Green Palm Sunday and Chocolate Jesus

In some U.S. churches, Palm Sunday is going the way of this year's Academy Awards by going green.

From The New York Times:

Clutching a tiny knife in his big calloused hands, Laizon Corzo wound his way through the thick foliage in one of southern Mexico’s forested areas in search of living treasures.

...Mr. Corzo is one of the indigenous farmers who puts palms in the hands of North American churchgoers on Palm Sunday, the Sunday before Easter. He is also on the cutting edge of a new movement to harvest what are being called “eco-palms.”

Slightly more expensive than the average palm, eco-palms are the rage in churches across the United States because of the social and environmental benefits they represent. They are collected in a way that helps preserve the forest, and more of the sale price ends up in the pockets of the people who cut them.

“We want to be a green congregation,” said the Rev. David C. Parsons, pastor of St. John-St. Matthew-Emanuel Lutheran Church in Brooklyn, which purchased eco-palms for the second straight year. “We are conscious of our footprint on the earth. There is a biblical mandate to do that.”

Now operating in a handful of palm-producing areas in southern Mexico and northern Guatemala, the eco-palm project is similar to programs for certified coffee, chocolate or diamonds. But the consumers in this case are churches, and many say that the religious significance of the plant compels them to buy the most wholesome palm possible.

“Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem was accented by the jubilant waving of palm branches,” Lutheran World Relief, one of the groups endorsing the project, says on its Web site. “Unfortunately, for the communities where these palms are harvested, palm fronds do not always represent the same jubilation they do for us.”

"Eco-palms"?

"The most wholesome palm possible"?

They've got to be kidding.

Palms are a renewable resource. It doesn't take years to grow palm branches.

If palm producers are receiving better wages, that's great.

But that's a business matter.

In that case, the "eco" should refer to economy, not ecology.

...Dean A. Current, a professor of natural resources management at the University of Minnesota, was called in to study the economics of the palm industry. He discovered that about 10 percent of the palms sent to the United States were bought by churches. The rest go to florists, who often use them in arrangements for weddings and funerals.

In surveying churches, Mr. Current found that most were willing to pay up to double the going price to be sure their palms were responsibly harvested. A big church might spend as much as $1,500 on palms for Palm Sunday.

Sometimes, they are burned for the next year’s Ash Wednesday, although that practice is being cast aside by some congregations because of concerns that it pollutes the air.

I'm guessing here but I doubt that burning the blessed palms is a major source of air pollution.

Certainly, heating and cooling a church for a year produces far greater pollutants than burning palms ever could.

The practice upholds the Church's tradition, at least in my church.

I find the following part of The Times article particularly bizarre.

...[E]xactly what [the palms] are used for up north is not always clear.

“I know it’s used for decoration,” said Moses Macal Maroukin, 69, a veteran palm chopper, who seemed somewhat mystified. He said he had no palm fronds in his home.

But then he revealed what the people here had long believed to be the real use of the exported palms. The juices in the stems and leaves are extracted, he explained in a conspiratorial whisper, and then turned into a special mixture that is used to stain greenbacks green.

“This is how you color your dollars,” he said, waving a palm.

Where did they find this clueless "veteran palm chopper"?

Mexico is an overwhelmingly Catholic country.

I find it extremely hard to believe that the people don't understand the significance of Palm Sunday or the use of palms.

Read about the observation of Holy Week in Mexico. This paragraph is especially relevant.

Palm Sunday, Domingo de Ramos in Spanish, starts off Semana Santa on Sunday April 1st this year and the week builds toward Maudy Thursday, Good Friday and of course, Easter Sunday, known as Dia de Gloria - Day of glory. On Palm Sunday everyone goes to Mass in the morning for the blessing of the Palm leaves; when dry, the leaves are made into crosses that people use as amulets, adorning their cars and homes.

The Times wants its readers to believe that the palm harvesters in Mexico are "mystified." The article takes a mocking tone toward the use of palms in the observance of Passion Sunday and the beginning of Holy Week.

I guess it's to be expected from a liberal propaganda outlet like The Times.

That reminds me. I still haven't commented on the Chocolate Jesus controversy.

A planned Holy Week exhibition of a nude, anatomically correct chocolate sculpture of Jesus Christ was canceled Friday after Cardinal Edward Egan and other outraged Catholics complained.

The "My Sweet Lord" display was shut down by the hotel that houses the Lab Gallery in midtown Manhattan. Roger Smith Hotel president James Knowles cited the public outcry for his decision.

The reaction "is crystal clear and has brought to our attention the unintended reaction of you and other conscientious friends of ours to the exhibition," Knowles wrote in the two-paragraph cancellation notice.

Matt Semler, the gallery's creative director, resigned in protest.

The six-foot sculpture was the victim of "a strong-arming from people who haven't seen the show, seen what we're doing," Semler said. "They jumped to conclusions completely contrary to our intentions."

But word of the confectionary Christ infuriated Catholics, including Egan, who described it as "a sickening display." Bill Donohue, head of the watchdog Catholic League, said it was "one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities ever."

It's disgusting that a chocolate, anatomically correct figure of Jesus would be displayed during the holiest week of the year for Christians or at any time.

The "artist" Cosimo Cavallaro certainly meant to cause an uproar. He had to know that he would offend Christians. The gallery director certainly knew what the reaction would be.

Cavallaro didn't submerge the sculpture in his urine, did he?

I suppose he wouldn't want to be accused of ripping off Andres Serrano's Piss Christ, and I doubt the chocolate would hold up under those conditions anyway.

I wonder. Has Cavallaro created a chocolate nude Mohammed? How about a chocolate nude Moses or a chocolate nude Buddha?

I don't think he has. A "My Sweet Mohammed" display probably wouldn't go over too well in midtown Tehran, or midtown Manhattan for that matter.

I do know that Christians the world over won't riot in the streets because they were offended by Cavallaro's tasteless creation.

I think that Cavallaro suffers from a decency deficiency. Perhaps that happens when you eat too much chocolate.
_______________________________

UPDATE: Apparently, there are thousands suffering from the same decency deficiency.

NEW YORK -- An anatomically correct chocolate sculpture of Jesus Christ infuriated Catholics and even led to threats, but the artist says offers to buy or exhibit the piece have been pouring in.

Artist Cosimo Cavallaro said Saturday that because of "some people who are fanatics" and the threats he received, he had stored the sculpture in a refrigerated truck in an undisclosed location.

...Cavallaro said the controversy spurred "thousands" of e-mail messages from people offering help, donations and exhibition space.

"It's quite amazing," he said.

April Fool Ahmadinejad

"I pity the April fool."



Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is being stubborn again.

This guy doesn't want to talk. He wants to control.

He wants to annoy the West. He likes playing the role of the "little thug that could."

CAMP DAVID, Md. -- President Bush on Saturday said Iran's capture of 15 British sailors and marines was "inexcusable" and called for Iran to "give back the hostages" immediately and unconditionally.

Bush said Iran plucked the sailors out of Iraqi waters. Iran's president said Saturday they were in Iranian waters and called Britain and its allies "arrogant and selfish" for not apologizing for trespassing.

"It's inexcusable behavior," Bush said at the Camp David presidential retreat, where he was meeting with the president of Brazil. "Iran must give back the hostages. They're innocent. They did nothing wrong."

It was the first time that Bush had commented publicly on the captured Britons. Washington has taken a low-key approach to avoid aggravating tensions over the incident and shaking international resolve to get Iran to give up its uranium enrichment program.

..."I support the prime minister when he made it clear there were no quid pro quos," Bush said.

Like Bush's words, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's comments were his most extensive on the crisis. They tracked tough talk from other Iranian officials, an indication that Tehran's position could be hardening.

"The British occupier forces did trespass our waters. Our border guards detained them with skill and bravery," Iran's official news agency quoted Ahmadinejad as saying. "But arrogant powers, because of their arrogant and selfish spirit, are claiming otherwise."

...Iran appeared unreceptive to possible talks with Britain.

"Instead of apologizing over trespassing by British forces, the world arrogant powers issue statements and deliver speeches," Ahmadinejad told a crowd in southeastern Iran.

Without question, I support pursuing all channels to resolve the situation diplomatically as opposed to militarily.

I think eventually Iran will get around to releasing the 15 British sailors and marines.

And I don't think it will take 444 days, as it did when Iran held Americans captive during impotent Jimmy Carter's failed presidency.

I suspect Ahmadinejad is enjoying flexing his little girlie man muscles, and convincing himself that he's really holding the West hostage.

He's not. Tony Blair is not Jimmy Carter.

Ahmadinejad is acting like a thug, the way some losers do. The little guy wants to be a big tough guy.

No apology from the British will suffice because I don't think he really wants an apology. That would end the crisis. Ahmadinejad doesn't want that.

That wouldn't feed his ego.

When Ahmadinejad calculates that he's pushed this hostage situation to the limit and realizes its time to back down, as he will at some point, he won't admit that he's surrendered when he releases the hostages. He'll claim victory for Iran no matter what.

This situation illustrates that in the end you can't talk to Ahmadinejad because he doesn't want to talk.

Iran's flip-flopping demands indicate that a solution is not the goal.

Ticking off the West is.

Clear Choice For Wisconsin Supreme Court

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has endorsed a candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

The Editorial Board decided to back the candidate with these members of Congress in her corner:

Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin
Senator Russ Feingold
Congressman Steve Kagen
Congressman Ron Kind
Senator Herb Kohl
Congresswoman Gwen Moore
Congressman Dave Obey

That candidate is Linda Clifford.

Do these supporters give you an idea of the sort of judge Linda Clifford would be?

I hope so. There's not a lot else to go on.

She has never been a judge, so she has no record whatsoever serving in the judicial branch. Zero. No experience. None.

The Board decided to back away from Annette Ziegler, the candidate with endorsements from sheriffs, district attorneys, and circuit court judges across the state. Former Governor Tommy Thompson, elected to an unprecedented four terms, also endorsed her.

Ziegler has years of experience as a judge.

If she had served as a judge for only one week or one day or one hour, Ziegler would have infinitely more experience as a judge than Clifford -- because Clifford has NEVER been a judge.

Nonetheless, in all its wisdom, the Editorial Board considers Clifford to be the clear choice for Supreme Court.

In the editorial, reasons, albeit empty ones, to not vote for Ziegler outnumber reasons to vote for Clifford.

The Board tackles Clifford's negatives by offering lame excuses for them.

Some have raised reservations about Clifford's judicial philosophy. They have characterized the current court as overreaching, citing as one example its attempt to make right the injuries suffered by a Milwaukee teenager poisoned by lead paint. The court's ruling allowed the boy to sue even though it was impossible to know which companies made the paint that poisoned him.

This was indeed overreaching. But all that critics have to suggest Clifford would be a party to such rulings is the label of "liberal" they attempt to tar her with.

Poor Clifford. She's being called (GASP!) liberal.

A little deeper into the editorial, it becomes clear that critics have much more than that label to suggest that Clifford would be an "overreacher."

The Board spells it out, negating its previous statement!

Clifford has said she has a strong respect for precedent and that she would follow the law. She has called her approach to judging pragmatic. She has said that the constitution must be allowed to breathe. We agree. And when this "breathing" occurs, this is not necessarily overreaching or so-called judicial activism.

The law must evolve to meet changing needs.

"So-called judicial activism"?

Writing law rather than interpreting it IS judicial activism.

Then, the board argues that Ziegler's judicial philosophy is BS.

Ziegler has indicated she is a judicial conservative. But experience teaches that "judicial restraint" is often a very thin veil. The truth is that conservative judges are just as apt to pursue their own agendas as liberals.

What experience teaches that?

The truth is conservative judges, constructionists, do not purse political agendas. They interpret the law.

Libs want activist judges to legislate from the bench and deliver laws that would never be passed by a legislative body. It's their avenue to enact their extremist lib agenda. The courts are the libs' last best hope.

That's the truth. Apparently, the Board can't handle the truth.

Once again, the JS Editorial Board is just making crap up.

The fact is there is a very clear choice for Wisconsin Supreme Court.

It's Annette Ziegler.

Real Deadline, Real Shmeadline

Andrew Taylor of the Associated Press tries to make a case that the Bush administration is lying about the urgent need to get a supplemental funding bill for the war in Iraq passed.

WASHINGTON -- The real deadline for Congress to provide more money for the war in Iraq is several weeks beyond the April 15 deadline cited by President Bush and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

The Pentagon can take several penny-pinching steps without harming troop readiness or other dire consequences predicted by the Bush administration until Congress actually comes up with the money.

Mid-April is about when $70 billion provided by Congress for the war will run out. After that, Pentagon accountants will move money around in the department's more than half-trillion dollar budget to make sure operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are not disrupted.

The Army, Gates testified this past week, "will be forced to consider" altering training schedules for reserves and units to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as delays in repairing equipment and renovating barracks.

The steps under consideration include borrowing from training, maintenance, personnel and procurement funds set to be spent later in the budget year, which runs through September. They have become routine in recent years.

The money is repaid, usually with minimal disruption, when the president signs the war spending bill. But you might not realize that, given the recent rhetoric from the White House.

"If Congress does not approve the emergency funding for our troops by April the 15th, our men and women in uniform will face significant disruptions, and so will their families," Bush said March 23.

...Such criticism was scarce when the GOP-controlled Congress was tardy in providing war dollars last year. At the time, there was a warning about "serious impacts" if the money was delayed further, but it came in a little-noticed letter from the White House budget office. Congress ignored the warning and went on vacation.

...[T]here was no effect on troop readiness and training missions, nor delays in rotating troops out of Iraq. Instead, the Army froze civilian hiring, fired some temporary employees, stopped nonemergency travel and delayed purchases of information technology, Schoomaker said.

That is why many lawmakers view Bush's April 15 deadline more as a target date. The private signal many are getting from the Pentagon is that mid-May is when the money will be needed to avoid disrupting activities such as training missions.

"The president is once again attempting to mislead the public and create an artificial atmosphere of anxiety," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Allow me to clarify that:

Harry Reid is once again attempting to mislead the public and create an artificial atmosphere of security. Reid is trying to sell Americans on that "What? Me worry?" parallel universe that Dems inhabit.

...Nonetheless, Democrats are a little nervous about leaving Washington on their long-scheduled Easter vacation without first delivering the $120 billion-plus Iraq spending bill.

...[The House] does not return until April 16. Even if a tentative deal is reached by then, getting it through the House and Senate and to Bush would take a week at a minimum. If Bush follows through on his veto, a new bill would have to be written and put to votes.

Does this sound like a fair and balanced hard news account to you?

To me, it reads like an editorial, trying to sway the reader to support the Dems and to push the reader to agree with the notion that the Pentagon should take "several penny-pinching steps" in order to get by.

Why should such steps be necessary?

Do we want the Army to freeze civilian hiring, fire temporary employees, stop nonemergency travel and delay purchases of information technology just to accommodate the Dems' political maneuvers?

Why not simply pass the necessary funding for our troops without demanding the screwing around and the "penny-pinching steps"?

What's more effective?

That all depends on your goal.

If you want to undermine the Commander in Chief and our national security, it's more effective to delay.

If you care about the long term security of the United States, it's far more effective to pass a clean supplemental funding bill quickly.


This lame article is nothing more than Dem propaganda.

Its sole purpose is to debunk the deadline and convince the public to ignore the Bush administration's call on Congress to quit playing games.

I don't care whether the deadline is April 15 or July 15 or October 15.

What the libs in Congress are doing is wrong.

They are bent on securing defeat in Iraq and sending a message to our enemies that America is weak.

Way to go, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and, to borrow David Obey's term, "idiot liberals."

FactCheck.org Slams Greater Wisconsin Committee's Slime

The campaign ads for the Wisconsin Supreme Court race between Judge Annette Ziegler and attorney Linda Clifford are getting national scrutiny.

FactCheck.org puts the Greater Wisconsin Committee's smear job on Ziegler under the microscope and exposes its lies.

You remember the Greater Wisconsin Committee. It was responsible for many of the misleading ads sliming Mark Green in the 2006 gubernatorial race.

From FactCheck.org:

No Prison Time for a Sex Offender?

The Greater Wisconsin Committee, a state-wide political action committee funded by labor, education and healthcare PACs, attacked the tough-on-crime image that's been a staple of Ziegler's own ads with a spot claiming that Ziegler gave a convicted sex offender a lighter sentence than even his own defense attorney asked. The ad is true only if the sentence is measured strictly by years in prison. The whole story is more complicated.

In December 1998 a jury found Gary Tate guilty of sexually assaulting his step-daughter repeatedly during a three-year period. Ziegler sentenced Tate to 25 years in prison but stayed the sentence, instead giving him a year in county jail and 20 years' probation conditioned upon Tate successfully completing a treatment program for sexual offenders. At the time, admission of guilt was a requirement of the treatment program.

According to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Ziegler made this comment at the sentencing:

MJ-S: "I want very much to punish the defendant for what he did," Ziegler said. "I want very much to protect the community." Equally important is providing treatment "so this never happens to anyone else again," Ziegler said.

Tate filed a motion asking for a new trial, but Ziegler denied it. Tate refused to admit he was guilty, which meant he automatically flunked his sexual-offender treatment. His probation was revoked as a result, and he began serving his 25-year prison sentence.

In November 2002, Tate appealed his probation revocation. The case went to the state Supreme Court. Tate's lawyers argued that since his sexual-offender treatment required him to incriminate himself and thereby forfeit any possibility of future appeals, the revocation of his parole was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled in Tate's favor. He was released from prison and is living in Wisconsin, according to the Wisconsin Sex-Offender Registry.

FactCheck concludes:

The ad is misleading in implying that Ziegler sentenced Tate to nothing more than a year in county jail. It would have been accurate to say that Tate became a free man just four years after his conviction as a result of Ziegler's sentence.

I don't think Ziegler can be blamed because the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in Tate's favor.

It seems to me that the ad is even more misleading than FactCheck claims.

FactCheck debunks three more ads, one from the Clifford campaign and two from the Ziegler camp.

Read more here.

FactCheck finds fault with both candidates. "We think there's plenty of blame to go around for the nasty tone of this race."

Overall, I think FactCheck's arguments criticizing the anti-Ziegler ads are much stronger than its case against the anti-Clifford spots.

Ziegler had to respond. She had to hit back hard to counter the Greater Wisconsin Committee's dirty work.

Its lies helped elect the king of scandals and corruption Governor Jim Doyle.

It should come as no surprise that Clifford would resort to slime tactics.

Clifford's list of supporters is a Who's Who of libs.

Pretty sad, especially compared to Judge Ziegler's impressive list of endorsements.

What's most important to me is judicial philosophy. Unlike Clifford, Ziegler's a constructionist, meaning she believes her role is to interpret the law, not write it.

I believe that a judge has a definite and modest role. The Court’s duty is not to determine what the law should be or to negate laws in order to arrive at a desired outcome. A Supreme Court Justice must act with restraint. The role of the Supreme Court is to interpret the spirit and the letter of the law and to apply that law consistently, fairly and impartially. It is imperative that a Justice rely on legal precedent, the Constitution, and the language of the applicable law. In other words, a Supreme Court Justice must not legislate from the bench.

This is not a difficult decision.

Ziegler has my vote.

Terri Schiavo: Victim of Lethal Bigotry

Two years ago today, Terri Schiavo died, after her family lost a prolonged, contentious battle for her right to live.

Terri's brother Bobby Schindler makes some great points about the gift of life, the Culture of Death, and the media in his article commemorating the anniversary of his sister's death.

Saturday, March 31, will mark the two-year anniversary of my sister Terri Schiavo's death by dehydration. Not a day passes that my family does not think of my sister and relive the horrific images of her needless and brutal death at the hands of those who deliberately set out to kill her.

As hideous as it was, the truth is, long before Terri's case made headlines, the removal of basic care – food and water – was becoming commonplace. It continues to happen every day across our country oftentimes in cases, like Terri's, where the patient does not suffer from any life-threatening condition.

Much of the problem that exists stems from a blind acceptance of misinformation that has moved us from a firm belief in the sanctity of life to a "quality of life" mindset, which says that some lives are not worth living.

This shift, what I call lethal bigotry, began with the medical community, has infiltrated our judiciary and is taking over our nation. People are making decisions in place of God, while even many Catholic leaders remain silent despite the Church's teaching and the pope's constant reminders that God alone is the arbiter of life and death.

The sad fact is we have become a nation that spends billions trying to find the perfect body, while ignoring the condition of our collective soul; where altruism seems to be a thing of the past, and moral relativism has become a bona fide religion.

...Terri and others like her should be a constant reminder to all of us that caring for the disabled is never a burden, but is instead an act God's unconditional love.

"Lethal bigotry" says it all.

Terri was betrayed by a husband, a judicial system, and a culture that brands certain lives worthless and condones withholding food and water from the ill and disabled.

It still makes me sick to think about what she endured.

I recognize the sanctity of all human life, at all its stages, and in all its conditions.

Two years ago, President Bush said:

I urge all those who honor Terri Schiavo to continue to work to build a culture of life, where all Americans are welcomed and valued and protected, especially those who live at the mercy of others. The essence of civilization is that the strong have a duty to protect the weak. In cases where there are serious doubts and questions, the presumption should be in the favor of life.

As exhibited by the killing of Terri Schiavo, this goal is far from being reached.

The struggle for life to prevail, when engulfed in a Culture of Death, is a challenging but morally imperative endeavor.

Although today is a sad day, we can honor Terri's memory by continuing to work to build a lasting Culture of Life; keeping in mind the words of Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, that "an attack against life is an attack against God."

Giuliani "Swift Boated" by NYC Firefighters

The lib media's war against Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani is picking up steam.

The New York Times has a hit piece today on the former mayor of New York City.

Rudolph W. Giuliani told a grand jury that his former chief investigator remembered having briefed him on some aspects of Bernard B. Kerik’s relationship with a company suspected of ties to organized crime before Mr. Kerik’s appointment as New York City police commissioner, according to court records.

Mr. Giuliani, testifying last year under oath before a Bronx grand jury investigating Mr. Kerik, said he had no memory of the briefing, but he did not dispute that it had taken place, according to a transcript of his testimony.

Mr. Giuliani’s testimony amounts to a significantly new version of what information was probably before him in the summer of 2000 as he was debating Mr. Kerik’s appointment as the city’s top law enforcement officer. Mr. Giuliani had previously said that he had never been told of Mr. Kerik’s entanglement with the company before promoting him to the police job or later supporting his failed bid to be the nation’s homeland security secretary.

In his testimony, given in April 2006, Mr. Giuliani indicated that he must have simply forgotten that he had been briefed on one or more occasions as part of the background investigation of Mr. Kerik before his appointment to the police post.

He said he learned only in late 2004 that the briefing or briefings had occurred, after the city’s investigation commissioner reviewed his own records from 2000. To this day, Mr. Giuliani testified, he has no specific recollection of any briefing or the details of what he was told. But he said he felt comforted because the chief investigator had cleared Mr. Kerik to be promoted.

“He testified fully and cooperatively,” a statement from Mr. Giuliani’s consulting firm said of the former mayor’s grand jury appearance. The statement added: “Mayor Giuliani has admitted it was a mistake to recommend Bernie Kerik for D.H.S. and he has assumed responsibility for it.”

Why is it that the libs expect Republicans to have photographic memories but Democrats are allowed to forget?

For example, from THE WASHINGTON TIMES:

In the portions of President Clinton's Jan. 17 deposition that have been made public in the Paula Jones case, his memory failed him 267 times. This is a list of his answers and how many times he gave each one.

I don't remember - 71
I don't know - 62
I'm not sure - 17
I have no idea - 10
I don't believe so - 9
I don't recall - 8
I don't think so - 8
I don't have any specific recollection - 6
I have no recollection - 4
Not to my knowledge - 4
I just don't remember - 4
I don't believe - 4
I have no specific recollection - 3
I might have - 3
I don't have any recollection of that - 2
I don't have a specific memory - 2
I don't have any memory of that - 2
I just can't say - 2
I have no direct knowledge of that - 2
I don't have any idea - 2
Not that I recall - 2
I don't believe I did - 2
I can't remember - 2
I can't say - 2
I do not remember doing so - 2
Not that I remember - 2
I'm not aware - 1
I honestly don't know - 1
I don't believe that I did - 1
I'm fairly sure - 1
I have no other recollection - 1
I'm not positive - 1
I certainly don't think so - 1
I don't really remember - 1
I would have no way of remembering that - 1
That's what I believe happened - 1
To my knowledge, no - 1
To the best of my knowledge - 1
To the best of my memory - 1
I honestly don't recall - 1
I honestly don't remember - 1
That's all I know - 1
I don't have an independent recollection of that - 1
I don't actually have an independent memory of that - 1
As far as I know - 1
I don't believe I ever did that - 1
That's all I know about that - 1
I'm just not sure - 1
Nothing that I remember - 1
I simply don't know - 1
I would have no idea - 1
I don't know anything about that - 1
I don't have any direct knowledge of that - 1
I just don't know - 1
I really don't know - 1
I can't deny that, I just -- I have no memory of that at all - 1

Sometimes it's hard to remember. If a lib can't recall, it's no big deal. A conservative isn't granted the same leeway.

The Associated Press is also getting in on the action and firing away at Giuliani.

Rudy Giuliani's White House aspirations are inescapably tied to Sept. 11, 2001 — for better and for worse.

While the former mayor of the nation's largest city was widely lionized for his post-9/11 leadership — "Churchillian" was one adjective, "America's mayor" was Oprah Winfrey's assessment — city firefighters and their families are renewing their attacks on him for his performance before and after the terrorist attack.

"If Rudolph Giuliani was running on anything but 9/11, I would not speak out," said Sally Regenhard, whose firefighter son was among the 343 FDNY members killed in the terrorist attack. "If he ran on cleaning up Times Square, getting rid of squeegee men, lowering crime — that's indisputable.

"But when he runs on 9/11, I want the American people to know he was part of the problem."

Such comments contradict Giuliani's post-Sept. 11 profile as a hero and symbol of the city's resilience — the steadfast leader who calmed the nerves of a rattled nation. But as the presidential campaign intensifies, criticisms of his 2001 performance are resurfacing.

Giuliani, the leader in polls of Republican voters for his party's nomination, has been faulted on two major issues:

• His administration's failure to provide the World Trade Center's first responders with adequate radios, a long-standing complaint from relatives of the firefighters killed when the twin towers collapsed. The Sept. 11 Commission noted the firefighters at the World Trade Center were using the same ineffective radios employed by the first responders to the 1993 terrorist attack on the trade center.

Regenhard, at a 2004 commission hearing in Manhattan, screamed at Giuliani, "My son was murdered because of your incompetence!" The hearing was a perfect example of the 9/11 duality: Commission members universally praised Giuliani at the same event.

• A November 2001 decision to step up removal of the massive rubble pile at ground zero. The firefighters were angered when the then-mayor reduced their numbers among the group searching for remains of their lost "brothers," focusing instead on what they derided as a "scoop and dump" approach. Giuliani agreed to increase the number of firefighters at ground zero just days after ordering the cutback.

More than 5 1/2 years later, body parts are still turning up in the trade center site.

"We want America to know what this guy meant to New York City firefighters," said Peter Gorman, head of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association. "In our experiences with this man, he disrespected us in the most horrific way."

Regenhard and Gorman have every right to speak out against Giuliani and present their opinions of him to the public. Free speech.

Giuliani defends himself against their attacks by blaming bitter union negotiations for the ill will between him and the firefighters. That seems legitimate.

...The IAFF drafted a membership letter — it was never sent — that excoriated Giuliani and promised to tell "the real story" about his role in handling the terrorist attack.

The then-mayor's decision to change policy on the ground zero recovery effort was "an offensive and personal attack" on firefighters, the letter said, going on to say that Giuliani's "disrespect ... has not been forgotten or forgiven."

Giuliani countered the attacks by releasing an open letter of support from retired firefighter Lee Ielpi, whose firefighter son was among the 2,749 victims on Sept. 11. "Firefighters have no greater friend and supporter than Rudy Giuliani," Ielpi said.

The question: Will the attacks on Giuliani from firefighters erode the image of him as a competent leader in times of crisis?

...Hank Sheinkopf, a veteran political consultant, predicted the 9/11 criticisms could resonate beyond New York during the presidential campaign.

"These are very emotional people who will touch a responsive chord with a lot of the electorate," he said. "The things that the 9/11 families say will wind up in television commercials used against Rudy Giuliani."

The issues also have forced Giuliani to try to strike a balance to avoid the perception that he's exploiting the attacks for his own personal gain. President Bush faced the same challenge in 2004 when he invoked the attacks to portray himself as a strong and steady leader in the face of terrorism. Some victims' relatives criticized Bush for using the ruins of the World Trade Center in his campaign commercials, while others defended him.

Libs HOPE that the electorate will change their opinion of Giuliani when he's "swift boated."

I think that will be a tough sell.

This is very different from John Kerry and the truth about his brief tour in Vietnam.

Americans experienced Rudy Giuliani in action for themselves.

I think most Americans also understand the gravity of the terrorist threat.

It will be difficult to wipe out all of Giuliani's positives from the slate of Americans' collective memory and rewrite the history of 9/11.

Was it misguided for TIME to declare Giuliani 2001 Person of the Year and practically canonize him?

"Mayor of the World"

"Tough and smart, sure. But who knew about Rudy's big heart? Here's how a very human man taught us superhuman courage."

Now, we should believe otherwise.

I don't think that will fly with the electorate.

It won't be easy to undo so much praise and convince Americans that Giuliani is not a great leader.

Nathan Thomas Summers "Confesses"

(AP Photo/APTN)

As promised, Iran's official TV station Al-Alam broadcast a "confession" from one of the 15 British captives, Nathan Thomas Summers.

As a bonus, the Iranian embassy in London released a third letter from Faye Turney, addressed to the British people.



She sat next to another serviceman and Summers when he "apologized" for illegally entering Iranian waters.


(AFP Photo)

TEHRAN, Iran -- One of the 15 British service members held captive in Iran appeared Friday on state television and said he apologized "deeply" for entering Iranian waters, and the country released a third letter supposedly from the one woman in the crew saying she has been "sacrificed" by Britain.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair, whose government has insisted that its navy personnel were captured in Iraqi waters, immediately condemned Iran's treatment of the captives, saying it "doesn't fool anyone."

In the video Friday, Royal Marine rifleman Nathan Thomas Summers was shown sitting with another male serviceman and the female British sailor Faye Turney against a pink floral curtain. Both men wore camouflage fatigues with a label saying "Royal Navy" on their chests and a small British flag stitched to their left sleeves. Turney wore a blue jumpsuit and a black headscarf.

A floral curtain -- nice touch, very comfy and friendly.

It's as if they were sitting in Beaver Cleaver's kitchen and Mrs. Cleaver was about to come into the frame and offer the captives a glass of milk.

"We trespassed without permission," Summers said, adding he knew that Iran had seized British military personnel who strayed into their waters three years ago.

"This happened back in 2004 and our government said that it wouldn't happen again," Summers said. "And, again, I deeply apologize for entering your waters."

It was not known whether the marine spoke under pressure from his captors, but Summers said in the broadcast "our treatment has been very friendly."

That's a fair statement from AP, although it slants in support of Iran.

Technically, it's not known whether Summers was pressured into delivering his remarks; but of course he did talk about the friendly treatment he's getting.

I don't see the point in that being included in the article. It shows a bias, an attempt to give Iran the benefit of the doubt.

Such leeway was lacking when AP and lib media outlets reported on Gitmo.

Why not say, "It was not known whether the marine spoke under pressure from his captors, but it seemed like a scripted load of crap"?

According to Al Jazeera, the broadcast was an "interview," not a violation of the Geneva Conventions.

Iranian television has broadcast an interview with a captured British marine in which he admitted to entering Iranian waters illegally and apologised to the Iranian people.

The Arabic-language Al-Alam television channel showed an interview with the marine on Friday in which he said: "I deeply apologise for entering your waters."

Footage of three of the 15 captured British navy personnel was shown by Al-Alam.

"The treatment has been very friendly," the marine - identified as Nathan Thomas Summers - said on the state-run channel.

...The interview was broadcast as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, demanded an apology by the British government, the Fars news agency said.

The Islamic Republican News Agency, Ahmadinejad's puppet, covers it this way:

Another UK arrested royal marine N. Thomas Summers on Friday admitted that the 15 British sailors had trespassed on Iran's territorial waters on March 23 and extended his apology to the Iranian nation for the issue.

Speaking to reporters, the royal marine said, "We illegally trespassed on Iran's territorial waters and were arrested by the Iranian border guards and I would like to apologize the Iranian people for the issue."
He said the Iranian forces captured the sailors and marines in a friendly manner and treated them well.

Referring to repeated illegal entry into Iranian territorial waters by the UK troopers and to the official commitment of British officials in the year 2004 on non-repetition of such violations, he apologized for illegal entry of the UK forces in the year 2004 too.

"Since we were arrested on March 23, 2007, everything has been OK and I am quite satisfied with the current conditions. Over the past days, Iranian forces have shown us a very friendly and good behavior and no ill treatment has been observed," said the sailor.

Another UK service person Fay Turney had already on Thursday expressed regret for illegal entry into Iranian territorial waters and described the Iranian border guards as very humane and good.

...The British media and officials have launched a wave of propaganda campaign against Iran immediately after capture of the British sailors and marines.

Regardless of the GPS surveys, monitored by Iran and offered to the British government, the British media insist that the British navy has not violated Iranian waters.

I expect such propaganda from Al Jazeera and IRNA.

I also expect propaganda from Left-biased outlets like AP.

Note to Ahmadinejad and propaganda promulgators:

As Tony Blair said, IT DOESN'T FOOL ANYONE.

Iran Waffles

An Iranian hardline student holds an anti-British placard outside Iran's Foreign Ministry in Tehran.(AFP/Behrouz Mehri)

There's more Iranian insanity:

Iran's official Arabic-language TV channel said Friday it would broadcast a confession by one of the 15 British sailors and marines detained last week in what Tehran insists were its territorial waters.

A newscaster on Al-Alam television said the taped confession would show a British sailor explaining how he and his colleagues entered Iranian waters "in an illegal way." He did not identify the sailor, but added the tape would appear later Friday.

Iran has demanded that Britain acknowledge that its sailors had violated Iranian waters, with Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki saying Thursday that such an admission would help to secure the release of the 15 service members.

Earlier this week, it appeared the two countries were moving toward a resolution of the crisis. Mottaki told reporters Wednesday that the only woman in the group, Faye Turney, would be freed shortly.

However, the Iranians were angered by tough talk out of London, including a freeze on most bilateral contacts and a British move to refer the issue to the U.N. Security Council.

On Thursday, the council expressed "grave concern" over Iran's seizure of the military personnel and called for an early resolution of the escalating dispute.

As tensions spiked again Thursday, the Iranians rolled back on their offer to free Turney.

On Friday, however, the Turkish prime minister's office said that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had indicated his government is willing to reconsider freeing Turney, who is married and has a young daughter.

If this hostage crisis doesn't prove to Dems and other cockeyed types that "talking" to Iran is an exercise in futility, then nothing will.

Trouble at Tosa West Bubblers

Students routinely disrespect and deface school property.

Unless the damage is major, such incidents usually don't make headlines.

What makes this case newsworthy is the racial element of the vandalism.

Wauwatosa -- School officials at West High School are trying to determine who scrawled "whites only" and "coloreds only" on two side-by-side water fountains on the second floor of the high school Thursday morning.

The incident came to light shortly before noon, according to district spokesman Chris Preisler. He said the phrases -- similar to those that were widely used on public facilities such as water fountains, restrooms and restaurant entrances in the South prior to integration -- were written in marker on the stainless steel backwash portion of the fountains.

...Administrators had building custodians remove the phrases from the fountains. He said the incident upset some students and that administrators made counselors available for any students who felt they needed to speak to one. An announcement on the matter was made over the public announcement system at the end of the day.

Preisler said school officials will discipline whoever is responsible for scrawling the racially offensive terms on the water fountains.

What a really stupid thing to do!

The kid responsible for the vandalism (assuming it was a student and not a staff member) not only did damage to school property but also made a terribly insensitive racial statement.

I can understand why students would be upset by the graffiti. If it was supposed to be a joke, it flopped. Not funny.

The kid or kids involved had to know that it would hurt students and potentially increase racial tensions at the school.

In addition, it gives the school bad press, creating an impression of some deeply rooted racial problems. That may or may not be a fair portrayal of Tosa West, but it's unavoidable.

Some jerk has caused a lot trouble by engaging in this completely unacceptable behavior.

But--

The words were discovered and they were removed.

I think it may be going a bit overboard to make counselors available for students who felt they needed to speak to one about the bubbler situation.

I can understand that an upset student might want to talk to a counselor about race relations at the school in general.

I can't see any students being so traumatized by the bubbler incident that they'd need counseling.

Anything to get out of class, I guess.

I would hope that school officials will punish the vandal or vandals. That should go without saying. Defacing school property is unacceptable.

I would also hope that the school takes this opportunity to teach students that racial segragation was not a proud chapter in American history.

Rosie O'Donnell's 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Rosie O'Donnell has gone "Kevin Barrett."

She is absolutely over the edge, off the deep end nuts.

O'Donnell is holding The View and Barbara Walters hostage. I sincerely think she's trying to get ABC to give her the axe.

Each day on The View she says something outrageous, like she wants to commit career suicide.

It's like a pathetic cry for help.

NewsBusters does a great job of chronicling her daily drivel and rants.

From today's show:

ELISABETH HASSELBECK: Do you believe that the government had anything to do with the attack of 9/11? Do you believe in a conspiracy in terms of the attack of 9/11?

ROSIE O’DONNELL: No. But I do believe the first time in history that fire has ever melted steel. I do believe that it defies physics for the World Trade Center Tower Seven, building seven, which collapsed in on itself, it is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved, World Trade Center Seven. World Trade Center one and Two got hit by planes. Seven, miraculously, for the first time in history, steel was melted by fire. It is physically impossible.

HASSELBECK: And who do you think is responsible for that?

O’DONNELL: I have no idea. But to say that we don't know it was imploded, that there was implosion in the demolition, is beyond ignorant. Look at the film. Get a physics expert here from Yale, from Harvard. Pick the school. It defies reason.

O'Donnell didn't have the guts to pin the blame for what she believes was the planned implosion of the WTC on President Bush, the way former UW-Madison Kevin Barrett does.

But, without question, she doesn't blame terrorists. She's convinced that it was an inside job of some sort.

Read some of her 9/11 conspiracy ramblings in an entry from her blog.

Isn't this about as far as she can go?

When are ABC and Barbara Walters going to put an end to this insanity?

That time is long overdue.

Sponsors should take their advertising dollars elsewhere and avoid The View like the plague.

More Arrests in Bay View Crime Spree

It appears that Bay View and south side Milwaukee residents, business owners, and their patrons can breathe a sigh of relief. The criminals terrorizing the area for months are in custody.

Six thugs have been charged for the string of robberies.

The five men and one woman facing charges of armed robbery with threat of force are Paul Asik Jr., 30; Xavier Perez, 18; Brendaly Gonzalez, 19; Angel DeJesus, 21; Carmelo Vaszquez Jr., 32 and Christian Colon, 19.

Colon is also charged with felony murder and sexual assault. Gonzalez is he only suspect without a prior criminal record in Wisconsin.

So, the Bay View Bandit turned out to be a band of bandits. That should come as no surprise, given the various descriptions of the robbers.

As suspected, Colon was involved with the murder of Nicholas G. Knutowski during an attempted robbery at Marty's Party tavern. That was back in early January, many crimes ago.

Thankfully, the police finally got this 19-year-old terror off the streets. A 19-year-old murderer!

Sadly, it wasn't soon enough to save Knutowski's life.

Note that five of the six have a prior criminal record. They aren't rookies.

The six people charged so far are among more than a dozen arrested for the robberies. That's a lot of bad guys put away -- at least for now.

Although the crimes are being solved and the criminals are being held accountable, I wonder about the long term effects of the crime crisis.

I wonder if there will be any lasting impact on the area because of all the robberies.

Will people ever feel as safe as they once did?

I suppose people will eventually relax, as long as there's not another string of robberies.

People will probably feel comfortable again; but I don't think it will be the same.

Once innocence is lost it's lost forever.
___________________________

The robberies were the work of the Spanish Cobras.

The arrests of suspects believed to be linked to the South Side Spanish Cobras gang cleared nearly 40 armed robberies that stretched across Milwaukee and nearby suburban communities where small businesses and customers were targeted by masked men wielding guns for months.

Twelve people have been arrested in the crimes which were heavily publicized in Milwaukee's Bay View neighborhood but have since been connected to several communities, including St. Francis, South Milwaukee, Cudahy, West Allis, Greenfield, West Milwaukee, Glendale, Wauwatosa and Waterford in Racine County, Milwaukee police Deputy Chief Brian O'Keefe said today.

O'Keefe said police continue to seek more suspects in the cases, however, six people ranging in age from 18 to 32 have been charged so far in Milwaukee County Circuit Court.

Gang activity is not new to Milwaukee.

Read more here and here and here.

The Milwaukee Police Department has spent decades trying to dismantle the gangs.

It seems with each step forward there's two steps back.

You'd think leaders would make the issue a priority. You'd think.

Iranian Hostage Crisis: Ahmadinejad-Style

What is with the Iranians and hostages?

Was megalomaniac Mahmoud Ahmadinejad looking for something to propel him back into the news?

I guess you can call for the destruction of Israel only so many times before the media stop reporting it.

A nice high profile hostage crisis seems to be just what bully Ahmadinejad ordered to feed his massive ego.

Besides, it's been over 25 years since the Iranians held Americans in captivity for 444 days during Jimmy Carter's disastrous presidential term. Maybe radical Iranians longed to relive those good old days so they rounded up some Westerners to hold captive.

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia -- Iran's foreign minister said Wednesday that Britain must admit that its 15 sailors and marines entered Iranian waters in order to resolve a standoff over their capture by the Mideast nation.

Manouchehr Mottaki's statement in an interview with The Associated Press came on a day of escalating tensions, highlighted by an Iranian video of the detained Britons that showed the only woman captive saying her group had "trespassed" in Iranian waters. Britain angrily denounced the video as unacceptable and froze most dealings with the Mideast nation.

The Iranian official also backed off a prediction that the female sailor, Faye Turney, could be freed Wednesday or Thursday, but said Tehran agreed to allow British officials to meet with the detainees.

Mottaki said that if the alleged entry into Iranian waters was a mistake "this can be solved. But they have to show that it was a mistake. That will help us to end this issue."

"Admitting the mistake will facilitate a solution to the problem," he said late Wednesday night in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, where he was attending an Arab summit.

It was the first time that Iran has publicly suggested a way to resolve the crisis, but British acquiescence appeared unlikely as the country has been insisting since the crisis began that its troops were in Iraqi waters and released a GPS readout on Wednesday to back up the claim.

Mottaki enjoys yanking the Brits' chain.

The Iranians are behaving like unruly toddlers testing the preschool teacher.

It's critical that the British do not go wobbly and submit to the ridiculous demands of the Iranians.

...Earlier Wednesday, a brief video of the captured Britons was shown on Iran's Arabic language satellite television station, Al-Alam.

One segment showed sailors and marines sitting in an Iranian boat in open waters immediately after their capture.

The video also displayed what appeared to be a handwritten letter from Turney, 26, to her family.

"I have written a letter to the Iranian people to apologize for us entering their waters," it said. The letter also asks Turney's parents in Britain to look after her 3-year-old daughter, Molly, and her husband, Adam.

The video showed Turney in checkered head scarf and her uniform eating with other sailors and marines. Later, wearing a white tunic and black head scarf, she sat in a room before floral curtains and smoked a cigarette.

Turney was the only detainee to be shown speaking, giving her name and saying she had been in the navy for nine years.

"Obviously we trespassed into their waters," Turney said at one point, her voice audible under a simultaneous Arabic translation. "They were very friendly and very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people. They explained to us why we've been arrested. There was no harm, no aggression."

Does anyone actually believe that those are Turney's own words?

"They were very friendly and very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people."

Yeah, right.

Her statement was clearly scripted.

Parading the British sailors and marines before the cameras is a disgusting display.

Furthermore, it's particularly disturbing that the Iranians chose to exploit the only woman captive. That was clearly a calculated move intended to persuade the British to acquiesce.

Read the spin from the Islamic Republic News Agency, Ahmadinejad's propaganda machine:

British marine Mrs. Faye Turney from F99 Royal Navy on Wednesday admitted entry into Iranian territorial waters and apologized for doing so.

Turney, who is going to be freed soon, said that Iranian coast guards treated them friendly and with hospitality.

"My name is Faye Turney. I come from England, I live in England at present. I have served on F99. I have served in Navy nine years, I was arrested on Friday on 23rd of March which obviously has passed internal waters.

"I was treated friendly and hospitable they are nice people, they explained why we were arrested, and there is no aggression, no hurt, no harm, they are very very compassionate," she said in an interview.

Meanwhile, she forwarded a letter to her family to inform them about her well-being.

An Iranian foreign ministry official handed over the letter to British Ambassador to Tehran Jeffrey Adams on Wednesday.

"I want you all to know that I am well and safe. I am being well looked after.

"The people are friendly and hospitable, very compassionate and warm. I have written a letter to the Iranian people to apologise for us entering into their waters.

"Please don't worry about me; I am staying strong. Hopefully it won't be long until I am home, she said in part of her letter to her family.

Iran announced that she will be freed soon.

15 British marines, who had violated Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, were arrested on Friday.

What a load!

Have the so-called human rights organizations called out Iran for this exploitation?

I wonder what Rosie O'Donnell has to say about the treatment that the British sailors and marines are receiving.

She always blathering about torture and Gitmo and how horribly the U.S. treats detainees. She's so extreme that she was even eager to defend Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

How does the video of the hostages fit into her idiotic conspiracy theory?

"But interesting with the British sailors, there were 15 British sailors and Marines who apparently went into Iranian waters and they were seized by the Iranians. And I have one thing to say: Gulf of Tonkin, Google it. Okay."

"Yes, but it’s very interesting too that, you know, these guys, they went into the water by mistake right at a time when British and American, you know, they're two, they’re pretty much our biggest ally and we're considering whether or not we should go into war with Iran."

Enough of the crazed O'Donnell and her lunacy.

The bottom line is the Iranians intentionally created an international crisis.

They set out to heighten tensions with the West.

Once again, Iran earns its place on the Axis of Evil.

President Bush Zings Webb

Nancy Pelosi makes nice.
REUTERS/Jason Reed (UNITED STATES)

Tonight was the annual Radio and Television Correspondents' Association dinner in Washington, D.C.

President Bush got in some good lines when he delivered his remarks, although I thought he looked a little tired.

My favorite line: "I'd like to thank Senator Webb for providing security."

I also liked the President's jab at Barack Obama. He said that Obama didn't show up at the dinner because there wasn't enough press.

Milwaukee's Feral Children

Is there hope for the city of Milwaukee?

Is its future bright?

Look at its children. Look at the generation coming up.

It's a discouraging picture.

I hope that the good kids grow up to stand up to the bad ones, because at present, Milwaukee's future seems very bleak.

Currently, there is a shocking lack of leadership and a level of incompetence that is mind-boggling. You can count on one hand the Milwaukee leaders willing to acknowledge that the city is in crisis and offering solutions to tackle its problems.

Mayor Tom Barrett is AWOL.

In the meantime, high schoolers fight inside and outside the classroom.

Kids assault their teachers.

An 11-year-old boy was taken into custody Tuesday at Elm Creative Arts School, 900 W. Walnut Ave. after he hit a teacher on the head with the phone, bit her and then kicked and punched an educational assistant in the chest, police and school officials said today.

MPS spokeswoman Roseann St. Aubin said the student became unruly and angry during a class and took a phone receiver located in the class and struck the teacher in the head three times. He then bit her, she said.

An educational assistant who was making an effort to restrain the child was kicked and punched in the chest, she said.

Kids commit murder.

Antonio Jones, murderer of 44-year-old Scott Huggins, is 16!

Today, two more kids were taken into police custody for their involvement in a murder.

A 15-year-old and a 16-year-old are in police custody in connection with the killing of Cardell Bonslater Sr. in February, police said this morning.

Bonslater, 63, was shot and killed during a robbery Feb. 5 at his appliance store located in the 3600 block of N. Martin Luther King Dr.

From a February 6, 2007, report in The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Two masked men - one with a gun -- entered Magic Furniture Variety Appliance Store, 3611 N. Martin Luther King Dr., at 7:19 p.m. and demanded money, said department spokesperson Anne E. Schwartz said. Bonslater was in the store with two other people moving an appliance.

After the men got cash, they fled and Bonslater followed them out. That is when he was shot, police said. Because the investigation is ongoing, no other information was released such as where on his body Bonslater was hit.

Are the 15 and 16-year-olds the masked men that killed Bonslater?

Read more about Bonslater.

Cardell Bonslater Sr. made a major career change a year ago, from hairdresser to appliance store owner, his daughter said Tuesday.

It was at his store - Magic Appliance in the 3600 block of N. King Drive - that Bonslater, 63, was killed Monday night in a robbery, police said.

Bonslater was in the store with a couple employees about 7:15 p.m. when two masked men, one armed, came in, said Anne E. Schwartz, department spokeswoman. The robbers got cash. Schwartz said Bonslater followed them and was shot outside, where he died.

...Bonslater's daughter Samantha Smith, 29, said her father was killed inside the store and didn't follow the robbers out. She doesn't believe her father would let masked people in the store after it was closed.

"I think it was someone already in the store with him," Smith said. "They asked him for money, and they shot him anyway."

Bonslater moved to Milwaukee from Chicago in 1996, Smith said. He cut hair in Chicago and Milwaukee, but he also was good at fixing appliances, she said.

"He was a jack of all trades," she said.

He opened his store a year ago and worked many hours there, she said, but he never had been robbed before Monday.

Bonslater, who was divorced, liked playing pool and belonged to a league, she said. But mostly he enjoyed spending time with his 10 children and 30 grandchildren, she said.

"Anyone who met him would have loved him," Smith said.

My heart breaks for the victims of these ruthless murderers. My heart breaks for their grieving families and friends.

Are the children that committed these crimes and brought so much misery victims?

Should we feel sorry for these kids gone astray?

If these children truly don't know right from wrong, if they don't know that assault, stealing and murder are wrong, then I guess one can't blame them for what they've done. In that case, they have no guidelines to follow when exercising their free will.

I don't buy it.

I don't buy that they don't know that killing someone in cold blood is wrong. Of course they know that taking someone's life is wrong.

The violence isn't caused by guns or a lack of jobs or poverty. Individuals choose to commit the crimes.

Milwaukee's children are all too routinely committing serious crimes. There's no excusing that.

This is about morals and the depths of the soul.

Are these young criminals animals, without any understanding of values and rules of society?

No.

Whatever our circumstances, we are each responsible for our actions.

We each should be held accountable for what we do; and in the case of Milwaukee's Mayor Tom Barrett, for what he DOESN'T do.

Eliot Stein: How NOT to Behave on the Internet

Instances of ugliness on the Internet abound.

This one is truly disgusting.

Cathy Seipp was dying.

The 49-year-old newspaper columnist and conservative blogger, who had come from Manitoba, Canada, to become the sharp-tongued doyenne of the Los Angeles media scene, was only hours away from losing her years-long fight with cancer, leaving behind a 17-year-old daughter, a lifetime of work as a plucky and plain-speaking wordsmith, and the respect of colleagues from both sides of the political spectrum.

But what was supposed to have been a dignified end for a long-suffering single mom instead turned into what friends called a disgustingly public travesty, an example of the current Wild West atmosphere of Internet privacy issues, and a sordid showcase of just how far a beef can go.

Just hours before her death, “Cathy Seipp” suddenly seemed to undo decades of hard work with an oddly written letter posted on the Web site, www. cathyseipp.com. In what came off as more bizarre rant than heartfelt apology, her supposed “very last blog entry” called her years of journalism a “shoddy,” “despicable” and “irresponsible” career as a “fourth-rate hack.” Her political stance? All a mistake.

The fiery, unwavering supporter of George W. Bush supposedly said she'd done a complete 180 in the past year and was now an implied supporter of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. What was even more perplexing was that “Seipp” was taking mean-spirited potshots at her own daughter, Maia Lazar, whom she called an “obnoxious” and “arrogant” wanna-be “skank” who was “mentally ill.” Throughout the letter, the one person whom “Seipp” seemed most sorry for ever having offended was Maia's 10th-grade journalism teacher, who had frequently clashed with mother and daughter. Finally, “Seipp” said she was probably to blame for her own illness — the “venom” she'd spewed for years was responsible for her terminal cancer.

Friends were horrified. They quickly realized that the letter was the work of an infamous character known as “Troll Dolls” who'd positioned himself as the blogger's archenemy and bought the domain name www.cathyseipp.com years earlier (Seipp's real Web site is www.cathyseipp.net). Troll Dolls is really Eliot Stein, a 54-year-old former online talk-show host and stand-up comedian who hadd taught Maia in a journalism class for a brief period in 2004, and who blamed Maia and Seipp for his departure from the school after only five weeks. Seipp's friends marshaled their resources, creating an impromptu Internet chat room to make their plans, fingering Stein as the culprit, enlisting the help of a lawyer to serve him a cease-and-desist letter, and successfully lobbying Stein's Internet host to take the Web site down permanently.

“He's a genuinely weird dude [who wrote] a rambling, odd, mean, totally cruel series of posts ... designed to trick well-wishers, as Cathy lay dying, into reading a torrent of rage and bitterness against her,” Rob Long, an L.A. television writer and longtime friend of Seipp's, wrote in an e-mail. “Just immensely cruel. It was easy to ignore when she was alive, but as she died it became intolerable — thousands and thousands of people wanted to reach out to Cathy and her family in the days surrounding her death, and this guy tricked, perverted and deeply hurt them. And for what? A years-old grudge?”

There was perhaps one silver lining, Seipp's friends said. They first found Stein's letter on March 20. Seipp died in the afternoon of March 21, never having known what Stein was saying in her name.

Read more.

I don't understand people like Stein.

I don't know what it's like to be without a conscience.

The Iraq Timeline and the War on the White House

The Democrats, Chuck Hagel, and Gordon Smith are playing games.

They voted for a U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq by March 31, 2008. By attaching the provision to a funding bill for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, they hope to up the pressure on President Bush to give up on victory.

Do you think insurgents, terrorists, and tyrants have the date on their calendars?

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad must be counting the days. Al Qaeda leaders, too.

The President has said that there's no way he would sign a bill that includes a timeline for troop withdrawal. A veto is certain.

The President is disappointed that the Senate continues down a path with a bill that he will veto and has no chance of becoming law. In the two weeks since the Senate defeated a similar proposal, General Petraeus reports encouraging signs are already emerging. The Senate, which unanimously confirmed the General for this mission, needs to support him by providing our troops the funding they need - not by mandating failure. As the President said, "Our men in women in uniform should not have to worry that politicians in Washington will deny them the funds and the flexibility they need to win."

The Dems and Republican defectors Hagel and Smith won't be able to override Bush's veto. It's all a game, an effort to appease the fringe anti-war crowd.

They don't care. They want to suck up to anarchists and Vietnam retreads by sending a message to the President and to our allies and to our enemies that the U.S. Senate is pressing forward to secure defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan.





They don't care that while they screw around playing politics, our troops are waiting for a bill to supply necessary funding.

WASHINGTON -- Congressional Democrats are showing no signs of backing down on their rebuke of the Iraq war, insisting President Bush will have to accept some sort of legislative timetable in exchange for the billions of dollars needed to fund the war.

"We would hope that the president understands how serious we are," said Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev., after the Senate voted to uphold a proposal in a war spending bill calling for the troop withdrawal.

As the Senate resumes debate on the $122 billion bill Wednesday, President Bush was expected to address the legislation in a speech at the National Cattlemen's Beef Association meeting in Washington.

Deputy press secretary Dana Perino said Bush would use the speech as an opportunity to address the war on terror and the need to let the new Iraq security plan get fully under way.

"The president will say it is dangerous to our soldiers on the ground to let Washington politics delay this funding," Perino said.

But Reid and other Democrats say they won't back down.

"Rather than making all the threats that he has, let's work with him and see if he can give us some ideas how we can satisfy the wishes of a majority of the Senate, the majority of the House and move forward," Reid said.

Reid is such a doofus.

I don't see the President's statement that he will not sign legislation that includes a date for troop withdrawal as a threat.

A veto is the right thing to do. It doesn't take a lot of brains to understand how dangerous a timeline is.

What war in our history has been won by telling the enemy how long we intend to fight?

Bush doesn't have to "satisfy the wishes of a majority of the Senate, the majority of the House."

He has to protect the American people and our interests, and uphold the Constitution.

The Oath of Office:

I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. (So help me God.)

It doesn't say anything about a president's duty to satisfy the Senate's wishes.

If anyone is making threats, it's the Dems.

Reid said, "We would hope that the president understands how serious we are."

That's not a threat?

It seems threatening to me.

Senate Republicans tried Tuesday to strip out the withdrawal language but failed in a 50-48 vote. One Democrat — Sen. Mark Pryor of Arkansas — sided with Republicans in opposition to the public deadline, contending such a measure would broadcast U.S. war plans to the enemies.

"Congress should not define how long our enemy has to hang on to win," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Sen. Chuck Hagel delivered the deciding vote by joining anti-war Republican Gordon Smith of Oregon in breaking ranks and voting with Democrats to put a nonbinding end date on the war.

"We have misunderstood, misread, misplanned and mismanaged our honorable intentions in Iraq with an arrogant self-delusion reminiscent of Vietnam," Hagel, R-Neb.

Pryor said he supports setting a deadline for U.S. involvement in Iraq, but only so long as such a date remains classified. Pryor compares the 2008 date set by his Democratic colleagues akin to announcing to the Germans plans for the U.S. invasion of France in World War II.

But ultimately, Pryor said, he will vote in favor of the bill.

Sometimes it's hard to believe just how irresponsible and incompetent our elected officials can be.

Hagel is enjoying the embrace of the lib media. He loves all the attention.

And Pryor...what can you say about him?

He's correct in saying that setting a withdrawal date would be like tipping Germany off about the D-Day invasion. But then, he turns around and says that in the end he'll vote for a withdrawal date.

It's like something John Kerry would do.

...Sen. Chuck Schumer said he sees Tuesday's vote as the first step in turning up the heat on Bush's war policies.

"This is not one battle; it's a long-term campaign," Schumer, D-N.Y., told reporters.

Listen to Schumer's language.

He and the Dems are at war with President Bush and the administration.

"This is not one battle; it's a long-term campaign."

That's sick.

Schumer's priority is to do battle with his fellow Americans, not foreign enemies wishing the U.S. harm.

Russ Feingold joins Schumer in talking about "first steps."

“Today marks an important step toward ending the war in Iraq. For the first time, the U.S. Senate will pass binding legislation requiring the President to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. While this is long overdue, it is a big step in the right direction and it brings us closer to ending our involvement in this disastrous war.”

This timeline doesn't spring from a desire to end the war. In fact, it wouldn't end the war. It would ensure continued bloodshed and a humanitarian disaster. It would increase the likelihood of more terrorist attacks here at home.

The timeline is all about politics and positioning.

The Dems and Chuck Hagel have decided that the enemy they vow to conquer is the Bush administration.
_____________________________

President Bush vows to fight these political opportunists.


President Bush gestures during his speech to the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, Wednesday, March 28, 2007, in Washington. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

WASHINGTON -- President Bush accused congressional Democrats Wednesday of meddling in Iraq war policy and setting a deadline for a U.S. pullout that would have disastrous repercussions for both countries.

As the Senate resumed debate Wednesday on a bill containing a spring 2008 timetable for bringing American troops home, Bush argued again that such a step would result in a needless delay of funds for troops. But Democrats are insisting that he'll have to accept some sort of timeline to get the money.

...Bush said Wednesday that the Democratic strategy move will not force him to negotiate. He said again that he would veto any funding legislation that includes a withdrawal timeline.

"The consequences of imposing such a specific and random date of withdrawal would be disastrous," Bush said in a speech at the National Cattlemen's Beef Association meeting. "Our enemies in Iraq would simply have to mark their calendars. They'd spend the months ahead plotting how to use their new safe haven once we were to leave. It makes no sense for politicians in Washington, D.C. to be dictating arbitrary timelines for our military commanders in a war zone 6,000 miles away."

Bush broadly defended his new war plan, which involves sending 21,500 additional U.S. combat troops to Iraq to help secure Baghdad and troubled Anbar Province. He said two months of joint operations with Iraqi troops have seen some early successes but "it's going to require a sustained, determined effort to succeed."

"If we cannot muster the resolve to defeat this evil in Iraq, America will have lost its moral purpose in the world and we will endanger our citizens," the president said. "If we leave Iraq before the job is done, the enemy will follow us here."

Bush accused lawmakers of engaging in little more than "political statements" even as money for troops will run out next month.

"If Congress fails to pass a bill to fund our troops on the front lines, the American people will know who to hold responsible," Bush said.