Skinning: Wordpress • Invision • Expression Engine • phpBB3
Does This Sound Familiar?
by Sandi

"Anyone who examines the record can see that this president has lied his way into this war."


(show) The rest of the above paragraph.


More at Transterrestrial Musings.

H/T Dean's World

Posted Saturday October 29, 2005 | Catagory: | Permalink
3 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Christopher Hitchens Calls Galloway's Bluff
by Sandi

Not just as a pimp for fascism but one of its prostitutes as well.

Via Lucianne

Posted Wednesday October 26, 2005 | Catagory: | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
WaPo's Attempt To Rehabilitate Joseph Wilson
by Sandi
It seems rather amusing that reporters like WAPo's Walter Pincus hate the administration enough that they would try to rehabilitate Joseph Wilson's credibility after being duped into writing Wilson's earlier proven frabrications. Especially after Wilson accused Pincus of sloppy reporting to cover up his own misrepresentations.

Stephen Hayes at the The Daily Standard fisks WaPo's feeble attempt by Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus to put life back Wilson's credability.



Update: The American Thinker reports:

Russo Martino, the man behind the forged documents indicating Saddam had purchased uranium from Niger, which Joseph A. Wilson falsely claimed he had seen and warned the Administration about, has come forward and admitted that he did this in the pay of France to undermine the British and American justification for the war in Iraq.
His admission to investigating magistrates in Rome on Friday apparently confirms suggestions that – by commissioning “Giacomo” to procure and circulate documents – France was responsible for some of the information later used by Britain and the United States to promote the case for war with Iraq.

Italian diplomats have claimed that, by disseminating bogus documents stating that Iraq was trying to buy low-grade “yellowcake” uranium from Niger, France was trying to “set up” Britain and America in the hope that when the mistake was revealed it would undermine the case for war, which it wanted to prevent.

Being on the payroll of the French intelligence, I suppose the French won't be too pleased about Martino being exposed.

Posted Tuesday October 25, 2005 | Catagory: (Media Bias) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Want to Flock Around With a New Browser?
by Sandi
The Flock preBeta version (0.4.9) is available for download on the Flock Developer page.

It's a neat browser that I have only been playing with since last night, but it has a lot of neat features.



Click to enlarge


Favorites: Flock favorites are stored online (shared or not shared) by just clicking a star in the URL bar. No more herding your favorites into folders. You can have multiple Favorite toolbars or switch between them. Favorites automatically contain any site feeds and that feed is cached and updated every hour as they are sored online.

History: Extensive History Search that starts searching as you type. Keeps track of which web pages you visit most frequently as well as the most recent. Indexes all the content of the pages you vist making retracing your steps a lot easier.

Blogging: Set up your blog account(s) from the Preferences. You can highlight text in a webpage, and one click to bring up the blog editor with that text inserted to publish (or drag and drop from the menu). You can also drag and drop picutes with the Flickr topbar. So far the Blogging only works with WordPress, Movable Type and Typepad but more should be added later. I'm tempted to try it anyway with PowerBlogs, but a bit leary as this is a preBeta version of Flock.

The Shelf: Or you can use The Shelf, which is just a scrapbook for stuff that you might want to blog about later. Shelf snippets are from web content only (you can't paste from your computer), and are already formatted as Blockquotes.

Well there is a lot more but as I have only played with Flock for a few hours, I have much yet to learn and figure out. It is smooth and has a real nice feel, and only crashed once which isn't bad for a prebeta. You can find out more on Welcome to Flock Developer Preview.

Update: Now that I have had a couple of days to play with Flock I have mixed feelings. Basically it's sort of like Mozilla or Firefox without the "Bookmarks," as it uses "del.is.icio.us" online bookmark manager. There are extra goodies though to make it worth a test drive. Oh there are rudimentary bookmarks there, but it is like having to go to "Manage Bookmarks" in Firefox to use them. The del.is.icio.us online probably works alot better if I can ever figure it out.

Before downloading Flock I didn't have a del.is.icio.us account so I imediately signed up for one. The problem is that I can't get any pages or tags permanently into it.

Using the proper procedure for adding tags works out just fine, but they do not show up in my del.is.icio.us account online. Not only that going back to check the tag on one I added shows no tags. WTF!

Well I've decided that it must be because when I first set it up it asked me if I wanted to share my URLs... Well hell no of course I don't want to share them, and maybe thats why del.is.icio.us is called a "social bookmarks manager." Gods nightshirt, the advertising companies must be having a fielday with this feature.

Other than that Flock is a great browser. The blog features are nice though a bit thin, but future updates will likely improve them. I especially like "Flickr Topbar" where you can drag photos right into the blog editor, but so far I can't get the "Blog Topbar" to work (error detecting your blog setting) no matter what URL I use.

So for now I've gone back to using Firefox until I can find decent documentation, or somehow get past this TAGing favorites block, and actually find some sanity in managing my URLs.

Posted Sunday October 23, 2005 | Catagory: (Blogging) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
The Camels Nose Is Under The Tent
by Sandi
Post source via The Boston Globe By Hiawatha Bray


Or maybe the camel is more in the tent than out. I'm not one to be paranoid and I'll be the first to scoff at the conspiracy theories floating around the forums I haunt. But... planners for RFID (Radio Frequency IDentification) are already letting their imaginations run wild. Soon without strong controls it will be getting out of hand.

"Why are you blocking the road?" the driver asks. ''Because you're going the wrong way," replies the cheerful Help Desk lady. "Your cargo told me so." It seems the cartons inside the truck contained IBM technology that alerted the company when the driver made a wrong turn.

It's clever, all right -- and creepy. Because the technology needn't be applied only to cases of beer. The trackers could be attached to every can of beer in the case, and allow marketers to track the boozing habits of the purchasers. Or if the cargo is clothing, those little trackers could have been stitched inside every last sweater. Then some high-tech busybody could keep those wearing them under surveillance.

The Hi-Tech companies and the government say that they don't intend to use them for tracking and big brother surveillance, but they are also balking at putting those principles into law.

If this sounds paranoid, take it up with IBM. The company filed a patent application in 2001 which contemplates using this wireless snooping technology to track people as they roam through ''shopping malls, airports, train stations, bus stations, elevators, trains, airplanes, rest rooms, sports arenas, libraries, theaters, museums, etc." An IBM spokeswoman insisted the company isn't really prepared to go this far. Patent applications are routinely written to include every possible use of a technology, even some the company doesn't intend to pursue. Still, it's clear somebody at IBM has a pretty creepy imagination.

EPC Global that sets standards for the spychips has a code of ethics requiring customer notificaton of the presence of RFID tags and recognition of the customers right to deactivate them. When Jack Grasso, EPC Global spokesman was asked about about putting these principles into law said, "We believe it is far too early." Because the RFID industry is so young, any regulation "would have a chilling effect that would put us back years." Chilling indeed, I would hope so!

Why is this so scary? Because so many of us pay for our purchases with credit or debit cards, which contain our names, addresses, and other sensitive information. Now imagine a store with RFID chips embedded in every product. At checkout time, the digital code in each item is associated with our credit card data. From now on, that particular pair of shoes or carton of cigarettes is associated with you. Even if you throw them away, the RFID chips will survive. Indeed, Albrecht and McIntyre learned that the phone company BellSouth Corp. had applied for a patent on a system for scanning RFID tags in trash, and using the data to study the shopping patterns of individual consumers...

Then there are the RFID pajamas from a California maker of children's clothing. It's a clever way to prevent kidnapping: Just put RFID readers in your home, to alert you if Junior's taking an unauthorized trip. It's easy to imagine parents buying into this idea, but they'll now have to install RFID readers in their homes. ''There's the nose in the camel's tent," said Albrecht. At first, companies will just scan your kids' jammies. But later they'll ask permission to scan the tags on your groceries and your clothes. The consulting company Accenture has patented a design that builds an RFID reader into a household medicine cabinet, to make sure you're taking all your medications.

Imagine your boss calling and yelling because you across town when your supposed to be home sick. The company for the corn flakes you bought the kids calling and pestering you to buy another product. Your HMO calling because you bought a pack of cigarettes. Or the motor vehicle department calling because your engine emmisions are above standards. Etc etc.

No I'm not paranoid——yet, but strong legislation needs to be put in place to keep this kind of hightech activity on a tight leash before gets too widespread. The problem is that this is the sort of thing that creeps in first disguised as useful everyday conveniences, time and work savers and comforts for life, then before we know it we wonder where our privacy went.

Posted Sunday October 23, 2005 | Catagory: | Permalink
1 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
How Much is Your Blog Worth?
by Sandi
H/T Dean's World.

Heh, any takers? Click the link and see what your blog is worth.



My blog is worth $97,100.88.
How much is your blog worth?



How about ten cents on the dollar? (cash)

Posted Saturday October 22, 2005 | Catagory: (Blogging) | Permalink
2 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Should We Have a Taxpayer Bill of Rights, Or Not?
by Sandi

That is the question Frank Lasee asked in his newsletter yesterday.

We’ll all say we want a real one, but some of us – some of us who should know better – are ready to endorse a false TABOR.

In his most recent column, JJ Blonien does just this. It’s not the first time – JJ endorsed Senate Joint Resolution 76 (the Gard-Panzer bill) last year.

SJR 76 was a false product. Window dressing. SJR 76 would have allowed the state to exempt huge blocks of spending from the limits, while leaving the Legislature to spend that money without asking. It would have allowed the state to eliminate shared revenues and school aids, and allow local governments to raise property taxes to make up the difference. It didn’t require referendums for bonding.

These points and others made SJR 76 meaningless. Bad law. It did not protect the taxpayer.

Now JJ is endorsing a TABOR with the same flaws. His proposals sound simple, straightforward, and commonsense, but it ignores the simple fact that government will exploit any loophole. And like SJR 76, his proposal leaves loopholes. It doesn’t protect the taxpayer.

For example, under JJ’s proposal, the state will rob Peter to pay Paul: shift spending onto local governments, and reduce or eliminate shared revenue. Because there are no limits on tax rates, locals will raise taxes to make up for the shared revenue they lost.

Or our governments will raise the tax rates simply to generate excess revenue, then ask for permission to spend it, since they already have it.

The taxpayer will not be protected.

The majority of voters want a TABOR that works. Our Wisconsin legislators don't want to turn spending power over to them, but they are willing to pass more feel-good do-nothing piece of legislation so as to look good for the constituency.

Related Posts (on one page):

  1. Should We Have a Taxpayer Bill of Rights, Or Not?
  2. There is no Universality in Universal
Posted Friday October 21, 2005 | Catagory: (Wis Politics) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Exterminate White People?
by Sandi
WTF?

This article was posted on my favorite forum by effej one of my readers. Speaking to a panel at Howard University Law School, Dr. Kamau Kambon had the following to say:

Addressing a panel on “Hurricane Katrina Media Coverage,” broadcast in its entirety on C-SPAN, Kambon told the audience that white people “have retina scans, they have what they call racial profiling, DNA banks, and they’re monitoring our people to try to prevent the one person from coming up with the one idea. And the one idea is, how we are going to exterminate white people because that in my estimation is the only conclusion I have come to. We have to exterminate white people off the face of the planet to solve this problem.”

Kambon’s solution received slight applause in the room, to which he responded, “I don’t care whether you clap or not, but I’m saying to you that we need to solve this problem because they are going to kill us.”

Look up paranoid and there should be a picture of this guy. Also supprising is that he got applause, slight or not.

Well it would alleviate other peoples paranoia that think the world will someday reach over population. That is a paranoia that Dean Esmay quashes.

Update: Dean Esmay takes a commenter to task who accuses bloggers of piling one and lamenting over racism the black community, and can't help but wonder about our motivations.

But since we are now getting into the insidious subject of questioning people's motives and pretending that we can read others' minds:

I have to wonder at your motivation in describing vile hatemongering racist garbage as merely crazy, and at your motivations for -- quite wrongly by the way -- sugegesting that this man has no power. He is certainly more powerful than your average Klansman or Neo-Nazi or Fred Phelps follower, yet why is it that I think you would not be questioning anyone's motives in attacking those filthy hatemongering pigs?

What fantasy world is it that you live in, by the way, that you think black people have no power in this country? And what world do you live in where encouraging racial violence is not a danger to all decent people everywhere in this country?

My motivation is to to decry racism and intolerance, and to decry those who advocate violence and preach hate. What are your motives in questioning that? Perhaps your own hidden racist desires to see white people as powerful and black people as powerless? Or your own hidden hatred of mainstream America?


Posted Friday October 21, 2005 | Catagory: (Stupid Should Hurt) | Permalink
11 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
A Good Fisking of the Tollerant Elitist Left
by Sandi
SF Gate writer Mark Morford, wrote one of the worst elitist journalistic editorial articles shameful rants. He comes completly unglued about this couple, because they have 16 kids and wouldn't mind having more. But my favorite forum has a military blogger who has done a delicious job of wacking Morford around.

Feel free to give SF Gate writer Mark Morford your views at mmorford@sfgate.com

Update: Via the Queen.

While one mother can handle 16 kids and want even more, it is heart wrenching that this mother threw her 3 off a San Francisco fishing pier into the bay to drown.


Posted Friday October 21, 2005 | Catagory: (Stupid Should Hurt) | Permalink
0 Comments | 1 Trackbacks
There is no Universality in Universal
by Sandi

Or how politicians take credit for what they don't stand for. Via Lance Burri, this concept is so true and probably why we get so much legislation that is half measures and end up costing several times what is proposed or suspected.

It’s not exactly a new concept. Kids do it. Parents mad about the messy room? Make a start at cleaning it, just to take the edge off. Maybe play with the baby brother for a while. Then ask about going to the movies.

Now, State Senator Judy Robson (D-Beloit) has taken this concept to a whole new level.

Robson has drafted a bill calling for universal health care in Wisconsin. That’s universal health care, as in everybody gets it, but nobody has to pay for it.

At least, I assume that’s what it means. Maybe I shouldn’t, but she’s left the door open for speculation.

That’s because, you see, while she’s drafted a bill calling for universal health care, she hasn’t drafted a bill to create universal health care.

What’s the difference?

Robson’s bill doesn’t do anything. It doesn’t address availability, or cost, or accessibility. It doesn’t provide incentives for people to live healthier lives, or for more people to choose health care as a career. It doesn’t promote greater awareness of health care options. It doesn’t mandate health care for those who don’t have insurance already.

Nothing. Seriously.

Well, okay, not nothing. It does require to pass another bill – this one giving us universal health care.

Today I hereby put in writing a call upon myself to—at some future date—have people that agree, pass a written law that I should stop smoking sometime or other.

Read the rest of Lance's article...

Related Posts (on one page):

  1. Should We Have a Taxpayer Bill of Rights, Or Not?
  2. There is no Universality in Universal
Posted Thursday October 20, 2005 | Catagory: (Wis Politics) | Permalink
2 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Evacuees Binge Fed Cash on Booze and Strippers
by Sandi
Report via the Boston Herald

From a FEMA online course I recently took, this kind of use is against FEMA regulations. What the penalties are (if any) I don't know because I haven't gotten that far yet.

[B]OURNE – Hurricane Katrina evacuees hastily handed $2,000 in federal relief money last month have been living it up on Cape Cod, blowing cash on booze and strippers, a Herald investigation has found.

Herald reporters witnessed blatant public drinking at a Falmouth strip mall by Katrina victims living at taxpayer expense at Camp Edwards on Otis Air Force Base. And strippers at Zachary's nightclub in Mashpee, a few miles from the Bourne base, report giving lap dances to several evacuees.

"They were tipping me $5 a pop," said a Zachary's dancer named Angel. "I told them I felt bad taking their money. But I still took it."

Why the President decided to bankroll these people instead of going the normal application for aid route is beyond me, yet I'm not supprised. Well one reason I'm sure was just for PR.

Posted Tuesday October 18, 2005 | Catagory: (Stupid Should Hurt) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
US Security Chief Strives to Expel All Illegal Immigrants
by Sandi
Report via BREITBART.COM

Michael Chertoff, Homeland Security Secretary either has a lot of optimism or else he is a braggart of imense proportions.

"Our goal at DHS (Homeland Security) is to completely eliminate the 'catch and release' enforcement problem, and return every single illegal entrant, no exceptions.

"It should be possible to achieve significant and measurable progress to this end in less than a year," Chertoff told a Senate hearing.

An admirable goal and I hope I'm wrong and that he can accomplish even half of that, but he will get no help from congress, or the adminsitration for that matter. Bush is for amnesty (under a different name) and "worker permits." Congress for the most part either want the cheap labor (Republicans), or potential votes (Democrats) legal or not. The latter also being one of the reasons Democrats strongly oppose valid Voter ID legislation.

Posted Tuesday October 18, 2005 | Catagory: (Immigration) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Taxes Too High - We Need Campaign Finance Refrom?
by Sandi
In a survey (support for TABOR) Wisconsin voters were asked: "Would you favor or oppose a Wisconsin state constitutional amendment that would limit increases in spending by both state and local governments to the rate of inflation?"

Owen at Boots & Sabers takes the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel to task for this unbelievable remark about why Wisconsin taxpayers want TABOR:
Simply, a big reason for that has to be the dismal state of current campaign finance law - which gives all the appearance in the world of abetting legalized bribery. Both the governor and the state Legislature must get serious about campaign finance reform.
Owen goes on to explain the logic of TABOR and the spin surrounding it. Read it all.


Posted Tuesday October 18, 2005 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
A New Toy For My Readers
by Sandi

H/T to Patrick at Badger Blogger for sparking my interested in a Shout Box, the new toy in my right sidebar.

It works like a live IM or simple chatroom if other readers are present, or a simple way to post a short message. For now anyone can use it, but if I get too much abuse (which I doubt with my handful of users), I'll set it to registered users only.

Feel free to play around with it, but leave critique to my posts in the regular comments. You can get your own shoutbox for your blog or website at SayBox.

Posted Monday October 17, 2005 | Catagory: | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Wanna Be A City Council Person?
by Sandi

You can't hardly have an election if no one is running.

OAKLEY, Idaho (AP) - Municipal elections are coming up, but this city in southern Idaho has no candidates.

Oakley has two city council vacancies to fill in November, but no one has filed the papers to be placed on the ballot, and the deadline for write-in candidacy is fast approaching.

Mayor Garth Greenwell said he hoped somebody would come forward. If nobody does, the two council seats will remain vacant, and on Jan. 1 Greenwell will work with the rest of the council to appoint someone to fill each vacancy, attorney Steve Tuft said.

"Even if there is not enough council members to constitute a quorum, government cannot be shut down," Tuft said. "So it will be up to the remaining council members and the mayor to appoint someone if no election is held in November."


Posted Sunday October 16, 2005 | Catagory: (Oddities) | Permalink
2 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
PETA Workers Face 25 Felony Counts
by Sandi
Report via Pilot Online

These discusting people don't even know what they stand for (assuming they ever stood for anything).

WINTON, N.C. — The cats and dogs two PETA employees have been charged with euthanizing and dumping in an Ahoskie garbage bin were killed by injections of pentobarbital, a barbiturate commonly used to put down animals, according to new warrants issued and served on Friday.

Additionally, the two employees were charged with three felony counts of obtaining property by false pretenses. The charges allege that they euthanized three cats from an Ahoskie veterinarian after promising to find the animals new homes, according to the new warrants.


Posted Sunday October 16, 2005 | Catagory: (Crime) | Permalink
1 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Thought and Belief Warriors in the Classroom
by Sandi
Dispositions theory for accreditation of teachers?

The cultural left has a new tool for enforcing political conformity in schools of education. It is called dispositions theory, and it was set forth five years ago by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education: Future teachers should be judged by their "knowledge, skills, and dispositions." What are "dispositions"? NCATE's prose made clear that they are the beliefs and attitudes that guide a teacher toward a moral stance. That sounds harmless enough, but it opened a door to reject teaching candidates on the basis of thoughts and beliefs. In 2002, NCATE said that an education school may require a commitment to social justice. William Damon, a professor of education at Stanford, wrote last month that education schools "have been given unbounded power over what candidates may think and do, what they may believe and value."

NCATE vehemently denies that it is imposing groupthink, but the ed schools, essentially a liberal monoculture, use dispositions theory to require support for diversity and a culturally left agenda, including opposition to what the schools sometimes call "institutional racism, classism, and heterosexism." Predictably, some students concluded that thought control would make classroom dissent dangerous. A few students rebelled when a teacher at Brooklyn College School of Education showed Michael Moore's movie Fahrenheit 9/11 in class and dismissed "white English" as "the language of oppressors." Five students filed written complaints and received no formal reply from the college. One was told to leave the school and take an equivalent course at a community college. Two of the complaining students were then accused of plagiarism and marked down one letter grade. The two were refused permission to bring a witness, a tape recorder, or a lawyer to meet with a dean to discuss the matter.

One of NCATE's stated purposes "is the [teaching] profession’s mechanism to help establish high quality teacher preparation." But by whos definition of quality and whos standards? From reading the above article it seems they are more likely to accredit only left leaning standards.

It appears that NCATE also influences School Library Media Education Programs.
Posted Sunday October 16, 2005 | Catagory: (Education) | Permalink
5 Comments | 1 Trackbacks
The Era of Big Government Being Over is Over
by Sandi
Gowing up I was a Democrat until in the seventies when I saw the "Great Society" spending taking its toll on my pocket book. Then switching parties and stuck mostly with the Republicans until the end of the eithties becoming—at least in name—an Independent but still voting for more GOP than Democratic candidates, mostly because I favor small government.

Well now I've been disabused to that kind of thinking. Not that I'm not still for small government, I am, but that there are few fiscally conservative Republicans left to be found. In fact I think I can find as many fiscally responsible Democrats. This administration with control of two branches of government has been totally irresponsible. The war on terror is essential and with reluctance I concede the vast spending there as being necessary, although I still think there has been a lot of waste.

This Congress has larded more waste into the federal budget than any other congress in history. The Highway bill has more pork than Oscar Meyer inspite of Delay's claim that there is nothing left to trim. The Prescription/Drug Medicare bill although admirable in its goals is seriously flawed and not a great relief to senors in spite of the massive cost. But worst of all is the hurricane relief bills that not only increase the size of government, but with Bush's open wallet approach the the range of disaster coverage has increased, laying out precedents for future disasters.

As Shikha Dalmia, senior analyst at Reason Foundation, writes conservatives have given up on smaller government.

Liberals and conservatives have both noted the message in all this munificence, and are fast turning the hurricane-damaged areas into a laboratory for a new round of big government ideas. Congress, seizing the opportunity to pander to voters, has introduced a massive $250 billion Hurricane Katrina aid bill—in addition to the $62 billion in taxpayer funds already allotted to relief efforts.

Bush maintains that the type of direct federal aid to victims he's advocating empowers individuals—not a bureaucracy—and is therefore perfectly consistent with ideals of small government. But there is a world of difference between individualizing existing social programs, as through vouchers, and creating new ones. Shalala's health care proposal, after all, would potentially put federal dollars directly in the pockets of individuals, but few conservatives would regard that as a triumph for small government.

Conservatives care not just about the size of government but about its scope as well. Direct federal aid—aid disaster victims don't even have to justify to a bureaucracy—would inevitably expand Americans' sense of individual entitlement, establishing a dangerous precedent. On Bush's principles, why not have the federal government pay for health insurance, job training, and child care for victims of any calamity? After all, why are people who knowingly live in a hurricane-prone area more worthy of federal largesse than those who meet with random, unpredictable accidents? In short, how can Bush resist any suggestion to launch an all-encompassing national accident insurance program?

A few conservatives like Mike Pence (R-Ind) called for fiscal responsibility in the wake of Katrina in a speach to young conservatives, the Young America's Foundation, but he has been whipped back into the line by his party superiors.

Republicans stand a good chance of loosing control of the Senate in 2006, if not the White House in 2008. I say good riddance. The Democrats over 40 years of control had proved no better, but it seems to me we are better off with the Republicans out of power where they were at least holding the Democrats feet to the fire in fiscal responsibility, than having them in power, where they suddenly become just as addicted to, and join Democrats in unrestrained spending.

In the past I've always favored our two party system. It is said that the two party system filters out the extreme elements. The multi-party allows the extreme, and often destabilizing, elements into the political system.

Well I'm not totally sold on a multi-party idea, but some of what I see now needs to be destablized, and I think the American people do too and know enough to filter out the extremes when needed at the polls. Could they be more effective in doing so with multi-parties? The way it is now, only two powerful party's leadership hold that filter.

Update: Tom at JustOneMinute posts The Dems Think Big For 2006.

Posted Sunday October 16, 2005 | Catagory: (Politics) | Permalink
1 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Iraq Starts Counting the Vote
by Sandi

IRAQ THE MODEL reports that the ballot counting begins. Pictured below battery lights are used since terrorists attacked power and water supplies yesterday.



Turnout looks moderate to high in most provinces. Omar lists only one province, Al-Qadisiya 115 miles S of Baghdad, as having a low turnout. Check IRAQ THE MODEL regularly for updates.

Via Dean's World updates and news are also availabel at The Glittering Eye.

Posted Saturday October 15, 2005 | Catagory: | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
My Blogs Good and Evil Rating
by Sandi
This site is certified 30% EVIL by the Gematriculator   This site is certified 70% GOOD by the Gematriculator

HA! But according to The Gematriculator my blog is more EVIL than The Queen of All Evil.

When I ran Rosemary's URL it came up only 21% evil and 79% good. Of course the numbers change with blog changes.

The Queen is a goodie two shoes! Muhahaha

H/T Dean's World

Posted Tuesday October 11, 2005 | Catagory: | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
When You Assume Without the Facts
by Sandi

In a letter to the editor printed of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
COUNTY BUDGET
Walker could lead by taking cut himself
Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker's plans to reduce the circuit court staff by 25% may be a good idea, especially if he also reduces his staff and salary by the same 25% to show how sincere he really is and willing to share the pain of downsizing. Leaders, lead!

Stan Beranek
Watertown
Scott Walker responds:
For those not familiar with my election as County Executive, I made a series of pledges back at the start of 2002. One of them was that I would cut my own salary by $60,000 (or about 46%) once in office. Like each of my other pledges to the general public, I kept my word and I now give $60,000 back each year. At the time, the County Executive was being paid more than the Governor of the State of Wisconsin. That, combined with the fact that I knew how bad the budget situation would be in the future, was the motivation for my salary cut.

Equally as amusing is the fact that my office cut $300,000 from our budget since 2002. That's a 25% cut. And, we returned nearly $200,000 worth of surpluses since 2002.

How's that for leadership?

- Scott
H/T to Badger Blogger and Scott Walker for Governor blog.



Posted Tuesday October 11, 2005 | Catagory: (Wis Politics) | Permalink
2 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Photos of Anti-War Demonstrators the MSM Won’t Show
by Sandi
H/T to Charlie Sykes and John McAdams for pointing out the sleeze that the MSM rarely shows.

Posted Monday October 10, 2005 | Catagory: (Stupid Should Hurt) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
The Republican Party Far Right Double Standard
by Sandi

Democrats are correct in calling the Right Wing Republicans on using a double standard. When Roberts was the stealth candidate they were sure that he was pro-life so they didn't want congress to do a lot of questioning about his past.

But now that Harriet Miers is nominated and the right isn't so sure of her fealty to their viewpoints and want congress to take a good look at her background.

Posted Sunday October 9, 2005 | Catagory: (Politics) | Permalink
1 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Bloggers Win Internet Free Speech Case
by Sandi

Patrick has the details

Posted Thursday October 6, 2005 | Catagory: | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
UN Coordinate Worldwide Immigration?
by Sandi

Groan!... As if we havn't made enough of a shambles of our own immigration, there are some that urge the UN to coordinate worldwide immigration.

More at Financial Times (London) via UN Wire, a newsletter from the United Nations Foundation.

Posted Thursday October 6, 2005 | Catagory: (Immigration) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Intelignet Design Debate Heats UP in the Blogs
by Sandi
Tuesday I linked to Dean Esmay's Post "A Voice of Sanity on Intelligent Design." Dean is a non-theist and a believer in Darwinism but sees Intelligent Design as "harmless twaddle." His post sparked opposition from bloggers and even snarky remarks from some commenters here and here. I agree with him that it is an overreaction to something that looks harmless.

One of the main objections put forth from the oppositin to ID being taught in classrooms is that it isn't science. That may be true, but then what passes for science in evolution is of more often philosophy. One of Dean's commenters Scott Harris pretty much sums up my feelings.

The problem with Science, as it is being taught, is that life begins by spontaneous incarnation. There is absolutely ZERO, ZIP, NADA evidence for such an assertion. It is just the best guess of scientists who do not want to acknowledge EVEN THE POSSIBILITY of God.

Back to Fred Reed:
I was probably in college when I found myself asking what seemed to me straightforward questions about the chemical origin of life. In particular:

(1) Life was said to have begun by chemical inadvertence in the early seas. Did we, I wondered, really know of what those early seas consisted? Know, not suspect, hope, theorize, divine, speculate, or really, really wish.

The answer was, and is, “no.” We have no dried residue, no remaining pools, and the science of planetogenesis isn’t nearly good enough to provide a quantitative analysis.

(2) Had the creation of a living cell been replicated in the laboratory? No, it hadn’t, and hasn’t. (Note 1)

(3) Did we know what conditions were necessary for a cell to come about? No, we didn’t, and don’t.

(4) Could it be shown to be mathematically probable that a cell would form, given any soup whatever? No, it couldn’t, and can’t. (At least not without cooking the assumptions.) (Note 2)

Well, I thought, sophomore chemistry major that I then was: If we don’t know what conditions existed, or what conditions are necessary, and can’t reproduce the event in the laboratory, and can’t show it to be statistically probable—why are we so very sure that it happened? Would you hang a man on such evidence?

My point was not that evolutionists were necessarily wrong. I simply didn’t see the evidence. While they couldn’t demonstrate that life had begun by chemical accident, I couldn’t show that it hadn’t. An inability to prove that something is statistically possible is not the same as proving that it is not possible. Not being able to reproduce an event in the laboratory does not establish that it didn’t happen in nature. Etc.

I just didn’t know how life came about. I still don’t. Neither do evolutionists.
If scientists would get out of the business of trying to undermine religious beliefs in the classroom, then presenting science would not be an issue. But they present as FACTS what are really mere ASSERTIONS. There is no way to scientifically demonstrate the validity of their proposals on the origin of life...

Be sure to check Deans World for more links including William Dembski's Expert Witness Report (pdf).

Related Posts (on one page):

  1. Intelignet Design Debate Heats UP in the Blogs
  2. Separation of State and School, or Rational Thought?
Posted Thursday October 6, 2005 | Catagory: (Science & Technology) | Permalink
6 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Tolerance Run Amok
by Sandi
Report via Front Page Magazine

The dictum "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it," has little meaning in England as "pigs" seem to be disappearing in deference to Muslim sensibilities.

Dudley Council, West Midlands employees are told that they can no longer dislpay things like little porcine porcelain figurines, toys, calendars or other cute little pigs objects. Why? Because a Muslim couldn't conform his life to the will of Allah with pigs staring him in the face. Recent plans to restore the statue of the Florentine Boar in Derby Park decapitated by a German bomb in 1942 is being threatened by local Muslims. School teachers are being banned from reading stories mentioning pigs.

Intolerance is becoming the rule in the name of sensitivity to people’s beliefs.

Why have pigs become so unpopular in Britain? Mahbubur Rahman, a Muslim Councillor in West Midlands, summed it up in explaining why the toy pigs had to go: “It’s a tolerance,” he said, “of people’s beliefs.”

How’s that again? It’s “a tolerance of people’s beliefs” to deny to others the right to display harmless pictures and figurines? Mahbubur Rahman seems unacquainted with the dictum, widely attributed to Voltaire, that “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Yet this is what tolerance really is: the acceptance of the fact that in a free society, some will do and say things of which one may disapprove, and that one has no consequent right to command or force them to stop. If this is not recognized in any given society, that society is not in fact free at all — any more than Henry Ford’s offer that “You can have a car in any color you want, as long as it’s black” represented a genuine choice.

Equating capitulations to Muslim sensibilities with tolerance isn't tolerance but bowing to Islamic supremacism.

Posted Thursday October 6, 2005 | Catagory: | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Separation of State and School, or Rational Thought?
by Sandi

We have too much political struggle and not enough intellectual engagement in our public schools.

While I believe stongly in God, like Thomas Jefferson I believe that religion shouldn't be taught in public schools. There is the ID (Intelligent Design) theory that is causing an unwanted ruckus in some schools. One example is the the lawsuit in Harrisburg, PA claining that intelligent design is not science, has no support from any major American scientific organization and does not belong in a public school science classroom.

But ID doesn't disclaim evolution and states only that there was a hand in guiding evolution, which could be God, aliens or any other source. I can't say I agree a whole lot with ID, but I contend that there is also a lot in the scientific theory of evolution that is also based on faith. Neither has an overwhelming case if very strong at all.

Michael Balter points out that as far as teaching ID in the classroom we are asking the wrong question and says: A national debate over how best to explain the complexity of living organisms would better serve our children, and adults too.

Mr Balter goes on to sum both sides:

Most scientists don't want any debate. Many view intelligent design as simply a new and more sophisticated attempt — "the thinking man's creationism," as Science magazine put it — to slip old-time religion into the classroom. They maintain that the theory of evolution, in particular natural selection, is so well supported by the evidence that it is the consensus scientific view. As such, it deserves a monopoly in school curricula.

Using complex statistics, intelligent-design theorists contend that natural selection fails to fully explain life's complexity, thus alternative explanations to evolution should be considered. As a rule, they don't speculate over who or what did the designing.

Intelligent-design proponents also argue that the scientific consensus on evolution is not rock solid. The Seattle-based Discovery Institute, whose Center for Science and Culture spearheads the intelligent-design campaign, has recruited more than 400 scientists to sign its "Scientific Dissent From Darwinism," which states in part: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life."

Mr Balter concludes that the judicially sanctioned monopoly in the classroom may have backfired on the evolutionists.

For one thing, the monopoly strengthens claims by intelligent-design proponents that scientists don't want to be challenged. More important, it shields Darwinian theory from challenges that, when properly refuted, might win over adherents to evolutionary views.

Pro-evolution scientists have little to lose and everything to gain from a nationwide debate. Let's put the leading proponents of intelligent design and our sharpest evolutionary biologists on a national television panel and let them take their best shots. If biblical literalists want to join in, let them. Let's encourage teachers to stage debates in their classrooms or in assemblies. Students can be assigned to one or the other side, and guest speakers can be invited. Among other things, students would learn that science, when properly done, reaches conclusions via experimentation, evidence and argument, not through majority view.

Would this bring religion into the classroom? Religious faith and thinking are already in the classroom, as the opinion polls strongly suggest. And the courts should stay out of it because educators would not be required nor allowed to advocate a religious point of view.

Thanks to Dean's World for the Michael Balter article. You should read Dean's article and his links for much more on this subject.

Now I want to switch to another article by senior editor Jacob Sullum in Reason Magazine who puts up some good arguements for separation of State and Schools. Not that I think there would ever be much political traction for such, but his reasoning highlights how education suffers immeasurably because teaching is so highly politicized. He is talking about the Pennsylvania and another case.

Both of these cases are ostensibly about the separation of church and state. But they also highlight the need for the separation of school and state.

When schools are run by the government, the details of ninth-grade biology classes, the propriety of patriotic rituals, and every other educational issue—ranging from how to teach math and reading to the contents of vending machines—becomes a political issue. Even when the arguments don't end up in court, they generate acrimony and resentment that could be avoided if education were entirely a private matter.

I'm not suggesting that parents would be completely satisfied with their children's schools if the government got out of the education business. No doubt they would always find something to complain about. But if they were not compelled to pay for government-run schools, they would be in a better position to choose schools that reflected their values and preferences, and the compromises they made would be voluntary, instead of terms imposed by the winning side of a political battle.

Sullum makes some good arguements but don't look for any traction politically in the direction of Separation of State and Schools, but whether or not we allow ID to be taught in school classrooms, cooler heads are needed to address these issue. Put another way we need a lot more rational rather than emotional thought.

I've always been of the opinion that private schools are best, and that the federal government has no business in education period. The state and especially the local governments are far better suited to meet their own challenges locally. Nor do I find any clause in Article 1 Section 8 of the constitution that gives the federal government any powers of legislative jurisdiction in any educational matters at all.

Related Posts (on one page):

  1. Intelignet Design Debate Heats UP in the Blogs
  2. Separation of State and School, or Rational Thought?
Posted Tuesday October 4, 2005 | Catagory: (Education) | Permalink
8 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
The Choking Game: Why Do Teachers Not Stop This?
by Sandi
Report via The Seattle Times


WTF? How teachers can sit by and watch kids play such dangerous games as the apparently popular "choking game" going around in schools is beyond comprehension.

The same day a Seattle girl died after apparently hanging herself while playing a choking game, a Grays Harbor County boy was admitted to a Tacoma hospital with brain damage after choking himself, fainting and hitting his head in front of a group of middle-school students and teachers.

It is known, especially in middle-school circles, as "the choking game," "the pass-out game," "the tingling game" or "the space monkey." Since April, two Idaho boys, one from North Carolina and another from California have been among a growing number of teens across the country to die after cutting off oxygen to their brains in an apparent attempt to get high...

Elma Middle School Principal Greg Scroggins said the boy and some other students were talking about the recent death of a California school child from playing the choking game. The boy, an eighth-grader, decided to try it.

The boy hunched over, put his hands on his neck to stop his breathing, fell over backward and hit his head, Scroggins said.

Kids (especially middle school) think they are indestructable. Teachers know better and are irresponsible to witness such an act and not stop it.

H/T Michelle Malkin

Posted Saturday October 1, 2005 | Catagory: (Stupid Should Hurt) | Permalink
3 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Are Arabs the most anti-American people on earth?
by Sandi
Report via New Your Post (free registration req'd)

Closer to the truth is that we in the west (US especially) are exporting anti-Americanism to Arab countries. In most cases it seems without a whole lot of success.

If Arabs countries really hate us so much, how come America is the number one foreign tourist destination for Arabs, and has been since the 1980s? Why is the vast majority of what is broadcast Arab TV stations including those regarded as the most anti-American US made programming? Why does the majority of articles in the two main pan-Arab daily newspapers come from US publications?

Author of the Post article Amir Taheri asks:

So, where did the impression that the Arabs are seething with anti-Americanism come from? Isn't it possible that the Arabs may be sharing the anti-American craze produced in the West, including the United States? Aren't the Arabs, as with so many other products, importing anti-Americanism?

In Arab newspapers, the bulk of the material that could be classified as anti-Bush and/or anti-American is translated from U.S. sources. Stroll in the streets where books and video and audio tapes are on sale at the curbsides and you will see that 90 percent of the items vilifying America come from American, French and British authors.

No Arab anti-American has produced anything like the conspiracy theories that American intellectuals such as Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore, Scott Ritter, Seymour Hersh and Edward Said, to name a few, have put on the markets everywhere, including the Arab world.

At any given time, one can find a horde of American activists visiting the region to urge the natives to hate America:

* Two years ago, a group of Americans appeared in Arab capitals to stop people in the bazaars to "apologize for the Crusades," although the United States didn't even exist when those wars were fought between Europe and the Middle East.

* Before the liberation of Iraq, scores of Americans came to Baghdad to offer themselves as "human shields" for Saddam Hussein. No Arab was so foolish.

* This month, a group of 30 American professors turned up in Tehran and Damascus to describe the United States as "a rogue state on the rampage".

* Bianca Jagger, presented as ambassador for UNICEF and "a leading thinker," has been in the region telling astonished audiences that the United States is the source of all evil in the world. (By the way, isn't UNICEF supposed to be apolitical?)

* One American professor recently published an op-ed in The New York Times relating his trip to Iran, where he was "disappointed" to see that students not only did not hate George W. Bush but, horror of horrors, also craved for an American-style democracy instead of an Islamist utopia.

* The anti-Bush demonstrations that Arabs watch on TV take place in Washington, San Francisco and Seattle, not in any Arab city.

H/T Deans World and A Daily Briefing on Iran.


Posted Saturday October 1, 2005 | Catagory: | Permalink
1 Comments | 0 Trackbacks