Of all of the insanities floating around, with the exception of “nuclear proliferation will make us safer”, this is the most dangerous by far.

And that doesn’t even get into the certain astonomically decrease in wealth and freedom for every person in the country.

But the .0005% who run the country will feel even more powerful, won’t they?

And after all, feeding their egos is the important thing, isn’t it?

“U.S. attorneys are political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the president,…”

You’re right BillK. what is it about this policy that libtards and BDS sufferers don’t understand? An “appointee”, especially a political one, serves at the discretion of the “appoint-er”, in this case, the POTUS. I don’t recall an “improper reason” clause in the Constitution so it seems obvious, to me at least, he can dismiss them at any time he or she so chooses, a “reason” not requisite.

Copps Urges Media Reform, Bemoans Years of “Mindless Deregulation”

By John Eggerton

Progressive reformer and acting FCC Chairman Michael Copps was basking in his element Thursday as he preached the gospel of media reform. He suggested that traditional media may be going the way of the VCR and analog TV sets, but also raised the issue of regulating media’s presumptive new king: the Internet.

Billed as Free Press’ “Bono and Brangelina,” Copps took the dais at a packed media reform forum. He has addressed the gathering before–last year in Minnesota–but always as a minority commissioner rather than the more bully pulpit of acting FCC chairman.

While saying he was still teeing up big decisions for the incoming chairman, Julius Genachowski, Copps urged haste in capitalizing on a new wind of reform he said was blowing through the Capital and across the nation.

Winding the stem on a speech that resonated again and again with the overflow crowd at the Newseum in Washington, Copps said that so long as his audience did not come to Washington simply to harvest the fruits of its labors, there could be an era of reform to match the New Deal.

“I don’t think we’ll be circling the wagons any time soon-but if we’re not quick about it and smart about it and thorough about it, the winds of change could blow themselves out before our job is done. We must seize the opportunity when we have it. Us. Now….When it comes to public policy, eight years of shallows and misery was enough for me,” he said. “I don’t even want to think about any more such years!”

Copps bemoaned what he called “two decades of mindless deregulation” with a brief interruption before a “veritable tsunami of consolidation.” The result? “Infotainment, sensationalism, cable news mud-wrestling, and homogenized playlists.”

“We’re not only losing journalists,” he said, “we may be losing journalism.” He said the problem started before the Internet, with consolidation and “mindless deregulation.” “When TV and radio stations are no longer required to serve their local communities, when stations or newspapers are loaded down with crushing debt or owned by huge corporations preoccupied with cutting costs through economies of scale, it should come as no surprise that some things precious get lost.”

He also explained part of his urgency for change. “There are those who argue that’s all over now. Consolidation and conglomeration are yesterday’s news. I don’t buy it. As soon as the economy begins to turn the corner, I predict we’ll see another urge to merge-to buy, leverage, and find those elusive economies of scale. More news rooms closed. More journalists fired. More private equity, less public dialogue.”

Saying he did not want to paint with too broad a brush, the acting chairman did give a shout out to broadcasters who were trying to serve the public interest, but said Wall Street expectations were forcing them in directions they did now want to go. “Whatever we do should help those stations that are trying to do the right thing and nurture the democratic dialogue.” …

http://www.broadcastingcable.c.....ation_.php

Gee, why do I think Mr. Copps meant that “democratic” with a capital D?

We need more regulation of what we see and hear.

We can’t let newspapers go under (read: those newspaper bailouts had best be coming soon!).

We can’t have newspapers or news networks owned by private equity. No, private is bad, evil even.

But more importantly:

Copps said that so long as his audience did not come to Washington simply to harvest the fruits of its labors, there could be an era of reform to match the New Deal.

Which is, of course, what every one of us has been doing anything we can to not see happen again, as a new “New Deal” is something from which the country may not recover from for decades… if ever.

Want more? He’s not done throwing laws around:

Looking farther down the road, Copps raised the possibility of Internet regulation. Historically, government regulation has been based on some sort of licensing relationship or statutory directive. But how does that apply to the online world, where websites not only are not licensed, but they may not even be in the United States? And what if the new media fail to provide the things we care about-the things we need?”

He didn’t have the answer, but Copps said it was time to have a “serious national discussion.”

Free Speech?

Only if it’s speech the Democrats have approved for public dissemination, of course.

From an excited AP:

Wis. high court to review 2006 gay marriage ban

By Ryan J. Foley

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed Thursday to decide whether the state’s 2006 ban on gay marriage was properly put to voters.

The court will review a challenge by political science instructor William McConkey, who claims the referendum on the constitutional amendment illegally put two questions to voters: whether to ban gay marriage and whether to outlaw civil unions. The state constitution limits referendums to a single subject.

A Dane County judge upheld the referendum last year, and the Baileys Harbor man appealed that ruling. Last month, the Madison-based District 4 Court of Appeals asked the high court to take the case immediately because of its statewide significance.

Justices announced Thursday they decided to take the case and gave lawyers 30 days to file initial briefs. Oral arguments are not yet scheduled but are expected this fall, with a decision potentially before the end of the year.

Fair Wisconsin, the state’s largest gay rights group, praised the court’s decision to take the case.

“The constitutional amendment is definitely something we see as a stain on the constitution. It sort of enshrines discrimination,” said its legislative director, Katie Belanger. “We are really looking forward to the Supreme Court making a fair decision about whether or not the amendment was put to the people in the legal and constitutional way.”

A spokesman for Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen pledged a vigorous legal defense of the amendment, which was approved by nearly 60 percent of voters.

“We have defended the voter’s choice, and we will continue to do so,” Bill Cosh said. …

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s.....IAGE_WIOL-

So where does McConkey work?

Why the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, of course!

So yes, Wisconsin voters, you’re paying the salary of the man who wants to overturn your wishes.

It doesn’t get any better than that.

From the socialists at the AP:

Proposal would require all to have health coverage

WASHINGTON (AP) – House Democrats are crafting a plan that would require all Americans to carry health insurance and would help families making less than $88,000 pay the premiums. Employers, too, would have to help foot the bill.

It’s the latest development in President Barack Obama’s push to fix the ailing U.S. health care system by getting the government more deeply involved.

Obama has said the final legislation must rein in costs, guarantee choice of health plans and medical providers, and ensure that all Americans have access to affordable coverage. But he’s leaving it to Congress to work out the details.

Responding to a question at a town hall-style meeting in New Mexico on Thursday, Obama said he expects a plan from Congress that will be a “vast improvement” over the current system.

A document obtained by The Associated Press provides an early look at where Democratic leaders in the House are heading as they try to meet an ambitious July 31 deadline for passing their version of the legislation. The Senate is working on a similar plan, with some key differences, on the same timetable.

The plan by the House Energy and Commerce Committee would build on the current system in which employers, government and individuals share responsibility for health insurance.

It would make major changes: Individuals and employers would face new obligations to help pay for coverage. Insurers would operate under stricter consumer protections. And the government would take added responsibilities for setting insurance rules and providing financial help to low- and middle-income families.

“It’s a sensible, mainstream proposal,” said Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), a member of the fiscally conservative group of Democrats known as the Blue Dogs. “If we do something along those lines we will be in the right ball park.”

Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.) questioned the proposed requirements that individuals get coverage and employers help pay. “Clearly the individual and employer mandates will come at great cost, and part of what we want to do is create an affordable plan for everybody,” said Camp. …

http://www.9news.com/news/worl.....yid=115731

No matter how you slice it, the Government will control care and of course will pick up the tab for most people, guaranteeing a payout which can never, ever be ended.

The House plan would set up an insurance purchasing pool called an “exchange” to help make private coverage more affordable for individuals and small businesses. Initially only employers with fewer than 10 workers would be able to buy coverage through the pool, but bigger companies would be able to join over time.

Health insurance plans that participate in the exchange would have to follow new consumer protection rules. They would not be able to deny coverage to the sick, or charge them exorbitant rates.

So if you’re a smoker or a heavy drinker – hey, come on in! We can’t charge you more!

That’ll work as well as “requring” credit card issuers to not charge higher risk customers more and will have the same result – a reduction of the services in question in the marketplace.

AP source: Rove to be questioned on U.S. attorneys

WASHINGTON (AP) – Former top Bush White House aide Karl Rove is scheduled to be interviewed Friday as part of a criminal investigation into the firing of U.S. attorneys, according to a lawyer familiar with the investigation.

Rove has said he will cooperate with the investigation being conducted by a special prosecutor into whether Bush administration officials or congressional Republicans should face criminal charges in the dismissals of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006.

An attorney told The Associated Press on Thursday that Rove will be questioned by the special prosecutor, Nora Dannehy. The attorney, who spoke on condition of anonymity, was not authorized to talk to the media.

Rove’s attorney Robert Luskin declined to comment on the timing of the interview, first reported by The Washington Post.

Rove and other Republican officials refused to be interviewed in an earlier Justice Department inquiry, which concluded that despite Bush administration denials, political considerations played a part in the firings of as many as four of the prosecutors.

U.S. attorneys are political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the president, but cannot be fired for improper reasons. Bush administration officials at first claimed the attorneys were let go because of poor performance. …

http://www.9news.com/news/worl.....yid=115730

Someone remind me again what the “proper reason” was Janet Reno used to fire them all?!?!

Obama cleaerly wrote he is anti-Isreal. The Pope has followed in his recent visit siding with Palenstine. Guess like his right hand bishop, and Iran, they don’t believe in the Holocaust. We should support Isreal when Iran for years threatens to wipe Isreal off the face of the earth, yet alone because of Iran’s nuke threats against America and other countries. Isreal is the only civilized country surrounded by a growing axis of evil and enemies.

America’s spy chief was sent on a secret mission to Israel to warn its leaders not to launch a surprise attack on Iran without notifying the US Administration.

As Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, prepares to visit Washington, it emerged yesterday that Leon Panetta, the head of the CIA, went to Israel two weeks ago. He sought assurances…, that their hawkish new Government would not attack Iran without alerting Washington.

Concerns have been rising that Mr Netanyahu could launch a strike on Tehran’s atomic programme, in the same way that Israel hit Saddam Hussein’s Osirak reactor in 1981. The country’s leaders reportedly told Mr Panetta that they did not “intend to surprise the US on Iran”.

Mr Netanyahu will leave for Washington this weekend. He will… try to convince of the need for tougher action against Iran. Mr Obama favours trying to engage Tehran, but his efforts have been received coolly by President Ahmadinejad.
Iran opens first nuclear fuel production facility
Iran ready to strike at Israel’s nuclear heart

Mr Netanyahu has held meetings with Arab leaders this week, including President Mubarak of Egypt and King Abdullah of Jordan. Both Sunni leaders share Israel’s fears of a resurgent Shia Iran.

Mr Netanyahu raised the issue of Iran during a private meeting with Pope Benedict XVI in Nazareth yesterday. “I asked him as a moral figure to make his voice heard loud and continuously against the declarations coming from Iran of their intention to destroy Israel,” ..
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t.....289593.ece

The CIA has turned down former Vice President Cheney’s request to release memos he says would show waterboarding and other “enhanced interrogation techniques” produced valuable information that saved lives.
Cheney’s office told FOX News that the former vice president is preparing his appeal to the denial.

President Obama could overrule the agency, as he did a month ago when he cited “exceptional circumstances” and declassified four memos that detailed waterboarding and other interrogation techniques used on suspected terrorists.

Cheney and others objected to that release, saying it would tell terrorists what to prepare for. A Senate report concluded days later that the harsh techniques were not just used at the CIA’s “secret prisons,” but also in Iraq, Afghanistan and at the terrorist detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

During an interview on FOX News last month, Cheney criticized the release of the memos and said he was disturbed that “they didn’t put out the memos that showed the success of the effort.”

Obama has said the memos Cheney wants released do not prove the harsh techniques are effective.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....ion-memos/

Amazing how Obama’s new CIA works.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi reportedly was told in February 2003 by her intelligence aide, Michael Sheehy, that waterboarding was used on CIA terror detainee Abu Zubaydah…

According to a report, Sheehy attended a briefing with Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., in February 2003 and discussed the CIA’s use of waterboarding.

A CIA document made public last week shows that Pelosi received a briefing in September 2002 on the tactics used on Zubaydah, an Al Qaeda leader and one of three prisoners subjected to waterboarding. Pelosi said she was told the agency was discussing its legal right to use the tactic in the future.

“We were not — I repeat — were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used,” said Pelosi, D-Calif.

Pelosi was briefed in 2002 while on the House Intelligence Committee.

However, the CIA has blocked Republican efforts to stir the controversy. Late Tuesday, the spy agency turned down the request of Rep. Pete Hoekstra, ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, for the CIA to declassify the “notes to file” from the CIA officers who briefed members of Congress on the enhanced interrogation program.

“This decision is unbelievable — that, even with all the exposure this program has gotten, these documents would not be released,” Hoekstra, R-Mich., said.

FOX News’ Jim Angle contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....rrogation/

The KA’s at Alabama have toned it down quite a bit over the last thirty years in which I’ve been aware of (or been drunk at) their Old South parties. They used to have a Navy jack (what most folks call the Confederate Flag) that spanned their entire portico – at least 30 x 45 feet – on display during that entire week. They used to also have little black kids march in the parade with them. I always thought that was awkward.

This capitalizes on the point I, and many others make, about our “sound-bite” society. After all, is it really surprising that Budweiser sales skyrocketed all because of some stupid talking frogs which, admittedly, were pretty funny?

In music, it’s called a “hook” as it is in advertising. You can see the obvious reasoning behind the name.

But over the years, they, the sound bites, have gotten much shorter and smaller, perhaps due to the dumbing down of society. 1955: “See the USA, in your Chevrolet” has dumbed down to “Like A Rock”. Is that any surprise?

Charge your iPod, kill a polar bear?

By GREG KELLER – THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

PARIS (AP) — The choice might not be quite that stark, but an energy watchdog is alarmed about the threat to the environment from the soaring electricity needs of gadgets like MP3 players, mobile phones and flat screen TVs.

Full article:
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/En.....16-ap.html

You can read the whole lengthy article and find absolutely nothing else about polar bears. Other than the attached picture -which is yet another cute shot of something that would kill and eat you just out of general principles. And which is thriving -according to those who have to live and work around the damned things.

So why post this? This is a perfect example of editors choosing titles for articles (which is the case, so I’m told). Not that the people calling the shots in the MSM are biased or anything…

So picture Joe or Jane Q. Public, flipping through the paper (or scrolling down the computer) and glancing at the headlines on their way to the sports page or to whatever their main interest is.
All they pick up on, is the headline.
Marvelous tactic.
Pure bullsh*t. But very effective.

Nope. No bias there…

Nothing new here. Oddly, lib-o-crats are not whining about it. I guess they are still busy spit-shining massuh’s shoes.

Neat thing is to watch it happen because the she-thing cannot control Barry as she did Bill-Jeff. She can’t affront him with a blistering tirade while the secret service listens in. She can’t hold him captive to get what she wants.

She is a useless entity to him and that suits me fine. I only hope they start playing little power games and one or the other ends up torpedoing themselves.