Not what they expected.

Surprise, surprise...now that the Dems are in control of the House and the Senate, they are backing away from the crown jewel of their campaign promises.

"CHICAGO - In Washington, Democrats are blaming Republicans for the Senate's failure so far to vote on a resolution opposing a troop increase in Iraq.
But in the heartland, some voters say such excuses no longer are good enough.
Having banked on the promise that Democrats would force a change of course in Iraq if they won control of Congress, some of the people who helped the Democrats get there are growing impatient.
They're frustrated that Democrats sank so much energy into a nonbinding resolution then dropped the bipartisan plan of Sens. John Warner, R-Va., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., like a hot potato when Republican leaders who support President Bush maneuvered them into a corner. "

"They're being overly cautious, to the point of really not accomplishing anything," said Lisa Rone, a psychiatrist from Oak Park, Ill. "I thought the Democrats would be much more clear about that vote and be much more active." "

Of course, if you ask Senator Harry Reid...

"I think the American public's very satisfied with what's happening," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "We're on the right side of the angels here."

They couldn't get their weak "non-binding" resolutions passed, they couldn't get Rep Murtha's "slow bleed" plan even into committee and even here in Minnesota, the Dems are backing away from their promises to their base. They realize that if they keep those promises, their days in power are limited!

Welcome to the club guys. Now you know how the Republican base feels.

Cleaning up the "culture of corruption"

One of the campaign promises that the national Democrats made was that they would clean up the "culture of corruption". Of course once they got into the majority, that promise - like their promise to get the US out of Iraq - quickly slipped away. Well, now at least one Republican lawmaker in DC wants to actually clean things up....

"Republicans plan to force a floor vote on Rep. William Jefferson's move to the Homeland Security Committee in an unprecedented maneuver to force Democrats to go on the record supporting their embattled colleague who is the target of a federal bribery investigation.
House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) pledged to call for a recorded vote on the House floor when Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) introduces a resolution to make the Jefferson move official."

Well that is indeed a start. Let's force them to defend the move. Says Rep Blunt:

"The idea that Homeland Security is less important than the tax-writing committee is ludicrous," Blunt said Wednesday."

He has a point.

It is sad though, that the Rep. Blunt and his collegues couldn't develop this kind of a spine BEFORE last Novembers elections. Things might have gone differently if they had.

Discovery discovers Christian FACTS

Captain Ed has more reaction to the James Cameron "documentary" that is must reading.

"Leading archaeologists in Israel and the United States yesterday denounced the purported discovery of the tomb of Jesus as a publicity stunt.
Scorn for the Discovery Channel's claim to have found the burial place of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and -- most explosively -- their possible son came not just from Christian scholars but also from Jewish and secular experts who said their judgments were unaffected by any desire to uphold Christian orthodoxy.
"I'm not a Christian. I'm not a believer. I don't have a dog in this fight," said William G. Dever, who has been excavating ancient sites in Israel for 50 years and is widely considered the dean of biblical archaeology among U.S. scholars. "I just think it's a shame the way this story is being hyped and manipulated...The filmmakers contend that the inscriptions on the boxes say Yeshua bar Yosef (Jesus son of Joseph), Maria (Mary), Yose (Joseph), Matia (Matthew), Mariamene e Mara (Maria the Master) and Yehuda bar Yeshua (Judah son of Jesus). They maintain that "Mariamene e Mara" is Mary Magdalene and that Yehuda bar Yeshua may be her son by Jesus."

Ed lists just a few of the reasons why those who really care about the truth should be skeptical of this "finding".

"The Cameron/Jacobovici hypothesis fails on a number of points. First, Jacobovici claims that having the names of Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and Judah (noted as Jesus' son) defies odds in a range between 600:1 and 2 million:1. That's a very wide range, and completely inaccurate. Other archeologists note that the names listed by the documentarians were the most common names in use at the time for Jerusalem. They also dispute that the name 'Jesus' on the ossuary is confirmed; some believe it is an early version of the name Hanoun.
Magness has more objections about this than the media hype. She also finds the names interesting, but for a different reason. Recall that the Bible refers to Jesus as Jesus of Nazareth, not Jesus ben-Joseph. The patronymics on the ossuary would have been appropriate for Judeans, not Nazareans, which indicates that the family uncovered in the Talpiot tomb were native to Jerusalem or its environs. The use of stone ossuaries rather than graves also indicates a middle-class status or above for the family, rather than the poor and/or ascetic life of Jesus of Nazareth and his family."

However, the irony of this just slays me (from the quoted article).

"Jodi Magness, an archaeologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, expressed irritation that the claims were made at a news conference rather than in a peer-reviewed scientific article. By going directly to the media, she said, the filmmakers "have set it up as if it's a legitimate academic debate, when the vast majority of scholars who specialize in archaeology of this period have flatly rejected this," she said." (emphasis mine)

Isn't that what the scientific community uses to bludgeon "creationists? That they want to teach ancient stories and not something that has been subject to scientific peer-reviews?

One thing about Christianity - it has long generated discussion and controversy. However, that is actually a good thing (for humanity). It gets us to thinking more about the future instead of focusing on the "here and now".

Side note to our Islamic friends....THIS is how you counter people insulting your prophet. Notice that no one is being threatened with loss of life, limb or livelyhood. I'm just saying...

Sure they care.

Phyllis Schlafly brings our attention to this lovely gem floating around the halls of Congress.

"Feminists have cooked up a new plan to raid the U.S. Treasury for more feminist pork. They want Congress to pass the International Violence Against Women Act.
They are using a report issued in October by former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan called "In-Depth Study on All Forms of Violence Against Women." The report is said to be based on interviews with 24,000 women conducted by the World Health Organization.
Who better to introduce the act than Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., the leading advocate of ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women? Biden never saw a U.N. treaty or a radical feminist spending bill that he didn't like. "

As a child of the 1970's, and a woman whose parents raised their girls to not be second fiddle to anyone, I am not afraid to stand up for "my rights" when appropriate. Because I have a position where I can, I am obligated to speak up for women who can not - which is why I write so much about the treatment of women in Islam. With all that said, the last thing women in this country need is a UN dictate that is overseen by countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Nigeria, India and Columbia.

"Pakistan has ratified the U.N. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. That's the country where a tribal council ordered a young woman gang-raped to avenge her brother's crime of being seen with an unchaperoned woman from another tribe. Gang rape is common in Pakistan.
Nigeria has ratified the convention. That's a country where women are stoned to death for the crime of adultery. Islamic law, called shariah, calls for death to women who commit adultery, but a lesser punishment for adulterous men.
Saudi Arabia has ratified the convention. That's the country where 14 girls died inside a Mecca school that went up in flames. Religious police kept rescuers from entering the building because some of the girls were not wearing their head coverings.
Colombia has ratified the convention. That's a country where thousands of women a year are sold into sex slavery. Similar outrages take place in India, Nepal and Thailand, which have also ratified the convention.
All these countries are eligible to sit on the convention's monitoring committee of 23 "experts" who monitor "progress" and order compliance. All U.N. projects to improve the lot of women follow the feminist model: Break up the family, force women into the work force, and send kids to day care. "

Shoot - with that kind of a track record, I'm surprised that Iran isn't on the list.

Ms. Schlafly gets to the dirty little secret of this bill.

"The International Violence Against Women Act is based on the lie that violence against women is the same problem in all countries. Many non-Western countries have social norms that justify abuse (such as genital mutilation, forced marriage, and polygamy), and "international standards" would vastly diminish the rights and benefits U.S. women now enjoy. "

Women here in the US don't need the kind of help the United Nations is offering here. The women that do ned help need help get it from the various church, government and mentoring programs that are available. The truth is, American women are the most fortunate of women in the world. Rather than bring ourselves down to the level of the rest of the world, let's elevate the rest of the women of the world to our level. Let's insist that those societies that treat women as objects and chattel join America in the 21st century when it comes to the treatment of women.

(H/T reader J Ewing)

Vision Casting

A lot of people are calling former New York City Mayor Rudy Guillani the "front-runner" in the Republican Presidential sweepstakes. After this speech I am starting to see why. (H/T Cap't Ed)

"Mayor Giuliani is calling on the Republican Party to redefine itself as "the party of freedom," focusing on lower taxes, school choice, and a health care system rooted in free market principles....Delivering a policy-driven overview of his presidential platform yesterday, Mr. Giuliani outlined the agenda in a Washington speech before a conservative think tank that sought to make clear distinctions between his vision and that of the Democrats, if not his rivals for the Republican nomination in 2008. The former New York mayor's proposed redefinition of the Republican platform would signal a shift away from any focus on social issues, on which Mr. Giuliani is much less ideologically aligned with the party.
Mr. Giuliani reserved his strongest criticism yesterday for Democrats, but he also said the government's handling of the war on terrorism had done "damage" to America's reputation abroad...Mr. Giuliani talked about taxes, education, and health care, saying they are areas where Republican ideas trump those of Democrats. Democrats, he said, would want to raise taxes to pay the higher costs of a war. "That shows a dividing line, and to me, a misunderstanding of how our economy works," Mr. Giuliani said. He said that while Republicans believe that the American economy is "essentially a private economy," Democrats "really believe, honest, that it is essentially a government economy."
Citing the tax cuts of President Kennedy, Mr. Giuliani said the Democrats' move away from a low-tax policy was one reason he left the party to become an independent and later a Republican."

The Republican Party needs to redefine itself as the Party of Freedom! That's pretty heady stuff. Ed called it "Reaganesque" and it sure seems like he is heading in that direction.

Contrast that with the remarks that Governor Pawlenty (rumored to be a potential Vice Presidential nominee) said yesterday to the National Governors Association.

"The Republicans have to articulate and present an agenda that reassures people and meets those concerns," he said. "And I don't think we've done that very well in the last three to five years."
He called it a time for the party to re-evaluate and "make sure people hear our message about how we're going to improve schools, how we're going to make health care affordable, how we're going to have a better environment and energy future … Republicans have been in neutral on those issues, at least in the public's perception." (emphasis mine)

On one hand we have a candidate saying that Republicans need to differentiate themselves from the Democrats and on the other we have a candidate saying Republicans need to be more like the Democrats....Care to guess which one is clueless as to why he almost lost his re-election bid last November.....

The Minnesota GOP is doomed to mediocrity as long as it's leadership (including the top of their ticket) remains oblivious to the fact that the electorate wants a choice in the matter - not more of the same.

More on the spanking bill

Publius remarked, in the comments to this post, that the way the press is reporting on Assemblywoman Sally Lieber's spanking bill in a manner that is less than forthright (there's a shock).

"Many news agencies and bloggers are writing that Sally Lieber's "No-Spanking" bill (introduced yesterday 2/22/07) has been dropped or that spanking has been removed from the bill. This is far from the truth. Read the bill and you will see that the bill has much to do with spanking.
The bill, AB 755, would make it against the law to spank children with a paddle (no matter how small) or with any switch or rod of any kind. And, depending on what attorney you ask, the bill may outlaw spanking with the hand."

Now there are some "experts" that claim that you should always use a proxy to your hand when spanking a child. They claim that it prevents the child from associating the punishment with the parent. I suppose one could say that. However, I know from experience that is not always the case. My parents were of that mindset and I associated any "punishment" that I got for my transgressions (and I was a bit of a hellion when I was a lass) with BOTH the proxy and the parent.

My thought has been that using your hand is not all bad as you will not spank your child hard enough to hurt your own hand thereby setting a threshold that you may not normally have with a proxy.

I certainly will not claim to speak for all parents here in saying which is the correct way to discipline your child. However, I will say that this is yet another one of those "don't they have anything better to do with their time" moments. While the citizens of California deal with the effects of illegal immigration, socialized medicine, astronomical gas prices (you think $2.50 a gallon is high Minnesota???) , gridlocked highways (imagine 8 to 10 lanes of stopped bumper to bumper traffic at 5pm) and everything else - why in heavens name is Assemblywoman Lieber even putting this forward?

Lesson to be learned.

There is a lesson to be learned in this story. Will the Governor and Legislature listen?

"D.C. bar owners say business has fallen significantly since the city's smoking ban was implemented almost two months ago. In contrast, restaurants say they have fared relatively well -- with little or no drop in sales. Their biggest complaint is the pile of cigarette butts lining their front sidewalks. Bar owners say that smokers no longer leave the office for lunch and a smoke, and that late-night customers don't stay out as long or they go out in Virginia, where they can smoke inside. The lunch and afternoon business at Adams Mill Bar and Grill in Adams Morgan fell so significantly that owner Darrell Green eliminated lunch service. He used to open at 11 a.m. Now, the doors open at 4 p.m. "

Business down, hours reduced, workers hurt.....TAX REVENUES DOWN!!!!!

Hello....is anyone in St. Paul listening?????

Speaking of Inconvenient

It seems like the former Vice President has some 'splaining to do!

"Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.

Gore’s mansion, located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).

In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.

The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.

Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359... Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year. " (emphasis mine)

Now if the former Vice President needs all that energy, who am I to begrudge him. However, when he sits there and tells everyone that they need to do without in order to "save the planet from global warming" I do expect the man to practice what he preachs!

Mr. Vice President....the whole point of being a leader is to lead! If you want the rest of the world to heed your call to conservation, then be a leader! Get those compact fluoroscent bulbs, set your thermostat down to 65 in the winter (like the rest of us do) and turn the air conditioning up to 78 like the rest of us do. Instead of driving a caravan of Suburbans....get a couple of Prius! Park that private jet and fly coach like the rest of us. Reduce, reuse, recycle...remember that? What are you doing to reduce your consumption?

Until then, don't tell me I'm not "doing enough" to protect the planet.

(H/T The Drudge Report)

Insulting the Prophet

Expect riots and religious edicts calling for death to all who dare insult the Prophet!

"Claims by a Canadian documentary filmmaker to have found not only the burial place of Jesus, but his DNA and evidence he had a son, are being dismissed as "fanciful and absurd" by both church leaders and archeologists."

Oh.....we're talking about Christians here...never mind - insult away!

Seriously, to claim that Jesus was married, had children and died and never resurrected is a direct slap in the face to the billions of Christians worldwide. It is, in essence, calling Christ a "false prophet"!

So are Christians rioting in the streets, burning cars, houses and businesses along the line. Has any so-called Christian leader called for film-maker James Cameron to be murdered (as Islamic leaders have called for the deaths of Theo Van Gogh, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Salman Rushdie)? Of course not! Instead, they are simply taking a critical look at the theory and expressing their doubt.

"Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem who was interviewed in the documentary, said the film's hypothesis holds little weight.
"I don't think that Christians are going to buy into this," Pfann said. "But skeptics, in general, would like to see something that pokes holes into the story that so many people hold dear."
"How possible is it?" Pfann said. "On a scale of one through 10 — 10 being completely possible — it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."
Pfann is even unsure that the name "Jesus" on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it's more likely the name "Hanun." Ancient Semitic script is notoriously difficult to decipher.
(Amos) Kloner (the first archeologist to go over the site where the ossuary was found) also said the filmmakers' assertions are false. "The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time," he said.
William Dever, an expert on near eastern archaeology and anthropology, who has worked with Israeli archeologists for five decades, said specialists have known about the ossuaries for years.
"The fact that it's been ignored tells you something," said Dever, professor emeritus at the University of Arizona. "It would be amusing if it didn't mislead so many people."

Michelle Malkin has many long running series on how Islamists react when their prophet is "insulted" and how the dhimmi's in the media have given them the kid glove treatment - refusing to print or broadcast anything that might upset Muslim sensibilities. It sure would be nice if Christians, Jews and other religions could get the same consideration.

Nanny (government) knows best!

You just can't make this up.

" Mom always said to "wash up" before eating.
On Thursday, state legislators took a big step toward making Mom's word the law for Chicago Public School students. The Illinois House passed a proposal from state Rep. Mary Flowers (D-Chicago) that would require CPS students to wash their hands with antiseptic before meals at school. "

Oh great - we are going to our kids crimanals now if they don't wash their hands?

Don't get me wrong. As a parent I know what kinds of diseases lurk in the average elementary school...and schools should help reinforce the parents instructions regarding washing hands, but does it need to be legislated?Aren't there more important things that the Illinois legislature should be working on? Things like balancing the state budget?????

Score one for personal responsibility

The Supreme Court made a ruling this week that finally returns the responsibility for the damages of cigarette smoking back to where it belongs...with the individual who smokes!

"The Supreme Court yesterday took away almost $80 million awarded to the widow of a longtime smoker and threw into doubt the prospects of future high-dollar jury awards against businesses. A divided Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of Altria Group, the parent of Richmond company Philip Morris USA and Kraft Foods, which contested an Oregon Supreme Court's upholding of an earlier verdict that forced the maker of the popular Marlboro cigarette to pay $79.5 million in damages. "

For lovers of freedom this ruling is doubly good news. Not only does the ruling put the onus of responsibilty back on the individual who chooses to light up (there is a reason cigarettes are called "cancer sticks") and it also throws into doubt the validity of those multi-million dollar judgements against the "deep pocket" corporations.

"Justice Stephen G. Breyer, writing for the majority, said a punitive-damages award based on a jury's desire to punish a defendant for harming those who are not parties to the lawsuit amounted to taking property from the defendant, which would be a violation of the constitutional right of due process. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr., Anthony M. Kennedy and David H. Souter made up the rest of the majority. "

Admittedly, the Court could have done better...it could have stepped up to the plate and given everyone a definative set of guidlines to follow in settling future cases.

"The court's decision leaves U.S. juries to ponder punitive damages under this rule: The jury may consider actual or potential harm to others in deciding how reprehensible a company's conduct was, but may not punish the company for the harm caused to others. "The court took a big wooden spoon and stirred up the swamp, making the view muddier than ever," said Steve Emmert, chairman of the appellate practice subcommittee for the Virginia state bar's litigation section. "I am convinced that this ruling will lead to confused juries looking to confused judges for guidance."

However, it is a necessary start.

Back when I was younger, I too chose to smoke...even though I watched what they had done to my grandmother (who died from emphysema when I was in High School). However, no one forced me to smoke...it was a personal choice and no one should be held responsible for any problems I face as a result of that choice but me! It's part of being an adult.

Exorcism Time

Have you noticed that any time anyone disagrees with, challenges the position of or in general disrespects a Democratic Party candidate, that Democrat or his/her campaign immediately calls for the other party to "renounce" the comments.The latest came just this week. First, Hillary Clinton's campaing called for Barack Obama to personally "renounce" the statements of Obama supporter (and former Clintonian) David Geffen.

"Sen. Hillary Clinton's spokesman called on Illinois Sen. Barack Obama to renounce comments made by Hollywood executive David Geffen that were sharply critical of the New York Democrat and her husband, former President Bill Clinton."

Since when is a candidate "responsible" for a supporters comments? I mean really....

Wednesday Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the White House to demand that President Bush renounce the comments that VP Cheney said while abroad.

"I hope the president will repudiate and distance himself from the vice president's remarks," Pelosi said. She said she tried to complain about Cheney to President Bush but could not reach him."

The Democrats use the term "renouce" in the same manner that the Max Von Sydow character in the movie "The Exorcist" used the Bible to drive demons out of Linda Blair's character. Apparently the Dems think that someone who disagrees with them is demon posessed. If it weren't for the pesky demon Converatism you would understand that "they" (the Democrats) only wanted to take care of us poor, incompetent fools in flyover country.

They simply don't "get" how anyone could have a different opinion than theirs. Well here is a hint...we humans have free will and that free will leads to a number of opinions. That is something that the Democrats need to learn to accept and deal with.

Environmental scientific "consensus

Remember DDT. The scientific consensus was that we had to ban DDT because it did too much damage to the environment. Well, maybe the scientific concensus was wrong.

About thirty years ago, the scientific consensus was that we could use old tires and tankers and other "garbage" as the base for rebuilding reefs and it would not damage the environment - it would actually SAVE the environment. Guess what...

"A well-intentioned attempt in 1972 to create what was touted as the world's largest artificial reef made of tires has become an ecological disaster. The idea was simple: Create new marine habitat and alternate dive sites to relieve pressure on natural reefs, while disposing of tires that were clogging landfills. Decades later it's clear the plan failed miserably. "

Today, the scientific consensus is global warming. However, there are several people who are finally speaking out about the global warming consensus.

"Czech president Vaclav Klaus has criticized the UN panel on global warming, claiming that it was a political authority without any scientific basis, Czech media reported Friday.Klaus told the Hospodarske noviny daily that the panel did not include "neutral scientists, a balanced group of scientists."

Last Sunday I recorded a program on the Research Channel on DishTV. The program was a panel discussion hosted by Fred Gadomski and Paul Knight who are both Senior Lecturers of Meteorology at the Penn State University. The program was titled "Spin Cycle:How the Media Portrays Climate Change"

"One study revealed that the 1930s played host to not only hotter and more extreme summers than the current decade, but also to some of the warmest and coldest winter months on record. A similar cycle emerged in the late 1960s, which--compiled with other data--has led meteorologists and researchers to notice a cyclical pattern of climate change about every 30 years.

It is all too easy to misinterpret data, said Knight and Gadomski, pointing to the supposed sharp increase in tornadoes in the mid 1980s. Meteorologists now link this statistical spike to the birth of home camcorders, which captured these natural disasters on personal video for the first time, and the recently-perfected Doppler Radar System, two tools which allowed unprecedented documentation of these occurrences. While the number of tornadoes may have stayed the same, the number being noticed and reported jumped dramatically. In fact, observed Gadomski, it seems that strong tornadoes actually decreased during that decade, further discounting media reports from that era, claiming that "weather has snapped." (emphasis mine)

I have long said, and this program validates it, that more research is necessary before we can claim with absolute certaintude that global warming is a man made phenomonon. When will our reactionaries in St. Paul and D.C. come to that common sense realization?

Hopefully the next time you hear someone like Heidi Cullen speak about the "reality" of anthropogenic climate change, you will have a little more of a rational view of the subject.

Sanity restored

Last month I wrote about a bit of proposed legislation out of California that absolutely blew my mind. Well, my mind is back in place and sanity has once again prevailed.

"SACRAMENTO, Calif. - A Democratic lawmaker has abandoned her heavily ridiculed campaign to make spanking a crime, acknowledging that the idea would get whacked even in California's sometimes whimsical Legislature. Instead, San Francisco Bay area Assemblywoman Sally Lieber introduced a more narrow bill on Thursday she said would help district attorneys more easily prosecute parents who cross the line from punishment into physical abuse."

The bill that was introduced is still highly flawed, and should fail. However, now that Assemblywoman Lieber has stepped back from the ledge, maybe we can get some real negotiation moving forward.

How NOT to handle a disobedient child.

I know that there are those who dislike my posts on this subject, but this is a subject that really needs to be driven home.

"A father killed his wife and four daughters in their sleep because he could not bear them adopting a more westernised lifestyle, an inquest heard yesterday.
Mohammed Riaz, 49, found it abhorrent that his eldest daughter wanted to be a fashion designer, and that she and her sisters were likely to reject the Muslim tradition of arranged marriages."

So he finds it abhorrent that his daugher wanted to work outside of the home. Fine....so what does a father do?????"

On Hallowe'en last year he sprayed petrol throughout their terraced home in Accrington, Lancs, and set it alight.

Caneze Riaz, 39, woke and tried to protect her three-year-old child, Hannah, who was sleeping with her, but was overcome by fumes. Her other daughters, Sayrah, 16, Sophia, 13, and Alisha, 10, died elsewhere in the house."

He burns his family to death????? If he didn't like "western society" why didn't he just move back to the Middle East where the culture was more to his liking?

The reason that I comment about the lives of women in Islamist society is because people need to see the mindset that is becoming prevelant in our society. My grandmothers and great grandmothers fought long and hard for womens rights and I will not let those rights be taken away from me, my sisters and my sisters daughters because certain members of a society think that women are property! I will not sit idly by and watch as this mindset is ignored by certain strata within our society who have no problems trashing Christianity but will not criticize Islam. The hypocricy needs to be pointed out for all to see and for all to deal with!

AND WE'RE BACK!!!!!

Sorry about that friends. I switched webhosting services last week and I was having FTP issues. However we are back up and running.

You may want to bookmark my back up site at Townhall should (heaven forbid) something like this ever happen again!

I was posting there while things were off line here and I will transfer them over this evening (hopefully before 24).

A history lesson and what we can learn from it.

Pete Du Pont gives us a quick history lesson in global climate change.

"When Eric the Red led the Norwegian Vikings to Greenland in the late 900s, it was an ice-free farm country--grass for sheep and cattle, open water for fishing, a livable climate--so good a colony that by 1100 there were 3,000 people living there. Then came the Ice Age. By 1400, average temperatures had declined by 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, the glaciers had crushed southward across the farmlands and harbors, and the Vikings did not survive.
Such global temperature fluctuations are not surprising, for looking back in history we see a regular pattern of warming and cooling. From 200 B.C. to A.D. 600 saw the Roman Warming period; from 600 to 900, the cold period of the Dark Ages; from 900 to 1300 was the Medieval warming period; and 1300 to 1850, the Little Ice Age."

He then compares the much touted IPCC report to the "Inconvenient Truth" of Al Gore's movie and find Al surprisingly wanting.

"While global warming alarmism has become a daily American press feature, the IPCC, in its new report, is backtracking on its warming predictions. While Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" warns of up to 20 feet of sea-level increase, the IPCC has halved its estimate of the rise in sea level by the end of this century, to 17 inches from 36. It has reduced its estimate of the impact of global greenhouse-gas emissions on global climate by more than one-third, because, it says, pollutant particles reflect sunlight back into space and this has a cooling effect. " (emphasis mine)

Boy talk about "inconvenient"....then there is this...

"The IPCC confirms its 2001 conclusion that global warming will have little effect on the number of typhoons or hurricanes the world will experience, but it does not note that there has been a steady decrease in the number of global hurricane days since 1970--from 600 to 400 days, according to Georgia Tech atmospheric scientist Peter Webster." (emphasis again mine)

But what about that "scientific consensus" that Al swears agrees to all of this?

"As we have seen since the beginning of time, and from the Vikings' experience in Greenland, our world experiences cyclical climate changes. America needs to understand clearly what is happening and why before we sign onto U.N. environmental agreements, shut down our industries and power plants, and limit our economic growth. "

Which is what I have been saying all along. I didn't realize that I was in such "lofty" company but it's nice to know that I am.

Activists unite

There are a lot of disgruntled GOP activists out there. One need only look at the MOB blog roll to see the likes of Amendment X at Savage Republican or AAA at Residual Forces railing about how the Conservative cause is being betrayed by our leaders and elected officials...with very good cause. The good news is, people are noticing.

"House Republican leaders and conservative activists are targeting critics of President Bush's plan to send more combat forces into Iraq -- and some GOP lawmakers are on the hit list.
Amid a mounting campaign in Congress to limit Bush's military options, conservatives led by talk show host Hugh Hewitt have created an advocacy group designed to counter the anti-war MoveOn.org. And its first round of targets will be the 17 GOP lawmakers who voted for last week's Democratic resolution in the House opposing the troop increases."

Whether it is organizations like Jason Lewis' Tax Cut Coalition or NZ Bear's Victory Caucus, conservative activists are banding together to make their voices heard. If you are one of the many disgruntled Conservative activists, you owe it to yourself to check these sites out.

THIS is your Legislature Minnesota

SD45 has a list of details. This is just a small sample of the Nanny State Bills that are coming out of St. Paul. I've already talked about a couple of them but here are a few more notable bills.

Rep. Andy Welti (D-Plainview) wants to impose severe criminal penalties if you “carry, use, or possess” a glass container on a watercraft or along Minnesota’s public waters. You could get 270 days in jail if you have a picnic on the lake and bring glass bottles of ketchup, mustard, and relish. If you have a six-pack of Buddy’s Cola from New Ulm on your pontoon boat, you would face 540 days behind bars, because each bottle would be a separate offense under the precise language of the bill. If you bring a jar of cold cream when you go sunbathing, you could do 90 days for that misdemeanor. Rep. Welti later said he introduced the bill as an anti-littering proposal, but his bill outlaws mere “possession” of the deadly glass containers. (House File 522)

Rep. Bev Scalze (D-Little Canada) wants to authorize cities to provide their city employees with “staff, equipment, and facilities” for “preventive health and employee recognition services.” (House File 905)

Rep. Kim Norton (D-Rochester) wants to stick taxpayers with the bill when students take the SAT or ACT tests for college admission. (House File 984)

Rep. Scott Kranz (D-Blaine) wants to raise taxes on homeowners’ deeds by 66%. He would then take that money to subsidize the rents of non-homeowners and to build houses or rental units for other people. (House File 939)

Rep. Phyllis Kahn gave a noble effort for the best of the bunch. She has sponsored voting rights for 16 year olds, eliminating the cap for legislators expense, requiring schools to "shield" their stadium lights (a bill that is directed at DeLaSalle High School on Harriet Island whom Representative Kahn has been fueding with), taxing botox treatments or allowing lottery sales at the State Fair., Rep. Kahn has worked her hardest to spend your hard earned tax dollars as quickly as possible.

The big "winner" so far has to be Rep. Frank Hornstein who has proposed forcing large businesses to pay for employees child care, providing a credit for alternative fuel vehicles that lasts longer than the vehicle itself does, providing free GED's for homeless, mandating that the state will have to pay more for private bid DOT contracts, Rep. Hornstein makes certain to go that extra mile to waste state dollars.

There are 82 of these bills. You really should check them all out. Once you do, I hope you will take a few minutes to contact your representative and let them know how you feel about these bills.

Peaceful Tolerant Islam

I was cleaning out the mailbox and I came across a few things that, rather than go into great deatail, I will link the articles and let you decide for your selves just how peaceful Islam is.

First - a couple of articles on Women's Rights in Islam

"One of the more controversial issues in Islam is the Quran’s authorization for husbands to beat disobedient wives. This is found in chapter 4, called “Women”, verse 34. Additional information on Islamic wife beating is found in Muhammad’s Traditions (Hadith), and Sira (biographical material). Many people have criticized Islam because of this harsh sanction, and many Muslims have written articles seeking ways to mollify or defend it. In review of the actual teachings of the Quran, Hadith, and Sira, Islam is rightly criticized. This command is not only a harsh way to treat one’s wife, it portrays the degraded position of married women in Islam. It will be shown from the Quran, Hadith, Sira, and other Islamic writings that this “Islamic” wife beating is physical and painful.

Please note that wife beating is not only an Islamic problem. It is a common occurrence throughout the entire world. Some cultures accept it more readily than others. However, Islam accepts the practice to an extent that Muslim societies do not see it as a problem."

"The reality, of course, is different. There are millions of illiterate people subjected daily to pressures by ignorant clerics to force women to wear the veil and, in most extreme cases, the niqab (total coverage of the woman’s body from head to toe) which is tantamount to subjugating her identity for no reason other than preserve the patriarchal society. "

"The letters are delivered in the night, dropped on the doorsteps of female Kandahar professionals. The anonymous missives warn the occupants that they will "bleed" if they don't stop working.
Other threats are more urgent. A female employee at a United Nations agency in Kandahar was warned by an unknown caller to leave Afghanistan within half an hour. More than half a dozen female government workers in the southern and western provinces have complained of death threats.
These are a few examples of the rising tide of violence against women in Afghanistan, especially in the south. Five years after the fall of the repressive Taliban regime, women -- in particular working women -- are increasingly being targeted by extremists."

Along those lines is this Der Spiegel interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali where she talks about the existance of free speech in Islam..

"SPIEGEL: Why have the protests escalated to such an extent?
Hirsi Ali: There is no freedom of speech in those Arab countries where the demonstrations and public outrage are being staged. The reason many people flee to Europe from these places is precisely because they have criticized religion, the political establishment and society. Totalitarian Islamic regimes are in a deep crisis. Globalization means that they're exposed to considerable change, and they also fear the reformist forces developing among émigrés in the West. They'll use threatening gestures against the West, and the success they achieve with their threats, to intimidate these people. "

A free press gets our attention next.

"Last week a book publisher told Nancy Kobrin, a psychoanalyst and lecturer on counter—terrorism, that they were withdrawing the publication of her book, The Sheikh's New Clothes, because they were afraid of fundamentalist repercussions, according to Kobrin.
According to Kobrin, Mary Loughrey, a vice president with the book publisher, called to tell her that "because of security reasons they feared for the safety of the staff and themselves."
he said Loughrey mentioned Muslim reaction — including calls for assassination — following Pope Benedict XVI's recent speech as part of the reason they were concerned."

Then there is this on the imposition of Shariah law on the west.

"Muslim populations in Britain and Canada are pressing for the adoption of the law of Shariah - the radically oppressive law of Islam. If the law was adopted in those countries, it wouldn't be restricted simply to Muslims. Proponents of the Law of Shariah want it not only for themselves, but for all citizens of those countries. They have avowed to enact this law by force if necessary. Islam was founded by violence. "

Do you still think that Islam is a peaceful, tolerant religion?

House ditches troops

I don't usually write about these things and for a good reason. However, what happened in DC Friday and Saturday are extrordinary events and need to be treated as such.

The American Legion, an organization of which the Logical Husband IS a member, issued a press release in the aftermath of the historic House anti-troops vote. (H/T AAA)

"The leader of the nation’s largest wartime veterans’ organization provided the following statement in response to the House vote disapproving the President’s decision to deploy more than 20,000 additional combat troops to the Iraqi theater.“Congress may consider its vote today on H. Con. Res. 63 to be non-binding, but veterans of previous wars and those in the field of combat right now consider Congress’s action to be a betrayal of trust and the first step toward surrender to the terrorists who caused this war in the first place." (emphasis mine)

Democrats like Rep Pelosi and Rep. Murtha will try to paint H.R. 63 as everything but an anti-troops resolution, but the troops see it for what it is....a slap in the face and the first step toward defeat.

"This war didn’t just start with the invasion of Iraq. It’s been going on for decades. It’s been going on in Republican and Democrat administrations and Congresses.
It isn’t about partisan politics. It’s about America. It’s about all of us, and especially those who are at this moment risking their lives on the field of battle.
Americans are not the enemy here. The terrorists and all of those governments that support them are the enemy. We must never forget that. "

Leave it to the Legion to remind Americans of the very recent history that the media and the Democrats would just as soon you forget.

"And, equally important, we must never forget the primary lesson learned in Vietnam: you cannot separate the war from the warrior.
Congress can talk all it wants to about how it supports the troops. But its actions set the table. The message they sent today to the frontline is that America is preparing to cut and run. We essentially told our fighting men and women that ‘we have taken step one in the plan to cut reinforcements, to cut armaments, and to withdraw any support you need to complete your mission" (emphasis again mine).

When will the American people (and especially the political classes) get this simple statement of fact!

"The Speaker characterized it succinctly when she said, “(t)his legislation will signal a change in direction that will end the fighting and bring our troops home.’
What she failed to add was ‘… in defeat, and without completing the mission they were trained to complete and ready to win if only America had not given up before they did.’
The American Legion and the American people find this to be totally unacceptable and we will do everything within our power to ensure that our troops are not used as political pawns by a Congress that lacks the will to win.”

There is not much else left to say - other than God bless and watch over our troops...because their government has ducked out on them!

So sad...

This story saddened me. (H/T MplsCrimeWatch)

"Minneapolis Park Police have arrested two men and a woman for stealing two statues from Theodore Wirth Park and trying to sell them as scrap metal.According to police, staffers at Greater Western Recycling in St. Paul got suspicious when the three people brought five large pieces of cut-up statue in for sale at noon Tuesday."

The 300 pound (each) statues were stolen from Theodore Wirth Park and sold for $310.00 or roughly $.50 a pound. The wirth Family was not happy.

"Wirth's grandson, Ted Wirth, was shocked someone took the statues. He was angered when he found out the statues had been cut into pieces."

I don't blame him at all.

The Decline of Decency

When does decency trump partisan politics? That is a question that was asked just a couple of days before Rep. Charlie Norwood's recent death. The author was comparing the reaction of the left side of the blogosphere, in their reaction to Rep. Norwood's illness, to the right side and their reaction to Sen Tim Johnson's (D-SD) illness and lamenting the lack of civility from our "friends" on the left.

"Showing his personal stripes as a hateful, callous “progressive,” Matthews, under the title "Charlie Norwood coming home; won't resign seat,” such remarks as, “Oddly he may actually make a case for Dr. Kevorkian style euthanasia in his waning days,” and “...if he is refusing treatment, the least he could while still alive is to resign the seat with dignity intact”. That last had the obligatory “We certainly wish the best for Congressman Norwood” tacked on to the front of it, but, given the context, it does not seem possible that any eight-word phrase could ring more hollow.
Referring to options for district representation in the event that Norwood passes away during this term in Congress, Matthews said that “Governor Perdue will have to call a special election after Norwood's evidently eventual extinction”, and offered up Terry Holley, the Democrat nominee whom Norwood defeated 67.4% to 32.6% this past November, as a candidate for the potentially open seat, citing the fact that it will be “a non-partisan election so he may actually have a chance this time..... Interestingly, Republicans had the opportunity to show how they would handle a similar situation last December, when Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) suffered bleeding in the brain as a result of a congenital malformation, and underwent emergency brain surgery. Rather than striving for political expediency at the expense of decency, Republicans, such as those at conservative blog RedState.com, neither called on Senator Johnson to resign, nor excoriated him for not doing so – despite a barely Democratic Senate, which could have been made into an effective Republican majority (counting the Vice President’s vote) had Johnson resigned and been replaced by a Republican gubernatorial appointee. Instead, statements such as "Our thoughts and prayers are with the senator and his family,” “We wish Senator Johnson a speedy recovery,” and, “Our thoughts and prayers remain with Senator Johnson” were the norm – a far cry from the statements of this former Democratic Party Chairman."

It is this coursening of debate that I remarked on here. I was not the least bit surprised to get a typical "well thought out" response from an "anonymous" liberal commenter. It's sad that these folks can't put partisanship aside for one minute to wish an opponent well in his illness.

Relax anonymous. Politics is not the most important thing in the world. Human relationships are. Do you talk to everyone in the same manner you "talked" to me?

The world according to Cartman

I've never understood the appeal of South Park. I don't "get" it. However, the Logical Husband and the Junior Logician do and they watch it together often. Usually when that happens I retreat to my computer - shaking my head and trying to understand what the draw of a program designed to insult anyone and everyone is. However that all changed today.

"Comedy Central's vulgar, profane, hilarious animated hit"South Park" begins its 10th season on Oct. 4 in an uncertain place.
In the past year, the show and its creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, won their first Emmy and were also honored with a Peabody for best electronic media. But the year was also fraught with moments of censorship that caused the show's creators to wonder if the world had changed so much in the last 10 years that "South Park" could really no longer thrive. "

It appears that Parker and Stone ran afoul of a parent corporation that was more concerned about upsetting a group of people, rather than the free speech that made this country great.

""South Park" has been vilified as crude, disgusting and nihilistic, and the eagerness of Stone and Parker to impale every sacred cow they can reach is a major reason for its success. After all, in the fictional town of South Park, Colo. — home to third-graders Kenny, Kyle, Stan and the evil Cartman — everything is fair game. Even the Prophet Mohammed, who appeared as a superhero in a July 2001 episode called "The Super Best Friends."
"People told us at the time, 'You can't really draw an image of Mohammed,'" Parker says. "And we were like, well, we can. We're not Muslim, so it's OK."
In 2006, however, when Stone and Parker wanted to depict Mohammed in an episode, Comedy Central wouldn't let them. After all, Muslims worldwide had rioted over insulting depictions of Mohammed in a newspaper in Denmark." (emphasis mine)

A lot of people, like Michelle Malkin, warned that this was going to happen.

Matt and Trey didn't back down. They knew that this capitulation was wrong.

"It seemed odd to the creators of "South Park," who had been and were still allowed to depict Jesus in any number of profane ways. In fact, the episode in question, "Cartoon Wars," shows a cartoon (supposedly created by al Qaeda) in which Jesus defecates on President Bush.
Open Season on Jesus
"That's where we kind of agree with some of the people who've criticized our show," Stone says. "Because it really is open season on Jesus. We can do whatever we want to Jesus, and we have. We've had him say bad words. We've had him shoot a gun. We've had him kill people. We can do whatever we want. But Mohammed, we couldn't just show a simple image." (emphasis mine)

It's not ok to insult Islam or Scientology but it's open season on Jesus! Something that Christians have been saying for a long time! Even better though - the lads were willing to "speak the truth to power"!

"During the part of the show where Mohammed was to be depicted — benignly, Stone and Parker say — the show ran a black screen that read: "Comedy Central has refused to broadcast an image of Mohammed on their network."
Other networks took a similar course, refusing to air images of Mohammed — even when reporting on the Denmark cartoon riots — claiming they were refraining because they're religiously tolerant, the South Park creators say.
"No you're not," Stone retorts. "You're afraid of getting blown up. That's what you're afraid of. Comedy Central copped to that, you know: 'We're afraid of getting blown up.'" (emphasis mine)

Couple this with the Scientology/Tom Cruise fracus and you can see where Matt and Trey wondered if last year was "it".

"As soon as we can't make the show we want to make, we're not going to make it anymore. At the beginning of the last run I thought we were really close. I thought it was like this might be it. But then, you know, we were able to still do a Mohammed show and do it the way we wanted, which was to do it and then say, 'All right, Comedy Central, you're a network, you have a right to do with this what you want, so we're making it this way. And then if you want to take out the image of Mohammed, that's fine, you can do that, but we're also going to make the show about you taking out the image of Mohammed.'"

Last year was tough, but they are moving forward into season 10 with an attitude that won this skeptic over.

"Part of living in the world today is you're going to have to be offended," Stone says. "The right to be offended and the right to offend is why we have a First Amendment. If no speech was offensive to anybody, then you wouldn't need to guarantee it." "

Point taken gentlemen.

Maybe I was wrong about "South Park". I think maybe I will have to sit down with the Logical Husband and the Junior Logician and watch "South Park" a couple of times this season.

I'd love to change the world

It's Saturday morning in the Logical Household. We were listening to music (off of the Logical Husbands MP3 player) while preparing breakfast when the 1971 hippy classic "I'd love to change the world" came on. The lyrics include all the classic liberal jingo:

"Everywhere is freaks and hairies
Dykes and fairies, tell me where is sanity
Tax the rich, feed the poor
Till there are no rich no more

I’d love to change the world
But I don’t know what to do
So I’ll leave it up to you

Population keeps on breeding
Nation bleeding, still more feeding economy
Life is funny, skies are sunny
Bees make honey, who needs money, Monopoly

I’d love to change the world
But I don’t know what to do
So I’ll leave it up to you

World pollution, there’s no solution
Institution, electrocution
Just black and white, rich or poor
Them and us, stop the war

I’d love to change the world
But I don’t know what to do
So I’ll leave it up to you"

Tax the rich, feed the poor, control population, stop pollution, end the war....it's all there. Given that, I'm really surprised that it has not made come back on the radio.

What struck me, some thirty years after I first heard and fell in love with the song (the harmonies are wonderful) was the naivete of the lyrics. "Tax the rich feed the poor 'til there are no rich no more" and what happens when all the rich are gone? Who pays to feed the poor then? "Who needs money" - we all do? Otherwise how are you going to pay for things you need that someone else has. Trade is a fact of life - we have seen that communism - as in living in a commune where all members work for the "greater good" only works in a utopian world where people are all perfect and perfectly good....something that this world sorely lacks. "World pollution - there's no solution"...no solution? Since the inception of the Clean Air Act (signed by a Republican President no less) the air and water quality in the US has improved greatly. Is there still room for improvement, yeah however, saying there is no solution at all is the dictionary defination of "defeatist".

However, it is the chorus that really says it all. "I'd love to change the world...but I don't know what to do. So I leave it up to you!" Liberals love to change the world....at someone else's expense. Al Gore wants us all to drive hybrid cars and use fluoroescent lights and turn our thermostats down...in the name of taming global warming - all the while flying around the world in his private jet and riding in big SUVs promoting his movie. John Edwards talks about the two Americas and how the middle class needs to sacrific more in order to help those less fortunate - all the while living his American dream in a 28,000 square foot home with a private lounge and basketball court! To quote Jay Leno - I guess we know which America he lives in. The list goes on and on.

Now I admit, I don't know what the thought process was when this song was written. It certainly could have been a satire of the prevailing thoughts of the movement at the time - along the lines of the song "The Trees" by Rush. However, it falls in line with the prevelant philosophy of the listeners that the band was targeting, so anything is possible.

SUV's in space

Here it is....definative proof of anthropogenic (man made) global warming - courtesy of Tracy at Anti-Strib.

"Mars would make a lousy host for the Winter Olympics. Yes, there's the lack of air to consider. But more important, Martian snow turns out to be rock hard. Worse, it is melting away at an alarming rate.
In fact, Mars may be in the midst of a period of profound climate change, according to a new study that shows dramatic year-to-year losses of snow at the south pole. "

And we all know how many SUV's the have on Mars now don't we???

In a less sarcastic mode, there was a kernel of truth in the article that both sides need to be mindful of.

"It is not yet clear, though, if the evidence of a single year's change represents a trend. But the study provides a surprising new view of the nature of the southern ice cap, said Michael Caplinger of Malin Space Science Systems."

Let's review...evidence from a single year of study does not represent a trend. What do you think ten years or 100 years on a planet that is millions of years old? Do you suppose this means that more study is needed on the subject? A rational, logical person would think so.

Neither side can lay claim to definative truth on the subject, but the fact that Earth and it's nearest neighbor Mars are both experiencing a period of global warming certainly lends more credence to the theory that global warming is something that is caused by solar activity, not mankind.

Let's get back to the research lab instead of declaring this a "done deal".

The sad state of journalism

I'm saddened and amazed at the reaction that the media is having to the death of Anna Nicole Smith. The 24 hour news "beast" has been feeding on her carcass for the last 20 hours. Lead stories on the radio, the television and on the internet all blare what most people suspected - "Anna Nicole dead - drugs likely involved!"

That got me to thinking about the state of the media today. It seems that the press is more concerned about getting readers and viewers to "feel" about a story, rather than doing the research to tell us the facts of the story. Take a look at the 24 hour news channels or your 10pm news. The lead story is likely to be a story guaranteed to evoke a feeling...."3 children dead because of the flu" was last nights lead. No mention that one child had an underlying medical condition or that one was a newborn whose immune system was not fully developed. The purpose was to scare parents into running out to get their kids a flu shot.

News must be put on the air to be the first to cover the story before any real details of the story are even proven. Never mind if the story is misreported or wrong. Sling it out there and put any retraction to be given at 3 AM Sunday morning or page 6 in the daily news. First is fine if first is followed up with research and in depth analysis, but it rarely is.

More and more they fill time with "tragedy" TV and infotainment. Instead of reporting on legislation pending in DC we see a series of stories on "The Runaway Bride" or Natalie Halloway or Janet Jackson or Nicole Kidman. Hours and hours are spent emoting about the latest celebrity gossip than are spent talking about the dangers of a nuclear Iran or the suffering in Darfur. Cut and dried facts have given way to emotion. Reason and research have given way to reaction and response.

It is to the point where we are ignoring real news behind the sad story of a celebrity who died too young. Our news agencies are failing us. Maybe it's time to turn off the television.

Childrens Health INsecurity Act

Craig Westover also blogs. He has a post this afternoon that is just stellar!

"This is one of those pieces that is so good, I wish I'd have written it.
February 8, 2007
Dear Mr. Chair and Members of the Health and Human Services Committee,
RE: HF 1 - Author Rep. Thissen (Children's Health Security Act)
Thank you for this opportunity to share our thoughts about HF 1. As you know, I had planned to testify in person, however, I have a previous commitment today that cannot be changed.
Citizens' Council on Health Care is a free-market health care policy organization supportive of patient and doctor freedom, medical innovation and entrepreneurship, and the confidential patient-doctor relationship.
CCHC supports policies that advance individual freedom for citizens; policies that limit the size of government; and policies that limit government intrusion in the lives of individuals and the relationship individuals have with their doctors."

The author of the letter, Twila Brase RN and President of CCHC, goes on at length about why HF1 and any form of government run health care is a bad thing! The biggest fallacy of "universal" health care is that it will provide care for people would otherwise would not get treatment. However, Ms. Brase, debunks that.

"Coverage is not Care - DHS Authorized to Deny
Finally, having "coverage" does not guarantee access to care. Ask anyone facing a government or managed care denial. DHS has statutory authority to ration care. The federal 1115 Medicaid/MNCare waiver allows placement of public recipients into HMOs, and the 2005 HHS omnibus bill gave DHS authority to define "evidence-based" treatment. The DHS medical director can deny a recipient's access to the HMO appeals process if the prescribed treatment does not meet the director's definition of an "evidence-based" treatment. Children "covered" by HF 1 could find their care limited.As Bernadine Healy MD, former director of the NIH and now columnist for U.S. World and News Report, warned last year in her column, "evidence-based medicine" can be used to deny access to care."(emphasis mine)

I have repeatedly posted evidence of this. Too many people in Canada and Great Britian have been denied care in a system that the Democrats want to emulate.

This last point goes to another issue I have previously posted about....privacy.

"Intrusive Government
Section 12 enables government to intrude on the confidential patient-doctor relationship. The legislation requires doctors, hospitals and health plans to send private medical data to the commissioner "in the form and manner specified by the commissioner." No details. The commissioner will decide outside the purview of the legislature. This is private data on the recipients and on "private sector enrollees." (line 6.17)
We don't know, the legislation doesn't say, but most likely this reported data will be detailed information on physician treatment decisions and so-called "patient outcomes," as well as data on physician compliance with whatever treatment and initiatives the commissioner determines to be "quality of care." The bill will empower government in the practice of medicine, monitor patients, and police human behavior.
This is a serious infringement on the rights of patients and doctors to be free."

Here again we have legislation propsed that will intrude into the "doctor/patient relationship" something that is sacrosanct apparently only when it comes to abortion. Otherwise, it's ok for the government to intrude in your health care decisions.

I am not harping on this privacy issue to undo Roe. Au contraire - Roe is established law. The reason I am harping on this is to highlight the utter hypocricy of a political party that uses doctor/patient privacy only when it suits their agenda to grab power away from you!

Mommy (government) Dearest

One bright spot in Minnesota print media is the St. Paul Pioneer Press. Oh, to be sure, there liberal to conservative ratio is still awfully high. However they have a couple of columnists that are a breath of fresh air in the daily news. Craig Westover is one of the columnists - Joe Soucheray is the other. Westover has written extensively what many, myself included, have said about the smoking ban. Todays column describes what is going on with the "Freedom" to Breathe Act.

"John Adams' defense of British soldiers accused in the 1770 Boston Massacre (and of the greater principle of due process) gave us his oft-quoted observation, "Facts are stubborn things, and whatever may be our inclinations, or the dictums of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."
Facts are still stubborn things.
Last week, the Health and Human Services Committee of the Minnesota House held a hearing on the Freedom to Breathe Act — otherwise known as the statewide smoking ban. In defense of a greater principle, Reps. Laura Brod, R-New Prague, and Tom Emmer, R-Delano, took on the cause of bar and restaurant owners who dare exercise their private property rights and permit smoking in their establishments. It was a good, old-fashioned political butt whipping. Brod and Emmer shredded the arguments of bill sponsors Thomas Huntley, DFL-Duluth, and Dan Severson, R-Sauk Rapids.
Unfortunately, the attitude that the end justifies the means is also still stubborn."

I have written at length about the smoking ban so I will just let Mr. Westover speak.

"Even if one favors a comprehensive statewide smoking ban, one ought be embarrassed by the bill passed out of the Health and Human Services Committee. Not only did ban supporters do a poor job of justifying the necessity of a statewide smoking ban, the Freedom to Breathe Act is a jumble of inconsistencies and potential unintended consequences.
And therein lies the problem: When legislation is predicated on inclinations and passions and justified by an altered state of facts and evidence, not only is the result unnecessary legislation, it's bad legislation."

We seem to be stuck in a cycle of bad legislation. What have we become, as a people, when we have to rely on the nanny government to take care of us (more on that later).

"Brod, Emmer and others raised numerous implications and potential unintended consequences of the Freedom to Breathe legislation. Does the bill inadvertently affect private homes used for business? Does public law that provides Minnesota the authority to enforce "criminal and prohibitory law" on American Indian reservations affect the legislation's attempt to exempt tribal casinos from the ban? When does a patron violation become a violation for which the establishment owner is criminally liable?
Normally, such issues are resolved in the committee process. Last session, eminent domain reform that limited when government could take private property for a public use passed through eight committees before earning a floor vote. This year, when Brod raised the question of what committees would be hearing the Freedom to Breathe Act, Huntley said he had no idea what the path might be, but he "would just as soon send it to the floor as soon as we can."
If the objective were crafting a bill that best served Minnesotans, then, as Brod suggested, it would pass through committees on local government affairs and public safety as well as commerce. But if the purpose of the bill were simply to ban smoking, then, as is Huntley's inclination, the quicker it got to the floor, the better — especially after Brod and Emmer shredded every health and economic justification for a smoking ban, save two.
By the time the committee was ready to vote, Rep. Ken Tschumper, DFL-La Crescent, was justifying the trumping of private property rights with the only undisputed argument ban supporters could muster — secondhand smoke smells bad."

Here's a hint for you Rep. Tschumper - if you don't like the smell of second hand smoke don't go where people are smoking!!!!!

"Rep. Tina Liebling, DFL-Rochester, finally clarified the real motivation behind the Freedom to Breathe Act — she declared a statewide smoking ban necessary to "set behavior norms" for all Minnesotans." (emphasis mine)

And that dear reader, tells you what this DFL legislature has in mind for you. After they are done with the smoking ban, what's next? Which leads us to Souch!

"Marty Seifert, a Republican representative out of District 21A in southwestern Minnesota, told me the other day that a legislator — I can't remember the name Seifert gave me — proposed legislation last week to ban glass bottles on a beach or in a boat. Normally, as the sound professional journalist that I am, I would call Seifert back and get the author's name, but what difference does it make?
We have elected so many legislators with strong mothering instincts that their names are interchangeable. Maybe it was Phyllis Kahn, the noted Nicollet Island chicken farmer. No, wait, she just proposed legislation to give kids the right to vote in school district matters.
Pretty soon these people will be in your closet, much less your home, making sure that you have the right number of stocking caps and mittens for what the meteorologists call those chilly mornings at the bus stop."

Souch nails it here. The same people who declare that government should never interfere in what a citizen does in the privacy of their own home when it comes to legalizing abortion or getting sodomy law repealed, have no problem getting into your home and your car and your boat to tell you what you can and can not do their!

"If you think the anti-glass legislation is a good idea, there is no holding you back. You will be right at home when the Legislature starts to meddle in your refrigerator now that the government has signed on as officially opposed to fat people.
God help us — and I mean God — when these officious snoops start legislating to combat what they believe to be global warming, as though they can influence nature. They will go from recommending energy-efficient light bulbs to a misdemeanor offense for not using them faster than a Ferrari can go from 0 to 60."

Garage logic at it's purest. We need more folks like Westover and Soucheray in Minnesota and in the state legislature.

Consequences

One of my current favorite songs is called "I so Hate Consequences" by Relient K. That is true for everyone we all hate the consequences of our words and actions - especially the bad ones. The "fear" of the bad consequences is one reason why I try to be very careful about what I say and how I say it. I write as if my mother (or mother-in-law) is reading it. A lot of people may not understand it, but here is a good reason why.

"Two bloggers hired by John Edwards to reach out to liberals in the online world have landed his presidential campaign in hot water for doing what bloggers do — expressing their opinions in provocative and often crude language."

If you have read anything that the ladies in question have written, you would say that the Times description is kind and understated. Charles at LGF has links to some of the more over the top screeds.

Most of the blogs that I read do not fall into the Times description of "what bloggers do". To be honest, there are only two blogs that I read daily that fall into what the Times considers "typical". There is a reason for that - just as there is a reason behind my nom de plume. I chose Lady Logician because I knew that it would be a daily reminder to me of what I wanted this blog to be...a place where discussion can take place in a respectful manner. It was my hope that if I kept my posts "above board" that my commenters would follow and for the most part it has worked.

The ladies in question will, I hope, take something away from this situation. One need not be profane to make a point (a lesson I thankfully did not have to learn in quite so harsh a manner). Being shrill will not further dialog. Hopefully L’Affaire Marcotte (as Dean Barnett calls this) will help bloggers on both sides of the political spectrum see that.

Broken record time

I know that I am starting to sound like a broken record here, but until we get this thought of "universal health care" out of our heads, I am going to continue.

"A Winnipeg teenager who is a Jehovah's Witness cannot refuse a blood transfusion, the Manitoba Court of Appeal ruled Tuesday.
In a unanimous decision, the court upheld a lower-court ruling that allowed the province's Child and Family Services department to force her to have a transfusion if doctors deemed it medically necessary.
The 15-year-old girl, who cannot be named, has Crohn's disease. In April 2006, she received a blood transfusion by order of the province — despite a statement she wrote saying she didn't want treatment — after she was admitted to hospital with internal bleeding related to the disease."

I do not agree with the interpretation that the Jehovah's Witnesses use to shun life saving blood products. However, it is not the courts place to dictate to a patient what treatments she will or will not accept! If we succumb to the appeal of government run health care, that is exactly what we will be subjecting ourselves to!

Again, my question to those principled pro-choicers who insist that government stay out of their decisions - how can you be for universal health care when you are so adamantly opposed to government intervention in abortion? It is, I think, an honest question!

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

This wonderful woman is the reason why I started speaking out on the plight of women in the Islamic world. She burst onto the world stage after the death of Theo Van Gogh at the hands of a "Muslim extremist". Van Gogh was murdered for producing the movie "Submission" which Hirsi Ali wrote the script and provided the voice over for. The note that was pinned to Van Gogh (with the knife used to kill him) was a threat on Hirsi Ali's life for her role in the film. The threat was real enough that the Hirsi Ali ended up living in a police station...for her own protection! She is now living in the US but is still keeping a very low profile because of the threats on her life.

Hirsi Ali was on Hannity and Colmes last night to promote her new book "Infidel". Hot Air has the video. Her quiet demeanor belied the intensity of the subject. It is must see viewing (and reading) for anyone who doubts the validity of my previous posts.

Environmental Hubris

You have to admire our friends to the north. They are not all buying into the anthropogenic Global Warming hype just yet.

"Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening."

Thousands of years ago, it was scientific consensus that the world was FLAT and we now know the truth there, do we not? Hundreds of years ago, the scientific consensus was that smoking cigarettes was actually healthy...30 years ago the scientific consensus was that we were entering a new global Ice Age. Now...

"What would happen if tomorrow we were told that, after all, the Earth is flat? It would probably be the most important piece of news in the media and would generate a lot of debate. So why is it that when scientists who have studied the Global Warming phenomenon for years say that humans are not the cause nobody listens? Why does no one acknowledge that the Emperor has no clothes on?" (emphasis mine)

Paging Al Gore...paging Emperor Al Gore, please pick up the white courtesy phone for an important call....

"Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear "

Mr. Ball is not the only academic who has quarrels with the pseudo-science behind the anthropogenic global warming hysteria. (H/T David at Our House)

"In Room 100 of the classic Christopher Wren-inspired Towne Building, Robert Giegengack seems much less than worried. The 67-year-old professor is preparing to give one of the semester’s final lectures to his 150-student class in environmental analysis, a popular science elective among Penn’s arts and sciences undergrads.
For decades, Giegengack was content to be a relatively obscure geologist who taught more than he published. Recently, though, he’s stepped into the swirling tempest surrounding global warming, in part because he says it’s not even one of the top 10 environmental problems we face. To make that point, he occasionally joins in a panel discussion, or gives a quote to a science writer. He’s thinking about writing something for one of the smarty-pants magazines. “I’ve always been interested in this question,” he says, “but when I first started working, no one cared — you couldn’t get an article published if you wanted to.” Now, though, “The public appetite for all this crap seems to be insatiable.”

Now the word is getting out that the IPCC report that was just issued was the work of bureaucrats and politicians and not the work of scientists...

"Last week's headlines about the United Nations' latest report on global warming were typically breathless, predicting doom and human damnation like the most fervent religious evangelical. Yet the real news in the fourth assessment from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) may be how far it is backpedaling on some key issues. Beware claims that the science of global warming is settled.
The document that caused such a stir was only a short policy report, a summary of the full scientific report due in May. Written mainly by policymakers (not scientists) who have a stake in the issue, the summary was long on dire predictions. The press reported the bullet points, noting that this latest summary pronounced with more than "90% confidence" that humans have been the main drivers of warming since the 1950s, and that higher temperatures and rising sea levels would result."

The people who wrote the summary are people who stand to gain from perpuating the hype. Meanwhile, the real, reproducable, documentable science is telling a much different story.

"More pertinent is the underlying scientific report. And according to people who have seen that draft, it contains startling revisions of previous U.N. predictions. For example, the Center for Science and Public Policy has just released an illuminating analysis written by Lord Christopher Monckton, a one-time adviser to Margaret Thatcher who has become a voice of sanity on global warming.
Take rising sea levels. In its 2001 report, the U.N.'s best high-end estimate of the rise in sea levels by 2100 was three feet. Lord Monckton notes that the upcoming report's high-end best estimate is 17 inches, or half the previous prediction. Similarly, the new report shows that the 2001 assessment had overestimated the human influence on climate change since the Industrial Revolution by at least one-third.
Such reversals (and there are more) are remarkable, given that the IPCC's previous reports, in 1990, 1995 and 2001, have been steadily more urgent in their scientific claims and political tone. It's worth noting that many of the policymakers who tinker with the IPCC reports work for governments that have promoted climate fears as a way of justifying carbon-restriction policies. More skeptical scientists are routinely vetoed from contributing to the panel's work. The Pasteur Institute's Paul Reiter, a malaria expert who thinks global warming would have little impact on the spread of that disease, is one example.
U.N. scientists have relied heavily on computer models to predict future climate change, and these crystal balls are notoriously inaccurate. According to the models, for instance, global temperatures were supposed to have risen in recent years. Yet according to the U.S. National Climate Data Center, the world in 2006 was only 0.03 degrees Celsius warmer than it was in 2001--in the range of measurement error and thus not statistically significant.
The models also predicted that sea levels would rise much faster than they actually have. The models didn't predict the significant cooling the oceans have undergone since 2003--which is the opposite of what you'd expect with global warming. Cooler oceans have also put a damper on claims that global warming is the cause of more frequent or intense hurricanes. The models also failed to predict falling concentrations of methane in the atmosphere, another surprise.
Meanwhile, new scientific evidence keeps challenging previous assumptions. The latest report, for instance, takes greater note of the role of pollutant particles, which are thought to reflect sunlight back to space, supplying a cooling effect. More scientists are also studying the effect of solar activity on climate, and some believe it alone is responsible for recent warming."

Remember - the information above is from the yet to be release IPCC report - not the bureaucratic summary, but the real scientific report!

I have said repeatedly that I don't dispute that the last couple of years have been warmer than usual. However, just as it is unscientific (and insincere) to take the last couple of weeks worth of extreme cold and say that there is NO global warming, it is also just as unscientific and insincere to take a couple of decades worth of warming and say that a planet that is several million years old is coming to an end. Global warming and cooling are cyclical and nothing man can do will change it. To think so is the epitome of hubris.