Selected News For Week Mar 8 - Mar 14

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Saturday, March 8th, 2008 at 12:01 am. You can leave a response.

71 Responses to “Selected News For Week Mar 8 - Mar 14”

1. Professor_Repulso
   March 8th, 2008 at 5:25 pm

   Ray Nagin is at it again:

   “So, I stand before you, a vagina-friendly Mayor. I am in!”

   http://www.thenew995fm.com/cc-.....le=3378880

2. texaspsue
   March 8th, 2008 at 6:11 pm

   Women press for more rights on International Women’s Day - Pictures

   http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7285141.stm

   While there is folly in NO, Women around the World fight for their basic rights and freedoms. Odd, why doesn’t (not)NOW, and other Lib women’s groups put their energy into helping these Women in their quest? (Laura Bush/Conservative Women are the only people that I have seen lately that have emphasized the plight and struggle for real Women’s rights around the World.)

3. BillK
   March 9th, 2008 at 3:01 am

   Awww, poor Ahnold.

   From the Los Angeles Times;

   Opposition to Calif. tailpipe limits comes from surprising corner

   Schwarzenegger’s effort to help fight global warming may be undone by the state’s own congressional Republicans.

   By Richard Simon

   WASHINGTON — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants California to implement its own vehicle emission standards to fight global warming. At first glance, Congress might seem a likely ally in his efforts to overturn the Bush administration’s refusal to let the state do so.

   After all, global warming is at the top of the agenda in Washington. The three remaining major presidential candidates back California’s efforts. And the state’s congressional delegation is the largest.

   But legislation to clear the way may fail for a reason that is close to home for Schwarzenegger — his fellow California Republicans.

   Most GOP members of the state’s congressional delegation are siding with the Bush administration in trying to keep states from imposing stricter regulations on greenhouse gas emissions than the federal government. Without bipartisan support from the state’s representatives, the bill’s proponents say, the measure’s prospects are dim.

   “I don’t support California thinking that it can act alone effectively,” said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista), noting that climate change is a problem that extends beyond state lines.

   A House bill to allow California and other states to implement their own tailpipe regulations was introduced last week, with the support of 27 of the 33 California Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco. Only two of the 19 Republicans — Rep. David Dreier of San Dimas, who is perhaps Schwarzenegger’s closest ally in the delegation, and Rep. Mary Bono Mack of Palm Springs — signed on as cosponsors.

   A similar Senate bill has 23 sponsors, including California Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, both Democrats.

   Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks), who with Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) is a chief sponsor of the House bill, said that support from the state’s GOP lawmakers would improve its chances. “If we had a majority of California Republicans behind this bill, it would put real pressure on the White House not to veto it. And it would give us a real push in the Senate,” he said.

   It’s not entirely unexpected to find the state’s famously fractured delegation split over a controversial issue. It’s been a year since California’s Democrats and Republicans met together. In contrast, the Texas delegation meets monthly.

   And it is often difficult to forge a consensus in the delegation, especially in a partisan election-year climate. “We have a very big and very diverse state, and we’re not always going to agree on things,” said Rep. John Campbell (R- Irvine), who opposes the bill.

   The GOP opposition is somewhat surprising because the legislation would pave the way for a law that enjoys widespread support in California. A poll conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California last year found that most Democratic and Republican voters were in favor of it.

   Republicans also typically support the rights of states to set their own policies. But Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield), echoing a comment made by other California Republicans, argued that greenhouse gas emissions require a national or international solution. Added Rep. George Radanovich (R-Mariposa): “I think we’ve got to be all in this together as a country rather than Balkanizing it.”

   Schwarzenegger spokesman Bill Maile said the governor supports the legislation. By allowing California to implement “the nation’s toughest tailpipe regulations,” he said, “it will help us achieve our aggressive goals to reduce greenhouse gases.” But a number of California Republicans in Congress say that they have yet to hear from Schwarzenegger or his office. …

   http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....5814.story

   Where to begin?

   The usual talking points here:

   • Why are California Republicans fighting Ahnold (perhaps because Ahnold long ago threw away any Republican values he may have once held?)

   • If only they met, consensus would be reached between parties. (Also known as Republicans capitulate.)

   • If Ahnold and all three Presidential candidates agree on something, why are the Republicans being obstructionists? (Because McCain is no more a Republican than Ahnold, Hillary or Obama are?)

   Bottom line let’s hear it for some Congressional Republicans who, at least for the moment, still remember what being a Republican is supposed to be all about.

   As well as that if the Los Angeles Times is complaining about them, they must be doing something right

4. BillK
   March 9th, 2008 at 3:09 am

   It’s a pity that fighting for what’s right for the country like this will come to a screeching halt in January, 2009.

   From the Los Angeles Times:

   Bush vetoes bill to ban waterboarding

   He calls tough interrogation methods ‘valuable tools’ in fighting terrorists. Democrats likely do not have enough votes to override the president’s rare veto.

   By Richard A. Serrano

   WASHINGTON — President Bush on Saturday blocked an effort by congressional Democrats to limit interrogation measures used in the fight against terrorism by vetoing an intelligence authorization bill that would have outlawed waterboarding and other harsh methods.

   A rare veto in the last year of his two-term presidency, Bush’s action was as much a rebuke of Democrats on Capitol Hill as it was a bid to maintain the strong presidential authority to wage war on foreign terrorists that he has asserted since the Sept. 11 attacks.

   “Al Qaeda remains determined to attack America again,” Bush said, calling tough interrogation methods “one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror.” He added that forcing prisoners to talk was critical, saying “the best source of information about terrorist attacks is the terrorists themselves.”

   But Democrats and civil liberties groups have argued that techniques such as waterboarding are torture and that the United States should not resort to such inhumane tactics. Even the FBI, which has dispatched agents to the terrorist prison at the U.S. Naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and sites in the Middle East, has suggested that torture is not needed to make captives cooperate.

   Yet Bush critics acknowledge that Democrats probably do not have the votes to override the veto and push ahead with legislation to limit CIA interrogators to the techniques in the Army Field Manual on Interrogation, which prohibits physical force.

   “Torture is a black mark against the United States,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who cosponsored the legislation. “It drives a wedge between us and our allies, making the war on terror harder to fight. And it makes it more likely our own troops will be abused by future captors.”

   In the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) said: “The world must know that America does not torture.” She cited statements from several dozen current and former U.S. military officials decrying harsh tactics, including Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commanding general in Iraq. Petraeus, in a letter last May, said that techniques in the Army manual “work effectively and humanely in eliciting information from detainees.” …

   http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....7504.story

   The issue is that while waterboarding certainly isn’t pleasant, it’s not torture, either.

   Of course in an era when keeping prison cells a few degrees too cool is defined as torture, it’s not surprising to see the Democrat whining (not to mention, recently, the condemnation of the allegedly conservative comic strip “Prickly City.”)

   Another article on the subject by the AP’s Deb Reichmann, gives details::

   In a memo to CIA employees Saturday, CIA Director Michael Hayden said the Army Field Manual does not “exhaust the universe” of lawful interrogation techniques. “There are methods in the CIA’s program that have been briefed to our oversight committees, are fully consistent with the Geneva Convention and current U.S. law and are most certainly not torture,” Hayden wrote.

   Sen. Jay Rockefeller, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he had heard nothing to suggest that the CIA, through enhanced interrogation methods, had obtained information to thwart a terrorist attack. “On the other hand, I do know that coercive interrogations can lead detainees to provide false information in order to make the interrogation stop,” said Rockefeller, D-W.Va.

   There also are concerns that the use of waterboarding would undermine U.S. human rights efforts overseas and could place Americans at greater risk of being tortured if they are captured abroad.

   “The president’s refusal to sign this crucial legislation into law will undermine counterterrorism efforts globally and delay efforts to rebuild U.S. credibility on human rights,” said Elisa Massimino, Washington director for Human Rights First.

   Bush objected to two other provisions:

   • A new independent inspector general for the government’s intelligence agencies to improve coordination and information-sharing. Bush said the position was unnecessary.

   • Senate confirmation of the directors of the National Security Agency and National Reconnaissance Office. Bush said that could delay the directors’ ability to take over quickly and risk injecting politics into the selection process.

   http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....9470.story

   Jay Rockefeller, of course, wouldn’t know an effective interrogation technique if it bit him on the butt. But that’s right, we’re just supposed to ask nicely, and if they don’t want to tell us anything, well, that;s OK too.

   Meanwhile, I’d like to ask Ms. Massimino how much worse Americans can be treated by our enemies than being summarily beheaded, dragged through the streets, being hung from bridges, etc.

5. BillK
   March 9th, 2008 at 3:19 am

   More bad news for Republicans, though it’s not the harbinger of doom the DNC, er, AP wishes it was:

   Dem. Wins Election to Fill Hastert Seat

   By Deanna Bellandi

   CHICAGO (AP) — A longtime Republican district fell to the Democrats Saturday when a scientist snatched former House Speaker Dennis Hastert’s congressional seat in a closely watched special election.

   Democrat Bill Foster won 52 percent of the vote compared to 48 percent for Republican Jim Oberweis. With 558 of 568 precincts reporting, Foster had 50,451 votes to Oberweis’ 45,741.

   Foster’s special election win means he will fill the remainder of Hastert’s term, which ends in January. The two will square off again in November, for a new, full term.

   The 66-year-old Hastert, who lost his powerful post as speaker when Democrats took control of Congress, resigned late last year.
   The race between Foster and Oberweis spawned a contentious campaign that saw both men turn to high-profile supporters to help sway voters in the longtime GOP district.

   Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama made a TV ad praising Foster; Oberweis had fundraising help from the apparent Republican nominee, John McCain, and Hastert’s backing.

   “It is a stunning rejection of the Bush Administration, its Republican allies, and presidential nominee John McCain,” said Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen in a statement.

   The district will have a rookie congressmen after years of enjoying Hastert’s clout. …

   http://ap.google.com/article/A.....wD8V9LA780

   The usual rhetoric surfaced in the campaign:

   During a recent TV appearance, Foster said he would be a “good vote in Congress to change President Bush’s policy” on Iraq. Oberweis contended the troop surge there was working, saying: “Things are getting better in Iraq.”

   Oberweis also has blasted Foster for being a proponent of big government because Foster says he wants to move toward universal health care. Foster claims Oberweis’ approach — he favors tax incentives to help people buy their own insurance — only works for people who are “healthy and wealthy.”

   Sigh.

6. BillK
   March 9th, 2008 at 3:26 am

   Why just belittle the War on Terror in the Mideast?

   From the Los Angeles Times:

   U.S. role in Philippine raid questioned

   A Philippine general says American intelligence guided his troops in a hunt for militants, but eight villagers were slain.

   By Paul Watson

   PIL, PHILIPPINES — In a hut on stilts with paper-thin walls of bamboo strips, an off-duty Philippine soldier was asleep alongside four members of his family when the crackle of assault rifle fire and shudder of grenade blasts awakened them early last month.

   Within minutes, Cpl. Ibnun Wahid, 35, was dead, along with seven other villagers, including two children, age 4 and 9, two teenagers and two women, one of them pregnant. All were shot at close range, witnesses said in interviews and sworn affidavits gathered by the provincial governor’s staff to support expected criminal charges.

   Like many on Sulu island, provincial Gov. Abdusakur Tan believes the dead were victims of coldblooded killings by government troops. The independent Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines has called for charges to be filed against troops and officers involved in gathering intelligence for and planning the operation, as well those directly responsible for the deaths.

   Gen. Ruben Rafael, commander of Philippine troops on the island, also known as Jolo, said in an interview that a U.S. military spy plane circling high above this seaside village provided the intelligence that led to the Feb. 4 assault. He said the crew of the P-3 Orion turboprop, loaded with a sophisticated array of surveillance equipment, pinpointed the village as a stronghold and arms depot for the radical Islamist Abu Sayyaf movement. Government soldiers were ambushed in the area in August, Rafael said.

   “The intelligence was very excellent because they have identified the houses, the men with the guns and all the armed men who were occupying these houses,” the general said. Rafael said the U.S. military also warned his troops during a firefight that dozens of militants were approaching to counterattack — information he said was also gathered from the spy plane.

   “Because of that, we had to fly our choppers and they were able to prevent these people from reinforcing” insurgents already in the village, the general said. “So that was very crucial support given to us by the U.S.”

   Maj. Eric Walker, commander of U.S. forces on the island, declined an interview request, and the U.S. military spokesman for the region referred questions to the U.S. Embassy in Manila. …

   http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....6498.story

   Blah blah, U.S. evil, innocent villagers, etc.:

   Under the Philippine Constitution, the hundreds of U.S. military advisors in the southern Philippines are not allowed to engage in combat while helping train local forces in the hunt for militants with Abu Sayyaf and the Indonesia-based Jemaah Islamiah.Both groups are allied with Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda network.

   The guerrilla force that Rafael said the Orion spotted would have been unusually large for Sulu. No insurgents were captured, wounded or killed approaching the village, according to the military’s accounts. A small arms cache, including a .45-caliber handgun, an M-16 assault rifle and some rifle grenades were seized in the raid, Rafael said.

   Two soldiers were killed and five wounded in the Ipil operation, statistics the army cites as proof of a battle with militants. Villagers contend that the soldiers were killed in their own crossfire. Commission investigators found that was a possibility, but suggested Wahid may have opened fire on the troops as they swarmed around his house.

   The Philippine military said an internal investigation had cleared its troops of any wrongdoing, which many here see as a whitewash.

   While condemning the findings, attorney Jose Manuel Mamauag, regional director of the Commission on Human Rights, said he was glad the military had issued its conclusions, allowing the commission to take the next step.

   “Definitely, we will file charges against the soldiers,” Mamauag said.

   The left has trained their counterparts well.

7. BillK
   March 9th, 2008 at 4:26 am

   From the Hollywood Reporter:

   Disney steers clear of ‘Path to 9/11′

   By Paul Bond

   Top brass at Disney were called on Thursday to defend their decision not to release “The Path to 9/11″ on DVD and to justify CEO Robert Iger’s $27.7 million pay package.

   “Path” was a 2006 ABC miniseries critical of President Bill Clinton’s handling of terrorist threats that was so controversial it prompted leading Democrats to ask Disney not to air the program. Disney, after making some hasty edits, ran it commercial-free.

   At Disney’s annual shareholders’ meeting in Albuquerque, N.M., one mutual fund portfolio manager said it was high time Disney turn “Path” into a DVD and recoup some of the $40 million it spent on the project.

   The fund manager, Tom Borelli, accused Iger of protecting Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign at the expense of shareholders and pointed out that Iger has been a steady Clinton donor since before the former first lady was elected to the Senate.

   He claimed to have a letter from a Lionsgate representative proving that Disney has no intention of even selling the DVD rights to another company. …

   http://www.hollywoodreporter.c.....1a7bda193e

   Now for the laughable answer:

   The fund manager noted Disney’s reported $46 million profit on “Fahrenheit 9/11,” also a politically controversial project — though far more critical of Republicans than Democrats.

   Seemingly taken-aback, Iger assured the shareholder that his decision on the DVD was based purely on business considerations and not on politics.

   Contacted after the meeting, Lionsgate insiders said that there is no serious interest in acquiring the DVD rights to “Path.”

   It’s not the first time advocates have claimed that Disney’s refusal to distribute a DVD of “Path” is motivated by politics. “Path” screenwriter Cyrus Nowrasteh has told reporters that a top executive at ABC Studios confided that “if Hillary weren’t running for president, this wouldn’t be a problem.”

   The obvious question, of course, is how Disney can say with a straight face it’s for business reasons when they have never even offered the title for presale, a common tactic used in the home video market to judge business potential for a title. DVD titles are offered for presale for release on a certain date, only to be cancelled as the date nears if demand is lower than expected.

   Meanwhile Disney continues on other PC tactics:

   As has become customary at these events, yet another shareholder pleaded for Disney to release on DVD “Song of the South,” the animated family film that is decidedly politically incorrect by today’s standards. “We continue to discuss and debate it,” Iger said diplomatically.

   I’m sure they do, and further wish they could have any memory of the film surgically removed from people’s minds.

   This despite the fact that they have no issue using the cartoon characters from the film in the theming for the “Splash Mountain” rides located at Disneyland and Walt Disney World.

   Yep, “just business.” Riiiight.

8. BillK
   March 9th, 2008 at 4:44 am

   It was inevitable, from Denver’s KMGH TV:

   Lawyers Argue Baby Killed After Crash ‘Not Real Person’

   Lage Facing First-Degree Murder Charge For Infant’s Death

   GRAND JUNCTION, Colo. — The attorney for a Grand Junction man accused of first-degree murder said some charges against him should be dropped because the victim was not a real person.

   Logan Lage, 24, faces multiple charges in connection with a head-on crash Nov. 6. Authorities say he was fleeing from the Colorado State Patrol when he slammed into a vehicle driven by 26-year-old Shea Lehnen.

   Lehnen was 8 1/2 months pregnant. Doctors performed a Caesarean section, delivering a girl, but the child died of asphyxia a few hours later. The coroner ruled the death a homicide.

   Public defender Will McNulty said the baby, named Lileigh, was neither a “person” nor a “child” when the crash occurred. Prosecutors disagree.

   Lage’s preliminary hearing is set for March 21. He faces 15 charges, including first-degree murder with extreme indifference, child abuse causing death and first-degree assault with extreme indifference.

   Lehnen and her 1-year-old son, who was strapped in a car seat, also received injuries in the crash. Lehnen was rushed to St. Mary’s Hospital, where an emergency Caesarean section was performed.

   Deputy Coroner Dr. Robert Kurtzman said injuries suffered in the crash by the baby’s mother damaged the placenta, compromising blood flow to the baby, ruling the baby’s death a homicide. …

   http://www.thedenverchannel.co.....etail.html

   Seriously, I’m surprised this hasn’t come up more often.

9. BillK
   March 9th, 2008 at 4:51 am

   Gee, what a shock, it’s just another useless Government program?

   From Denver’s KMGH TV:

   Officials Question Value Of Daylight Saving Time

   Report Says Changing The Clock Doesn’t Save Energy

   FORT COLLINS, Colo. — It not only costs most people an hour of sleep, now officials and researchers are questioning the value of daylight saving time.

   Daylight saving time starts on Sunday at 2 a.m. Remember to set your clocks one hour ahead tonight.

   The concept was first put forward by Benjamin Franklin, as a satire, during a visit to Paris. He wrote that fewer candles would be used if people got up earlier and went to bed earlier.

   The city’s engineer for energy services says moving the clock forward, even starting the shift earlier, seems to merely shift energy use to different times.

   “At the end, all I could say was that we were shifting it around,” John Phelan told The Coloradoan. Studies were “very inconclusive.”

   A study by the University of California-Santa Barbara, found that daylight saving increases energy use. It was based on a study of households in Indiana. An earlier study of energy in Australia came to similar conclusions. …

   http://www.thedenverchannel.co.....etail.html

   Especially in today’s 24-hour society, Daylight Savings Time just means energy usage is shifted from the evening to the morning. No shock there, and it’s not a matter of accommodating time farmers need in the fields any longer.

   Instead it means more lights on because you and the kids have to get ready for work and school before dawn.

   That makes sense.

10. BillK
    March 9th, 2008 at 4:57 am

    From Denver’s KMGH Television:

    Town To Send Recruiters To The Tropics

    City Needs Workers, Many Come From Australia

    VAIL, Colo. — The town of Vail is experiencing problems getting visas for workers much like small businesses in the area.

    The Vail Daily says the town has decided to send recruiters to Puerto Rico.

    Officials worry that new visa rules could make it difficult to bring in workers from Australia, a major source for staff in the past. At the moment the town employs 35 of them.

    John Power, human resources director for the town, says if a cap is set on visas it will be hard to fill some jobs.

    http://www.thedenverchannel.co.....etail.html

    It’s just too bad that the economy is so bad, or these jobs could be filled by Americans.

    I guess they’re just jobs “Americans won’t do.”

11. BillK
    March 9th, 2008 at 5:02 am

    From the Vail (CO) Daily:

    Now it’s global cooling: What’s the deal?

    By Bill Sepmeier

    A small news item last week is blooming into a larger story now, fueled by press generated by a meeting of climate scientists to discuss a recent dip in global temperatures.

    It seems that in just one year, temperatures at virtually all UN-certified weather monitoring stations worldwide have dropped almost a full degree Celsius. That’s a lot of chillin’. In fact, it’s about 100 years of global warming, deleted, in one year.

    What the heck is going on?

    Theories are already surfacing, the most common being a lowered output in power from the sun which, naturally, has a lot to do with global temperature. But a little research into this doesn’t seem to support the idea, since while the sun has been in a “quiet cycle” for the past 11 years or so and its output has, if anything, been slowly rising. The sun is perhaps the most observed star in the heavens; any significant decrease would have been noticed.

    More likely, the amount of solar energy actually reaching the earth’s surface has decreased sharply due to an increase in albedo caused by an increase in tiny aerosol particles in the atmosphere. Volcanoes, wildfires, man-made pollution from everyday modern human activity such a fossil fuel burning, even the contrails produced by flying jet aircraft all increase albedo and as a result, less light and heat reach the planet’s surface. This has been demonstrated to cool things down worldwide, and cool things down very quickly. Remember Mount St. Helens in 1980? We had great skiing the year after she blew up.

    Rapid industrial growth in China and Asia, combined with few western-style limits on pollutants, has been introducing a lot more particulate aerosols into the atmosphere. Recent worldwide droughts have also produced wildfires which have consumed millions of acres of trees and brush, producing millions of tons of smoke. The droughts also have reduced global evaporation and lowered the resulting atmospheric water vapor level, bringing down the level of water vapor, a major greenhouse gas.

    And we can’t ignore the popular conspiracy theory claiming that various governments around the world are involved in secret climate modification activity using “Chemtrails” to dispense tons of aluminum oxide and barium sulphate into the stratosphere, by aerosolizing these materials in high-flying jet engine exhaust, to deliberately lower the planet’s temperature.

    It’s actually plausible. The technology has been described by climate change doomsayer James Lovelock, who points out that a 0.05 percent decrease in sunlight would eliminate — temporarily — all man-made global warming to date. Lovelock has suggested introducing higher levels of sulphur into jet fuel, for a temporary fix.

    Of course, this would be a fix with other consequences: acid rain which would harm trees which scrub CO2 from the air is the most serious known problem that would increase by adding sulphur to our air.

    But some — or all — of these things combined may have reached a “tipping point” last year, delivering the coldest winter in the Northern Hemisphere in years.

    The coming year will provide a lot more information regarding “global cooling” and its causes. For now, there is one given: the cost of energy will rise.

    There are a couple of battles in progress, though. Politically, what to do about the climate? And in the atmosphere, a war rages between invisible carbon dioxide and microscopic particulates. One would cook us, the other bring on the best skiing in 20 years. We all will be watching.

    http://www.vaildaily.com/artic...../866263023

    Or, it could be natural climate variation like many scientists have been trying to tell people since Al Gore first started espousing his theories.

    Nah. Must be a sign of other evil going on elsewhere, and Bush must be at fault.

12. BillK
    March 9th, 2008 at 5:11 am

    From the Times of London:

    Plastic Bags Evil? Think Again, Some Scientists Say

    Scientists and environmentalists have attacked a global campaign to ban plastic bags that they say is based on flawed science and exaggerated claims.

    The widely stated accusation that the bags kill 100,000 animals and a million seabirds every year are false, experts have told The Times of London. They pose only a minimal threat to most marine species, including seals, whales, dolphins and seabirds.

    British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced last month that he would force supermarkets to charge for the bags, saying that they were “one of the most visible symbols of environmental waste.”

    Retailers and some pressure groups, including the Campaign to Protect Rural England, threw their support behind him, and similar movements have spread across the United States.

    But scientists, politicians and marine experts attacked the British government for joining a “bandwagon” based on poor science.

    “The Government is irresponsible to jump on a bandwagon that has no base in scientific evidence,” said Lord Taverne, the chairman of Sense about Science. “This is one of many examples where you get bad science leading to bad decisions which are counter-productive. Attacking plastic bags makes people feel good but it doesn’t achieve anything.”

    Campaigners say that plastic bags pollute coastlines and waterways, killing or injuring birds and livestock on land and, in the oceans, destroying vast numbers of seabirds, seals, turtles and whales. However, the Times has established that there is no scientific evidence to show that the bags pose any direct threat to marine mammals.

    They “don’t figure” in the majority of cases where animals die from marine debris, said David Laist, the author of a seminal 1997 study on the subject. Most deaths were caused when creatures became caught up in waste produce. “Plastic bags don’t figure in entanglement,” he said. “The main culprits are fishing gear, ropes, lines and strapping bands. Most mammals are too big to get caught up in a plastic bag.”

    He added: “The impact of bags on whales, dolphins, porpoises and seals ranges from nil for most species to very minor for perhaps a few species.For birds, plastic bags are not a problem either.”

    The central claim of campaigners is that the bags kill more than 100,000 marine mammals and one million seabirds every year. However, this figure is based on a misinterpretation of a 1987 Canadian study in Newfoundland, which found that, between 1981 and 1984, more than 100,000 marine mammals, including birds, were killed by discarded nets. The Canadian study did not mention plastic bags.

    Fifteen years later in 2002, when the Australian government commissioned a report into the effects of plastic bags, its authors misquoted the Newfoundland study, mistakenly attributing the deaths to “plastic bags.”

    The figure was latched on to by conservationists as proof that the bags were killers. For four years the “typo” remained uncorrected. It was only in 2006 that the authors altered the report, replacing “plastic bags” with “plastic debris”. But they admitted: “The actual numbers of animals killed annually by plastic bag litter is nearly impossible to determine.”

    In a postscript to the correction they admitted that the original Canadian study had referred to fishing tackle, not plastic debris, as the threat to the marine environment.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336189,00.html

    But when have facts ever figured in an environmentalist campaign?

    Even Greenpeace is dismayed by the life of its own the campaign has taken on:

    David Santillo, a marine biologist at Greenpeace, told the Times that bad science was undermining the government’s case for banning the bags. “It’s very unlikely that many animals are killed by plastic bags,” he said. “The evidence shows just the opposite. We are not going to solve the problem of waste by focusing on plastic bags.

    “It doesn’t do the government’s case any favours if you’ve got statements being made that aren’t supported by the scientific literature that’s out there. With larger mammals it’s fishing gear that’s the big problem. On a global basis plastic bags aren’t an issue. It would be great if statements like these weren’t made.”

13. BillK
    March 9th, 2008 at 5:18 am

    From a despondent AP:

    U.S. Forces Find Mass Grave With 100 Bodies in Iraq

    BAGHDAD — A mass grave containing about 100 bodies was discovered Saturday in a region north of Baghdad that has seen years of intense fighting between Shiites and Sunni extremist members of Al Qaeda in Iraq.

    The grisly discovery came as Iraq’s Sunni parliament speaker called on the nation’s Shiites and Kurds to work together with the minority he represents to pass an election law that would help reconcile Iraq’s often warring sects and splinter groups.

    The grave, near Khalis in the Diyala province about 50 miles north of Baghdad, is still being investigated, but the U.S. military said the skeletal remains appear to have been there for a long time.

    It was not immediately clear how the people had died, the military said.

    Police Col. Sabah al-Ambaqi said the grave was discovered in an orchard near al-Bu Tumaa, a Sunni village outside Khalis. He said authorities including both Iraqi and U.S. forces were conducting a search when they uncovered the site.

    Khalis is a Shiite town surrounded by Sunni communities and has been the scene of repeated sectarian attacks. Al Qaeda in Iraq is active in the area, which has seen hundreds of kidnapping and mass abductions in past years. …

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336188,00.html

    But oh, that’s right, Obama says none of this would ever have happened if the US hadn’t invaded in the first place. My bad.

14. BillK
    March 9th, 2008 at 5:31 am

    From the San Francisco Chronicle:

    Homeschoolers’ setback sends shock waves through state

    By Bob Egelko and Jill Tucker

    A California appeals court ruling clamping down on homeschooling by parents without teaching credentials sent shock waves across the state this week, leaving an estimated 166,000 children as possible truants and their parents at risk of prosecution.

    The homeschooling movement never saw the case coming.

    “At first, there was a sense of, ‘No way,’ ” said homeschool parent Loren Mavromati, a resident of Redondo Beach (Los Angeles County) who is active with a homeschool association. “Then there was a little bit of fear. I think it has moved now into indignation.”

    The ruling arose from a child welfare dispute between the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services and Philip and Mary Long of Lynwood, who have been homeschooling their eight children. Mary Long is their teacher, but holds no teaching credential.

    The parents said they also enrolled their children in Sunland Christian School, a private religious academy in Sylmar (Los Angeles County), which considers the Long children part of its independent study program and visits the home about four times a year.

    The Second District Court of Appeal ruled that California law requires parents to send their children to full-time public or private schools or have them taught by credentialed tutors at home.

    Some homeschoolers are affiliated with private or charter schools, like the Longs, but others fly under the radar completely. Many homeschooling families avoid truancy laws by registering with the state as a private school and then enroll only their own children.

    Yet the appeals court said state law has been clear since at least 1953, when another appellate court rejected a challenge by homeschooling parents to California’s compulsory education statutes. Those statutes require children ages 6 to 18 to attend a full-time day school, either public or private, or to be instructed by a tutor who holds a state credential for the child’s grade level.

    “California courts have held that … parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children,” Justice H. Walter Croskey said in the 3-0 ruling issued on Feb. 28. “Parents have a legal duty to see to their children’s schooling under the provisions of these laws.”

    Parents can be criminally prosecuted for failing to comply, Croskey said.

    “A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare,” the judge wrote, quoting from a 1961 case on a similar issue.

    The ruling was applauded by a director for the state’s largest teachers union.

    “We’re happy,” said Lloyd Porter, who is on the California Teachers Association board of directors. “We always think students should be taught by credentialed teachers, no matter what the setting.” …

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....DVF0F1.DTL

    I bet they are.

    Though I’d like to know which schools in the entire state of California actually teach patriotism, though I can certainly see “loyalty to the state and nation.” (If you think that sounds vaguely Soviet, you must be one of those whackos.)

    Nothing represents the “You think they’re your children” mentality better than the closing qote from the “Children’s Law Center of Los Angeles”:

    But Leslie Heimov, executive director of the Children’s Law Center of Los Angeles, which represented the Longs’ two children in the case, said the ruling did not change the law.

    “They just affirmed that the current California law, which has been unchanged since the last time it was ruled on in the 1950s, is that children have to be educated in a public school, an accredited private school, or with an accredited tutor,” she said. “If they want to send them to a private Christian school, they can, but they have to actually go to the school and be taught by teachers.”

    Heimov said her organization’s chief concern was not the quality of the children’s education, but their “being in a place daily where they would be observed by people who had a duty to ensure their ongoing safety.”

    Or, you cannot be trusted to keep your children safe; only we, the liberal guardians, may determine that.

    To make sure, you know, they aren’t exposed to hate speech like in that Leviticus book in that Bible some parents have in the home.

15. texaspsue
    March 9th, 2008 at 10:05 am

    “A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare,”

    Oh really? I thought it was to teach reading, writing and arithmetic. Silly me.

16. JohnMG
    March 9th, 2008 at 12:59 pm

    texaspsue;….”Heimov said her organization’s chief concern was not the quality of the children’s education….”

    Is it any wonder that our children cannot compete, education-wise? Here is someone considered to be an expert in the teaching field that apparently hasn’t a clue as to what the job entails. To make a statement such as this defies logic. I doubt seriously if she even realizes the stupidity issuing from her own mouth. Statements such as this should be used as evidence in a courtroom to criminally prosecute idiots such as she. Charges could be leveled on issues such as fraud, grand larceny, dereliction of duty, abuse of a public trust, mis-appropriation of funds….I think the list could become quite lengthy. Sadly, the inmates seem to be in charge of the assylum. Are we as a country beyond redemption?

17. Diane
    March 9th, 2008 at 1:05 pm

    texaspsue - I’ve always thought that the primary purpose of the educational system was to teach children to think for themselves. Essentially, I try to work myself out of a job. After more years in teaching than I wish to think about at the moment, I’ve come to the conclusion that there aren’t a lot of teachers who feel that way. Many of my fellow teachers view education as a means of indoctrination - a way to teach children the right way to think. Few of them will admit that in public, but it’s fairly common knowledge. Anyone who’s followed the rants and vagaries of the NEA for more than a tiny march of years knows it anyway. If that thing was really published in 1961, it would appear that attitude has been prevalent for longer than I knew.

    As for homeschooling, I was on the Admissions Committee of a private Catholic school (7-12) in the San Francisco Bay Area for some years. We had a number of applications from homeschoolers. I found they split about 2/3, 1/3 - 2/3 of them were very well qualified (one year, the top three students in our seventh grade class came to us from home school), the other 1/3 were woefully unprepared. Pretty much all the homeschoolers were taught by uncredentialled parents. While a 33% failure rate sounds horrendous, it actually compares quite favorably to what the public schools are doing on average.

18. retire05
    March 9th, 2008 at 2:27 pm

    I think Dianne will admit that most teachers come from state universities. Universities like the University of Texas where an admitted communist is a professor, and Juan Hernandez, the open borders advocate that works for John McCain also taught at UT Arlington. These colleges are rife with professors like Ward Churchill. By the time the 18 year old finishes college at 22, they are well indoctrinated with the socialist view point and have even, in most cases, accepted it. Perhaps that explains Obama’s lure to those with a higher education. Obama is spouting what they have been taught is gospel.

    So they come out of college, teacher’s certificate in hand, and enter our elementary/secondary public school systems. And they teach the same philosophy they were indoctrinated in at the state university.
    Having them do that makes the university professors job so much easier when our kids reach the same universities. They (the unsuspecting student) has had half the job done on they already.

    Home schooling is gaining popularity. Parents are deciding that they want a greater influence in what their children learn and indoctrination by a leftist/socialist teacher is not on the menu.

    Gramsci, who I talked about before, said that children needed to be indoctrinated early because if they reached somewhere near the age of 12, they were lost to the communist/socialist movement forever.

    More and more the courts are ruling that our children are not our own. No right to parental notification in the case of a minor daughter getting an abortion. No right to home school even though most kids I know that are home schooled are better educated than their public school counterparts. But just let one of the little darlings do some damage to public property and see how quickly the courts think you are the one responsible for your children.

    Next thing you know the looney courts in California will be telling parents they have to have a degree in nutrition in order to feed their kids or they will have them placed in some home where they eat properly. That way there will be no problem with first graders reading “Heather Has Two Mommies” and four graders being forced to watch “An Inconvienent Truth”.

19. U NO HOO
    March 9th, 2008 at 5:05 pm

    From THE MORNING CALL, Allentown PA:

    Islamic law, or shariah, in a modern context

    March 8, 2008

    MOHAMMED KHAKU, Past President of Al Ahad Islamic Center in Allentown (PA)

    … The public has a pre-conceived notions that shariah law is ancient and outdated while contemporary scholars have failed to recognize Islamic Law as an equal to English Common Law.

    On the contrary, many historian and research studies have found that Islamic shariah laws are comparatively just when compared to Hindu laws, which are still used in some parts of India, and the Law of Moses from the Old Testament, which still guides the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) today.

    With the Muslim religion rapidly expanding, it is inappropriate to put shariah law into a footnote of history…

    http://www.mcall.com/features/.....5932.story

20. BillK
    March 9th, 2008 at 7:18 pm

    From a gleeful Los Angeles Times:

    Socialists take big lead in Spain election

    The ruling party appears to be trouncing the right-wing Popular Party. Voter turnout is high.

    By Tracy Wilkinson

    MADRID — Spain’s ruling Socialist Workers Party jumped to a significant lead over the conservative Popular Party in an acrimonious national election today, partial returns showed.

    With nearly half of the vote counted, Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero and the Socialists appeared well on their way to winning a second term in government. Flag-waving Socialist activists crowded outside party headquarters in Madrid in celebration, and party Secretary Jose Blanco went on national television to claim victory.

    But the Socialists’ early hopes of securing an absolute majority in the parliament were fading as the margin narrowed between their votes and those of the Popular Party. A close result will complicate the ability of the victorious party to govern.

    Turnout was high in an election that reflected deep divisions in a country grappling with a new economic slump and resurgent political violence. Election officials said about 74% of the 35 million eligible voters cast ballots, just 1 percentage point off the turnout in 2004, when terrorist attacks drove people, especially first-time voters, to the polls in near-record numbers.

    One common theme ran among voters on both ends of the ideological spectrum interviewed after they cast their ballots. They said they wanted a more civil political atmosphere in which leaders worked to find compromise rather than attack one another endlessly — the kind of tense discord that has characterized the last few years of government.

    “I’d like to see a new legislature in which they don’t go after each other like attack dogs,” said Ignacio Fernandez, 42, a bespectacled college professor who voted for the Socialists in his funky working-class Madrid neighborhood of Lavapies.

    “I voted for the lesser of two evils,” said Francisco Alvarez, 66, a retired military officer voting in the upscale Salamanca neighborhood. “We’ve had political inertia that has ignored the real problems.”

    Perhaps more polarized than at any time in its recent history, the Spanish public faced a stark choice. A recent downturn in Spain’s once-booming economy and worries about an enormous influx of immigrants were issues that dominated the campaign.

    Zapatero and his party have used his four-year term to promote some of the most liberal social reforms in Europe. They pushed a more independent foreign policy after years of pro-U.S. government, moved to limit the influence of the Roman Catholic Church and expanded the rolls of immigrant labor.

    The Popular Party of Mariano Rajoy, backed by the church, advocates reversing or slowing many of the Socialists’ reforms, restricting immigration and curtailing autonomy for Spain’s restive regions.

    The Socialists’ campaign focused on telling voters that a Popular Party victory would turn the clock back on reforms and return Spain to a reactionary past.

    “It is not a convincing argument, but it is an emotional one, and the polarization is giving left-wing voters extra reason to bother to turn out to vote,” said Charles Powell, history professor at Madrid’s San Pablo-CEU University.

    The Popular Party’s followers, meanwhile, mobilized for months because of their dismay over the direction of the country.

    The day before the election was filled with talk of the assassination Friday of a Socialist Workers Party activist, Isaias Carrasco, in the Basque town of Mondragon. Authorities blamed the attack on the Basque separatist organization ETA, which canceled a truce with the government last year.

    Some Spaniards suggested that militants were attempting to interfere in the voting process just as the electorate was shaken four years ago when Islamic militants bombed commuter trains three days before elections, killing 191 people.

    Four years ago, the train bombings helped drive turnout but did not alter the way most people voted. The 2004 election gave an upset victory to Zapatero. …

    http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....5094.story

    Let’s see here… people are sick of political bickering, people want compromise, disappointment that the liberal party did not secure an absolute victory because “a close result will complicate the ability of the victorious party to govern” and moves to distance themselves from U.S. foreign policy and to “limit the influence of the Roman Catholic Church and expand the rolls of immigrant labor.”

    The reporter’s still discussing Spain here, right?

21. BillK
    March 9th, 2008 at 11:55 pm

    Yes, it’s another crisis, from the Los Angeles Times:

    Renters priced out of L.A.

    By David Lazarus

    Deanna Corbin, 46, would live in Los Angeles if she could. But she can’t, at least not with a modicum of space and safety, not on her $38,000 salary as an administrative secretary.

    So Corbin gets up at 4 a.m. every day and hustles her 11-year-old daughter out the door by 5 for the two-hour drive from their apartment in Lancaster to downtown L.A.

    Most days, they don’t return home until 8 p.m., when Corbin tries to devote some time to her daughter’s homework before they both collapse into bed. It all begins again at 4 the next morning.

    This is the harsh reality for thousands of working-class people priced out of one of the priciest cities in the world. From housing and food to energy and entertainment, Los Angeles is increasingly out of reach for those living paycheck to paycheck.

    “It’s a crisis,” said Gil Duran, a spokesman for Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. “We have to have a city of mixed incomes with affordable housing for workers.”

    Easier said than done. But planning and public-policy experts say steps can be taken to protect the city’s social and economic diversity. It’s just a question of priorities.

    Any discussion of getting priced out of L.A. has to begin with housing, by far the biggest expense for most people. Never mind buying. Even with the real estate market on the ropes, buying a house or condo remains a fantasy for the majority of Southern Californians.

    The real story here is rentals. About 60% of L.A. residents are renters, according to the National Multi Housing Council, an industry group. That compares with a nationwide average of 32%.

    The Department of Housing and Urban Development says families shouldn’t spend more than 30% of their annual income on housing. But here, many people pay up to 50% of their income for an apartment.

    Runaway housing costs, in turn, tend to push wages higher, which can cause the price of just about everything else to climb as businesses seek to recoup their expenses.

    One reason housing prices are so high is a requirement that newly built multiunit dwellings (and condo conversions) provide at least one — usually two or three — parking space per unit. This inflates the cost of each apartment and discourages construction of smaller, more affordable units because developers would be required to provide even more parking.

    “The fixation on parking in Los Angeles has driven up the price of housing and increased congestion on our streets,” said Donald Shoup, a professor of urban planning at UCLA. He said including two spaces with a unit can add about $45,000 to construction costs.

    One solution would be to waive the parking requirement for smaller apartments, thus creating an incentive for developers to place more such units on the market. And because there’d be no parking cost built into the rent, such units would (in theory) be cheaper than apartments that come with extra room for vehicles.

    This could have the added benefit of increasing demand for public transportation — presuming, that is, people would trade car ownership for reduced rent. Increased demand would hopefully spur development of commuter-friendly projects like a long-delayed Westside subway line.

    But Gail Goldberg, L.A.’s planning director, said any proposal that includes cutbacks in parking tends to go nowhere. “People feel like there’s already not enough parking and that people are intruding into their neighborhood. This is a difficult discussion to have.”

    Meanwhile, a coalition of community, religious and business interests called Housing L.A. is pushing City Hall to require developers to include affordable housing in new projects and to slow the conversion of rental units into condos.

    These are worthwhile goals, but they’re strongly opposed by deep-pocketed developers and real estate firms. So good luck with that. …

    http://www.latimes.com/busines.....243.column

    Are there no jobs in Lancaster?

    Housing too expensive? Why we’ll force developers to make “affordable” housing.

    That always works.

22. BillK
    March 10th, 2008 at 12:04 am

    The sky is falling, again, from the AP, busy making their own news:

    AP Probe Finds Drugs in Drinking Water

    By Jeff Donn, Martha Mendoza and Justin Pritchard

    A vast array of pharmaceuticals — including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans, an Associated Press investigation shows.

    To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose. Also, utilities insist their water is safe.

    But the presence of so many prescription drugs — and over-the-counter medicines like acetaminophen and ibuprofen — in so much of our drinking water is heightening worries among scientists of long-term consequences to human health.

    In the course of a five-month inquiry, the AP discovered that drugs have been detected in the drinking water supplies of 24 major metropolitan areas — from Southern California to Northern New Jersey, from Detroit to Louisville, Ky.

    Water providers rarely disclose results of pharmaceutical screenings, unless pressed, the AP found. For example, the head of a group representing major California suppliers said the public “doesn’t know how to interpret the information” and might be unduly alarmed.

    How do the drugs get into the water?

    People take pills. Their bodies absorb some of the medication, but the rest of it passes through and is flushed down the toilet. The wastewater is treated before it is discharged into reservoirs, rivers or lakes. Then, some of the water is cleansed again at drinking water treatment plants and piped to consumers. But most treatments do not remove all drug residue.

    And while researchers do not yet understand the exact risks from decades of persistent exposure to random combinations of low levels of pharmaceuticals, recent studies — which have gone virtually unnoticed by the general public — have found alarming effects on human cells and wildlife.

    “We recognize it is a growing concern and we’re taking it very seriously,” said Benjamin H. Grumbles, assistant administrator for water at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....634D19.DTL

    So the water providers say the public might be “unduly alarmed” - so in steps the AP to make damned sure of it.

23. BillK
    March 10th, 2008 at 12:14 am

    No matter how liberal Ahnold gets, can he fight a real liberal?

    From the San Francisco Chronicle:

    S.F. mayor may run for governor

    By Cecilia M. Vega

    San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is considering a 2010 run for governor - a campaign that would embrace many of the same divisive causes he has championed as mayor, including same-sex marriage, universal health care and protections for illegal immigrants, The Chronicle has learned.

    Newsom has long been rumored to be a potential contender in what is likely to be a crowded field of Democrats looking to succeed Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a list that includes Attorney General and former Gov. Jerry Brown, former state Controller Steve Westly and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

    In recent months, Newsom has quietly been meeting with Democratic campaign strategists and other supporters to discuss a gubernatorial run, and he is now “certain to at least consider the possibility,” said Eric Jaye, a Newsom confidant and political consultant.

    When asked whether he was planning to run, Newsom said, “A number of people in the last few months have reached out and talked to me about it.”

    He declined to discuss any details of a possible campaign.

    “It’s premature to talk about it in the open,” Newsom said. “In the next few months we’ll see what happens.”

    But as recently as last week, Newsom was acting in a way that suggests the 40-year-old mayor may be doing more than just mulling his political future. He appears to be gearing up for a statewide campaign centered around those same liberal causes that have made him both a rising political star and a polarizing political force beyond the city limits.

    Newsom has traveled outside San Francisco in recent weeks to talk to college students and business leaders about his administration’s highly publicized focus on environmental issues like global warming. He has penned opinion pieces that have appeared on popular left-leaning Internet blogs like the Daily Kos, an avenue for Newsom to reach out to young Democratic voters and build name recognition.

    And as the state Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday on same-sex marriage - a case brought about by Newsom’s controversial 2004 decision to grant marriage licenses to thousands of gay and lesbian couples - the mayor’s handlers made sure he played a prominent role in the day’s events.

    Before the proceedings began, the mayor called a morning news conference to talk about the court case. He then took a well-choreographed walk outside City Hall which, not by coincidence, was captured by the throngs of television cameras gathered for the nearby hearing. He followed the stroll with a surprise visit to the same-sex marriage supporters watching the proceedings in an overflow room. Throughout the day he made strong statements about the important role the next governor will play on the topic.

    Schwarzenegger has vetoed two bills that would have legalized gay marriage.

    “This governor represents yesterday on this issue,” Newsom said. “There’ll be a governor who represents the future and the next governor will unquestionably in my mind, if it’s a Democrat, support it.”

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....QVE80K.DTL

    Once again, it will be up to voters to decide whether or not to elect someone who will enact the laws they, rather than voters, feel are right.

    Why bother? Why not just wait for judges to impose them?

    Of course one GOP strategist has a warning:

    “There may be one caveat,” said Hoffenblum, who noted the state’s recent trend of favoring more moderate Republican candidates like Schwarzenegger.

    “If the Republicans do get a real hard-core right-winger as their candidate,” he said, “and Newsom (was the Democrats’ nominee), then I’d bet a San Francisco liberal could get elected governor.”

    So better not run a conservative, Republicans, or you’ll get a liberal elected.

24. BillK
    March 10th, 2008 at 12:25 am

    The AP does their best to draw Bush implications:

    French Voters Put Sarkozy to Ballot Test

    By Elaine Ganley

    Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s usually omnipresent chief of state, was lying low until after municipal elections that start Sunday — trying to prevent his low poll ratings from dragging down his allies.

    President Sarkozy’s conservative party fears his dramatic slide in popularity will damage its chances in the two rounds of balloting that end March 16.

    Though centered on parks, schools, transportation and other local issues, many analysts say the elections for mayor, deputy mayor or municipal councilor are a referendum on Sarkozy’s performance and image — out of sync with what the French expect of a head of state.

    The 53-year-old Sarkozy was elected last year with a pledge to loosen strict labor laws and ease high taxes. But the French economy remains sluggish and only minor changes have been made. His quick marriage to model Carla Bruni after his divorce also soured voters, as did his angry outburst toward a man who refused to shake his hand.

    Polls show the president’s popularity as low as 37 percent.

    The rival left, led by the Socialist party, is looking to reverse conservative gains in the last municipal elections in 2001 in the nearly 36,700 cities, towns and villages and cripple Sarkozy politically.

    Many candidates of Sarkozy’s Union for a Popular Movement, or UMP, have removed the party logo from their posters.

    Former small business minister Renaud Dutreil, a UMP member who risks defeat by his Socialist adversary in Reims, capital of Champagne country, blames his troubles on “the bad winds blowing from Paris.”

    Prime Minister Francois Fillon — whose popularity ratings have risen — has been making trips to bolster candidates in key cities, in place of Sarkozy.

    If the right suffers a major loss, Sarkozy “would be like a magician who has lost his magic,” said political analyst Jean-Luc Parodi. Even some lawmakers from his own party might be less likely to fall in line with his policies. …

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....842S34.DTL

    Yep, Sarkozy’s party is fleeing from their figurehead, likely to long term damage to the party, and of course people are blaming the newly elected President for not fixing things overnight.

    Déjà vu anyone?

25. BillK
    March 10th, 2008 at 3:49 pm

    From the AP:

    Apology for Prince Harry Leak

    By Rohan Sullivan

    SYDNEY, Australia (AP) - An Australian magazine apologized Monday to readers and troops serving abroad for publishing a story revealing that Prince Harry was fighting with British troops in Afghanistan.

    New Idea magazine said when it ran the story in January it was unaware of an agreement between the British Ministry of Defense and major news organizations not to disclose Harry’s deployment to protect the 23-year-old prince and his fellow soldiers.

    The story eventually resulted in the royal being sent home.

    The report went largely unnoticed until last February when the Drudge Report published it, citing the magazine and a German publication. British officials decided to pull Harry out of Afghanistan for his safety and that of his unit.

    In an unsigned item in its latest edition issued Monday, New Idea did not explain the source of its January story on Harry and indicated it did not check with British military officials before publishing.

    “We did not knowingly breach any embargo and were not party to any agreement for a media blackout on the story,” the magazine said. “However, and more importantly, we do acknowledge that our actions in publishing the story can be reasonably viewed as insensitive and irresponsible.”

    The magazine apologized to its readers and to troops and their families who serve abroad.

    http://news.aol.com/health/sto.....0809990003

    Can you even imagine an American publication conceding there was even a rationale for possibly apologizing?

    The New York Times would have had real time tracking of Harry’s unit on their web site.

26. BillK
    March 11th, 2008 at 2:28 am

    OK, I’ve seen a lot of strange, anti-American complaints from the MSM, but wow.

    From the Los Angeles Times:

    Domestic terror groups in disarray after Sept. 11

    After the violent mayhem of the ’90s, right-wing extremist groups are less active. Some believe the 2001 attacks diverted rage away from the U.S. government and toward foreigners.

    By Richard A. Serrano

    RENO — Three years after foreign terrorists killed nearly 3,000 Americans in the Sept. 11 attacks, Steve Holten left the San Francisco Bay Area, drove east through the Tahoe National Forest, skirted the Truckee River and settled himself in Reno. Here he proclaimed himself a lieutenant colonel of the local chapter of Aryan Nations. He sent an e-mail to area newspapers declaring war on the federal government, the media and the Jews.

    But no war came. Holten’s career as a domestic terrorist was short and uneventful. FBI agents promptly arrested him, and a federal grand jury indicted him for transmitting a threatening e-mail. He pleaded guilty and served four months in prison. After getting out he contracted the AIDS virus, and he was rearrested, this time for soliciting a man for sex in a nearby city park.

    With shaved head and Nazi lightning-bolt tattoos on his neck, Holten is emblematic of how far the anti-government terrorism movement has sunk in the years since the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

    Richard Butler was a lion of the movement. He built the Church of Jesus Christ Christian/Aryan Nations from a barbed-wire-encircled compound in Hayden, Idaho, into a hate empire. But when he died in September 2004, at age 86, he left a depleted organization with two factions feuding over the detritus.

    John Trochmann, once an omnipresent face of hatred for the government, still has the iron-gray beard and fiery eyes from the days when he helped found the Militia of Montana. Today he drives a 13-year-old black Suburban to gun shows in the Pacific Northwest to hawk anti-government pamphlets or sell log cabins to get by. He still believes, but at 64, he doesn’t act.

    “9/11,” he said in an interview at his home near Montana’s Bitterroot Mountains. “Boy, did it ever change things.” …

    http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....8604.story

    Poor depressed white supremacists?

    Oh, that’s right - in many ways they’re their ideological brothers:

    “The enemy is still the United States,” he said. But he concedes that his declaration of war was ill-conceived and that perhaps the heyday of the domestic terrorism movement was past.

    Just weird.

27. BillK
    March 11th, 2008 at 2:38 am

    The government has to be at fault, it has to!

    From the Los Angeles Times:

    Gulf War syndrome’s chemical-origin theory upheld

    A class of compounds found in nerve gas and pesticides remains the likely cause, a review of studies concludes.

    By Jia-Rui Chong

    A review of medical studies on Gulf War syndrome supports the theory that the still-hazy disorder was caused by a group of related chemicals found in pesticides used around military facilities and anti-nerve-gas pills given to soldiers, according to a study released Monday.

    A similar chemical was also found in nerve gas that was inadvertently released when U.S. soldiers destroyed a munitions depot just after the 1991 war, according to the study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    The group of chemicals, known as acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, has long been discussed as a possible cause of Gulf War syndrome.

    The review “thoroughly, conclusively shows that this class of chemicals actually are a cause of illness in Gulf War veterans,” said Dr. Beatrice Golomb, an associate professor of medicine at UC San Diego and the author of the latest paper.

    Other researchers, however, said the syndrome’s symptoms are so varied that it’s probably difficult to place the blame on a single cause.

    “It seems clear at this point, 17 years beyond the conflict, that the chances we will ever resolve this with any single ’smoking gun’ exposure grows smaller with time,” said Dr. Charles Engel, director of the Department of Defense Deployment Health Clinical Center at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington.

    Gulf War syndrome is a complex — and controversial — illness typically characterized by a variety of symptoms, including fatigue, muscle or joint pain and mood problems. About 200,000 veterans are believed to suffer from it, according to the study.

    But there is still uncertainty. A panel of the federal Institute of Medicine said in 2006 that it could not say if there was a coherent set of symptoms that pointed to an identifiable syndrome.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/sc.....6479.story

    What this story fails to make clear is there are a wide variety of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors at varying strengths. VX nerve gas is one, but so is Dursban as found on the shelves at your local garden center.

    The article of course groups them all together, as if using Diazinon to control ants in the past means you too will suffer from Gulf War syndrome.

    But what to expect from a press that hates America and blows parts-per-trillion existence of medications in water into the next Great Public Health Crisis?

    At least there’s some sanity in the piece:

    Engel, of Walter Reed, said he was unconvinced — in part because there is little, if any, accurate measurement of chemical exposures during the war.

    “It is well known that significant error results from looking back years after the fact and asking people to try to recall potential exposures,” he said.

28. BillK
    March 11th, 2008 at 2:49 am

    Iowa Republican Steve King is assailed from all sides for speaking the truth.

    From the AP:

    Rep. King Stands By Prediction That Obama Presidency Would Be Welcomed By Terrorists

    DES MOINES, Iowa — An Iowa Republican congressman on Monday defended his prediction that terrorists would celebrate if Democrat Barack Obama were elected president, despite a rebuke from aides to John McCain, the GOP’s apparent presidential nominee.”(Obama will) certainly be viewed as a savior for them,” Rep. Steve King told The Associated Press. “That’s why you will see them supporting him, encouraging him.” King said his offices have been bombarded with calls — positive and negative — since he said Friday that al-Qaida “would be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on September 11 because they would declare victory in this war on terror.”

    King cited Obama’s pledge to pull U.S. troops from Iraq, his father’s Muslim roots in Kenya and his middle name, Hussein, which King said has a meaning to terrorists.

    Asked about the remarks as he campaigned in Mississippi, Obama said, “I think that Mr. King has it backwards. The fact that the continuation of a presence in Iraq as Senator McCain has suggested is exactly what, I think, will fan the flames of anti-American sentiment and make it more difficult for us to create a long-term and sustainable peace in the world.

    “But I have to say that Mr. King and individuals like him thrive on offensive or controversial statements as a way to get in the papers, so I don’t take it too seriously. I would hope Senator McCain would want to distance himself from that kind of inflammatory and offensive remarks,” Obama said.

    Aides to McCain also disavowed King’s comments.

    “John McCain rejects the type of politics that degrades our civics … and obviously that extends to Congressman King’s statement,” spokesman Brian Rogers told The Associated Press. …

    http://elections.foxnews.com/2.....errorists/

    It’s entertaining to watch both Obama and McCain belittle King’s comments when they are of course accurate.

    Once again, Obama’s comments show he buys the terrorists’ claims hook, line and sinker. “Just don’t bother them and they won’t bother us” seems to be Obama’s rationale.

    Of course, leaving Iraq won’t placate them. We must leave the Middle East entirely. And stop supporting Israel. And restore Palestine. And stop exporting Western hedonism. And adopt Sharia law. And kill those who blaspheme Mohammed.

    Why can I see Obama agreeing to all of these demands and more?

    After all, he sees no problem with sitting down and meeting with them.

    Just like Obama and the left’s position on missile defense - if we don’t have a defense system, no one will fire one at us.

    I wonder if he’ll disarm his Secret Service detail as well, as if they don’t carry guns, his enemies won’t carry guns, right?

29. BillK
    March 11th, 2008 at 2:56 am

    Let’s worry about more things, from the AP:

    Minn. Lawmaker Proposes Campaign on Fragrance-Free Schools

    ST. PAUL, Minn. — Those all-over body sprays that promise to turn teenage boys into babe magnets? Instead of attracting girls, they could be making them sick.

    A Minnesota lawmaker proposed a bill Monday urging a fragrance-free educational campaign to discourage students from dousing themselves in scents that aggravate classmates with asthma and other health problems.

    Odors that fill hallways come mostly from boys who douse themselves in body sprays like Axe, said Mikolai Altenberg, a senior at Minneapolis South High School. He said the smell is “indescribable” and unavoidable.

    “You can smell it from 10 feet away,” Altenberg said. “Mostly it’s just guys who just think that putting Axe all over them is a substitute for showering.”

    Rep. Karen Clark, a Democrat, first proposed banning fragrances in Minneapolis schools, one of the state’s largest school districts. The bill she introduced Monday scales that back to an awareness campaign in Minneapolis and in other districts that volunteer. The campaign could include letters to parents, fact sheets, signs in schools, e-mail and Web sites.

    One in eight Minneapolis students has asthma, and school nurses have treated students for wheezing and headaches brought on by the fragrances wafting from classmates, said Mary Heiman, a nursing service manager who runs the district’s asthma program. …

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336532,00.html

    Can one in eight Minneapolis students really have asthma?

    If so, what’s wrong in Minneapolis?

    Of course we need scent-free schools, but should a homeless guy wander into the local library reeking of urine, stool and a month’s B.O., that is, of course, their right.

30. DW
    March 11th, 2008 at 1:41 pm

    From the AP:

    U.S. air force to bid farewell to F-117 stealth fighter

    By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

    DAYTON, Ohio - It was invisible to enemy radar and the world’s first stealth attack aircraft will soon fade from view entirely.

    The radar-evading F-117 was part of the U.S. air force arsenal for 27 years, secretly patrolling skies from Serbia to Iraq but now the aircraft is being retired.

    The last F-117s scheduled to fly will take off next month before landing at their final destination in Nevada for a retirement ceremony.

    An informal retirement ceremony takes place Tuesday at the Wright-Patterson air force base in Dayton, Ohio, which manages the F-117 program.

    The air force decided to speed up the retirement of the F-117s to free up funding to modernize the rest of the fleet.

    The F-117 is being replaced by the F-22 Raptor, but the government says it could bring the F-117 out of retirement if needed.

    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Wo.....76-ap.html

    I posted this mainly because I know that most people here -like me- enjoy discussing military hardware.
    I do have to admit, though, hearing that this aircraft is being retired makes me feel kinda old…
    I’m far from being one of the site’s “old fossils”, but even I can remember watching the “modern” front-line fighter-bombers zooming overhead on training missions. Planes like the F-4 Phantom, or the F-101 Voodoo, or the F-5 Freedom Fighter…
    Man, what’s next…?

31. JohnMG
    March 11th, 2008 at 2:05 pm

    DW; This is not a good sign. Despite all the propaganda involved, someone within the procurement arm of the Air Force has information that will only become public when it is too late to remedy the situation. With either of the democrat hopefuls in the WH, funding for military projects will be cut. Look how nicely this fits into the scheme……….’Well, the Air Force has already retired the Stealth so we no longer need to fund that program, and the money appropriated for the successor can now be used for something else’…….Congress does as it wishes regardless of prior committemnts for funding.
    Remember the gutted military that Reagan inherited from Carter? Well, this country may well never recover from either a Clinton, or especially an Obama presidency.

32. BillK
    March 11th, 2008 at 8:21 pm

    Where’s job growth occurring? Where else?

    From Reuters:

    U.S. Payrolls Unexpectedly Fall for Second Straight Month

    WASHINGTON, March 7 (Reuters) - U.S. employers cut payrolls for a second straight month during February, slashing 63,000 jobs for the biggest monthly job decline in nearly five years as the labor market weakened steadily, a government report on Friday showed.

    The Labor Department said last month’s cut in jobs followed an upwardly revised loss of 22,000 jobs in January instead of 17,000 reported a month ago. In addition, it said that only 41,000 jobs were created in December, half the 82,000 originally reported.

    The back-to-back January and February job losses were the first consecutive monthly declines since May and June of 2003.

    The February jobs report was more bleak than expected. Economists surveyed by Reuters forecast 25,000 jobs would be added to payrolls last month. They had forecast that the unemployment rate would edge up to 5.0 percent. …

    http://www.nytimes.com/reuters.....ref=slogin

    Where is job growth?

    One bright spot was that the government added 38,000 jobs in February on top of 4,000 new-hires in January.

    That’s 42,000 new Federal jobs over two months.

    We’ll all be Government employees soon.

33. JohnMG
    March 11th, 2008 at 8:36 pm

    BillK;….”Iowa Republican Steve King is assailed from all sides for speaking the truth….”

    I just love this Obama response. We all might just as well get used to it….we’re going to be hearing it quite frequently.

    “But I have to say that Mr. King and individuals like him thrive on offensive or controversial statements as a way to get in the papers, so I don’t take it too seriously. I would hope Senator McCain would want to distance himself from that kind of inflammatory and offensive remarks,” Obama said.

    Anything critical being said of him will be dismissed as bigotry or racism.

    Now he even assumes the mantle of McCain campaign advisor with this….

    “I would hope Senator McCain would want to distance himself from that kind of inflammatory and offensive remarks…”

    And McCain’s strategy? “Yeah, Barak, that’s a good idea. That’s just what I’ll do. You don’t mind, now, do ya?”

34. BillK
    March 12th, 2008 at 2:44 am

    From the Los Angeles Times:

    Wife puts troubling face on scandal

    NEW YORK — It was the way she stood there, enduring.

    Silda Wall Spitzer did not say a word as her husband, Gov. Eliot Spitzer, brusquely apologized to his family and the public after he was allegedly caught on a wiretap doing business with a high-priced prostitution ring. Her face was drawn. But she took her husband’s hand as they left the room.

    This scandal has many salacious details, but it was the image of Silda Wall Spitzer at her man’s side that dominated conversations across the country Tuesday.

    That moment of public humiliation stayed with people — men and women, Democrats and Republicans. At a beauty salon in Brooklyn Heights, at the Mellow Mushroom pizzeria in midtown Atlanta, at a Denver office building, at a bar in the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, the same questions came up:

    How could she?

    Why did she?

    Haven’t we seen this play one too many times?

    Why do we go through this ritual of public shame and repentance, with the political wife standing mutely before the TV cameras as her husband admits his sexual indiscretion?

    “I find it nauseating . . . phony and awful,” said Leah Schanzer, 38, a doctoral student who stopped for coffee at a Starbucks in New York City. She gave an exaggerated shudder.

    “It makes it seem like she’s Susie Homemaker,” said her friend Leslie Heller, 47. “She shouldn’t be standing there, next to him.”

    As attorney general and — for a little over a year — governor, Spitzer set himself up as a crusader, bent on exposing unethical behavior. The allegation that the Democrat frequented an international call-girl ring has proved an irresistible twist.

    “The story is juicy because of the sex, but it’s really about betraying the trust that you hold,” said Roz Perlmuth, 66, a retired teacher from Palm Desert, Calif.

    Newspaper websites have been swamped with thousands of comments on the case; gleeful barbs are being tossed around the blogosphere.

    But to many — especially women — the tawdry details added up to more than another generic scandal. When they looked at Silda Wall Spitzer’s weary face, it felt personal.

    “She should’ve said, ‘This is your fight. This is your battle. You stand there and get yourself out of it,’ ” said Linda Walters, 61. The Denver resident said she divorced her own cheating spouse.

    In the Seattle airport, traveler Jim Thorpe said he had not cared a bit about Spitzer’s sexual proclivities — until he saw a clip of the one-minute apology. “The only disgusting part is the consultant who advised him to trot out his wife by his side,” said Thorpe, 53.

    “I’d have paraded in front of the microphone with a knife,” said Cassandra Horton, 43, who works at an escrow firm in Phoenix.

    Easier said than done, said Kathleen B. Jones, a professor emeritus of women’s studies at San Diego State University.

    ” ‘I am woman. Hear me rage.’ That’s easy to write on a blog. . . . But if I’m in that situation, do I really want to add to my humiliation in that very public moment?” Jones asked. “What choice does she have?” …

    http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....5985.story

    One rumor making the rounds is that somewhat like Carmela Soprano, Silda Spitzer had an agreement with her husband where he was free to go out and indulge, as long as he was careful and didn’t bring it home.

    We’ll see.

35. BillK
    March 12th, 2008 at 2:51 am

    From a dismissive AP:

    Cheney Says US Needs Missile Defense

    By Tom Raum

    WASHINGTON — Borrowing a theme from the presidential contest, Vice President Dick Cheney said Tuesday that the possibility of a 3 a.m. emergency call to the White House is all the more reason for the next commander in chief to follow through on President Bush’s plans for a national missile defense.

    “It’s plain to see that the world around us gives ample reason to continue working on missile defense,” Cheney told the conservative Heritage Foundation at a dinner recognizing the 25th anniversary of President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative, a proposed network of rockets capable of shooting down incoming intercontinental ballistic missiles.

    Bush has set in motion a more modest version of Reagan’s original plan.

    “In the ongoing political campaign, there’s been discussion recently about 3 a.m. phone calls,” Cheney said. “We all hope that a commander in chief never has to pick up the line and be told that a ballistic missile is headed toward the United States. In such an instance, catastrophe would be minutes away.” …

    http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....8218.story

    Bravo, Mr. Cheney.

    He continued:

    “In 1972, nine countries had ballistic missiles,” Cheney said. “Today, it is at least 27. And that includes hostile regimes that oppress their own people, seek to intimidate and dominate their neighbors and actively support terrorist groups.”

    In addition to potential threats from North Korea, Cheney emphasized what he said was a growing threat from both