress though is that I come to class to find so little conservatism. This I think is causing me more stress, because it seems like people carry such odd illusions about the way people conduct business or live their lives. I think mostly I feel as though I go to a place detached from reality, and it is wearing me out.

Earthquake prediction

There's been a 5.9 earthquake near Parkfield, CA. 5.9 is serious but not worrisome. What is interesting though is that Parkfield, which is very active, is often the subject of research into earthquake prediction. Check out this 1992 article on an expired Parkfield prediction and this one on a more recent unfulfilled prediction south of Parkfield. It will be interesting to see if this 5.9 and the flurry of aftershocks will produce data allowing a successful prediction.

'Bring-It-On John' Begs Bush to Stop Bringing It

Now the war hero is whining because the campaign is getting too tough.

SPRING GREEN, United States (AFP) - Democratic presidential challenger John Kerry appealed for an end to the TV advertising war that has marked his election battle against President George W. Bush.

What happened to Kerry's boast about spoiling for a fight, and daring Bush to "BRING---IT---ON!"? At this rate he'll soon be requesting a purple heart for his bruised ego.

(hat tip Drudge)

Israel nails Hamas terror leader in Syria

Now this is the way to wage a war on terror!

Memo to the U.S. State Department: please take note of these rather effective diplomatic procedures for future dealings in the Middle East.

U.S.-based broadcasts inspire pro-democracy protests in Iran

I guess Castro's jamming signals must have have let up slightly.

Many of the Persian-language broadcasts beaming into Iran are based in my own backyard of Southern California. The story behind how such broadcasts affect events in Iran is quite a compelling story that the English speaking press has never fully tapped into.

U.S. regularly releases Taliban Terrorists back into Afghanistan so that they can continue waging war against America and its allies.

Now I ask you: Is this anyway to run a war on terrorism???

On the one hand, I'm glad that a senior Taliban commander was killed.

On the other hand, what the f**k was the U.S. military thinking in releasing this guy from Guantanamo Bay in the first place??!!! What if he had managed to kill more American troops? (How do we know that he didn't?) Was it a case of the U.S. cow-towing to the Red-Cross/U.N.-loving appeasers of the world in releasing him?

Who else have we released? How many of them are now gearing up to kill our troops?

"Officials in Afghanistan and the United States have suggested in the past that at least five Afghan detainees released from Guantánamo had returned to Afghanistan and to become Talib commanders or fighters."

If the militray is serious about this war, then it shouldn't be releasing anyone it even remotely suspects has ties to the Taliban...ever! People like this should have been given the firing squad some time ago.

If people manage to lose faith in Bush, it will be because of stories like this.

Completely FUBAR if you ask me!

EXPOSING THE ASIA-PACIFIC FOUNDATION

The Asia-Pacific Foundation, the "think tank" based in London whsoe Director and CEO is one of the "officials" quoted in today's Los Angeles Times story, has articles on its website such as the one entitled "Hamas: Strenthening Credibility", in which it is stated that "Hamas is not purely a violent organization", and which criticizes Israel's "assasination policy, killing those Israel claims to be terrorists". The Blogosphere needs to do further investigation on this "think tank". The Calblog Husband is suspicious.

The LA Times and Their French Experts

This blog will never match the depth of Patterico's LA Times examination including yesterday's entry on Rathergate and the facts omitted by the Times. However occasionally, something irks me so much that it bears mention. Today's report on Al Qaeda is an example of facts hidden "after the jump". The opening paragraphs read:

Authorities have made little progress worldwide in defeating Islamic extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda despite thwarting attacks and arresting high-profile figures, according to interviews with intelligence and law enforcement officials and outside experts.

On the contrary, officials warn that the Bush administration's upbeat assessment of its successes is overly optimistic and masks its strategic failure to understand and combat Al Qaeda's evolution.

Who are these experts and officials? Here are the ones willing to be named:

* Judge Jean-Louis Bruguiere of France, dean of Europe's anti-terrorism investigators

* M.J. Gohel, head of the Asia-Pacific Foundation, a London think tank

* Michael Scheuer, who wrote a book critical of counter-terrorism efforts, who is no longer allowed to talk to reporters and whose move from head of eforts under Clinton to a "broader role" appears to be a demotion

* Gijs de Vries, the counter-terrorism coordinator for the European Union.

* Richard Clarke, the former White House counter-terrorism chief

* Pierre de Bousquet de Florian, director of France's intelligence agency

So what do we have? French counter-terroriam officials, a London think tank, an EU official, a CIA officer who appears to have scores to settle and Richard Clarke. You remember Richard Clarke, right?

More on Italy/Iraq

Joe Gandelman over at Dean's World linked back to my post on post-liberation Italy. In the comments, Arnold Harris compares Iraq to Greece, which is interesting and I recommend you take a look.

One reason why Italy is an interesting parallel is Mussolini, whose name never came up in the Collier's article. Kerry said
Bush made Saddam the priority. I would have made Osama the priority." Imagine if someone said "Roosevelt made Mussolini the priority. I would have made Hitler the priority." In hindsight, it is just nonsense.

Can Italy Learn Democracy?

That's the headline on the cover of a Collier's magazine dated November 27, 1943. It's an article written when Italy was in the throes of a post-war state similar to that in Iraq. Here's the article summary, straight from page 11:

Besides the adults who are members of the Party, Italy has a whole generation which reached maturity under Fascism. Re-educating this group and settling antagonisms which threaten to produce a civil war are the big problems in the creation of a democratic Italy

Such doom and gloom. Sound familiar? Substitute Saddam for Fascism and Iraq for Italy and this could have been written this morning in any number of mainstream press outlets.

Here are some passages about Marshal Badoglio, the man leading Italy before their first elections -- the equivalent of Iraq's Allawi:

There's so little leadership left in Italy that up to mid-October, Badoglio hadn't been able to find enough men, pending opening of the jail doors, to fill out his cabinet.

* * *

But he has guaranteed the British and American governments that, upon his installation in Rome, he will form a government of all shadings of public opinion, excluding all Fascists or pro-Fascists. As soon as possible after Italy's liberation, elections will be held to permit Italians to choose their own government.

How did Italy ever make it? And what's this "British and American governments"? Why isn't there a broader-based coalition?

There's no timeline for elections there. Parts of Italy, though Mussolini was toppled, were still controlled by the Germans. Badoglio didn't have peace throughout the whole country yet. Parts were a "no-go" zone, as Kerry complained about parts of Iraq.

Remember Kerry's complaints that Alawi had to rule from behind a walled compound:

[I]n what is left of Italy -- four provinces in the heel of the boot . . . [the king] and Badoglio live in damp, unheated villas without running water.

Were there complaints that Badoglio was a puppet government? Of course:

Members of [the Communist and Socialist] organizations to whom I talked in Cairo, Algiers and here in Italy, complain that by "setting up" the king and Badoglio, the Allies have not given the Italians leaders who symbolize the true democtratic sentiment of the people.

The conclusion to the article expresses the hopelessness of the situation:

In spite of all indications of progress, Italy's ultimate destiny is clouded in uncertainties. Italy is a nation with a glorious Roman past, and a tragic Fascist present, and an unfathomable future. . . . Compared to these problems, the matter of forming a new government in freed Italy, with or without Badoglio, fades into unimportance.

Just as holding elections in Iraq doesn't matter with terrorists still in control of Fallujah?

Italy is a free nation now. Iraq will be too. We have to stay the course.

Managing the Board of Directors

I like writing. I hate looking for a publisher. Then I thought, hey, that's why I have a blog. So, here you have the first in an occasional series of articles:

Managing the Board So You Can Manage Your Company

The board meeting went well. The board had moved through the agenda quickly and easily. Even the motion to recommend a bylaw change to expand the size of the board and establish committees sailed through. The CEO left the meeting feeling good. Any bylaw change approved by the board almost assuredly would be approved by the shareholders. More board members would provide greater expertise for management to draw on. Committees would allow management to get board assistance without forcing all board members to invest huge amounts of time. The CEO was looking forward to the advantages the expansion would bring. Heading to her car, she saw a knot of board members talking at the other end of the parking lot. She waved, thinking nothing of it.

The trouble started the next day. One board member called to inform the CEO of the concerns that he and a few unnamed other board members had. Was the CEO trying to dilute their power? Did she have nefarious plans that she wanted to hide from the entire board by assigning tasks to committees? The board member assured the CEO that he trusted the CEO, it was just these other board members that were concerned.

Days of discussion followed. By week’s end, the proposed bylaw change had been abandoned and, instead of recruiting new expertise to the board, the CEO spent the next month preparing and submitting reports to the board to show that nothing was amiss. An opportunity had been squandered.

After Enron and the other assorted corporate scandals, many board members have taken the charge to oversee the corporation too seriously, interfering with day-to-day management. As one CEO put it, “you’re basically doing two jobs – managing the company and managing the board.” This irregular behavior distracts management from the job of running the company. It can and should be halted as quickly as possible. Otherwise, in the end, it is injurious to the company itself. That same CEO added, “unfortunately, the board doesn’t have the stomach for what’s good for the company in the long term. You’re dealing with their immediate gratification need which isn’t always best over the long haul.” This article gives management the tools it can use to regain control.

The board must function as a whole. The board should be provided with written information well before any board meeting and all issues should be discussed within meetings among the board members as a whole. Management should refuse to engage in substantive discussions outside of board meetings. The head of the board should encourage board members from engaging in outside discussions. Matters too intricate or specialized for full board discussion should be assigned to a committee. Minutes of committee meetings should be disseminated as part of the board information.

Although board members are entitled to review any information pertaining to the company, requests for information should be disclosed to the entire board and copies of any information provided should be disseminated to the entire board in advance of meetings. “The best surprise is no surprise,” said David Levy, Director of Financial Aid at the California Institute of Technology and member of several non-profit boards. Joseph Troy and William Gould, in their treatise, Advising and Defending Corporate Directors and Officers, note that there are limits to this power. Specifically, board members are required to treat confidential information confidentially; the director is not allowed to use his right for a private purpose that conflicts with the company’s interests; and there are reasonable time constraints on their exercise.

Company bylaws provide procedural guidelines that can quiet unnecessary disputes. Closely-held companies are particularly guilty of putting the bylaws on a shelf and never returning to them. Most bylaws contain set rules as to the responsibilities of various positions, resolving many nascent power disputes. Bylaws also contain standards for removing a board member; identification of cumulative voting requirements that may enable some board members to retain their seats regardless of behavior; and prescribed dispute resolution methods.

One may be surprised at how correcting procedural sloppiness resolves a lot of problems. First, proper procedure contains the problem and keeps it from distracting management. Second, many people who have no trouble bending the CEO’s ear in private are less willing to gripe before a full board.

What will remain are substantive problems that really do require resolution. Doing so can and should benefit the company as a whole. First, identify the issues and line up the players. One should be looking for board members who are neutral on the matter. One or two of the most respected neutral board members should be enlisted to lead the discussion. Guidelines for the discussion should include:

· No personal attacks.

· Everyone gets a chance to speak without interruption.

· The leader should keep a list of issues as they arise so they can all be addressed.

· Resolutions should meet the needs of the company, not the needs of the board.

In the event that internal board discussions cannot resolve the matter, outside consultants can be brought in. They generally fall into 4 categories: trainers, strategic planners, counselors and mediators.

Trainers teach basic skills and board duties. Trainers can put on a single session on topics as basic as running an effective meeting or as advanced as restructuring board committees. Usually, trainers are brought in within a retreat setting rather than as part of a regular board meeting.

Strategic planners can help when a board disagrees about the direction of the company. Strategic planning is a complex process and a board should expect an initial time investment of at least 100 hours over 6 months. However, done properly, a strategic plan can provide a road map to keeping the board focused for quite some time.

Counselors are best when personal disputes between board members interfere with company business. Choose one that has a background in organizations. Some will do one or two-day sessions designed around teambuilding skills. Others have specialized approaches. In their book, Hats Off to You, Ernest A. Doud, Jr. & Lee Hausner, Ph.D., recommend that one
Make[s] sure the person you select:

· Understands both the [personal] and business implications of your conflict

· Is someone with whom everyone has good personal chemistry;

· Is someone you trust!

Finally, mediators are a good choice when board members have serious substantive issues that need to be resolved. A mediator can take the various factions from problem to solution, encouraging the board to come to a firm agreement. Some mediators will assist in drafting the agreement in a form that will bind the board. Depending on the nature of the dispute, that form can consist of board resolutions, resignation of a director, the buyout of shareholders that form the backing for a particular position or a myriad of other creative solutions. As with the choice of any other professional, the mediator should have a strong background with corporations and boards and, if possible, familiarity with the substantive area of the problem.

Above all, management needs to keep its focus. A board problem must be resolved as efficiently as possible rather than ignored. Management cannot afford to get embroiled in a dispute, choosing sides and getting caught up in the emotions that will run high. A company’s bottom line will be improved with a board that provides the proper amount of guidance and oversight instead of interference.

For more information, contact Justene Adamec.

Freedom of the BlogPress

PayPal is threatening to cancel the Daily Pundit's account because of his blog's content. GoogleAds threatened to do the same to Prestopundit yesterday. While, on its face, it seems reasonable for both companies to not want to be associated with "offensive" material, these are not porn or hate sites. The ability of the larger internet companies like Google and Ebay (which owns Paypal) to indirectly influence the content of blogs will be a huge problem if it continues.

Terri's Law Struck Down

Terri's Law allowed Florida Governor Jeb Bush to step in and stop the murder of a brain-damaged woman when a lower court held that her husband's rigths were greater than hers. The Florida Supreme Court has now struck down Terri's law. Here's the opinion (pdf file). No word yet on the next step.

UPDATE: Blogosphere commentary:

Patterico

Xrlq

How can Kerry win?

Call me crazy. I'm still waiting for Cheney to step down, although it appears that they've just shipped him off to the undisclosed location. Still, I've watched this race for a while, without daily commentary, and my conclusion is that Kerry is toast. It's not going to be close. A Mondale-level loss wouldn't surprise me, although Calblog husband can't bring himself to hope for more than a Dukakis-style loss.

Yes, the polls are close, and when you watch the state-by-state races for electoral votes, it is even closer. The campaign is just heating up, though. Most of what we talk about in the blogosphere, such as the details of the Swift Boat veterans, and the constant flip-flops, are just now hitting the national consciousness. That Kerry actually met with the Viet Cong in France while the Vietnam war was going on is the next Swift Boat ad. Americans have heard about the flip-flopping but most of what they've seen in the convention. Now, they'll pay attention and see the difference. It'll be interesting to see if he can maintain a consistent position from the first debate to the last.

In addition, the wheels are coming off the campaign cart. The headlines are not good. Even the L.A. Times will have trouble burying it all after the jump. Joe Lockhart in the middle of the CBS scandal. Kerry suggesting that he knows better than Prime Minister Allawi what it's like on the ground in Iraq. Now Teresa has suggested that Osama will be produced just before the election.

Bush is just starting to campaign seriously. I expect the nation to again be surprised during the debates when they discover that the conventional wisdom that Bush is dumb and inarticulate is simply untrue.

Kerry is toast.

Iraq's WMD's revisited

No stockpiles perhaps - but definitely a dormant program in Iraq for Weapons of Mass Destruction. (hat-tip: Lucianne)

I have read many theories on this issue, and this one rings as the most truthful sounding so far (at least on a gut-check level).

Too bad the media will likely be too tired of this issue to give it enough proper play...

In Defense of John & Ken (and Dreier bashing)

I assume that everyone knows I work for KFI and that John & Ken don't particularly need anyone defending them regarding their show.

But I just have to wonder if some people heard the same show that I did yesterday.

I am a bit unclear to what extent the criticism read here is directed specifically at John & Ken versus the larger "outing" issue. I am also unclear if subsequent tentative retractions were referencing earlier charges of John & Ken's "sleazy" tactics per se, or were merely a retraction on the issue of the factual issues surrounding the outing story.

But assuming that there are still critics of John & Ken's tactics out there, let me offer this unsolicited defense -

John & Ken had on the author of an article in LA Weekly regarding stories surrounding David Dreier's sexual orientation.

John & Ken did not "out" Dreier - they merely reported the fact that stories were now being printed that "outed" him.

Some may feel that such a distinction shouldn't matter and that John & Ken should not

have had the guest on at all and ignored the issue. But I ask them to look at it from their perspective -

Since they spend everyday bashing Dreier over his substantive positions on illegal immigration, John & Ken felt that they had to address the fact that the story is being reported in other outlets. LA Weekly, KPFK, and various blogs.

Since they are on a crusade to boot Dreier from office over illegal immigration, they of course had to speak about this other issue which has the potential to affect voting patterns in the Congressman's district - even though they clearly think the sexual orientation issue would be a distraction to the larger cause.

Even Boi From Troy previously "reported on the reporting" as John and Ken did yesterday. I frankly fail to see the difference, even if John & Ken let the Weekly reporter have air time to repeat his assertions.

While John & Ken accepted the thrust of the reporter's contention as a hypothetical, they also challenged him as to why this story is being printed now after Dreier's 24-years in office. They also challenged him as to why a gay Congressman would necessarily feel obligated to vote for what is euphemistically referred to as the "gay agenda".

True - John & Ken did nothing to forcefully challenge LA Weekly's Doug Ireland regarding his proof. Nor did they explicitly criticize him for printing the article in the first place. They, along with many listeners, did in fact express understandable curiosity as to why Dreier pays his chief of staff so much.

However, John & Ken also made it quite clear that the issue is irrelevant as to why Dreier should be fired from office. It is also notable that they have not referenced the issue at all on their blog site which posts much of the damning evidence needed against Dreier on the immigration issue.

John & Ken have been deluged with hundreds of e-mails regarding stories of Dreier's sexual orientation for weeks on end. Other's have attempted to call into the station to inform John & Ken about various rumors regarding Dreier that are irrelevent to the issue of illegal immigration. Such callers never made it on the air.

John & Ken rightfully ignored the issue until yesterday when they devoted 30 minutes to it simply to acknowledge that a report was coming out in the LA Weekly about the issue. They gave the article's author his say and then went back to concentrating on the illegal immigration issue as they have been for weeks. To continue to simply ignore the very existence of the story in other media outlets would have seemed strange in the eyes of John & Ken listeners who already knew about the issue from other sources. This way, the hosts acknowledged it, let the air out of it so to speak, and then moved on.

They feel (as I do) that kicking out Dreier over an issue such as sexual orientation would be a tragedy when its so important to send a clear, direct, and unfiltered message that the reason he needs to go is simply and purely based on his stance regarding illegal immigration.

The point of John & Ken's interview yesterday was neither to challenge nor endorsing the LA Weekly author's contentions. It was simply to acknowledge the story's existence as an objective fact. (Not the story's contentions as fact - merely the story's existence.)

So let's quickly reiterate why Dreier needs to go:

Some (including the head mistress of this very site) have suggested that its important to keep Dreier since he is a powerful committee head and thus very influential within the GOP.

I have nothing but respect and gratitude for calblog's head mistress, but it is this very fact that argues in favor of firing Dreier. The fact that he is head of the Rules committee and the 3rd most powerful Congressman in the House absolutely guarantees that nothing will get done about illegal immigration since he will be able to kill any legislation that moves us in the right direction when the heat is off of him after the election.

It is better to fire him and replace him with another Republican as committee chair that has a better track record on the issue.

Meanwhile, Dreier is showing just how sleazy he is by blatantly trying to jump on the illegal immigration bandwagon only after John & Ken turned the heat on him over the issue.

Dreier even has the gall to suggest that it's not John & Ken who are responsible for getting him to submit his latest bill, but rather the recent Time magazine article that magically made him aware of this issue for the first time in 24-years.

All intellectually honest readers who have followed this issue must acknowledge this unassailable fact: Dreier wouldn't even be paying his current lip-service on the issue if it were not for John & Ken's efforts.

For that alone, these hosts deserve support - not criticism.

Money quote:

Groups that favor stricter immigration policies and those that support legalization measures agreed that a bill by Rep. David Dreier, R-Glendora, is a transparent election-year attempt to appease his right-wing critics.

"It's not something I would have expected from Congressman Dreier, who has just not been a champion of immigration enforcement and immigration restrictions,' said John Keeley, director of communications at the Center for Immigration Studies, which wants tighter controls on immigration. "It's conspicuous that Dreier is offering it. The timing is striking.'

You tell me if Dreier's Democratic opponent would really be worse than him on this key issue regarding virtually every quality of life issue throughout Southern California -

"It's really intriguing to me that this seasoned congressman has waited 24 years to do this, and he's doing it during an election year when he's losing ground,' said Cynthia Matthews, Dreier's Democratic opponent in the upcoming election.

Calling the congressman "slimy,' Matthews said Dreier is using the proposal as a red herring to hide his true colors on immigration. His continuing support for a guest worker program - which critics equate to amnesty - is out of step with most Californians, she said.

Bear in mind that Matthews will know full well if she wins the election that the only reason for her victory would be the fact the her Republican constituents want action on illegal immigration.

She knows that if she doesn't deliver, then she will be easily ousted in 2 short years. With that knowledge, voters who care about this issue have nothing to lose by trying her out.

Meanwhile, Dreier does a transparent 11th hour about-face in order to appease the gathering storm - knowing full well that after the election, he can bottle up his own legislation with some obscure House procedure that would ensure its defeat in such a way that he can claim that it was somehow "out of his hands" despite his "best efforts" as a lone Congressman. We all know (or at least should know) how the game is played. All lawyers know that the only time you have leverage in a negotiation is if you demonstrate that you are willing to walk away. Supporting the GOP at all costs by using the "Democrats are worse" excuse takes away that leverage.

There are times when you have to consider the bottom line - Do you want action taken on illegal immigration or not?

Of course there are no guarantees that anything will get done if Dreier is kicked out of office. But the salient fact is that it will be guaranteed that absolutely nothing will be done about the issue if Dreier manages to survive this latest election.

You can take that to the bank.

Soldier on Leave from Iraq Attacked at Concert

A soldier home on leave recuperating from a land mine that almost destroyed his leg, was beaten unconscious while leaving a concert.

"I don't remember getting hit at all, really," said Barton, a member of the 1st Calvary Division. "He hit me in the back of the head. I fell and hit the ground. I was knocked unconscious and he continued to punch and kick me on the ground."

Barton and his family said he was beat up because he was wearing an Iraqi freedom T-shirt.

"It's not our fault," Barton said. "I'm just doing a job."

According to a Columbus police report, six witnesses who didn't know Barton said the person who beat him up was screaming profanities and making crude remarks about U.S. soldiers, Burton reported.

[...]

After a two-week leave, Barton was supposed to return to Iraq Tuesday. But his broken nose will delay his return.

You can file this one under demonization works, because the demonizing of Operation Iraqi Freedom, or of the Commander and Chief, has real-life consequences out there on the streets.

(hat tip Mcgehee)

The John & Ken Show Turns Sleazy

I tuned in to KFI (AM640) at 5pm today for the latest installment of John & Ken's Political Human Sacrifice campaign.

The hosts introduced someone from a gay activist group that's targeting Republicans who support a federal ban on gay marriage. The group already had Dreier on its list of targets, and it was clear from the get-go that the guest had an agenda.

The guest opened with the boast, "We're 'outing' Dreier," and then accused Dreier of having a homosexual relationship with a member of his staff. The proof?: It is claimed that Dreier pays someone on his staff a lot of money. Before long I had to turn off the program in disgust, but from what I heard I was convinced that this activist group didn’t have the kind of goods on Dreier that warranted such public accusations.

The charges themselves seemed particularly sleazy, especially since it is a most basic etiquette in gay culture not to 'out' those who wish to keep their orientation private. As far as I’m concerned, it’s despicable and unconscionable for a gay-rights group to use accusations of homosexuality as a weapon and as a means of punishing their political enemies. Whether the charges are founded or not, their attitude is, "Let them suffer."

The charges reflect poorly on the character of those who assert them. As far as I can tell to this point, the charges are also unproven--thrown out there simply to hurt a congressman. If such charges are ever proven to be true, I’ll change my tune in this regard. As of now, however, the motives of the group making the charges are more suspect than Dreier’s private or public life.

I'm disappointed at John & Ken. They seemed to have stooped pretty low in this instance. It’s as though there's no limit to the depths they'll go to attack Dreier.

Just for the record, I personally dislike Dreier. On the Hugh Hewitt show he once referred to those who opposed outsourcing and 'free trade' as xenophobes, a charge which I found to be preposterous and slanderous. I detest his weaselly support of illegal immigration under the guise of being pro-business. I’ll be glad to see him go if he is defeated this November.

All this having been said, I find it distasteful to attack Dreier simply for the sake of attacking him, and with no regard to how sleazy the source or the charge. Some things are even more important than defeating a disappointing congressman like Drier—decency, for one.

I’m hoping Justin (who works directly with KFI) will comment or post on this subject. He would almost certainly be able to discuss the background of today’s John & Ken Show in far greater detail, and perhaps bring to the dialogue a perspective different than my own.

UPDATE #1

Oops! Looks like Justin beat me to the punch. D’Oh! See his post directly below mine.

I note Justin's report that the Village Voice is gearing up to run an ''out' Dreier' article. I reiterate and clarify here my conviction that gays are being untrue to their very selves (to whatever meaning they accord to their own sexual orientation, and to what they believe to be its very innate, inborn essence within them) when they stoop to 'outing' their political opponents for spite or for political gain, just as much as the women of N.O.W. were untrue to their gender when they stood by serial-harasser Bill Clinton simply because he was kin to their political agendas.

TENTATIVE RETRACTION (to my initial posting): If Dreier turns out in fact to be gay, then I will stand corrected from my initial skepticism, and will strikeover the portions of text defending him from the charges brought on John & Ken. If it was already rumored on the blogosphere, then I’m behind the curve on it. The accusations on the John & Ken Show were the first I heard of it.

UPDATE #2

Boi kindly linked this post, and offers insight into allegations circulating about Dreier.

UPDATE #3

Justin has subsequently posted, registering his dismay regarding my treatment of the "'out' Dreier" segment of Wednesday's John & Ken show. My response to Justin's post can be found in its entirety in his comments section, but in short...

I really do like the John & Ken show, honest (otherwise I wouldn't be a semi-regular J&K listener); I just didn't think it was appropriate for them to bring on a guest that came off sounding like such a sleazeball.

But here's the kicker. As Justin says in his post,

John & Ken also made it quite clear that the issue is irrelevant as to why Dreier should be fired from office.

Precisely! Justin just proved my point. It was a wholly “irrelevant” issue as to why Dreier should be fired from office. Airing Dreier's rumored sexuality was therefore gratuitous; that’s the reason I found it particularly sleazy, and why I labeled it as such in my post.

Dreier to be "outed" beyond the blogosphere

As is increasingly the case, the big story was started by blogs.

Now it will soon move into the newspapers.

Blogs such as Boi From Troy reported some time ago about the stories surrounding Congressman David Dreier being a closeted homosexual.

Now word is building that the L.A. Weekly will be confirming the story this week on its website and printed editions. The story will also likely appear in the Village Voice and reiterated in a future edition of Hustler.

As a astute commentator earlier suggested, this could be problematic for John & Ken's Political Human Sacrifice since it has the potential to dilute the message voters would be sending by kicking Dreier out of office.

Now if he were to lose in a heavily Republican district,

it would be unclear if he was given the boot strictly because of his horrible record on illegal immigration versus being fired for his sexual orientation.

Quite a shame if it ends up shaking out that way.

The Right and the Media

I am in the middle of this book and was not going to review it until I had finished, a date pushed even further into the future because I mislaid it after the first 100 pages and only recently found it. However, recent events at CBS warrant letting you know about it now.

As you all know, blogs forced CBS' hand. In addition, blogs were fast and CBS (as well as the other mainstream media) were slow to react. Don't think this is a new phenomenom. This book has the history.

Martin Luther used the printing press and the Catholic Church was slow to react. So the written materials largely reflected the views of the Reformation. In the American Revolution, pamphleeters sparked the cause and there was little available supporting the opposing views of the monarchy.

This book mostly focuses on how the conservatives starting with Goldwater in the time of the liberal Republicanism of Nelson Rockefeller used direct mail to make an end run around the mainstream media and get their message to the public. One of the authors pioneered the direct mail movement and tells the story from his viewpoint. It's a fascinating read including vignettes such as Ronald Reagan responding belatedly to a request because the letter, now crayon-bedecked was found in Ronnie Jr.'s toy box.

There are a few gratutious insults volleyed at the left but overlook them if that's your bent. The information on process here is invaluable.

Other reviews are available at Red State (and also here) and Blogcritics, by people more organized than I, who have gotten through the whole thing.

You can click on the book to buy it.

Swaggart: "I'd Kill [a Gay] and Tell God He Died."

Hugh linked to what he described as "Jimmy Swaggert's [sic] outrageous outburst directed at gays and lesbians." Even with this warning I was wholly unprepared for what I would see...

On a recent television broadcast, televangelist Jimmy Swaggart exposed his murderous rage against gay men:

I'm trying to find the correct name for it . . . this utter absolute, asinine, idiotic stupidity of men marrying men. . . . I've never seen a man in my life I wanted to marry. And I'm gonna be blunt and plain; if one ever looks at me like that, I'm gonna kill him and tell God he died.

Swaggart's murderous hatred is far more grievous a sin than the propensities of those who he would kill over the merest offending look. He himself is thinking with the carnal mind, even as he rages against those he deems carnal.

Some detractors of Christianity would attempt to point to Swaggart as a spokesman for Christianity.

Preposterous! The spirit manifested by Swaggart is antithetical to true Christianity.

Others would say that the Bible is dangerous, that the Old Testament Scriptures encourage or even command Christians to do precisely what Swaggart advocates.

Such individuals fail to understand the Old and New Covenants, or the difference between the two. What’s more, there is not one text of Scripture—Old Testament or New—that support Swaggart’s brand of hate in letter or in spirit.

UPDATE:
(via Drudge, who finally caught up with the story)

After receiving many complaints, Swaggart has apologized for his 'lemme killa gay' diatribe.

If it's an insult, I certainly didn't think it was, but if they are offended, then I certainly offer an apology.

Forget "insensitive pig," try "space cadet." What planet is the guy on? At this point do we really care?

Regarding his statement, "I'd kill him and tell God he died," Swaggart explained,

It's a humorous statement that doesn't mean anything.

Note #1 to Swaggart: It isn't funny—killing never is.
Note #2 to Swaggart: It doesn't mean nothing—words have meanings (Mat. 12:37).

John & Ken turn the heat up on illegal immigration

(Full disclosure: I work for KFI AM 640, and have done fill-in producing work for John & Ken but do not work on their show regularly.)

KFI's John & Ken seem to be having an impact with their Political Human Sacrifice efforts against Congressman David Dreier.

Fox News television did a piece featuring John & Ken yesterday. A new segment also just ran today on

CNN's Lou Dobbs concerning illegal alien politics (also featuring John & Ken). (No Internet links yet for the cable news stories.)

I also doubt that it is a coincidence that Time magazine's blockbuster article ran just weeks after John & Ken put the spotlight on the issue in Southern California.

Today, I had to cross a loud picket line from immigration activists protesting KFI's "racist radio" in order to get to work. Telemundo is covering the KFI protests today. Security is being stepped up around the offices here.

John & Ken and illegal immigration is starting to get big play both in traditional and new media outlets.

And after years of ignoring the issue, Congressman David Dreier is actually starting to pretend that he cares about the issue of illegal immigration by introducing new legislation today. (Gee....what a remarkable coincidence in timing. Dreier has only represented Southern California for over 2 decades and now claims that the Time magazine article this month has suddenly called his attention to the issue.)

It should still be too late for Dreier. Most will be able to see through his actions for what they are - a reaction from one who doesn't care about the issue in his core beliefs, but instead tacts with the wind as soon as he gets scared that his Congressional seat might actually be in jeopardy.

He his definitely scared. But if Dreier should manage to beat John & Ken's Political Human Sacrifice, you can rest assured that after the election, Dreier will pull some stunt to make sure this bill is never passed (Adding language or provisions that will make sure all Democrats and a few Republicans are forced to vote against it; bottling it up in committee, etc. There are countless number of tricks that shifty politicians can use in order to claim support for a cause while at the same time making sure that nothing gets done to make progress on it.)

Of course Democrat Joe Baca also needs to be sacrificed. But everyone knows that the bigger message will only be sent to Congress with Dreier's ouster.

Fire Dreier the Liar...now.

Kerry Asserts "One Position on Iraq"

Kerry's new line is, "I have one position on Iraq."

Hilarious!

Oh, let's hope he makes this his meme through Election Day.

I can imagine one of the innumerable possible retorts ...

BUSH: "Now senator Kerry claims to have 'one position on Iraq.' Yep ... one position at a time!"

Bulldoze the U.N.

In His speech to the U.N. today, President Bush included some requisite butt-kissing ...

History will honor the high ideals of this organization. The charter states them with clarity: to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.

Blah, blah, blah.

History may well honor the pretended ideals of this organization, and if so it will be a web of revisionist lies, for by all accounts the U.N. is failing miserably at every tenet of its charter.

After we danced that fruitless dance with the U.N. leading up to Operation Iraqi Freedom, France told us in the end that they planned to veto us all along. In that weaselly, backstabbing subterfuge the U.N. squandered its last vestige as moral arbiter. That should have forever closed all discussion in the U.S. about "U.N. approval." Hawks and doves can debate about the use of force, but no one has any more business appealing to the wishes of the U.N.

Henceforth the only thing an American President should present to the U.N. is an eviction notice: "The bulldozers and wrecking balls are on the way, I entreat you to leave the premises immediately."

PS--Probably Bush's best paragraph was this:

We're determined to destroy terror networks wherever they operate, and the United States is grateful to every nation that is helping to seize terrorist assets, track down their operatives, and disrupt their plans. We're determined to end the state sponsorship of terror, and my nation is grateful to all that participated in the liberation of Afghanistan. We're determined to prevent proliferation and to enforce the demands of the world, and my nation is grateful to the soldiers of many nations who have helped to deliver the Iraqi people from an outlaw dictator.

How Many Dems Wish Harm to the President?

As McGehee notes, demonization works.

Given the fever pitch of the Bushitler crowd, I have to wonder how many Dems secretly
root for this nutjob.

UPDATE

To those who suppose that hatred manifest by the left is merely reciprocal to the hatred manifest by those on the right, please look at this compilation of leftist Bush=Hitler allusions. The conservative right has manifested nothing even approaching a comparative hatred for Kerry.

(hat tip LGF)

Kofi's Election '04 Strikeforce Readies to Deploy

Well, folks, Kofi's election snoopers have arrived.

WASHINGTON, D.C., Sep 17 (OneWorld) - A team of 20 independent democracy experts from 15 countries and five continents has arrived in the United States in order to observe this year's presidential election campaign.

The election monitors, who have been brought here by the San Francisco activist group "Global Exchange," will be fanning out in the coming days initially to research how the election preparations are being conducted in five states. They will then return just before the actual polling November 2.

As has been reported earlier, “Global Exchange” is a consortium of Democratic party loons, and the election monitors will be presided over by a Democatic U.S. congressman bent on avenging the 2000 election.

(hat tip LGF)

New Bearflaggers

The door to the Bear Flag Legue has creeeeeaaaaaked open. It should have creaked open a lot sooner but the doorkeep was off in a drunken stupor or some such thing. We have three new members and two changed URLs. Welcome to:

The Straight Scoop
annika's journal
Polipop

and change your URLs for

Mad Mikey
Pirate's Blog

How time flies

Happy blogiversary to the Boi from Troy.

This just in: Kerry Against the War

Those of you playing at home will need to update your scorecards.

He has also said that Congress (including Kerry) was right to vote to give Bush the power to go to war. Bush was wrong to use it.

He also criticized Bush for sending soldiers into war without body armor (which Kerry voted against).

The mind boggles.

In a Fashion Reminiscent of Genghis Kahn

I suppose it's inevitable that 'Hanoi' John Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony would inspire a video game.

(hat tip World Net Daily)

Split Iraq into 3 Countries? Why!

The new story I keep hearing about Iraq is that it needs to be split into 3 seperate countries. This is because evidently Sunni, Kurd, and Shiite factions could never get along and they don't trust each other. The ties in with the Intelligence reporting establishing the possibility of civil war. What I truly don't understand is, the complete lack of imagination, heck you don't even need imagination, on the part of those calling for Iraq to be split. If we are going to split the country, which I think is unnecessary, but if we would, why not instead create 3 states, and 1 Federal Republic, hmm does this sound familar, heck we could even grant this Federal Republic limited enumerated powers so that the state would have substantial legislative freedom apart from the limited federal government. Isn't it a great idea. I'm just glad I thought of it. It'd be a totally new way of doing things, I know it'd be risky, after all it's never been tried before, but I think it could work. Doesn't it sound like a better idea then splitting the country unnecessarily?

Why I hate polls

The LA Times is reporting that Bush's lead has evaporated and it's a dead heat and Drudge is highlighting the USA Today report of a Gallup poll showing a Bush blowout of 13 points. I don't mind that. I do mind that I am going to spend the whole freakin' day listening to both sides touting how great it's going.

Main Spanish Paper Lauds 9/11 Hijackers

This is an email advertisement for the online version of El Pais, Spain's main newspaper which belongs to the PRISA group ...

And here is Allah's stinging, merited retort.

UPDATE

After a firestorm of outrage, El Pais has issued an apology, translated here. (hat tip LGF)

As far as I'm concerned the paper, publisher, and parent company can offer all the mea culpas they want, but until they say, "All those found to have been involved in planning and producing this atrocious advertisement will be fired," all their apologies are still BS.

Some things (such as El Pais' advertisement) are so heinous that "We're sorry"—while a good start—is not enough. True sincerity can only be measured in pink slips.

The Real Issue?

Carl Bernstein said on Hannity & Colmes that the REAL issue is the war records of the two candidates. If so, why wasn't there a President Dole?

Ra^thergate

Check out LGF's latest, a totally cool animated overlay of MS Word default over CBS's "CYA memo."

(And, for posterities' sake, the post that started it all: Powerlineblog's "The Sixty-First Minute")

Six Flags Jihadi Day

This from WorldNetDaily:

The Muslim Youth Division of the Islamic Circle of North America and the Muslim American Society, two of the largest Muslim organizations in America, had said they arranged exclusive use of Six Flags Great Adventure in Jackson, N.J., for the entire day Friday. The ICNA website declared, "First Time Ever – All Day – Entire Park Exclusively for Muslims!"

Part of ‘Jihad Adventure Day’ is to include—I kid you not—a comedy act entitled, "Allah Made Me Funny." In all seriousness, I think it should be titled, "Allah Made Me 'Splode."

Only after a burst of public outrage was the attendance ban on infidels lifted.

(hat tip: Mike Gallagher)

UPDATE:

The New York Times has run a characteristically sympathetic piece on the Muslim gathering.

The last week has been fraught with threats and racial epithets lobbed at the Islamic Circle of North America, the group that rented the park for the event, and the corporate offices of Six Flags Great Adventure.

Note that no one at ICNA was kidnapped, beheaded, or blown up.

A lot of [Muslims] don't feel safe [...], because of our dress standards, they might be afraid of being taunted. There's a lot of hostility out there.

Yes, you heard that right, adherents of the Religion of Peace Bombings and Beheadings are afraid of being ... taunted.

(hat tip World Net Daily)

More attempts at using copyright to stifle political speech (or admittedly, propaganda) (copyright stalinist alert!)

I would assume that anyone who thinks that downloading the John Kerry/"New Soldier" book in its entirety constitutes fair use would have no problem with the DNC using a small portions of Meet the Press and the now laughable 60 Minutes segments in their ad attacking president Bush, despite protests of copyright infringement by NBC.

Yet amazingly, television networks support the notion that

the distribution of an interview with a public official should be entirely controlled by the entity that supplied the recording equipment.

It should not matter that it is NBC asking for the removal of the footage rather than the RNC (the dangerous implications should be obvious for those who believe that the network news often has an ideological axe to grind). It also shouldn't matter that the use of the footage comes within the context of a current political campaign. Whenever the President speaks out on matters of policy, such statements should be fair use for everyone regardless of the "creative elements" that a news outlet brings to it such as the choice of questions or the amount of zoom used on the video camera lens. Unfortunately, many court cases would seem to suggest that such is not the case (at least in regards to the full content of such an interview. A survey of the current law would suggest that the DNC has a pretty good case in using its short "Meet the Press" snippet in the middle of its propaganda - assuming they had the fortitude to stand up to the copyrights Stalinists.)

Even more bizarre is the non-sequitur put forth by the Weekly Standard's Stephen F. Hayes when he states:

"It is not unusual or illegal for political campaigns to use television footage under the protection of the 'fair use' doctrine. But the Bush campaign ad was rather bland compared to the new ad from the DNC. It was a positive ad in which President Bush defends his conduct of U.S. foreign policy."

Does Hayes actually mean to suggest that if you support a sitting President, then you can use copyrighted footage under the guise of "fair use" - but if you attack a sitting President with copyrighted footage, then it is more likely a violation of federal law??

That is certainly the impression Hayes leaves the reader with. Absolutely bizarre beyond belief...

Hayes has done some great writing before, and Bush has certainly been unfairly attacked in several ways. But come on folks...People should easily be able to beat the Democrats on the merits of their arguments (or lack thereof), rather than resort to the legal threats and game-play that this country's current copyright scheme often provides.

Convincing the DNC to pull footage because it is false and therefore the right thing to do is one thing. But convincing them to pull footage over the threat of legal actions based on inexcusable coercive monopolies of public information is another matter entirely.

Surely freedom-loving people of good will should understand that this principle must apply even in cases where the "speech" in question is really propagandist drivel spouted out by desperate hate-mongering political hacks.

Using copyright as a means to suppress political speech according to partisan dictates is a cancer that must be cut out of the law for the sake of all who support First Amendment freedoms.