I am going to respond to Dan Ornelas' post regarding healthcare in more than the alotted 1,000 characters of the comments section.

First, I don't think healthcare can be characterized as either a right or a privelege. Healthcare is a necessity. But if I had to pick between right or privelege, I'd probably go with right. It's not a constitutional right but I think it should be a right of a people living in a wealthy society of great medical advances to be able to afford health coverage. Our country has the medical technology to do amazing feats. We can separate conjoined twins, we can give a man an artificial heart and we have made it so that AIDS is not longer automatically a death sentence. Still, too many people die from influenza and infections that are treatable because they cannot afford to see a doctor. Also, there is too much bureaucracy when it comes to running tests and prescribing drugs. I think it is the government's responsibility to, either directly or indirectly, provide all of its citizens with some type of health insurance for both emergencies as well as doctors visits.

Catchy title of post aside, I am not calling for a universal healthcare plan nor do I think that every person needs the level of health coverage that Senators provide themselves. If a person has a fantastic job with fantastic health coverage, they've earned it. For those who aren't covered and don't qualify for Medicare or Medicaid, they should be able to purchase adequate and affordable health coverage. Also, I want to make it clear that I'm not suggesting the system be like Canada or some European nation where the government provides services free of charge, but I think the government needs to offer a plan that will supplement the cost of healthcare.

One of the reasons for the rising costs of healthcare though is that insurance of doctors and hospitals have gone through the roof, forcing many independent practices to close their doors. Clearly, punitive damages on malpractice suits need to be capped. John Edwards won't tell you this because he is a trial lawyer, but our country cannot have it both ways. Extraordinary punitive damages and affordable and extensive healthcoverage just cannot coexist. In order to provde each and every person in the United States with affordable and adequate healthcare, we need more doctors.

Second, over the course of this past year, I think Barbara Boxer has aged fifteen...at least. When I worked in the Senate last summer she looked young, compared to the other female Senators and very well dressed and well groomed. On CNN last night, she looked weathered. She has gray streaks, and I think she did that on purpose! Barbara Boxer was a fashion don't last night.

Thanks to Collegehumor.com.

"Health care is not a privilege; it is a right."

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) California, at the Democratic National Convention yesterday.

Um, no. It is not a right. It's not a right at all. Of course, abortion isn't a right either, but they managed to shove that in there. Gotta love that free-floating, sliding-scale Constitution.

I'm sailing away, set an open course for the virgin sea
I've got to be free, free to face the life' ahead of me
On board, I'm the captain, so climb aboard
We'll search for tomorrow on every shore
And I'll try, oh lord, I'll try to carry on

I look to the sea, reflections in the waves spark my memory
Some happy, some sad
I think of childhood friends and the dreams we had
We live happily forever, so the story goes
But somehow we missed out on that pot of gold
But we'll try best that we can to carry on

A gathering of angels appeared above my head
They sang to me this song of hope, and this is what they said
They said come sail away, come sail away
Come sail away with me
Come sail away, come sail away
Come sail away with me

I thought that they were angels, but to my surprise
They climbed aboard their starship and headed for the skies
Singing come sail away, come sail away
Come sail away with me
Come sail away, come sail away
Come sail away with me

-Styx, "Come Sail Away"

I backed my car into a cop car the other day
Well he just drove off sometimes life's ok
I ran my mouth off a bit too much oh what can i say
Well you just laughed it off it was all ok

And we'll all float on ok
And we'll all float on ok
And we'll all float on ok
And we'll all float on any way well

Well, a fake Jamaican took every last dime with a scam
It was worth it just to learn from sleight-of-hand
Bad news comes don't you worry even when it lands
Good news will work its way to all them plans
We both got fired on the exactly the same day
Well we'll float on good news is on the way

And we'll all float on ok
And we'll all float on ok
And we'll all float on ok
And we'll all float on alright
Already we'll all float on
Now don't worry we'll all float on
Alright already we'll all float on
Alright don't worry we'll all float on

And we'll all float on alright
Already we'll all float on
Aliright don't worry even if things end up a bit to heavy
we'll all float on alright
Already we'll all float on
Alright already we'll all float on
Ok don't worry we'll all float on
Even if things get heavy we'll all float on
Alright already we'll all float on
Don't you worry we'll all float on
All float on

-Modest Mouse, "Float On"

Now here's a recipe, from Lawren Mills' blog, that combines both food groups:

"Guinness Stout Ice Cream"

1 cup water
2 tablespoons cornstarch
1/2 cup sweetened condensed milk
1 1/2 cups evaporated milk
1/4 teaspoon salt
1/2 cup sugar
1/2 cup Guinness stout


In a heavy saucepan whisk together the water and the cornstarch and simmer the mixture over moderate heat, whisking, for 2 minutes. Add the milks, the salt, and the sugar, heat the mixture over moderately low heat, whisking, for 1 to 2 minutes, or until the sugar is dissolved, and remove the pan from the heat. Let the mixture cool completely, stir in the Guinness, and freeze the mixture in an ice-cream freezer according to the manufacturer's instructions.

Makes about 1 quart.

Could this story actually help Americans accept the idea of gay marriage? It might seem counter-intuitive, but the fact that gay couples are getting divorced altogether heightens the similarities that can be drawn with heterosexual marriage. Afterall, the divorce rate there is alarmingly high.

For alternative coverage of the Democratic Convention go to www.conventionbloggers.com which has a nifty round-up of all the reports from bloggers with press passes to the convention. Puttin a little frigidity on all the hot air coming out of Boston perhaps.

It's been just over 2 weeks since I began my boycott of The Drudge Report, and it's going well. I haven't snuck a peak at the site. Not even once. And I'm dedicating more time to reading other blogs and finding better and more unique stories from other sources.

You were almost kind
You were almost true
Don't let me see that other side of you.
You have learned in time
That you must be cruel
I'll have to wait to get the best of you.

Poison in everything you say,
Don't you don't you.
Wonder what difference does it make
Either way.

You were almost kind
You were almost true
Why give away that other side of you.
Happens every time
So it must be true
Step on a kid he'll grow up hating you.

Poison in every thing you say,
Don't you don't you.
Wonder what difference does it make
Either way.
Were you ever kind
Were you always cruel
Who has ever seen that other side of you.
Happened every time
So it must be true
Where did you learn it's either him or you.

You were almost kind
You were almost true
Don't let me see that other side of you.
You have learned in time
That you must be cruel
I'll have to wait to get the best of you.

Poison in everything you say,
Don't you don't you.
Wonder what difference does it make
Either way

-Guster, "Either Way"

Ken Jennings, a.k.a. Jeopardy Guy a.k.a. the Mormon Assassin is on fire.  When the Sports Guy writes about you, well...I can only hope the Sports Guy will one day write about me.  Anyhow, I am obsessed with this guy.  I switch from wanting the streak to keep going to wanting one of the other contestants to punch his face for hogging all the answers.  No one has brought mixed feelings like this before.

For the political nerd in each of us

Thanks to Benjamin Thomas Haney for making me never want to fly again

John Edwards' daughter, Cate, is the same age as the Bush Twins

If you walk your dog around Lake Murray and it makes poo on the path, pick it up!  If I catch your dog making poo and you just leaving it there for people to step on/ride their bikes over, I will make it my civic duty to rip you a new one. 

Currently Reading: My Life by Bill Clinton

Padres Report: 53-43.  Tied 2nd place in the much tougher than before though NL West.  Tied for Wild Card.  2-3 loss v. Dodgers tonight.  Tomorrow @ LA Dodgers.

Miles Run: 17.75!

"The battle between Israeli forces and Palestinian militants produces daily dilemmas for ordinary Palestinians living in the occupied territories..."

Earlier this week, peace talks between rebel groups and the Sudanese government broke down because the Sudanese government refused to disarm the Janjaweed militias that are stalking innocent people and killing them.

Still, some people are hesitant to call the atrocities genocide.  Both the House and the Senate have passed resolutions to call this a genocide and Sen. Kerry has labeled the conflict a genocide, but the Bush administration has been careful to not use the g-word.  To a certain extent, this can be understandable.  For Bush, calling this a genocide would be invoking the Genocide Conventions and committing troops to the area while we are already fighting two wars.  Regardless, troops are needed and a UN resolution needs to be passed.  As this Washington Post Editorial writes, this is a time for countries who speak out against United States unilateralism, to put their money where their mouth is.

"If countries -- such as France -- that frequently scold the United States for unilateralism want the United Nations to be taken seriously, they need to push the Security Council toward sanctions and humanitarian intervention."

Today, the NYTimes reports that the United States and the UN has once again threatened Sudan with sanctions if the government does not start arresting the leaders of marauding militias responsible for a wave of violence in the Darfur region.  Not surprisingly, the Sudanese government has said that the pressure is unfair, but as my new favorite bad-ass Colin Powell says, if they can turn the switch of violence on then they can turn it of!  Because no matter how many times the government promises to make things better, chaos still stalks the Sudanese and the violence is continuing.

I jinxed them.  Less two weeks after my link to the Kirsten Dunst/Jake Gyllenhall sex tape petition, the couple announced they had broken up.  Sad day.

Then yesterday, I learned Brandy, singer of the hit single "I Wanna Be Down," was never really married to her baby daddy!  Oh my.

And today, Yahoo reports that Paris Hilton has broken up with Nick Carter.  Wow, I thought these two were the real deal and would be together for all eternity.

What went wrong?  Seriously, someone get me this week's issue of US Weekly. 

Read http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/18/magazine/18LIVES.html and tell me we're not in trouble.

I was listening to the Rush Limbaugh Show this week (I know,  I know, shocking) when he recited this letter from the New York Times Magazzine.

I have never been more appalled in my life.

I should have know what kind of person I was dealing with when I read in the opening paragraph that the primary thing a father would have given her was "economic security."

But Amy Richards made it out of her single-parent household to become a success.  Oh, but her birth-control pills made her "moody", so goes off them, and low and behold she gets pregnant... with triplets.

Her first thought? ''Is it possible to get rid of one of them? Or two of them?''

It's times like these that I wish Luke would let me swear on his site.  Alas, I'll suffice with making her look like a fool, not that I have to try very hard.

She mentions that there are some economic and lifestyle concerns for her, but they acknowledges that she could probably work around them.  Her only problem was that she didn't want to.

Then, when her significant other questions her decision to abort two of her triplets, she violently snaps back that she doesn't want to move to Staten Island and "start shopping only at Costco and buying big jars of mayonnaise". 

EXCUSE ME!?  End two lives because you can't bring yourself to shop at a discount store?  Well, let's all bow down before her highness!  Too good to mingle with the common people?  Maybe I can pull you around Manhattan in a rickshaw so that you don't have to take the subway to Macy's.

If this is in any way indicative of other women (or men) in our society, we are screwed.  Do people even understand the concept of sacrifice any more?  My parents never drove a new car from the time my sister and I were born till now that we're in college.  Amy complains that she can't fly during her pregnancy?  My parents have flown a grand total of 3 times since they were married over two decades ago.  But my parents grew up before the onslaught of liberalism that was the late 60s and 70s.  Hard to believe how screwed up a time that must have been to produce trash like this woman.

Bottom line: Amy Richards, you disgust me.  I hope that every time you look at your surviving child, you remember the cruel fate you chose for his siblings.  I pray that God Almighty forgives you for the evil you freely, and casually, committed. 

John Stossil: "Lawyers are like missiles.  We need them for security, but they can still kill alot of innocents."

I guess that makes the North Carolinian an ICBM.  Overall, a pretty accurate analogy for the utility/curse of attorneys.

So it looks as if everyone is feeling pressed to do their civic duty this election year.  P. Diddy has recently announced plans to start a voter registration drive for the target audience of (surprise!) "disenfranchised" ubran youth.

"I was disenfranchised just like everybody else."

Excuse me, Sean.  What was that you said?  Are you or any of the minorities you claim to want to help, really disenfranchised?  You do know what that word denotes and connotes, right?  He gave that quote about apparently being stripped of his right to vote in reference to the 2000 election.  Well, Puffy, did you vote?  Are you saying somebody, presumably a man in a white hood, actually kept you from voting?  Wow, and this went entirely unreported!  I don't know how.

It's careless comments like that which lead me to believe that maybe, and I'm just throwing this out, P. Diddy has slightly less than non-partisan intentions for this registration drive, even though he claims otherwise.  See, it seems that since Sean Combs was NOT denied the right to vote in 200o, perhaps his reference to being disenfranchised is in regards to the popular myth that our current President sits in the White House because he "stole" the election; that Bush won presidency even though he lost Florida.  This, despite the fact that no recount by any government or media agnecy ever found any evidence that Al Gore would have won the state's election.

But perhaps the greatest evidence of Puffy's ulterior motives lies in the very motto he has selected to advertise his campaign.

"This election is a matter of life or death... Vote or die."

Vote or die?  Die?  Really?  So if we couple this maxim with your previous support for John Kerry, and your obvious dislike for the current administration, what can we conclude?  A vote for Bush is a vote for death.  How uplifting!  Well, I'm sure Puffy just intends that message for the urban youth, to think that if they vote Republican, they're committing suicide.

I guess that's what you get when the most self-absorbed man in America
tries to help our democracy. 

An interesting story out of Kenya.

Stories like this are precisely why I am skeptical to trust a person when they claim to be acting out of the 'will of God.' But really, who knows? Maybe God wanted this 19 year old boy to marry a woman 52 years his senior. Who knows.

...as seen on the roads

Also on my commute I saw a small Japanese autmobile, probably about 10 years old with patches of rust. Next I noticed the driver, an army soldier (national guard?) wearing a black beret. Next I saw a large sticker on the car's back glass. It was one of those hillbilly Calvin peeing stickers, but this one was Calvin peeing on the words "Osama Bin Ladin" ... priceless

...as heard on the radio

I was listening to Bob & Tom during my morning commute, and I overheard this (a paraphrase):

Tom: "I wouldn't want to live in Iraq even if I was running a brothel with tasty eats."
Bob: "That's how you intend to connect with the average American?!"

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Sept. 11 commission concludes that a "failure of imagination," not governmental neglect, allowed 19 hijackers to carry out the deadliest terrorist attack in U.S. history. The panel calls for an intelligence overhaul to confront an al-Qaida organization intent on striking again. ...read the rest

According to a report from the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) under the University of Chicago, Protestants will no longer be the majority in the U.S. by the year's end. Additionally the report shows that "[b]etween 1993 and 2002, the proportion of Americans who said they were Protestants fell from 63 percent to 52 percent after decades of stability." (as quoted in this Washington Times article)

I was flipping through the channels on TV earlier tonight and ran across Pat Robertson, who said boldly that the U.S. had been a nation of a "Protestant consensus" and that that consensus was being lost. His tone was of lamentation, but he offered no solutions.

Perhaps Pat Robertson, and those like him, would favor less from condemning this nation as going into the proverbial moral garbage can, and more from looking at themselves for the source of the Protestant decline.

Le me elaborate. Why has the percentage of Protestants in this country dropped? First, the percent of individuals claiming to have no religion climbed from 9% in 1993 to 14% in 2002. Second, the percentage reporting a religion other than Christianity or Judaism has risen from 3% to 7%. Third, and perhaps most significantly, a growing number of Americans are labeling themselves as generic Christian rather to a Protestant denomination or non-denominational church.

In contrast, the number of Catholics in the U.S. has maintained level at 25% of the total population or close to 65 million today. This makes Roman Catholicism easily the largest Christian religion in the nation.

What do these numbers tell us, and why should Pat Robertson listen up? Well, the report showed that every major Protestant denomination was losing members, but that the much smaller fundamentalist/evangelical churches were gaining membership. Narrow-minded observers might look at this stat and say that Protestantism in whole needs to gear itself to be more like the fundamentalist churches-- but this view is completely wrong.

The growth in fundamentalist churches has been completely exceeded by the decline in mainstream Protestant churches, because of the fundamentalists represent such a small overall segment of the population numerically. But, I must ask the question: what effects do the evangelicals have on the nation's religious environment in whole? Believe it or not, I've already posed a possible answer to this question. Look no further than-- you guessed it-- Thesis #9. Look at Monday's post, where I quoted it already this week.

The Pat Robertson's of the nation might not want to hear this, but Protestant fundamentalism completely carves out the religious middle ground. While growing numbers are joining fundamentalist churches, even higher numbers are saying "cya later, no thanks" to organized Christian worship altogether. The Catholic Church, on the other hand is resistant (not immune) to this virus, because, by its very structure, it includes the entire spectrum of fundamentalism/orthodoxy to liberalism in its magisterium.

One of my friends and I got into an argument once last year. It went something like this:

Friend: "All those people over there (the Palestinians) respect is force."

Me: "I think that's a bit cynical. I think other factors, such as economics and diplomacy play a significant role too."

First of all, I think that any characterization of them (all Arabs, all Palestinians, all Muslims, etc.) as one unified group is at best misleading, and at worst racist. But do not be deceived, such stereotyping is not just reserved for the average Joe College Student-- when you see a columnist refer to the "Arab street," he's doing the same thing, coated in fancier language.

But I digress. Let's recap what's been going on recently in the land formerly known as to be known as Palestine:

- Yasir "This land is my land" Arafat hired some dude to be a lead defense official.
- He then fires the guy and hires his nephew to the post.
- Palestinian gunmen attack Palestinian Authority structures and threaten Arafat.
- The Palestinian legislature speaks out against Arafat's power grab and the PM threatens to resign if Arafat does not loosen his noose on power.
- Arafat backs down and rehires the first dude to the defense post.

So, what have we learned? It would seem that both force and politics were respected this time around in the land of milk and honey.

Oh yeah, and I got my groove back.

Andrew Sullivan, in a post on Thursday, reiterated the point I made in Thesis #9 of my "25 Theses on the Modern State of Christian Faith."

Here is Andrew's post...

and here is Thesis #9:

Growing fundamentalism threatens all of Christianity by polarizing people into two camps: those who agree with the particular fundamentals being espoused and those who do not. Fundamentalism, as I define it here, does not refer to the mere belief in certain Christian fundamentals, of which nothing is wrong. But rather, it refers to the prioritization of an increasing number of beliefs as fundamental, which did not used to be classified as such previously. Fundamentalism decreases toleration of differences in beliefs and encourages the wavering believer to choose to not to believe at all, rather than be forced to conform to the increasing set of fundamentals and harshness in enacting compliance with those fundamentals. In the face of secular pressures, fundamentalism decreases Christianity's reach and accessibility.

Wow, I ran across a link to this "Jesus Action Figure" for sale by the Vicale Corporation.

The best part is when you make this buff version of Jesus made out of plastic talk, and it says in a thundering voice: "I am the Lord thy God..."

Now I'm patiently awaiting the talking Mary action figure, made out to look like a Barbie doll of course. :-)

I was visiting friends in Cincinatti yesterday, hence the absence of blogging that day. I'm cursing myself for not using audioblogging while I was gone. Oh well, pretty slow news right now.

The courtship and 55-hour marriage of Miss Britney Spears and Mr. Jason Alexander.  Not for virgin eyes. 
 
In case you were wondering, yes, Tara Reid did recently get a boob job.
 
On April 4, 1999, Bad Boy rapper, Mase, announced his retirement from the world of rap & hip-hop to concentrate on God.  It was truly a sad sad day in my life.  I wondered whether I would hear any quality raps like "Only You" ever again.  Five years later, Mase is officially back.  This should certainly signal the end of the bad rap of recent years.
 
In other Bad Boy news, I am completely convinced that Sean "P.Diddy" Combs is the most savvy business person alive.  Now, he is adding politics to his sphere of influence.
 
Apparently in the Bill O'Reilly language, the truth about gay marriage really means bashing the NYTimes.  Also, I don't understand why it is okay for people to be labeled liberals but not okay for them to be labeled conservatives.
 
I didn't need the FAA to tell me this.  I've known O'Hare is too congested since I enrolled at Notre Dame.
 
Padres Report: 48-41.  Third place NL West.  5-1 win today v. Houston Astros.  2.5 games out of first place LA Dodgers.  Tomorrow @ Houston Astros.
 
Reading: The Aeneid by Virgil...still.
 
Miles Run: 16!

Thankfully Mike Ditka decided on Wednesday to not run for U.S. Senate. While Ditka would have been a terrible Senator, he would have been a lot of fun to follow as evident by this quote:

"I don't know how I'd react under the scrutiny," said Ditka, known for a hair-trigger temper. "I don't know how I'd react on the Senate floor if I got into a confrontation with somebody I didn't really appreciate or maybe didn't appreciate me."

Is the wolf guarding the henhouse?  As John Prendergast writes in the NYTimes:
 
For all the visibility of Darfur lately, the United Nations and others have accepted a Sudanese plan under which the wolf will guard the henhouse. The international community has called on the government to disarm the same militias it helped create and arm, and to use the government police to patrol the same camps the regime has been terrorizing. A mere 300 African Union troops spread over an area the size of France are meant to ensure the government's change of heart.   This formula guarantees that six months from now the Janjaweed will still be in a position to kill, rape and pillage, leaving unchallenged the ethnic cleansing campaign that has changed the map of Darfur.
 
The Houston Chronicle writes that it is finally time to call this humanitarian crisis what it really is: genocide.
 
And...
 
Speaking at the NAACP convention, John "-ny come lately" Kerry accused President Bush of ignoring the genocide.  Sending Colin Powell to Sudan isn't exactly ignoring the situation, although it would be nice to have the President be more vocal about it.

The new York Times has recently published two very good articles about Palestinian life.  This first article is very moving in that it shows how people deal with the lawlessness in Palestine due to the economy's dependence on foreign aid and the paralysis of governmental institutions.  Most of all it illustrates the lack of trust Palestinians have in Arafat.  This second article discusses life in Gaza, the poorest part of Palestine and clearly the region that suffers the most due to the ongoing conflict.  Also, check out the multimedia features on the right hand column.  The poll below does an excellent job of dispelling the "myth" that Palestinians don't want peace and want to exterminate Israel.  Note my previous remarks about Gaza, where this poll was taken.
 
 

Is the DOMA constitutional or not? And what power does Congress have to limit federal court jurisdiction on this matter? Two good questions that I'm still looking for answer to. I asked Clarence Thomas a few months ago when I met him, and he indicated that Full Faith and Credit is indeed at play (no surprise there), but he did not give any indication of his stance on it.

Eugene Volakh, head blogger of the wonderful blog The Volakh Conspiracy, has a post saying that he thinks DOMA is constitutional and that too many people are assuming openly that it is not. Btw, Eugene, a law professor specializing in 1st Amendment cases, is friends with Glenn Reynolds another law professor blogger.

But still no word on the whole jurisdiction limiting thing. I'll see if I can ask Eugene and get some more info.

The system, called CAPPS II, was akin to the terror level color-coding system, except that it was to give every single airline passenger a color-coding to indicate their risk of being a terrorist. To set these color-codes, the system was to accumulate volumes of data on each passenger.

Back on January 12, I railed against this idea, saying that it would 'color code us back to 1984.' My complaints about privacy invasion, along with numerous others, have now convinced the Department of Homeland Security (that name still creeps me out) to drop the program. Congrats to all.

(via Andrew Sullivan) ... Tony Blair's reasoning behind the war completely echoes my own:

"The only reason he ever let the inspectors back into Iraq was that he had 180,000 US and British troops on his doorstep ... Had we backed down in respect of Saddam, we would never have taken the stand we needed to take on WMD, never have got progress on Libya ... and we would have left Saddam in charge of Iraq, with every malign intent and capability still in place and every dictator with the same intent everywhere immeasurably emboldened. For any mistakes made, as the report finds, in good faith, I of course take full responsibility. But I cannot honestly say I believe getting rid of Saddam was a mistake at all."

Here's a big [expletive] you to George W. Bush and the Congressional GOP leadership for dragging the nation through this Federal Marriage Amendment crap for no reason. Spend time on things that really matter, like completing the job in Iraq and hunting down Osama Bin Ladin!

Here's the update on the Senate's action. The GOP introduced the original text of the FMA, banning both gay marriages and civil unions on a federal level and at the state level. Democrats surprise Republicans by agreeing to a vote on the Amendment, knowing that it won't pass with the needed 67 votes. To the Republican's chagrin, the Amendment was not even on track to reach 50 votes, and the GOP smelled serious embarrassment. In response, the GOP introduces a weaker version of the amendment that would not apply to states or civil unions. The Democrats, afraid that this version might have a shot at passing, filibuster. Republicans try a procedure vote but fail to get the 60 votes necessary for cloture. Debate and action on the FMA ends.

The big political loser here is the GOP. They saved face by eventually forcing the Dems to filibuster something, which they can use in attack ads come November. However, the Dems can proclaim, "look what the Republicans did... they drug everyone threw this mess for no reason, and they are gay haters." Furthermore, Bush has lost any of the gay vote he had, and the GOP has been divided on this issue, with dissent from several senators and even Mrs. Cheney.

Update: Hidden at the end of this AP contribution, is an interesting and frightening blurb about some potential U.S. House actions. According to the article, the House Republicans might try to pass a bill that would remove the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA, passed in 1999) from the Federal Courts' jurisdiction. The DOMA says that no state must accept a same-sex couple's union from another state. Only requiring a simple majority, if this proposed bill passes, it would keep courts from hearing the inevitable Full Faith and Credit complaint against the DOMA.

Congress has the power to limit the courts' jurisdiction according to Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution. However, I am not familiar with the scope of this clause or its past application. Something seems fishy here, because if Congress could simply rule something out of the court's jurisdiction like this, then wouldn't judicial review be effectively dead? Any Constitutional brains out there help me on this one.

Really, I think I'm looking at this 180 degrees off. I should be asking in terms of the media, who aren't pressters?

Growing up in a Republican family, and listening frequently to Rush Limbaugh on the radio, I was taught from a young age that the media was liberally biased.

Of course, taking a look at the entire media across the nation, I no longer feel that to be the absolute case. However, my attitude has turned more towards despair than ever before, when I realized an even more ominous thread in the media: incompetance.

But I digress somewhat. To the point now. Knight Ridder news service, the second largest newspaper owner in the nation, utterly lied about President Bush's words in regards to Iraq and Al Qaeda, and then their correction lied! The Weekly Standard's got the truth on Knight Ridder's untruths. Sadly, I think their error might be a combination of liberal bias and incompetance. I have a strong feeling they don't even realize the scope of their mistake. Blinded by their instincts to criticize and condemn the government and its leaders.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the Department of Homeland Security's color-coded terror alert system does more harm than good. It helps to instill a sense of fear across the nation without creating any actual security benefits.

A recent Congressional report indicates very limited effectiveness of the terror alert system due to lack of specificity in the information:

The report by the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, was based on survey of 28 agencies and 56 states. Those responding "generally indicated that they did not receive specific threat information and guidance, which they believe hindered their ability to determine and implement protective measures," the report said.

I just got the e-mail from the campaign. The latest poll from the Indiana Manufacturers Association shows Daniels with a 5 point lead: 42-37

My prediction back on April 13 that Daniels would win the Indiana governor's race seems quite strong indeed. It's about time that my predictions get back on track.

Instapundit quotes a StrategyPage article on the current state of insurgents in Iraq:

Al Qaeda operations in Iraq have encountered unexpected problems. Iraqis have become increasingly hostile to al Qaeda's suicide bombing campaign. Religious leaders, which al Qaeda expects to get support from, have been openly denouncing these bombings. Iraqis, aware that they are more likely, than American soldiers, to be victims of these attacks, are providing more information on where the al Qaeda members are hiding out. Most of the al Qaeda in Iraq are foreigners, and easy for Iraqis to detect. As a result of this, many of the al Qaeda men have moved back to Fallujah, which has become a terrorist sanctuary.

Now that the nation is in the hands of the Iraqi people, they are fighting for their own liberty. With each act of defiance against the insurgents, the Iraqis are declaring their independence from the tyranny of terrorism in their midst.

Ok, I stole that post from fellow Domer, Spoons. He has a story about how Ditka is receptive to running for the Senate in Illinois, if asked by Republicans.

Kudos to Chris Letkewicz who forsaw this in his open blog post last Friday.

Just another piece of evidence that the blogging phenomenon isn't just a small step-- its a quantum shift:

advertisement moving to blogs... and the big bloggers are making big money off it.

Speech after speech, President Bush and other proponents of the FMA have said something along the following line: 'We need to enact this amendment reserving marriage to between a man and a woman, because over-zealous courts are enacting gay marriage by judicial fiat and forcing our hands.'

To be kind, this is deceptive. To be blunt, this an utter lie.

Let's examine the facts:

1. The current text of the FMA prohibits not just gay marriage but also civil unions.

2. Its language is much stronger than necessary. For instance, if the real goal was to address over-zealous courts, then it could read, "This Constitution may not be construed to guarantee a right to gay marriage under any federal or state jurisdiction."
-This wording would prohibit courts from determining the matter, but it would allow state legislatures to pass their own laws for or against gay marriage, as opposed to the current FMA text which removes the matter from states' hands altogether.

3. To date, only one court has "enacted gay marriage," that being the Massachusetts high court. In every other jurisdiction, the issue has either not been ruled on, or it has been ruled in favor of a state's ban on gay marriage.

4. The FMA has zero chance of passing, yet Bush and the Congressional GOP leadership continue to press for a vote...


Now, unlike Andrew Sullivan, I am unwilling to go so far as to say that the GOP is currently being controlled by the evangelical right. I see Bush's support for the FMA less as a cowtowing to right wing moralists and more as a political move to create contrast between he and John Kerry.

As such, using a grave issue in a purely political tactic of creating "high contrast," this GOP support of the FMA is deplorable. Instead of getting a focused and honest debate about the role of church and state, federalism, and moral social issues that go along with the question of gay marriage, the Republicans are forcing on the nation a bunch of hot air designed to confuse the debate, create a political wedge, and to create an illusion that John Kerry wants to attack the institution of marriage.

This does both sides a disservice. Think about it. If the GOP had backed a weaker amendment that just limited the courts, there is a much better chance the amendment would have passed, and the opponents of over-zealous courts would have had a victory. Now the GOP will be stuck with a loss under its belt and its goal of creating a wedge is actually creating a wedge within the party. But at least George W. Bush has a greater chance of being reelected. Joy.

I was really disappointed when I heard the news that Ronald W. Reagan (the former President's son) will be speaking at the Democratic National Convention against stem cell research.

Read the story...

Now, Ron Jr. is entitled to his opinion, and I respect him for taking it, even if I disagree with it. However, he is running on his father's name to give his opinions publicity-- in favor of the party that his father opposed most of his adult life. I cannot reconcile that in my mind.

The U.N. oil-for-food scandal continues to heat up,