"The numbers are astonishing. Congress is now spending money like a drunken sailor. And I've never known a sailor drunk or sober with the imagination that this Congress has." -- Senator John McCain.

As the son of a drunken sailor, I'm not a fan of the analogy. Still, it's nice to see someone in Congress recognize that Congress and President Bush have been on a political vote-buying spending spree. While the rest of us have had to tighten our belts to ride out the economy, Congress has been spending money on steel tariffs, farm subsidies, federalization of the TSA, and "free" prescription drugs. They have even voted themselves a raise; all of which hard working Americans will be paying off for years to come.

Sorry for the lack of posting this weekend. Friday was my birthday and this being a long holiday weekend, I've pretty much just been spending quality time with my family. I know it sounds corny, but you'll get over it. I hoped to read through all my email today, but I've mainly spent the day watching VT stink up the field against UVA which means I get to hear it from this guy for a whole year. (Better luck next year, I hope.)

When I was a young lad, my father was a Navy chief. Since he was away for six months out of the year, my mother never bothered to celebrate Thanksgiving. In fact, it wasn't until my sister first attended grade school that we had even heard of Thanksgiving. Apparently she came home one day and asked my mom what this "Thanksgiving" thing was that she'd been hearing about.

Ever since then, we've been celebrating Thanksgiving together. Although my sister hardly ever makes it home anymore, I always try to make it back. That means I'll either be traveling today or early tomorrow morning, depending on what time I leave work today. Blogging will be light over the holiday, which is a good thing. Rather than reading websites, you should be spending time with your family and being thankful for everything that is good in your life.

Here's to you and yours.

If you've commited a crime in East Point, now you can use their web site to arrest yourself. It's nice to see the police have a sense of humor.

Owen Courreges is dismayed that Rice and UT are going to renew their affirmative action programs following Sandra Day O'Connor's ruling that racial discrimination should be permitted for the next 25 years. Ever since, university officials have been busy counting and classifying people by the color of their skin, and coming up with quotas for each color of person they want attending their school.

"We have thoroughly studied the matter through the summer and into the fall," said Rice President Malcolm Gillis. "Since 1996, we have tried race-neutral means, but these alone haven't yielded the necessary level of diversity, including racial and ethnic diversity, to achieve Rice's educational goals."

(emphasis mine)

The RIAA has been suing 12 year old girls, grandmothers, and countless others for unauthorized listening of their music. Now they are seeking permanent protection from countersuits, and some senators in Congress appear more than happy to give it to them. It's amazing what a few hundred thousand dollars worth of bribing lobbying will do.

Related articles:
RIAA ramps up to start hacking users -- 01/13/2003

VT head coach Frank Beamer has decided to stop rotating quarterbacks, reports the AP. Of course that's only after it cost the Hokies a loss at Pitt, a near loss at Temple, and a loss to BC at home. The rout over Miami was mainly a defensive and special teams coup where big plays and a stingy defense made up for the lackluster offense.

Apparently deer are overpopulated again, and deer/vehicle collisions are on the rise. I knew something was up on this weekend's trip to the VT-BC game in Blacksburg. We must have passed 6-8 roadkill in each direction.

Oklahoma's KTUL reports that an alleged murderer who was on the lamb met his match when he abducted a doctor and his wife and stole their van. Murder supsect Scott Eizember suffered multiple perforations to his body when Dr. Peebles used a concealed handgun to liberate himself and his wife from their captor. Eizember escaped, but was apprehended while trying to seek medical attention. He will likely face multiple murder charges, shooting with intent to kill, and kidnapping.

Have you ever wondered which category of political stereotype you fall into? Well, reader Donald Hagen has A Satirical Political Beliefs Assessment Test to help you determine if you are a Archconservative, Leftwing Wacko, Antigovernment Libertine, or a Commie Sympathizer.

Potential member states of the E.U. appear to be having second thoughts. The Telegraph reports that Britain is prepared to veto proposals for the new constitution because of the way it handles defense. Apparently England is not too keen on leaving their national security up to a bunch of European bureaucrats. Frankly, I cannot blame them. It would be a bit like the U.S. depending on Canada and Mexico.

Across the continent in the East, Czech President Vaclav Klaus had some harsh words for Europeans. The Washington Times reports that he said they are living in a "dream world" of welfare and long vacations and have yet to realize "they are not moving toward some sort of nirvana."

FOR SALE: One presidential vote. Willing to exchange vote for President willing to defend Constitution, limit the scope of the governmental nanny state, cut government spending and cut taxes. Price is FIRM and not negotiable. Serious offers only. Tax and spend Democrats and Republicans need not apply.

This is fantastic news:

The U.S. economy grew at an 8.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter, faster than the government initially estimated as companies boosted inventories in September to meet the surge in demand.

The nation's gross domestic product, the value of all goods and services produced, grew from July through September at the fastest pace since the first three months of 1984, when Ronald Reagan was president.

It's too bad that the big government Democrats and Republicans appear to be willing to erase all the good economic news with their socialist vote buying programs ala "free" prescription drugs.

Damn, someone beat me to it.

If you are going to download illegal child pornography, bootlegging somebody's unsecure wi-fi connection is probably a wise move. What isn't a wise move is trying to (ahem) wax the tadpole while surfing for child porn and driving around town at the same time. The Register notes that Walter Nowakowski of Canada was spotted driving the wrong way down a one way street. Cops allegedly found him driving with his pants around his ankles, and his laptop picking up child porn over a bootlegged wi-fi connection. They also report that a search of his home turned up "10 computers along with thousands of CDs and floppy disks suspected to contain child porn images".

I don't blame you for having doubts about the HCI 5-year plan I posted yesterday. I can neither verify nor refute the authenticity. I've found it posted several other places, but the source seems to be a mystery. If this is to be believed, it first started circulating in January of 1994. Given that the gun grabbers have actively pushed many items in that plan lead me to believe that it is, for the most part, authentic.

Regardless of the authenticity, the 5-year plan was too ambitious to implement that quickly. Gun grabbers are still out there though, biding their time and waiting for the next school shooting on which to capitalize. If you want to see the long term effects of the "5-year plan", just check out this post by Kevin Baker.

Virginia's tax and spend liberal Governor Mark Warner makes me cringe every time I see him or hear him speak. He is one of the worst Governors the Commonwealth has ever seen, and plans to ruin the state economy before he leaves office in 2006. If Virginia had a recall provision, I would be personally collecting signatures for his ouster.

One sticking point to my hatred for Comrade Warner is his lack of fiscal responsibility. The Washington Post's press release on Mark Warner's recently unveiled tax plan makes me physically ill from the very first paragraph.

Virginia Gov. Mark R. Warner (D) on Monday proposed a massive overhaul to the state's tax system that he said would reduce taxes for nearly two-thirds of the state's residents while generating $1 billion in new state money from higher taxes on shoppers, smokers, corporations and the rich.

If you can read and understand bullshit you already know which two-thirds of the population will be getting a tax break, and which third will be footing the bill for it.

The specifics of the Governor's plan to return Virginia to "traditional, conservative budget practices" are disturbing. Warner plans to "stabilize" Virginia's finances by implementing the following:

1% increase in sales taxes.

$715 million increase in "basic school aid".

8% increase in Medicaid.

$140 million "down payment on the funding demands" of state colleges.

Increase cigarette taxes 1000% AND allow individual cities and counties to add their own tax capped at 2000%of the current tax.

Increase income taxes for those earning more than $100,000.

As evidenced by the proposed tobacco tax hike, Warner is following the typical Daschle-Democrat playbook, and pitting Red America vs. Blue America. Considering that Virginia is a leading tobacco state, raising tobacco taxes will further hinder farming and work to destroy the Commonwealth's top cash crop. The money taken from Red America will flow from the rural counties to the overweight budgets of the urban and suburban cities of Blue America. Warner even admits that he plans to stick it to farmers by redistributing wealth, albeit under the guise of fairness.

He also said the plan will correct what he called a fundamentally unfair tax system designed 100 years ago for a rural farming state that no longer exists.

"We will return Virginia to the traditional, conservative budget practices that has been it's hallmark," Warner said. "This is a plan that's fair to the people who pay the bills." [...]

Warner vowed to close loopholes that allow Virginia corporations to avoid paying some taxes on their income. And he said the state must phase out a costly but popular tax break for the elderly.

Warner said his plan reduces the 4-cent sales tax on groceries to 2.5 cents and would impose lower tax rates on working families by increasing deductions and reducing taxes on the first $20,000 of income, saving them millions of dollars each year.

Grrrr. The lies are just infuriating. Every time I hear a politician speak about raising taxes on corporations that are using "loopholes" to avoid paying "their fair share", I want to kick him in the nuts. And his claim that people who make more than $20,000 per year are not considered "working families", nor are they "people who pay the bills" is infuriating.

The kicker to the whole thing is that not once did Warner ever even consider reducing spending items in the budget. He never even looked at spending cuts, and in fact plans to increase spending along with increasing taxes on the evil and hated rich yet again.

This is too funny.

Demonstrators gathered outside Fort Benning to protest a military school were hit with a sonic barrage Saturday: patriotic music Army officials had blaring from the main gate.

A crowd estimated by Columbus police at 8,000 gathered to protest the school once known as the School of the Americas, which they blame for Latin American human rights abuses. It appeared to be the largest first-day gathering in the 14-year history of the protest.

The Army's loudspeakers, playing "The Army Song" and "God Bless the U.S.A.," were 50 yards away from where protesters were speaking to the crowd.

Leaders of School of Americas Watch, which has protested at Fort Benning every year since the early 1990s, said they planned to sue over the noise tactic and accused the Army of a "psychological operation."

Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune notes that in some communities, enough is never enough.

Tobacco opponents once had to endure the risk of being enveloped in fumes anytime they went out to eat. But as the number of smokers has declined, restaurants have adapted to satisfy nonsmokers. They forbid cigars and pipes, offer separate smokers and nonsmokers sections, or simply prohibit smoking altogether.

Wilmette has 39 restaurants, and before the ordinance was passed, 33 of them didn't allow smoking. Anyone with an aversion to the smell of tobacco had plenty of dining options even without crossing village boundaries. Chicago, for that matter, has some 500 smoke-free restaurants.

But getting their way 85 percent of the time was not enough for the proponents of total bans.

Anti-smoking rules are about controlling behavior, not about meeting a non-smoking demand.

When it comes to gun control, proponents make the claim that they only want responsible regulations. People like me are said to be under the paranoid assumption that gun grabbers want to take away all my guns. Well, just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean that they aren't really out to get you. Had this ambitious 1993 Game Plan plan laid out by Sarah Brady and the other gun grabbers at the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Ownership, formerly Handgun Control Inc., been realized, the world would be a much different place today.

Although the document has been around for quite a while, it has to be one of the most shocking things I have ever read when it comes to gun control. HCI's game plan paints a bleak future for gun owners. The highlights are too numerous to mention so you should read the whole thing. If I had to mention some of the most shocking proposals, there are several which float to the top. For instance, Sarah Brady would make it illegal for more than 4 gun owners to assemble in any one place at a time. They would also make all gun owners names and photographs available to the public, ban gun shows and military re-enactments, and perform "random police checks" searching for those that own firearms.

HCI would also make proliferation of the "gun culture" illegal. Included in their regulations would be a ban on "typical military clothing, camouflage, pouches, and gear, boots and other combat gear", the elimination of armed police officers, and the regulation of "dangerous literature". Yes, the gun grabbers are even making the claim that "the time will come when our nation has to agree that some literature does not belong in a safe society. . . We must realize that there can be such as thing as too much freedom where such literature poses a serious threat to the public safety." I think that statement pretty much sums up their take on the Bill of Rights.

To get the full effect, you really should read the entire memorandum. It is memos like this that could make the phrase "cold dead hands" a tragic reality.

----------Reprinted from here, and mirrored here----------
Summary of Notes and Minutes

Meeting of Friday, December 17, 1993

Rough Draft Proposal for Internal Memo and Five Year Plan

HANDGUN CONTROL, INC.

Following is a summary of Notes and Minutes of a meeting held December 17, 1993 at the Western Regional Office of Handgun Control, Inc. for the purpose of discussing strategy and defining an agenda for the formulation of gun control legislation in 1994 and the following five years. The document is on Handgun Control stationary, and is marked CONFIDENTIAL-Not For General Distribution. Also included is an attachment on HCI stationary which is marked:

HCI - Confidential Document DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OR COPY/NOT FOR GENERAL CIRCULATION. The attachment is also marked CONFIDENTIAL, and Confidential Information for use by Lobbyists or Senior Officers Only. The attachment is dated December 29, 1993 and contains details relative to the Notes and Minutes of the December 17, 1993 meeting. The material was distributed to the following individuals:

Richard Aborn David Birenbaum Lee Fisher
Larry Lowenstein John Phillips Helen Raiser
Maurice Rosenblatt Jeanne Shields Odile Stern
N.T. Shields Sarah Brady Stanley E. Foster
John Hechinger Edward O. Welles Charles J. Orasin
Lois Hess Sandy Cooney Amy Weitz

The contents of the document were to be forwarded to the national office for reference, and a series of brainstorming sessions are to be held at the White House through the winter of 1994. A brief discussion on Fundraisers and Press Releases follows, with reference to swaying votes for Sen. Feinstein's Assault Weapon Ban, and the drafting of a letter of support to Rep. Charles Schemer to offer additional materials for his use in testimony and press conferences. The document urges HCI members to continue their high profile supporting gun control issues and to continue with their praise of President Clinton, Attorney General Janet Reno, and Senator Dianne Feinstein for their political courage in standing up to the Gun Lobby. The following is summarized from the content of the general document and the Attachment.

WHAT IS PENDING NOW, AND CAN BE LAW IN 1994!

A)Ban of all clips holding over 6 bullets.

B)Ban on all semiautos which can fire more than 6 bullets without reloading.

C)Ban on possession of parts.

D)Ban on all pump shotguns capable of being converted to over 5 shots without reloading.

E)Banning of all machine guns, destructive devices, short shot guns/rifles, assault weapons, Saturday Night Specials and Non- Sporting ammunition.

F)Arsenal licensing for possession of multiple guns and large amounts of ammunition.

G)Elimination of the Department of Civilian Marksmanship.

H)Ban on possession of a firearm within a home located within 1000 feet of a schoolyard.

I)Ban on all realistic replicas/toy guns or non-firearms capable of being rendered realistic.

J)The right of victims of gun violence to sue manufacturers and dealers to be affirmed and perhaps, aided with money from government programs.

K)Taxes on ammo, dealers licenses and guns to offset the medical costs to society.

L)The eventual ban of all semi-automatics regardless of when made or what caliber.

WHAT WAS ONLY A DREAM TEN YEARS AGO CAN BE REALITY AS EARLY AS THIS YEAR!!!

The memo describes subjects discussed during a "brain storming" session conducted after the formal meeting. The focus of this session was to guide gun control initiatives over the next five years. The document states that these subjects may not be politically feasible ideas for 1994, but the members are confident that with continued pressure they can achieve most if not all of these goals within the next five years. These goals are summarized below:

FIVE YEAR PLAN:

1) National licensing of all handgun purchases.

2) License for rifle and shotguns. Strict licensing should be mandatory for all firearms, whether handguns or not.

3) State licenses for ownership of firearms. It is reasonable to require that all individual must prove that they require a firearm.

4) Reduction of the number of guns to require an arsenal license. The suggestion is that the number be reduced to possession of greater than 5 guns and 250 rounds of ammunition.

5) Arsenal license fees. It is reasonable to require an annual fee of at least $300.00, with a cap of $1,000.00.

6) Limits on arsenal licensing. No license permitted in counties with populations in excess of 200,000.

7) Requirement of Federally Approved storage safe for all guns.

8) Inspection licensing of all safes. This would be a good revenue source, and would be conducted yearly.

PUBLIC SAFETY REGULATIONS:

9) Ban on manufacturing in counties with a population of more than 200,000.

10) Ban on all military style firearms. This will be based on a "point system" and hopefully can be expanded to include high powered air guns and paint ball weapons.

11) Banning of any machine gun parts or parts which can be used in a machine gun.

12) Banning the carrying of a firearm anywhere but home or target range. There should be a federal mandate to the states regulating the carrying of firearms.

13) Banning replacement parts.

14) Elimination of the Curio relic list. A gun is a gun.

15) Control of ammunition belonging to certain surplus firearms.

16) Eventual ban on handgun possession. We think that within 5 years we can enact a total ban on possession at the federal level.

17) Banning of any ammunition that fits military guns (post 1945).

AMMUNITION AND EXPLOSIVES:

18) Banning of any quantity of smokeless powder or black powder which would constitute more than the equivalent of 100 rounds of ammunition.

19) Ban on the possession of explosive powders of more than 1 kilogram at any one time.

20) Banning of high powered ammo and wounding ammo.

21) A national license for ammunition.

22) Banning or strict licensing of all re-loading components.

23) National registration of ammunition or ammo buyers.

24) Requirement of special storage safe for ammunition and licensing.

GUN RANGES:

25) Restricting gun ranges to counties with populations less than 200,000.

26) Special licensing of ranges. The range must have the written permission of all property owners within 7 miles.

27) Special range tax to visitors. $85.00/day/person proposed.

28) Waiting period for rentals on pistol ranges.

ACTIVITIES WHICH PROMOTE GUN VIOLENCE:

29) Banning gun shows.

30) Banning of military re-enactments. This includes survivalist and paramilitary, as well as WW1, WW2, and Civil War re-enactment's on federal land. We hope to encourage the states to prohibit them from state and county lands as well.

31) Making unlawful the assembly of more than 4 armed individuals who are not peace officers or military.

32) Begin to curb hunting on all public lands.

33) Making gun owners records and photos a matter of public record.

34) Random police checks for weapons (like sobriety checkpoints).

THE NEXT FIFTEEN YEARS:

The document goes on to say that with the present allies in the White House and Congress it is now possible to remove guns from public hands. Following is a discussion on the banning of military accouterments (military clothing, camouflage, pouches, gear, boots and other combat gear). There is also a discussion on the formation of strict guidelines for violence in television and the movies. This includes the provision for suing the makers of shows deemed violent in content. If the industry will not regulate itself, then there should be an independent branch of government to determine which scenes cause more harm than good to the public, and regulate the number of violent acts portrayed.

The document concludes with a discussion on the total elimination of arms from society. This includes the control of dangerous literature. The statement is made that there is too much irresponsible material covered by the first amendment, and that there can be such a thing as too much freedom where literature poses a serious threat to the public safety.

ATTACHMENT 1:

I. PROPOSED LICENSE FEES - 1994-1995 GUN CONTROL PROPOSALS:

The document includes an attachment which gives an overview of the proposed license fees for 1994/1995 Gun Control Proposals. This includes an escalation of fees, which start at $50.00 in the first year, and conclude with fees of $625.00 in the eighth year. The enclosure also covers a $1,000.00 fine and 6 months jail for failure to acquire a license, followed by recommendations of $5,000.00 and 12 months jail for failure to maintain a license, and $15,000.00 and 18 months jail for failure to turn over guns for destruction after lapse of license. Failure to re-new a license or notify issuing authority of change of status would be considered a felony. All firearms owned would then be considered contraband and could be confiscated. There is also a schedule for the licensing of rifles and shotguns, and the proposal for arsenal licensing. This includes a $300.00 to $1,000.00 annual fee, and $200.00/gun if over the prescribed limit. There is also a provision for assessing $100.00/50 rounds over the limit for ammunition. Included is an outline covering the suggested fee schedule for a Safe License of $228.00 to $392.00 per year, and Ammunition Registration and License of $55.00 to $117.00 per year to purchase ammunition. Other fees discussed include: Federal Re-Loading License of $130.00 to $175.00 per year. Ammunition Safe License Fee of $55.00 to $75.00 per year. Range License fee of $12,000.00 to $15,000.00 per year. Range Tax fee of $85.00 to $100.00 per person per visit. Inspection License fee of $588.00 to $688.00 per year.

II. SUGGESTIONS WHICH CAN BE MADE IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE TO KEY POLITICIANS AND THE SECRETARY OF THE U.S. TREASURY:

The attachment recommends members suggest the following to key politicians and the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury: Increase dealers license to $600.00 to $700.00 per year. Increase Title 1 Manufacturing License fee to $6,200.00 to $9,400.00 per year. And increase Title 2 Manufacturing License fees to $13,000.00 to $18,000.00 per year.

III. AN ESTIMATE OF THE FISCAL IMPACT OF THE LICENSING ON FIREARMS OWNERSHIP:

A recap of the fiscal impact of the licensing of firearms ownership is shown to be $1,556.00 to $3,473.00 per year. The document states that this cost is not unreasonable, since it would offset considerably the estimated $60 billion in medical and social costs related to gun violence. Ultimately, such action would take the glamour and attraction out of firearms ownership and decrease the numbers of gun owners to a manageable number.

IV. REDUCTION OF GUN OWNER POPULATION AND POTENTIAL YEARLY REVENUE:

The document states that it is estimated the referenced proposals would allow us to take guns out of the hands of an estimated 30 million unsuitable or ineligible individuals. The fees for the remaining qualifying individuals would additionally reduce the number to about 14 million gun owners. The ultimate goal is to reduce the number of licenses to zero.

V. POSSIBLE USES FOR THE REVENUE:

Revenue generated from fees could be used to institute a mandatory national educational campaign in the public schools (K thru 12) to de-glamorize guns and gun ownership, and to tell the truth about the Second Amendment. Fees could also be used to mount a well funded and concerted campaign to add credence to the calls for eliminating the Second Amendment entirely via constitutional amendment. Also, fees would provide a revenue source for the cost of enforcement of the new laws by Federal and State Law Enforcement officials, and provide an offsetting monetary fund to provide medical services and legal services to victims of gun violence. There is also a recommendation for the establishment of a national toll free number for reporting violators of the new gun restrictions and non-licenses. A sum may be set aside for cash rewards for tips which result in conviction.

There is discussion on additional revenue sources via gun related activities (range fees, taxes, etc.), It is estimated that there will be a drop of 40% in such activities in the first year, and an additional drop of 35% the second year.

VI. LEGAL ACTION AND POSSIBLE NEW REVENUE SOURCES:

The attachment discuses legal actions and possible new revenue sources, and states that pending issues are to be given at the appropriate time to the LCAV office for investigation as to feasibility, implementation, and public reaction. At no time should these suggestions be made public before it can be ascertained what the current public reaction might be, and have this information given to the LCAV attorneys before release.

There will be a concerted P.R. campaign over the period of several years, which will include press releases, press conferences, direct lobbying, and constant pressure via the national media. The aim of this campaign is to change the way America thinks in regards to guns and gun owners. Once gun owners in America have been identified through a verifiable source, it would be possible to seek further compensation for the victims of gun violence through legal means. As a group, the gun nuts would constitute an identifiable entity for class action suits and other legal actions for compensation.

It would be expected that gun groups and lobbying groups such as the NRA would encourage non-compliance. Thus, nationally recognized groups will be technically "organizing to break the law". Once this can be proven, these groups will be vulnerable to lawsuits based on the RICO statute and drained of their financial resources through repeated legal action. There is a discussion on the suing of the makers of toy/replica guns, toy weapons, and violent entertainment. The threat of legal action would convince many manufacturers and distributors that other non-violent related toys would be more worthwhile to sell. Items could include: Violent video games, television shows, movies, video tapes, water guns, super soakers, electronic noise guns, replica guns, toy weapons like swords, batons, and martial arts items. The attachment concludes by stating that Tort law as we know it may not have to undergo a change in order to facilitate these actions. It is not necessary to actually win in order to affect change, since the constant threat of legal action will induce change in the way people do business.

A Quick Guide to Arguing With The Gun Zealots

There is also a page on Handgun Control stationary titled "A QUICK GUIDE TO ARGUING WITH THE GUN ZEALOTS" which lists strategic points to remember for public speaking. It points out that the general public is confused between semi-automatic and automatic weapons and that this confusion can work in HCI's favor. Constantly dropping the words submachine gun, fully automatic, machine gun, military weapon, and high tech killing machine are good debater's tricks used to instill a sense of dread over these weapons. Other points include a discussion on semi-automatic weapons, endangerment of children, enough is enough, and there are too many guns in the U.S. There is also a brief listing of "Points of Victory in the Past Ten Years".

Banning handguns has not helped Australia. Even when smuggling of illegal firearms is curtailed, criminals will find a way. For instance police have made arrests in an illegal manufacturing ring, where criminals were making and distributing as many as 2500 keyring guns the size of a cigarette lighter. Of course with a total ban, the illegal guns industry is completely non-regulated. Criminal manufacturers don't follow any safety rules and sell guns to criminals and children.

I have upgraded the website to Movable Type 2.64 and implemented a comment anti-spam feature. I tested it, and it seems to be working fine, so let me know if you run into any problems.

I had been running 2.51, but the anti-spam plugin requires 2.6 or better so I had to upgrade. I don't see anything really all that new with Movable Type, so I don't think I missed much by not upgrading sooner. I only upgrade to get new features, not just for the sake of upgrading like many people.

There will be a notable lack of blogging this weekend as I travel to Blacksburg for the last home game of the VT season. Back Sunday.

(Photo via Reuters)

I haven't paid much attention to the Michael Jackson arrest, although I did hear a radio clip with Jermaine (or was it Tito) who claimed Jacko was being "lynched". It was as close to playing the "race card" as I've heard so far, and it made me wonder if the defense team will claim that ex-LAPD officer Mark Furman planted a bloody condom at the crime scene to pin the whole thing on Michael.

Exxon reps have some really good news for global plant life reports CNN.

Worldwide annual emissions of carbon dioxide . . . are expected to increase by 3.5 billion tons, or 50 percent, by the year 2020, an executive for ExxonMobil Corp said.

This is fantastic news for environmentalists and plant lovers, who know carbon dioxide is crucial for all plant life on earth.

As a straight man, I'm a little shocked at all the homosexual bigotry going on. There are a lot of conservatives out there saying that they have nothing against homosexuals or what they do behind closed doors, but on the other hand they don't want them to have the same rights under the law as heterosexuals.

I am hearing more and more arguments and "what if" games being played against gay marriage, and none of them hold water. The simple truth is that when two consenting adults who love each other and want to pledge the rest of their lives together, it doesn't matter one bit whether or not they are of the opposite sex. Also, the state should not have the ability to provide benefits for some while denying them for others based solely on their sexual preference.

Most of the "what if" arguments try taking things to the extreme to validate their point. It is the same arguments that gun banners use when they ask if everyone should be permitted to carry around hand grenades or nucular weapons. Here are some of my favorites:

Should people be permitted to marry their dog? -- Well, if the dog has opposable thumbs and can sign the marriage license, I say go for it. You'd have better luck with an orangutan or other primate though.

Should people be permitted to marry little kids? -- Why does every argument about gays always delve into a question of pedophilia? Considering states already forbid heterosexuals from marrying someone under the age of consent, it is a complete red herring. It is a cheap ploy used to drag out the for the children mantra.

Should people be permitted to marry their sister? -- Here we go with incest. To be perfectly honest, as long as you both are consenting adults, I fail to see where it matters to me. Your sister may have something to say about it though, and you'll probably have babies with eight heads, but if it floats your boat, go for it. The reasoning that incestuous relationships may result in a greater number of birth defects, is really no reason to outlaw it either. Parents who are dwarfs or have genetic defects are also more likely to have children with defects. Should we make it illegal for them to procreate?

Allowing homosexuals to marry cheapens the institute of marriage. -- As if gay marriage is worse than shows like Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?. The idea that someone else's relationship could cheapen your's simply by existing is ludicrous. Is your relationship with your spouse really so fragile that you feel the need to tell other people how to live their lives?

But homosexuality is immoral. -- So are a lot of other things. Divorce is also immoral, perhaps we should outlaw that. I think it's immoral to bring children into the world that you cannot afford to raise, but I'm not advocating that we start locking up teenagers who get knocked up.

While I wholeheartedly support the state recognition of gay marriage, I do disagree with the judicial activism. Matters like this are best left up to the Legislative branch of government, however I can hardly blame the courts, given this recent Supreme Court decision. At this point the lower courts really have no other choice.

Radley Balko waxes poetically about property rights and anti-smoking:

The fact that Washington residents can currently choose between establishments that do or do not allow smoking somehow smacks anti-tobacco activists as oppressive. The goal isn't to ensure that everyone has options, it's to make sure everyone is forced to choose the option they've deemed appropriate.

Balko notes that the anti-smoking crusade is not about freedom it is about tyranical control over human behavior. Anti-smokers and their apathetic enablers have gone from pursuading people not to smoke, to mandating it with the threat of lethal force.

Ohio Governor Bob Taft has been one of the largest champions of criminal's rights since Illinois Governor Ryan commuted or pardoned everyone on death row. Taft has been a strong supporter of the "carjacker protection" passage of the concealed carry bill, which would make carrying a gun in your vehicle illegal unless it was disabled so that it could not be used for self defense.

Taft's latest move to protect the criminal class involves setting up a database whereby criminals could check to see if potential victims possess a concealed carry permit. Taft thinks that muggers and rapists should not have to confront victims without knowing whether or not they are armed. As such he has threatened to veto any bill that does not include a provision for an informational database on who has a concealed firearm permit and who doesn't.

In a letter to House and Senate leaders, Taft said that criminals have a right to know who has a gun and who doesn't. Of course the ones who should really be worried are those that don't. Taft's bill would make them an easier mark.

The town of Poolesville has taken a stand for property rights, reports the Gazette.

Patrons of Poolesville bars and restaurants can continue to light up after the town commissioners voted Monday night not to adopt the Montgomery County smoking ban that went into effect last month.

"I believe sometimes government sticks its nose in too many places," Commissioner Jerry Klobukowski said, making the motion to preserve smoking at Monday's town meeting.

The vote was 3-0, with Commissioner Tom Dillingham abstaining. Commissioner Andy Johnson was absent.

It's nice to hear someone in government actually admit that it isn't their place to be all knowing and all powerful. Of course this blows holes in the "consistency" goal (read TOTAL ban) that Michael Bopp from the American Cancer Society claims is necessary to mold human behavior.

HokiePundit is taking his perks in stride.

As part of being in the Marching Virginians, I get to go to away games (for free, with financial compensation, on the taxpayer's dime...this must be what it's like to be a Democrat).

Taking a look at these memos, there is no question that the Senate Democrats have been politicizing the judicial process. The memos speak of delaying nominations until after the election and after high profile cases had come to a head. That they were particularly worried about nominations being approved that could have impacted the Affirmative Action case at the U. of Michigan, displays that the Senators have little respect for the actual rule of law. There are also numerous references to doing what the special interests want (especially AFL-CIO, "civil rights leaders", and NARAL); something of which I'm sure both parties are frequently guilty.

Please read, and then express shock and awe.

(link via Brian Preston, via Spoons)

This is quite sickening.

A concessions worker filled used plastic cups with beer and resold them at Sunday's Tampa Bay Buccaneers game and pocketed $1,080 in unreported sales, police said.

John Angelus Keene, 68, was charged with felony grand theft, said Tampa police Detective Bill Todd.

Todd said he observed Keene picking up used cups from tables and refilling them without rinsing them at a Bud Light booth near the south end zone of Raymond James Stadium.

I cannot wait for the lawsuit against the Bucs, the NFL, the stadium owners, and Budweiser. Everyone, of course, except the concessions worker who has probably been doing this all season.

The issue of gay marriage has once again been thrust into the spotlight, so I must once again go on record as being in favor of it. The position makes me unpopular with some conservatives, and to them I say bite me. Marriage is an institution that traces its roots back thousands of years. The idea that a bond between a loving couple must be regulated, licensed, and taxed by the state is offensive to homosexuals and heterosexuals alike. So is the idea that permitting a same sex couple to marry would somehow cheapen the relationship of everyone in a "traditional" marriage.

Forgive me, for being libertarian, but I fail to see where the harm lies in allowing same sex couples to marry or form "civil unions". As long as they are not a threat to my life, liberty, or property I really don't care if homosexuals get married or not. As I have yet to hear any convincing evidence as to how a gay marriage would impact my life at all, let alone have an impact on my liberty, I'll keep a laissez-faire outlook on it.

It seems to me that marriages should be a contract between a couple and God. The state needs only to recognize marriages for purposes of taxation, settlement of estates, consolidation of resources, and other matters relating to the state. Letting homosexuals marry doesn't impact any of that. Why shouldn't married homosexuals be permitted the state benefits as those afforded to straight marriages?

The only convincing issue that opponents can reasonably float is when children are involved. While I agree that children are best raised by a mother and a father, it doesn't strike me as something that should be subject to state regulation. If homosexual parents are banned for violating the "traditional" family unit, single parents must be subjected to the same restrictions. When it comes to parenting and the care of children, it should only come down to the safety and well being of the child, and the state should only be permitted to intervene when it is warranted.

The little rascal isn't even born yet and my friend Ken already sent me a damned photo. Notice that the kid isn't even out of the womb yet and he's already drinking a Mickey's.

The results of this poll are pretty telling. My guess is that the 6% that aren't shocked to hear about Michael Jackson's arrest warrant are the same 6% that let their kiddies go spend the night at his house.

UPDATE: I did my part. I just ordered two more surplus tins (1400 total rounds) of 7.62x39 for my evil assault weapon AK-47.

Ohio has been fighting for concealed carry for a few years now. They had a good house bill passed, but the senate added "carjacker protection", which would make it illegal to carry a gun in your car. OFCC quotes a few of the supporters of the "carjacker protection" clause.

"We do not want a loaded firearm readily accessible to the driver of a car. If there's a dangerous situation and you're in your car, you can drive off." - Capt. John Born, Ohio State Highway Patrol.

"...Of all the changes made by the Senate, as a father, I am most proud of the work we did to ensure the safety of Ohio children under this bill." - Steve Austria, who chaired the committee which added Taft's "Carjacker Protection" provision in the Senate.

"The bill as passed by the Senate gives law-abiding citizens the opportunity to protect themselves by carrying a concealed weapon, while protecting the best interests and safety of all Ohioans." Senate President Doug White, who delayed appointing conference committee members for four months for political reasons.

That gives little solace to the family of this man.

A man was shot to death about 2:30 a.m. Friday while driving on Lechner Ave. near Sullivant Ave., on the West Side. Columbus police believe the driver was trying to back away from his assailant when he was shot.

It comes as no surprise that a jury from the conservative land of Pat Robertson (where your's truly grew up by the way) would quickly convict John Allen Muhammad for the multiple murders in Virginia, DC, Maryland and Alabama. I would be very surprised if they don't come through with a death sentence.

Virginia is very tough on criminals. We have no parole and are second in executions behind Texas. (Per capita, methinks we beat them.) I can only hope that the future executions of serial killers Muhammad and Malvo will help us one day gain the number one spot. While my liberal friends have stopped short of calling my fondness for the death penalty disturbing, they have told me that my state pride is a little misplaced.

ASIDE: I am reminded of a nice Arkansas girl I met in a bar one night. We were having a lovely conversation and really hitting it off. That is until she said something about derogatory about Texas. I blurted out "Well, you have to admire their willingness to follow through with the death penalty." The look of shock and awe on her face was enough to tell me that I'd lost her. I tried to just let it go. I told her we should agree to disagree, but after about 10 more minutes she just couldn't drop it. Oh well.

Q: How do you know your football team sucks?

A: When your top news story is that your quarterback is changing his name from Mike back to Michael.

I cannot help but think that this would make a perfect Christmas gift for Dawn Olsen.

At the time I didn't think twice about this costume. That it appears to be having a humorous effect on people like Dax and Kim, makes it that much more rewarding.

Scott Norvell reports that the PC nazis in Britain are stamping out "racist" personal ads. (emphasis mine)

A jilted pub owner in Britain who advertised in search of a "single white male" for companionship was told to remove the message because it was racist, reports London's Sun.

Diane Prestidge said she was lonely after her husband walked out on her so she put a blackboard up outside her pub in Drybrook. "Wanted: part-time single white male, 40-50," it said. "Must like cats. Must have a wicked sense of humor to cheer up overworked, underpaid, flu-ravaged, p****d-off pub landlady."

Shortly afterward, she said, representatives of the local race equality council paid a visit and told her to erase the message or face the consequences.

Such is the hypocrisy of the PC crowd that looking for an Anglo-Saxon date is considered racist but intimidation and threats are acceptable.

KFDM-TV tells us of some really dumb criminals. The Reader's Digest version goes like this:

Men walk into convenience store and pull out a gun.

Gun falls apart, and men flee enraged broom-wielding store owner.

Woman tries to retrieve pieces of gun, but also flees enraged broom-wielding store owner.

Trio flees store in van and get as far as the nearest ditch.

Trio flees van on foot.

One is later apprehended when reporting his van stolen.

Washington D.C. politicians are considering nullifying the property rights of business owners, and forcing them to ban smoking in their establishments. The decision is being hailed in Montgomery County, where smoking is already banned and thousands of customers are hopping across the border to patronize businesses in the District. Meanwhile, anti-smokers have been ratcheting up the propaganda in support of both the Maryland and D.C. ban.

An estimated 53,000 people die each year from secondhand smoke nationwide -- Montgomery County Community Partnership Executive Director Doug Tipperman in the Washington Times in October.

"Secondhand smoke is estimated to cause 65,000 deaths per year in the United States." -- the "facts" according to Metropolitan Washington Council, AFL-CIO in November.

I wonder if the AFL-CIO has thought this all the way through. Although they are correct that studies show that bars and restaurants that survive the ban will probably do better in the long run, from an overall economic standpoint, there will be a huge loss of jobs and decreased competition. It only stands to reason that as restaurants leave the market, economic forces will eventually sway in favor of the survivors. Individual restaurants will probably see business taper off for 6 months or more, but as their competitors close up shop and lay off their employees, their business will recover. Overall, however, the economy suffers.

The real losers are Joe and Jane Bartender who will see a huge drop in their paychecks. They will also have much more time to enjoy breathing that cleaner air, on the second shift they'll need to pick up to make up for the lost wages. Bantheban.org points out that the "65,000 deaths" figure doesn't seem to be factually grounded, and is more than four times the homicide rate of the United States.

Meanwhile, businesses in New York are losing so much business because of the ban that the state is planning on letting them apply for waivers. Of course the pro-temperance nannies at the American Cancer Society are fighting the move. In response to claims that businesses are losing revenue, Michael Bopp had this to say (emphasis mine):

"Our first response is, prove it. It was always anticipated that there would be some minor, temporary disruption of business. But over time as other states and other municipalities have demonstrated, business comes back, once the consumers adjust to the new market place."

Bopp, who pushed for a smoking ban on the theory that secondhand smoke causes cancer, wants businesses to prove that they are suffering economically. (It should be noted that the World Health Organization studied the effects of secondhand smoke for 7 years and no matter how hard they tried, could not link secondhand smoke to cancer.) Bopp continued:

"Once they begin to grant waivers, there is a risk that some places will get off the hook and some places will comply and then you have an economic disaster looming where some businesses can't be competitive. The only way to keep it fair is to keep it consistent."

Bopp is admitting that the smoke ban is only effective at modifying human behavior if smoking is banned everywhere. Bopp says that by allowing some restaurants to permit smoking, there is an unfair competitive disadvantage to those that cannot permit smoking. If this is true, then it must also be true that banning smoking hurts businesses. Otherwise there would be no need to make the ban "consistent". By the way, by "consistent", Bopp means sea to shining sea and on all land public and private.

There is something fundamentally wrong with this:

Shreveport is home to lots of people with southern drawls, and it's giving the police department fits.

The department's high-tech voice recognition system for routing non-emergency calls gets confused by drawls - what one police official calls "lazy mouth." Many callers have been misdirected to the wrong person or department.

So let me get this straight. The police department uses a machine to answer the telephone and route calls to the proper department, but it's the callers who are "lazy".

Tax and spend congressmen have reached an agreement on one of the largest vote buying entitlement schemes in Medicare history, reports Fox News.

Republican congressional leaders said they sealed a tentative agreement Saturday on a new prescription drug benefit for the nation's seniors, which would be the largest expansion in Medicare's history. [...]

At its core, beginning in 2006, it would give millions of older Americans a prescription drug benefit, projected to cost $400 billion over 10 years.

Any politician who votes for this new entitlement has no right to bitch about the budget deficit. Also, does anyone on Capitol Hill actually believe the cost of this program will actually come in at a mere $400 billion?

The Heritage Foundation takes a comprehensive look at the ramifications of Congress' recklessness, and conclude the the following are quite likely:

The size of government will expand -- A new entitlement will take America even faster down the road that has caused so much economic damage in Europe's welfare states. Indeed, the unfunded Medicare expansion is essentially a huge future tax increase since the population of Medicare recipients will nearly double once the baby-boom generation retires. Ironically, just when some European countries are waking up to the problem and restraining unfunded entitlements, America will be creating an enormous new entitlement.

President Bush's recently enacted tax cut and tax reform package will likely be the first casualty -- Because of arcane budget rules, the bulk of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire at the end of 2008 and the end of 2010. Extending these tax cuts or making them permanent will be enormously difficult in an environment of skyrocketing spending for government-provided health care. Indeed, the creation of a prescription drug entitlement may be akin to repealing the Bush tax cuts.

By adding to the deficit, the huge new unfunded liability will likely be the death knell of further tax relief and fundamental tax reform -- A prescription drug benefit means bigger deficits--a problem that will intensify as the baby boomers start to retire in the next decade. Once these demographic and fiscal variables become part of the budget forecast, lawmakers seeking to cut taxes and create a simple and fair tax code, such as the flat tax, in all probability will face insurmountable political obstacles.

It is appalling that congress is willing to risk the financial future of this nation in the interest of a political power grab. Partisanship has both parties worried about the 2004 election and being able to take credit for a sweeping new entitlement program will be quite a feather in the cap of incumbents when they come up for re-election. Although I seriously doubt that will happen, I can only hope that those of us that end up having to pay for this monstrosity will make those that vote for it pay the political price come November.

Joseph Duemer takes one comment spammer to task, sending the company an invoice for the advertisement they posted on his site. Hillarity ensued.

Missouri police got an earful from a motorist charged in an auto accident, reports The Examiner. They note that Daniel Smith, who was allegedly involved in a motor vehicle accident, threatened officers with copyright lawsuits if they tried to record his name.

But when they asked Daniel Smith, 45, the driver of the striking vehicle, for his driver's license, he told them his name was copyrighted. Instead of handing them his license, he gave them a piece of paper he had generated on a computer saying that anyone who duplicated his name in any fashion would be subject to a lawsuit. [...]

The officers then called in for a supervisor. After he arrived, he was immediately added to the list of people being sued.

When the supervisor explained that Smith would need to contact the city's Law Department, he said each time his name appears on any document it was a $500,000 action and if it was not paid within 10 days, it goes to $1.5 million.

Mr. Smith's alleged behavior reminds me of the George Kellerman character, who threatened to sue the entire City of New York in the Out-of-Towners.

That is the reason for blocking the judicial nomination of Miguel Estrada, according to one democrat staffer, reports the Washington Times.

In one memo to Sen. Richard J. Durbin of Illinois obtained by The Washington Times, Washington lawyer Miguel A. Estrada is singled out as "especially dangerous" because "he is Latino." [...]

In the Nov. 7, 2001, memo, the Durbin staffer was recounting a meeting his boss had missed with Mr. Kennedy and "representatives of various civil rights groups."

"[Y]esterday's meeting focused on identifying the most controversial and/or vulnerable judicial nominees, and a strategy for targeting them," the staffer wrote about the groups present. "They also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous, because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment."

Democrats on the Senate Judiciary committee have an agenda to keep minorities, especially conservative minorities, from getting ahead. Estrada was bucking the trend with his success. He got there on his own through hard work and determination instead of government handouts. Letting him take a seat on the D.C. circuit would endanger the political power of those that rely on people's dependence.

Fourty-four Democrats have denied a vote on the nominations of 4 minority appointments (Miguel Estrada, Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, Carolyn Kuhl), as well as those of Charles Pickering and William Pryor. In their defense, all the 44 Dems can do is attack fellow Democrat Zell Miller for calling the filibuster of Judge Janice Rogers Brown a "lynching".

I finally got around to posting the entire Halloween Party 2003 album. If you are interested, feel free to check it out.

Another town is working to pass a Kennesaw (GA) style gun law that requires a gun and ammunition to be maintained in every home. Geuda Springs (KS) city council approved a law modeled after the 1982 Kennesaw statute that requires the head of every household to own and maintain a firearm and ammunition. Obvious exceptions are convicted felons and the mentally or physically disabled, as well as gun fearing wussies (who they refer to as "conscientious objectors").

"We are an incorporated city," [Geuda Springs City Council member John] Brewer said. "As an incorporated city, we have duties and responsibilities to our citizens. One is utilities, one is protection and one is judicial services. We currently provide utilities and judicial services are provided by the county, but we currently don't provide protection. Here in Geuda Springs, we don't have a police force or a marshal, and the protection of the people is mandated to the city government. The ordinance is really just a legal statement that shows that we are providing for protection of our citizens. It fulfils the duty to protect by allowing each individual household to provide for his or her own protection. We are simply using the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to the City of Geuda Springs' advantage."

Although the statute has been approved by the city council, it still needs to be signed to become law. Violation of the ordinance will carry a $10 fine.

Related articles:
A chicken in every pot, a gun on every nightstand -- 10/31/2003

This is disturbing.

Earlier this year, the Ohio Supreme Court claimed that a concealed carry ban was not unconstitutional. They based their decision on the fact that open carry is perfectly legal in Ohio. Since open carry of firearms is legal, Ohioans are not being denied their right to self protection. The ruling has led to numerous self defense walks all over Ohio, including one in Youngstown.

While citizens walked through Youngstown openly carrying firearms unmolested, the Youngstown Police Chief Robert Bush had this to say about open carry (emphasis mine):

"If I get a call about one of you walking and carrying a gun, I will arrest you and you will go to jail and we'll let the judges figure it out. I am not going to explain to the person calling that you are simply exercising your right to carry. I don't care. I will arrest you and you can explain the situation in front of a judge."

I would expect as much from the land of James Traficant. Still, when we reach a point in time where officials of the state are willing to violate their oaths of office and willingly express an intent to break the law, it is time for them to be removed from office. Would Bush take a similar approach with people exercising their freedom of expression or press?

Even if you are not a gun owner or someone who would normally champion civil rights, you should at least be able to admit that police chiefs should obey the law. Especially when just up the road in Canton, innocent men are left to spend months behind bars. By expressing such contempt for the state supreme court and the law of the land in Ohio, Chief Bush has shown that he is no longer fit to serve in the executive branch. Bush should be removed from office for making such a statement.

This space left intentionally blank

A few weeks ago there was a story in the news of an 89 year old woman evicted from her farm after more than 55 years over a $572 tax bill. The farm, valued at over $800,000, was sold to a developer for a mere $15,000.

This week the buyer gave the home back to the elderly woman and received a refund from the state.

In case you missed it, Wisconsin passed a concealed carry bill this week and sent it to the governor's desk for his veto. The bill passed both the Assembly and the Senate with near veto proof majorities, so even when (not if) the governor vetoes it, they may be able to override it. That would most certainly put them in the bullpen with New Mexico and Missouri, where anti-gunners are making their last stand in court, after having lost in the Legislature.

Telemarketer: "You've won a free trip. Either you a friend or a family member submitted your name, and you won!"

Ravenwood: "Ok, what's my name?"

Telemarketer: "Um... uh...."

[click]

Back in September, I noted a New York Post story about a New York City bartender who was fired for looking the other way around smoking customers. It looks like she may have been stuck between a rock and a hard place on the issue. The rock being Michael Bloomberg's stringent anti-ashtray law, and the hard place being her employer who didn't want his bartenders making waves with the customers. In the end, she was the fall guy. Here is her comment/letter in it's entirety:

Below please find the letter that I wrote to the editor of the NY Post in response to the story published about me. You'll find that everything that was published therein was either untrue or contained such inherent vagaries that it was not possible to ascertain the facts regarding the events as they had actually occurred. Please read:

"To the editor:
re: Bartender Fired in Puff Huff 9/28

I am the bartender who is losing her job over this incident and I was, to say the least, greatly dismayed by the story that was printed about me. A number of things bother me about this article beginning with fabricated quotes being attributed to me. But that aside, the details of the incidents involving health department inspectors who entered the bar as well as my employer's smoking policy at the time were blatantly omitted from your story. There was no mention of the fact, which I expressly related to your reporter, that my boss, Mr. DeMarco, had been allowing patrons to smoke in the bar up until the time of the first inspection. All of the staff at Puffy's were given instructions by him to "don't ask, don't tell" when it came to customers lighting up on the premises. In other words, we were told to ignore smoking in the bar altogether. Consequently, I was between a rock and a hard place when the inspectors came to call. Admittedly, I did lose my temper with one inspector upon the suggestion that I call the police on my customers, who by the way are my bread and butter as I depend on their tips for my livelihood. However, there was also no mention of the fact that my angry words were reiterated to me verbatim in retaliation by the same inspector in question. Furthermore, immediately following this short exchange, I extricated myself from the situation realizing that what I had done was wrong. The half-hour shouting match described in your article took place between the inspector and a couple of outraged customers, one of whom had asked to see her badge and was refused. I was in no way involved in the situation at that point except as an eye-witness. Mr. DeMarco was not on the scene until most of this had already passed and therefore cannot act as a reliable source of information regarding these events. He was once again not around at all when the follow up inspection occurred three weeks later.

By the time that this next inspection came around, a strict no-smoking policy had been put in place and no one was found smoking on the premises. It is stated in the article that I "ignored" the inspector during this second visit, this being the reason on record for the loss of my job. In fact, this was not the case at all. On this occasion, after identifying herself, the inspector wandered around the bar for several minutes without asking me for any help and at one point let herself into the basement storage area. When she returned upstairs, she planted herself behind the bar and attempted to block me as I was running about serving my customers. She had still not spoken to me about anything specific at this point. I politely told her that I would be with her just as soon as I'd finished taking care of my customers. Just as I'd finished she raised her voice at me declaring that she was going to give me two minutes to show her where the bar's health permit was. I immediately lead her to the area where the permit was hanging while she shouted at me "Where is it? Give it to me now!" Mr. DeMarco telephoned the bar just after this and I put him on the line with the inspector who claimed to him that I was being 'uncooperative'. No ticket was issued on this occasion.

The end result of all of this is that I am being railroaded out of a job that I desperately need by a heartless employer who is trying to cover his own back and who will not listen to a single rational word that I have to say regarding the matter. I have honestly been looking for work, this time outside of the bar industry, for one month now and have had no success as of yet. I worry that any potential employer who may have read the story that you've printed will have misconstrued my role in the events in question and that I will be therefore hindered from finding work. Certain people may hold as a motto that "any publicity is good publicity", however I am a person of meager financial means who values and guards above all her character and work ethic. Regardless of any personal opinion that I may have about the anti-smoking law, I have no axe to grind with the inspectors themselves. I am, overall, distressed at the moment over my impending bout with unemployment considering the current economic circumstances and righteously feel that I should somehow set the record straight. I kindly thank you for your attention regarding this matter.

Sincerely,
Lisa Marie Dallas"

Of course, not a single word of this was published and in the weeks that have followed I have become thoroughly impoverished. I have $3 to last me for about one week while I wait for a check from a job that I've done for a Temp agency, and my unemployment benefits for the weeks in between are well below the average welfare recipient's payment. I am in danger of losing my apartment by the end of the year because I cannot come up with enough money to make ends meet even after working a few full-time weeks. So, it seems, that this has all worked out ironically 'great' for me.

I contend that my character was defamed by my boss and the NY Post's Sunday editor. I did not and still do not appreciate being exploited for this cause even though I vehemently disagree with the anti-smoking laws that are cropping up around the world. I believe that, instead of the issuance of severely restrictive decrees from 'on high' as we have been given here in NY, there should be some sentiment of sanity and sound proven science involved in the process of setting up such ordinances as these having to deal with public health. Instead, there is only political rhetoric backed up by merely manipulated and unanalyzed statistics which, unfortuneately, seem to hold more sway than facts themselves. But then again, the bar-going public, whose health is at stake, was never seriously polled about what they percieve to be the facts of the issue in the first place. Who needs facts when you've got the government and the media at hand to portray them for you? In any case, given the choice, I believe that if the ban were to be rescinded, the same public would still walk right back into that very same bar where they've always been hanging out, perhaps even with a better sense of freedom than anyone around here has had recently. While I cannot explicate in its entirety the breadth of my thought on the issue at the moment, I do have to get back to figuring out what I'm going to do with the $3 that I've got left to live on for the next week. Thank you for letting me clarify my role in this issue.

-Lisa Marie Dallas

"The people have the right to bear arms for their security and defense, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons." -- The passage of the New Mexico Constitution that anti-gun pro-crime activists plan to use to try to invalidate concealed carry.

Anyone with elementary grammar skills could point to this phrase and realize that it merely states that the government recognizes a person's right to keep and bear arms, however that does not necessarily mean they have the right to carry them concealed. The passage is very similar to the Missouri constitution which states: "That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons". Nothing in either constitution says that the government cannot permit a person to carry a concealed firearm.

Just like nothing in either constitution shall be held to permit that people have the right to "free" internet access or "free" health care, that doesn't mean that the state cannot enact such legislation. Of course, if the court finds that the constitution really does say that the legislature cannot "grant" the "right" to concealed carry, that would include police officers and other members of the executive (i.e. enforcement) branch of government. They are not above the constitution, and just like Missouri, anyone currently in jail that was arrested by an officer with a concealed firearm should immediately have their conviction overturned because police violated their civil rights.

"any written material, any image or any other representation of ideas or theories, which advocates, promotes or incites hatred, discrimination or violence, against any individual or group of individuals, based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin, as well as religion if used as pretext for any of these factors." -- Speech that the E.U. intends to make illegal, according to Digital Freedom Network.

Chicago's Mayor Daley is raising the sticker fees for SUVs because he claims the heavier vehicles cause more wear and tear on the roads, reports the Sun Times.

For the last month, budget director Bill Abolt has argued that SUVs should be required to pay more to erase a deficit in the fund used to repair city streets because "heavier vehicles place more wear and tear on the roads."

Earlier this week, the Chicago Sun-Times reported that engineering and transportation experts were poking holes in that argument.

They insisted that roads are typically designed for heavy trucks that weigh "at least double" if not 10 times what an SUV does. They argued that there is virtually no difference between the road damage caused by SUVs and passenger cars.

This isn't about wear and tear caused by SUVs, it's about class warfare. Anti-SUV laws are the next great crusade right behind smoking and fast food. Notice that the anti-SUV crowd has pretty much left minivans and passenger, which are just as heavy and polluting, alone. Of course minivans conjure up images of soccer moms and wholesome American goodness, whereas SUVs are identified with the selfish yuppie class and the hated "rich".

"I hate to see the American flag hanging out of every bloody station wagon, out of every SUV, every little Midwestern house in some residential area. It's easy to confuse patriotism with nationalism. Flag waving ain't gonna do it." -- Jethro Tull frontman Ian Anderson in an interview published Sunday in the Asbury Park Press. The remarks got him banned "forever" from WCHR-FM in New Jersey.

The station took a poll of listeners and the verdict was in favor of banning them. Of course there will probably the gratuitious calls of censorship and McCarthyism, because everyone knows that freedom of speech means you can say unpopular things and people still have to buy what you're selling.

These must be referring to metrosexual men.

In the latest departure from traditional marriage procedure, some American men are beginning to take their wives' last names, either using the woman's name in addition to their own or nixing their given names completely.

Sorry ladies, but unless we coincidentally share the same last name, there is no way in hell I'm giving mine up; unless of course you are bringing a hefty dowry to the table, and are willing to let me stay at home (or the gun range) while you go off to work everyday. Even then it's doubtful.

It reminds me of something I told my last serious girlfriend. When we discussed the remote possibility of marriage, I told her that she wouldn't have to work. Actually what I said was that she should stay at home on her pedistal where she belongs.

Ted Rall's inflammatory Anti-Veteran's Day essay has been making the rounds. Rall dreams of Iraqi fundamentalists killing our troops in the name of "freedom fighting". He is cut from the same cl