Thursday - October 16, 2008

PEOPLE, AS LONG AS BIG BROTHER KEEPS DOING STUPID THINGS I’M COMPELLED TO SHARE THE LUNACY.

NOW WHAT DO YA MAKE OF THIS LATEST BIT OF MOONBATTERY?

Council bans man from tending his front garden - because it is too tidy
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
Last updated at 12:21 PM on 16th October 2008

Brian Hubbard has been banned from gardening by his local council because his lawn is too tidy

A dedicated gardener has been banned from trimming the grass outside his house - because it is TOO tidy.

Brian Hubbard, 72, has been mowing, weeding and edging the verge outside his home for the past eight years.

But now Herefordshire Council have ordered him to stop because he is encroaching on council-owned grass.

Mr Hubbard, who worked as a civil servant for 40 years, has served as a parish councillor in his home district of Belmont, Hereford, with special responsibility for green surroundings.

Mr Hubbard was sent a letter from the council’s parks, countryside and leisure development service, giving him 28 days to return the area to its original state.

The letter ordered the removal of garden tools and furnishings, path and bed covering material, and all vegetation not in keeping with the surrounding area.

It warned if there was still a problem after that period, works would be carried out and re-charged to him.

Mr Hubbard branded the council’s warning as absurd. ‘The council said it sent me this letter after noticing that my grass verge was tidier than the other ones on the street’ he said.

‘All I have done is cut the grass and keep it as tidy as possible.

‘I was told to stop doing it and somebody from the council said it was because that if it was too tidy people might not feel they could walk over it.

‘It is absolutely ridiculous, I am just trying to help the council with what their job is.

‘If I was a timid or nervous type of person I might feel rather threatened by the letter, which I think is utter nonsense.
‘The contractors that cut the grass verges use heavy duty sit on lawn mowers.

‘I’m going to ignore the letter - they won’t stop me.’

Belmont district councillors have reacted with disbelief at the council’s actions.

Independent councillor Glenda Powell believes that the pensioner should have been praised for his work. ‘I think it’s absolutely ridiculous’ she said. ‘Whether it’s a piece of council ground or not if it’s a bit untidy we should be commending people who help clear it up.

Mr Hubbard, whose local council has banned him from gardening, says he will ignore the warning

‘It is barmy, I think it’s absurd and I don’t understand the logic to what they have said to Brian.
‘I have been to his home many times and his role on the council was actually to look after all the trees and bushes in the community.
‘I know Brian well and he used to be a parish councillor and has a great reputation.’

Councillor Heather Davies said Mr Hubbard and his wife should be congratulated for taking pride in the area.

She said: ‘When I was on my way to see them, the road looked a mess because the grass had been cut but the cuttings left.

Local councillors are shocked at Herefordshire council’s treatment of Mr Hubbard

‘Mr Hubbard should be thanked for picking his cuttings up.

‘If more people were like that, the area would look really nice. We should be supporting him because its brilliant what he does - not sending him letters like this.’

A spokesman for Herefordshire Council said it apologised if Mr Hubbard thought the letter was too strongly worded.

He said: ‘We are aware of Mr Hubbard’s endeavours to tend the land next to his home in Dorchester Way and commend him for his public spiritedness.

‘Public open spaces are there for everyone to enjoy and in Herefordshire we have 1,400 which are maintained by the council’s contractors.

‘These contractors are paid out of the public purse and have a responsibility to meet standards laid out in the contracts which govern their work.

‘If anyone feels a public open space is not being cared for as it should, please contact the council and we will speak to our contractors.

‘We apologise if Mr Hubbard feels the letter he received from us is heavy-handed. We are happy to meet Mr Hubbard to discuss the issue.’

http://tinyurl.com/4szycm

Posted by Drew458     on 10/16/2008 at 11:17 AM   
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous • Nanny State • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

FAKE MICROSOFT PATCH TUESDAY.

I get the Tuesday Patch on Wed here, and this arrived in Thurs. email.

While tech things not usually my forte (but I’m in there trying to learn. Slowly. ) I simply wondered how many have seen this and are aware.

My guess is that most BMEWSers would be aware of something in email anyway.  Even I know about that. BUT ..
hey.  Just on the off chance that even one hasn’t caught this and might get nailed, I thought I should post the article and the link.

October 14th, 2008
Fake Microsoft Patch Tuesday malware campaign spreading

Posted by Dancho Danchev @ 3:00 pm

Malicious attackers are once again taking advantage of event-based social engineering attacks, and are currently mass mailing fake notifications for Microsoft’s Patch Tuesday, attaching a copy of Trojan.Backdoor.Haxdoor, next to a legitimately looking PGP signature which is, of course, fake too :

“We received some questions from customers about an e-mail that’s circulating that claims to be a security e-mail from Microsoft. The e-mail comes with an attached executable, which it claims is the latest security update, and encourages the recipient to run the attached executable so they can be safe. While malicious e-mails posing as Microsoft security notifications with attached malware aren’t new (we’ve seen this problem for several years) this particular one is a bit different in that it claims to be signed by our own Steve Lipner and has what appears to be a PGP signature block attached to it. While those are clever attempts to increase the credibility of the mail, I can tell you categorically that this is not a legitimate e-mail: it is a piece of malicious spam and the attachment is malware. Specifically, it contains Backdoor:Win32/Haxdoor.”

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2027

Posted by Drew458     on 10/16/2008 at 10:32 AM   
Filed Under: •   
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - October 15, 2008

FYI

We all owe a debt of gratitude to Peiper. Because of his post earlier today, BMEWS did NOT miss out on Blog Action Day 2008: Poverty.

What is Blog Action Day 2008: Poverty?

Today thousands of bloggers will unite to discuss a single issue - poverty. We aim to raise awareness, initiate action and to shake the web!

I’d like to initiate action by expressing my concern for the greedy poor like the Crompton family. . .

scroungers.

Awareness raised. Action taken. Web shaken. . . well, maybe only stirred.

Good work Peiper! (and there was much rejoicing. Yaaayyy.)

UPDATE: Apologies. I forgot the warning:

This post, while not about Europe in any meaningful sense, does reference a post about Europeons.

There. Must.not.upset.Walt.

Posted by Christopher     on 10/15/2008 at 11:10 PM   
Filed Under: • Humor • Stoopid-People •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

debate blogging

Oh God, this thing is soooo dullllll. Same talking points dragged out and run over, again. and again. and again .... snorrrrre.

Ok, McCain sort of went after BO on the Ayers thing. Sort of. Then he turns into a crybaby and wastes 10 minutes going on about how his feelings have been hurt.

BEST FREUDIAN SLIP EVAH: McCain refers to BO as Senator Government. Whoo hoo!!

Disaster, narrowly avoided: McCain gets tongue tied and refers to Palin as a “bresh of frest air”. Thank GOD he didn’t say a BREAST of fresh air!”

Now they’re back to rehashing the same old crappy talking points again. Am I the only one who has figured out that if the Obama health plan goes through, the one that lets people sign up with GIECO or whatever it is that’s the same health insurance plan that the government has, that it will take about 36 seconds for every single employer in the country to stop providing health benefits? What’s to stop them? You can’t make a law that says “Business #1 does not supply health insurance to their employees. That’s Ok, those people can come on the government plan. Business #2 does supply health insurance to their employees, therefore they must continue doing so forever.” No, equal treatment under the law. That’s the American Way. Bam, zoom!, there won’t be a company left inside a week. Why should they when the government will pick it up? And then we have instant Socialized Medicine. Better reserve your ambulance now, just in case you need one 3 years down the road.

I don’t know how much more of this garbage I can take. I’m like a little kid on a car trip “is it over yet? NO. is it over yet? NO. is it over yet? NO.”

Posted by Drew458     on 10/15/2008 at 09:12 PM   
Filed Under: • Politics •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(1)  Permalink •  

police are ordered to pay convicts for giving advice on fighting crime. ( MAJOR MOONBAT ALERT!)

Keep in mind people, the govt. in power is the Labour Party.  Think left, think liberal, think STUPID!
Whoops ,,, I think I may have offended the entire left and the govt.  Have to go now, there’s a knock at my door.

Now police are ordered to pay convicts for giving advice on fighting crime
By James Slack
Last updated at 12:44 AM on 15th October 2008

Police forces have been ordered to ask convicts to give them advice on fighting crime.
Criminals can join new groups.

The idea is that the panels act as ‘critical friends’, offering guidance on how local police are seen by the people they serve.
It is also claimed that by consulting over future operations - such as raids - the groups can tackle the ‘distrust of the police service endemic in certain minority communities’.

The Association of Chief Police Officers has told forces to advertise for volunteers - and added that criminals are welcome to apply.
The guidance states that there should be a ‘presumption in favour of appointing the applicant’.
They can even continue as advisers if they are caught committing a crime while serving on one of the panels, the document adds.

Some members are allowed access to confidential police intelligence, and will have to sign the Official Secrets Act.
The Tories have warned that although the scheme is intended to bolster confidence in the police, it could have the opposite effect.
Shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve said: ‘There are some criminals who, because of the gravity of their past offending or the ongoing risk they present, should not be permitted to sit on these groups to avoid damaging public confidence.

‘It is far from clear how this very general advice will be implemented in practice, both to avoid harming the trust of local communities and protecting the confidentiality of police investigations.’
The guidance also states that there is an argument for not vetting any applicants.
Reasons given include the fact ‘the Gypsy Traveller Community may not have permanent or previous addresses for any vetting to be conducted’ and the fear of offending the ‘transgender community’.

It states: ‘There could be reluctance to reveal information about their previous identity, or current identity, that could jeopardise their privacy.’
However, the document concludes that some security checks should, in fact, take place.

A spokesman for Acpo said that criminals on the advisory boards would be vetted and screened.
She added that they would not have access to the Police National Computer. 

(oh yeah? )

http://tinyurl.com/3e8flo

HERE’S THE PERSON WHO THOUGHT THIS UP. OFFICER ARRRK.

Posted by Drew458     on 10/15/2008 at 11:32 AM   
Filed Under: • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Mickey Mouse’s vote for the Democrats could rebound on Obama’s chances of becoming U.S. president.

WE CAN HOPE .... GUESS I WON’T KNOW TILL TOMORROW MORNING HOW TONIGHT’S DEBATE WENT.  BUT DO NOT EXPECT MUCH FROM MCCAIN.

Why Mickey Mouse’s vote for the Democrats could rebound on Obama’s chances of becoming U.S. president
By DAVID GARDNER
Last updated at 1:04 AM on 15th October 2008

Barack Obama is facing demands for an investigation into alleged links to a Left-wing group accused of creating bogus voters to boost his chances of becoming U.S. president.

The scandal involving tens of thousands of fake registrations across the U.S. has led to eight states launching criminal probes into the Association of Community Organisations for Reform Now (Acorn).

It claims to have signed up 1.3million poor and working-class voters in a mass registration in 18 states this year.

But it has been accused of trying to register a voter named Mickey Mouse in Orlando, Florida, and enrolling a 19-year-old to vote 73 times in Ohio.

One set of false registration forms filed by the group in Las Vegas included the starting line-up for the Dallas Cowboys football team.

Mickey vote: Acorn registered a voter by the name of Mickey Mouse in Orlando

The controversy could undermine support for Democrat Mr Obama to become the first black president on November 4 because he would benefit from many of the first-time voters signed up by Acorn.

Republican candidate John He says it created bogus new voters to manipulate the result of the election in favour of the Democrats.

The Wall Street Journal says the Obama campaign paid £477,000 to help finance Acorn’s vote drive.

He is also said to have led registration efforts early in his political career in a Chicago project involving the group and was a lawyer for Acorn in 1995.

Republican pundits last night drew parallels to claims in a new book about Mr Obama, saying he employed a consultant to have all his opponents in his 1996 Senate race removed over procedural errors.

According to The Case Against Barack Obama, anyone standing as a senator must collect 757 voters’ signatures.

But the consultant found fault with so many signatures of rivals’ backers - such as printing names rather than writing them - that they were dropped from the election and Mr Obama was elected unopposed.

The Obama campaign denies being involved with illegal voter registration and says he never worked closely with Acorn.

Acorn blames any wrongdoing on lazy staff who wanted to be paid for doing no work and were subsequently fired.

Spokesman Brian Kettenring said: ‘The attention being paid by the Right is tremendously disproportionate to the problem.’has called for an investigation into Mr Obama’s ties to Acorn.

http://tinyurl.com/3mmch9

Posted by Drew458     on 10/15/2008 at 10:33 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Politics •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Useless Idiots

And they come right out and say so. Not that that stops their campaign workers from wearing Obama buttons. And the only evidence of anything McCain-ish is a tissue box on some table somewhere. But that’s just the teaser ... because you already knew the commies would never publicly get behind Obama. Wink wink, nudge nudge, not publicly, oh no. The real news is that the commies, our commies, are just thrilled to pieces that Wall Street is a mess, and the economy is teetering. And that major Socialism seems to be the temporary answer, and will be part of the next iteration of government.

US communists say their time has come

A rare bird in the political world, the US Communist Party is feeling rather smug in these days of capitalist turmoil. At the party’s New York headquarters on 23rd Street in Manhattan, regional party chairman Libero Della Piana, 36, laid out why he thinks Marxist-Leninism’s time has finally come.

“We are very excited, we feel that we are at a turning point,” Della Piana, an imposing half-Italian, half-African American with a pony tail, told AFP.

“We can afford to be less on the defensive for the first time since Ronald Reagan, and we can say our word in rebuilding America on a new basis, rebuilding a better world, instead of one based on the greed of the few.”

But American communists think that the collapse of Wall Street and huge disillusionment among the public with the economy has put them on a roll.

“We receive more and more phone calls, we have more inquiries from people, we see an increase in interest,” Della Piana said. “We hope to be part of the discussion. I can see a role for the Communist Party in this next period.”

few people were about during a visit by AFP on Monday and the atmosphere was collegial and slightly sleepy, rather than revolutionary.

“They are all out working to get people to vote,” explained Bill Davis, 65, who has been a faithful member for 37 years.

There is no communist running for the White House and the Communist Party does not endorse Democrat Barack Obama. Yet many staff here wore his picture on lapel buttons, while Republican John McCain was relegated to a box of tissues—the tissues being pulled through his mouth.

So they don’t actually endorse their candidate of choice, but they’re eagerly looking forward to the good times when he gets elected. 

Posted by Drew458     on 10/15/2008 at 09:43 AM   
Filed Under: • Commies • Politics •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

JOBLESS COUPLE WITH 10 KIDS ON THE DOLE, UNHAPPY.  THEY WANT MORE BENEFITS!

Can’t find the words to fit the story here.  Pretty certain bet that the offspring will follow in parents footsteps.

The jobless couple with 10 children who rake in £32,000 a year in benefits.. and who STILL aren’t happy
By NEIL SEARS
Last updated at 5:41 PM on 14th October 2008

Tracey Crompton has never had a job, and her husband Harry has been out of work for 15 years.

Yet the couple live for free in a seven bedroom house with their ten children and receive £32,656 in benefits a year.

They even have their own vineyard in their 270ft long garden.

In fact, they receive so much in handouts that they have already bought and wrapped £3,000 worth of Christmas presents, and plan to buy more.

The couple say they are enjoying the credit crunch because it has forced down the price of luxury goods like TVs and computer games, but do have two gripes.
Firstly, they want even more benefits.

Secondly, that their neighbours have nicknamed them ‘Britain’s Biggest Freeloaders’.

Mrs Crompton, 40, moaned: ‘I’m not satisfied with the benefits we get - I want more. I haven’t been able to work because I’ve had to bring up the kids and Harry’s got health problems.’

Fortunately their benefits do stretch to a £250 weekly shop which usually includes 50 packs of crisps and ten litres of fizzy drinks.

Mrs Crompton went on: ‘If the kids need something I go and get it. I rarely go without things either. If I need something, like a new pair of shoes, then I’ll get it.’

The couple and their children Michael, 20, Robin, 19, Matthew, 17, Sarah, 16, Samantha, 14, Harry Andrew, 12, Alex, 11, Kristian, nine, Jesse Lee, seven, and Joshua, six - live in Hull in two semis knocked into one.

As both are unemployed, their weekly £120 rent is paid by housing benefit and they receive another £628 a week in income support, disability and carer’s allowance and other payments. Mr Crompton, 50, says he is unable to work due to angina and irritable bowel syndrome.

Mrs Crompton said: ‘We don’t have money worries. We don’t go without things and I think that’s because we are self-sufficient. We grow our own food. I don’t see why others should have money worries.’

Sadly, others do not always understand. ‘Every time I walk down the street, people shout “scroungers”,’ said Mrs Crompton.

And it seems that she does not have the time for housework.

The walls of her home are dirty and peeling and the floor is covered in videos and magazines.

‘I don’t have much time for cleaning since I started a college course in catering,’ said Mrs Crompton.

‘I’m really nervous about what will happen at the end of my course. I’ve never worked and so it would be scary to think I would have to get a job. It would have to be very well-paid to pay more than the benefits.’

http://tinyurl.com/4fnb2e

Posted by Drew458     on 10/15/2008 at 08:24 AM   
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous • Outrageous • Taxes • UK •  
• Comments (9) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

still sick, might be getting better

I’ve spent the last week in Mucus Hell. Awful coughing, nose running like a faucet, bit of a fever, and enough sinus pressure to make my teeth hurt. So much nose blowing that I ought to be dehydrated by now. Doctor said bronchitis and a sinus infection. Two bottles of really large and expensive pills.

This happens to me just about every year when the seasons change. Beats me why. If we have a short fall, going straight from late summer into snow then I’m fine. But if we have an extended fall, where the temps go up and down and in and out for a month or two, then I’m screwed. This year we’ve had frost in September and 80 degree days in mid October. But we haven’t had the cold wet miserable duck hunting season weather of November yet, thank goodness.

So if you’ve been wondering why I haven’t been posting that much, now you know. But I think I might be coming out of it at this point. I’m back to the cough-so-hard-when-you-get-up-that-you-almost-puke-and-then-feel-Ok-for-a-few-hours stage that I came in on, so I’m hoping that’s an improvement. And I think I can find some energy to do some basic stuff around here like laundry and taking out the garbage and putting fresh sheets on the bed. All that basic stuff that just grinds to a halt when you’re sick.

Posted by Drew458     on 10/15/2008 at 07:30 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Sarah Palin dives in poll ratings, and msm in USA are not biased, reports The Telegraph.

And ya read it here.  Unless you caught it all back home in US.

It may hurt but there’s no way to ignore this reporting on American elections from the Brit side.
Honestly, and yes I know I’m being cowardly, I so far have avoided watching the other parodies of Mrs. Palin. I saw the first and yes it was funny.
I might get the nerve to see the others. Not really sure I want to.  It’s nice and warm and secure here in the sand.

Sarah Palin dives in poll ratings as Tina Fey impersonates her on Saturday Night Live
It has broken Sarah Palin’s spell and could decide the next president. As Obama and McCain square up for Wednesday’s final debate, Neil Midgley explains how US TV entertains, informs and influences voters in a way that would be unthinkable in Britain.

By Neil Midgley
Last Updated: 9:05AM BST 15 Oct 2008

Three weeks from now, Sarah Palin may be the Vice-President elect of the United States of America. But today, few people would call her the most powerful woman in American politics.

Arguably, that honour doesn’t go to former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi either. Today, the most influential woman in America is probably Tina Fey – a television comedienne.

Since Palin’s nomination as Republican John McCain’s running mate for the White House, Fey has mercilessly and relentlessly impersonated her on NBC’s late-night satirical show Saturday Night Live (SNL).

Fey’s physical resemblance to Palin is uncanny, and Fey has an equally spooky knack of replicating the Alaska governor’s near-Canadian accent.

In public, Palin has taken Fey’s mockery in good part. But Palin’s poll ratings are telling a more devastating story.

In a Newsweek poll in September, voters were asked whether Palin was qualified or unqualified to be president. The result was a near dead-heat. In the same poll this month, those saying she was “unqualified” outnumbered those saying she was “qualified” by a massive 16 points.

Some of Fey’s best satire has come straight from Palin’s own unforced errors.

At the end of last month, Palin was interviewed by Katie Couric, the main news anchor for the CBS television network.

Couric asked Palin whether the $700 billion for the Wall Street bail-out, which had at that point not been approved by Congress, might be better spent helping out middle-class families.

Palin replied: “That’s why I say I, like every American I’m speaking with, we’re ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out.

“But ultimately what the bail-out does is help those who are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Helping the – it’s got to be all about job creation too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track.

She went on: “So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans and trade – we’ve got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing, but one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today – we’ve got to look at that as more opportunity.”

That babbling response was a gift for Couric, but an even bigger one for Fey the following Saturday. Repeating Palin almost verbatim gave Fey her most powerful line so far.

Thanks to Fey, SNL is defying gravity. While other television shows continue to lose viewers, its ratings are up 50 per cent this autumn – despite the fact that it is now in its 34th season. It currently commands 10 million viewers – a creditable figure for a primetime drama, let alone a late-night sketch show.

NBC has given it an extra slot on Thursday nights. And its success in feeding off serious anchors such as Couric highlights just how powerful a force television has become in deciding this presidential election.

Other satirical shows, such as The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report, are also enjoying record ratings, as well as influence far beyond their own viewers.

Stewart’s combination of comic monologue, fake news reports and genuine celebrity guests (such as Michelle Obama and Tony Blair) has gained him a cult following both in the US and here, where the show airs on the digital channel More4.

Even bigger than Saturday Night Live have been the presidential and vice-presidential debates. Sarah Palin’s set-to with Joe Biden on October 2 attracted nearly 70 million viewers – a record for a vice-presidential debate and the highest-rated election debate since 1992.

Presidential candidates Obama and McCain only managed 63 million, but even that is a massive number. To put it in context, this year’s American Idol finale – one of the highest-rated shows in the calendar – had 32 million viewers.

It is impossible to imagine a similar level of engagement with political television in this country. Gordon Brown and David Cameron would not only have to debate each other on TV – an unlikely scenario in itself – but pull in an audience bigger than the finals of Britain’s Got Talent and Strictly Come Dancing put together.

American networks do have some advantages over the BBC and ITV in planning and executing their political coverage.

Presidential elections happen on a rigid four-year timetable, avoiding the unholy scramble when a British general election is called at a month’s notice.

That allows the networks to engage with the process much earlier on – not least with their Sunday morning political talk shows.

“Two years ago, the then-potential candidates were making their pitstops on [NBC Sunday morning show] Meet the Press,” says Brian Stelter, a media reporter for the New York Times and the lead contributor to that newspaper’s TV Decoder blog. “In some ways, those shows are really try-outs.”

British TV channels also labour under Ofcom’s impartiality requirements, which bar the kind of opinion-led political shows that litter America’s cable news channels.

Every weeknight, there is a primetime battle between Fox News’s legendary conservative Bill O’Reilly, and firebrand liberal Keith Olbermann, whose show airs on NBC’s cable news spin-off channel MSNBC.

Olbermann calls O’Reilly “Billo the Clown”; O’Reilly glories in the fact that Fox gets higher ratings than MSNBC.

The BBC News channel and Sky News could never engage in such playground antics, no matter how entertaining – not least because they could distort the outcome of elections.

“I think we’re learning what it means to have opinion journalism in this country on such a grand scale,” says Stelter. “It’s only in the last six to 12 months that those lines have hardened between Fox and MSNBC. I think the [ratings] numbers for cable have surprised people.

“Cable, which is a niche offering, is in some cases beating some of the big broadcasting networks. I think that shows that people are looking for different stripes of political news.”

American political TV certainly is polarised. When Governor Palin attacked the media in her speech at the Republican convention last month, the crowd chanted “NBC”.

Gwen Ifill, a respected anchor on the non-commercial channel PBS, who moderated the vice-presidential debate, saw her impartiality attacked because she is writing a book about African-American politics that mentions Obama in its title.

Yet despite the Wild-West flavour of some shows, America’s networks comprehensively outstrip this country in both volume and quality of political coverage.

All three major US networks – ABC, CBS and NBC – offer a large amount of serious (and unbiased) political coverage, both in their evening network newscasts and in their morning equivalents of GMTV. All three have Sunday morning political talk shows.

(and here we conservative folks have been thinking how biased those innocents are. silly us. )

By contrast, ITV has almost abandoned politics, and Channel 4 offers precious little political coverage outside Channel 4 News (and, occasionally, Dispatches).

The BBC still wheels out politics on Sunday mornings, but Andrew Marr’s show is very soft and The Politics Show, with its heavy regional component, often seems like a box-ticking exercise by the corporation.

Michael Portillo and Diane Abbott, BBC1’s late-night political Punch and Judy, would seem dangerously flippant among NBC’s line-up of heavyweight political pundits.

Even more worryingly, political television gets no support from Ofcom’s ongoing review of public service broadcasting (PSB), which will likely mutate into government policy early next year.

The regulator appears so obsessed by preserving regional news on ITV, and so charmed by Channel 4’s bid for public funding, that it will allow the broadcasters’ coverage of national politics to drift.

Unlike science, arts, and history, political television does not get a separate mention from news and current affairs in Ofcom’s definition of PSB; the word “democracy” did not appear once in the regulator’s latest 155-page report.

Impartiality and the public service ethos hardly characterise Tina Fey’s performances. Tonight’s presidential debate forms part of a series driven largely by commercial networks, not publicly funded channels. Neither Fox News nor MSNBC was set up as a sop to a regulator.

Yet if Lord Reith were alive today, he’d see more education, information and entertainment about politics in US television than on the BBC.

Can we learn something from our American cousins? As Sarah Palin erself might say, “Darn right, doggone it, you betcha!”

http://tinyurl.com/3nygoz

That link will also take you to all the Tina Fey parodies. 

Posted by Drew458     on 10/15/2008 at 03:38 AM   
Filed Under: • Blog Stuff • Miscellaneous • Satire • Television •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - October 14, 2008

Such a crisis

So, if the banks are safe, and the stock market is back up to nearly the region we think it should be, are we still having a financial crisis? If not, and this whole thing has mostly blown over in a bit more than 2 weeks, is this still evidence of the Failed Economic Policies of the Bush Administration? Because, really, if they were failures, wouldn’t we be in a Depression or Huge Recession now, AND have been in one for quite some time already? Because, while the feds did come up with their pork laden bailout plan, it hasn’t actually been put into action yet, has it? They haven’t spent a dime of that $850 billion yet as far as I know. And now the latest plan to support the banks with a quarter trillion bucks ... that’s just talk at the moment too, right? And the market is rising under rocket power.

Is it possible that our economy is actually so huge and so robust that it can weather this mortgage mess and come zooming right back? If it is, then are we actually crisis-proof, but because of the size of the stock market we should just accept lots of volatility?

Kind of the same thing happened this year with the price of oil. In July the price of crude was $147. Now, in mid-October, it’s $83, and that’s after a $2 increase yesterday. Demand can not have fallen 43% or more in the past 3 months, put gas prices are down by 30% and are still falling. It makes you wonder if the whole recent oil crisis wasn’t some huge speculation bubble based on nothing more than greed and someone’s power to manipulate the market. 

Posted by Drew458     on 10/14/2008 at 09:48 AM   
Filed Under: • Economics •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

‘I’ve lost faith in The Messiah’: How EDWARD HEATHCOAT AMORY lost his Obama-mania.

Ok people now this really is interesting.  It has me a bit lost though.

This Brit (like we need or want his input) is saying that O. is a fraud and a cheat and not exactly partial to the truth.  So, he is disillusioned with Obama but still wants him to be our president. ?? huh?  Oh yeah, he doesn’t want Mrs. Palin a heartbeat away from so much power. 

Earlier, Drew and Turtler (quickly becoming our site historian) had an interesting exchange of comments.

Here in this article I think are some of the issues that we should be talking about and trying to tell people about.  And it’s an Obama supporter who has the goods and spills the beans.  See what you think.  I believe it’s issues like these that Turtler is saying we need desperately to pursue.

This is not a short article and as a rule I’d post part of it and simply give you the link for the rest.  But not today.

Oh, one more thing.  This fellow doesn’t like President Bush’s cowboy boots or prayer meetings.  I’m trying to figure out just what his boots and prayers have to do with anything.  Seems a bit like snobbery to me.  His boots?  Why should this guy care if our prez. wears boots?

By Edward Heathcoat-amory
Last updated at 10:36 AM on 14th October 2008

Four years ago, during one of the dullest and most depressing American presidential election campaigns in living memory, I happened by chance to watch an obscure senator from Illinois deliver a speech to the Democratic National Convention.

It was electrifying. I can still remember the power of his voice, as he said: ‘I stand here knowing that my story is part of the larger American story, that I owe a debt to all of those who came before me, and that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.’

Barack Obama was the best political speaker I’d seen in my lifetime. And I wasn’t the only one who thought so. He walked off that stage a star, and four years later he is the Democratic candidate for President of the United States.
Obama-mania: Taking the world by storm

My enthusiasm that day is now shared by millions, in America and in Europe. He gives hope to those of us in Britain who admire what America stands for but can’t abide George Bush, with his cowboy boots, prayer meetings and appalling judgment - over Iraq, in particular.

For us, Barack Obama - who risked his career with a speech in 2002 against the war - seems to be the man who can decontaminate the American brand.

So I’ve rooted for Obama as he fought first to defeat Hillary Clinton and now John McCain, his admirable but not inspirational opponent. I’ve followed Obama’s speeches on YouTube, and they’ve gone on getting better.

I’ve listened to him narrate his own remarkable autobiography - Dreams From My Father - and I’ve willed him on to victory.

Then a friend recommended a short book entitled The Case Against Barack Obama, by a respected U.S. investigative journalist called David Freddoso, which has stirred up a storm of controversy in America since it was published in August.

Based on forensic research into Obama’s political background, it casts a fascinating light on his early years in politics, and in so doing debunks many of the compelling myths that have been built up around him.

‘Have a read,’ my friend suggested, ‘and see if you still feel the same.’ So I did. And the result has profoundly altered my views. Oh, I still want Obama to win. Sarah Palin may be a remarkable person, but I don’t want her a heartbeat away from leadership of the free world.

But when Barack Obama becomes President, as I still hope he will, I no longer expect him to change the world. As I shall explain, I’ve lost most of what Mr Freddoso would call my ‘Obamamania’. And here’s why.

First, let’s examine how Obama took his first significant step on to the political scene when be became a state senator for Illinois in January 1996.

It was a rather remarkable contest, in that Obama was elected unopposed. And the reason for that was that he had found a way to have all the other candidates removed from the ballot, including the incumbent.

Obama under the glare of the spotlight: He has at times played a dirty game to get into politics.

If you want to run for a U.S. state senate seat, you need the backing - ie, the signatures - of a minimum of 757 ordinary electors within your district.

Obama employed a special consultant, Ronald Davis, to look at each of the 1,600 signatures that the sitting senator, Alice Palmer, a member of his own party, had gathered. And Mr Davis found problems with so many that Palmer was dropped from the ballot, and for good measure he managed to have the other three candidates ditched as well.

According to a local newspaper, problems included ‘printing registered voters name [sic] instead of writing, a female voter got married after she registered to vote and signed her maiden name’.

It was a legal electoral tactic, but a little odd from the man who had run ‘Project Vote’ - a campaign to persuade the disenfranchised to vote for the first time. Yet here was Obama disenfranchising those same voters in another way, using the toughest of political tactics to deny them a choice at the election.

Asked about it later, he said: ‘If you can win, you should win, and get to work doing the people’s business.’

The next telling aspect to the case against Obama is his attitude towards the corrupt politics of Cook County, the five-million-strong council area that includes Chicago.

Until recently, Cook County was run by John Stroger, the President of the Cook County Board of Commissioners. And he ran an extraordinary political machine, in which a full 50 per cent of all the campaign contributions he received came from either employees on the county payroll, or contractors doing work for the county.

A federal investigation found that jobs were handed out not on merit, but thanks to personal connections with the Stroger machine. If you were a ‘soldier for Stroger’, you would get a job. And then, allegedly, you would in return contribute campaign funds to re- elect your political patron.
‘He was in a prime position to speak out against this appalling corruption. Instead, he did nothing’

‘He was in a prime position to speak out against this appalling corruption. Instead, he did nothing’

What’s that got to do with Obama? Well, as a local state senator and then as a U.S. senator for Illinois, he was in a prime position to speak out against this appalling corruption. Instead, he did nothing.

In fact, when a well-qualified liberal challenger, Forrest Claypool, stood against Stroger with support from both Democrats and Republicans, again Obama did nothing.

And when Stroger had a stroke, and his unqualified son, Todd Stroger, was nominated by the machine to replace him, again Obama did nothing.

Worse, he issued a statement saying that: ‘Todd Stroger is a good progressive Democrat who will bring those values and sensibilities to the job.’

Young Stroger won that election, and since his victory he has continued with his father’s patronage politics. For example, he gave his cousin, the county’s chief financial officer, a 12 per cent pay increase to $160,000 (£92,500), hired his best friend’s wife on $126,000 (£73,000), and appointed a childhood pal as his official spokesman.

Hardly the ‘good progressive Democrat’ whom Obama supported. But that was by no means Obama’s only connection with tainted political empires.

Obama has also enthusiastically endorsed Richard Daley, mayor of Chicago. Daley managed to cling to office despite a federal investigation into a widespread system of political patronage over which he presided.

Two of his aides were convicted in 2006 for running this system, and rewarding the mayor’s allies with jobs and promotions. One job applicant was actually in Iraq on the day that his supposed ‘interview’ took place, but still managed to score a perfect five out of five to secure a coveted position.

Yet in 2007, Obama endorsed Daley’s campaign for re-election as Chicago’s mayor, saying ‘the city overall has moved in a positive direction’.

This should come as no surprise, since Obama has inherited his chief spokesman and political adviser directly from Mayor Daley. David Axelrod worked for Daley for 15 years and has consistently defended him, arguing at the time that Daley’s men were about to go to jail: ‘The so-called machine doesn’t exist any more.’

Obama said earlier this year: ‘I think I have done a good job in rising politically in this environment without becoming entangled in some of the traditional problems of Chicago politics.’ The evidence, unfortunately, suggests otherwise.

Freddoso’s case against Obama then moves on to his time in the U.S. Senate. Obama hasn’t been there long, but one of his much-trumpeted-achievements was the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, 2006.

This helped expose, and therefore limit, the system of ‘earmarking’, where legislators direct national funds to parochial local projects, often as part of dodgy deals to get their support for national legislation.

So it is doubly disappointing that in 2007, Senator Obama ‘earmarked’ $1 million for the University of Chicago medical centre. The vice-president of the centre is his own wife, Michelle Obama.

Indeed, she had received a pay rise of $200,000 (£115,500) at the very same time that Obama first became a senator - and thus able to organise earmarks. Coincidence? Or something more sinister? Obama insists the former, but it certainly doesn’t look good.

Change in the system: But Obama realised he could raise more than the limit and changed his policy

Then the book moves on to Obama’s single most disappointing decision. In the wake of Nixon’s Watergate scandal, state funding for Presidential elections was introduced as an option.

Under the terms of the deal, candidates can choose to receive a fixed sum of $84 million from U.S. taxpayers to pay their election expenses, but then can’t spend any more of their own money. Alternatively, they can opt to raise all their funds independently with no fixed ceiling.

Progressives have long argued for mandatory state funding, since it’s intended to make newly elected presidents less indebted to the donors who paid their way to the White House. So it was no surprise when, in 2006, Obama said he ‘strongly supported’ state funding.

In 2007, he promised to ‘ aggressively pursue’ a deal with McCain, under which both candidates would opt for central funding rather than private donations. But then he realised how much money he could raise on his own - perhaps as much as half a billion dollars.

So he promptly dumped his commitment to state funding. He said the decision ‘wasn’t an easy one’ but that the system was ‘broken’. This is rubbish. It’s just that he has a better chance of beating McCain - who has accepted the $84 million state funding deal - if he can massively outspend him.

Like the time he had all his fellow candidates eliminated from the ballot in 1996, he wanted to win, more than he wanted to hang on to his principles.

Next, the book has a look at Obama’s long-term relationship with the Church of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who believes that the American government has been deliberately infecting black people with the HIV virus.

Changes: But Obama has switched his position when it benefited him

Freddoso points out that the Church’s ‘vision statement’ says it is founded on the writings of Dr James Cone. Dr Cone argues, among other things, that ‘ Christianity and Whiteness’ are opposites.

Obama left Wright’s Church only earlier this year - when the Reverend accused him of ‘political posturing’. This is well-worn territory, of course. Obama’s critics never tire of criticising his links to Wright. But they are no less disturbing for that.

Finally, Freddoso looks at Obama’s relationships with a series of property developers, including Tony Rezko, who recently went to jail for fraud.

When Obama bought his house in 2005 for $300,000 (£173,000) less than the market value, Rezko bought the plot next door. When challenged about their connections, Obama claimed: ‘I’ve never done any favours for him.’

Not quite true, apparently. The two were friends and Obama wrote a series of letters supporting Rezko’s successful attempts to get state subsidy to build affordable housing in Chicago.
Chicago real estate developer and fast-food magnate Antoin ‘Tony’ Rezko spent years pouring thousands of dollars in campaign contributions into Barack Obama’s campaign

Unfortunately, Rezko’s 30 buildings have subsequently run into financial difficulties, which is a bit tough for their tenants as living conditions have deteriorated. Rezko even turned off the heating in the middle of winter to save money.

Not a nice man, then. But a generous supporter of Obama, collecting and donating $250,000 (£144,000) to his political patron over the years.

So there, in essence, is Freddoso’s case against Obama. But as he also says, his book doesn’t demonstrate that Obama is in any way personally corrupt or even ‘a bad man’. Yet it does suggest that ‘he’s like all the rest of them in Washington’.

Those Americans who support him, and the billions around the world who believe that he could rebuild Brand America, would do well to remember that Obama’s a politician with huge gifts, but also great flaws. He’s a beacon of hope. But not now - nor ever - a political Messiah.

http://tinyurl.com/3qydyp

Posted by Drew458     on 10/14/2008 at 08:29 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

HA! WHEN LIBS DO THEIR BEST TO HELP THE POOR, THE DOWNTRODDEN, THE DISADVANTAGED.

THE ROCKET SCIENTIST LIKE DOWNTRODDEN JUST CONTINUE SHOOTING THEMSELVES IN THE FOOT.

I had to think a bit before posting this to everyone’s attention.  And I’m not on a kick France rant today. But the story originates there and it is interesting that time and time again the proof looks the left square in the eye, and the eye goes, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

There are some who CAN NOT be helped.  They are usually lazy, stupid, criminal and want hand outs.  No help please.  No matter how much money is thrown away trying to appease this class of scum, it’s always going to be money down the sewer they live in.

So, here we go again.  Riots, burning cars, threats to life and limb.  Heeeeers Fraaaaannnnce.  Again.

Filming of John Travolta movie on Paris housing estate cancelled after rioting youths threaten crew

By Peter Allen
Last updated at 12:01 PM on 14th October 2008

Filming of a new John Travolta movie on a deprived Paris housing estate has been cancelled - after rioting youths torched ten of the production’s cars and threatened crew.

‘From Paris With Love’ was meant to have highlighted social problems in the grim suburbs which surround the French capital.

Jobs as extras and support staff were even offered to largely immigrant residents who are plagued by unemployment and discrimination.

But within days of arrived in Les Bosquets, a high rise estate in Montfermeil, in the notorious Seine-Saint-Denis north of the capital, violence broke out.

‘All ten of the vehicles set to be used in the film were burnt out and there were threats aimed at support crew,’ said a production spokesman.

‘There’s no now possibility of Mr Travolta or any of the other stars of the film operating in such a dangerous area.

‘The scenes we were mean to do here will now be shot elsewhere.’

‘From Paris With Love’, which will also star British actor Jonathan Rhys Meyers, will be legendary French director Luc Besson’s last film.

All those involved hoped the £30 million movie would draw attention to urban communities alienated from mainstream France.

Travolta, the star of numerous films including Grease and Pulp Fiction, in particular wanted to get as close as possible to an underclass which suffers some of the worst social problems in Europe.

He and his wife Kelly Preston arrived in Paris earlier this month, and were due to spend the next three months living close to Montfermeil.

Film makers had been allowed into the area on two conditions - that local people were used as extras, and that meals for the film workers were produced by a local company.

Reacting to the cancellation, Montfermeil’s mayor Xavier Lemoine said: ‘I’m very sad for all residents who were due to take part in this production.’

Earlier this year, Mr Sarkozy’s government unveiled an £800 million plan aimed at tackling social problems in run down estates like Les Bosquets, investing in job creation schemes, education and transport.

However, the former Interior Minister is best known for his reactionary approach to trouble - invariably sending riot police into what he described as ‘ghettoes’, and calling lawless locals ‘scum’ who should be ‘washed away with a power hose.’

Responding to such emotive language and behaviour, former Socialist prime minister Laurent Fabius said: ‘We need to act on prevention, education, housing, jobs ... and not play the cowboy.’

http://tinyurl.com/4blnfr

Posted by Drew458     on 10/14/2008 at 07:51 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • EUro-peons •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

WITH APOLOGIES TO BMEWS. CLASS.  A MEA CULPA?  CARLA BRUNI AIDS TERRORIST.

Recently Drew and I agreed on the term class as applied to certain women.  Neither of us thought Paris Hilton exhibited much by her overall public behavior, though I tended to think perhaps she might be improving somewhat after being incarcerated.  Something she was never brought up to believe one of her monied class would experience. 

I then posted an eye candy photo of a woman who up till that time I thought exhibited class beyond all measure.  The First Lady of France, Carla Bruni. 
Fully clothed she had far more appeal and striking looks then many women half her age (40 something). 

I forgot she had been a million dollar model and so knew how to best present herself.  I now confess that blinded by her physical appearance, I was quite willing to conveniently forget just how far left her politics were are.  I came to believe she was one who did exhibit class as I understood the word.
Well, maybe I don’t understand what “class” really is.  I always just assumed I’d know it when I saw it and she seemed to embody the very meaning itself.

If real class in a person goes beyond the physical (and it does), then my idea of Bruni class has shown her to have hooves of clay.  Actually, that might not be fair to her as she never made a secret of her leftist politics and has spoken openly on the subject.  And that fact alone (being left) doesn’t mean she’s classless.
However, it’s what she’s managed to bring about in criminal matters, the total disregard of victims as she worked on the ever horny Sarko, president of France, to deny Italy the extradition of a member of The Red Brigade, that has me riled this morning.

She has NO CLASS whatever.  Simply a very good actress with the appearance of class.  I’m more disappointed in myself (typical male huh?) then in her.
She never denied her stripes and I never gazed beyond her light to see what what was behind.  So, here’s the story that has me all bothered today.

Carla Bruni uses influence to halt extradition of Red Brigades terrorist
Carla Bruni and her sister have persuaded Nicolas Sarkozy not to extradite a woman who faces life imprisonment for murder to her native Italy, sparking anger amongst her victims’ families.

By Henry Samuel in Paris
Last Updated: 6:01PM BST 13 Oct 2008

In a sign of her influence over her husband’s decision-making, the Italian-born First Lady - along with her sister - convinced the French president to drop a court order to deport exiled Red Brigades terrorist Marina Petrella to Rome.

Her personal intervention and the presidential u-turn sparked anger in Italy, which has been seeking Mrs Petrella’s extradition from France since she fled after being freed on bail in 1986.

A group representing victims of the Red Brigades said it would travel to Paris this weekend and protest against the decision in front of the Elysée palace.

Mrs Petrella was found guilty in absentia by an Italian court in 1992 of murder, kidnapping, attempted kidnapping and armed robbery.

A French court approved her extradition in December and an order to send her back to Italy had been signed by the prime minister. But after “pugnacious” lobbying by Mr Sarkozy’s wife on behalf of her older sister, actress Valeria Bruni-Tedeschi, the president changed his mind - citing humanitarian grounds.

“Mrs Petrella was in danger of dying. This hunger and thirst strike had to stop, which it did. There is a humanitarian clause, I used that clause,” Mr Sarkozy said during a financial press conference.

“I told him (Mr Sarkozy) about her, especially just after I saw her in jail.

I gave him some information that was perhaps a little bit important in his decision,” said Miss Bruni-Tedeschi.

“He focused his attention on a case that he hadn’t completely focused on before,” she said. Her sister Carla said she was “happy” about the decision.

The pair personally delivered the message to Mrs Petrella on Sunday at her secure prison hospital bed, where she is refusing to eat and is in “very poor” health.

“I have a message for you from my husband,” the First Lady reportedly told her. “You will not be going back to Italy.”

The Communist Red Brigade was accused of dozens of murders in the 1970s and 80s, including that of Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro in 1978.

Mr Moro’s widow, Olga, expressed outrage: “All judicial accords and conventions have been violated” by a decision “no doubt taken because the Sarkozy household was scared of unpopularity,” she said.

Mrs Petrella had been living at liberty in France until she was arrested in August 2007 at Italy’s request soon after Mr Sarkozy’s election. He had promised to end France’s policy of granting repentant ex-Red Brigades members asylum– first initiated by Socialist president François Mitterrand in 1985.

Mr Sarkozy denied that his decision would anger his Italian counterparts. “I remained in contact with them. I don’t think there was a lack of understanding. There is never a lack of understanding when one takes a humanitarian decision,” he said.

But Isabella Bertolini, a member of Mr Berlusconi’s People of Freedom party disagreed: “To apply a humanitarian clause to a terrorist convicted of homicide, theft and kidnapping sounds like a bad joke,” she told newspaper La Republicca.

The First Lady’s sister told Italian daily Corriere della Sera that Mrs Petrella’s story had particular significance for the wealthy Bruni family, which had fled to France after receiving death threats from the Red Brigades.

“I arrived in France as a little girl exactly because my family was afraid of what was happening in Italy, also because of terrorism,” Miss Bruni Tedeschi said.

“We all had a sentiment of fear, even I who was so little, and I know what it means to be welcomed by a foreign country, feel protected by it, and I can imagine what it means to suddenly lose that welcoming, lose that protection.”

This is a rare foray into politics for Mr Sarkozy’s third wife, who unlike her husband has always espoused left-wing causes.

However, it is not the first time the President has involved a spouse in politics: last year he sent his second wife Cécilia on a successful mission to free Bulgarian nurses from jail in Libya. The pair divorced last October and a month later he met Carla Bruni, a top model and successful folk pop singer.

http://tinyurl.com/3kra9x

Posted by Drew458     on 10/14/2008 at 04:02 AM   
Filed Under: • Celebrities • Commies • Crime • Editorials • EUro-peons • Terrorists •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner