Study finds one-third in D.C. illiterate

Tell me why there is no outcry about this? All you here is failed Iraq re-construction…violence in Iraq…blah, blah, blah. Meanwhile, there were six murders in DC this weekend. Face it, our own Nation’s capital is a festering cess-pool of human misery and violence.

Study finds one-third in D.C. illiterate – Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON – About one-third of the people living in the national’s capital are functionally illiterate, compared with about one-fifth nationally, according to a report on the District of Columbia.  Adults are considered functionally illiterate if they have trouble doing such things as comprehending bus schedules, reading maps and filling out job applications.

The study by the State Education Agency, a quasi-governmental office created by the U.S.

Department of Education

to distribute federal funds for literacy services, was ordered by Mayor Anthony A. Williams in 2003 as part of his four-year, $4 million adult literacy initiative.

The growing number of Hispanic and Ethiopian immigrants who aren’t proficient in English contributed to the city’s high functional illiteracy level, which translated to 170,000 people, said Connie Spinner, director of the State Education Agency. The report says the district’s functional illiteracy rate is 36 percent and the nation’s 21 percent.

Adults age 65 and older had the lowest literacy score of any group, the report found.

The District of Columbia Chamber of Commerce, which contributed to the report, said the city lost up to $107 million in taxes annually between 2000 and 2005 because of a lack of qualified job applicants.

Gathering of Eagles–30,000 strong

Living in the DC area, I had planned to post about this event today. But Michelle Malkin has done much better than I ever could. Thanks to Ms. Malkin for the great photos and links. And thanks to the Gathering of Eagles for punking out the moonbats. Sorry that some of the images don’t load…go to Michelle Malkins blog for more updates….-Chin

Michelle Malkin: Blogburst: Gathering of Eagles–30,000 strong

Gathering of Eagles–30,000 strong

By Michelle Malkin · March 17, 2007 05:35 PM

***Update: Heidi at Gathering of Eagles reports on the National Park Service estimate of the GoE turnout: 30,000 strong. The silent majority no more.***

***Update March 18, 2007 1:30am: The NYTimes lies…***

Pure bullcrap. Yup, the journalistic standard-bearers of the NYTimes relied on “several veterans of the antiwar movement” to give them crowd estimates of the Gathering of Eagles. It’s the domestic equivalent of MSMers relying on dubious Iraqi stringers to provide them with war coverage while they sit in their comfy Green Zone offices in D.C. and Manhattan.

***Update March 18, 2007, 7:30am: Compare and contrast…***

College student Leslie Grainger sent me this striking photo she took of a proud American at the GoE yesterday:

She writes:

My name is Leslie Grainger, I met you earlier in the day today at the gathering of eagles ( I am the college student, that drove 12 hours from Massachusetts to go). The Vietnam veterans were abandoned by their generation, and they’ve always had to stand up for themselves, and on their own, I was there because I wanted to show the veterans that I love them and thank them for helping to ensure my freedom and safety. I was also there to show the veterans than I will not stand quietly, or look away (as their generation did) when our new veterans, and our troops are being disrespected. I think our effort today let the veterans of the past know that Americans will never let the disrespect or degradation of our troops go un-opposed again. I have been praying that one day the actions of the silent majority of America that supports the troops would speak louder than the cries of those who oppose them, and I think that happened today aswell.I took a lot of photos but there is one in particular I think you’d like…It’s surely a photo the media, or liberals wouldnt like to see.

Now, here’s the GoE photo the Washington Post chose to spotlight:

Pictures that say a thousand words, no? As I wrote last night, “Having spent nearly 6 hours covering the event, I can tell you that the (com)Post cherry-picked one angry face out of thousands and thousands of proud, dignified, peaceful pro-victory, pro-troop participants. Typical of their selective photo bias. Just go back and look at how they cover illegal alien protesters and pro-life protesters. No surprises here.”

Tons more photos you won’t see in the WaPo or NYTimes over at our Hot Air Flickr album. A sample:

***

It was a breath-taking, historic, and emotional day in Washington, D.C. You won’t know it if you tune in to the usual MSM channels. But new media–bloggers, conservative documentarians, Internet activists, FReepers (giant thread here), citizen journalists, photojournalists, and talk radio hosts–turned out in full force to participate and cover the Gathering of Eagles counter-protest. Thousands upon thousands turned out despite freezing temperatures and hairy travel conditions. We met bikers who drove up all night from Huntsville, Alabama; a retired NYC firefighter who arrived here at 2am; college students who traveled from Massachusetts; a Vietnam veteran’s wife who bought plane tickets at the last minute from San Francisco; and countless participants who arrived as part of Move America Forward’s cross-country caravan.

A pure, grass-roots effort, the Gathering of Eagles’ volunteers matched the massive Soros-funded anti-war machine sign for sign, chant for chant, and marcher for marcher. The contrast was most stark right before the entrance to the Memorial Bridge, where Eagles gathered with a field of American flags–while anti-Bush, 9/11 conspiracy nuts wrapped themselves in a figurative blanket of yellow “Out of Iraq” placards. Several of the vets shouted, “Yellow! How appropriate!” in between spirited chants of “U.S.A! U.S.A!” While the classless Cindy Sheehan ranted profanely, the Eagles raised their voices in polite, but roaring disapproval and raised their American flags in answer to the ANSWER socialists’ Che banners and peace pennants.

Why did the Eagles come? One common refrain: Vietnam veterans, some fighting back tears, told us they came to show the kind of support for the troops that they did not receive when the surrender lobby marched on the Pentagon 40 years ago today.

Mission accomplished.

Meantime, the battle for victory against global jihad continues. God bless our troops on the front lines.

E-mail or track back if you were there for a GoE blogburst.

We’ll have a full video report on Hot Air Monday (update: here it is) and more coverage to come. Here are a few photos I snapped with frozen fingers. I’ll upload the rest to the Hot Air Flickr page later tonight:

Early Saturday morning, Eagles line up to pay tribute to fallen heroes at the Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial. Security officers screened every visitor in the white tent on the right.

Face off…

***

Slapstick Politics covered the Denver moonbat protest.

Charles Ryder of Age of Hooper will have video of the Gathering up soon.

MKH has video.

Janet at SCSU Scholars observes:

My friend, Chris, and I were a bit worried about the turnout, but as we came down the hill from the Metro station and looked to our left, our concerns diminished rapidly. There were Vets everywhere, from all over the country.Security for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial was tight. Visitors could enter from one end only and exit at the other side. Everyone had to pass an electronic screening. The line was long but orderly.

For the demonstrations, The National Park Service had set locations for each side and patrolled the interim space constantly. There were no altercations that I saw. Some anti-war people tried to get to the Vets but they were asked to leave quickly and quietly – they did. It was apparent that the anti-US crowd did not expect a Veterans turnout of this size.

What will the media show? I don’t know but the line up of protesters walking to the Pentagon to protest will look long. What will be missing from the scene are the thousands of vets who lined the protest route and thousands more were on the other side of the grounds. Take all numbers with caution – my best guess, having walked back and forth multiple times is that the numbers were even at worst, Vets outnumbering protesters a bit at best.

I have just watched the “news” on Channel 4 in NBC in Washington DC. Their statement of “tens of thousands of protesters” is flat out wrong! More biased coverage – NBC never showed the number of vets other than the ones at the Wall. Thousands of Vets were everywhere. Perhaps NBC had to inflate the numbers because the crowd was so much smaller than expected. In addition, they had to revert to film from 1967 to show larger crowds. It also appears the “name” speakers didn’t arrive because only Cindy Sheehan was shown. ‘Tis a national disgrace when the media must enforce its anti-freedom agenda on the public.

In general, the anti- ____ crowd was comprised of naive and some very factually-challenged people. Signs with “data” were simply wrong.

The usual protest representatives were there: sixties hippies; their kids; ANSWER; Che Guevara; the pacifist and anti-fight for anything crowd. They were joined by another assortment of protesters: high school kids bussed in from Philly – they get extra credit in their US History classes if they participate in a protest (note, anti, not pro); a few who dressed like Palestinians and carried signs for the oppression of the Palestinians; “No war with Iran” crowd; impeach everyone crowd; anti-Halliburton; etc. These people are well-financed, signage is good.

On the other hand, the vets were proud, professional, and polite. Speakers summarized some real history – in particular, the real culprits for Vietnam casualties. One speaker, Kevin Michael of DC was particularly powerful! He is a Desert Storm Veteran and proud of it. He speaks well for all veterans.

After the protesters took their march to the Pentagon (who works there on a Saturday is beyond me) the Vets milled around, making sure key contacts will be maintained. An interesting side point: the grounds where the vets congregated were clean, no trash; the grounds where the protesters congregated – well, they apparently don’t know how to use trash cans.

More vid from Lifelike Pundits and Pam at Blogmeister.

Bryan Preston shares his thoughts on the astroturfed anti-war demonstrators and highlights an exclusive first-look at a new Move America Forward ad going national Monday. More at MAF here.

Old War Dogs posts rolling GOE coverage and after-action reports.

Photos from Right on the Right. And from Michael Fumento.

An e-mail that summed up the feelings of many vets we met:

I, a submarine force veteran from the Vietnam Era, was there with my Marine Corps Force Recon friend who fought in South Vietnam. As one speaker indicated, we have been quiet for 4 decades and now that congress is moving in the direction of abandoning Iraq as they did to South Vietnam, we will no longer remain silent. To me and others I talked with, this was a gathering that released the decades of disgust and personal anguish over our government’s abandonment of over 58,000 American men and women military personnel and those of our allies who died and the other hundreds of thousand who sacrificed to keep South Vietnam free from our mutual enemy. There was little talk of us not being held in high regard on our return, but open emotional displays of unity with those who shared our mission 40 years ago.Whether or not it was recorded, we took the physical and moral high ground today, adjacent to the Lincoln Memorial, overlooking the ANSWER mob and displayed our greater strength with just a portion of our patriot warrior contingent. To those that I talked with over a 5 hour period from all over the United States and from our many military service and organizations, the consensus was that this is just the first shot across the bow of the anti-war and anti-American ANSWER and congress.

Alan M. Reasin
ETR2 SS
Conowingo, MD

The Redhunter has a good write-up and pics. So does This Ain’t Hell.

Uncle Jimbo at Blackfive reports on the Madison, WI moonbat convergence.

Robert C. Sampson drove 13 hours in hellish traffic from Connecticut on Friday to get to the Gathering of Eagles:

I am thrilled that I got the opportunity to go stand side by side with my patriot brothers and sisters today and I’m going to just briefly report the important facts you are not going to hear from the mainstream news outlets. I also strongly encourage you to visit some of my fellow bloggers who I am quite sure are going to elaborate on the event much more than I. Just since I’ve been back, I’ve been informed that CNN, C-Span and even Fox news made very little mention of the number of Eagles in attendance while they gave a lot of news coverage to the anti-war protesters…

Yup.

…We stuck around to the end and helped pick up the thousands of flags donated and placed by the Eagles before us. It was my understanding that they are to be shipped to our fighting men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many were signed and I was quite moved at some of the supportive comments inscribed on them.Overall, I think today was a turning point in a lot of ways. I heard someone say that they got the impression that the anti-war folks were blown away at the turnout of Eagles and in some ways it quieted their normally “in your face” tactics having us shouting back at them. Also, I think it[‘]s worth noting that some of the forces on our side have finally reached the conclusion that we need to show up for events like this. We are ignored by the liberal media at large and if we are going to make an impact in the two minutes of news the average Joe watches per day, we need to make some news ourselves. Let[‘]s hope the trend continues. I know I’m up for it.

Many Eagles asked why big-name conservative celebrities didn’t attend the rally. I have no idea. I can only tell you that I wouldn’t have missed it for the world. Special thanks to the gals at Euphoric Reality for driving this event in the blogosphere.

Semper Gratus sends a pic of Eagles armed with a spit shield:

Looks like Fox News’s Griff Jenkins could have used one of those spit shields.

Mark Levin Fans were there and have posted a photo gallery.

Here’s the WaPo’s unfair and unbalanced coverage of GoE. Check out the feature photo they chose to represent the face of the Eagles. Having spent nearly 6 hours covering the event, I can tell you that the (com)Post cherry-picked one angry face out of thousands and thousands of proud, dignified, peaceful pro-victory, pro-troop participants. Typical of their selective photo bias. Just go back and look at how they cover illegal alien protesters and pro-life protesters.

No surprises here.

***

More:

Baron Bodissey from Gates of Vienna was at GoE and has a terrific write-up, plus photos:

After a long walk down from the Metro station at Farragut West, I expected the area on the Mall around the Vietnam Memorial to be crowded with lefty demonstrators. But it wasn’t — apparently the moonbats like to sleep in. But the veterans were out in force; I saw a heartwarming combination of Rolling Thunder people, Patriot Guard Riders, and VFW representatives of various ages crowding their counter-demonstration area next to the memorial.It was very cold and blustery with occasional snow showers, and the veterans’ area soon became a sea of icy mud. But that didn’t dampen the spirits of those who came to protect the memorial. I talked to people who had come in from California, New York, Florida, Texas, and many other places across the country.

The first veteran I talked to was a man named Kevin Gray, who was carrying a sign dissing Jane Fonda. Ms. Fonda is a frequent target of gibes and insults among vets — I heard one of the organizers announce over the PA system that the porta-johns were available along Constitution Avenue “for anyone who wants to take a Fonda or a Sheehan.”

US Supreme Court to take up ‘Bong Hits 4 Jesus’ case

Two quick questions… (1) Is this really important enough to make the SCOTUS docket? (2) How ironic is it that a kid taking his civil rights case to SCOTUS now lives in a communist country? 

US Supreme Court to take up ‘Bong Hits 4 Jesus’ case

The Supreme Court examines Monday a case raising questions over free speech rights in US high schools as it hears arguments over a student’s unfurling of a quirky banner proclaiming “Bong Hits 4 Jesus.” Joseph Frederick drew the ire of his school principal in Juneau, Alaska, on January 24, 2002, when the then 18-year-old student unveiled the huge banner in front of television cameras as the Olympic flame passed in front of a crowd.

Principal Deborah Morse, whose school had authorized the students to leave class for the event, was not amused by Frederick’s linkage between Jesus and a bong, a pipe used to smoke marijuana.

Morse crossed the street, destroyed the banner and suspended Frederick from school for 10 days.

Frederick, now 23, said he had conducted “a free speech experiment.”

The banner is “absurdly funny. It doesn’t make any sense at all,” he said in a telephone news conference from China where he studies and teaches.

On Monday, his experiment goes before the US Supreme Court, which will hear debate over a student’s right to free speech versus the school’s power to impose order.

The case has drawn heavy hitters, including the powerful American Civil Liberties Union, which backed Frederick from the beginning.

Morse is represented by Kenneth Starr, the former special prosecutor who led the investigation of Bill Clinton and his relationship with a White House intern, which almost cost the then US president his job.

The US government will also side with the school.

Frederick took his case to federal court, arguing that his free speech right, protected under the First Amendment, had been violated and demanding damages from Morse.

The “Flying Imans” continue to soften the target.

As we reported Monday, those six Islamic clerics who were removed from a US Airways flight at Minneapolis-St. Paul airport for suspicious behavior have launched a lawsuit against the airline, with help from the professional grievance mongers, CAIR.

But that in itself isn’t today’s outrage; the really disturbing part of this story is that CAIR plans to sue not only US Airways, but the passengers who witnessed and reported the imams’ behavior.

And CAIR is hunting for their names right now. The real target of the 6 imams’ ‘discrimination’ suit. (Hat tip: LGF readers.)

But the most alarming aspect of the imams’ suit is buried in paragraph 21 of their complaint. It describes “John Doe” defendants whose identity the imams’ attorneys are still investigating. It reads: “Defendants ‘John Does’ were passengers … who contacted U.S. Airways to report the alleged ‘suspicious’ behavior of Plaintiffs’ performing their prayer at the airport terminal.”

Paragraph 22 adds: “Plaintiffs will seek leave to amend this Complaint to allege true names, capacities, and circumstances supporting [these defendants’] liability … at such time as Plaintiffs ascertain the same.”

In plain English, the imams plan to sue the “John Does,” too.

Who are these unnamed culprits? The complaint describes them as “an older couple who was sitting [near the imams] and purposely turn[ed] around to watch” as they prayed. “The gentleman (’John Doe’) in the couple … picked up his cellular phone and made a phone call while watching the Plaintiffs pray,” then “moved to a corner” and “kept talking into his cellular phone.”

In retribution for this action, the unnamed couple probably will be dragged into court soon and face the prospect of hiring a lawyer, enduring hostile questioning and paying huge legal bills. The same fate could await other as-yet-unnamed passengers on the US Airways flight who came forward as witnesses.

The imams’ attempt to bully ordinary passengers marks an alarming new front in the war on airline security.

Here’s the PDF document with the imams’ complaint against US Airways. Read it for yourself.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?en…f_the_Day&onlyo

Major Food Stamp Scam Uncovered by Feds

Move along people. Nothing to see here. Let’s keep focusing on the funding to keep our troops safe. We don’t have time to worry about the rampant fraud, waste and abuse within our entitlement infrastructure. The welfare state is slow bleeding us to death. But it’s not politically expedient to criticize your core voting blocks.

Major Food Stamp Scam Uncovered by Feds

by Jim Kouri – PUERTO RICO — Thirty-one individuals linked to a $30 million food stamp fraud scheme were arrested here this morning following the culmination of a four-year undercover investigation headed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The investigation revealed that several grocery stores and food markets engaged in a fraudulent scheme to provide beneficiaries of the Puerto Rico Nutritional Assistance Program (PRNAP) with cash in lieu of groceries for a fee. The accused business owners would register false grocery sales for the amount requested by the participants and charged them a fee of 25 percent of the requested cash.

Those arrested today included business owners, employees and food program beneficiaries. All conspired to defraud the U.S. government. It is estimated that this scheme cost the U.S. government $30 million.

The PRNAP receives a grant of approximately $1.5 billion per year from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service to provide nutritional assistance to low-income families in Puerto Rico.

“We will continue working with our law enforcement partners to shut down schemes like this where criminals profit at the expense of federal assistance programs designed to help those in need,” said Manuel Oyola Torrres, special agent in charge for the ICE Office of Investigations in Puerto Rico. “Those who defraud the federal government will be caught and will be prosecuted.”

The investigation succeeded thanks to the cooperative efforts of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division (IRSCID) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Hillary Clinton: Mountain, or just another mole?

This story about Bush dismissing some US attorneys has kicked around all week. And to be honest, I wasn’t very interested. That is, until just about every Lib I know tried to voice their outrage over Bush’s misuse of his powers. So I dropped the Clinton ’93 bomb a few times an in attempt to get on with my day. Reactions ranged from feigned ignorance to the event to the typical ‘Oh well, but Bush…<insert irrelevant strawman here>.

Listening to Rush Limbaugh this week…He has seized on this in typical Pit Bull fashion as one more arrow in the conservative quiver to combat the political trickery of the “Clintonistas”. But another voice from the Limbaugh program reveals the duality of todays political landscape.

On Friday, Rush’s guest was Tom Delay. In discussing an unrelated subject, Delay explained that Liberals, by their nature, are collectivist. This fact is borne out in multiple examples where seemingly disparate factions of the left will coalesce to attack a common political enemy. Conservatives, Tom went on, a more inherently individualist. We basically require a strong personal motivator to ‘jump on the bandwagon’. So, stories like this one take on a Liberal life of their own, with little Conservative retort.

As a movement, our lack of passion with respect to the obviously trivial is perceived as weakness. Liberals, in their fervor to attack societal norms and their defenders, make mountains from political mole hills. And, when we as conservatives recognize them as mole hills, we are apologists or avoiding the ‘issue’.

Shillary’s latest display of moral relativism and revisionist history is no different. The tactic is quite simple but quite effective. Get everyone focused on the mole hill and not on important issues to which you have no answers. The proof of this plan’s worth is found in the mid-term pudding.

And so, I post this little tidbit from the WSJ with a caution. It’s intended purpose is as a pest control. Spray it on any Liberal moles that happen to cross your path on your way to the mountain.

OpinionJournal – Featured Article

Hillary Clinton knows all about sacking U.S. Attorneys.

Wednesday, March 14, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT Congressional Democrats are in full cry over the news this week that the Administration’s decision to fire eight U.S. Attorneys originated from–gasp–the White House. Senator Hillary Clinton joined the fun yesterday, blaming President Bush for “the politicization of our prosecutorial system.” Oh, my.

As it happens, Mrs. Clinton is just the Senator to walk point on this issue of dismissing U.S. attorneys because she has direct personal experience. In any Congressional probe of the matter, we’d suggest she call herself as the first witness–and bring along Webster Hubbell as her chief counsel.

As everyone once knew but has tried to forget, Mr. Hubbell was a former partner of Mrs. Clinton at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock who later went to jail for mail fraud and tax evasion. He was also Bill and Hillary Clinton’s choice as Associate Attorney General in the Justice Department when Janet Reno, his nominal superior, simultaneously fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys in March 1993. Ms. Reno–or Mr. Hubbell–gave them 10 days to move out of their offices.

At the time, President Clinton presented the move as something perfectly ordinary: “All those people are routinely replaced,” he told reporters, “and I have not done anything differently.” In fact, the dismissals were unprecedented: Previous Presidents, including Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, had both retained holdovers from the previous Administration and only replaced them gradually as their tenures expired. This allowed continuity of leadership within the U.S. Attorney offices during the transition.

Equally extraordinary were the politics at play in the firings. At the time, Jay Stephens, then U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia, was investigating then Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski, and was “within 30 days” of making a decision on an indictment. Mr. Rostenkowski, who was shepherding the Clinton’s economic program through Congress, eventually went to jail on mail fraud charges and was later pardoned by Mr. Clinton.

Also at the time, allegations concerning some of the Clintons’ Whitewater dealings were coming to a head. By dismissing all 93 U.S. Attorneys at once, the Clintons conveniently cleared the decks to appoint “Friend of Bill” Paula Casey as the U.S. Attorney for Little Rock. Ms. Casey never did bring any big Whitewater indictments, and she rejected information from another FOB, David Hale, on the business practices of the Arkansas elite including Mr. Clinton. When it comes to “politicizing” Justice, in short, the Bush White House is full of amateurs compared to the Clintons.

And it may be this very amateurism that explains how the current Administration has managed to turn this routine issue of replacing Presidential appointees into a political fiasco. There was nothing wrong with replacing the eight Attorneys, all of whom serve at the President’s pleasure. Prosecutors deserve supervision like any other executive branch appointees. The supposed scandal this week is that Mr. Bush had been informed last fall that some U.S. Attorneys had been less than vigorous in pursuing voter-fraud cases and that the President had made the point to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Voter fraud strikes at the heart of democratic institutions, and it was entirely appropriate for Mr. Bush–or any President–to insist that his appointees act energetically against it.

Take sacked U.S. Attorney John McKay from Washington state. In 2004, the Governor’s race was decided in favor of Democrat Christine Gregoire by 129 votes on a third recount. As the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and other media outlets reported, some of the “voters” were deceased, others were registered in storage-rental facilities, and still others were convicted felons. More than 100 ballots were “discovered” in a Seattle warehouse. None of this constitutes proof that the election was stolen. But it should have been enough to prompt Mr. McKay, a Democrat, to investigate, something he declined to do, apparently on grounds that he had better things to do.

In New Mexico, another state in which recent elections have been decided by razor thin margins, U.S. Attorney David Iglesias did establish a voter fraud task force in 2004. But it lasted all of 10 weeks before closing its doors, despite evidence of irregularities by the likes of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or Acorn. As our John Fund reported at the time, Acorn’s director Matt Henderson refused to answer questions in court about whether his group had illegally made copies of voter registration cards in the run-up to the 2004 election.

As for some of the other fired Attorneys, at least one of their dismissals seemed to owe to differences with the Administration about the death penalty, another to questions about the Attorney’s managerial skills. Not surprisingly, the dismissed Attorneys are insisting their dismissals were unfair, and perhaps in some cases they were. It would not be the first time in history that a dismissed employee did not take kindly to his firing, nor would it be the first in which an employer sacked the wrong person. No question, the Justice Department and White House have botched the handling of this issue from start to finish. But what we don’t have here is any serious evidence that the Administration has acted improperly or to protect some of its friends. If Democrats want to understand what a real abuse of power looks like, they can always ask the junior Senator from New York.

9-11 Mastermind confesses.

Just remember…secret prisons=BAD!! 

WASHINGTON – Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the confessed mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, confessed to that attack and a string of others during a military hearing at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to a transcript released Wednesday by the Pentagon.Mohammed claimed responsibility for planning, financing, and training others for bombings ranging from the 1993 attack at the World Trade Center to the attempt by would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid to blow up a trans-Atlantic flight with explosives hidden in his shoes.

In all, Mohammed said he was responsible for planning 29 individual attacks, including many that were never executed. The comments were included in a 26-page transcript released by the Pentagon, which also blacked out some of his remarks.

The Pentagon also released transcripts of the hearings of Abu Faraj al-Libi and Ramzi Binalshibh.

Binalshibh is suspected of helping Mohammed with the Sept. 11, 2001, attack plan and is also linked to a foiled plot to crash aircraft into London’s Heathrow Airport. Al-Libi is a Libyan who reportedly masterminded two bombings 11 days apart in Pakistan in December 2003 that targeted President Pervez Musharraf for his support of the U.S.-led war on terror.

The hearings, which began last Friday, are being conducted in secret by the military as it tries to determine whether 14 alleged terrorist leaders should be declared “enemy combatants” who can be held indefinitely and prosecuted by military tribunals.

Hearings for six of the 14 have already been held. The military is not allowing reporters to attend the sessions and is limiting the information it provides about them, arguing that it wants to prevent sensitive information from being disclosed.

The 14 were moved in September from a secret CIA prison network to the prison at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, where about 385 men are being held on suspicion of links to al-Qaida or the Taliban.

Global Warming Expeditition to North Pole cancelled due to Cold-Frostbite

I’d say something very (frost)biting about the irony here. But I’m simply laughing too hard to type.

Frostbite Ends Bancroft-Arnesen Trek

A North Pole expedition meant to bring attention to global warming was called off after one of the explorers got frostbite. The explorers, Ann Bancroft and Liv Arnesen, on Saturday called off what was intended to be a 530-mile trek across the Arctic Ocean after Arnesen suffered frostbite in three of her toes, and extreme cold temperatures drained the batteries in some of their electronic equipment.

‘Ann said losing toes and going forward at all costs was never part of the journey,’ said Ann Atwood, who helped organize the expedition.

On Monday, the pair was at Canada’s Ward Hunt Island, awaiting a plane to take them to Resolute, Canada, where they were to return to Minneapolis later this week.

Bancroft, 51, became the first woman to cross the North Pole on a 1986 expedition. She and Arnesen, 53, of Oslo, Norway, were the first women to ski across Antarctica in 2001.

But the latest trek got off to a bad start. The day they set off from Ward Hunt Island, a plane landing near the women hit their gear, punching a hole in Bancroft’s sled and damaging one of Arnesen’s snowshoes.

They repaired the snowshoe with binding from a ski, but Atwood said the patch job created pressure on Arnesen’s left foot, which led to blisters that then turned into frostbite.

Then there was the cold _ quite a bit colder, Atwood said, then Bancroft and Arnesen had expected. One night they measured the temperature inside their tent at 58 degrees below zero, and outside temperatures were exceeding 100 below zero at times, Atwood said.

‘My first reaction when they called to say there were calling it off was that they just sounded really, really cold,’ Atwood said.

She said Bancroft and Arnesen were applying hot water bottles to Arnesen’s foot every night, but had to wake up periodically because the bottles froze.

The explorers had planned to call in regular updates to school groups by satellite phone, and had planned online posts with photographic evidence of global warming. In contrast to Bancroft’s 1986 trek across the Arctic with fellow Minnesota explorer Will Steger, this time she and Arnesen were prepared to don body suits and swim through areas where polar ice has melted.

Atwood said there was some irony that a trip to call attention to global warming was scuttled in part by extreme cold temperatures.

‘They were experiencing temperatures that weren’t expected with global warming,’ Atwood said. ‘But one of the things we see with global warming is unpredictability.’

Has Ann Coulter hit her tipping point?

Last week, we pointed out the hypocrisy with regard to how Ann Coulter was treated as opposed to Bill Maher. You can read that piece here. It’s appears, after a week, that CBS big wig Steve Freidman agrees with us. Albeit in an Uber-liberal qualified way.

Has Ann Coulter hit her tipping point? – Yahoo! News

NEW YORK – Ann Coulter has been a reliable name for years among people who plan television news shows — an attractive, articulate blonde conservative who’s made a living lobbing verbal bombs.

Following her use of a gay slur about Democratic presidential candidate

John Edwards

this month during remarks to the Conservative Political Action Conference, some on TV are wondering whether her shelf life is expiring.

Many were angered by her use of the “f-word”. Coulter later said she considered it a “schoolyard taunt.” She said it was a joke about “Grey’s Anatomy” actor Isaiah Washington saying he would seek counseling after using the word to refer to a fellow actor.

At least four daily newspapers have dropped Coulter as a columnist, citing her comment about Edwards.

Head-turning remarks are hardly anything new for the author of “Godless: The Church of Liberalism” and “How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must).” In “Godless” last year, she wrote of World Trade Center widows: “I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much.”

“It’s a world of `are you talking about me? are you talking about me?'” said Steve Friedman, executive producer of “The Early Show” on CBS. “And eventually you have to get more and more outrageous to be talked about. One day you cross the line and become persona non grata. I think she’s getting close. I think Bill Maher is getting close.”

Edwards Campaign Proves They Are A Bunch of Thin Skinned Sissies-Again!

Honestly, who could vote for this guy? We posted the Edwards Campaign response to the Coulter comment last week. And now they are at it again. What’s the Matter John? The rest of broadcast media licking your shoes and carrying your water isn’t enough? Liberals just can’t accept that we, as conservatives, might have something to say or tough questions to ask. And God forbid if conservative minded business people create media outlets to balance the debate in this country. You better suck it up, John! We’re not going anywhere. And we don’t buy what the MSM (Including FOX) spoon feeds the sheep. If you can’t debate the issues unless it’s a ‘friendly venue, then we’ll assume you can’t hang in the arena of ideas.

And And we don’t vote for sissies!

More Liberal Hypocrisy Here!

Join the Campaign to Change America / John Edwards ’08 Blog

Deputy Campaign Manager Jonathan Prince sent the following email to supporters this evening.

You may have heard by now that John Edwards was the first candidate to officially say no to the Fox News debate in Nevada — and because of the hard work of so many grassroots and netroots Democrats, news is breaking tonight that Fox is out.

Fox has already started striking backat John for saying no. (There’s a surprise – Fox attacking a Democrat.) Last night, Roger Ailes – the life-long Republican operative who is now Chairman of Fox News Channel – said that any candidate “who believes he can blacklist any news organization is making a terrible mistake” and “is impeding freedom of speech and free press.”

And John’s not their only target. Tonight Fox News Vice President David Rhodes is telling news organizations not to get involved in the Nevada Democratic Caucus because of “radical fringe” groups – meaning grassroots Democrats (that would be you) – who objected to Fox’s long history of spreading Republican propaganda at the expense of Democratic leaders.

The whole right-wing is getting in on the attack; the Drudge Report is blaring the headline: “War! Dems Pull Out of Fox News Debate.”

Enough is enough. It’s time to send a clear message to Fox News and their allies that their right-wing talking points and temper tantrums won’t go unchallenged anymore – when it comes to what Democrats should do in the Democratic primary, we’ll decide – no matter what they report:

https://johnedwards.com/action/contribute/fox

Fox News has already proven they have no intention of providing “fair and balanced” coverage of any Democrat in this election.

In recent weeks they have run blatant lies about Senator Obama’s background. And Fox was only too happy to give Ann Coulter a platform to spew more hate a few days after her bigoted attack on Senator Edwards and the gay community.

Now it’s time for Democrats to stand together and send a clear message to Roger Ailes, Fox News and all the rest of them: bias isn’t balance, but turning tables is fair.

The truth is, Fox News can “report” whatever they want. And when it works for us, we’ll deal with them on our terms. But this campaign is about responsibility and accountability, and we need to send the message to Fox that if they want to be the corporate mouthpiece of the Republican Party more than they want to be an impartial news outlet, they shouldn’t expect Democrats to play along.

You can send that message by contributing today, and remind Fox News that in this election, Democrats won’t take their spin lying down:

https://johnedwards.com/action/contribute/fox

Thank you for standing up for what we believe in.

Jonathan Prince
Deputy Campaign Manager
Edwards for President