Wednesday - August 01, 2007
Button Test
Bold After highlighting
Italic After highlighting
Underline After highlighting
- List Item After highlighting. Needs to be surrounded by
Seperator - inserts seperator image
Drop Cap - After highlighting the letter to drop.
Animals - Inserts animal image
People - Inserts people image
Pointer - Inserts pointer image
- More ...
News - Inserts News Image
Link - makes a link of the highlighted text
Email - makes an email link from the highlighted text
image - Links to an image (I used the smokey Bear image link)
Close All - Closes all open tags
Bold-Underline
Thinker - Inserts Thinker image
Big Red - After highlighting text
- After highlighting text. Must put a blank space on each blank lineBlockquote
Strike
Superscript
Subscript
Bat - inserts bat image
Spacer - Adds a spacer for images inside of blockquotes. Change size to 4 pixels taller than image
Arrow - Inserts arrow image
Flowerbar - Inserts flowerbar image
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 08/01/2007 at 01:59 PM
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Walter F. Mondale: The man behind the curtain
Walter Mondale, that shining example of political greatness, shares with us his views on Bush - Cheney.
The Washington Post’s recent series on Dick Cheney’s vice presidency certainly got my attention. Having held that office myself over a quarter-century ago, I have more than a passing interest in its evolution from the backwater of American politics to the second most powerful position in our government. Almost all of that evolution, under presidents and vice presidents of both parties, has been positive—until now. Under George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, it has gone seriously off track.
Three decades ago we lived through another painful example of a White House exceeding its authority, lying to the American people, breaking the law and shrouding everything it did in secrecy. Watergate wrenched the country, and our constitutional system, like nothing before. We spent years trying to identify and absorb the lessons of this great excess. But here we are again.
Since the Carter administration left office, we have been criticized for many things. Yet I remain enormously proud of what we did in those four years, especially that we told the truth, obeyed the law and kept the peace.
Yo Walt, I know it’s been a while but it seems you forgot something:
Now granted, the Carter presidency predates me a teeny bit (I was born 24 Nov 1976 so Reagan is the first President I can remember) but my parents have told me all about how bad it was when Carter was POTUS. Now Mondale comes out and says he’s proud of what they did in that four years? WTF?
Posted by Severa
on 08/01/2007 at 01:57 PM
Filed Under: • Politics •
• Comments (8)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Whoopie Cushion
According to CNN, Whoopie Goldberg is the new co-hos of “The View”, replacing resident cow Rosie O’Donnell.
This ought to provide truckloads of blog-fodder.
Whoopi Goldberg was introduced as the show’s latest co-host Wednesday, joining Barbara Walters, Joy Behar and Elisabeth Hasselbeck on the panel of ABC’s hit daytime show.
Goldberg replaces Rosie O’Donnell, who ended her controversial—but ratings-boosting—tenure in May.
Goldberg has won an Oscar, Emmy, Grammy and Tony in her career. The Oscar was a best supporting actress award for her performance in 1990’s “Ghost.”
“I love this show,” Goldberg, 51, said upon joining the panel on Wednesday’s show. “I love coming on it. I love hanging out with you guys.”
“The View” has been undergoing tumult and turnover since the spring of 2006. In April 2006, longtime co-host Meredith Vieira announced her departure for NBC’s “Today” show. Later that month, the show announced it had signed O’Donnell as its new panelist.
In late June 2006, Star Jones Reynolds announced on air she was leaving in July. However, host and creator Walters announced the next day Jones Reynolds was gone from the show immediately.
O’Donnell joined the show in September. Her time with the show was marked by a much-publicized feud with New York real estate magnate Donald Trump and debates with co-host Hasselbeck, often O’Donnell’s ideological opposite. Ratings reached new highs, however.
In April 2007, O’Donnell announced she would be leaving in June. However, after a furious argument on May 23 with Hasselbeck over Iraq and the war on terror, O’Donnell decided not to return.
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 08/01/2007 at 12:46 PM
Filed Under: • Humor •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Headlines
In my opinion, the headline of a story is one of the most important things to get right. It can convey the position and sense of a story before you even begin to read. A headline that contains a play on words, coinciding with the content is a double-header in my book. That being said, the headline also can convey a false view into the story. It can bias a reader or inject ideas that are irrelevant or plain wrong before the reader even beings.
Such is the headline I just came upon:
Police: Disney Employee Molested Girl For Years
What are the immediate thoughts that come into your mind when you read that headline? I mentally composed the story in about a half second, “knowing” what the article was going to be about. Didn’t you?
Here’s what it really says:
CLERMONT, Fla.—A 54-year-old Disney maintenance man was arrested Friday on charges of sexual battery involving a child.
Christian V. Johnson, of Clermont, was arrested after police said he molested a girl on multiple occasions from the time she was 10 to 14 years old. An 18-year-old man also told police that Johnson molested him when he was 8 years old.
According to an arrest report, Johnson told investigators he did not see anything wrong with the sexual relationship he had with the female victim. He denied touching the male victim.
Johnson worked as an electronics maintenance worker at Walt Disney World and has been placed on unpaid leave pending the outcome of the charges.
The allegations did not involve children Johnson met at the park.
That ticks me off. They wait until the very last sentence to dispell the mental image they concocted with the headline.
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 08/01/2007 at 11:27 AM
Filed Under: • Media-Bias •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Tuesday - July 31, 2007
By the Flip of a Coin (An interesting followup to “I Don’t Believe in Luck")
We are innundated, daily, with the atrocities of the world.
I suppose it’s why they have the “lighter” side of the news. No need to go completely mad, after all, here’s a water-skiing duck - that kind of thing.
My mom, who’s in her late 70s, thinks the world has gone completely insane. She’s thought so for years. I don’t necessarily disagree with her, but I always say “maybe it’s just the same, but we know more about it now”. I’m not sure I can convince myself of that argument anymore. We are, after all, at war. A substantial part of the population doesn’t believe it, but I do.
So with all the brutality, visciousness, and fundamentalist crap we face on a daily basis, how do we stay sane?
Here’s one of my escapes: it’s the audition tape of the man who ultimately won this year’s “Britain’s Got Talent” TV show, hosted by none other than Simon Cowell. I’ve seen it dozens - if not hundreds of times.
Take a peek at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1k08yxu57NA
Go ahead - follow the link now, and then come back.
Back already? Great.
This isn’t me putting my head in the sand, thinking that the world’ll go away.
Quite the contrary.
To me, this is proof positive that there exists - in some of us - a fundamental beauty and decency that cannot be taken away. Regardless of your musical persuasion, the sight and sound of an obviously humble and simple man can show us all that we can and must prevail.
The flip of a coin?
Paul Potts said in a recent newspaper interview that he flipped a coin before submitting his application to the show.
It’s lucky for all of us that it came up on the right side.
Posted by Somnambulist57
on 07/31/2007 at 09:51 PM
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous •
• Comments (12)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • I Don’t Believe in Luck
But this guy was damn lucky.
Apparently, this guy ran through the metal barrier and concrete wall on the right, flipped end-over-end to land where you see him.
Yes, there’s more to the story.
See the extended section.
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 07/31/2007 at 10:12 AM
Filed Under: • Odd-Strange •
• Comments (7)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Is the Tide Turning?
Are we seeing a change of heart at the NY Slimes?
From Best of the Web:
On Second Thought, Don’t Surrender
In an important and surprising New York Times op-ed piece, Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack, both from the liberal Brookings Institution, describe a visit to Iraq, where they find that things are not as bad as--well, as New York Times readers have been led to believe. The piece is titled “A War We Just Might Win”:
Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.
After the furnace-like heat, the first thing you notice when you land in Baghdad is the morale of our troops. In previous trips to Iraq we often found American troops angry and frustrated--many sensed they had the wrong strategy, were using the wrong tactics and were risking their lives in pursuit of an approach that could not work.
Today, morale is high. The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in Gen. David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference.
O’Hanlon and Pollack report that Sunni sheikhs in Anbar province “are close to crippling Al Qaeda and its Salafist allies,” that “the Iraqis have stepped up to the plate” in the northern cities of Tal Afar and Mosul, and that “the American high command assesses that more than three-quarters of the Iraqi Army battalion commanders in Baghdad are now reliable partners.”
They say the situation “remains grave,” especially on the “political front,” but they counsel against a quick retreat, as many Democrats on Capitol Hill have been advocating:
How much longer should American troops keep fighting and dying to build a new Iraq while Iraqi leaders fail to do their part? And how much longer can we wear down our forces in this mission? These haunting questions underscore the reality that the surge cannot go on forever. But there is enough good happening on the battlefields of Iraq today that Congress should plan on sustaining the effort at least into 2008.
In a way, though, what is most telling about this piece is the introduction:
Viewed from Iraq, where we just spent eight days meeting with American and Iraqi military and civilian personnel, the political debate in Washington is surreal. The Bush administration has over four years lost essentially all credibility. Yet now the administration’s critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place.
For the sake of argument, let us suppose that the authors are right when they claim the Bush administration has “lost essentially all credibility.” Does this excuse the administration’s critics for being “unaware of the significant changes taking place"--especially when some of those critics have, for reasons of partisanship, ideology or just plain animus, actively campaigned to destroy the administration’s credibility?
In the critics’ defense, one may say that they have not, by and large, been in positions of responsibility; that if things have gone wrong in Iraq, the administration deserves the lion’s share of the blame.
On the other hand, those critics now include the leaders of both houses of Congress, as well as several politicians who would like to become president. For them, at least, it is a serious failure of leadership if they base their views on Iraq on their own disdain for President Bush, or the hope of exploiting voters’ disdain for him, rather than on reality.
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 07/31/2007 at 08:53 AM
Filed Under: • Iraq • Media-Bias •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Monday - July 30, 2007
Unbelievable
This story broke over the weekend.
NEW YORK (AP) _ A 23-year-old man was arrested Friday on hate-crime charges after he threw a Quran in a toilet at Pace University on two separate occasions, police said.
Stanislav Shmulevich of Brooklyn was arrested on charges of criminal mischief and aggravated harassment, both hate crimes, police said. It was unclear if he was a student at the school. A message left at the Shmulevich home was not immediately returned.
The Islamic holy book was found in a toilet at Pace’s lower Manhattan campus by a teacher on Oct. 13. A student discovered another book in a toilet on Nov. 21, police said.
Muslim activists had called on Pace University to crack down on hate crimes after the incidents. As a result, the university said it would offer sensitivity training to its students
Tasteless? Sure. Foolish? You bet.
But a FELONY?????
If someone took a Bible and put it in the toilet, would it be a felony charge?
If someone took a Book of Mormon and put it in a toilet, would it be a felony charge?
If someone took the Writings of Buddah and put it in a toilet, would it be a felony charge?
Is anyone here a Pace student? Want to be a test case?
** Update **
According to Allahpundit, both of these charges are misdemeanors, but were elevated because they were HATE CRIMES. In other words, my fellow countrymen, he had bad thoughts about someone during the commission of this crime and therefore deserves to be made into a felon.
MM has a copy of the complaint. Turns out the newspaper reports were wrong: he hasn’t been charged with any counts of aggravated harassment, just two counts of fourth-degree criminal mischief (one for each Koran he flushed). As we saw yesterday, fourth-degree mischief is a misdemeanor. So how did Shmulevich end up with two felonies? Simple — they used the state hate crimes statute to elevate the penalty. You’ll find it here in section 485.05; criminal mischief is specifically identified as a covered offense in subsection 3. The provision ordering the court to enhance the punishment is in subsection 2 of section 485.10, right below the hate crimes statute. In pertinent part:
When a person is convicted of a hate crime pursuant to this article and the specified offense is a misdemeanor or a class C, D or E felony, the hate crime shall be deemed to be one category higher than the specified offense the defendant committed, or one category higher than the offense level applicable to the defendant’s conviction for an attempt or conspiracy to commit a specified offense, whichever is applicable.
Presumably, Shmulevich is looking at two Class E felonies now instead of misdemeanors. What’s the penalty for a Class E felony in New York? If the judge is feeling uncharitable, four years. At a minimum, per the same statute, one year.
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 07/30/2007 at 03:19 PM
Filed Under: • Outrageous •
• Comments (13)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Little Rich Girl Gets a Spanking
And boy-oh-boy, this one is going to hurt.
Paris Hilton loses inheritance
PARTY princess Paris Hilton is $60 million out of pocket after her billionaire grandfather - appalled by her jail term for drink-driving offences - axed her inheritance.
Family patriarch Barron Hilton was already embarrassed by his granddaughter’s wild behaviour - notably when her home sex video was leaked on the internet.
But the 79-year-old considered her 23-day sentence last month the last straw.
“He was, and is, extremely embarrassed by how the Hilton name has been sullied by Paris,” says Jerry Oppenheimer, who wrote a biography of the clan called House Of Hilton.
“He now doesn’t want to leave unearned wealth to his family.”
Hilton senior, the only member of the family left with a sizeable stake in the huge hotel chain, has let it be known that he intends to donate to charity the $2.4bn he will gain from this month’s sale of the company to private equity firm Blackstone.
The money will go to the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, the charity set up in the name of the founder of the family business.
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 07/30/2007 at 02:25 PM
Filed Under: • Stoopid-People •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Fred on Eminent Domain
Yes, I know he hasn’t announced yet. yes, I know he is not the best on every topic in the political arena. What I do know is he starts with the Constitution.
Mrs. DuToit said it best:
If we don’t like the laws, then we should elect people who will overturn them (in the great conservative tradition), not ignore them.
I think Fred gets that and I don’t think many others do (certainly no others in the pool of conservative candidates).
So despite my disagreement with him on some fairly major issues, I think he’s probably the best man for the job.
Today’s article deals with Eminent Domain. Here’s a snippet:
Last week, California officials in National City voted unanimously to use eminent domain to take over more than 600 properties—including a nonprofit youth center dedicated to keeping local kids out of gangs and off the street. They plan to give this land to local private developers for a group of condominiums.
It’s said that a man’s home is his castle, but across America some property owners are being rooked by local bureaucrats and politicians and having their private property confiscated by local governments for the supposed public good.
And he ends it well.
Our Founders placed respect for private property as a key principle when writing out nation’s Constitution, and the protection of private property resulted in the United States becoming the greatest economic power in the world and a beacon of freedom to all. This principle is even more important today, as homeownership has become an increasingly integral part of our citizens’ aspirations for a better future for themselves and their loved ones. If the Supreme Court will not protect our right to ownership, then political leaders must step up to the challenge.
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 07/30/2007 at 10:32 AM
Filed Under: • Politics •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Sunday - July 29, 2007
“How close were we to seeing an armed nuclear conflict?”
Mangun sends us this story:
US Sinks North Korean Ship Bound for Iran
“How close were we to seeing an armed nuclear conflict?” That is the question being asked as Syrian nationals temporarily vacated Beirut, Lebanon and the Jordan Valley during mid July according to sources close to ACG-CIS. Many security and intelligence officials believe that this behavior may have been related to the US sinking of a North Korean ship approximately 100 nautical miles from the coast of Iran.
It was not immediately clear why, around July 10, 2007, the Syrian nationals, primarily engaged in construction, trades and agricultural occupations, should have vacated Lebanon without notice. The nationals were noticed to have returned to Beirut and the Jordan Valley by July 21, 2007.
I’m not familiar with this source, and cannot quickly find anything to back it up, so the BS meter is twitching.
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 07/29/2007 at 07:05 AM
Filed Under: • Iran • North-Korea •
• Comments (12)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Saturday - July 28, 2007
Fred on Federalism
On Federalism
The Framers drew their design for our Constitution from a basic understanding of human nature. From the wisdom of the ages and from fresh experience, they understood the better angels of our nature, and the less admirable qualities of human beings entrusted with power.
The Framers believed in free markets, rights of property and the rule of law, and they set these principles firmly in the Constitution. Above all, the Framers enshrined in our founding documents, and left to our care, the principle that rights come from our Creator and not from our government.
We developed institutions that allowed these principles to take root and flourish: a government of limited powers derived from, and assigned to, first the people, then the states, and finally the national government. A government strong enough to protect us and do its job competently, but modest and humane enough to let the people govern themselves. Centralized government is not the solution to all of our problems and – with too much power – such centralization has a way of compounding our problems. This was among the great insights of 1787, and it is just as vital in 2007.
The federalist construct of strong states and limited federal government put in place by our Founders was intended to give states the freedom to experiment and innovate. It envisions states as laboratories in competition with each other to develop ideas and programs to benefit their people, to see what works and what does not.
This ingenious means of governing a large and diverse nation prevailed for more than a century. But today our Constitution and the limited, federalist government it established, are considered by many to be quaint or out of touch with the world we live in, to be swept aside by political expediency.
The Supreme Court sometimes ignores the written Constitution to reflect its view of the times. So does Congress, which routinely forgets that our checks and balances, the separation of powers and our system of federalism are designed to diffuse power and protect the liberties of our people. Before anything else, folks in Washington ought to be asking first and foremost, “Should government be doing this? And if so, then at what level of government?” But they don’t.
There’s more at the link. The more I read, the more I like. I might have to create a Fred category 
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 07/28/2007 at 07:39 AM
Filed Under: • Politics •
• Comments (7)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • So, You Want HillaryCare?
Kim over at WizBang, found a great article about Canada’s healthcare system. This is what happens when you hand the keys to any program over to Uncle Sam.
Michael Moore, call your office.
I was once a believer in socialized medicine. As a Canadian, I had soaked up the belief that government-run health care was truly compassionate. What I knew about American health care was unappealing: high expenses and lots of uninsured people.
My health care prejudices crumbled on the way to a medical school class. On a subzero Winnipeg morning in 1997, I cut across the hospital emergency room to shave a few minutes off my frigid commute.
Swinging open the door, I stepped into a nightmare: the ER overflowed with elderly people on stretchers, waiting for admission. Some, it turned out, had waited five days. The air stank with sweat and urine. Right then, I began to reconsider everything that I thought I knew about Canadian health care.
A five-day wait for an ER visit....I hope its not a, you know, EMERGENCY!
Here’s some more good news:
Government researchers now note that more than 1.5 million Ontarians (or 12% of that province’s population) can’t find family physicians. Health officials in one Nova Scotia community actually resorted to a lottery to determine who’d get a doctor’s appointment.
These problems are not unique to Canada—they characterize all government-run health care systems.
Consider the recent British controversy over a cancer patient who tried to get an appointment with a specialist, only to have it canceled—48 times. More than 1 million Britons must wait for some type of care, with 200,000 in line for longer than six months. In France, the supply of doctors is so limited that during an August 2003 heat wave—when many doctors were on vacation and hospitals were stretched beyond capacity—15,000 elderly citizens died. Across Europe, state-of-the-art drugs aren’t available. And so on.
Single-payer systems—confronting dirty hospitals, long waiting lists and substandard treatment—are starting to crack, however. Canadian newspapers are filled with stories of people frustrated by long delays for care. Many Canadians, determined to get the care they need, have begun looking not to lotteries—but to markets.
Go read the rest and see your futute when the whiners get their way and get .gov to take over your health care.
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 07/28/2007 at 07:31 AM
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine •
• Comments (6)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Thursday - July 26, 2007
Moral Conundrum
A couple of weeks ago, our church did an outreach to the local area. For three days we partnered with a local contractor and did some work on local homes that were in dire need of repair. Then in the evenings, in the local park, we conducted a “kid’s camp” for any and all kids that were there. Kind of like a Vacation Bible School, but at the park.
One lady who had her kids there was a Hispanic woman with two boys: age 10 and 2. They had a great time and in the course of the week, we found out she really wanted to learn English so she could get a job. She had been watching kids in her home, but since they were all Spanish speakers, it was no problem.
So my wife and I and another lady from the church have been meeting her and her kids in the park twice a week now to let our kids play together while we help her with English. She is a quick study and very smart. I’m confident that she will be conversational within a month of twice-a-week lessons.
I have not asked directly yet, but my suspicion is that she is probably here illegally. From what I’ve gathered, her and her husband came from Mexico about 10 years ago to California. They recently moved to the east coast to be closer to family.
Now, you’ve seen my posts on illegal immigration and know that I’m staunchly against it. I firmly believe it is an affront to those who stood in line and followed the process.
But now there’s a name and a face and a family to go with that opinion.
I would not turn them in at this point, mainly because I’m not sure they are illegal (I can speak a good bit of Spanish, but do not consider myself fluent) as well as my feeling that it would not accomplish anything meaningful. Here are a couple of pretty productive, smart and resourceful individuals (who also have two American sons). I doubt they would get sent anywhere at this point.
So here’s the conundrum: Do I continue to help her learn English in hopes that she can progress a little in society and be more productive? Or do I drop the lessons, claiming the moral high ground because of my stance on illegal immigration?
Posted by Mr. Christian
on 07/26/2007 at 01:58 PM
Filed Under: • Illegal-Aliens • Immigration •
• Comments (40)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
Amazing aerial images taken by daring Allied pilots on secret missions during WW 2
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Hookers and Booze
peiper over at Barking Moonbat EWS found some absolutely kickass aerial photos from WWII. I grabbed this one because I’m a big fan of the movie A Bridge Too Far.…
On: 11/23/09 03:14
Clear Thinking and Straight Talk
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at baldilocks
Let Them Fight or Bring Them Home Read all of it--and tell every American you know to do so. (Thanks to BMEWS) UPDATE: The author of the above blog is…
On: 10/02/09 08:29
A Box With Four Sides
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Macker's World
See, Afghanistan was worth saving. I can't say the same about Pocky-stawn, especially since it possesses nuclear weapons and no thanks to North Korea, China, and AQ Khan. So they…
On: 05/07/09 01:37
Display it with pride
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Macker's World
Take a look at the sidebar and click on the "DHS Certificate" shown. You'll see what Crappy Nappy thinks of those who believe in Limited Government and Constitutional Rights. Therefore,…
On: 04/19/09 10:25
A Bad Time To Call
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Conservatism Today
Drew at Barking Moonbat Early Warning System was in a foul mood as he took a call from a guy with the Republican party while he was doing his taxes…
On: 04/14/09 05:46
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:
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.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
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 © 2004-2008 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
