Saturday, September 25, 2010

Human Trafficking? I don't know, but definetly illegal!

I don't know who makes up these headlines but the story gives no clue as to the subject "human trafficking".  Does the reporter know something more than, "they say may be part of human trafficking ring."?  Who are they and what is may?  Did the deputies say?
Did the investigaors say, "may be part of..."?  According to the story the investigaors had no clue where the illegals came from or where they were going.  If I were writing the story the headline would be, "Chase Leads Deputies To House Full Of Illegals"...just saying. ~ Norman E. Hooben 

Source: WOAI News

Chase leads deputies to possible human trafficking ring

SAN ANTONIO -- A chase led Bexar County deputies to a home they say may be part of human trafficking ring.

Deputies chased a stolen truck to a home in the 11,000 block of Jarrett Road in Far Southwest Bexar County around 11:00 a.m. Friday. The deputies found 17 illegal immigrants living inside the home in horrible conditions. Investigators believe the illegal immigrants were smuggled here and stayed cramped up inside the small home, sleeping wherever they could find space.

"The living conditions are pretty bad," said Sgt. R. Fletcher of the Bexar County Sheriff's Department. "And we're talking about 15 to 17 people in a 3 bedroom home."

Deputies got word a San Antonio company's F-250 truck was stolen and were tracking it using a GPS system. When officers stormed into the home, several of the immigrants ran out the back door.

"Three individuals that ran alerted us to start foot pursuit," Sgt. Fletcher said.

Even a nextdoor neighbor had no idea what was going on, until he saw men running and the police department's Eagle helicopter flying overhead.

"I just saw a guy running across my property," Benny Tijerina.

Investigators are now trying to find out where the illegals were picked up and where they were headed. They told News 4 WOAI they are questioning the owners of the home, and those owners will likely face charges.

Drink The's the law

Bonus Video

Not always news worthy, but what the heck...bristol palin

When The Mainstream Television Loses Viewers

I'm not sure if the photo below is a rendition of photo shop that includes the statement from Katie Couric after finding out she was a real loser.  Losing thousands of viewers certainly makes one wonder why anyone would want be informed by someone who leans in only one direction.  Then again if the photo is authentic and Katie just simply reacted to the ratings, her actions are just what one could expect...from a loser! ~ Norman E. Hooben

The following from: I Hate The Media

Network TV news bids a fond farewell to another 739,000 disgruntled viewers
September 25, 2010
The final ratings are in for the 2008-2009 TV season and it’s ugly. Viewers are abandoning network TV news even faster than millionaires are moving out of Manhattan. has the happy news:
The ratings are in the for just-completed 2009-2010 network evening news season. And when compared to 2008-2009 season, “NBC Nightly News” ABC’s “World News” and the “CBS Evening News” have lost a combined 739,000 Total Viewers and a combined 338,000 A25-54 viewers.
“Nightly News with Brian Williams,” which finishes at #1 for the 14th season in a row, lost the least: -138K Total Viewers (8.698M in 08-09 v. 8.560M in 09-10), while Katie Couric’s CBS program, lost the most: -343K (6.053M in 08-09 v 5.710M in 09-10). “World News” which saw Charles Gibson anchor the first few months of the season, and Diane Sawyer picking up in December, lost the most younger viewers: -221K (2.351M in 08-09 v. 2.130 in 09-10).
Remarkably, the 2008-2009 TV season included coverage of the 2008 presidential election and inauguration, which should have given viewership a boost.
So on broadcast TV, ABC News lost viewers. CBN News lost viewers. And NBC News lost viewers. On cable TV, MSNBC lost viewers. CNN lost viewers. And HLN lost viewers. Only Fox News gained viewers.
So here’s a serious question: Would all those left wing networks prefer losing every last viewer to providing balanced news coverage? Or will one of them finally see the light?
What do you think?
katie couric finger
And American TV viewers said, "Right back at you, Katie."

Friday, September 24, 2010

A Sad Day In even sadder day for America...The Department of Justice has fallen by the wayside...

The following from: Pajamas Media

American Hero: Coates Negates a Year of Justice Department Spin on New Black Panther Case
Posted By J. Christian Adams On September 23, 2010

It has been a very bad week for the dwindling number of people defending the dismissal of the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party by Eric Holder’s Justice Department. Today might have been the worst day of all. Former Voting Section Chief Christopher Coates testified to the United States Civil Rights Commission that Obama political appointees dismissed the case because they are opposed to enforcing civil rights laws in a racially neutral fashion.
And that was just the beginning.
In a dramatic hearing in Washington, D.C., Coates simply destroyed the year-long spin from the Justice Department regarding the dismissal. Coates is the former Voting Section chief, and served as lead attorney on the Black Panther case. He has practiced voting rights law longer than any other lawyer at the Justice Department. His testimony today was the worst possible nightmare for the Obama political officials responsible for the dismissal.
I testified before the Commission in July that Obama political appointee Julie Fernandes made it clear that the Voting Section at the Justice Department would not be bringing any more cases against traditional national racial minorities, like the members of the New Black Panthers. Under oath, Coates corroborated my testimony.
The public has been wondering for over a year why the case was dismissed. Coates testified why today:
[There is a] deep-seated opposition to the race-neutral enforcement of the Voting Rights Act against racial minorities and for the protection of whites who have been discriminated against.
Coates verified that the DOJ is infested with racially motivated hostility towards equal enforcement of the law. Like me, Coates testified about the history of open and pervasive hostility inside the Voting Section to protecting the rights of white voters. This hostility first emerged in the case against Ike Brown in Noxubee County, Mississippi, going back as far as 2004:
The opposition within the Voting Section to taking actions on behalf of white voters in Noxubee County, Mississippi, … was widespread.
Coates confirmed that senior managers didn’t even want to open the investigation into discrimination against white voters in Noxubee County:
The Deputy Chief who was leading that election coverage asked me: “can you believe that we are going to Mississippi to protect white voters?”
Coates described how his memoranda were doctored by former Voting Section Chief Joe Rich, confirming my testimony as well as an article that appeared here [1] at PJM this week.
Coates also testified that he was reprimanded by Acting Assistant Attorney General Loretta King when he asked attorneys in job interviews if they could enforce the law equally. Coates asked them if they were willing to enforce the law in a racially neutral fashion, regardless of the race of the wrongdoer, even if the wrongdoer was black. Naturally, this inquiry into the applicant’s sense of fairness greatly offended the racially obsessed King. Her agenda was quite different than Coates’ agenda. Coates testified he was summoned to the senior political offices for a tongue-lashing by King, and the interview questions Coates was asking had to go:
King took offense that I was asking such a question of job applicants and directed me not to ask it again because she does not support equal enforcement of the provisions of the Voting Rights Act.
King wanted like-minded attorneys who were corruptly willing to turn a blind eye toward racial discrimination committed by national racial minorities. Soon thereafter, Coates was stripped of his power even to interview applicants. King wasn’t taking any chances that fair-minded, law-abiding attorneys might slip through — only the corrupt need apply.
He testified, as I did, that Justice Department attorneys and staff flatly refused to work on cases where the wrongdoer was black:
[An attorney told Coates in] no uncertain terms that he had not come to the Voting Section to sue African American defendants. … One of the social scientists who worked in the Voting Section and whose responsibility it was to do past and present research into a local jurisdiction’s history flatly refused to participate in the investigation. On another occasion, a Voting Section career attorney informed me that he was opposed to bringing voting rights cases against African American defendants … until we reached the day when the socio-economic status of blacks in Mississippi was the same as the socio-economic status of whites living there.
All of the employees Coates discusses here are still employed by the Civil Rights Division.
I testified that DOJ officials have made inaccurate statements to the public, to Congress, and to the Civil Rights Commission about the NBPP dismissal. Coates agreed, and testified:
I do not believe the representations to this Commission accurately reflect what occurred in the NBPP case and do not reflect the hostile atmosphere that has existed within the Civil Rights Division for a long time against race-neutral enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.
Coates also said that he was testifying because the Department has made misrepresentations to Congress, to the Civil Rights Commission, and to the public, sometimes under oath.
Coates described the significance of these misrepresentations. He testified:
If incorrect representations are going to successfully thwart an inquiry into the systemic problems regarding race-neutral enforcement of the Voting Rights Act by the Civil Rights Division, problems that were manifested in the disposition of the NBPP case, that end is not going to be furthered or accomplished by my sitting silently by at the direction of my supervisors while incorrect information is provided. I do not believe that I am professionally, ethically, legally, much less, morally bound to allow such a result to occur.
Coates provided even more detail about a disgusting case of racially motivated harassment that occurred in the Voting Section:
A young African American who worked in the Voting Section as a paralegal volunteered to work on the Ike Brown case, and he later volunteered to work on the NBPP case. Because of his participation in the Ike Brown case, he and his mother, who was an employee in another Section of the Civil Rights Division, were harassed by an attorney in that other Section and by an administrative employee and a paralegal in the Voting Section.
The employees responsible for this disgusting behavior should be fired, or should resign in shame. The perpetrators know who they are — and so does the political leadership. They are not fit to work in the Civil Rights Division.
There was much howling and complaining about the Bush administration hiring attorneys without experience working for left-wing civil rights groups. But now the public learns the truth: perpetrators of genuine racial harassment and gangster intimidation infest the Civil Rights Division, worked for civil rights groups, and were not hired by the Bush administration. (Look for more details here at PJM in a future article about the individuals responsible.)
Coates also corroborated my testimony that Kristen Clarke of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund lobbied to have the lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party dismissed. How far this once proud civil rights organization has fallen. Kristen Clarke acted as an advocate for racist thugs.
Finally, Coates testified as I did that the Department is unwilling to use Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to protect a white minority. Indeed, he confirmed, the Department refuses to even conduct an analysis whether a voting change will harm a white minority in places like Noxubee County, Mississippi.
It is disingenuous for some in the media to ignore this spiraling scandal. It will be even harder for critics like Commissioner Abigail Thernstrom to ignore testimony like we heard today. Today offers reasonable people like Thernstrom a chance at a redeeming reversal of course. Coates said:
The final disposition of the NBPP case, even in the face of a default by the defendants, was caused by this incorrect view of civil rights enforcement, and it was intended to send a direct message to people inside and outside the Civil Rights Division. That message is that the filing of voting cases like the Ike Brown and the NBPP cases would not continue in the Obama administration. The disposition of the NBPP case was not required by the facts developed during the case or the applicable law, as has been claimed, but was because of this incorrect view of civil rights enforcement that is at war with the statutory language in the VRA and with racially fair enforcement of federal law.
Overall, Coates painted a picture of racially motivated lawlessness inside the Department of Justice. I testified about the same circumstances, and there are many others who could provide sworn accounts of the same racially corrupt state of affairs.
America has only heard from two of us, but there are many more who know the truth.
The Department would do well to admit wrongdoing and fix the problem, else they might suffer a cascade of current employees meeting with congressmen in preparation for potential hearings next year. Under law, DOJ staff cannot be fired for sharing information with members of Congress, such as Representatives Lamar Smith, Frank Wolf, or Darrell Issa. You can find their numbers on the internet.
While today was a particularly bad day for the Department and their deceitful spin about the New Black Panther dismissal, the rest of the week saw other significant developments. On Wednesday, Judicial Watch filed a new Freedom of Information Act lawsuit — they are seeking documents relating to the scope of direct White House involvement in the dismissal of the case.
Also on Wednesday, Mike Roman had a blockbuster piece that reveals Philadelphia New Black Panther Jerry Jackson, one of the polling place stormtroopers, is a felon in possession of a firearm. The Holder Justice Department is failing to enforce federal felon in possession statutes against Jackson, which make it a crime for him to possess a firearm.
Earlier in the week, Judicial Watch released logs, which I covered here at PJM [2], showing the Department has not been telling the truth about the extent of senior political appointee involvement in the dismissal. Instead of merely being informed about the decision of lower political appointees, the highest levels of the Justice Department were telling their underlings what they thought should be done. All along, the DOJ has characterized the dismissal as a disagreement between civil servants. This week we learned that testimony — sometimes under oath — was false.
Finally, the DOJ inspector general assured Republican Congressmen Frank Wolf and Lamar Smith that he was opening an investigation into whether the Voting Section enforces civil rights laws in a racially discriminatory fashion and harasses employees who bring cases like the New Black Panther lawsuit.
It was a very bad week for the DOJ.
Yet Americans have a new hero today. The extraordinary courage it took for Coates to risk his job, his career, even his safety to come forward and testify is extraordinary. Aspiring lawyers looking for a role model can find in Coates a noble reason to enter the profession.
We no longer must consult history for a lawyer-hero willing to take personal risk for sacred principles such as the rule of law and racial equality. Our age can claim Christopher Coates. My profession has not seen a hero like Coates since the giants of the civil rights movement convinced the courts to eradicate legal racial discrimination. Coates has dedicated a lifetime to following in their footsteps, to ensuring free access to the ballot.
Today, in the twilight of his career, America witnessed his finest hour.

Article printed from Pajamas Media:
URL to article:
URLs in this post:
[1] as well as an article that appeared here:
[2] which I covered here at PJM:

Hear Mark Levin talk about this >>Click Here<<  ...Note: Set the marker at the 11 minute mark. a pig's eye!

Making A Statement...maybe an understatement!

Breaking News...Queen asks for poverty handout!

The following from: The Independent

Queen tried to use state poverty fund to heat Buckingham Palace

Ministers were asked if money earmarked for schools, hospitals and low-income families could be used to meet soaring fuel bills
By Robert Verkaik
Friday, 24 September 2010
Documents disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act reveal that the Queen asked ministers for a poverty handout to help heat her palaces
Documents disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act reveal that the Queen asked ministers for a poverty handout to help heat her palaces

The Queen asked ministers for a poverty handout to help heat her palaces but was rebuffed because they feared it would be a public relations disaster, documents disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act reveal.
Royal aides were told that the £60m worth of energy-saving grants were aimed at families on low incomes and if the money was given to Buckingham Palace instead of housing associations or hospitals it could lead to "adverse publicity" for the Queen and the Government.
Aides complained to ministers in 2004 that the Queen's gas and electricity bills, which had increased by 50 per cent that year, stood at more than £1m a year and had become "untenable".

Thursday, September 23, 2010

The Redistibution Of Wealth ...a primer by Barack Husein Obama

They say we're morons...maybe we are!

Source: Campaign For Liberty

Breaking News: DISCLOSE Vote Today!
Posted by Tim Shoemaker on 09/22/10 09:42 AM
Last updated 09/23/10 10:22 AM

The Hill reports that Senate Democrats will once again attempt to shove the First Amendment-shredding DISCLOSE Act (a.k.a. The Establishment Protection Act) down our throats.  A top spokesman for Harry Reid, Jim Manley, tweeted this afternoon that the Senate would debate DISCLOSE tomorrow, with a vote likely Thursday. 
At the end of July, the liberty movement was able to hold off DISCLOSE by just one vote!  We knew they would bring it back up in an attempt to catch us off guard.  This is the time for the movement to stand tall in the face of statism and deal this bill a final blow.
For more information on this egregious affront to our personal liberties, visit our past blogs on the topic.  This bill will force non-profits like C4L to turn over a donor list to the federal government and make it publicly available on our website.  This will expose donors to "controversial" issue advocacy organizations to intimidation and harassment (every issue is controversial to someone).  It would force organizations to adopt needless layers of bureaucracy in order to comply with the paperwork and filing deadlines of the new bill.  It will restrict our free speech by placing vague, arbitrary restrictions on the language of our communications (even with our own members).  Additionally, it further blurs the line between issue advocacy and express endorsements of a candidate, leaving the determination up to the federal government.  
C4L's Kevin Brett put together the following video just before the Senate voted in July recapping the House debate and providing some insight into why the Democrats are pushing such legislation now.

Contact your senators today and demand they OPPOSE DISCLOSE!

Comparative Analysis: Morning vs Mourning

As is from Monkey In The Middle

Mourning In America

Hat tip to Wake Up America

In 1984, the Reagan reelection campaign set the standard for modern political advertising with its fabled "Morning in America" series, which included one of the greatest political ads of all time -- "Better, Prouder, Stronger." The ad captured the zeitgeist -- America under President Reagan was coming back, full of optimism and confidence in the future.

Today, the zeitgeist is exactly the opposite. Americans are worried about their future, and about a government determined to implement policies that just don't work. But like its predecessor, "Mourning in America" offers a new hope -- if we can just get our government to return to time-tested policies that can spark a rebirth of liberty.


The Original Morning

How have times changed!

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Randomly came across this... - You don't have it so bad after all. - Also, two eyewitnesses; the commentator and the commenter.

Source: Notes From Abroad

Power Perspective

I read an article recently about power interruptions in Maryland. People were complaining that over a six month period, the power had flickered off for ten seconds or so -- more than half a dozen times. Other outages lasted a few minutes or an hour.

If only we experienced those outages in Timor!

Power interruptions are a daily occurrence. Today, the power went off around lunch time -- it's now 7:30pm and it's still off.  Yesterday, the power was off for five hours -- the day before -- 4 hours -- and so on and so on.

No one seems to know why the power goes out so often.

It used to be better. It only went off on Sundays for about five hours. Now, it's daily.

But we're lucky here in Dili compared to those living in the districts. Their power is on from 6pm until midnight -- every day.

Let's hear it for backup generators!


Storm'n Norm'n said...
I used to live in Belpasso, Sicily back in '78. The owner of the condo we rented would turn the heat on when it got pretty cold in the 7 PM til 10 PM...the remainder of the time had to be spent wrapped in blankets or clothed like you were outside. Another thing that I experienced while living on that Island is that marble floors radiate cold like you would not believe...especially when there's no insulation below. Lucky that the winters are very short...even though it was more than halfway up Mount Etna...the volcano, but that's another story. Norm


I saw a little boy dragged by a taxi this morning.

It is not easy to write about -- I didn't actually see the taxi hit the child -- what I witnessed or heard, first,  was a muffled, scraping sound -- then I saw something stuck under the car -- being dragged on the asphalt. Then, I heard frantic shouts from someone in a red shirt running toward the car.

At first, I thought it was a piece of cardboard under the car -- then it appeared to be a dog. The car didn't immediately stop and once it did -- the boy's body lay in the middle of the street. He wasn't moving. The taxi driver reluctantly stopped some 10 yards up the road. I say reluctantly because he kept slowing down and then finally stopped.

A man, presumably the father or a relative, in the red shirt, ran screaming and crying into the street and hugged the boy's body -- other witnesses stopped traffic -- and several people approached the driver -- who didn't immediately get out of the car.Still others ran to help the child.

It happened just after sunup this morning -- and there were a number of others who witnessed this horrible tragedy and came running to offer help.

I still find it difficult to believe and process what I witnessed -- all in a matter of seconds.

I don't know the details of what happened -- for instance -- how fast the taxi was moving -- although when I noticed it -- the car was moving slowly. I also don't know if the child was crossing the street or playing in the street.  I did see the taxi driver's face -- just after the boy's body cleared the under-part of the car -- and from his expression -- he appeared not to know what he'd hit.

I don't know if the child survived -- although his little body appeared lifeless.


Storm'n Norm'n said...
I once witnessed a jeep hitting a child..saw the entire incident! It was downtown Saigon around 1970 or '71. While walking with three Air Force officers one of them exclaimed, "That kid! He's going to get hit!" And at an instant, I turned to witness the horrible event. A Vietnamese military jeep struck the young lad with the passenger side of the vehicle...the bumber hit somewhere in the hip or waist area knocking the child down into a prone (face down) position. Instinctively the child raised his head has the right front wheel ran over his chest thus slamming the the head into the pavement. The rear wheel repeated the roll-over before the jeep came to a stop. An adult rushed to grasp the child in her arms but as we could judge from our distance the child was already dead. All these years and I still remember the details...forgot them for awhile until you reminded me with this post. This is the first time I've been to your blog and I got here by starting at my blog and simply clicking 'Next Blog' at the top of the page. Norm

Harry Reid Can't Be Serious...but he is! - Islam the religion of peace?...not hardly!

What planet does Harry Reid Live on?

Harry Reid: I Have Two Serious Muslim Friends

Imam Harry Reid extols the virtues of Islam. Apparently, Reid knows two Muslim doctors who actually treat patients, unlike Muslim doctors who blow up on subways in London. This is good news, of sorts, but burning the Koran is at least as legal as planting an Islamic supremacist mosque at Ground Zero.
Say Harry!  Say Harrieeeee!  Here's one of those "...misdirected guys around the world" Check 'em out!  This guy is definetly giving the religion a bad name!

Harry, In case you missed some of the virtues of Islam let me bring you up to date...

1.  More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.
2.  Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years.
3.  More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland.
4.  Nineteen Muslim hijackers killed more innocents in two hours on September 11th than the number of American criminals executed in the last 65 years.
According to Qur’an 3:167, Muslims who refuse to fight in the name of Allah are hypocrites. Believers answer the call of Jihad to fight in Allah’s cause. Muhammad, Islam’s only Prophet, labels non-believers “infidels” – enemies of Allah. He orders Muslims to fight, murder and enslave them until the whole world surrenders to Islam. The order to fight infidels is clear, open ended and retractable only by Allah.
Qur’an 8:039 – And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah.
Qur’an 9:005 – Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush.
1) In 1968, Sen. Robert Kennedy was shot and killed by:
Answer: A Muslim, male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40
2) In 1972 at the Olympics in Munich, Germany, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
3) In 1979, the U.S embassy in Iran was taken over by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

4) During the 1980s, a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

5) In 1983, U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut were blown up by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

6) In 1985, the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70-year-old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

7) In 1985, TWA Flight 847 was hijacked in Athens, and a U.S. Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

8) In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

9) In 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

10) In 1998, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

11) On Sept. 11, 2001, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Center. Of the remaining two, one crashed into the U.S. Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by: Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

12) In 2002, the U.S. fought a war in Afghanistan against:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

13) In 2002, reported Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
Answer: Muslim, male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

Footnote: At Fort Hood, Texas, another Muslim, 39, killed 13 people and wounded 30 others.

Coming to your nation's capitol...

Egyptians See Themselves In New Leadership Role...are they trying to fool you or themselves

Source: CNN
Altered photograph in Egyptian newspaper continues to make waves
From Ben Wedeman, CNN
September 17, 2010 -- Updated 1731 GMT (0131 HKT)
  • The newspaper swaps the picture to show Mubarak leading the group
  • The original picture has Obama walking ahead
  • Al-Ahram reflects the position of the Egyptian government
  • Egypt
  • Hosni Mubarak
Cairo, Egypt (CNN) -- Three days after an Egyptian newspaper ran an altered photograph that suggested President Hosni Mubarak led the recent Middle East peace talks, the digital manipulation continues to make waves here.
"I'm amazed at the reaction," said blogger Wael Khalil, who first spotted the altered photograph, on Friday. "Why is everyone so surprised at this?"
On Tuesday, the government-majority owned Al-Ahram newspaper published a picture showing Mubarak leading U.S. President Barack Obama, Jordanian King Abdullah, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the red carpet, with the words "The route to Sharm Al-Sheikh" beneath it. The phrase referred to the Sharm Al-Sheikh peace talks on that same day.
The original photo, taken September 1, had Obama leading the group. Khalil discovered the altered image had swapped Mubarak for Obama.
Read my blog on why the doctored photo flap is a lesson to old media
Altered picture published in Al-Ahram
Al-Ahram generally reflects the position of the government. Editor Osama Saraya wrote Friday that the controversial picture was "expressive" and it underscored Egypt's historic role in the peace process.
But Hisham Qasim, an independent newspaper publisher and human rights activist, did not mince words.
"The editors of Al-Ahram have gone over the top. They are making Mubarak look silly worldwide," he said. "It's amazing how much coverage Mubarak is getting. It has become the joke of journalism.
"I don't know what the editors can do. Any explanation will make them look even sillier," he added.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Dead Fish.....dead fish, dead fish, dead fish, etc., etc., etc.

Source: ABC News
Fish Kill
Fish carcasses from a major fish kill in Louisiana's Plaquemines Parish are shown here. (Courtesy Kurt Fromherz/Plaquemines Parish )
Fish Kill
Plaquemines Parish officials said a request for extensive testing has been made to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association and the Environmental Protection Agency. (Courtesy Kurt Fromherz/Plaquemines Parish )
Fish Kill
Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser asked the Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries to investigate the fish kill. "We can't continue to see these fish kills," he said. "We need some additional tests to find out why these fish are dying in large numbers. If it is low oxygen, we need to identify the cause." (Courtesy Kurt Fromherz/Plaquemines Parish )
Fish Kill
Some of the dead fish found floating in the Bayou Chaland area were pogies, redfish, shrimp, crabs and freshwater eels. (Courtesy Kurt Fromherz/Plaquemines Parish )
Fish Kill
Since the BP oil spill, Louisiana's Bayou Chaland area has been heavily affected but the cause of the fish kill has yet to be determined. (P. J. Hahn/Plaquemines Parish Coastal Zone Management/Reuters)
Fish Kill
Officials with Louisiana's Plaquemines Parish are investigating why hundreds of thousands of dead fish were found in the Bayou Chaland area of the state, which is west of the Mississippi River. Workers with the Plaquemines Parish Inland Waterways Strike Force discovered the massive fish kill Sept. 10, 2010, and reported it to the Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries. (P. J. Hahn/Plaquemines Parish Coastal Zone Management/Reuters)


Monday, September 20, 2010

Women On Target...What did you do this weekend?

All snapshots are included in the slide show below.
To save a photo double click on the slide show and then
right click on the picture to "save as".


Sunday, September 19, 2010

When letters from Democrat nominees read like this maybe they can see the...

September 16, 2010
Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Office of the Speaker
H-232, US Capitol
Washington, DC  20515

Dear Speaker Pelosi,

I am the Democratic nominee to fill the 6th Congressional District seat being vacated by Congressman Bart Gordon.  I am writing to request that you not seek the Speaker’s position during your next term and make your intention not to seek this leadership position public.

Let me explain my perspective.  Voters in my district believe that you do not represent their values, and my opposition has little to offer apart from critiquing your leadership.   While I could reference numerous examples of this trend, one reporter summarized the challenge: “a highly intelligent, well spoken and charismatic figure, Carter has all of the intrinsic skill set necessary to be a successful candidate…. But for all of the skill, abilities and compelling life stories, there is still one seemingly unshakable albatross hanging around the neck of Brett Carter – Nancy Pelosi.” (Stephen Shirley, Daily News Journal, 9/12/10).  I take no pleasure in being the bearer of this news, but sadly, it is the reality we face.

Brett R. Carter
Democratic Nominee
6th Congressional District, TN

Read full contents of letter here

"unfortunate timing for Obama"

"The number of people in the US who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on President Barack Obama's watch..."
The following headline caught my eye:
World poverty falling sharply but patchily
The source points out that the gains made by the poor can be contributed "...from robust economic growth in countries such as China and India, the world's two most populous countries."  It (The New Zealand Herald) describes some of the poorest sections in China and other places while emphasising other United Nations provided data.  (side note: IMHO The UN has too much influence in New Zealand...and I don't trust them for a minute...the UN that is!).  You can read the full story here but I have a slightly different take on the rationale behind the story.
Sure those with the improved status of living standards are deserving of anything that comes their way down the economic highway.  But where did that growth come from in China?  Have you ever heard of Wal-Mart ?  Of  course you have...the world knows Wal-Mart!  And who in the world knows Wal-Mart best?  That's right, China!  Wal-Mart is probably China's biggest customer; which makes you, the Wal-mart shopper, China's biggest paver of economic highways.  So there!  The New Zealand Herald should rewrite their story and give credit where credit is due.  The headline then should read, "World Poverty Falling Sharply Thanks To Wal-Mart Shoppers" 
Now what does all this have to do with Obama...  Well at the same link that I found the first headline I also discovered this, "Rising Tide Of US Poverty Nears 60's Levels".  You can read the entire story as soon as I finish my little rant right here. 
There's something about that heading that created a scenario that has some scientific backing. "Rising Tide" mmm, I'm sure that means that somewhere else is experiencing an "ebb tide" (the opposite of rising tide).   So one can equate (not to be confused with the Wal-Mart brand) from the combined stories that when Americans are sinking into poverty the Chinese are climbing the ladder of success.  But hey, the tide always changes...and I'll be looking forward for the change in November.  ~ Norman E. Hooben
Rising tide of US poverty near 60s levels By Hope Yen and Liz Sidoti Sep 15, 2010
The rate of America's working-age poor is expected to hit its highest since Lyndon Johnson launched the war on poverty. Photo / AP

The rate of America's working-age poor is expected to hit its highest since Lyndon Johnson launched the war on poverty. Photo / AP

WASHINGTON - The number of people in the US who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on President Barack Obama's watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels.
Census figures for 2009 - the recession-ravaged first year of his presidency - are about to be released and demographers expect grim findings.
It's unfortunate timing for Obama and his party just seven weeks before important elections when control of Congress is at stake. The anticipated poverty rate increase - from 13.2 per cent to about 15 per cent - would be another blow to Democrats struggling to persuade voters to keep them in power.
"The most important anti-poverty effort is growing the economy and making sure there are enough jobs out there," Obama said.
He stressed his commitment to helping the poor achieve middle-class status and said: "If we can grow the economy faster and create more jobs, then everybody is swept up into that virtuous cycle."
Demographers found wide consensus that 2009 figures are likely to show a significant rate increase to the range of 14.7 per cent to 15 per cent. Should those estimates hold true, about 45 million people in the United States, or more than 1 in 7, were poor last year.
It would be the highest single-year increase since the Government began calculating poverty figures in 1959. The previous high was in 1980 when the rate jumped 1.3 percentage points to 13 per cent during the energy crisis.
Among the 18-64 working-age population, the demographers expect a rise beyond 12.4 per cent, up from 11.7 per cent. That would make it the highest since at least 1965, when another Democratic president, Lyndon Johnson, launched the war on poverty that expanded the federal government's role in social welfare programmes from education to healthcare.
Demographers are also confident the report will show:
* Child poverty increased from 19 per cent to more than 20 per cent.
* Blacks and Latinos were disproportionately hit, based on their higher rates of unemployment.
* Metropolitan areas that posted the largest gains in poverty included Modesto, California; Detroit; Cape Coral-Fort Myers, Florida; Los Angeles and Las Vegas.
"My guess is that politically these figures will be greeted with alarm and dismay but they won't constitute a clarion call to action," said William Galston, a domestic policy aide for President Bill Clinton.
"I hope the parties don't blame each other for the desperate circumstances of desperate people. That would be wrong in my opinion. But that's not to say it won't happen."
Lawrence Mead, a New York University political science professor who is a conservative and wrote The New Politics of Poverty: The Nonworking Poor in America, argued that the figures would have a minimal impact in November.
"Poverty is not as big an issue right now as middle-class unemployment."
But if Friday's report is as troubling as expected, Republicans in the midst of an increasingly strong drive to win control of the House, if not the Senate, would get one more argument to make against Democrats in the campaign home stretch.
The Republicans say voters should fire Democrats because Obama's economic fixes are hindering the sluggish economic recovery. Rightly or wrongly, Republicans could cite a higher poverty rate as evidence.
Democrats almost certainly will argue that they shouldn't be blamed. They're likely to counter that the economic woes - and the poverty increase - began under President George W. Bush with the near-collapse of the financial industry in late 2008.
Although that's true, it's far from certain that the Democratic explanation will sway voters who already are trending heavily toward the Republicans in polls as worrisome economic news piles up.
Hispanics and blacks - traditionally solid Democratic constituencies - could be inclined to stay home in November if, as expected, the Census Bureau reports that many more of them were poor last year.
Beyond this fall, the findings could put pressure on Obama to expand government safety net programmes ahead of his likely 2012 re-election bid even as Republicans criticise him about federal spending and annual deficits. Those are areas of concern for independent voters whose support is critical in elections.
Experts say a jump in the poverty rate could mean that the liberal viewpoint - social constraints prevent the poor from working - will gain steam over the conservative position that the poor have opportunities to work but choose not to because they get too much help.
"The Great Recession will surely push the poverty rate for working-age people to a nearly 50-year peak," said Elise Gould, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute. She said that means "it's time for a renewed attack on poverty".
To Douglas Besharov, a University of Maryland public policy professor, the big question is whether there's anything more to do to help these families.
The 2009 forecasts are largely based on historical data and the unemployment rate, which climbed to 10.1 per cent last October to post a record one-year gain.
The projections partly rely on a methodology by Rebecca Blank, a former poverty expert who now oversees the census. She estimated last year that poverty would hit about 14.8 per cent if unemployment reached 10 per cent. "As long as unemployment is higher, poverty will be higher," she said.
A formula by Richard Bavier, a former analyst with the White House, predicts poverty will reach 15 per cent. That would be the highest level since 1993.
The all-time high was 22.4 per cent in 1959, the first year the Government began tracking poverty. It dropped to a low of 11.1 per cent in 1973 after Johnson's war on poverty but has since fluctuated in the 12-14 per cent range.
In 2008, the poverty level stood at US$22,025 ($30,174) for a family of four, based on an official government calculation that includes only cash income before tax deductions.
It excludes capital gains or accumulated wealth. It does not factor in noncash government aid such as tax credits or food stamps, which have surged to record levels in recent years under the federal stimulus programme.
Beginning next year, the government plans to publish new, supplemental poverty figures that are expected to show even higher numbers of people in poverty than previously known.
The figures will take into account rising costs of medical care, transportation and childcare, a change analysts believe will add to the ranks of both seniors and working-age people in poverty.