Anti-War Democrat Visits Iraq ... Now Says We Should Stay

Yet another enlightened soul who once opposed the mission in Iraq has somewhat changed their mind after finally visiting the country.

It's amazing what happens when you actually listen to what the military has been saying all along. Just ask U.S. Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA). After visiting Iraq, and speaking with US and Iraqi troops he is finally convinced that we need to stay a little longer.

The Olympian:

U.S. Rep. Brian Baird said Thursday that his recent trip to Iraq convinced him the military needs more time in the region, and that a hasty pullout would cause chaos that helps Iran and harms U.S. security.

"I believe that the decision to invade Iraq and the post-invasion management of that country were among the largest foreign-policy mistakes in the history of our nation. I voted against them, and I still think they were the right votes," Baird said in a telephone interview from Washington, D.C.

"But we're on the ground now. We have a responsibility to the Iraqi people and a strategic interest in making this work."

Baird, a five-term Democrat, voted against President Bush ordering the Iraq invasion — at a time when he was in a minority in Congress and at risk of alienating voters. He returned late Tuesday from a trip that included stops in Israel, Jordan and Iraq, where he met troops, U.S. advisers and Iraqis, whose stories have convinced him that U.S. troops must stay longer.

It almost makes me want to create an "enlightened" tag with all the converts lately.

Hillary Lies To Black Journalists

We all know what Hillary Care is ... it's socialized health care. There can be no denying it ... unless, of course, you're Hillary.

Last week, here in Vegas, we had the National Association of Black Journalists in town, and Hillary spoke at the convention. She was asked a very solid question by a journalist about the negative impacts her socialized health care plan would have on the black community.

Here's her response ...

LVRJ:

U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, campaigning for president, faced a rare skeptical question at a gathering of the National Association of Black Journalists in Las Vegas last week. Why does the Democrat insist on pushing socialized medicine, "particularly when it will hurt African-American communities more than anybody else?" she was asked.

"I have never advocated socialized medicine," the former first lady replied. "That has been a right-wing attack on me for 15 years."

Uh ... yeah ... that whole "vast right wing conspiracy" thing again.

Before we continue, allow me to define socialized medicine for you.

Socialized Medicine:

Socialized medicine can refer to any system of medical care controlled and financed by the government.

Socialize:

1. To place under government or group ownership or control.
2. To make fit for companionship with others; make sociable.
3. To convert or adapt to the needs of society.

Ok, does everyone have it? If health care is placed under government control, and is funded by taxes ... it is socialized health care. It is not a conspiratorial attack on Hillary.

Unfortunately, some of us still have copies of the 1,300-page proposed "Health Security Act" crafted by Mrs. Clinton's secret committee in 1993. Under it, a patient who "stepped out of line" and offered to pay cash for a doctor's services would have been subject to criminal penalties.

But such heavy reading is hardly required. What is the rationale of the nanny-staters for all their new seat belt laws, helmet laws, child restraint laws? That "everyone" will have to pay our medical costs if we're injured, of course.

That's socialized medicine. Or does Sen. Clinton regularly vote against ongoing allocations for Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP?

Why is Hillary trying so hard to hide from her own plan? It is what it is, and you can't spin it become something else.

Hillary, you just got pwned!

To read what the exchange entailed, and Hillary's lies on the socialized health care of other nations go HERE.

Petraeus To Propose Troop Cuts

We'll see if the General's proposition holds up, and it should be noted that more troops than expected ended up in Iraq (not much). So the cuts might be to just bring the level of troops down to the required surge level.

Breitbart:

The top American commander in Iraq said Wednesday he was preparing recommendations on troop cuts before he returns to Washington next month for a report to Congress, and believes the U.S. footprint in Iraq will have to be "a good bit smaller" by next summer.

But he cautioned against a quick or significant U.S. withdrawal that could surrender "the gains we have fought so hard to achieve."

The general issued his comments to a small group of reporters who accompanied him to the headquarters of a group of former Sunni insurgents who are now working with American and Iraqi forces against al-Qaida in western Baghdad's Amariyah neighborhood.

Though this may just be a drawback to the intended surge levels ... it appears to be a part of the long term strategy after the surge's success.

"We know that the surge has to come to an end, there's no question about that. I think everyone understands that by about a year or so from now we've got to be a good bit smaller than we are right now.

"The question is how do you do that ... so that you can retain the gains we have fought so hard to achieve and so you can keep going. Again we are not at all satisfied where we are right now. We have made some progress but again there's still a lot of hard work to be done against the different extremist elements that do threaten the new Iraq."

Law Enforcement Allowed Access To US Spy Satellites

Google is coming! Google is coming!

No doubt the paranoids will loose their lunch over this move, and will cite it as proof the US is becoming a police state.

The US government has vastly expanded the number of local and federal authorities allowed access to US spy satellites.

Before anyone gets bent out of shape here ... let's remember that you have no expectation of privacy when you go out in public.

WSJ:

The U.S.'s top intelligence official has greatly expanded the range of federal and local authorities who can get access to information from the nation's vast network of spy satellites in the U.S.

The decision, made three months ago by Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell, places for the first time some of the U.S.'s most powerful intelligence-gathering tools at the disposal of domestic security officials. The move was authorized in a May 25 memo sent to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff asking his department to facilitate access to the spy network on behalf of civilian agencies and law enforcement.

Up until only a few agencies had access to the satellites, and only for scientific research.

The satellites will also be utilized for that "virtual fence" on our southern border.

Carbon Credits, Kyoto Causing Deforestation

One more chapter has been added to the growing novel of the carbon credit scam. This story picks up where Guyana getting uber pissed at Kyoto left off.

Essentially, the carbon credit scheme we have in place now is causing greedy money grabbers to cut down their forests so they can get paid.

Alter Net:

The current carbon market actually encourages cutting down some of the world's biggest forests, which would unleash tonnes of climate-warming carbon into the atmosphere, a new study reported on Monday.

Under the Kyoto Protocol aimed at stemming climate change, there is no profitable reason for the 10 countries and one French territory with 20 percent of Earth's intact tropical forest to maintain this resource, according to a study in the journal Public Library of Science Biology.

The Kyoto treaty and other talks on global warming focus on so-called carbon credits for countries and companies that plant new trees where forests have been destroyed.

At this point, there is no credit for countries that keep the forests they have, the study said.

"The countries that haven't really been the target of deforestation have nothing to sell because they haven't deforested anything," said Gustavo Fonseca, one of the study's authors.

Gee where have I heard that before.

"So that creates a perverse incentive for them to actually start deforesting, so that in the future, they might be allowed to actually cap-and-trade, as they call it: you put a cap on your deforestation and you trade that piece that hasn't been deforested," Fonseca said in a telephone interview.

The countries most at risk for this kind of deforestation, because they all have more than half their original forests intact, are Panama, Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Peru, Belize, Gabon, Guyana, Suriname, Bhutan and Zambia, along with the French territory of French Guiana.

These places need a system of credits to involve them in the "global deforestation avoidance market," said Fonseca, of the World Bank's Global Environment Facility.

The carbon credit scam, just like the global warming scam, is nothing short of a for-profit business that deals with billions upon billions of dollars.

Remember When John Edwards Said All Of The Money He Received From News Corp Went To Charity? Yeah, He Lied.

After Edwards attacked Hillary for accepting money from Murdoch we discovered that he too had accepted money from Murdoch. When confronted with such truth Edwards did as Edwards does ... he lied. He said that all of the hundreds of thousands of dollars he was paid by News Corp went to charity. What he forgot to mention was that two of those charities included his daughter and senior political aide ... oops!

Michelle:

“Every dime of the money they gave to me has gone to charity,” Edwards told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer earlier this month, suggesting News Corp. was trying to “silence” him because he opposes media consolidation. “This is a personal attack in response to me saying something that is not personal: I do not believe we should consolidate the media.”

His spokesman, Eric Schultz, said the charities include Habitat for Humanity and College for Everyone. Edwards did not mention the previously unreported fees to Prince and to Edwards’ daughter.

This guy must be sharing Obama's fact checker because they are both all over the place.

So The Chinese Want Us To Believe That This Toy Boss Committed Suicide

Yeah right. I suppose it is possible, but it is also possible in the land of executions that he was ... well ... executed.

BBC:

Zhang Shuhong, who co-owned the Lee Der Toy Company, was reportedly found dead at his factory in southern China.

About 1.5 million toys made for Fisher Price, a subsidiary of US giant Mattel, were withdrawn from sale earlier this month. Many were made by Lee Der.

He reportedly hung himself on Saturday, but I'm thinking he had a little help.

The news report did not give a reason for Zhang's apparent suicide, but Lee Der was known to be under pressure after the huge product recall.

Fisher Price announced on 2 August that it was recalling some of Lee Der's Chinese-made toys, in a move affecting 83 product-types sold around the world, including the US and the UK.

An internal investigation found the toys had been made using a non-approved paint pigment which contained excessive amounts of lead, violating safety standards.

A manager at Lee Der blamed its paint supplier for the incident, according to the Southern Metropolitan Daily.

Something smells fishy in the Fisher Price scandal to me.

If the company was blaming the paint supplier officially then why not wait for the investigation? This doesn't seem like a legitimate situation for someone to be committing suicide either.

I could be completely wrong on this, but China initially took an aggressive stand against the US's accusation of unsafe products after several safety issues. They have since been very passive, and trying to reassure the US that Chinese exports are safe.

Then comes this latest fiasco which served to embarrass the Chinese government, and harm the nation financially. We all know people disappear when you embarrass the Chinese government. Maybe, just maybe China sent a quiet message to business execs in China to not embarrass the country anymore.

Rove Steps Down

I know, I know, everyone is doing this story. Nor do I need to put in the effort to quote what some of the prominent liberal blogs are saying about the situation. Just read the story HERE if you haven't already.

Eco-Terrorists Attempt Assassination Of UCLA Doctor

Greenies gone wild!

Eco-terrorists with the Animal Liberation Brigade planted a bomb on Arthur Rosenbaum's car in an attempt to murder him, and with no regard to his family.

LA Weekly:

Rosenbaum, a highly regarded pediatric ophthalmologist who had been regularly harassed by animal-rights activists for his research work with cats and rhesus monkeys at the Jules Stein Eye Institute at UCLA, noticed a device underneath his luxury sedan. The bomb squad was dispatched to the scene and hauled away a makeshift — but deadly — explosive. A faulty fuse was the only reason it didn’t go off.

Three days later, the so-called Animal Liberation Brigade sent a typo-riddled “communiqué” to the North American Animal Liberation Press Office in Los Angeles. It was posted on the NAALPO Web site:

“130am on the twenty forth of june: 1 gallon of fuel was placed and set a light under the right front corner of Arthur Rosenbaums large white shiney BMW.

“He and his wife ..., living at ... in la, are the target of rebellion for the vile and evil things he does to primates at UCLA. We have seen by our own eyes the torture on fully concious primates in his lab. We have heard their whimpers and screeches of pain. Seeing this drove one of us to rush out and vomit. We have seen hell and its in Rosenbaums lab.

“Rosenbaum, you need to watch your back because next time you are in the operating room or walking to your office you just might be facing injections into your eyes like the primates, you sick twisted fuck.

“Demonstrators need to realize that just demonstrating won’t stop this kind of evil. Look up Arthur Rosenbaum to find out about his experiment from two thousand four threw two thousand seven. ‘animal liberation brigade’”

This isn't the first encounter with the greenies either.

For several years now, Rosenbaum and other faculty members at UCLA Medical Center have been targeted by animal-rights activists outraged by their experiments on primates. The researchers have endured crank phone calls, menacing e-mails and intimidating threats screamed over bullhorns in the middle of the night in front of their homes.

But with the attempted bombing of Rosenbaum, and the attempted Molotov cocktail bombing last year of UCLA researcher Lynn Fairbanks in Bel-Air, activists are no longer content with talking a mean game — they now want blood.

There appears to be dubious links to the Animal Liberation Front and this group, but they do operate as a separate entity.

As you know ... the Terrorism Knowledge Base is the premier source for terrorism information anywhere. Well, their take on the ALB should be enough for you to take this group seriously.

The Revolutionary Cells-Animal Liberation Brigade is an unusually violent animal-rights terrorist movement.

Helluva opening statement isn't it?

Torturous, Opressive U.S. Troops Save Iraqi Children's Lives

Those bastards!

Anyway, there are countless examples of the solid relationship with American troops and the Iraqi children. These latest three stories are just further evidence of the extent to which our troops will go to help an Iraqi child in need.

Army News Service:

Soldiers have answered the prayers of an Iraqi boy and his parents in Hollandia.

Sitting in the local health clinic with his father on a May morning, Ahaip Najim had no idea that hope would arrive. But in came members of the 97th Civil Affairs Battalion and 3rd Squadron, 1st Cavalry Regiment, to assess the town's needs.

"They discovered him in the health clinic there and just gathered around him," said Capt. Jimmy Hathaway, commander, Headquarters Troop, 3rd Sqdn., 1st Cav. Regt. "They decided right there that they were going to do everything in their power to help him."

The boy had an obstructed bowel, and had undergone surgery that left his intestines outside of his body. The risk of infection was serious, and our troops went to work to get the boy the proper surgery.

Cavalry and civil affairs Soldiers began calling contacts throughout the Army to find help for the child.

"Finally, we were put in contact with the hospital in An Najaf, Iraq," Capt. Hathaway said. "They agreed to help us."

The next challenge was getting Ahaip and his father to al Sadr Hospital, but the pieces fell into place after the Soldiers explained the situation to Multinational Force - Iraq Commander Gen. David H. Petraeus.

"He asked if there was anything we needed. He said this is exactly the type of thing we needed to be doing and volunteered his own aircraft," Capt. Hathaway said. "The aircraft was provided by Multinational Division - Center, but Gen. Petraeus' offer really said a lot about how important this mission had become to everyone."

They used two Blackhawks, two Apaches and a MEDEVAC to make sure the boy was safe during transport.

He is recovering now.

This act of kindness from our troops has had an astounding impact on that city.

The coalition's relationship with the town of Hollandia has improved with Soldiers' help to the boy and his family, Capt Hathaway added.

"They are very pro-coalition," he said. "They all saw the coverage of this on Iraqi television and saw that we were trying to help. One man told me, 'You did what you said you were going to do. Thank you.' That means a lot. We go into the town now and people come out to see us. They laugh and joke with us. We feel very welcome there."

The next story is somewhat similar.



Defenselink:

Even though she’s surrounded by war, Dalal is not much different from other children her age. She likes jump-rope and Cinderella and enjoys reading and drawing. Her favorite classes are religion and language, and she recently completed second grade -- earning perfect marks in all her studies. But, unlike many of her peers, the 8-year-old Iraqi girl also has fought a life-threatening battle from within since birth.

Due to the efforts of a U.S. Special Forces medic and an Army civil affairs noncommissioned officer, all of that changed recently, and Dalal was granted a new lease on life.

Dalal received an operation in Amman, Jordan, July 23 to correct a heart defect known as “tetralogy of Fallot.” The congenital disease causes a decreased flow of blood to the lungs, as well as mixing of blood from separate chambers of the heart. Left unattended, Dalal’s prognosis could have been death around the time she hit puberty.

I especially thought her liking Cinderella was a nice touch in the piece.

Dalal’s journey to the operating room began in eastern Iraq several months ago.

“The previous (Special Forces) team here discovered her,” said Army Staff Sgt. Joe Murtaugh, a U.S. Special Forces medical sergeant assigned to Iraq’s Anbar province.

While reviewing Dalal’s medical records, Murtaugh found an e-mail address for the International Organization of Migration in Jordan and contacted them for assistance.

“They directed us to several contacts, but the most important was (Army Staff Sgt. Marikay Satryano). She took care of all the logistical details in Jordan and even arranged for three organizations to cover the $8,000 cost of Dalal’s surgery,” Murtaugh said.

A civil affairs specialist assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Amman, Satryano created a program that matches charities and corporations to individual Iraqi children’s cases. Over the past two years, she has arranged for 61 children to receive lifesaving cardiac surgery either in Amman or the United States. In Dalal’s case, Satryano coordinated with the Environmental Chemical Corporation to arrange a free flight from Baghdad to Jordan. She also scheduled everything with the hospital in Amman and the free services of a Jordanian dentist who provided some necessary dental care.

This one person has arranged 61 Iraqi children to receive lifesaving surgery ... wow! That's what Americans are all about, and we helped Dalal's smile with some free dental care as well.

U.S. special operations forces played a major role in ensuring Dalal and her father could make the trip to Jordan.

“We assisted them in getting the new Iraqi G-series passports to travel out of the country,” Murtaugh said. “Our special operations task unit coordinated a flight from their hometown to Al Asad (Air Base), and we worked with the Combined Joint Special Operations Air Command to fly them from Al Asad to Baghdad. Another team member and I escorted the family to Baghdad, and we stayed with them until they departed to ensure there were no problems. Everyone was extremely helpful and provided us with excellent support throughout.”

So what does Dalal's family have to say about all of this?

“We appreciate that they (the Americans) care about us,” Dalal’s father, whose name was withheld to protect his identity, said through an interpreter. “I know you are here doing another job, and I am thankful for all you do. This is an unforgettable thing what you are doing for my family, and we cannot thank you enough for your help.”

The last story today outlines the compassion of US troops even when it is not a life or death situation.



Army News Service:

Before she deployed, Spc. Diana Sokol listened to Soldiers tell stories about how Iraqi children asked them for soccer balls and other items. She saw photos of kids in the city with virtually nothing but the clothes on their back, and she knew she would take action once deployed.

So when arrived in Iraq with Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 2nd Combined Arms Battalion, 69th Armor Regiment, the medic started a goodwill mission of securing soccer balls and other toys for Iraqi children.

"There is more than just fighting a war," she said. "We are supposed to help the Iraqis while we are here, as well."

To date, Spc. Sokol has distributed more than 300 soccer balls and 500 stuffed animals to children within the Strike Force Brigade's area of operation. And she she's far from being finished.

"Americans are very generous and would often send gift boxes of supplies to me, which I really appreciate," she said. "But how many bars of soap and toothpaste can you use on one deployment?"

Spc. Sokol started asking friends and family to send toys for the children instead. By word of mouth, information spread through her family, friends and their co-workers, and more people started to donate. One friend, who works at Texas Instruments, started a toy drive to collect more than 500 soccer balls, the biggest one-time donation to date.

Several other small businesses, such as soccer shops, along with individual donations, also helped, she said. Beanie Babies Ambassadors donated 300 stuffed animals, turning Spc. Sokol's room into a small warehouse.

"I will continue to give out toys for as long as I am here and hopefully someone else will continue," Spc. Sokol said. "Now, units come to me before going out on missions asking for toys and soccer balls for the kids.

Hearts and minds people ... hearts and minds.

Mexico Finally Apologizes to Miss USA For Behaving Like Asshats

Miss USA (Rachel Smith)

Remember when Miss USA was booed by Mexicans during the Miss Universe pageant?

Yeah, they finally got around to apologizing to her nearly three months later.

MSN:

A Mexican tourism official issued an apology for the jeers aimed at Miss USA in May during an international beauty contest in Mexico City.

Rachel Smith, the U.S. entrant into the Miss Universe competition, was booed by some of the audience after she slipped and fell during an evening-gown competition. Her fall and the audience reaction briefly attracted international attention.

Gabriel Szekely, chief of staff for Mexico's tourism department, wrote in a letter that he regretted the "unfortunate events" of the pageant.

"We understand the concern of the people of the United States about the incorrect behavior of a small group that attended the event," Szekely wrote. "We apologize for the inconvenience, and be sure that Miss Rachel Smith will always be welcome in Mexico."

Uh, I hate to break it to this guy but it was NOT a small group that booed Ms. Smith. It was damn near the whole audience, and that isn't counting all of the harassment she endured the whole time she was in Mexico both prior and post competition.

It was a nice try to assign blame to small fringe group of idiots rather than the very large number of Mexicans who behaved like the imbeciles they are though.

So why did Mexico finally apologize after all of this time? Was it that they've been having trouble sleeping at night? Could it have been a large number of good Mexicans writing letters, and making phone calls describing how embarrassed they were at the conduct of the countrymen? Of course not ... it was because two "homeless advocates" complained.

The letter was addressed to Los Angeles homeless activist Ted Hayes. It came after Hayes and a second activist, David Hernandez, complained to Ruben Beltran, the city's consul general of Mexico. It has been forwarded to Smith.

Well leave it to a couple of homeless advocates to get the job done. It is sad that it took the efforts of these two to get the Mexican government to behave better than their citizens, but I'm grateful for their effort.

In closing ... while a representative of Mexico's government said Ms. Smith is welcome in Mexico anytime ... the Mexican people made it clear that she is not. I would never set foot in that country again if I were her.

Whites No Longer Majority In 10% Of Counties ... 1/3 Of Most-Populous Counties...

Does that mean that white people can finally have our equivalents of the NAACP, BET, United Negro College Fund, affirmative action, and the other countless entities out there that benefit everyone except white people? Nah, that would still be racist.

NY Times:

In a further sign of the United States’ growing diversity, nonwhites now make up a majority in almost one-third of the most-populous counties in the country and in nearly one in 10 of all 3,100 counties, according to an analysis of census results to be released today.

The shift reflects the growing dispersal of immigrants and the suburbanization of blacks and Hispanics pursuing jobs generated by whites moving to the fringes of metropolitan areas.

Oh well, it's not like we can lose our jobs or businesses because we don't speak Spanish right? Oh yeah, we can lose work for not speaking Spanish, and this guy did lose his business.

Another Marine Has Murder Charges Dropped In Haditha Case

I had blogged about the possibility of the charges being dropped HERE. Well, they finally dropped the charges against Lance Corporal Justin Sharratt.

They also dropped the charges against Capt. Randy Stone for dereliction of duty for failing to properly report the civilian deaths.

Breitbart:

Murder charges against a US Marine accused of killing three Iraqi civilians during an alleged massacre in Haditha two years ago have been dropped, the military said on Thursday.

A statement released by the Marines at their Camp Pendleton base in southern California revealed that three charges of unpremeditated murder against Lance Corporal Justin Sharratt had been withdrawn.

The decision was announced in a written ruling from the commander Lieutenant General James Mattis and followed a recommendation from an investigator last month that the charges should be dropped.

"An independent Article 32 investigating officer has considered all the facts and determined that the evidence does not support a referral to court-martial for Lance Corporal Sharratt," Mattis wrote.

"Based on my review of all the evidence in this case and considering the recommendation of the Article 32 officer, I have dismissed the charges."

He's the second Marine to have murder charges dropped in the case, and he won't be the last. The case against the Marines is pathetic at best, and is unraveling on a near daily basis. I've given you several post in dealing with the problems with the case, and even more post dealing with Murtha's lies ... which are very relevant. So I'll let you follow the links.

The sad part is that many Americans still don't know that there was, in fact, two ambushes targeting the Marines, and then their backup after the initial IED.

AT&T Censors Pearl Jam

I realize that a significant portion of the libs pissed off about this are hypocritical because they often support censoring conservative voices. With that said ... conservatives typically do not support censoring of any kind, and AT&T deserves some flak.

Reuters:

Pearl Jam fans and Internet watchdogs were up in arms Thursday after it was revealed that AT&T Inc. censored portions of the rock band's live concert cybercast on Sunday.

While performing "Daughter" during the annual Lollapalooza festival in Chicago, the band segued into a portion of Pink Floyd's "Another Brick in the Wall," during which frontman Eddie Vedder sang, "George Bush, leave this world alone" and "George Bush, find yourself another home." Those lyrics were missing from the broadcast.

There were other liberal diatribes unleashed by Vedder that were not censored as well.

Vedder also railed against oil giant BP during the set, and later, brought a disabled Iraq War veteran onstage to call for an end to the conflict. Neither of these segments were edited.

So, at least, it doesn't look like it was part of the vast right-wing conspiracy.

AT&T says it was a mistake, and squarely put the blame on webcast vendor.

In a statement, AT&T attributed the bleeping to "a mistake by a Webcast vendor" that was "contrary to our policy. We have policies in place with respect to editing excessive profanity, but AT&T does not censor performances. We very much regret that this happened in the first place."

They are also working with Pearl Jam to post the song in its entirety.

If you head over to Pearl Jam's website you will find some angry "the corporations are out to get us" statements about the event.

Sheep Raped By Man Doesn't Testify ... Man Goes Free

Photo Courtesy Of AJayswebcams.com
I think the Netherlands needs to rethink their place in the world. If it isn't sex with children ... it's sex with sheep.

Source:

A MAN who was accused of having sex with a sheep has walked free because the animal was unable to testify.

The man, from Haaksbergen, near Utrecht in the Netherlands, was reported to police after a farmer caught him having sex with a sheep.

But the case was thrown out of court as the sheep couldn't take to the stand to testify that it didn't want to have sex and had suffered emotional stress.

Under Dutch law, bestiality is not a crime unless it can be proved the animal didn't want to have sex.

That's right ... bestiality is a-o-k in the Netherlands.

So, how exactly is an animal able to prove that it wanted to have some nasty boom boom with a human?

Poll: Judge Who Sued Over Pants Likely To Lose Job

AP Photo
Remember the judge who sued for millions of dollars over a $10.50 alteration? You already knew he lost his case, you already knew the cleaners were counter-suing, you already knew there was a collection fund set up for their legal fees, but did you know that Judge Pearson may lose his job?

WaPo:

By the middle of next week, Roy Pearson, the D.C. administrative law judge who sued his neighborhood dry cleaners for $54 million and lost, will receive a letter that starts the process that could put him out of a job.

City sources said a marathon meeting of the Commission on Selection and Tenure of Administrative Law Judges ended late Monday with agreement to meet again next week to finalize wording of a letter explaining the panel's doubts about granting Pearson a 10-year term on the bench. Pearson's initial term expired at the end of April, at the height of his legal battle against the Chung family, owners of Custom Cleaners on Bladensburg Road NE.

Would you want this guy to be a judge for the next 10 years? Clearly he has shown a lack of common sense and fairness ... inherent traits for a judge.

The panel's discussion about Pearson's future has focused on what role a judge's behavior outside the courtroom should play in assessing his qualifications. Was Pearson's extraordinary zeal in pursuing the case against the Chungs so embarrassing that it amounts to evidence of poor judicial temperament?

I think every decision a judge makes outside of the courthouse is relevant in deciding if they are qualified for the job.

If people can have employment turned down because of their credit rating in this country then a judge should be denied the bench based on litigious action.

So what do you think?

Should Judge Pearson Lose His Job?
	Yes
	No
	Other Punishment
pollcode.com free polls

Government Employees Get Performance Bonuses Not Based On Performance

I know, I know ... big surprise right? The federal government is set up to provide performance bonuses to its employees. Guess who gets to make the determination of who is deserving of the bonuses? Well the employees, of course.

Review Journal:

According to recent reports, more than two-thirds of senior Washington bureaucrats received bonuses designed to reward high performance. Merit pay, if you will.

"It seems those who administer this bonus program at the various agencies think all the Senior Executive Service employees are above average," said Sen. Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat who has called for an investigation from the Government Accountability Office.

The numbers are amazing, but not surprising:

-- At the Office of Personnel Management, 97.2 percent of the senior executives received performance bonuses.

-- At the General Services Administration, the number was 97.1 percent.

-- The Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Labor and Defense awarded merit bonuses at a rate of 93.1, 91.7 and 91 percent respectively.

On the bright side, at least the rewards are one-shot payments, rather than salary hikes that add to annual baseline personnel costs.

At the same time, it's obvious that without proper oversight, allowing federal bureaucrats to hand each other "performance" bonuses is, with apologies to the great P.J. O'Rourke, akin to giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

So we have a government that can vote for their own pay raises, their own bonuses, and commit crimes without fear of the FBI searching their offices ... outstanding!

Government Doesn't Need Warrants For Eavesdropping

The backlash on this should be fun. I can see all the posts about the death of the 5th Amendment again from people who've never read the 5th Amendment, and more whining without any historical perspective. Best part is that those decrying fowl for being able to listen to international calls are going to propose opening more crates in our ports ... as if there is a difference.

NY Times:

President Bush signed into law on Sunday legislation that broadly expanded the government’s authority to eavesdrop on the international telephone calls and e-mail messages of American citizens without warrants.

Congressional aides and others familiar with the details of the law said that its impact went far beyond the small fixes that administration officials had said were needed to gather information about foreign terrorists. They said seemingly subtle changes in legislative language would sharply alter the legal limits on the government’s ability to monitor millions of phone calls and e-mail messages going in and out of the United States.

They also said that the new law for the first time provided a legal framework for much of the surveillance without warrants that was being conducted in secret by the National Security Agency and outside the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law that is supposed to regulate the way the government can listen to the private communications of American citizens.

“This more or less legalizes the N.S.A. program,” said Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies in Washington, who has studied the new legislation.

We've been hearing for a while now (falsely) that the government eavesdropping program was "spying on Americans" whenever they made a call. This was completely untrue, and a well known lie. The government can only monitor calls where one party was outside the US, and a terror suspect. The new law makes that clear as day.

By changing the legal definition of what is considered “electronic surveillance,” the new law allows the government to eavesdrop on those conversations without warrants — latching on to those giant switches — as long as the target of the government’s surveillance is “reasonably believed” to be overseas.

For example, if a person in Indianapolis calls someone in London, the National Security Agency can eavesdrop on that conversation without a warrant, as long as the N.S.A.’s target is the person in London.

So we can stop the lying now.

Just to calm the nerves of you paranoid folks out there ... it's just a stop-gap and expires in six months.

Court Says FBI Raid On Congressional Office Unconstitutional ... Constitution Disagrees

The never ending saga that is William Jefferson (D-LA) continues. This is, at best, a very confusing ruling. The US Court of Appeals in DC said the raid wasn't unconstitutional, but the FBI not allowing Jefferson to hide papers was ... well, that's essentially what they were saying.

As a side note ... the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution does not protect lawmakers from having their offices searched, and being arrested. More on that later.

Breitbart:

The FBI violated the Constitution when agents raided U.S. Rep. William Jefferson's office last year and viewed legislative documents, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.

The court ordered the Justice Department to return any privileged documents it seized from the Louisiana Democrat's office on Capitol Hill. The court did not order the return of all the documents seized in the raid.

Jefferson argued that the first-of-its-kind raid trampled congressional independence. The Justice Department said that declaring the search unconstitutional would essentially prohibit the FBI from ever looking at a lawmaker's documents.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected that claim. The three-judge panel unanimously ruled that the search itself was constitutional but that FBI agents crossed the line when they viewed every record in the office without giving Jefferson the chance to argue that some documents involved legislative business.

"The review of the Congressman's paper files when the search was executed exposed legislative material to the Executive" and violated the Constitution, the court wrote. "The Congressman is entitled to the return of documents that the court determines to be privileged."

Are you a little confused? You should be, and here's why:

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is the primary investigative arm of the United States Department of Justice, the DOJ is a part of the Executive Branch. Therefore, according to the court, the checks and balances between the three branches of government were violated because the FBI (as representatives of the executive) were able to see legislative material during their search of Jefferson's office. Thus, some of the documents must be returned.

The court did not rule whether, because portions of the search were illegal, prosecutors should be barred from using any of the records in their case against Jefferson. That will be decided by the federal judge in Virginia who is presiding over the criminal case.

"We're pleased with the court's decision that makes it clear that the search violated the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution," Jefferson's attorney, Robert Trout, said after a brief review of the ruling. He said he has not yet discussed the decision with Jefferson.

Actually, the search did not violate the clause at all, and the Supreme Court has ruled on this before.

The FBI even used a "filter team" not involved in the case to review the congressional documents. They also stated that the Constitution does not shield lawmakers, and it doesn't.

Now we are waiting for the next ruling in Virginia to find out if the incriminating evidence will be thrown out.

Most Americans are perplexed by this case because we all know if you commit a crime you will be arrested, and your property will be searched with a warrant. Well, Jefferson faces criminal charges, and a warrant was issued to search his office. No big deal right? Wrong!

The Constitution has a Speech and Debate Clause which is designed to prevent the Executive Branch of government from arresting congressional representatives in order to prevent them from voting. It's a check to prevent a tyrant from controlling Congress. Since the FBI is a part of the Executive Branch, and Jefferson is a part of the Legislative Branch, Jefferson is saying that the clause was violated by an abuse of power from the Executive Branch.

So what is the Speech and Debate Clause?

It is Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the US Constitution, and it reads as follows:

'Sec. 6. The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony, and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House they shall not be questioned in any other Place.'

You'll notice that the clause itself specifically says that representatives are not protected in the case of a felony ... Jefferson is facing felony charges. Therefore there is no protection from arrest afforded to Jefferson by the Constitution.

The arrest and search doesn't appear to be in question with this latest ruling despite Jefferson's attempts to have all charges dropped because of the clause. The issue is the paperwork seized from his office that authorities say prove their case against Jefferson.

The court ruled that Jefferson should have been given the opportunity to identify, and separate legislative documents from the rest of the paperwork in his office. Since the FBI was not allowed to view said documents, how could they confirm Jefferson wasn't lying?

Now why on earth would a court rule that a suspect has the right to tell law enforcement which documents they can view and take as evidence, and which documents they are not allowed to see? Jefferson could easily have lied in order to prevent incriminating evidence from being used against him, and the FBI would never have known it.

This ruling creates a "safe haven" for lawmakers engaging in illegal activity to hide evidence in their offices, and any warrants served by law enforcement would become null and void. Instead of it being a search ... it would become a request for evidence.

Find Law describes the clause as:

This clause is practically obsolete. It applies only to arrests in civil suits, which were still common in this country at the time the Constitution was adopted. It does not apply to service of process in either civil or criminal cases. Nor does it apply to arrest in any criminal case. The phrase ''treason, felony or breach of the peace'' is interpreted to withdraw all criminal offenses from the operation of the privilege.

Clearly our founding fathers would not have built into the Constitution any protections for lawmakers breaking the law.

"The immunities of the Speech or Debate Clause were not written into the Constitution simply for the personal or private benefit of Members of Congress, but to protect the integrity of the legislative process by insuring the independence of individual legislators." - United States v. Brewster

In the case of Williamson v. United States (1908) the Supreme Court wrote:

It is not asserted that it has ever been finally settled by this court that the constitutional privilege does not prohibit the arrest and punishment of a member of Congress for the commission of any criminal offense. The contention must rest, therefore, upon the assumption that the text of the Constitution so plainly excludes all criminal prosecutions from the privilege which that instrument accords a congressman as to cause the contrary assertion to be frivolous.

Meaning, any privileges you have as a lawmaker go out the window with criminal offenses. The Supreme Court also ruled that "felony" applied to all criminal offenses because the word was commonly used during the era of our founding fathers to describe any crime.

Like I said earlier ... this is a confusing ruling at best. If lawmakers are allowed to hide evidence against them in their offices ... how can we prosecute their criminal behavior? Since law enforcement tied to the Department of Justice is not allowed to view documents in the lawmaker's office without their permission ... what law enforcement agency is allowed jurisdiction to search congressional offices to gather evidence?

This is looking less and less like a checks and balances issue between the branches of government, and more like a power grab for the legislature.

UPDATE: Looks Like CAIR Did Not Drop Lawsuit Against John Doe Passengers

Yesterday I told you that LGF was reporting that the AP's story that CAIR had dropped the passengers from the suit was false. It appears that we have confirmation that CAIR is still planning on suing the passengers for reporting suspicious behavior.

Washington Times:

A religious-freedom advocacy group yesterday asked a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit against airline passengers who reported suspicious behavior of a group of Muslim imams that resulted in their removal from a US Airways flight.

The amicus brief by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota was filed on behalf of "John Doe" passengers who are included in a lawsuit against the airline and the Minneapolis Metropolitan Airports Commission.

If CAIR had dropped the passengers then we wouldn't have this group requesting the passengers be dropped from the suit.

CAIR seems hell bent on taking it to the passengers anyway.

A second attorney for the imams told Judge Ann Montgomery during a hearing Tuesday, "We don't contemplate naming any private passenger as a defendant," KSTP-TV in Minneapolis reported.

Gerard Nolting, the lawyer who represents one of the "John Doe" passengers, called the statement "meaningless and disingenuous" because "tomorrow they may contemplate adding the passengers" by name.

The statements CAIR has been making about this case are vague, and could be used to by time without having public scrutiny.