Mars is nearby for a while. Take a look at it.

I, unfortunately, couldn't do it on Saturday night, when it made the closest approach of the current swing by, because the sky was all cloudy :-(

And now I'm in Ohio, where I can't see it with my telescope. Hopefully, it'll still be there on Friday when I get back, and the sky won't be cloudy again.

Good night :-)

I spoke to Ray, my love, early tonight but I just realized I forgot to tell him good night. And by the time he sees this, it's probably going to be too late, so, have a good day love. Talk to you soon. Love you. Massimo

The culture war re-ignites

This morning I was having breakfast and the TV was showing Bush's next pick for the Supreme Court (he sure didn't waste any time, feeding my fears that Miers was just a pawn in the big scheme of things -- he couldn't appoint a radical judge right away, so he picked someone everyone opposed, for different reasons, so that he could pick that radical freak next.)

The radical freak we all feared is Samuel Alito, and I sure hope with all my heart he will not be confirmed. I sure hope the Democrats will fight this nomination to the end, including through the use of the filibuster, if it comes to that.

The guy is, simply put, a radical right-wingnut and he has proven it with years of opinions on the bench. Here is one of his latest exploits:

In the early 1990s, Alito was the lone dissenter in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a case in which the 3rd Circuit struck down a Pennsylvania law that included a provision requiring women seeking abortions to notify their spouses."

The Pennsylvania legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands' knowledge because of perceived problems - such as economic constraints, future plans or the husbands' previously expressed opposition - that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion," Alito wrote.

That opinion is just so crazy, I can't believe a sane person would ever express it. Abortion is such a contested issue in America, and this is the last person we want on the highest court to make decisions he clearly prejudges based on his personal views. His appointment would absolutely bring the repeal of Roe v. Wade closer to reality.

This is some more from AP:

Democrats pointed to two cases in which he had issued rulings from the bench that were rejected by the Supreme Court. More than a decade ago, he upheld a requirement for spousal notification in an abortion case. Earlier this year, with O'Connor casting the deciding vote, the high court threw out a death sentence that Alito had upheld in the case of a man who argued his lawyer had been ineffective.

While there was no immediate talk of a filibuster that would deny Alito a yes-or-no vote, Democrats also expressed dismay over rulings on gun control, immigration and the Family and Medical Leave Act over a 15-year career on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia.

Abortion, death penalty, gun control, immigration, health care rights. This guy is on the wrong side of every issue, and all these issues will come in front of the court within a few years. We DO NOT want some psychopath that will reject every sane argument and throw our civil rights in the crapper (and the country back in time by at least 200 years.)

This guy MUST BE DEFEATED. Period.

$$$ trumps human life

Why is that always the case? This report came out Saturday, but it's so shocking that I needed to post this here:

During the four weeks of testimony, the trial focused on a 1985 report by the Office of Special Planning, an antiterrorist task force convened by Peter Goldmark, who was the executive director of the Port Authority from 1977 to 1985.... After a visit to Scotland Yard in London that year, he wrote a memo saying that Scotland Yard was "appalled" that there would be public transient parking beneath a facility like the World Trade Center.

The report concluded: "A time-bomb-laden vehicle could be driven into the W.T.C. and parked in the public parking area. The driver would then exit via elevator into the W.T.C. and proceed with his business unnoticed. At a predetermined time, the bomb could be exploded in the basement. The amount of explosives used will determine the severity of damage to that area."

Which is exactly what happened.

That no action was taken after a warning like that from the authorities, is horrible and appalling. Congress should launch an investigation into the matter immediately.

I hope the families of the victims win millions in damages. Although the money won't bring back their loved ones, at least the same money earned by the people responsible for not taking action will change hands now and go to the victims' families.

A victory for gays!!

The Alaska Supreme Court has sided with the gay and lesbian couples who sued to obtain the benefits enjoyed by heterosexual couples when they get married, overturning a lower court ruling that had let the current discrimination in place:

Gay rights advocates claimed a major victory after the state Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to deny benefits to same-sex partners of public employees.

In overturning a lower court ruling, the state high court said Friday that barring benefits for state and city employees' same-sex partners violates the Alaska constitution's equal protection clause.

And this wasn't just a fluke. It was a unanimous decision that sets the stage for Alaska to join 11 other states that already have laws, policies or union contracts providing employee benefits in all eligible same-sex unions. Furthermore, other courts in the country could now be looking to the state of Alaska on how it handled the equal protection rationale.

The city of Anchorage, the defendant, will not appeal the decision, but the Republican Governor was outraged by the decision (GET OUT!!) and is already looking at ways to undo it.

The best part of the ruling was the reasoning behind the overturning itself:

In the 2001 Superior Court ruling overturned Friday, Judge Stephanie Joannides said the state and city did not have to extend benefits to same-sex couples, equating them with unmarried heterosexual couples who also are not eligible.

The high court said that comparison failed to acknowledge the fact that heterosexual couples can choose to get married, while homosexual couples cannot.

OnBase training - Day 1

I survived. It was a loooooong day. Actually, it's not that bad, but the amount of information that the teacher throws at us is unimaginable. He has a good analogy for it: it's like drinking from a fire hose. Trust me. He wasn't exaggerating. The teacher is very nice though. Funny, knowledgeable, and willing and eager to answer any question you might have, which is great if you don't understand a concept. Hyland seems like a great company to work for. The median age must be like 30-35 and virtually every employee I saw today had a smile on his or her face. They have a meeting on Monday mornings were they have a recap of the week and where the company stands and they pick a deserving employee who gets to spin a "wheel of fortune" to win a prize (up to a $1,000 cash!) They also have a weekly barber shop (sometimes a masseuse...) and on site daycare. They even used to have a dry cleaning service where you can just drop off your clothes, they clean them for you, and you can pick them up at the end of the day. All deducted from your paycheck, so you don't even have to worry about the bill. How great is that?! The class, like I said, is a mountain of information thrown at you, and can get quite boring and dry at times. The worst part is that, because of the amount of information to teach, the guy can't slow down too much, which makes taking notes much harder. Thankfully, he said the test on Friday is open books, notes, everything we want, and whether you pass it or not doesn't even mean you won't pass the class. Phew!

Cleveland, Ohio

Here I am!! As you can see I do have Internet access, so I won't be cut off a whole week! :-)

The flight went great and was very short, like an hour. The hotel is fabulous. It's not just a room, it's a studio, with a fully furnished kitchen (regular fridge, stove, microwave, dishwasher, cooking area, and marble counters -- people, I don't even have them at home!) and a beautiful bathroom. Very nice indeed.

Well, just wanted to check in. Time for bed I'm afraid. I'm so tired.

New House!

Before I go, I want to post a picture of the house Ray and I have put an offer on. Yesterday, we had the inspection, which seems to have gone pretty well. Here it is. Isn't it beautiful?

Business trip

My very first business trip starts today. I'm leaving this afternoon for Cleveland, Ohio, to attend a week of training at Hyland Software, Inc. regarding OnBase, the base product for the development work we do at Computer SI, my company in Norwalk, Connecticut.

The class starts tomorrow and lasts till Friday, when I'll be back home with my family at last.

I'm not that enthusiastic about going, because the classes last from 9 to 5 each day (Friday we have a test from 9 to 1,) and might be quite intense. After that, I'll be all alone in a hotel room, so it certainly can't count as a vacation.

Ray won't have it too easy either, since he'll have to take care of the kids and the dogs by himself, although his mom and sister have already offered and planned on helping him a lot. (Thank you.)

I don't know if or how much I'll be able to go on the Internet, so I might be cut off all week for all I know.

I'll post more about how it's going if I can, otherwise when I'm back.

Bye,
Massimo.

Body hanging from tree mistaken for Halloween decoration

Check this out:

The apparent suicide of a woman found hanging from a tree went unreported for hours because passers-by thought the body was a Halloween decoration, authorities said.

The 42-year-old woman used rope to hang herself across the street from some homes on a moderately busy road late Tuesday or early Wednesday, state police said.
The body, suspended about 15 feet above the ground, could be easily seen from passing vehicles.

State police spokesman Cpl. Jeff Oldham and neighbors said people noticed the body at breakfast time Wednesday but dismissed it as a holiday prank. Authorities were called to the scene more than three hours later.

"They thought it was a Halloween decoration," Fay Glanden, wife of Mayor William Glanden, told The (Wilmington) News Journal.

"It looked like something somebody would have rigged up," she said.

What a sad story. It's sad enough that the poor woman didn't have the strength to go on anymore, without the added insult of being mistaken for a decoration.

An innocent mistake though, albeit unfortunate.

Mars swings by on Saturday night!

From CNN:

Mars is ready for another close-up as the Red Planet will swing unusually close to Earth this weekend.

On Saturday, Mars' orbit will bring it 43.1 million miles away from Earth, with its closest pass scheduled for 11:25 p.m. EDT.

The two planets -- normally separated by about 140 million miles -- will not be this close again until 2018.

Should make for a nice sighting with my telescope!!

Kutsher's Country Club

Oh well, I finally found the time to organize and resize the pictures of this "wonderful" place our family visited a couple weeks ago... (you can click on the pictures to see a bigger size and check out the details.) This is what we saw on the internet on Kutsher's Country Club: Pretty nice isn't it? Well, this is what we saw when we got there: I can actually picture that ceiling coming down on your head when you're heading for the emergency exit, running for your life, in a fire or something... It was raining outside... and inside. Containers were all over the place, just like in the following picture: And this is the close up of the opening in the ceiling: Another one here: Is this a place you'd call Country Club? Not I. We felt like it hadn't been renovated in at least 40 years (it actually felt like being on the set of an episode of "The Twilight Zone.") How can you even think of keeping a place like this open to the public? Here is some nice wallpapering: Electrical panels in the corridors, at anybody's reach (Ray actually joked we could shut off every room on the floor just going by and run away...), and without a door to keep it shut: This passageway led to the racquet ball courts and gym, very attractive, isn't it? Here is the detailed view: And a nice view of the outside: Then there were the signs. This one was to our room: And, as if having a sign to the rooms made of paper and stuck to the wall(paper) with duct tape (instead of, I don't know, printed metal hung on the wall,) weren't appalling enough, here's the detail of how two extra rooms were added by hand (what, they weren't there when they printed the sign?), in such little size, you can't see them if just going by, so if that's your room, you might be wandering for a while: And here's another sign. You would think, if you're printing a sign to put on a wall, something that doesn't really change daily, like this one, and you make a mistake, you fix it and print another one, right? Not at Kutsher's (and check out the nice tape they used): Speaking of the health club, this is what the men's locker room looked like: It just screams HEALTH CLUB at you, doesn't it? Yeah, more like "get in here barefoot and you'll catch some weird African disease." And to wrap this horror show up, this is the daycamp facility, which is where parents could leave their kids for the day and have some time for themselves (check out the broken mirrors held together with yellow tape): This is where they kept their supplies... ... right next to a working iron. We actually found Nicole in this exact area when we went to pick them up - in spite of it being forbidden to kids - chewing a safety pin. The girl in charge also fed them peanut butter and jelly for lunch without having asked us ahead of time if either of them was allergic to peanut butter -- so they could have ended up at the hospital. Needless to say, she didn't get any tip. And this is what the kids could play all day long with: A big fat NOTHING. All the boxes were empty!! Oh well, live and learn. Nothing much we could have done about the place's conditions I guess, but at least, like I said in a previous posting, the time we spent there, was good.

The insurgency gets stronger and more lethal

John Aravosis writes this about the over 2,000 dead American soldiers in Iraq:

We know they're dying faster -- it took 18 months for the first 1000 casualties and just 14 months for the next 1000. The insurgency is getting stronger and more lethal. So if that continues, we can expect to hit 3000 dead next August. (And we WILL still be in Iraq ten months from now.)

Nothing seems to stop the insurgency. Things will only get worse for our soldiers. We should leave soon, and quickly.

I wonder if Bush will be on his next 5-week vacation next summer when we hit 3,000 dead. Unless, of course, things get even worse and we hit that digit earlier than that. Whatever, chances are he'll be on vacation anyway.

Is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad itching for war?

That would seem to be the case, given what he said in an interview:

During a meeting with protesting students at Iran's Interior Ministry, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad quoted a remark from Ayatollah Khomeini, founder of Iran's Islamic revolution, that Israel "must be wiped out from the map of the world."

The president then said: "And God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism," according to a quote published by Iran's state news outlet, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

Such a statement is reason to worry. A big reason, and to worry a lot. The reaction has been of severe condemnation from several of the world capitals, and Israel's vice premier has understandably called for Tehran to be expelled from the United Nations.

Israel's Vice Prime Minister Shimon Peres said Iran should be expelled from the United Nations.

"Since 1945, the establishment of the United Nations, no head of state which is a member of the United Nations ever called for the destruction of another member of the United Nations, publicly and clearly, as the president of Iran did," said Peres, a Nobel peace laureate.

"It is against the charter of the United Nations, it is against the practice of the United Nations, and you cannot have a charter where some of the people are for peace and self-defense and the other half for the destruction of it."

Naturally, this is all the more troubling given the fact that Iran might be developing nuclear weapons:

U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Ahmadinejad's views "underscores our concern and the international community's concerns about Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons."

And it's not just the US. This morning I heard on the radio that British Prime Minister Tony Blair said that that kind of talk could justify a preemptive strike against Iran. Canada mentioned the Islamic country's nuclear ambitions as adding to the gravity of the statement. And in Europe, France, Germany, and Britain, the three countries currently involved in negotiations with Iran to avert sanctions (or worse) in exchange for Iran renouncing its nuclear ambitions, all called in their respective Iranian ambassadors to demand an explanation for the incident.

Troubling times loom ahead.

Newsview: Withdrawal Shows Bush's Weakness

Well, this Newsview article is just the cherry on the cake olive in the Martini for Bush today:

Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' sudden withdrawal underscores the strength of the social conservatives who form President Bush's political base and the weakness of a president buffeted by one political misfortune after another.

Her withdrawal came after restive conservatives mounted a stinging campaign against her credentials.

Heading into what may be the darkest days of his presidency, Bush still has an opportunity to regain the support of that rebellious bloc and avoid drifting earlier than usual into the lame duck status that eventually claims all second-term U.S. presidents.
...
Evangelicals, Republican women, Southerners and other critical groups in Bush's political coalition are worried about the direction the nation is headed and have been disappointed with his performance, AP-Ipsos polling has found. Core groups have grown increasingly disenchanted with Bush.

Oh my. Ok, now, for maximum glee, re-read the parts in bold. Then proceed.

I can't imagine how frustrated, disappointed, bitter, and enraged George must feel right now. He totally lost his face on this today. He appointed one of his cronies, nobody liked her, but he, stubborn as usual, said, "Trust me, she's the best candidate for the job, she'll be great. Trust me on this." But his closest allies replied with a resounding, "NO! Get rid of her!"

And today he was forced to.

The White House and its allies portrayed the withdrawal as one initiated by the nominee and accepted by a reluctant president.

After all, the former Texas corporate lawyer who was once Bush's personal attorney had been praised by the president just three weeks ago as the most qualified candidate for the post in the country.

And Specter told The Associated Press on Oct. 11 there was little chance Bush would withdraw the nomination: "Absolutely not. I think that would be a sign of incredible weakness."

How humiliating must that be. By calling her the most qualified candidate for the post, he implied anyone else will be less qualified. Nice feeling.

And Specter put it in perspective for all of us: HER WITHDRAWAL WOULD BE A SIGN OF INCREDIBLE WEAKNESS.

Well, it makes it all the more pleasing to witness...

And read what another champion of tactfulness had to say:

But Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., not a strong Bush supporter, may have offered a more candid view of conservatives like himself.

"The president in my opinion made a bad choice here," Lott told Fox News. "Occasionally that happens. She has dealt with it admirably. In a month, who will remember Harriet Miers?"

OH MY GOD!! That must have made Harriet feel just great.

So what happens next?

Democrats urged Bush to pick a moderate for the bench, but some expressed doubts that he would. "The way that political leaders move when they are facing challenges is back to their base," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.

Conservatives were hopeful - but not assured - that Bush would turn to one of the dozen or so experienced conservative jurists he passed over in selecting Miers.

You mean one of the dozen or so experienced conservative jurists they hand-picked he passed over.

Way to go, George, you're doing a heck of a job.

Oh well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Wal-Mart: the Evildoer

A long time ago, when I first started hearing about the horrible business practices at Wal-Mart, I stopped shopping there. I only go there if I need something only they sell or if the money I would save is so much, I just can't look the other way. Wal-Mart uses its shear size and purchasing power to squash all competitors, small mom-and-pop stores and large chains alike. They don't offer benefits (or at least nothing comparable to what similar stores offer,) underpay their employees, discriminate against women, forbid all kinds of unions, and hire illegal immigrants even thought it's against the law. Need more reasons? Here is further proof that Wal-Mart should be ostracized:

The [internal] memo calls for Wal-Mart saving money by forcing more employees into part-time work without benefits and discriminating against the unhealthy and disabled:

To discourage unhealthy job applicants, [the memo] suggests that Wal-Mart arrange for "all jobs to include some physical activity (e.g., all cashiers do some cart-gathering)."... "It will be far easier to attract and retain a healthier work force than it will be to change behavior in an existing one," the memo said. "These moves would also dissuade unhealthy people from coming to work at Wal-Mart."

How sick is that? Discourage unhealthy people from working at Wal-Mart? Hold on a second, you already don't offer benefits, don't offer any kind of health insurance, so if I work for you, I have to pay for it all by myself. And now you tell me that you don't even want me to work for you if I'm not in perfect health? Who founded this company, Hitler?

Is tomorrow Fitzmas?

Fitzmas is a term coined by the liberal blogosphere to refer to the fact that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald might be giving us an early Christmas (Fitzgerald + Chrtistmas = Fitzmas) this year when (or if) he comes out with criminal indictments for White House officials involved in the leak of the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Rove and Libby are the most talked about in terms of people at risk of indictments, but Cheney's name should be in that list too:

I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.

Notes of the previously undisclosed conversation between Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2003, appear to differ from Mr. Libby's testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, from journalists, the lawyers said.

The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson's husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration's handling of intelligence about Iraq's nuclear program to justify the war.

Lawyers said the notes show that Mr. Cheney knew that Ms. Wilson worked at the C.I.A. more than a month before her identity was made public and her undercover status was disclosed in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak on July 14, 2003.
...
But the notes, now in Mr. Fitzgerald's possession, also indicate that Mr. Libby first heard about Ms. Wilson - who is also known by her maiden name, Valerie Plame - from Mr. Cheney. That apparent discrepancy in his testimony suggests why prosecutors are weighing false statement charges against him in what they interpret as an effort by Mr. Libby to protect Mr. Cheney from scrutiny, the lawyers said.

Taking a hit for the boss doesn't get more graphic than that. Imagine if Cheney got indicted and had to resign and go to jail over this.

Ah, it's so nice to day-dream like that...

Will Harriet Miers be the gift that keeps on giving?

I previously posted about Ms. Miers withdrawing her nomination to the Supreme Court in response to the barrage of outrage coming from the rightmost quarters of the GOP, and I was my usual pessimist, until I read this post by John on AMERICAblog and I felt a little more hopeful.

I'm posting the whole thing because I can't really pick one point and not the other. They're all good:

Now that we've entered the post-Harriet world, it's time to analyze what this means.
Yes, it means that Bush will pick a far-right nutjob for the next nominee. That makes me happy. Here's why.

1. Harriet Miers' nomination was killed by the Republican party because they didn't think she was conservative enough. That means that Democrats can kill the next nomination if they think it's not liberal enough.

2. The GOP just lost all of their Supreme Court talking points. Who in the GOP is going to be able to stand up with a straight face and say "every nominee deserves an up or down vote"? Kiss that talking point good bye.

3. And who is going to be able to argue that there should be no "litmus test" on abortion and other issues? Harriet was killed because last night a report came out that she was sympathetic to a woman's right to choose. She failed their litmus test on abortion, and she was killed. That means if the next nomination fails our litmus test on abortion, we can kill the next one.

4. The Harriet debacle shows Bush to be incredibly weak. That doesn't help him at all, in anything. It will only further the public perception of him as a failing president of a failing presidency. And the weaker Bush is, the less trouble he can stir up.

5. The Democrats had the power to filibuster Bush's handful of wacky lower court nominees with impunity, there is no way they're going to have a problem filibustering those same nominees when the wacko is appointed to the Supreme Court. It will be a cake walk.

6. If Bush thought he could get a wack-job confirmed, he'd have appointed a wack-job instead of Harriet in the first place. He didn't. Nothing has changed to put Bush in a better stead now to get such a wack-job confirmed, and in fact, he's worse off because now he appears even weaker and all his talking points have been blown out of the water. So let him appoint the wack-job, and let the fun begin.

7. The religious right and "conservatives" in the GOP have shown their cards. They're nasty, vindictive, extremists who want the entire pie or nothing, and they're willing to destroy their own president if he doesn't give them 110% of everything they want. They've burned their bridges with this president, and this president is going to be around for 3 years. This should be fun.

8. Bush has shown his cards to the far right. He's not a real conservative. He doesn't like their agenda. He's embarrassed to publicly embrace it. No matter who he appoints next, they now know Bush isn't one of them and that impression - that realization - will linger for the rest of his term.

9. And finally, Bush is setting the religious right up, and that makes me smile. Yes, Bush will pick a wack-job for the next nominee, even though he knows the wack-job won't be confirmed. Bush will fight for his nominee, blah blah blah, and the nomination will fail. Then Bush will say, see, I tried - then he'll nominate Alberto Gonzales, who the religious right hates, and get him confirmed. Bush will be able to argue that he gave the religious right want they wanted and it just didn't work. Oh well, time for Alberto.

So that's why all of this makes me very very very happy. It's a big mess, and messes provide opportunities.

I guess my remaining skepticism comes from the fact that the Democrats have shown very little spine so far, so nothing makes me believe they'll finally see the light now. And if they don't, we might lose the Supreme Court for decades to come (Roberts is in his fifties, and Scalia and Thomas are much younger than the more liberal judges.)

Who should decide what medicines you can get, your doctor or just any pharmacist?

This post by John on AMERICAblog highlights a worrisome trend here in the US: pharmacists who refuse to give patients drugs legally prescribed by their doctors, like contraceptives, based on their moral and ethical judgment.

This is ludicrous. This country, because of the religious right's influence, is losing its mind. Your constitutionally protected religious affiliation freedom shouldn't be a reason for you for refusing to do your job. If you feel like your conscience forbids you from performing the duties required of your occupation, it's time for you to look for a new job, because obviously you can't be as effective in the current one as someone else would.

Pharmacists shouldn't be allowed to say, "Sorry, I'm a Catholic and my religion is against abortion, therefore I cannot sell you the pill." Anyone saying that should lose his job in a heartbeat.

My friend Fabrizio worked for a few years in Kuwait, managing an Armani store. His employees were for the most part Muslims. He told me that whenever the time for the Koran-mandated prayer came, all employees would just drop whatever they were doing, get on their knees, and pray. There was nothing he could say or do. It was what their religion mandated, and their country was based on that religion. Can you imagine the same thing happening here? No? Well, think again, because it could.

If we let people get away with not selling drugs they disagree with today, we might have to put up with them praying for fifteen minutes in front of us while our frozen food is thawing and we're in the checkout line at the grocery store tomorrow. What's gonna prevent them from doing it? It's their right to express their faith and no one can say anything about it.

I remember reading about a large Muslim community in some Midwest town here in the States where they were demanding the right to broadcast their prayers like they do in the Middle East. Over there, my friend told me, around 5 in the morning, a voice starts praying over speakers that can be heard anywhere in the city. There is no ignoring them. They are so loud, they initially scared him. How would you like the same thing happening here? Can't imagine it? Think again. The movement to obtain that right has already started, since people in that community were pointing at churches' bells at the start of the Mass and saying, "If they can why can't we?"

The more I see the effects of it, the more I wish the Founding Fathers did not write freedom of religion in the Constitution. All this wouldn't happen if the US had a national faith, like many other countries do. Why? Because the different faiths wouldn't be fighting each other to prevail.

Anyway, I digress. Point is, if you're a pharmacist, all you can say to me is, "Sorry, we don't have the drug. I can order it for you." You SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED to tell me, "My faith forbids me from selling you this drug."

If you say that, you should be fired.

The darkest days of his presidency

And let's hope the longest days, months, and years too.

Bush apparently is not a happy camper anymore. He's getting a taste of the "hard work" he's always just talking about. He's like a spoiled brat who's been enjoying life for four years, while other people were doing all the work; now, all of a sudden, those people have either screwed things up or are sick of fixing Bush's messes and are telling him he's got to start pulling his weight. And that's what pisses him off most. You mean he actually has to work, not just pretend he is? Holy crap! That wasn't part of the deal!!

He just doesn't want to be in charge anymore. He doesn't care anymore.

Facing the darkest days of his presidency, President Bush is frustrated, sometimes angry and even bitter, his associates say.
...
"He's like the lion in winter," observed a political friend of Bush. "He's frustrated. He remains quite confident in the decisions he has made. But this is a guy who wanted to do big things in a second term. Given his nature, there's no way he'd be happy about the way things have gone."
...
Presidential advisers and friends say Bush is a mass of contradictions: cheerful and serene, peevish and melancholy, occasionally lapsing into what he once derided as the "blame game." They describe him as beset but unbowed, convinced that history will vindicate the major decisions of his presidency even if they damage him and his party in the 2006 and 2008 elections.

He's totally delusional. Does he really think history will look at him positively? He's already considered one of the worst presidents ever, if not THE ABSOLUTE WORST, so I don't think he'll be regarded as a good one down the road. Yes, Reagan and Clinton had their detractors in the opposite party too, but Bush has detractors in his own ranks now. That's much worse to overcome.

I certainly wouldn't be surprised to find out he actually has started drinking again. And it would suit him right, if you ask me.

2,000 and counting

The number of US soldiers killed in Iraq keeps mounting and there is no end in sight:

Experts think the country's increasingly regional-oriented politics will fuel the insurgency and even spread it further inside Iraq. Others put forward a simple, disquieting scenario: So long as U.S. and other foreign troops remain in Iraq, the insurgency will continue.

"It will become more chaotic," predicted Magnus Ranstorp of the Swedish National Defense College in Stockholm, Sweden. "It is obvious that the United States is in Iraq to stay. If this is the case, the Shiites will likely join the Sunnis in the fight."

If that isn't a nightmarish scenario then what is? There are 3 main ethnic groups in Iraq. So far the insurgency has been fueled by the Sunnis, the smallest in size. Imagine if the Shiites, the largest, were to join them in the fight.

Nothing seems to abate Iraqis willingness to fight, not elections, not a constitution, not freedom from Saddam Hussein, not democracy. Insurgent attacks continue or increase after each and every milestone Bush puts in front of them. Isn't it clear that what they want is for the US military to leave?

This little venture of Bush could turn out to be even worse than Vietnam for the US. It might actually supplant Vietnam's long-lasting image as America's lowest point in the public's collective consciousness.

Nice legacy you're building there, George. You're doing a heck of a job.

Administration officials keep lying to cover Bush's and their own incompetence

So, it seems like not every country is in as bad shape as we are in preparedness measures to fight an eventual bird flu pandemic:

Canada has one of the most enviable national pandemic plans in place, with stockpiles of the coveted antiviral drug Tamiflu and an action plan among provincial and federal health officials. Having learned from the SARS epidemic, which claimed 44 lives in Toronto in 2003 and cost the city $1 billion in lost tourism, Canada is ahead in such preparations.

See, some politicians actually do learn from past history and mistakes. Not Bush though. He spends his time bike riding and cutting branches in his ranch. God only knows what the hell he does all day long in his office.

But Prime Minister Paul Martin said the developed nations have an obligation to the poorer ones to share pandemic plans, influenza testing and any drugs that might ward off a global tragedy caused by a mutant strain of H5N1 avian flu, which has already killed dozens of people in Asia.
...
As the conference prepared to convene — with Canada having said it would back an anticipated proposal by Mexico calling on wealthier nations to put aside 10 percent of their flu vaccines and future drugs to fight a pandemic for poorer nations — European health officials met in Copenhagen to review that continent's readiness.

How smart would that be? We can have millions of doses of vaccines, but if the pandemic takes over large swaths of Asia, Africa, and South America, there will be no safe haven, because of the ease of spread of the disease. Now let's see what argument the Bush administration puts forth to try and stop this plan from ever being implemented.

This CNN article was also interesting:

As the scare over bird flu intensifies, Europe and Asia are ordering clampdowns on the movements of birds and people.

Hong Kong's border with China, one of Asia's busiest, might be sealed if the deadly H5N1 bird flu starts spreading from human to human, according to the South China Morning Post newspaper.

The H5N1 strain first surfaced in Hong Kong in 1997, then re-emerged in 2003 in South Korea, before spreading to Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, China, Indonesia, Cambodia, Russia and Europe.

Hong Kong has been a hotbed of virus alerts in recent years, including the outbreak of the SARS disease in 2003, which killed almost 300 people there. The H5N1 bird flu strain also infected 18 people in Hong Kong in 1997, six of whom died.

Consequently, Hong Kong's entire poultry population, estimated at around 1.5 million birds, was destroyed within three days. This is thought to have averted a pandemic.

What is it with Hong Kong? Don't they have any sanitary regulations in place, given the fact that all these new diseases seems to originate there?

Are we such a threat to conservatives?

Apparently so, since Republicans are once again trying to get a constitutional amendment passed that would outlaw gay marriage in the US:

Conservative members of Congress are renewing an effort to outlaw gay marriage through an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, pointing to Massachusetts as the spark in a potential firestorm of court decisions that could redefine marriage across the country.

In a hearing yesterday, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, the Republican chairman of a panel studying the proposed amendment, said Congress is racing against "imminent" action by "activist" judges to legalize gay marriage.

Funny how the GOP likes activist judges when they rule in their favor. They only attack them when the judges' decisions are contrary to their needs and wants.

The amendment effort is sweeping in scope: it would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, aiming to rescind Massachusetts' law passed in May 2004.

Although a similar effort last year led by President Bush failed in both chambers of Congress, conservative lawmakers are hopeful the amendment will come to a vote, though no timeline has been scheduled.

In order to pass, the amendment would need the support of two-thirds of those voting in each House and then be ratified by three-quarters, or 38, of state legislatures.

Hopefully, the right-wingnuts will never be able to muster the majorities necessary to pass such a hateful amendment, because if they did, its passage at the state level would be almost guaranteed, since currently 18 states have constitutional amendments defining the institution as a union for man and woman and 27 states have statutes protecting traditional marriage.

This version of the amendment, however, doesn't seem very well written and might be too sweeping, which might doom it in Congress.

Another lawyer testifying, Louis Michael Seidman, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, said the amendment is "sloppily" written and would thus grant federal judges "unchecked power" to interpret it.

"The amendment reflects remarkably poor lawyering," said Seidman, adding that the wording would actually abolish marriage in Massachusetts -- for straight and gay people alike.

Because the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that gays must be treated equally, he argued that denying gays the right to marry also denied it to heterosexual couples. "The amendment has the remarkable, and no doubt unintended, effect of abolishing marriage in the state of Massachusetts," Seidman told the panel.

I wonder what straight people in the Bay State think about that.

Critics say there are more important issues to be debating, like spiraling gas prices, the war in Iraq and rising health-care costs.

"Congress shouldn't be wasting its time taking away people's rights when gas prices are $2.89 a gallon and we owe $1.8 trillion dollars to foreign counties," said Matt Vogel, spokesman for U.S. Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Lowell. "Those are real priorities Congress should be handling."

My point exactly. The fact that the religious right in this country has been able to galvanize its constituency (and a large swath of the population at large) around the issue of gay marriage is so mind boggling, especially given the severity of the problems the country currently faces.

It's so sad that people can be so hateful and so closeminded not to see that all gay people want is the same protections straight people currently enjoy when they get married.

If they're so worried about the institution of marriage being threatened and destroyed, maybe they should concentrate their efforts on outlawing divorce.

Harriet Miers withdraws her Supreme Court nomination

So the religious right wins another battle. They showed their teeth, barked loud enough, and Bush caved. Further proof of how ineffective this guy is in the White House.

President Bush on Thursday accepted the withdrawal of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, according to a statement from the White House.

In her letter to the president, Miers said she was "concerned that the confirmation process presents a burden for the White House and its staff and it is not in the best interest of the country."

Now the "conspiracy theory" that her nomination was only a smokescreen comes back to haunt me. Is it possible Bush nominated a crony just so that nobody would like her, he'd have to nominate someone else, and so he'd be able to pick a staunch conservative (which is what he wanted all along) by using the excuse that at least someone will like that nominee, while no one liked this one?

We'll see.

"We will have to go back and take the Middle East within a decade"

Lawrence Wilkerson, a retired U.S. Army colonel who was chief of staff for Secretary of State Colin Powell, had some harsh words for the current administration and some cautionary words for anyone who would listen:

He indicated that this flawed, secretive process contributed to what he thought was a bad decision to go to war in Iraq.

But Wilkerson said that any decision by the Bush administration to leave Iraq "precipitously" would result in Iraq's neighbors sending in troops and creation of a breeding ground for terrorists like Afghanistan, leading to another major war involving the United States.

"We will have to go back and take the Middle East within a decade," if that happens, he said.

The Bush administration never planned for what would happen in Iraq after the war, he said.

"There was simply no plan with regard to postwar Iraq," other than some contingencies for humanitarian assistance, he said.

Shameful. Bush, unilaterally and pre-emptively decided to attack a sovereign nation based on a mound of lies, and he didn't even bother to plan for the post-war disaster. Does it take a genius to know that a war will leave mayhem behind? And now we're stuck. We can't even leave without risking the country to implode and the whole region to destabilize.

Nice work Mr. President. You did a heck of a job!

H5N1 threat spreads in Europe and Asia. Is Africa next?

According to this CNN article, there was a bird-flu related human death in Thailand for the first time since 2003, a farmer who "contracted the virus after slaughtering and eating an infected chicken."

The H5N1 strain, which first surfaced in Hong Kong in 1997, re-emerged in 2003 in South Korea, and has spread to Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, China, Indonesia, Cambodia, Russia and Europe.

In Europe, the strain has been found near Moscow, Russia, in Romania, Turkey, Greece, and Macedonia. A governmental agency's advice:

The agency gave two tips for people to minimize the risk of infection: do not touch dead or sick birds, and only eat well-cooked eggs or poultry.

European Health Commissioner Markos Kyprianou told reporters that because the flu may be carried by migratory birds, other European countries could experience outbreaks.

Then, I read a post by Chris in Paris on AMERICAblog that included this:

Two thousand turkeys in a farm were infected with the disease and destroyed to help stop the spread of the disease. The local officials are saying everything is OK, they're doing everything needed to stop the spread of the disease but the reality of the situation is that this disease is spread from migratory birds and this turkey farm is next to a nature park. Turkey is an important location for bird migrations from Asia and into Africa so this discovery is extremely serious and could be the beginning of the spread into Africa, a continent that cannot afford to be hit with bird flu.

It made me realize that no matter how much we are worried about this looming threat to our health (and our lives,) we have medicines, hospitals, and money to pay for our care at a national level. If the disease spreads (and explodes) in Africa, however, how are they going to cope? How is the poorest continent on earth going to deal with such an easily spreadable disease?

The whole African continent might end up being decimated by a pandemic. An unimaginable number of deaths. Scarier still, the whole continent might end up being quarantined indefinitely, for threat that the millions of diseased bodies, dead or alive, pose to the rest of the world.

Like I wrote in a previous post, we are all vulnerable, rich and poor, black and white.

Eerily spectacular

I saw this picture of the approaching Hurricane Wilma on Yahoo! and I had to post it:

A general view of the beach at the resort town of Cancun in Mexico's state of Quintana Roo as Hurricane Wilma approaches October 19, 2005. Described by meteorologists as potentially catastrophic, Wilma dumped rain on the Honduran coast and whipped up winds that briefly reached nearly 175 mph (280 km). Authorities began evacuating 10,000 people in the Mexican coastal state of Quintana Roo and tourists lined up at the airport to escape the beach resort of Cancun, where the storm was due to hit on Thursday.

Vice President Rice?

This USNews.com article hints at such a development while reporting of growing rumors of the possible resignation of the vice presidency on the part of Dick Cheney, because of his involvement in the Plamegate scandal that should soon bring down a few of the most powerful men in Bush's administration, including, possibly (hopefully?) Cheney himself.

A vice presidency gig would be the ideal launch pad for a possible 2008 presidential run for Condi, and I have to say, I'd like to see that. Not because I like her, mind you, I actually sort of despise her, since she seems totally incompetent, a lying and deceiving bitch, and just the next crony in line for a top-tier vacancy.

The reason I'd like to see her run as the top billing of the Republican ticket is that her gender would strip the "she's a woman" argument of all its appeal if Hillary Clinton wanted to run. Imagine that, a presidential match between two women (What!?), of which one is black (No Way!), the black one is the Republican and pro-choice (GASP!!), and some believe she might be a lesbian (OVER MY DEAD BODY!!!)

Just imagine the confusion and uneasiness:

• of the rednecks of having to vote for a black person,
• of the religious right of having to vote for a pro-choice candidate AND a closeted lesbian,
• and of many males of having to vote for a woman (although they might actually be thrilled at the idea of having a lesbian at the White House...)

It would definitely be Hillary's to loose.

Should those who break the law be punished or rewarded?

The answer to that question is (and should be) a no-brainer. Punished. Always. So why is our president trying to reward millions of illegal immigrants in the US by giving them a free pass?

I came to this country 8 years ago because my boyfriend was American. Since I couldn't just stay here (even though Ray had the resources to support both of us, which meant I wouldn't have been a burden on the state,) and staying illegally was out of the question (especially since I could never have gone back to Italy to visit my parents,) I enrolled in a community college hoping to find a job that would have allowed me to get a work visa.

Two years went by, and I graduated (Associate degree,) which meant I had to transfer to a 4-year institution in order to keep my student visa active (and I won't even bore you with all the requirements needed to stay 'in status' when you're a student.)

Two years later, I graduated again (Bachelor's degree,) and gained a one-year temporary work visa to get some on-the-job training before leaving the country. Finding a job was very hard then, because the economy had gone bust (my field especially, computer science,) so when the temporary visa expired, I had to get another student visa and start my Master's program, which I'm almost done with now.

Luckily, this past May, after almost 8 years, I found a company willing to sponsor me for a work visa and I've been working here ever since. The reason I'm still working on my Master's degree is that my immigration lawyer told me it might speed up the process for a green card, eventually.

Anyway, in all these years, I've always kept my status legal, I've always worked hard for my student visa (so hard, I graduated both times with a 4.0 average -- I was the Valedictorian both times too!), and I've never done anything that could jeopardize my chances of being able to stay in my partner's country without having to explain myself to the government.

Meanwhile, thousands of people every year cross the Mexico-US border (or other entry points) illegally to find a job in this country that will allow them (and their families) to live a better life. They do so in spite of the risk of getting caught and sent back to their countries of origin. They do so despite knowing that it's illegal.

So here is the situation: I've done my best, worked the hardest to respect the law (spending thousands of dollars in the process to keep my student visa active by going to school,) and now I'm faced with the possibility that millions of people who broke the law will be rewarded with the very same work visa I've not yet received. How would that make you feel?

I'm furious. I believe it's wrong. If you're here illegally, you broke the law. You should be deported. And you can't complain, because you knew exactly what you were doing and did it anyway, whatever the circumstances that brought you to that point. The law is the law. There are million others in my situation, I know, who have done all they could to follow the law, hoping some day to get a visa, and now we are left behind and the lawbreakers are rewarded for their illegal behavior. It's unfair, unjust, and unwise, since it will only spur more people to cross those borders illegally instead of legally.

I feel bad for those millions who risk their lives and spend all they have to come here to work the lowest paying and hardest jobs there are, jobs that Americans (and myself) don't want to do anyway. But I feel bad for myself too, since I've had to live with this cloud over my shoulders for eight long years (and it's not over yet.) I feel bad for my family, because my situation is not totally 'settled' and I have no idea when it will be. I feel bad for Ray because I was a 'burden' for him for all these years, because I couldn't legally work. And I didn't, 'cause I couldn't. They couldn't either, but they did it anyway. Who should be rewarded now?

The weather will get worse and worse

Another nail in the coffin of Bush's theory that there is no such thing as global warming and that, even if there were, we wouldn't be the ones causing it:

Extreme weather events -- including heat waves, floods and drought -- are likely to become more common over the next century in the United States because of human-generated greenhouse gas emissions, according to a new study by Purdue University researchers.
...
Instances of extreme heat will probably increase throughout the country, the scientists concluded, and many areas will experience heavier downpours even if rain becomes less frequent.
...
Under this scenario, which assumes the amount of carbon dioxide in the air will roughly double over the next 100 years, the coldest days of the year in the Northeast will be as much as 18 degrees Fahrenheit warmer, and the temperatures currently experienced on the 18 hottest days of the year in the Washington area will prevail for two months.

The Southwest will become drier and hotter, the paper predicts, while the Gulf Coast will become warmer and experience less frequent, but more intense, rains.

And stronger hurricanes, obviously, with more loss of life and destruction of property. But who cares? We just cannot let China and India get away with not reducing their emissions, therefore, we won't reduce ours either.

So there. That'll teach 'em a lesson.

Incalculable damage :-)

I checked out Dan Froomkin's washingtonpost.com column this morning and the first paragraph set the tone for a good reading:

The Bush White House this week is bracing for the possible indictments of Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, the president and vice president's two most essential aides. The damage to the White House could be incalculable.

Schadenfreude.

Harriet Miers is in for a tough ride

Well, poor Harriet can't seem to gain much traction at all with the vast majority of the religious right, no matter how hard Georgie tries to sell her to them.

Democrats don't really know what to do with her, Republicans don't want her either. I sure hope she has the number of a good therapist handy, or at least some strong anti-depressants, especially given what's expecting her if her nomination isn't dropped like a hot potato:

Should hearings begin on Nov. 7 as is now tentatively planned, they would likely turn into a spectacle. Mr. Specter has said he plans to press Ms. Miers "very hard" on whether Roe v. Wade is settled law. "She will have hearings like no nominee has ever had to sit through," Chuck Todd, editor of the political tip sheet Hotline, told radio host John Batchelor. "One slipup on camera and she is toast."

Should she survive the hearings, liberal groups may demand that Democrats filibuster her. Republican senators, already hesitant to back Ms. Miers after heavy blowback from their conservative base, would likely lack the will to trigger the so-called nuclear option. "The nomination is in real trouble," one GOP senator told me. "Not one senator wants to go through the agony of those hearings, even those who want to vote for her." Even if Ms. Miers avoids a filibuster, it's possible Democrats would join with dissident Republicans to defeat her outright.

Goodness, that sure will make for good television viewing. It might even be worth taking a few hours off from work to watch it. Do you think she'll crack and cry like the teenage girl she really is (she's the one who referred to Bush as cool.)

Saudi Arabia in the crosshairs?

It certainly can't be good to have a lame-duck president in the first year of his second term already, but given this kind of information, maybe it's better he's in no position now to declare more wars unilaterally:

George Bush told Tony Blair shortly before the invasion of Iraq that he intended to target other countries, including Saudi Arabia, which, he implied, planned to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

Mr Bush said he "wanted to go beyond Iraq in dealing with WMD proliferation, mentioning in particular Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan," according to a note of a telephone conversation between the two men on January 30 2003.
...
In September 2003, the Guardian reported that Saudi Arabia had embarked on a strategic review that included acquiring nuclear weapons. Until then, the assumption in Washington was that Saudi Arabia was content to remain under the US nuclear umbrella despite the worsening relationship between Riyadh and Washington.
...
Despite hard evidence that Pakistan was deeply involved in exporting nuclear technology, the Bush administration embraced President Pervez Musharraf as an ally against al-Qaida. Washington's relations with Saudi Arabia remain cool.

Imagine that:

• Saudi Arabia
• Iran
• North Korea
• Pakistan

Does Bush have any idea of how big the US military really is, or his dad just told him its resources are unlimited? I mean, we stopped pursuing Al Qaeda in Afghanistan because Bush wanted Iraq's oil (and to get Saddam for dissing his dad,) how could we possibly fight FOUR MORE WARS?!

Not to mention the fact that Saudi Arabia has the largest oil reserves in the world, which makes it quite powerful, and, together with Iran, has a lot of influence in the Arab world. And both Pakistan and North Korea have nuclear weapons, which they could either use directly against our troops, or give to terrorists to use on the mainland.

Bush is crazy. And dangerous too. Let's just hope his political capital is all spent for good and his numbers stay in the crapper till December 2008.

What will Bush do without Rove?

It looks like Karl Rove might get indicted of some crime by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald as early as this week, in which case his job at the White House would most definitely be in jeopardy.

He seems to have a plan already, come what may:

Karl Rove has a plan, as always. Even before testifying last week for the fourth time before a grand jury probing the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity, Bush senior adviser Rove and others at the White House had concluded that if indicted he would immediately resign or possibly go on unpaid leave, several legal and Administration sources familiar with the thinking told TIME.

Resignation is the much more likely scenario, they say. The same would apply to I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the Vice President's chief of staff, who also faces a possible indictment.

Oh well, I'm not going to hide the fact that I'm gushing right now :-)
After all, he's just getting what he deserves, after having smeared and ruined so many other people's lives.

However, today I'm even happier because I always thought, Who cares if Rove loses his office at the White House? He'll be just one phone call away, still holding Bush's hand through any event, just less visibly. But then today I read this:

A former White House official says Rove's break with Bush would have to be clean -no "giving advice from the sidelines"- for the sake of the Administration.

And now I feel even better. I almost peed my pants when I read that. Rove gone for good. What will it be of the White House without one of its two presidents (the other one being Cheney, who might be in trouble himself?) Well, to know the answer to that question, you don't have to look any further than at Bush's performance since Katrina hit the Gulf Coast. In simple terms, a disaster.

Does Cheney have a bull's eye on his back?

I certainly do hope so. It would give me endless pleasure to see that pompous prick indicted of ANY charge in the Plamegate scandal. Now I know how the Republicans felt when the Lewinsky brouhaha wouldn't die.

The difference, naturally, is that this is about national security and ruining a CIA agent's career and cover (and possibly endangering her life and that of any other agent who ever worked with her,) while Clinton's was about a stained dress and some steamy action in the Oval Office. Quite different if you ask me.

A special counsel is focusing on whether Vice President Dick Cheney played a role in leaking a covert CIA agent's name, according to people familiar with the probe that already threatens top White House aides Karl Rove and Lewis Libby.

The special counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, has questioned current and former officials of President George W. Bush's administration about whether Cheney was involved in an effort to discredit the agent's husband, Iraq war critic and former U.S. diplomat Joseph Wilson, according to the people.

Anyway, I always wondered what the Wilsons were going to do with this administration's smearing campaign. If they were ever going to look for justice (or revenge, call it as you like.) Now I got my answer:

In an interview yesterday, Wilson said that once the criminal questions are settled, he and his wife may file a civil lawsuit against Bush, Cheney and others seeking damages for the alleged harm done to Plame's career.

If they do so, the current state of the law makes it likely that the suit will be allowed to proceed -- and Bush and Cheney will face questioning under oath -- while they are in office. The reason for that is a unanimous 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision ruling that Paula Jones' sexual harassment suit against then-President Bill Clinton could go forward immediately, a decision that was hailed by conservatives at the time.

Good. I really do hope they sue Bush and Cheney's asses all the way to Baghdad if necessary. This will also ensure that the matter will not die even after Fitzgerald is done with his criminal investigation into the leak of sensitive information.

And the fact that it was a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court ensures that even if Bush were able to put another judge who sympathizes with him on the court, he wouldn't be able to avoid this incoming cannonball.

The new 007

I'm not a big fan of the James Bond franchise, but Daniel Craig, the new face of Bond after Pierce Brosnan left the role, might make me change my mind...

The next Bond movie, the first for Craig, will be Casino Royale, an adaptation of author Ian Fleming's first James Bond novel, in which the spy was introduced as a more youthful and cold character than he has been portrayed on film.

"I certainly think it will be a little bit darker - that's not to say it won't have its sense of humour, of course it will have that," Mr Campbell [the director] said.

The 21^st Bond film would be "definitely darker, more character, less gadgets".

Well, darker worked for the latest Batman installment, so it might work here too. I would definitely welcome more character development than gadgetry, since the Bond movies started looking like video games a long time ago, to the detriment of plot depth, which is what differentiates a movie.

The producer, Michael G Wilson, has also revealed that work has already started on the 22^nd James Bond film, which would be Craig's second as 007.

Can you imagine? They have barely started his first and they're are already in pre-production for his second.

Would you like more boobs with that touch up?

WOW! You've got to check out this website. This guy apparently is a professional "retoucher" of photographs. You wouldn't believe how different these people look after he works his magic!!

Too much belly? No problem. Too small boobs or butt? That's ok. Got some wrinkles, veins, or bones showing? Let me take care of those for you. Cellulite? Fuhgeddaboudit.

And the fact is, some untouched pictures are just fine, but when you look at the souped-up version, well, the real person looks like shit! Older, tired, spent. Not attractive at all. The problem is that many of the touched up versions don't even look real anymore. They look like dolls, very plasticky. But perfect, that's for sure.

The most shocking images are perhaps those of world-famous-beauty Halle Berry. Oh man, she's beautiful in the real picture, but when you look at the touched up version, you start noticing all those "imperfections" that make her human: the wrist bone, a tiny eye bag, a more saggy boob. And they all disappear before publishing.

Amazing, and very deceiving, if you ask me. I can't believe Ms. Berry hasn't sued his ass yet!

When judges are bigots

This article talks about a lesbian couple who is being discriminated against by a judge in their adoption of a baby girl just because of their sexual preference.

Having just gone through an adoption with my partner, I feel for this family who is being torn apart by prejudice in 2005 in what should be the most democratic and freest country in the world:

In 2004 the lesbian couple was asked by the state to provide a home for an abandoned infant and to consider adopting her. They took the baby home when she was two days old and have provided care for her since then, including naming the child Morgan.

But when the judge supervising the child's foster care placement realized that the child's prospective adoptive parents were lesbians, the court ordered the State child welfare agency to find her a home with a heterosexual married couple instead.

The State did not locate such a family for many months and meanwhile the two mothers, who are licensed pre-adoptive foster parents, applied for and were granted an adoption by the Marion Superior Court. The Morgan Juvenile Court then ruled that the adoption was invalid.

It is just unconscionable that a judge would rule a legal adoption invalid only because of his blind bigotry. He should be impeached.

Bush's presidency a failure according to most people

Well, this is the best news I could have gotten today, and it's not even lunch time yet:

For the first time, more people say George W. Bush's presidency will be judged as unsuccessful than say it will be seen as a success, a poll finds.

Forty-one percent of respondents said Bush's presidency will be seen as unsuccessful in the long run, while 26 percent said the opposite.

Seven in 10 said they want the next president to offer policies and programs that are different from the Bush administration's. Only half said they wanted the next president to offer different policies in 2000, at the end of the Clinton presidency. By a 2-1 margin, people said the Bush administration has had a negative impact on politics and the way government works.

People were inclined to say Bush's policies have made things worse on a wide range of issues such as the federal budget deficit, the gap between rich and poor, health care, the economy, relations with U.S. allies, the tax system and education.

The only weird numbers are these:

By 47 percent to 30 percent, those surveyed said Bush has improved the situation with national security.

HUH??

What?! After Katrina and Rita, how can there still be people out there feeling safer than when this idiot president took office?

Anyway, can we make today a National Holiday?

:-)

Should Miers be rejected?

Well, I really don't have a definite answer on this subject. The woman might be a good lawyer, but no one really knows if she'll be a good judge.

However, this article discusses it with some hilarious bits that I had to post about:

Basically, I had about as much business talking down the qualifications of a presidential nominee as, oh, Harriet Miers has of being a Supreme Court justice. So, with that in mind, I realized that it's not really my place to say anything proving Harriet Miers to be unworthy of the high court, mainly because she and George Bush have been doing a pretty good job of it all by themselves.

For starters, let's look at this pair of "doozies" that came out last week:

"He is the smartest man I've ever met."
- Harriet Miers, about George W. Bush.
"I picked the best person I could find."
-President Bush, defending the selection of Harriet Miers as his latest nominee to the Supreme Court.

Well, at least they deserve each other. Looking at this, the only conclusions I can draw are that Harriet Miers has met about seven men in her entire life, and George W. Bush is very, very bad at looking for Supreme Court justices. That happy little exchange is only the tip of the iceberg in the Bush-Miers love fest: documents surfaced last week that revealed, among other things, that Miers gave then-Texas Governor Bush a birthday card that read:

"Dear Governor GWB, you are the best governor ever - deserving of great respect!"

The best governor ever? That's quite a statement to make, declaring George W. Bush not only the best governor in the nation, but the greatest governor in all of history. I'm sure Miers did a lot of research in moving Gov. Bush to the head of the all-time governors list, besting people like Thomas Dewey, Franklin Roosevelt, and Pontius Pilate. Either that, or she was fawning over the President like a high school girl (she also wrote him a note that year saying she thought he was "cool"). Either way, it's that kind of snap, absolutist judgment and/or disregard for history that I like to see in a Supreme Court justice.

Not to be outdone, the President responded with a note that said he appreciated Miers' friendship and "sage advice," but added a post script that read "p.s. no more public scatology." For those of you wondering, "scatology" is defined as "the study of fecal excrement or excretory functions." I'm not one to pass judgment on what people do with their spare time, but if Miers is really into this scatology stuff, at least we'll have a good idea on where she stands on the Right to Privacy.

Hysterical.

Anyway, the article also makes the point, very interesting, that Bush's reasoning (or lack thereof) in picking Miers could be unconstitutional because based on her religious affiliation, something specifically prohibited by Article VI of the Constitution.

Imagine if the Senate rejects her precisely for the reason Bush picked her.

Iraq is in chaos

No matter how tomorrow's vote goes, Iraq might be a lost cause. Only time (lots of it) will tell how it will turn out to be. This Independent article by Robert Fisk, a Middle East correspondent, is quite sobering, more proof of Bush's rising mound of lies:

Most of Iraq is in a state of anarchy, with insurgents controlling parts of Baghdad just half a mile from the so-called Green Zone, an Independent debate was told last night..

He told the debate in London: "The Americans must leave Iraq and they will leave Iraq, but they can't leave Iraq and that is the equation that turns sand to blood. At some point, they will have to talk to the insurgents.

"But I don't know how, because those people who might be negotiators - the United Nations, the Red Cross - their headquarters have been blown up. The reality now in Iraq is the project is finished. Most of Iraq, except Kurdistan, is in a state of anarchy."

He said that the portrayal of Iraq by Western leaders - of efforts to introduce democracy, including Saturday's national vote on the country's proposed constitution -­ was "unreal" to most of its citizens. In Baghdad, children and women were kept at home to prevent them from being kidnapped for money or sold into slavery. They faced a desperate struggle to find the money to keep generators running to provide themselves with electricity. "They aren't sitting in their front rooms discussing the referendum on the constitution."

I think television connives with governments at war." He added: "Newspapers can tell you as closely as they can what these horrors are like."

Fisk was also asked about the implications of publishing graphic images of the dead. This was his reply:

He rejected suggestions that graphic pictures of the dead in newspapers took away their dignity. He said: "My view is the people who are dead would want us to record what happened to them."

I agree. If I were brutally murdered, I'd like for it to be known, and possibly investigated to its full extent.

The H5N1 threat spreads to Europe

This deadly strain of avian flu isn't confined to Asia anymore. It has apparently spread to Europe after it has been found in birds in Romania and Turkey:

EU states have been urged to stockpile anti-viral drugs after confirmation that the bird flu virus found in Turkey is the H5N1 strain dangerous to humans.

EU Health Commissioner Markos Kyprianou said the European Union should be ready for a potential flu pandemic.

It came after tests on dead birds from Kiziksa, north-west Turkey, confirmed the H5N1 strain. An outbreak in Romania is assumed to be the same, the EU said.

The commissioner confirmed the virus found in Turkey was the deadly strain, adding: "There is a direct relationship with viruses found in Russia, Mongolia and China."

This really scares me. How long before it starts jumping from human to human like the common cold? Can you imagine a cold so deadly that you can die in a few days and can be spread by breathing infected air or touching infected surfaces?

Unimaginable.

Iraqi Constitution update

Well, this is getting complicated to follow. According to this BBC article, the constitution approval in Saturday's referendum is all but ensured, in spite of the eleventh-hour intervention of the Iraqi parliament meant to sugarcoat it for the Sunnis and trick them into not rejecting it.

First, there are issues of security in the Sunnis territories, the heart of the insurgency, that might impede many eligible voters from casting their votes:

Senior Western officials believe the credibility of the referendum is on the line.

If significant numbers of the Sunni minority are not able to cast their ballots, they fear the entire process could be undermined.

After largely boycotting last January's parliamentary elections, this time the Sunni community is mobilising to vote because it knows how much is at stake.

Then, then there is the whole issue of how the Sunnis will vote as a block:

Political and religious leaders - both moderate and radical - are united in calling on their community to vote No in the referendum.

The biggest fear not only of the Sunnis but also of Western officials and even some members of the Shia dominated government, is that the draft constitution could exacerbate sectarian violence and ultimately result in the break-up of the country along religious and ethnic lines.

And then there is the federalism issue:

Under the federal system envisaged in the draft constitution, the central government in Baghdad would only have exclusive control over foreign, defence and financial policy. Baghdad would not even have control over the police, nor oil and gas fields which come on-stream in the future.

Critically, the draft constitution also allows provinces which have not already come together to form a region to do so after holding a referendum.

The Kurds already have their own autonomous region in the north and want it extended to include the oil-rich area around Kirkuk. The Sunnis suspect the Shia want to establish their own region in the south including the huge Rumayla oil-fields which produce 1.6 million barrels per day. That would leave the minority Sunnis with a land-locked region in the centre of the country consisting mostly of desert and bereft of natural resources.

Little wonder the Sunnis are desperate to vote against the draft constitution being offered up in Saturday's referendum.

No wonder at all. I'd vote no as well. But the leaders of the Sunni community are concerned that even if they do get the maximum turn-out, the vote would still be extremely tight, unless some Shia groups join the no-camp at the last minute. And no one really knows how likely that is.

And this little tidbit to finish it all off:

Even the spokesman for the Shia prime minister, Leith Kubba, seems to hope the constitution will be rejected in Saturday's vote or at the very least re-written if it passes.

What a mess. Saturday is going to be an interesting day.

France takes action against obesity

I recently posted about the efforts being made in the UK to reduce the threat of obesity on the population (mainly by ridding school cafeterias of junk food.) I now found an article in Time magazine that indicates the French are taking similar actions:

Over the pat decade, the obesity rate among French children has doubled, from 6% to 12%, and between 1997 and 2003 the percentage of overweight and obese adults jumped from 37% to 42%. That growth curve parallels the one in the U.S. about 10 years ago.

The French are ahead of us in one important way: they have launched an ambitious state-sponsored effort to head off weight gain before it reaches American proportions. Le Guen is backing several bills in the National Assembly that would regulate diet and exercise nation-wide. Starting this fall, vending machines will be banned from all public schools and universities.

Ten cities have adopted a school curriculum based on eating well and in moderation.

So Britain has learned the lesson by seeing what happened in the States, and has taken action. France has learned the lesson by seeing what happened in the States, and has taken action. Why hasn't the federal government in the States learned the lesson by looking at itself in the mirror and taken any action? Several states are enacting legislation to rid schools of junk food, but where is the federal government involvement in the effort?

I guess Bush is busy riding his bike, so he can't deal with the obesity crisis facing the nation. Plus, if he acted, his fat-cat friends in the food industry would lose millions, and he can't let that happen!

The Amazing Bore

Ray and I caught up with this show and are both very disappointed. As I feared, given the logistical difficulties of moving 4-member teams instead of 2-member teams, this edition of The Amazing Race is, simply put, boring.

The teams haven't left the States yet, although that usually happens within the first half of the first episode and this was episode three. The destinations are always within a few hundred miles at most, and nothing is too hard to find (unless you're a moron, or you're not paying any attention to what you're doing, or you're completely clueless, which some teams are.) Suffice it to say that the race started in New York City and they are now in Alabama. If I drove for 3 days (the length of the race so far, more or less,) I'd have crossed half the country already by now.

Furthermore, the makeup of the teams is a liability in itself. Since there had to be 4 related members, I believe some people got dragged into the race by family member eager to do it, probably against their will. That at least is how the Paolo family's mother looks like she feels. Same goes for some of the kids. Maybe they are eager to race, but they can't be expected to take on some challenges, like driving a car through a field of mud, which, in turn, forces the parents to do all those tasks. As a result, one of the two families with young kids was out the first episode, after the youngest kid couldn't row a boat as hard as his father. Go figure.

The last episode had the pit stop right next to the last task, which could be performed only by one team at a time in the order of arrival. That meant that the last team to perform the task was likely going to be the last to reach the pit stop, which is exactly what happened. Where is the suspense?

Note to the producers: the family-edition sucks. What's done is done, since the race is over by now, but if the show gets renewed (a challenge in itself after a showing like this -- I wonder how low the ratings will sink before it's over,) you might want to go back to the regular 2-member teams for the next one.

Too bad, since it even won an Emmy for Best Reality Show just a month ago.