A Change of Plans

Okay, kids. It's summertime, summertime, sum-sum-summertime, summertime-ahh-ah-ahhh-ahhhhh...and here's the thing: It's much too beautiful out there in sunny California to be held up with my face buried in my laptop, reading material that usually has my blood pressure dangerously high. There's a big, bad, beautiful world out there to explore and quality time to be spent with my children who seem to be growing faster than the average that time allows. So before they all leave for college or marriage, or whatever they plan to do with their lives when they leave my nest (yes, I'm being dramatic, they're young), I'm going to spend time with them while they're here with me fulltime on summer break.

The downside to this for you, my faithful readers and those who can't help but adore me, is that I'll be posting less. I'm gonna try to cut it down to every other day, and catch up on comments and the debates that ensue after the kids are in bed for the evening. Don't cry for me Argentina, and put that hanky away, I'll still be around, just not as often. My children need me, and let's face it, I need them. They're tugging at me, holloring for me, clammoring for my attention. And what am I doing? Sitting here reading CRAP! I swear when I looked up from my laptop just now the youngest was a year older and my oldest was sporting a goatee.

Have a great 4th of July weekend! I'll be celebrating my 10 year wedding anniversary on the 3rd (doing what I just don't know yet), so I may not be around until next Wednesday....unless something inspires me to rant and rave. So I guess what I'm saying is...stay tuned. XOXOXOXOXO

The Discreditors

If there is one thing that the right wing IS good at, it's the art of completely discrediting those that dare oppose them. It doesn't matter who or what you are, you are not safe if you disagree. You could be a veteran and/or war hero (Murtha, Cleland, Kerry, even McCain wasn't safe from it in 2000), grieving mother or widow (Sheehan, 9/11 widows), the judicial system (those dang activist judges upholding the rule of law), liberal bloggers (we're all just blogging in our pajamas from our parent's basements anyway), a congressional panel (investigate 9/11? the nerve), and really...just God help you if you're in anyway affiliated with and/or support the ACLU or are an actor, director, producer, and live or work anywhere near Hollywood. Smear, smear, and smear.

The newspapers and television media have been a target for quite sometime now. Freedom of the press has been under seige since around September 2001. It's been somewhat relentless in its tenacity. You know what I'm talking about because we've all heard it nearly everyday for years now..."The liberal media", "The disturbing images you see on your t.v.", "reporting only bad news from Iraq", "where are the positive stories?", "Hard to imagine the positive because of what you read in the papers", "I think we know who the media want to win this election--and I don't think it's George Bush.", "printing classified information". <-----THAT. That one right there is the biggest one. Oh, that and that they threw Judith Miller in jail for not revealing her source (which we all know turned out to be Scooter Libby...any guess on his chances of a presidential pardon before Bush leaves office?). And when Geraldo Rivera drew a map of troop locations in the sand in Iraq, on the air for Fox News, and was asked to leave (either by Fox News itself or the military) he went on to smear, who? MSNBC for reporting that.

Bush went on a finger wagging tirade the other day in the Rose Garden about the recent NY Times article regarding SWIFT money tracking. VP Cheney had his back. New York Republican representative, Peter King is calling for a criminal investigation into the Times disclosure (nevermind that there's a mole in this administration that is doing the leaking). Bill O'Reilly (and really, Fox News in general) had to have gotten down on his knees and thanked the Lord for the fodder he can milk off of this for weeks to come. And Tony Snow had this to say:

"Traditionally in this country in a time of war, members of the press have acknowledged that the commander in chief, in the exercise of his powers, sometimes has to do things secretly in order to protect the public," Mr. Snow said. "This is a highly unusual departure."

Google me this, Tony. Two words, sounds like...Pentagon Papers.

No government ought to be without censors & where the press is free, no one ever will.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to George Washington, September 9, 1792

And Then The Supreme Court Said...

The Supreme Court seems to have remembered itself and its duty. Let's see if it will continue to hold this administration accountable for its actions. If the Bush administration continues to act outside of the law, it is they that are putting the safety of America at risk. By not following the rule of law, they risk putting those that would do us harm in the position of walking free, simply by not following the law. This administration fails to recognize that it is their own actions, and not those that hold them accountable or report those actions, that put our country at risk. For them it is much easier (and effective it seems) to shoot the messenger rather than take a long, hard look in the mirror.

WASHINGTON (June 29) - The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees, saying in a strong rebuke that the trials were illegal under U.S. and international law.

The court declared 5-3 that the trials for 10 foreign terror suspects violate U.S. law and the Geneva conventions.

The ruling raises major questions about the legal status of the approximately 450 men still being held at the U.S. military prison in Cuba and exactly how, when and where the administration might pursue the charges against them.

Kudos to the United States Supreme Court.

What? No Python?

A pregnant Britney Spears will grace the cover of the August issue of Harper's Bazaar...in the nude. Now I don't know 'bout y'all, but I was hesitant to prance around buck naked in front of my own husband let alone have myself photographed and distributed globally. My nakedness during pregnancy usually was synonymous with "turn out the light, Honey". Of course, our house doesn't contain professional lighting, filters, makeup; oh yeah, and one can't move about the privacy of their own bedroom while striking a pose and blocking the pertinent area's with one's knee and hands.

My own vanity aside, I say, "you go girl"!

Get Thee to a Theater

You would think that with all of the undiscovered talent out there, and the fact that just about everyone in Los Angeles has written a screenplay that is sitting on a shelf collecting dust in their bedroom (myself included), that we wouldn't be bombarded relentlessly with movie sequels. Mission Impossible 3, Basic Instinct 2 (was the first really decent enough to allow for a second?), Big Mama's House 2, Ice Age 2, The Santa Clause 3, Superman Returns (again?), Police Academy 8 (eight??? really??? I guess Steve Guttenbergs gotta eat too), Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning (end it already), Pirates of the Carribean 2 (actually, I'm kind of looking forward to that one), Saw 3 (no mystery there), I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer (we get it, you know)...just to name a few off the top of my head, but you get the picture.

I know it is said that Shakespeare already wrote all of the stories that there are to be told, but come on. Would a little originality be too much to ask of my $10 price of admission? Not to mention the $50 spent on snacks for the family? After taking the kids to see Garfield 2: A Tale of Two Kitties, please don't make me suffer through a Garfield 3: The Cat That Ate Italy.

Quote of the Day

Kudos to Republican Senator, Arlen Specter for stating the simple and the obvious, and a statement that the American people deserve an answer to:

''Why does it take a newspaper investigation to get them to comply with the law?'' the senator asked. ''That's a big, important point.''

Spot on! Indeed.


Link to Quote

If Women Ruled the World

I'm pretty much convinced that if women ruled the world there would be much less death and destruction. I'm not talking about the old days of centuries gone by when queens were exclaiming "off with their heads!"...we're past that. Put women in charge and things will start looking a little brighter. War? Feh! Too messy. We'll talk it out. If there is one thing that women can do, it's talk. We'll have group therapy (summits) and resolve our problems like civilized people. If someone (other countries) get out of line all we have to do is give them that look. You know the one. The one that says you better stop that right now and don't make me pull this car over. The budget crisis? What woman can't shop for a weeks worth of groceries for a family of 4 and still have money left over for that perfect pair of jeans? We can stretch a dollar so far you'd swear our currency was made of rubber. We're charitable, nurturing, strong (you try having a child ripped from your loins and get up and walk around the next day), and master negotiators (do you know of any women who aren't able to talk someone into giving them what they want?). And if we aren't able to get what we want, we'll just claim that whatever it was that we wanted wasn't what we really wanted anyway and that we're better off for not having it. We're fickle too.

Ponderings.

Death Doesn't Become Us

Kudos to the Philippines for abolishing the death penalty in their country. It's a shame I can't say the same for my own country...the only western super power to still impose this archaic form of punishment upon its people. Note the list of countries that still use this travesty (and those who don't):

Death Penalty Worldwide

Don't ya just love having our ideals lumped together with those of Iran, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Riwanda, Sudan, North Korea, Cuba, and Libya? If you do, you just might not be a liberal.

A Personal Brag

Today was our toddler daughter's debut on the stage. Although she's nearly 3 years old, so I guess technically she is considered a "pre-schooler". Gosh! You'd think after 3 kids I'd get the proper termanolgy down. Well, you'd think. But I digress. She was stunning. Nevermind that on Thursday she tripped over her big brother's shoe and broke her fall with her face, which resulted in a fat lip complete with blood blister. My poor little sugar. It figures, of course, her first stage presence and she's beat up. Kinda like when you're going to take that professional family photo and someone inevidably ends up with either a black eye or a bad haircut. I'm off track again. She was magnificent in her fluffy, cotton candy pink tutu, sequins, and ballet slippers...and her white tights that encased her thunder thighs. She was a beautiful angel standing up on that stage. And that's just what she did, mind you...stand there. No matter. She got up there like a trooper with the rest of her tutu clad gang. They were darling and the hit of the recital.

That's my mother's brag for the day.

Democracy Threatened By Comedy Central

Holy Cow! Now I've seen everything folks! It appears as if Richard Morin (we'll just say Dick Moron for shits and giggles, cause sometimes I have the sense of humor of a ten year old), columnist for the Washington Post, believes that Jon Stewart's Daily Show is an enemy of democracy, as he states here:

This is not funny: Jon Stewart and his hit Comedy Central cable show may be poisoning democracy.

Two political scientists found that young people who watch Stewart's faux news program, "The Daily Show," develop cynical views about politics and politicians that could lead them to just say no to voting.

Oh brother. Let's put this into perspective, shall we? If people are cynical about politics, it's because there is so much to be cynical about. The Daily Show does what regular news programs do not...it manages to drudge up past, and often times contradictory statements made by those in power, and show them together one after the other. It has the huztpa to highlight the gaffs, missteps, and sometimes downright shocking elements the mainstream media tend to leave out because they're oh so sophisticated.

Democracy is being poisoned alright, but it ain't being done by Jon Stewart. It's being done by the very people Jon Stewart points too on his show. He just happens to make an issue out of what the real rabble rousers are doing and saying...and not doing, and saying that they're doing what they're not doing, and not doing what it is that they actually say they are doing. Or something.

What this moron is really saying is that he believes America's youth is so guillable, that it takes its cue from Comedy Central. Better Comedy Central than The O'Reilly Factor or Hannity and Colmes if you ask me. I think they're savvy enough to decipher fact from fiction. The youth, not those at Fox News.

War, Sans Strategy

VP Cheney stands by his statement that the insurgency is "in its last throes". The Bush administration believes that "staying the course" and "we'll stand down when the Iraqi's stand up" are strategies. They're not. They're soundbites and they know it. They have no plan. Bush's exit plan for Iraq is to let the next president take care of it. That's not really a plan either, except that it is a plan to make it not his problem anymore. The Democrats have a strategy for troop withdrawl, but it will never make it out of the Republican controlled senate. We lost another 15 soldiers this week alone in Iraq. Hardly seems like the last throes of anything, if you ask me. Our troops deserve leadership, not soundbites.

Karl Rove has fired up the rumor mill with (paraphrasing)"Democrats familiar pattern with cutting and running". Nevermind that it was Republican president Gerald Ford who withdrew our troops from Vietnam. I wonder how many civilians will research that tidbit on their own instead of just taking that soundbite at face value?

Dean Repeats Call for Iraq Troop Drawdown

Big Man Keeping the Little Man Down

Some Republicans seem to have a problem with raising the minimum wage. Raising it from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour would help to raise the standard of living for many Americans, and helps to keep up with the cost of living. I'll note that these same Republicans didn't blink at Congress giving themselves a 2% ($3,300) increase just earlier this month, as I mentioned here. These Republicans believe that an increase that helps some keep up with the higher cost of living is giving the workers power over the employers. Is it that they believe employers should be able to pay their employees as low a wage as they determine is adequate? Is it their belief that there should never be an increase? In the 1960's the minimum wage was $1.00 per hour. Can your family survive on that? Could you survive on that even if you only had yourself to care for? Could you survive on $5.15 per hour? Just barely I'd imagine.

Shame on Congress for deeming their own needs more pressing than those of their constituents.

Officials Response? Nope, Nope, and Nope

Before all you Bush supporters light those celebratory cigars, take a gander at what was really found in Iraq, two years ago. From the Washington Post:

Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, and Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) told reporters yesterday that weapons of mass destruction had in fact been found in Iraq, despite acknowledgments by the White House and the insistence of the intelligence community that no such weapons had been discovered.

"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Santorum said.

The lawmakers pointed to an unclassified summary from a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center regarding 500 chemical munitions shells that had been buried near the Iranian border, and then long forgotten, by Iraqi troops during their eight-year war with Iran, which ended in 1988.

The U.S. military announced in 2004 in Iraq that several crates of the old shells had been uncovered and that they contained a blister agent that was no longer active. Neither the military nor the White House nor the CIA considered the shells to be evidence of what was alleged by the Bush administration to be a current Iraqi program to make chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

Last night, intelligence officials reaffirmed that the shells were old and were not the suspected weapons of mass destruction sought in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.

I know you all find this titillating, but all it does is reaffirm the exaggeration by the Bush administration about the danger posed by Saddam.

Clothes that Tell You What You Want to Hear

I'm a tall gal, and up until about 10 years ago it was nearly impossible to find a pair of jeans that passed my ankles. Prior to that it was a neverending quest, and daunting task, for me to find a pair of jeans that fit properly. The problem was, it wasn't the 80's anymore and, being a self proclaimed fashionista, I was no longer wearing my ankle length pants tucked into my boots. I wanted jeans that touched my toes and that I could still wear heels with. The dilemma was if I bought them long enough, they were swimming around my waist, and as you probably guessed, if I bought them to fit my waist I looked as if I were trapped in 1989. Finally designers caught on that there are tall, thin women out there who wear jeans.

Cut to 2006. Designers are now cutting styles larger and labeling them in smaller sizes. It's a marketing ploy and one that I don't think is such a bad thing. If it boosts a size 12 woman's self esteem to not have to shop in the plus size stores, where's the harm? If she is a size 10 in an average sized department store and it helps to make her feel good about herself, thus giving her a positive outlook, why not give her that bit of happiness?

Stores aren't just cutting sizes larger and labeling them smaller to make women feel good about themselves though (that's just a benefit to the women). The truth is, women are getting larger. It's no secret that obesity is on the rise and the average size American woman is overweight. If the stores don't cut their sizes larger, the majority of women won't be able to buy clothes in their stores because they simply won't fit. Thus leaving the stores no choice but to expand the waistlines of their merchandise, to keep up with the expanding waistlines of their clientele. A phenomena most likely brought on by ready-to-eat meals, an over indulgence of refined sugar, and this country's obsession with super sized fast food (with a giant diet Coke to wash it down). It is a necessary means in order to stay in business. The malleable sizing of garments are leaving petite women to shop in the junior's department, and probably quite literally...flapping in the breeze. What's next? Negative sizes, -01 perhaps?

Fox News calls it "vanity sizing". I prefer to think of it as good business sense.

Size 00: Sizes Shrink as Women Get Bigger

Fudging Media

What I want to know is, when did it become the duty of the media to select our presidential nominees for the American people? CNN ran a poll asking those who responded who they would definetely vote for and who they would definetely not vote for. Of course they hand picked the politicians straight out of the republican talking points...wait, maybe I just answered my own question. The poll showed that nearly half would definetely not vote for Hillary Clinton. Well...duh! I haven't met a Dem yet who has endorsed her candidacy for presidency. In any event, the media is supposed to report the news. That's its job. A very important job. What it is not supposed to do, is create news. Some of the options on their poll are of people who haven't even announced or suggested that they'll run for office, and one of them, Al Gore, has straight up said he will not be running. So what is their point of finding out who will or won't be voting for him? Wow! What a scoop! They've finally discovered how many people won't vote for someone who isn't even running! What a feather in CNN's cap! Thank goodness they jumped on this because the elections are a whole 2 years away. Whew! They almost missed the boat on that one, those Johnny Come Latelys.

What I've also found is that ever since the 2000 election, there is no break from presidential election "what if" news. It's as if we're in one long election year from hell, with no end in sight. Now that we know, again for the millionth time, that Hillary won't make it out of the primaries IF she were to even run, can we get on to some of the more pressing issues that plague us? Do I really need to list them?

Poll: Clinton gets high 'no' vote for 2008

Deadly Trinkets Left Behind

Nick Clooney from the Cincinnati Post wrote an insightful article today about the deadly after effects of one country bringing war to another. It's worth a read and this segment will haunt me:

To me, the haunting quality of all this is trying to inventory all the places on earth where protracted wars have taken place. Armies have been very good at firing shells and planting mines. Much less thought was given to removing unexploded ordnance once the conflict was over.

Deaths of innocent people, most not even born when the war was fought, will still be paying the blood cost when all of us are gone.

The Bush administration and its supporters would probably say that it is Saddam's fault for not disarming...wait...there was nothing to disarm...

A Liberal Choice

Considering I write a liberal blog, I thought I'd go into a little detail about why I'm a liberal.

I'm a huge supporter of social programs that assist less advantaged citizens. Particularly citizens who have children. Whatever the adult's reasons for not supporting their children properly, I do not believe that children should have to suffer for the plight of their parents and/or guradians. I believe that in one of the richest countries of the world, society should help provide for those children whose parents can't or won't. A) Because they're kids, and B) Because it benefits society when they become contributing adults. The child born of welfare dependent adults could and should be able to grow to be the doctor that saves your life one day.

I believe in a woman's right to choose. And so long as a woman's body is the vehicle that delivers humans into this world, I don't see my stance changing anytime soon. It's not that I want women to have abortions or even think that they should. I would strongly advise any woman I know to consider other options. The right falsly labels "pro-choice" as "pro-abortion", and that simply isn't the case. I'm not pro-abortion nor do I know anybody who is. I don't, however, believe that it is my right to insist on making it my duty to make that choice for them. I think that forcing a woman, who desperately doesn't want to be pregnant, to carry a pregnancy to term is a recipe for disaster. Society erroneously believes that a mother's love for her unborn child will conquer whatever reasons they have for not wanting a child. That is not always the case. Carrying a pregnancy to term is an enormous responsibility and one that, if there were no abortion option, would be asked of a woman not willing to be responsible for it.

I'm against capital punishment for any reason. I do not believe that I or society should have the right to determine someone beyond redemption and better off dead. The pro-capital punishment argument regarding the financial cost to society for keeping dangerous criminals alive in their jail cell is, in my opinion, a despicable arguement. I do not think someone's life worth should be decided by the amount of money it costs to keep them alive. Just because the almighty dollar makes the world go 'round, doesn't mean that it should. The eye for an eye mentality never sat well with me. The whole, "you committed a heinous crime by killing someone so we are going to...um...kill you too" is saying two wrongs make it right. What it is, is revenge, and what it doesn't do is make the victim's families mourn their loss less. It just creates more victims (i.e. the criminal's family).

I believe in separation of church and state. Keep religion out of law. And that's really the long and short of that. And politicians who pander to the religious right lose my respect faster than you can say "supercalifragilisticexpealidocious"...okay, faster than that even. Both John McCain and Hillary Clinton now fall into that category. 'Nuff said about that.

I'm anti-war and believe that it should only happen as an absolute last resort. Even with today's technology and the almighty "smart bomb", too many innocent lives are lost. You may be more familiar with it's callous term, "collateral damage". Ugh!

For what it's worth, I do not choose my friends based on their political views (Jack at the West Ranch Beacon Blog). Although, my own mother is a republican, but ya don't choose your parents now do ya...kidding. In fact, the majority of my friends don't give a rat's fig about politics, period. At the moment, only 2 come to mind and they live out of state. That was one of the main reasons I stared my blog, because I was sure my friends didn't care much about what I was saying, politically.

This concludes today's glimpse into my mind. There is so much more...Perhaps I'll write a "part deux" in the future.

Enjoy your weekend!

Woulda Shoulda Coulda

For the Bush supporters who think that taking out Al Zarqawi is a major victory in the Iraq war, let's take a little trip down memory lane.

In Colin Powell's famous February 2003 speech to the United Nations urging war against Iraq, Zarqawi was cited as an example of Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism. In his speech, Powell mistakenly referred to Zarqawi as a Palestinian, but Powell and the Bush administration continued to stand by statements that Zarqawi linked Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda.

At the time, Zarqawi's group was a rival of bin Laden's. A CIA report in late 2004 concluded that it had no evidence Saddam's government was involved or aware of this medical treatment, and that "There’s no conclusive evidence the Saddam Hussein regime had harbored Zarqawi."[13] [14] One U.S. official summarized the report: "The evidence is that Saddam never gave Zarqawi anything."[15] However, Jordan's King Abdullah stated in an interview that Jordan had detailed information of where in Iraq Zarqawi lived. Jordan attempted to have Zarqawi extradited, "but our demands that the former regime [of Saddam Hussein] hand him over were in vain," King Abdullah said.[16]

According to NBC News [17] the Pentagon had pushed to "take out" Zarqawi's operation at least three times prior to the invasion of Iraq, but had been vetoed by the National Security Council. The council reportedly made its decision in an effort to convince other countries to join the US in a coalition against Iraq. "People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of pre-emption against terrorists," said former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.

In May 2006, former CIA official Michael Scheuer, who headed the CIA's bin Laden unit for six years before resigning in 2004, corroborated this. Paraphrasing his remarks, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) stated Scheuer claimed that "the United States deliberately turned down several opportunities to kill terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in the lead-up to the Iraq war." ABC added that "a plan to destroy Zarqawi's training camp in Kurdistan was abandoned for diplomatic reasons." Scheuer explaimed that "the reasons the intelligence service got for not shooting Zarqawi was simply that the President and the National Security Council decided it was more important not to give the Europeans the impression we were gunslingers" in an effort to win support for ousting Saddam Hussein.

It appears as if the Bush administration decided that it would be better to wait until we invaded Iraq, putting American troops in the position to be attacked, wounded, and slaughtered by this madman, only then to claim victory when he was finally taken out earlier this month (surrounded by women and children), than to eliminate him prior to his becoming a real threat to the troops. All in the name of politics. How many lives could have been spared if Bush hadn't put Al-Zarqawi on the back burner?

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi-Wikipedia

Dear People Magazine

I have to ask you...what did you smoke? And I don't want any.

"American Idol" Taylor Hicks is ranked as the No. 1 "hottest bachelor" by People magazine — and he's looking for love.

Really?!?! I respectfully disagree.

Soul Patrol!

Hicks tops People's 'hot bachelor' list

Sinking to New Lows and Raising Themselves Up

With their approval ratings in the gutter, an inability to prioritize legislation, the deficit at an all time high, corruption leaking out of it faster than they can stick their fingers in the holes of the dike, and lacking in any remedial accounting knowledge for allocating funds in an efficient manner, Congress decided they earned a much deserved....raise.

Despite record low approval ratings, House lawmakers Tuesday embraced a $3,300 pay raise that will increase their salaries to $168,500.

The 2 percent cost-of-living raise would be the seventh straight for members of the House and Senate.

It's good to be the king, eh kids?

House Lawmakers Accept $3,300 Pay Hike

Quaking in the Quaker State

The women of Ohio should pack up their collective uterus's and leave the state, for yet another assult on what choices a woman can make about her body is about to get a can of whoopass opened on it in the Ohio state senate. It's outrageousness (a ban on abortion under any circumstance) assures that it will not pass. It's another "Quick! Look over here religious right! We're in your corner" bullcrap that is so ripe for the picking in an election year. More waste of tax payer's money that could go towards something useful. Sigh...

Ohio abortion bill hearing today

A Cause for Grief

Ann Coulter's words regarding the widow's of September eleventh have been swimming around in my head like an angry jellyfish. Okay, I'm quoting Spongebob, but I have three kids, I don't get out much...cut me some slack. Her defense is that these women are using their grief as a platform for political reasons. But so do countless other victim's families. For instance, Natalie Holloway's family, Terri Shaivo's, Cindy Sheehan, and Mother's Against Drunk Drivers, just to name a few. Where are Ms. Coulter's scournful words for MAAD? Or does she just save her vitriol for those who dare speak out for change in the policies of the Bush administration (i.e. 9/11 widows and Sheehan)? I don't recall Ann stating that Terri Shaivo's parents were enjoying their daughter's death after their book was published, or when Laci Peterson's parent's book was published for that matter.

No. Coulter is only critical in the most despicable of ways when those that use their grief as a catalyst for change, oppose Bush. I wish that someone with the opportunity to do so, would challenge her on it.

Introducing...Me

I've added my picture (above) to my profile...so now all you crazy wackos out there know what I look like. Don't make me sorry I did it.

Peace out.

Casualties of Divorce

It really chaps my hide the way parents use their children as pawns in the game of divorce. As a child of divorced parents myself, I speak from experience that just the act of divorce itself is traumatic enough. The fact that your family, your security, is no longer what it always had been is frightening for a child (I was 4 years old at the time). So when I see adults using their children to inflict emotional pain on the other adult, I see red. It's rarely the adults who pay dearly in this scenario and it is usually the child(ren) that are burdened with the guilt of believing that the game of emotional mudslinging is all their fault. All because two adults aren't mature enough to manage their problems in a civilized manner. I can't and probably won't ever be able to understand that deplorable behavior...and the adults in question should be wholly ashamed of themselves.

Judge Wants Psychologist to Assess Baldwin

She With the Poison Pen

Well, I would say that she sold her soul to the devil, but I don't believe that Ann Coulter ever possessed a soul to begin with. The deviant twat released her new book on Tuesday, 6/6/06...very appropriate for Nosferatu, with the catchy title, "Godless: The Church of Liberalism". She had some terribly cruel (even for her) and vicious things to say about the widows of September 11th.

Coulter writes in a new book, "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," that a group of New Jersey widows whose husbands perished in the World Trade Center act "as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them."

She also wrote, "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."

Coulter appeared Tuesday on NBC's "Today" show, and stuck by her stance, saying the women used their grief "to make a political point."

Her criticism was aimed at four New Jersey women whom she dubbed "The Witches of East Brunswick," after the town where two of them live.

They have spent the years since the 2001 terror attacks supporting an independent commission to examine government failures before the attack, and in the 2004 presidential campaign they endorsed Democrat John Kerry.

What is wrong with this person? And why in God's name am I giving her any attention at all? I should just put down the laptop right now and walk away, as should everyone, and let her rot from the inside out without a platform from which to do so.

Ann Coulter

A Week With Family

I apologize for my lack of attention to my blog this week. I have family visiting from the east coast and am happily enjoying every moment of it. We seemed to pack as much activity in today as we could. The morning started out with a brisk hike through Fryman Canyon; carrying my two year old most of the way. That's gonna hurt tomorrow! We spent the rest of the day at Hurricane Harbor, and I gotta tell ya...I'm getting old. The slides are supposed to be fun, right? It isn't supposed to hurt, is it? After climbing a staircase that seemed to touch the heavens, I faced a steep drop off, complete with one woopdie doo after another. I assumed the position (arms clasped behind my neck, and feet crossed), pushed off, and flew gaining speed and momentum...except with each woopdie doo I would leave the slide momentarily and return with an extremely painful wallop. I was thrilled, scared, excited, and thinking, "this isn't supposed to hurt, is it?". The wollups were sucking my will to enjoy the fun of it. I finally reached the end, with my bathing suit bottoms wedged so far up my ass that I had to pull them out of my mouth (it seemed)! Which I'm sure was a great show for the young men who positioned themselves at the exit, probably lying in wait for such a sight. Good times. Although, I'm sure I'll have some bruises tomorrow!

I hope y'all continue to pop in and I'll try to post when I'm able!

Peace out!

Blinded By Science

It would seem that President Bush and his baby brother, Jeb Bush, have no intention of viewing former Vice President, Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth". No sense in sullying their minds with that science business. It would interfere with their strong, core beliefs of....corporate fascism.

Georgie Boy:
But will he see Al Gore's new movie about global warming?

"Doubt it," Bush said on Monday when asked by a member of the audience during remarks in Chicago. "An Inconvenient Truth," the movie by Gore, who lost to Bush in the 2000 presidential election, opens in U.S. theaters this week.

Jebbie:
That led a reporter to ask Bush if he planned on seeing former Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore's movie on global warming, "An Inconvenient Truth." "No, I'm not going to be doing that," he said, before offering a thumbnail review of "X-Men: The Last Stand," which he called "excellent."

Bush then noted that Gore's movie had about $500,000 in ticket sales compared to more than $130 million for X-Men. "So I was in the majority of opinion, apparently, on that," he said, before quickly adding, "in terms of entertainment. I respect Vice President Gore's advocacy. I think he's very sincere and I don't want to joke about that."

I suppose they're not interested in seeing their contribution to global warming.

Jeb Bush Quote

George Bush Quote

O'Reilly Re-writes History

Kudos to Keith Olbermann for exposing Bill O'Reilly as the lying bastard that he is. O'Reilly got some very important facts backwards regarding American troops in Malmedy during WWII. From the Crooks and Liars site:

Olbermann: The bodies at Malmedy were not found until a month later. There were 84 of them, all, American soldiers. More than half showed gunshot wounds to their heads. Six had received fatal **blows** to the head. Nine were found with their arms still raised **above** their heads.

The fact that O'Reilly got these horrible facts completely backwards -- twice -- offended even his own usually compliant viewers. From his program **Wednesday** night...Wrong answer.

When you're **that** wrong -- when you're defending Nazi War Criminals and pinning their crimes on Americans, and you get **caught** doing so -- **twice** -- you're supposed to say 'I'm sorry, I was wrong'... and then you should shut up for a long time. Instead, Fox **washed** its transcript of O'Reilly's remarks Tuesday -- its website claims O'Reilly said "In **Normandy**..." when in fact he said "In **Malmedy**..."

The rewriting of past reporting -- worthy of Orwell -- has now carried over into such on-line transcription services as Burrell's and Factiva. Whatever did or did not happen **later**, in supposed or actual retribution... the victims at Malmedy, were **Americans**, gunned down while surrendering -- by **Nazis** in 1944 -- and again, Tuesday Night and Wednesday Night -- by a false patriot who would rather be loud than right.

"In Malmedy, as you know" Bill O'Reilly **said** Tuesday night, in some indecipherable attempt to defend the events of Haditha, "U.S. forces captured S.S. forces who had their hands in the air and were unarmed and they shot them dead, you know that. That's on the record. And documented."

The victims at Malmedy in December, 1944... were Americans. **Americans** with their hands in the air. **Americans** who were unarmed. That's on the record. And documented.

And their memory deserves better than Bill O'Reilly.

We **all** do.

Time to step out of your spin zone O'Reilly and drink a couple of glasses of water to wash down that humble pie. You're a miserable man and the fact that Fox News changed its trasncripts to cover his ass just shows what a fraud that "news" channel really is.

Crooks and Liars

Isolated Incidents

1. Abu Ghraib
2. Gitmo
3. Presidential signing statement authorizing torture
4. Marines being charged with conspiracy, kidnapping, and murder
5. Haditha

The next time Sean Hannity tells me that my vocal opposition and lack of support for the Iraq war are undermining the efforts being made by the troops, and undermining our President, I may just have to fly out to New York to the Fox News Studio just so he can personally kiss my ass.

Dysfunction Junction What's Your Function

Sweet fancy Moses! I've read about severely dysfunctional families, but these people are some kind of special brand o'psycho.

Two grandparents in Lake County, Fla., were arrested for allegedly offering a hit man $100 to kill their three grandchildren, daughter-in-law and the family's pet dog, according to Local 6 News.

{snip...}After an investigation, authorities said the couple's son, Jason Jackson, 31, concocted the alleged murder-for-hire plan from jail and asked his parents to seal the deal, Bolden said.

The 31-year-old is awaiting trial in a sexual molestation case, and his wife and children were scheduled to testify against him.

Investigators said the rest of the money was to be paid to the hit man after the family members were killed Tuesday night.

Now there's a lot of things I might do for my kids, but this ain't one of those things. I think they might deserve the "What Were They Thinking?" award. And their son is a molester? NO! Say it isn't so! Why am I not surprised? I can only imagine what morals and values were learned at his parent's knee. Sick, twisted, creeps that they are. Heaven's to Mergatroid, Stella!

Police: Couple Offered Hit Man $100 To Kill Grandkids