She's done an "Arianna Huffington"!

What has happened to Catherine Crier. I used to think she was a good Conservative, but it now appears she's gone the way of Arianna Huffington.

Take her latest post over at Huff Puff.

Basically it is a plug for her new book, CONTEMPT -- How the Right Is Wronging American Justice.

Here is the book's Amazon.com description:

America’s federal courts have an enormous impact on the daily lives of Americans. They also make up the last relatively independent branch of government. But, there is a committed and well-organized confederation of ultra-conservative politicians, reactionary interest groups, and fundamentalist religious sects working to change that once and for all. And they are succeeding.

How?

They have a plan. They have money. And they have millions of “believers.”

A majority of Americans strongly oppose the dogmatic agenda of this extreme right-wing onslaught, but that majority has remained silent.

Someday, you and your family may wake up in a very different country, a country re-made in their intolerant image, a nation governed by their inflexible laws.

Catherine is wrong. The majority of Americans oppose judges legislating from the bench, but have remained silent. We aren't the intolerant ones. We believe in laws that are laws, not ones that are flexible, as it seems Catherine prefers.

She's gone crazy.

Here is some of her Huff Puff post:

The extreme Right has conquered the executive and legislative branches of government, but it has not been able to bring the federal courts to heel…yet. Undoubtedly, this group has a prodigious impact on the Supreme Court and the other federal courts, but it wants so much more. Its leaders have taken an entity that innately resists politics and turned it into a highly politicized battle zone. They seethe over this unelected, independent third branch of government, the last bulwark between the American people and their attempted coup. That some federal judges have proven well educated, fair, and unintimidated by these voices and methods has further stymied their best-laid plans. The extreme Right may control a good part of the castle, but they have yet to breach the citadel. Only, make no mistake, they mean to bring every last wall crashing down.

And if they manage this, what will they do?

Most of them would like to see the United States under biblical law. Comparable to countries like Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, all of which live by Sharia (the strict Islamic code of the Koran), America's right-wing fundamentalists seek a nation governed by Old and New Testament scripture. Born-again Christianity will supplant the Constitution. This is no exaggeration—purchase a DVD of either Justice Sunday event, buy a book by one of their ministers, or simply go to one of their web sites. They do not make a secret of it. What's more, they demand that all Americans adhere to their rigid and reactionary beliefs.

The Far Right wants to control our federal judiciary in order to enact this reactionary agenda. At first blush, the focus seems to center on social issues—abortion, gay rights, affirmative action, and religion in schools. These items certainly garner the most press attention, but don't be fooled.

Make sure you read the rest of her crackpot claims.

Catherine acts as though the judiciary is so very independent of bias, as though we evil Conservatives have managed to take over everything else through dubious means, but the judiciary has managed to withstand the attack.

That's ridiculous. We the People elected a Republican President, a Republican majority into the House, and a Republican majority into the Senate.

Apparently Catherine doesn't believe that We the People have a right to elect the leaders who choose. But we did and now she's attacking us for it.

Does she not see that all over the country Liberal Activist judges have been making laws (which is not the function of the judiciary according to the Constitution) that are contrary to what Americans have decided? It seems like every time the PEOPLE of a state vote to ban the travesty that is "gay marriage" some Liberal Activist judge tells the people too bad, what you want doesn't count.

And then, then, Catherine compares the Faithful on the Right (for they would never be on the Left---the Left does not believe in God) to the evil, cowardly terrorists who took down 4 planes on 9/11 and committed atrocities all over the world. She compares Christians to Muslim extremists.

You're wrong, Catherine. We Christians don't have "rigid and reactionary beliefs." We have tried and true traditional laws and morals that have guided people for centuries. We have beliefs that don't change depending on which way the wind blows and who we want to impress. Is it so wrong to believe in something?

Is the belief that one should not murder such a horrible, rigid and reactionary belief?

To be reactionary is to react to something after it has already happened. The laws and morals and values Conservatives believed in were there before these things we are supposedly "reacting" to. If truth be told, Liberals are the reactionary ones. Conservative Christians ask that children be allowed to pray freely and openly in school as they had for hundreds of years. Liberals react by declaring the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional.

We don't have a "reactionary agenda," Catherine. We believe that the judiciary should stay within the confines set by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution of the United States of America. Have you read it?

We don't believe the court should create things like abortion and gay marriage or take religion out of public life. The Founding Fathers must roll in their graves when your rotten little friends in black robes create another phony right.

Of course, it seems as though Catherine thinks it quite alright for the Lunatic Left to force their Liberal agenda on the rest of us (the Majority in the last 3 elections, Catherine). It is only a bad thing if we good Christian Conservatives try to hold on to the America that the Founding Fathers created.

Here is the end of her Huff Puff post:

For all of those Americans who believe that our democracy is safe, you are wrong. Today, the radical Right is winning, and they know it. Sooner rather than later, we may be living in a very different country, a country that had been ours, a country that will be theirs.

You are right, Catherine, our democracy isn't safe . . . from Loonies like you and Arianna Huffington and Cindy Sheehan and George Soros and Michael Moore and John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and Tim Robbins and all the rest.

You all want to make this country into some sort of Sodom and Gomorrah (though you un-churched pagans probably don't know what those places were). Yout hope to form a Socialist-Communist-Leftist nation with no laws except what feels good (and no Christians allowed).

I hope we are winning because that means we are preserving what so many men have died for all these years: the United States of America our Founding Fathers gave us. One where God reigns Supreme, not unelected judges. One where life is valued, rather than thrown into waste bins like the merest garbage. One where the Sacrament of Marriage is preserved as a union between One Man and One Woman, as God intended and men have kept for thousands and thousands of years. One where people are valued for their goodness, rather than just their skin color or their sex or their lack of money. One where George Washington wouldn't feel like he were in the debauchery of places like Sodom and Gomorrah.

I hope we will be living in that different country soon. That country that we were when we began, not the Liberal hellhole of lewd conduct and laciviousness that you and your cronies prefer.

You've got it wrong, Catherine, We the People are in the midst of winning this country back from the likes of you and your friends. And we will be victorious. We have God on our side. Have a look at The Holy Bible.

But be careful, you might end up burning your eyes out. Evil cannot look upon goodness.

Ann Coulter's Latest

Ann Coulter: ACTUALLY, 'JUDICIAL ACTIVISM' MEANS 'E=mc2'---

Democrats are so excited about Hurricane Katrina, they're thinking of moving "Camp Casey" to an area outside the National Weather Service. What they haven't figured out yet is how Richard Perle and the "neocons" cooked up a hurricane that targeted only black people. Meanwhile, rescuers in New Orleans have discovered a lower-than-expected 424 dead bodies or, as they're known to liberals, "registered Democratic voters."

In liberals' defense, they've got a better shot at convincing Americans that Bush is responsible for a hurricane than convincing them that John Kerry was fit to be commander in chief. Compared to Kerry, Katrina is a blowhard they can work with.

Liberals think Hurricane Katrina means they get to pick the next Supreme Court justice. And as of today the smart money is on Cindy Sheehan — something about her moral authority being absolute.

It would be a lot of fun to watch liberals going through their "Howard Dean phase" right now, except liberal hysteria always frightens Bush. Instead of poking them through the iron bars of their cages with a stick like a normal person would, Bush soothes them with food pellets and reassuring words. What fun is that?

We're winning! This is no time to concede defeat.

If Americans loved judicial activism, liberals wouldn't be lying about what it is. Judicial activism means making up constitutional rights in order to strike down laws the justices don't like based on their personal preferences. It's not judicial activism to strike down laws because they violate the Constitution.

Don't neglect to read the rest!

I'm now using HaloScan

I've just switched over to Haloscan commenting and trackback.

Some comments made previously appear (to me) to be gone, so I'll have to figure that out.

HP and GOF Trailer!!

You can see a new Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire trailer here.

HP and GoF comes out on 18 November in the U.S. It is the fourth movie in the series, based on the fourth book of what will be seven. Like the 3rd movie, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, HP and GOF will also be shown at the IMAX.

I saw a preview when I went to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory on 15 July 2005. From the looks of it and the new trailer, it will be an excellent film.

I am SOOOO excited!

This sort of thing deserves more coverage

AP: Afghanistan Holds Landmark Elections---

KABUL, Afghanistan — Afghans went to the polls Sunday to elect a new legislature, hoping to bolster a fragile democracy after a quarter-century of war and sideline the Taliban militants who fought to undermine the vote.

"Today is a magnificent day for Afghanistan," said Ali Safar, 62, who was standing in line to vote in the capital, Kabul. "We want dignity, we want stability and peace. Thirty years of war and poverty is enough."

Some 12.4 million Afghans were registered to vote at more than 6,000 polling stations, guarded by some 100,000 Afghan police and soldiers and 30,000 foreign troops.

The Taliban called for a boycott of the elections, but said they would not attack civilians heading to the polls. A wave of assaults in the 48 hours leading up to the vote left nine militants and three policemen dead.

Security forces said they thwarted four rebel bombings, including an attempt to blow up a massive dam.

The vote was seen as the last formal step toward democracy on a path set out after a U.S.-led force drove the Taliban from power in 2001, when they refused to hand over Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden following the Sept. 11 attacks.
---
A U.S. military spokesman, Col. James Yonts, predicted "a massive number" of voters would turn out, telling The Associated Press that "this election will send a powerful message to the Taliban that their influence is waning."

All That Glitters

AP: Bush Sees 'Bright Dawn' Emerging in Gulf---

And from the depth of darkness we can see a bright dawn emerging over the Gulf Coast and the great city of New Orleans."

Really, it's no surprise the President can see a "bright dawn" emerging in the Gulf. All that taxpayer gold he's giving away down there certainly must light up the sky.

This is the future of America?

AP: Fraternities Face Pressure to Clean Up---

BOULDER, Colo. - A year after a freshman pledge died of alcohol poisoning at the University of Colorado, fraternities are again recruiting fresh-faced 18-year-olds — but this time against the school's wishes, and under a cloud of fear that one more scandal could shut them down.

"The existence of our community is at risk," said Chris Kline, a member of the fraternities' governing board, the Interfraternity Council. "If one of us screws up, it could go on all of us."

Lynn Gordon "Gordie" Bailey Jr. of Dallas was found dead in a Boulder fraternity house on Sept. 17 after a drunken ceremony in the foothills above the city.

CU administrators, already struggling to shake the university's reputation as a party school, asked sororities and fraternities to delay freshman rush until the spring semester to give new students time to get used to their new surroundings.

The fraternities refused, saying freshman should be able to chose when to join, and that delaying rush would hurt them financially, reducing dues and leaving empty rooms in their houses.

"We have to run it like a business," said Adrian Fryxell, 20, president of Phi Kappa Tau. "We can't afford to take that hit."

By defying the university, the 16 fraternities lost many privileges, including free use of campus facilities and publicity in university materials. The administration also advised parents to discourage their students from rushing in the fall.

Marc Stine, the Greek societies' liaison to the community, said the university's opposition is having an effect. Turnout for this year's rush has been half to two-thirds of previous years' levels.

"Parents may listen more to the vice chancellor than me," Stine said.

The fraternities have started their own push to change their culture, mindful that another scandal could put them under pressure from their national chapters, the Legislature, police or the city to disband.

Regardless of whether or not they have fraternities and sororities, colleges and universities all over the United States need to change the attitudes on their campuses. The prevailing attitude held by college students is that college is the time for partying, drinking, and doing whatever they want, regardless of who is hurt by such behavior.

School administrations don't care about the neighborhoods that surround their schools or the impact their imbecilic, drunken students have on the residents of those neighborhoods.

When did the focus of college change from one of learning and becoming mature to one of having a second childhood and being as irresponsible as possible? Most college students I see every day are self-concerned, immature, irresponsible brats. The boys use all sorts of language in front of everyone and the girls look and act like hookers. Most people drink like they are already alcoholics and they are only in their early twenties.

If these people are the future of our country, then Heaven help us.

"A cesspool of wasteful spending."

LA Times: Louisiana Officials Indicted Before Katrina Hit---

WASHINGTON — Senior officials in Louisiana's emergency planning agency already were awaiting trial over allegations stemming from a federal investigation into waste, mismanagement and missing funds when Hurricane Katrina struck.

And federal auditors are still trying to track as much as $60 million in unaccounted for funds that were funneled to the state from the Federal Emergency Management Agency dating back to 1998.

In March, FEMA demanded that Louisiana repay $30.4 million to the federal government.

The problems are particularly worrisome, federal officials said, because they involve the Louisiana Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness, the agency that will administer much of the billions in federal aid anticipated for victims of Katrina.

Earlier this week, federal Homeland Security officials announced they would send 30 investigators and auditors to the Gulf Coast to ensure relief funds were properly spent.

Mark Smith, a spokesman for the Louisiana emergency office, said the agency had responded to calls for reform, and that "we now have the policy and personnel in place to ensure that past problems aren't repeated."

He said earlier problems were largely administrative mistakes, not due to corruption.

But federal officials disagreed. They said FEMA for years expressed concerns over patterns of improper management and lax oversight throughout the state agency, and said most problems had not been corrected.

They point to criminal indictments of three state workers as evidence the problem was more than management missteps. Two other state emergency officials also were identified in court documents as unindicted co-conspirators.

"The charges were made after some very extensive reviews by FEMA investigators and other authorities, who identified issues they felt were of the severity and magnitude to refer them to the U.S. attorney's office," said David Passey, the spokesman for FEMA's regional office in Texas.

Passey, while acknowledging that the state had made some administrative changes, said it had not completed the kind of overhaul FEMA said was needed.

"It concerns us a lot. We are devoted to the mission of helping people prepare for, prevent and recover from disasters and we want these federal funds — this taxpayer money — to be spent and used well and in accordance with the rules," he said.

Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington watchdog group, said recent Louisiana history showed that FEMA "money earmarked for saving lives and homes'' was instead squandered in "a cesspool of wasteful spending."

I guess "corruption in Lousiana" isn't just a Hollywood-invention.

You can read the rest here.

(Curtsy to Drudge)

Where can we find men like this?

AP: After 55 Years, Vet to Get Medal of Honor---

LOS ANGELES - Tibor Rubin kept his promise to join the U.S. Army after American troops freed him from the Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria during World War II.

A Hungarian Jew, Rubin immigrated to New York after the war, joined the Army and fought as an infantryman in the Korean War. In 1951, Chinese troops captured Cpl. Rubin and other U.S. soldiers and he became a prisoner of war for 2 1/2 years.

More than five decades later, after a relentless campaign by grateful comrades and Jewish war veterans, President Bush on Sept. 23 will give Rubin the Medal of Honor.

"I was only staying alive to get that medal and now I'm going to enjoy it," said the 76-year-old Rubin, who now lives in Garden Grove.

He was nominated four times for the medal, the nation's highest recognition for bravery in battle. But some believe the paperwork was never submitted because a member of his chain of command discriminated against him for being Jewish and born in Hungary.

When he was at the Chinese prisoners' camp known as "Death Valley," Rubin said he would pray in Hebrew for the U.S. soldiers — about 40 each day — who died in the freezing weather. He also took care of soldiers suffering from dysentery or pneumonia.

Rubin, who goes by the name Ted, called concentration camp good "basic training" for being a POW and applied lifesaving lessons he learned there. For example, Rubin said he would retrieve maggots from the prisoners' latrine and apply them to the infected wounds of his comrades to remove gangrene.

Fellow POW Sgt. Leo Cormier said Rubin gave a lot of GIs the courage to live.

"I once saw him spend the whole night picking lice off a guy who didn't have the strength to lift his head," Cormier told the Army. "What man would do that? ... But Ted did things for his fellow men that made him a hero in my book."

As a POW, Rubin turned down repeated offers from the Chinese to be returned to his native Hungary.

"I told them I couldn't go back because I was in the U.S. Army and I wouldn't leave my American brothers because they needed me here," Rubin said.

Rubin wouldn't say anything negative about the Army and his long wait for the Medal of Honor. But in affidavits filed in support of Rubin's nomination, fellow soldiers said their sergeant was allegedly a vicious anti-Semite who gave Rubin dangerous assignments in hopes of getting him killed.

In 1988, the Jewish War Veterans of the United States urged Congress to recognize Rubin's efforts. And U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler of Florida introduced a bill in 2001 to force the Pentagon to review the records of Jewish veterans who may have been denied the Medal of Honor because they were Jews.

About 150 records remain under review, said Bob Zweiman, past national commander of the Jewish War Veterans.

God bless Mr. Rubin! What a hero!

Well, we already have it and we know how to use it!

AP: Iran Proclaims Right to Nuclear Energy---

UNITED NATIONS - Iran's president proclaimed his country's "inalienable right" to produce nuclear fuel Saturday, defiantly rejecting a European offer of economic incentives if the Mideast nation would halt its uranium enrichment program.

In a fiery speech to the U.N. General Assembly, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denied his nation had any intention of producing nuclear weapons. To prove that, he offered foreign countries and companies a role in Iran's nuclear energy production.

The Iranian leader lashed out at the United States for its insistence on keeping its nuclear weapons even as it rejected Iran's efforts to build a peaceful energy program.

He said Iran has a right to produce nuclear fuel under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and implicitly accused the Europeans and Americans of "misrepresenting" Iran's desire for civilian nuclear energy "as the pursuit of nuclear weapons."

"This is nothing more than a pure propaganda ploy," he said.

"The Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates its previously and repeatedly declared position that in accordance with our religious principles, pursuit of nuclear weapons is prohibited," Ahmadinejad said.

And apparently killing innocent human beings and one's own self are also not in accordance with Islamic principles, but that doesn't stop plenty of evil, cowardly terrorists from flying planes into buildings or blowing themselves up and taking crowds of innocent human beings with them.

Please visit Regime Change Iran for more information on fighting for freedom in Iran. It is a great site with lots of news and lots of links.

Another Winning Idea from Nagin

AP: Relief Chief: Mayor's Plan 'Problematic'---

BATON ROUGE, La. - A weakened levee system and a lack of drinkable tap water will make it "extremely problematic" to follow the New Orleans mayor's timeline for allowing residents to return to the evacuated city, the head of the federal disaster relief effort said Saturday.

Coast Guard Vice Adm. Thad Allen said federal officials have worked with Mayor Ray Nagin and support his vision for repopulating the city, but he called Nagin's idea to return up to 180,000 people to New Orleans in the next week both "extremely ambitious" and "extremely problematic."

"Our intention is to work with the mayor ... in a very frank, open and unvarnished manner," Allen told The Associated Press in an interview at Department of Homeland Security headquarters in Baton Rouge.

Allen called on the mayor to be "mindful of the risks" and said he would inform Nagin of his concerns at a meeting set for Monday.

The prime concern, Allen said, was the risk of another storm hitting the region, threatening an already delicate levee system and possibly requiring residents to be evacuated again. Hurricane season ends Nov. 30, though peak storm activity typically occurs from the end of August through mid-September.

"You want to have some way to conduct evacuation, because something less than a Category 4 storm is going to present significant issues that might require the evacuation of the general population," he said. "You want to make sure you have your arms around how you will do that, or if you could do it."

A Vatican Investigation

Reuters: Vatican's search for gays in seminaries raises alarm---

BOSTON (Reuters) - A Vatican investigation of U.S. seminaries for evidence of homosexuality, sparked by a scandal over pedophile priests, infuriated gay rights advocates on Friday.

Teams of American Church officials will visit 229 seminaries, which train about 4,500 future priests, beginning this month and ending in spring, U.S. church officials said.

The Catholic Church demands celibacy of its priest and gay activists said the latest review amounted to a witchhunt.

The Vatican approved the seminary review, known as an apostolic visitation and the first in America since 1983, in response to the sexual abuse crisis that erupted in 2002 and triggered lawsuits by thousands of people abused by priests.

"There should not be any doubts about the lifestyle the priests ought to live," said Monsignor Francis Maniscalco, spokesman at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "It is an evaluation of seminaries to see if they are doing their job."

It certainly has taken the Vatican long enough to look into this. Such behavior is not in line with the Bible or Catholic Church teachings, no matter what Liberal "Catholics" say.

But no surprise that the gay activists are all upset. Wah wah.

Gay rights advocates such as Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign in Washington, said the Church was making gay men scapegoats for pedophiles.

"You have this massive problem within the Catholic Church and the Church's response to it, in one sweeping gesture, seems to be 'we're going to travel around the country and ask people if they are gay'," Solmonese said.

"What the Church is doing, to the outside observer who reads this, is immediately equating gay men with the abuse that is going on here that is perpetuating something that is absolutely not true."

The real problem is the Church's fixation on celibacy, said Daniel C. Maguire, a professor of moral theology at Marquette, a Jesuit university in Wisconsin.

"I see it (the investigation) as a diversionary tactic away from the real problem of Catholic clergy which is enforced celibacy," he said. "It's highly unrealistic. I would call it a failed experiment in human control." he said.

He said some studies he had read estimated about 50 percent of students studying at U.S. seminaries were now gay, and he believed the review could ultimately drain the Church of future priests.

"It's an impossible plan because if they eliminate the gays they are going to eliminate half their clergy in some of their places," he said.

I would like to know what Daniel C. Maguire proposes we do? Allow Priests to fornicate? That's against Church teachings and what the Bible says. Allow Priests to marry? That's got to be the first time a Liberal has suggested marriage would solve something. Liberals always seem to be about "free love" and being irresponsible.

If the Catholic Church has to eliminate half their clergy in some places, then so be it. Living a homosexual lifestyle is sinful, immoral, and not what Catholic Priests ought to be doing.

Really, though, it is no surprise that Maguire is "a professor of moral theology at Marquette." Jesuits have become the Leftists of the Catholic Church. And Jesuit Universities are Liberal Think Tanks.

Geez, that helps so much.

AP: Bush Rules Out Tax Hike to Fund Recovery---

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Friday ruled out raising taxes to pay the massive costs of Gulf Coast reconstruction, saying other government spending must be cut to pay for a recovery effort expected to swell the national debt by $200 billion or more.

Hours earlier, Bush vowed to help rebuild the region with an eye toward wiping out the persistent poverty and racial injustice that exist there.

"As we clear away the debris of a hurricane, let us also clear away the legacy of inequality," he said at a prayer service at Washington National Cathedral in memory of Hurricane Katrina's victims. Polls suggest a majority of Americans believe the president should have responded quicker to Katrina, and high percentages of blacks tell pollsters they believe race played a role in the slow response by all levels of government.

At the White House, the chairman of Bush's National Economic Council, Al Hubbard, made clear that Hurricane Katrina recovery costs are "coming from the American taxpayer." Another top aide, domestic policy adviser Claude Allen, said the administration had not identified any budget cuts to offset the disaster expense, and Bush did not name any either.

Congress already has approved $62 billion for the disaster, but that is expected to run out next month and require another budget-busting installment. The federal deficit was projected at $333 billion for the current year before the storm slammed into the Gulf Coast more than two weeks ago.

Some fiscal conservatives are expressing alarm at the prospect of such massive federal outlays without cutting other spending.

"It is inexcusable for the White House and Congress to not even make the effort to find at least some offsets to this new spending," said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.
---
Bush, who declined to try to put a price tag on the costs, expressed no worry.

"You bet it's going to cost money. But I'm confident we can handle it and I'm confident we can handle our other priorities," he said during a news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin. "It's going to cost whatever it costs."

Bush said it's important that government quickly restore the region to give people hope, and repeated his statement from Thursday night's speech from the heart of the New Orleans' French Quarter that the federal government would cover most of the cost of rebuilding schools, bridges and other infrastructure. Asked who would pay for the work and how it would impact the nation's rising debt, Bush said "the key question is to make sure that the costs are wisely spent."

"It means we're going to have to make sure we cut unnecessary spending," he said. "It's going to mean that we maintain economic growth and we should not raise taxes." (emphasis added)

Well, since the President hasn't really ever "cut unnecessary spending," I'm not sure he knows how. How does he expect to pay for all the stuff he's promised the Gulf Coast?

He's a Republican?

Reuters: Bloomberg opposes Roberts' nomination---

NEW YORK (Reuters) - New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Friday opposed John Roberts' nomination to be U.S. Supreme Court chief justice, making him the first noted Republican to break with the Bush administration over who should lead America's top court.

Bloomberg, a former Democrat seeking re-election in a heavily Democratic city, said Roberts had failed to show a commitment to upholding the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision establishing a right to abortion.

"I am unconvinced that Judge Roberts accepts the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling as settled law," Bloomberg said.

Roberts' answers to questions in Senate confirmation hearings "did not indicate a commitment to protect a woman's right to choose," he said. "For that reason I oppose the nomination of Judge Roberts as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court."

While Bloomberg's statement is unusual from a Republican, the mayor has no standing over whether Roberts will be confirmed by the U.S. Senate as chief justice.

Bloomberg, who became a billionaire by building the media company named after him, is ahead in polls in the New York mayoral race ahead of November's election here.

Like many Republicans in New York, Bloomberg has long been a liberal on social issues and has been unafraid to publicly break with President George W. Bush.

Isn't it wonderful how the media always makes heroes out of "Republicans" who oppose the President. I wasn't aware Bloomberg was anything more than a RINO, so his public "break" with the President isn't that important.

The article mentions that Bloomberg is "the first noted Republican to break with the Bush administration over who should lead America's top court." He's no "noted Republican." Noted Republicans are people who are actual Republicans, like Tom Tancredo, Sean Hannity, Tom DeLay, and the like, not RINOs like Bloomberg.

Does anyone really care what Mr. "Will Never Be Giuliani" thinks about anything?

An Expression of National Identity

AP: U.S. to fight Pledge of Allegiance ruling---

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Thursday that the Justice Department will fight to overturn a federal court ruling that the Pledge of Allegiance can't be recited in public schools because it contains a reference to God.

Gonzales said the pledge is one of several expressions of national identity and patriotism that mention of God but don't violate the Constitution's ban on state-sponsored religion.

The high court "has affirmed time and again that such official acknowledgments of our nation's religious heritage, foundation and character are constitutional," Gonzales said in a statement a day after the ruling by U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton in San Francisco.

Karlton's decision could put the issue on track for another round of Supreme Court arguments. The court sidestepped the issue last year, ruling atheist Michael Newdow had no standing to bring the case on behalf of his daughter because he did not have custody of her.

The Bush administration had opposed Newdow on the same basis that Gonzales set forth Thursday. Newdow also is involved in the latest case, acting as attorney for three parents challenging the pledge because it includes the words "under God."

Gonzales is widely viewed as a leading contender for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's seat on the Supreme Court because he is close to President Bush.

Gonzales' statement of support to keep "under God" in the pledge could appeal to religious conservatives, who have expressed concerns about him as a potential justice because he has not stated opposition to the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion.

The Becket Fund, a religious rights group that is a party to the pledge case, said it would appeal to the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which held the "under God" provision of the pledge unconstitutional in 2002.

The decisions by Karlton and the appeals court conflict with an August opinion by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. That court upheld a Virginia law requiring public schools lead daily Pledge of Allegiance recitation, similar to the requirement in California.

Meanwhile, the Senate voted late Thursday to condemn the district judge's ruling. The non-binding resolution, approved by unanimous consent, states that the phrase "one nation under God" in the pledge reflects the religious faith central to the founding of the nation and that its recitation is "a fully constitutional expression of patriotism."

The House and Senate approved similar resolutions in 2002 in response to the Ninth Circuit decision.

Did you note the part right at the end that says the "Senate voted . . . to condemn the . . . ruling . . . by unanimous consent." I wonder which anti-Christian Lefties were missing?

I'm glad to see Alberto Gonzales doing something other than touring around, giving speeches to Hispanic groups. After all, the President did appoint him to an actual job.

Show your support for the Pledge of Allegiance by signing it here.

You can listen to Red Skelton's explanation of the Pledge of Allegiance and learn the history of the Pledge here.

Bill Likes Experience

CNN.com: Clinton: FEMA chief should be experienced---

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Former President Bill Clinton on Friday said it should be required that any future head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency have "prior experience in emergency management."

"When a disaster strikes, that person becomes the most important person in the federal government," Clinton said on CNN's "Larry King Live."

Clinton did not directly refer to former FEMA director Michael Brown, who resigned this week amid intense criticism of his handling of the government's response to Hurricane Katrina. Before joining the Bush administration in 2001, Brown had spent the past decade as the judges and stewards commissioner of the International Arabian Horse Association.

"I think the most important thing is you probably should have some sort of requirement that anybody who has the job has prior experience in emergency management," Clinton told King. "It's a very serious, important job."

He noted that his FEMA chief, James Lee Witt, had headed up emergency management in Arkansas.

"I made it a Cabinet-level agency, and when a disaster struck, everybody in the government worked for that person."

Clinton also said FEMA functioned better when it was an independent agency. FEMA now is within the Department of Homeland Security, which was formed after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

"I'm biased; I liked it the way it was," he said.

He added that if the agency remains within the Homeland Security Department, it "should be somehow made quasi-independent" to be able to more effectively respond to disasters.

Despite FEMA's rough start in the days immediately after Katrina's landfall, Clinton said he has been impressed with the way Coast Guard Vice Adm. Thad Allen has taken on the leadership role in the disaster areas. Allen was tapped to head up FEMA's on-site operations.

"We've got everybody on the same page now. It looks like we've got everybody working together, and we've got a huge job to do," Clinton said. "We just all need to be rowing in the same boat, trying to get people's lives back together and get plans in place to rebuild the area, particularly in New Orleans."

Has there ever been an ex-President who has spent so much time criticizing his successor? Perhaps Slick Willie should find something else to take up his time. Like writing another heavy-as-a-rock, dull-as-dirt book. Or perhaps he should go on a world cruise.

And since his administration was absolutely perfect, and handled all those major national crises perfectly . . . Oh, wait, there were no major national crises like 9/11 or Hurricane Katrina during the Clinton years, only crises of the Clintons' own making.

Dance With the One That Brought You

AP: Bush Plans Meeting on O'Connor Replacement---

President Bush is in the early phases of consultations with Congress on filling a second vacancy on the Supreme Court, officials disclosed Friday, as Judge John Roberts coasts to Senate confirmation as chief justice.

White House counsel Harriett Miers has called selected members of the Senate within the past day or two to solicit their views on replacements for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, these officials said.

At the same time, Bush has invited four key senators to a breakfast meeting at the White House next Wednesday to discuss filling O'Connor's seat. The guest list includes Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., as well as Sen. Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who chairs the Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the panel's senior Democrat.

Officials said Miers had called at least two Senate Democrats, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland and Evan Bayh of Indiana. Mikulski's office declined to confirm the call, even though an aide had confided earlier in the day to a roomful of other Democrats that it occurred. Bayh's spokesman said he did not know the reason for Miers' call.
---
Reid urged Bush to choose someone in O'Connor's mold. "Justice O'Connor has been a voice of reason and moderation on the court," the Democratic leader said in a statement.

Leahy said, "It's a good first step, but real consultation is a two- way street."

This is not why we re-elected President Bush. He shouldn't be asking the Democrats for advice on who he should nominate. He should be asking those of us who did the hard work of putting a Republican majority into the House, Senate, and a Republican into the Presidency.

The Democrats lost the 2000 Election. They lost in the 2002 Elections. They lost the 2004 Election. President Bush needs to stop acting like they won and live up to the promises he made.

We need a Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Pro-God, Original-intent, Patriotic American on the Supreme Court, not more Ruth Ginsbergs and David Souters.

If President Bush expects any support on anything, he had better stop kissing up to the Dems and remember who got his butt into the White House.

Is she joking?

Cindy Sheehan, on Huff Puff and MichaelMoore.com, via Drudge:

It is a Christ-like principle to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and shelter the homeless. That's what is happening in Algiers and other places in Louisiana...but by the people of America, not the so-called "Christians" in charge. If George Bush truly listened to God and read the words of the Christ, Iraq and the devastation in New Orleans would have never happened.

Is she serious? So if President Bush were really a Christian, a natural disaster named Hurricane Katrina would not have hit New Orleans? And New Orleans wouldn't have been flooded, even though it is surrounded by water in the form of the Gulf, the Mississippi River, and Lake Pontchartrain? Does she realize New Orleans is below sea level? Or does she live in another universe?

I don't care if a human being is black, brown, white, yellow or pink. I don't care if a human being is Christian, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, or pagan. I don't care what flag a person salutes: if a human being is hungry, then it is up to another human being to feed him/her. George Bush needs to stop talking, admit the mistakes of his all around failed administration, pull our troops out of occupied New Orleans and Iraq, and excuse his self from power. The only way America will become more secure is if we have a new administration that cares about Americans even if they don't fall into the top two percent of the wealthiest.

The federal government has already spent an incredible amount of money on the victims of Hurricane Katrina: food, water, rescues, medicine, transportation, reimbursement for others. How much should the government spend, Cindy?

You are right, Cindy. If a human being is hungry, then it is right that another human being feeds him, but the federal government is not a human being. American citizens have a Christian duty to help their brother in need. The government should not be doling out money.

And we are occupying New Orleans??????? Wasn't the Left just complaining that the military didn't get into New Orleans fast enough? What do they want????

And President Bush should "excuse his self from power"? Shouldn't that be "himself"?

There has not been a terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11, since the President sent the military out to defend and protect us in Afghanistan and Iraq, Cindy. We are more secure than when Bill Clinton was in office (and declined to take Osama bin Laden when he had the chance). We are more secure than we were on 9/10/01. That is due to the fact that President Bush is proactive and doesn't wait for the terrorists to come to our doors. He has the military out killing as many of the evil little cowards you like so much as possible: in Afghanistan AND Iraq. Incidentally, you don't believe the war in Afghanistan is a right, either, so how do you suggest we become more secure?

The military is protecting all Americans, not just the wealthiest 2%. All Americans, regardless if "if a human being is black, brown, white, yellow or pink" or "Christian, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, or pagan." Cindy, you insult the brave men and women of the military when you say they are only out there to protect the rich. Incidentally, many of the wealthy are your leftist buddies like George Soros and Michael Moore.

Someone get her some meds!

Atta Documents Destroyed?

AP: Weldon: Atta Papers Destroyed on Orders---

WASHINGTON - A Pentagon employee was ordered to destroy documents that identified Mohamed Atta as a terrorist two years before the 2001 attacks, a congressman said Thursday.

The employee is prepared to testify next week before the Senate Judiciary Committee and was expected to identify the person who ordered him to destroy the large volume of documents, said Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa.

Weldon declined to identify the employee, citing confidentiality matters. Weldon described the documents as "2.5 terabytes" — as much as one-fourth of all the printed materials in the Library of Congress, he added.

This would have been during the Clinton White House.

Army Maj. Paul Swiergosz, a Pentagon spokesman, said officials have been "fact-finding in earnest for quite some time."

"We've interviewed 80 people involved with Able Danger, combed through hundreds of thousands of documents and millions of e-mails and have still found no documentation of Mohamed Atta," Swiergosz said.

He added that certain data had to be destroyed in accordance with existing regulations regarding "intelligence data on U.S. persons."

Weldon has said that Atta, the mastermind of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and three other hijackers were identified in 1999 by a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger," which determined they could be members of an al-Qaida cell.

On Wednesday, former members of the Sept. 11 commission dismissed the "Able Danger" assertions. One commissioner, ex-Sen. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., said, "Bluntly, it just didn't happen and that's the conclusion of all 10 of us."

Weldon responded angrily to Gorton's assertions.

"It's absolutely unbelievable that a commission would say this program just didn't exist," Weldon said Thursday.

Pentagon officials said this month they had found three more people who recall an intelligence chart identifying Atta as a terrorist prior to the Sept. 11 attacks.

Two military officers, Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, have come forward to support Weldon's claims.

Slade Gorton is a RINO, and, unfortunately, from my state.

I really don't care if 10 people on a liberal committee believe grass is purple. If there are witnesses who know what happened, they have a right to be heard. It is irresponsible of members of the 9/11 Commission to dismiss these claims outright. Are the 9/11commissionerss covering up for someone?A

Iranian "President" at UN; Protests in NYC

On Wednesday, 14 September 2005, the Iranian "President" Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke before the UN.

You can read what he said here, at Regime Change Iran.

Pictures of the protests are here.

You can find out more about the protests by visiting by reading the Wednesday post at Regime Change Iran.

President Bush also spoke at the United Nations on Wednesday, and reaffirmed America's stance against terrorism. You can read it here.

More from Take Back the Memorial

From Take Back the Memorial---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 15, 2005
Contact: Anthony Gardner
Coalition of 9/11 Families
amg@wtcufg.org
(973) 216-2623

15 Major 9/11 Family Groups Reject LMDC Mediation Plan

New York, N.Y.—September 15, 3005—The alliance of 15 major 9/11 family organizations was stunned to learn through the media last week and not from the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation of their plans to engage in mediated talks with 9/11 family members about the presence of the International Freedom Center on the World Trade Center memorial site. According to the media, the LMDC’s stated purpose in hiring an outside mediator was to facilitate ‘conversations that might otherwise not happen.” We hasten to point out that individual and collective members of the 9/11 family groups, along with of citizens from the Lower Manhattan community and other interested parties, have been meeting in good faith at LMDC-sponsored forums for more than three years. The last such meeting, held by the Civic Alliance for Rebuilding Lower Manhattan, took place just two days ago. If anything, the LMDC has once again demonstrated that it does not understand the difference between having meetings and actually listening to the public.

The LMDC appears not to understand that the objection, in principle, to the presence of the IFC on the World Trade Center site is no longer a matter that can be resolved by 9/11 family groups alone. They have been joined by the 22,000 members of ‘New York’s Bravest”–the Uniformed Firefighters Association– which lost 343 of its active members and three of its retired members in the 9/11 attacks, as well as the Firemen’s Association of the State of New York, the state’s largest firefighter organization consisting of 110,000 volunteer firefighters, many of whom participated in the rescue and recovery effort at Ground Zero. These organizations are also joined by more than 46,000 people from all over the country who have signed an online petition calling for the LMDC to remove the IFC and the Drawing Center from the memorial site. We anticipate that the growing list of organizations joining this fight for a proper memorial will increase these numbers exponentially in the coming days.

The LMDC’s stubborn refusal to acknowledge this wider rejection of the IFC mirrors its denial of other critical problems with the larger memorial and memorial museum plans. Constantly fuzzy and, curiously, always reduced projections on the millions of people per year who will visit the memorial do not add up when compared to other major memorials around the country such as the Statue of Liberty. The LMDC cannot demonstrate that the memorial itself and the underground museum on the site will be able to accommodate visitors without having to turn away millions per year and thousands daily. Nor can it demonstrate that it can safely and securely send 20,000 people underground every day, much less through one entrance and one exit.

Additionally, the LMDC cannot show how precious 9/11 artifacts and the momentous story of the worst attack in the history of our nation can all be contained in a cramped underground space which will also house train tracks, a PATH terminal, loading platforms, passageways, waterfalls, ventilation shafts, soil and root systems from the forest above and infrastructure for a massive cooling plant below. In short, the problem of space may ultimately be the most practical reason not to allocate 300,000 square feet of space to any entity other than the memorial and the memorial museum. To do so will bring dishonor to the lost, discord to the living and disunity to the country.

By creating yet another deaf and redundant ‘process” from which they are removed, the LMDC and Governor George Pataki are simply delaying resolution of an issue which has been clearly laid out before them, as well as wasting time and resources that could be better spent addressing other compelling problems that must be solved before the first shovel is sunk into sacred ground. The time is long overdue for civic and political leaders to act. The IFC must go.

Advocates for 9/11 Fallen Heroes (rjtallon@cs.com, jale131@hotmail.com, 159e85@aol.com)
Cantor Fitzgerald Relief Fund
Coalition of 9/11 Families
Fix the Fund
Give Your Voice
Margie Miller 9/11 Support Group (WTCFamilyCenter@aol.com)
9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America
9/11 Families for a Secure America
September 11th Families Association
September’s Mission Foundation
Skyscraper Safety Campaign
Voices of September 11th
W. Doyle 9/11 Support Group
WTC Families for Proper Burial, Inc.
World Trade Center United Family Group

How would he know what leadership means?

AP: Bush Vows Aid for Storm-Struck Gulf Coast---

Bush repeated a hotline number, 1-877-568-3317, for people to call to help reunite family members separated during the hurricane. Moments later, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., criticized Bush, saying "Leadership isn't a speech or a toll-free number."

"No American doubts that New Orleans will rise again," Kerry said. "They doubt the competence and commitment of this administration." House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, in a joint statement, said, "We are concerned by Bush administration initiatives this week waiving wage protections, environmental safeguards and protections for veterans, minorities, women and the disabled."

How does Kerry know anything about leadership? He has never been President of the United States. How dare he make fun of an effort to reunite separated family members?

And many Americans doubt whether New Orleans ought to rise again at it's present location. Obviously a city under sea level, surrounded by the gulf, a river, and a lake isn't very safe.

No matter what President Bush does, Liberals will always find a way to criticize him.

Restoring "Sanity"

NYT: G.O.P. Split Over Big Plans for Storm Spending---

WASHINGTON, Sept. 15 - The drive to pour tens of billions of federal dollars into rebuilding the hurricane-battered Gulf Coast is widening a fissure among Republicans over fiscal policy, with more of them expressing worry about unbridled spending.

On Thursday, even before President Bush promised that "federal funds will cover the great majority of the costs of repairing public infrastructure in the disaster zone," fiscal conservatives from the House and Senate joined budget watchdog groups in demanding that the administration be judicious in asking for taxpayer dollars.

One fiscal conservative, Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, said Thursday, "I don't believe that everything that should happen in Louisiana should be paid for by the rest of the country. I believe there are certain responsibilities that are due the people of Louisiana."

Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, called for restoring "sanity" to the federal recovery effort. Congress has approved $62 billion, mostly to cover costs already incurred, and the price tag is rising. The House and Senate approved tax relief Thursday at an estimated cost of more than $5 billion on top of $3.5 billion in housing vouchers approved by the Senate on Wednesday.

"We know we need to help, but throwing more and more money without accountability at this is not going to solve the problem," Mr. DeMint said.

Their comments were in marked contrast to the sweeping administration approach outlined by Mr. Bush in his speech from New Orleans and a call by Senate Republican leaders for a rebuilding effort similar to the Marshall Plan after World War II. Congressional Democrats advocated their own comprehensive recovery program Thursday, promoting a combination of rebuilding programs coupled with housing, health care, agriculture and education initiatives. The president also emphasized the importance of private entrepreneurship to create jobs "and help break the cycle of poverty."

Senators Coburn and DeMint are absolutely right. The government cannot just throw money to the Gulf Coast. The federal government owes the taxpayers a very careful accounting of how our money is being spent.

President Bush is no fiscal conservative, which is a great disappointment. Congressional Republicans have also done their part to spend as much money as they could. This isn't why we worked so hard the last 3 elections.

(Curtsy to Drudge)

The Katrina Address

I just watched President Bush give his speech addressing Hurricane Katrina, the aftermath, the blame, and the future. You can find the transcript here.

I liked some of it, but there were some major parts I have big issues with.

First, fellow Americans have lost everything in the greatest natural disaster in America's history. It is only right and moral that fellow Americans give aid and comfort. It is right that we donate to the American Red Cross and Catholic Charities and all the other wonderful charities that rush into the rescue. It is right that we hold fundraisers and fill empty milk cartons with spare change and send packages of food, clothing, and necessities. We wouldn't be America if we didn't help those in need. But it should be Americans doing so, not the government.

That said, on to the speech:

And the federal government will undertake a close partnership with the states of Louisiana and Mississippi, the city of New Orleans, and other Gulf Coast cities, so they can rebuild in a sensible, well planned way. Federal funds will cover the great majority of the costs of repairing public infrastructure in the disaster zone, from roads and bridges to schools and water systems. Our goal is to get the work done quickly. And taxpayers expect this work to be done honestly and wisely – so we will have a team of inspectors general reviewing all expenditures.

While I recognize it is not necessarily feasible for devastated cities that no longer have any revenue to pay the costs of repairing public infrastructure, I do not think the federal government should either. Cities are the responsibility of their officials and of the states, not of the federal government. If your house burns down, you cannot expect the city government to pay for its rebuilding. The same goes for public buildings, bridges, schools, etc.

It wouldn't be so bad if the federal government were merely lending the money to these cities, but I don't think that is what the President is suggesting. A federal loan to the state/city would mean that that state/city would use the money now, but pay us taxpayers back.

I think this should be the case for any disaster here in the United States: earthquakes in California, floods anywhere, blizzards, etc.

In the rebuilding process, there will be many important decisions and many details to resolve, yet we are moving forward according to some clear principles. The federal government will be fully engaged in the mission, but Governor Barbour, Governor Blanco, Mayor Nagin, and other state and local leaders will have the primary role in planning for their own future. Clearly, communities will need to move decisively to change zoning laws and building codes, in order to avoid a repeat of what we have seen. And in the work of rebuilding, as many jobs as possible should go to men and women who live in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.

Governor Barbour is awesome and did an excellent job. Blanco and Nagin ought to resign for their astounding incompetence. They shouldn't be allowed to offer input. They have already shown they can't follow a plan if they have years to prepare for it. Should we let them come up with ideas off the cuff, when they can't even follow instructions?

And as for the jobs, they should be fair game. Anyone who wants a job in this country and is willing to work hard should be able to head down South. After all, the government will be using taxpayer money to fund these jobs. I'm sure there will be plenty to do, including shipping supplies, cleaning up muck, tearing down buildings, etc.

I do think that the people of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama ought to be out there cleaning up their own cities and homes. No sitting around, listening to jazz, and eating Southern cooking while National Guard and others slave away. They need to take responsibility for their futures.

As all of us saw on television, there is also some deep, persistent poverty in this region as well. And that poverty has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action. So let us restore all that we have cherished from yesterday, and let us rise above the legacy of inequality. When the streets are rebuilt, there should be many new businesses, including minority-owned businesses, along those streets. When the houses are rebuilt, more families should own, not rent, those houses.
---
we should provide immediate incentives for job-creating investment … tax relief for small businesses … incentives to companies that create jobs ... and loans and loan guarantees for small businesses, including minority-owned enterprises, to get them up and running again. It is entrepreneurship that creates jobs and opportunity . . .

I cannot stand it when the President panders to the PC crowd. Americans lost their homes, property, businesses, and lives in the Gulf Coast. All kinds of Americans, not just the poor or minority. If people want to build businesses, they need to do it through their own hard work, not through government handouts. If the government sets up a program to give out loans so people can rebuild or start businesses, then that would be fine. I have a big problem, however, with the government doling out money simply because someone is a minority or poor. Shouldn't all Americans touched by this disaster be given the same level of help, regardless of their station in life? I think so.

The American Dream isn't one of the government bailing people out. It is about Americans working as hard as they can to build up their businesses, to get ahead in life, to have what they need. By continuing the abhorent tradition of the welfare state, the government will not be doing the poor people of the region any favors. This is the chance for those who have always relied on the government to learn how much better life can be. It is a time for children who have grown up with rotten schools and welfare parents to learn in good schools and have working parents. People who want to own homes need to work hard to do so. The government shouldn't just hand houses out. There are people all over the country who have worked hard for years and still don't own their own homes. Most people have mortgages and work hard to pay them off. It wouldn't be very equitable for the government to just give some people houses. Perhaps all home mortgages in the United States should be forgiven at the same time people are given houses through Hurricane relief.

To help lower-income citizens in the hurricane region build new and better lives, I also propose that Congress pass an Urban Homesteading Act. Under this approach, we will identify property in the region owned by the federal government, and provide building sites to low-income citizens free of charge, through a lottery. In return, they would pledge to build on the lot, with either a mortgage or help from a charitable organization like Habitat for Humanity. Home ownership is one of the great strengths of any community, and it must be a central part of our vision for the revival of this region.

And if the government is going to give away government land, then it had better do so all over the country. That's just wrong. The federal government has already poured so much money into hurricane relief, and will continue to do so, and American citizens have done the same. Where are we going to draw the line? Are we just going to give every person (of a certain income/race) a new home, a federal job, and buckets of money?

That isn't how America should work. I believe Americans should help those who are in need, but the government should not be in the business of fixing lives. The American Red Cross does an excellent job in that aspect and the American people are providing bountiful donations. The people hurt by the hurricane must reclaim their own lives and futures---the government can't do it for them and it shouldn't try.

It is not the government's job to right wrongs in people's lives or in history. By providing homes, land, money, etc., the government is ensuring a continued welfare state. Shouldn't we instead be offering job training, loans, and encouragement? Shouldn't we offer hope instead of the depressing squalor of being reliant on the government?

Americans have never left our destiny to the whims of nature – and we will not start now.

That was true before the introduction of the welfare state. Now a significant portion of the US population prefers others to do all the work while they sit around and suck the rest of us dry. If we want to reclaim that American characteristic, now is the time to begin.

Now, there were parts I liked in the speech. Unfortunately, for me they were drowned out the pandering to Liberals.

The end was excellent and I wish the entire thing had been in this vein:

I know that when you sit on the steps of a porch where a home once stood … or sleep on a cot in a crowded shelter … it is hard to imagine a bright future. But that future will come. The streets of Biloxi and Gulfport will again be filled with lovely homes and the sound of children playing. The churches of Alabama will have their broken steeples mended and their congregations whole. And here in New Orleans, the street cars will once again rumble down St. Charles, and the passionate soul of a great city will return.

In this place, there is a custom for the funerals of jazz musicians. The funeral procession parades slowly through the streets, followed by a band playing a mournful dirge as it moves to the cemetery. Once the casket has been laid in place, the band breaks into a joyful “second line” – symbolizing the triumph of the spirit over death. Tonight the Gulf Coast is still coming through the dirge – yet we will live to see the second line.

Thank you, and may God bless America.

This can happen, but only if people decide to reclaim their lives, their cities, and their self-respect. After the waters have drained away and the mess is cleaned up, I hope we see people begin to set up their own stores and restuarants, build their own homes, and rebuild their cities. I pray that they will.

So, if you want to help, please donate to the relief effort. You can read more about different charities here.

"The oath is to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States."

I was listening to Rush this morning and he pointed out this exchange that took place between Dick Durbin and Judge John Roberts during the hearings today. I found the transcript at CNN.com.

It is Rush's contention that John Roberts' answer to Durbin's question basically obliterates the usual liberal belief about the judiciary.

Here is the exchange:

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D), ILLINOIS: Well, if I might say, Judge, if you've made one point many times over during the course of the last three days, it's that as a judge you will be loyal and faithful to the process of law, to the rule of law.

I think that is without question from what you've said. I accept that on its face.

But the questions which we continue to ask you really try to go beyond that. Because I said at the outset that I thought one of the real measures as to whether or not you should be on the Supreme Court goes back to a point Senator Simon had made: Would you restrict freedom in America or would you expand it?

DURBIN: When you are defending gays and lesbians who are being restricted in their rights by the Colorado amendment, you are trying, from my point of view, to expand freedom in America. That, to me, is a positive thing. That's my personal philosophy and point of view.

But then when you say, "If the state would have walked in the door first to restrict freedoms, I would have taken them as a client too," I wonder, where are you?

Beyond loyalty to the process of law, how do you view this law when it comes to expanding our personal freedom? Is it important enough for you to say in some instances, "I will not use my skills as a lawyer because I don't believe that that is a cause that is consistent with my values and belief"?

That's what I've been asking.

ROBERTS: I had someone ask me in this process -- I don't remember who it was, but somebody asked me, you know, "Are you going to be on the side of the little guy?"

And you obviously want to give an immediate answer, but, as you reflect on it, if the Constitution says that the little guy should win, the little guy's going to win in court before me. But if the Constitution says that the big guy should win, well, then the big guy's going to win, because my obligation is to the Constitution. That's the oath.

The oath that a judge takes is not that, "I'll look out for particular interests, I'll be on the side of particular interests." The oath is to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States. And that's what I would do.

DURBIN: Would you at least concede that you would take into consideration that in our system of justice the race goes to the swift, and the swift are those with the resources, the money, the lawyers, the power in the system? And that many times the powerless, the person who has struggled and clawed their way to your courtroom, went through a wall of adversity which the power never had to face? Is that part of your calculation?

ROBERTS: Absolutely. And it's, again, what's carved above the doors to the Supreme Court: "Equal justice under law." And the judicial oath talks about doing justice without regard to persons, to rich and to poor. And that, of course, is critically important. You do have to appreciate that there are going to be interests who, for one reason or another, don't have the same resources as people on the other side.

The idea is not to give the case to the side with the best resources, the side with the best lawyers, the side with the most opportunity to prepare it and present it. It is to decide the case according to the law and according to the Constitution.

And as case after case in the Supreme Court shows, that's often the prisoner who's sitting in his cell and writes his petition out longhand.

ROBERTS: Sometimes the Constitution is on that person's side and not on the side of the corporation with the fancy printed brief.

But the judge's obligation is to appreciate that the rule of law requires that both of those be treated equally under the law.

DURBIN: Judge Roberts, thank you very much.

Roberts gave excellent answers. The law should see all parties in a suit as equals, regardless. The case should be judged based on the dictates of the Constitution and the laws of the United States, not on other circumstances.

Judge Roberts appointment to the Supreme Court will be huge.

I Pledge Allegiance . . .

My father sent me an e-mail containing a link to a recording of the famous old comedian, Red Skelton.

It is a recording from one of Red's shows, made in 1969. You can read a little more about it here.

In the recording, Red talks about the Pledge of Allegiance. He explains what each word stands for.

You can hear the recording here. Listen to the whole thing and follow along with the words on the screen. At the end, Red asks an important question about the Pledge of Allegiance. It is especially relevant now, when activist judges are ruling that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional.

To read the history of the Pledge of Allegiance, please visit here.

And also ask yourself, why are these words (merely words) so offensive to the Left? I would say it is because the Left truly hates everything America stands and everything America stands for is so wonderfully described in the Pledge. They prefer terms like diversity and tolerance and equity and social justice and other PC words. They don't like the idea of pledging allegiance to America because they believe America is bad and evil.

I prefer the Pledge of Allegiance:

I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation under God, indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all.

Please take a moment to visit PatriotDrive.org and Pledge your Allegiance.

A Special Story

AP: WWII Soldier's Last Letter Makes It Home---

POOLE, Neb. - It took more than 60 years, but the final letter of a soldier killed in World War II finally made it home.

Gary Mathis bought a box of old newspapers at a yard sale in Kansas, and discovered the letter inside a newspaper from 1915. The letter's envelope has military post office markings dated March 6, 1944.

It was addressed to W.J. Krotz of nearby Poole, about 120 miles west of Lincoln.

Mathis placed an announcement and picture of the letter in the Ravenna News, hoping someone might know the family.

Louise Kisling said she heard about her brother's letter through word of mouth. Clinton Krotz, an infantry soldier in Italy during the war, was killed in action on May 8, 1944. The letter was the last one he sent home.

In the letter, her brother thanked his parents for a wristwatch they had sent as a birthday gift, as well as some candy and nuts.

Kisling said her only disappointment was that her parents never got the chance to see the letter. An envelope within the letter was postmarked by the Poole post office, Kisling said. She was not sure how it ended up in Kansas.

Mystery aside, Kisling is grateful.

"We sure appreciate the man that saved it," she said. "It's amazing a letter can come back after all these years."

Long Time Coming

They ought to have done this long ago. Then, perhaps, we wouldn't have had all these scandals in the past few years.

Reuters: Catholic probe to look at gays in seminaries: NY Times---

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Catholic Church investigators tasked by the Vatican to review U.S. seminaries will be looking for "evidence of homosexuality" and for professors who dissent from Church teaching, the New York Times reported on Thursday.

The newspaper said a Vatican document prepared to guide the process and given to The New York Times by a priest, surfaces as Catholics await a Vatican ruling on whether homosexuals should be barred from the priesthood.

American seminaries are under review as a result of the sexual abuse scandal that swept the priesthood in 2002, the year the probe which is now starting was announced.

In a possible hint of the ruling's contents, the American archbishop supervising the seminary review said "anyone who has engaged in homosexual activity or has strong homosexual inclinations," should not be admitted to a seminary.

The Times said Edwin O'Brien, archbishop for the United States military who is supervising the seminary review, told The National Catholic Register that the restriction should apply even to those who have not been sexually active for a decade or more.

O'Brien was once the rector of the North American College, a seminary for Americans studying in Rome and has familiarity with both the Vatican and the U.S. Church.

The issue has been in the spotlight because a study commissioned by the Church found last year that about 80 percent of the young people victimized by priests were boys.

The seminary review, called an apostolic visitation, will send teams of American Church officials to the 229 seminaries, which have more than 4,500 students.

At each seminary, the visitors will conduct confidential interviews with faculty members and seminarians, plus everyone who graduated in the last three years, the Times said.

A document with instructions for the review is being distributed to seminarians and faculty members. It asks whether the doctrine on the priesthood presented by the seminary is "solidly based on the church's Magisterium," or teaching, and whether teachers and seminarians "accept this teaching."

I highly recommend this book, Goodbye, Good Men : How Liberals Brought Corruption Into the Catholic Church, by Michael S. Rose. It came out in 2002.

Here is the description from Amazon.com:

Goodbye, Good Men provides the real story behind the sex scandal currently rocking the Catholic church. Investigative reporter Michael Rose has conducted countless interviews and exhaustive research to uncover several out-of-control seminaries as the root cause of the scandal. While most pundits and critics are calling for liberalization of the Church in the wake of these scandals, Rose presents compelling evidence that liberal influence is the very cause of the crisis. The revelations in Goodbye, Good Men will shock the nation and ignite a firestorm of debate on the subject.

Making Liberals Mad (Wait, they already are)

AP: Roberts Heads Toward Likely Confirmation---

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee John Roberts carefully picked his way through a second day of questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday as Republicans challenged Democrats to support his all-but-certain confirmation as the nation's 17th chief justice.

"If people can't vote for you, then I doubt that they can vote for any Republican nominee," said Sen. Orrin Hatch (news, bio, voting record), R-Utah.

Minority Democrats sounded unswayed.

Sen. Charles Schumer told Roberts he was "cutting back a little on what you said yesterday," referring to an earlier statement that the Constitution provides a right to privacy.

The New York Democrat made his charge after Roberts declined to cite any examples of disagreement with the opinions of Justice Clarence Thomas on the subject. Thomas has written there is no general right to privacy, a right often viewed as the underpinning of a right to abortion.

"We are rolling the dice with you," Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., told the 50-year-old appeals court judge, who turned aside questions about abortion, the right to die, the permissibility of torture and other issues he said may come before the court.

Too bad, Joe! The last thing this country needs is another activist judge like the kind you would prefer.

GOP officials say they are confident of the support of all 10 Republican members of the panel when the committee roll is called on Thursday next week, although it is possible all eight Democrats will oppose him. The full Senate may vote the following week, in time for Roberts to take his seat before the high court opens a new term on Oct. 3.

Officials in both parties say Roberts is likely to receive votes from several Democrats when his nomination reaches the full Senate. Among them are senators who represent Republican-leaning states or those who joined in a bipartisan compromise earlier this year to defuse a threatened showdown over the administration's conservative appeals court judges.

Good to hear. This vote should have been done and over with long ago.

Later, Specter told reporters Roberts had "answered more questions than most."

"Nominees answer about as many questions as they think they have to to be confirmed," added the Pennsylvania Republican. "I think it may well be, and it's too soon to say with certainty, that Judge Roberts has gone beyond."

Schumer disagreed. He told Roberts he had turned the hearing room into a "cone of silence."

Feinstein voiced a different concern.

"I guess what has begun to concern me a little bit is Judge Roberts, the legal automaton, as opposed to Judge Roberts, the man," she said as she tried without success to elicit his views on end-of-life issues.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said Roberts, a steel executive's son who attended a private boarding school in Indiana and later graduated from Harvard, lived a comfortable life, and he questioned whether he could deal with cases involving society's less fortunate.

"I had a middle-class upbringing in Indiana," Roberts said. "I worked in the steel mills outside of Gary" during the summers. "Comfortable, yes, but isolated in no sense."

So, Schumer, are you saying no one outside the room could hear what Judge Roberts was saying? I've seen Get Smart too. Are you sure you applied the term properly?

And as for Feinstein, what has begun to concern me is how easily Liberals throw out tradition. It is very hard to get Liberals to have any completely solid beliefs. They change with the way the wind blows.

As for Durbin, does it ultimately matter how Judge Roberts grew up? Should we question how Dick Durbin grew up? According to his website's biography, he attended Assumption High School, which I assume to be a Catholic high school, which means his parents probably paid tuition, and received two degrees from the expensive Georgetown University. Not a bad upbring, huh, Durbin?

"I stand by that comment.

Excellent post at Southern Appeal about who President Bush should pick to fill the vacant Supreme Court seat.

More on the Crescent

On 10 September, Michelle Malkin posted about the design of the memorial for the victims of Flight 93.

Basically, it includes a huge crescent, the symbol of the religion practiced by the evil terrorists who murdered the passengers and crew of Flight 93.

You can read Michelle's latest column about it here.

You can contact the Secretary of the Interior here:

The next step for those wishing to object to the memorial design--partially funded with your tax dollars, and wholly belonging to all of us--is to contact Interior Department Secretary Gale Norton, who along with Congress, has final approval authority over the design.

Her e-mail address is gale_norton@ios.doi.gov.

Her phone: 202 208-7351.

Her mailing address: Department of Interior 1849 C St, NW, Washington DC 20240.

Today Michelle posted that the memorial for Flight 93 will be redesigned. You can read about it here. Michelle has a ton more information, so visit her posts to read the whole story.

Even though the memorial is to be redesigned, we need to keep pressure on those in charge. It is outrageous that people even attempt to get away with PC agendas when it comes to remembering 9/11. The terrorists who murdered 3,000 people on that day don't care whether someone is Politically Correct or not.

Boycott Target, Shop Walmart

Last year, in the months right before Christmas, Target Stores decided not to allow the Salvation Army to put its usual donation kettles outside Target Stores during the Christmas season.

Target has declared it will not reconsider and I am declaring I will not reconsider my decision not to shop at Target. I haven't bought anything at Target in a year.

Indiana Post-Tribune: Target keeps no-kettle policy---

Target Corp. will not reconsider allowing the Salvation Army back at its stores even though the national charity is working overtime to provide relief to victims of Hurricane Katrina.

Maj. George Hood, secretary of the Salvation Army’s national community relations office, said he hasn’t heard from Target about the no-kettle policy since the hurricane struck.

With the upcoming holiday season, some at the Salvation Army thought Target might rethink its new no-solicitation policy that put the traditional bell-ringers and holiday cash-collecting kettles off Target properties.

“We would be thrilled ... especially in light of this disaster,” Hood said.

But there has been no contact between the two groups about the policy, altered in 2004, Hood said.

Target is not changing its no-solicitation policy, which allows shoppers a distraction-free environment, according to Paula Thornton-Greear, spokeswoman for the Minneapolis-based chain.

“We don’t permit solicitation by any organization,” she said.

Thornton-Greear said Target is partnering with the American Red Cross to help victims of Katrina.

“In addition to ($1.5 million to the Red Cross), Target has provided real estate to support recovery efforts by relief agencies,” Thornton-Greear said. “Target has also coordinated large-scale donations of essential products, including water, ice, coolers, diapers and baby wipes.”

The company also takes applications to its charitable foundation, she said.

Last year, the Salvation Army expressed disappointment after losing holiday spots at 1,300 Target locations.

Salvation Army officials said they raised $250,000 from kettles at Indiana Target locations in 2003, and Chicago-area Target store kettles raised $442,000 the same year.

Hood said Target’s competitor Wal-Mart and its Walton family founders have stepped in with major financial contributions during the Katrina relief effort.

“Wal-Mart has been our strongest corporate sponsor,” Hood said.

“The Walton family has given us $4 million ... (Wal-Mart officials) said 'Whatever you need, call us first.’”

(Curtsy to K-Lo at The Corner)

Oh, goody

We had some earthquakes about 4 summers ago. We don't usually have things like this up here.

LiveScience: Slow Seismic Slip Event Underway in Pacific Northwest---

An important seismic event imperceptible to humans has begun in the Pacific Northwest as predicted, according to the government agency Geological Survey of Canada.

The chance of a major earthquake is 30 times higher now for a roughly two-week period, but the odds are still remote, scientists say.

The event is called episodic tremor and slip (ETS). It involves a slow movement of the Juan de Fuca and North America tectonic plates along the Cascadia margin of southern British Columbia. Faults associated with the plates have been the sites of major earthquakes -- akin to the colossal tsumani-causing quake last December in Indonesia -- every 500 years or so, the geologic record shows. The last such temblor in the area struck on Jan. 26 in the year 1700.

Slow creep

The movement is slower than a traditional earthquake but more rapid than the normal creep associated with the fault. It runs in the reverse direction of the normal creep.

The movement was predicted. Scientists recently learned that these ETS events recur about every 14 months. It has been detected by Global Positioning System instruments.
---
The slip began Sept. 3 on the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State and has migrated north to the Vancouver Island area, Cassidy wrote. Victoria moved 0.12 inches (3 millimeters) to the West over the course of two days. The events are thought to last six to 15 days.

Cassidy's colleague, Stephane Mazzotti, has done some calculations on the odds of a large temblor.

"The probability of occurrence of a megathrust earthquake is about 30 times higher during this approximately two-week window, than during the rest of the 14.5 month cycle," Cassidy told LiveScience. "Having said that, 30 times a small number is still a small number."

Geologists simply don't know when one of these events will trigger a major quake, Cassidy said.

The immediate importance of the event is that it occurred as predicted and can now be used to improve understanding of the region's seismology.

"By better understanding these events, we will be able to better predict the effects (and perhaps timing) of future magnitude 9 earthquakes along the West Coast," Cassidy and his colleague write.

(Curtsy to Drudge)

The FBI Investigating?

Yesterday, I wrote a post about William Jefferson, D-LA, using the National Guard to go back to his home in New Orleans, while people were still trapped.

Today, I was listening to Rush talk about the story.

Apparently Jefferson is under FBI investigation.

Rush has a link to this story from the NO Times-Picayune.

Mike Fawer said the Aug. 3 raids on Jefferson's Washington and New Orleans homes, his office and his car have all the markings of an undercover sting operation.

The FBI has declined to comment on the investigation and so far has refused to supply Jefferson with the affidavits that supported the search warrants, which would shed light on what investigators are pursuing.

A source who has seen the warrants told The Times-Picayune that the government is seeking information about possible African business dealings, a company that lists Jefferson's wife as a director, and connections between Jefferson and a small technology company, iGate Inc., in Louisville, Ky. The Washington Post has reported that a sting had been in the works for a year and that the FBI raid found a large amount of cash in Jefferson's freezer.

Rush also includes links to other articles.