John Edwards: Family Man Times Two?

When the National Enquirer broke the story of John Edwards' mistress, Rielle Hunter, and his love child, I defended Edwards.

I thought Edwards, who was in the hunt for the Dem presidential nomination at the time, was the latest victim of silly, tabloid trash.

I said I didn't for one minute believe that Edwards would cheat on his wife, especially given her health situation.

During their marriage, they've faced tragedies and challenges together. I couldn't imagine Edwards doing that to her.

Now there's a new chapter in the Edwards saga, also brought to you by the National Enquirer.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS CAUGHT WITH MISTRESS AND LOVE CHILD!

Vice Presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards was caught visiting his mistress and secret love child at 2:40 this morning in a Los Angeles hotel by the NATIONAL ENQUIRER.

The married ex-senator from North Carolina - whose wife Elizabeth continues to battle cancer -- met with his mistress, blonde divorcée Rielle Hunter, at the Beverly Hilton on Monday night, July 21 - and the NATIONAL ENQUIRER was there! He didn't leave until early the next morning.

Rielle had driven to Los Angeles from Santa Barbara with a male friend for the rendezvous with Edwards. The former senator attended a press event Monday afternoon with L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on the topic of how to combat homelessness.

But a months-long NATIONAL ENQUIRER investigation had yielded information that Rielle and Edwards, 54, had arranged to secretly meet afterward and for the ex-senator to spend some time with both his mistress and the love child who he refuses to publicly acknowledge as his own.

The story of the rendezvous and Edwards' early morning departure from the hotel reads a bit like a screwball comedy.

At 9:45 p.m. (PST) Monday, Edwards appeared at the hotel, and was dropped off at a side entrance. NATIONAL ENQUIRER reporter Alan Butterfield witnessed the ex-senator get out of a BMW driven by a male companion and stroll into the hotel.

Said Butterfield: "Edwards was not carrying anything. He walked in alone. He was wearing a blue dress shirt with the sleeves rolled up. He was looking around nervously before he entered the hotel.

"Once inside, he interestingly bypassed the lobby and ducked down a side stairs to go to the bottom floor to catch the elevator up - rather than taking the elevator in the main lobby. He went out of his way not to be seen."

Meanwhile, Rielle had reserved rooms 246 and 252 under the name of the friend who had accompanied her from Santa Barbara, Bob McGovern. Rielle was in one room and McGovern was in another with her baby. This allowed her and Edwards to spend time alone, a source revealed.

Edwards went out of the hotel briefly with Rielle, they were observed by the NATIONAL ENQUIRER and then went back to her room, where he stayed until attempting to sneak out of the hotel unseen at 2:40 a.m. (PST). But when he emerged alone from an elevator into the hotel basement he was greeted by several reporters from the NATIONAL ENQUIRER.

Senior NATIONAL ENQUIRER Reporter Alexander Hitchen asked Edwards why he was visiting Rielle and whether he was ready to confirm that he was the father of her baby.

Shocked to see a reporter, and without saying anything, Edwards ran up the stairs leading from the hotel basement to the lobby. But, spotting a photographer, he doubled back into the basement. As he emerged from the stairwell, reporter Butterfield questioned him about his hookup with Rielle.

Edwards did not answer and then ran into a nearby restroom. He stayed inside for about 15 minutes, refusing to answer questions from the NATIONAL ENQUIRER about what he was doing in the hotel. A group of hotel security men eventually escorted him from the men's room, while preventing the NATIONAL ENQUIRER reporters from following him out of the hotel.

Said reporter Hitchen: "After we confronted him about seeing Rielle, Edwards looked like a deer caught in headlights!

..."Some guests up at this late hour watched the spectacle in amusement from a staircase nearby."

I have difficulty believing that Edwards would arrange to see his alleged mistress and baby in a hotel in LA.

Certainly a more discreet location could have been the site of the meeting.

And then Edwards attempting to slip out of the hotel, thwarted by Enquirer reporters and a photographer, the running around, the hiding out in the restroom -- It's a goofy scene.

If Edwards was, in fact, holed up in the bathroom for 15 minutes, I'm sure an Enquirer photographer would have captured that. There would have been plenty of time.

One of the reporters could have taken photos or video on a cell phone.

It's strange to me that there's no photographic evidence of the episode.

However, the Enquirer seems bent on proving this story to be true. After all, it has been a "months-long investigation."

Moreover, I wouldn't think the Enquirer would want to mess with trial lawyer Edwards. It would be like begging for a lawsuit.

I don't buy the details of this latest account, but I am beginning to wonder about the alleged affair and the child.

I still don't want to believe that Edwards would betray his wife Elizabeth as she battles her disease. I would hope that he would have the decency to love and respect his wife and children as they deal with Elizabeth's health crisis.

Edwards did get kind of close to being a heartbeat away from the presidency of the United States. It's not good to think that someone next in line to be leader of the free world would be the type to have a Charles Kuralt thing going.

This revelation, true or not, does cast a dark shadow on Edwards, possibly making him less likely to have a role in what could be an Obama administration.

It's hard to say. The National Enquirer has been right, but it's been wrong.

I don't know what to believe. I know what I want to believe.

Richard Nehring and Ill-gotten Fruit

Why would a successful business owner risk all he has by engaging in felonious behavior?

Waukesha -- The owner of V. Richards Market and his produce manager knowingly purchased stolen produce to sell in the upscale Brookfield grocery store, according to felony charges filed against them Tuesday in Waukesha County Circuit Court.

Charges of receiving stolen property were filed against John E. Nehring, 55, of Wauwatosa — who also owns a Sendik’s store in Shorewood and G. Groppi Food Market in Milwaukee’s Bay View neighborhood — and his V. Richards produce manager, Angel Vasquez, 28, of Milwaukee.

The criminal complaint says the two paid $1,500 cash to a delivery driver for stolen cases of pineapple, peaches and boxes of Gala apples last summer. The produce included 70 cases of pineapples, 102 cases of peaches and 42 boxes of Gala apples, which in total were valued at $2,883, the complaint says.

...The fruit was stolen from the Milwaukee-based Tropic Banana Co., the complaint says. An employee of the N. Van Buren St. business confronted Nehring on Aug. 29 regarding the stolen produce, and both Nehring and Vasquez admitted to paying a driver for the stolen produce, according to the criminal complaint. Nehring told the employee that he would pay full price for the produce, the complaint says.

The driver, who has not been charged, told investigators that Vasquez asked him in July 2007 if he had anything he wanted to get rid of and that the store would give him a good price, the complaint says. The driver said he started taking items from the company’s warehouse and selling them to the store for cash. According to the complaint, all the stolen items were taken to V. Richards, the driver said.

The driver said Vasquez would call and give him a list of needed items, and the driver would deliver them once or twice a week. He sometimes would deliver the stolen items along with the legitimately purchased produce and other times deliver the stolen items separately, the complaint says.

I wonder if Nehring's penchant for knowingly purchasing stolen goods to sell in one of his stores only involved produce.

If he willingly accepted and sold stolen fruit, it's not much of a stretch to think he may have had a similar racket going with meat or other items.

A dishonest grocer -- That's disturbing.

I wonder what impact this will have on Nehring's stores and his employees.

They have to be concerned about the future of their jobs and their security.

Obama and the Surge and Afghanistan

Barack Obama's carefully orchestrated globetrotting has hit some bumps.

The media's saturation coverage of Obama on tour has uncovered some less than positive moments for Obama.

An interview with Terry Moran on ABC's World News showed that Obama isn't exactly as silver-tongued as he's been made out to be.

Transcript excerpt, from NewsBusters:

MORAN: This is Obama's second trip to Iraq. His first was in January 2006 when the country was plunged into horrific violence. But the surge of U.S. troops, combined with ordinary Iraqis' rejection of both al-Qaeda and Shiite extremists, has transformed the country. Attacks are down by more than 80 percent nationwide. U.S. combat casualties have plummeted -- five this month so far, compared with 78 last July. And Baghdad has a pulse again. If you had to do it over again, knowing what you know now, would you support the surge?

OBAMA: No, because, keep in mind that-

MORAN: You wouldn't?

OBAMA: Well, no, keep in mind, these kinds of hypotheticals are very difficult. You know, hindsight is 20/20. But I think that, what I am absolutely convinced of is that at that time, we had to change the political debate because the view of the Bush administration at that time was one that I just disagreed with.

What a lame answer!

This isn't hypothetical. It's a straightforward question: "Knowing what you know now, would you support the surge?"

The arrogant Obama refused to admit that he was wrong.

The surge was the right thing to do. It was good policy and produced good results.

Obama and his Dem cohorts were wrong. Rather than have the decency to acknowledge that his opposition was a mistake and take the opportunity to praise the accomplishments of the U.S. military, Obama stubbornly claims that he still was right to oppose the surge, now a proven success.

Obama didn't only have problems with Moran. Katie Couric wasn't rolling over for Obama. She questioned him about the surge and his incredibly stupid statements, as well as Afghanistan.

Couric deserves some credit for trying to get Obama to actually answer her questions, to provide answers with substance rather than fluff.

Transcript excerpt:

Couric: Before the surge, as you know, Senator, there were 80 to 100 U.S. casualties a month, the country was rife with sectarian violence, and you raised a lot of eyebrows on this trip saying even knowing what you know now, you still would not have supported the surge. People may be scratching their heads and saying, "Why?"

Obama: Well … because … what I was referring to, and I've consistently referred to, is the need for a strategy that actually concludes our involvement in Iraq and moves Iraqis to take responsibility for the country.

Couric: But didn't the surge …

Obama: And …

Couric: …help do that?

Obama: Let me finish, Katie. What happens is that if we continue to put $10 billion to $12 billion a month into Iraq, if we are willing to send as many troops as we can muster continually into Iraq? There's no doubt that that's gonna have an impact. But it doesn't meet our long-term strategic goal, which is to make the American people safer over the long term. If that means that we're detracting from our efforts in Afghanistan, where conditions are deteriorating, if it means that we are distracted from going after Osama bin Laden who is still sending out audio tapes and is operating training camps where we know terrorists' actions are being plotted.

If we have shifted away from the central front of terrorism as a consequence of enormous and continuing investments in Iraq, then that's a poor strategic choice. And ultimately, what we've got to do is - we have to recognize that Iraq is just one of our … security problems. It's not the only one.

We've got big problems in Afghanistan. We've got a significant threat in Iran. We've got to deal with Pakistan and the fact that there are safe havens there. Those are all the factors and all the issues that I've gotta take into account when I'm president of the United States.

Couric: All that may be true. But do you not give the surge any credit for reducing violence in Iraq?

Obama: No, no … of course I have. There is no doubt that the extraordinary work of our U.S. forces has contributed to a lessening of the violence, just as making sure that the Sadr militia stood down or the fact that the Sunni tribes decided to flip and work with us instead of with al-Qaeda - something that we hadn't anticipated happening.

All those things have contributed to a reduction in violence. So this, in no way, detracts from the great efforts of our young men and women in uniform. In fact, that's one of the most striking things about visiting Iraq is to see how dedicated they are, what a great job they do - all those things … are critically important. What I'm saying is it does not solve the broader strategic question that we have been dealing with over the last five, six, seven years. And that is how do we take the limited resources we have, both militarily and financially, and apply them in such a way that we are making America as safe as possible? And I believe that my approach is the right one.

Couric: But talking microcosmically, did the surge, the addition of 30,000 additional troops ... help the situation in Iraq?

Obama: Katie, as … you've asked me three different times, and I have said repeatedly that there is no doubt that our troops helped to reduce violence. There's no doubt.

Couric: But yet you're saying … given what you know now, you still wouldn't support it … so I'm just trying to understand this.

Obama: Because … it's pretty straightforward. By us putting $10 billion to $12 billion a month, $200 billion, that's money that could have gone into Afghanistan. Those additional troops could have gone into Afghanistan. That money also could have been used to shore up a declining economic situation in the United States. That money could have been applied to having a serious energy security plan so that we were reducing our demand on oil, which is helping to fund the insurgents in many countries. So those are all factors that would be taken into consideration in my decision-- to deal with a specific tactic or strategy inside of Iraq.

Couric: And I really don't mean to belabor this, Senator, because I'm really, I'm trying … to figure out your position. Do you think the level of security in Iraq …

Obama: Yes.

Couric: … would exist today without the surge?

Obama: Katie, I have no idea what would have happened had we applied my approach, which was to put more pressure on the Iraqis to arrive at a political reconciliation. So this is all hypotheticals. What I can say is that there's no doubt that our U.S. troops have contributed to a reduction of violence in Iraq. I said that, not just today, not just yesterday, but I've said that previously. What that doesn't change is that we've got to have a different strategic approach if we're going to make America as safe as possible.

Couric: If you believe, Senator, Afghanistan is, in fact, the central front in the war on terror, why was this your first trip there? And why didn't you hold a single hearing as chairman of the subcommittee that oversees the fighting force there?

Obama: Well, the, actually, the subcommittee that I chair is the European subcommittee. And any issues related to Afghanistan were always dealt with in the full committee, precisely because it's so important. That's not a matter that you would deal with in a subcommittee setting. And the fact that I didn't visit Afghanistan doesn't detract from my accurate assessment that this has been the central front on terror.

I've been saying for over a year that we need to have more troops there. My visit confirmed every commander on the ground saying we, in fact, do need the two or three brigades that I've been recommending there. The fact that we're not gonna be able to solve the problem in Afghanistan unless we deal with the border situation with Pakistan, something that I talked about over a year ago.

What I'm encouraged by is that there's been a growing consensus on both sides of the aisle that, in fact, we need to put more effort into Afghanistan. And I think that, you know, my hope is that whoever the next president is, that we're gonna get that policy right because it is absolutely critical for us being successful long term.

Way to go, Katie! It's about time someone pressed him to actually say something. He was getting a little ticked off because she expected him to address the matter of the surge in a straightforward manner.

Clearly, Obama displayed poor judgment when he originally opposed the surge.

And now, he's displaying poor judgment again, by failing to admit his mistake.

The surge worked. Be a man and deal with it rather than fumble around and avoid the truth. Obama comes off as sleazy because he was being sleazy.

There's more that's disturbing about what Obama has to say.

Obama yaps about Afghanistan being the central front in the war on terror. He claims that he has spent more than a year pushing for more troops there. Obama wants more effort in Afghanistan.

OK.

Too bad Obama's past voting record cannot be reconciled with his latest rhetoric.

Tim Sumner writes:

Last year, Obama repeatedly said the surge in Iraq would not work. In addition, Power Line’s John Hinderaker points out Senator Obama’s current rhetoric about Afghanistan does not match his past voting record:

Worst of all, far from being committed to victory in Afghanistan, Obama voted to cut off all funding for all of our military efforts in Afghanistan on May 24, 2007 (H.R. 2206, CQ Vote #181), thereby seeking to bring about defeat there as well as in Iraq. His current effort to portray himself as a wolf in sheep’s clothing on Afghanistan is a complete fraud.

Obama was wrong on the surge.

He's being dishonest about his position on Afghanistan.

If you want straight talk, don't expect it from Obama.

Nan Hegerty's Discrimination Suit Tossed

Former Milwaukee Police Chief Nan Hegerty followed in the tradition of another Milwaukee police chief and filed a discrimination lawsuit when she was replaced.

When Arthur Jones cried racial discrimination and sued the city, his two suits were dismissed.

History is repeating itself. Like Jones, Hegerty's suit has met the same fate.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

State officials investigating a gender discrimination complaint filed by former Milwaukee Police Chief Nannette Hegerty found no probable cause in her claim against the city and dismissed the case.

The Equal Rights Division of the state Department of Workforce Development also found that portions of the claim were not filed in a timely manner and determined that there was no reason to hold a formal hearing in the case, which Hegerty filed in March.

The dismissal of the claim will become final unless Hegerty submits a written appeal to the division.

Hegerty's attorney said this morning that his client will not appeal the dismissal.

John F. Fuchs noted in an e-mail statement this morning that Hegerty "brought this action merely to illustrate, and attempt to remedy, the phenomenon perpetuated by the MPD in which a female, whatever the reason or its technical legality, was compensated less for the same job as were her male predecessor and male successor."

Yeah, right.

Hegerty really wasn't interested in suing. She just "brought this action merely to illustrate, and attempt to remedy, the phenomenon perpetuated by the MPD in which a female... was compensated less for the same job as were her male predecessor and male successor."

Sure, that was all that she hoped to get from the lawsuit -- an opportunity to illustrate an injustice.

She didn't do that.

She only served to make her departure from the MPD less dignified. Very unfortunate.

The Media is in LOVE with Barack

Vote.

I like this one:

Lauren Aljubouri and Eric Tavulares

About Lauren Aljubouri:

Monday, one of Aljubouri’s favorite teachers remembered the promising, talented young artist. “We need more non-conformists like Lauren Aljubouri,” Arrowhead High School art teacher Matt Luebke said.

With a mentor’s pride, Luebke showed TODAY’S TMJ4 some of Aljubouri’s work, including the unfinished piece she was working on when she graduated, and an abstract self-portrait.

“She had it, she was very creative,” Luebke said.

Aljubouri planned to follow her passion at UWM’s Peck School of the Arts with aspirations of becoming a teacher herself. Anxious to move on, Aljubouri graduated Arrowhead High School in January, a semester early.

“She did it because she was done with high school. She learned what she needed to learn here and she was ready to go off into the world,” Luebke said.

Aljubouri's younger sister said Lauren looked at life with an artist’s eye. “She was very inspired by anything really that looks interesting. She’ll make her only little way on something,” Brittany Aljubouri said.

See some of Aljubouri's artwork in this video from TMJ4.

Here's more about Aljubouri:

Debbie Aljubouri said her daughter was independent, driven and intelligent, determined to pursue her passion for the arts at UWM.

Lauren Aljubouri had worked at Hartbrook Cafe in Hartland from the time she was 15 until June, painting a mural at the business just before she finished working there, her mother said. Lauren Aljubouri graduated early and with honors from her high school, she said.

Lauren Aljubouri handled her search for colleges on her own, telling her mother that all she needed to do was attend the registration session at UWM, Debbie Aljubouri said.

“There isn’t anything that girl couldn’t do, no matter what it was, and do it well,” Debbie Aljubouri said. “She just handled everything.”

Lauren Aljubouri moved into her apartment within the past few weeks, her mother said.

She had worked at Umami Moto, a Milwaukee restaurant, for about a month, said Omar Shaikh, an owner of the business.

“She was a wonderful girl, rather quiet, but a very dependable, hard worker,” Shaikh said. “She seemed like a young, happy girl.”

Sadly, the story of this talented young woman has an abrupt, horrific end.

Her family and her friends are dealing with a sudden, terrible loss.

Last night during a phone interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Aljubouri's mom sobbed and said, "We’re just absolutely devastated. She had so much promise in the future, and it’s such a tragic loss. "

She was strangled early on Saturday morning by her childhood sweetheart, Eric Tavulares.

Eric Tavulares was fascinated with the movie “Natural Born Killers.”

He told police he has seen it 10 or 20 times. He told police, according to a complaint filed Monday, that he had been watching it Friday night, the night he strangled his childhood sweetheart, 18-year-old Lauren Aljubouri.

According to the complaint:

Tavulares, also 18, told police he has had known Aljubouri since the second grade and that they had been dating on and off since the sixth grade.

Aljubouri, who graduated in January from Arrowhead High School in Waukesha County, got home around 10:45 p.m. Friday.

She and Tavulares lived in an apartment in the 2400 block of N. Frederick Ave., not far from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, where Aljubouri planned to study graphic design. Tavulares planned to study fire science at Milwaukee Area Technical College.

Tavulares told police they began watching “Natural Born Killers,” a 1994 movie directed by Oliver Stone in which the murder spree of two psychopathic lovers becomes a media obsession.

They stopped the movie about halfway, Tavulares said, and went to bed.

“He stated he does not recall exactly what happened next,” the complaint says, “but something caused him to switch mentally and he rolled over on Lauren Aljubouri and he began strangling her.”

Within three or four minutes, Tavulares said, Aljubouri was dead.

The murder of Lauren Aljubouri has been reported by local media for the past three days.

However, it was when Natural Born Killers came into the reports that this local story became a fascination for the national media.

The local media, too, have altered their take.

Now the emphasis is on Tavulares and his obsession with that incredibly violent movie, loosely based on a screenplay by Quentin Tarantino and directed by Oliver Stone.

Since its release in 1994, it has been cited as playing a role in a number of real life murders. Supposedly, people watch it and then flip out and kill. Apparently, it's inspiring in that way.

So the death of Lauren Aljubouri becomes another murder linked to Natural Born Killers.

I'm not saying that the media shouldn't report the facts of the case. Tavulares is saying the movie influenced him. It is what it is.

The problem that I have with this national attention and the change in the local coverage is that it shifts the focus to the lore of that movie and off of the very human loss of a daughter and sister and niece and friend.

More on Lauren Aljubouri:

Described by her father, Faiek Aljubouri, as “beautiful, determined, creative and very independent,” Lauren was self-taught on the guitar, loved to write and flourished in art.

“She was quite talented,” said Tom Miller, Aljubouri’s uncle and godfather.

She recently completed a mural at Hartbrook Cafe. Her artwork also was featured on the covers of an AHS school curriculum guide and for a school play, her mother said.

“There wasn’t anything that girl couldn’t do and do so well,” Debbie Aljubouri said.

Aljubouri is remembered as hard working, earning enough credits to graduate from high school early in January, and then working at Hartbrook Cafe until moving into her apartment in preparation for school.

“Everything she told me she’d do, she did it,” her father said. He said as an immigrant, “we all have dreams when we come here – she was my dream.”

In a letter of recommendation for Aljubouri, Sarah Johansen, an English teacher at AHS, wrote, “Though I only had Lauren in class for one semester, she left an indelible impression. She’s a young woman of extraordinary confidence and charisma who is impossible to forget.”

“She was just a good kid,” said Miller.

Killler Tavulares isn't such a good kid.

The suspect is also a former Hartland resident, who is on probation for possessing illegally obtained prescription drugs. Under a plea agreement with prosecutors, the man entered a guilty plea to the misdemeanor charge while misdemeanor charges of possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia as well as a felony charge of possession with intent to deliver were dismissed.

In September, the man was sentenced to two years’ probation and 60 days in jail for resisting/obstructing an officer. In June 2007, the man was arrested for underage drinking and fighting.

The Journal Sentinel reports that Tavulares has "convictions for resisting or obstructing an officer, possession of an illegally obtained prescription drug and bail jumping."

Tavulares told police that when he realized Lauren Aljubouri was dead, he jumped off her and attempted to resuscitate her.

A police officer arrived at their apartment shortly after 3 a.m. Saturday.

Tavulares answered the door.

“I did it,” he told the officer, according to the complaint.

“I can’t believe it. I did it,” he said.

The officer followed Tavulares into the kitchen. Without being questioned, according to the complaint, he again told the officer, “I killed her.”

TMJ4 reports:

The suspects' family isn't saying anything about Eric Tavulares. But they did have a brief message Monday for Lauren's family. "Our hearts are all broken," said Liz Tavulares.

Eric's sister read from a statement as she struggled to keep her composure. "Lauren was a beautiful woman who we all cared about and we will all miss her very much," Liz Tavulares said.

Eric's sister wants Lauren's family to know this; "From our entire family our deepest heartfelt sympathies our thoughts and our prayers are with Lauren and her family."

Tavulares' family is struggling, too. He has forced his family to bear an incredible burden.

Aljubouri's death is such a tragedy. So many people are hurting.

It shouldn't be fodder for tabloids and trash TV. Her murder isn't some instance of movie violence. For her family and friends, the loss is real and so great.

My heart goes out to her loved ones.

Bill Maher and Milwaukee and the 'Baby-fication' of America

"I think that religion stops people from thinking. I think it justifies crazies. I think flying planes into a building was a faith-based initiative. I think religion is a neurological disorder."

--Bill Maher

To promote Bill Maher's show at the Riverside this coming Thursday, Tim Cuprisin of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel devotes a column to the so-called comedian.

I have to add that qualifier since I don't think of him as a comedian anymore, not because I don't occassionally laugh at what he has to say but because he's not about entertainment.

If you believe he's sincere, he's an activist, pushing a specific agenda.

If you believe he's insincere, and controversial for the sake of controversy, he's an exhibitionist.

Comedian? No.

Bill Maher was vaguely aware that his coming Milwaukee appearance had angered some local conservative bloggers a couple months back.

It's hardly a new thing for a comedian who doesn't hold back on the kinds of comments likely to anger some folks. And the Internet kerfuffle over a crack that Maher made about the pope being a Nazi certainly hasn't prevented him from doing his stand-up act Thursday at the Riverside Theater.

"I think I did hear about it," Maher said in a telephone interview last week.

The Milwaukee reaction paralleled the response from The Catholic League, a vocal group that often gets media access by expressing outrage.

"In today's day and age, it's easy to make it look like you have a whole army, but you don't," Maher said of his critics. "What you really have is a fax machine and e-mail, and you can make it look like there are thousands of people who are storming the barricades with their pitchforks."

Cuprisin is being misleading when he refers to the "Internet kerfuffle over a crack."

Maher's rabid attack on the Catholic Church and Pope Benedict XVI can hardly be characterized as a "crack."

Would you call this a "crack"?

"I'd like to tip off law enforcement to an even larger child-abusing religious cult. Its leader also has a compound, and this guy not only operates outside the bounds of the law, but he used to be a Nazi and he wears funny hats. That's right, the Pope is coming to America this week and, ladies, he's single."

"If you have a few hundred followers, and you let some of them molest children, they call you a cult leader. If you have a billion, they call you 'Pope.' It's like, if you can't pay your mortgage, you're a deadbeat. But if you can't pay a million mortgages, you're Bear Stearns and we bail you out. And that is who the Catholic Church is: the Bear Stearns of organized pedophilia -- too big, too fat."

"When the current Pope was in his previous Vatican job as John Paul's Dick Cheney, he wrote a letter instructing every Catholic bishop to keep the sex abuse of minors secret until the Statute of Limitations ran out. And that's the Church's attitude: 'We're here, we're queer, get used to it,' which is fine, far be it from me to criticize religion. But just remember one thing: If the Pope was -- instead of a religious figure -- merely the CEO of a nationwide chain of day care centers, where thousands of employees had been caught molesting kids and then covering it up, he'd be arrested faster than you can say 'who wants to touch Mr. Wiggle?'"

Of course, Catholics were offended.

And of course, Maher was eager to offend. That's how he makes his living. Being offensive, spewing hate-filled rants, is his bread and butter.

Cuprisin continues:

Maher sees the response to his initial crack as "part and parcel of the baby-fication of America."

"People used to have to protest everything that they didn't like. If someone said something that they didn't like, they turned off the radio, they turned off the television, they turned the page in the newspaper.

"At some point, life in America became all about not having one second where you are made to feel uncomfortable in any way. So if something makes you uncomfortable, what you have to do is start a campaign, make the person go away, demand apologies.

"It's all such nonsense, because it's so easy to choose not to have me in your life, if that's what you want," he said, his voice trailing off in a laugh.

Again, Cuprisin calls Maher's rant a "crack," "his initial crack."

Surely professional journalist Cuprisin must be somewhat familiar with the power of words and their connotation.

Maher's diatribe wasn't a crack. It's as if Cuprisin is purposely marginalizing just how offensive Maher was when talking about Pope Benedict and his visit to the United States.

Maher's notion that the uproar is an indication of the "baby-fication" of America is lame.

I don't consider exercising free speech to be "baby-fication."

Maher not only was incredibly insensitive but he was factually inaccurate in his anti-Catholic, anti-Pope Benedict rant.

He has his little HBO forum to air his thoughts/lies. Fine.

The public responds. Fine.

Having my faith attacked in such a vile fashion was extremely disturbing to me.

I reacted, as did people all over the country.

That's not the "baby-fication" of America. That's America, baby.

About HBO, Maher said, "I'm on a network that totally understands freedom of speech."

Too bad Maher doesn't understand it. Freedom of speech is a two-way street. I think free speech is best answered with more speech.

Maher offends. People respond. No need for Maher to whine.

Maher said, "It's the great clarifier, standup comedy. First of all, it's the greatest joy I have."

Really? There's something very twisted about finding great joy in unfairly and mercilessly tearing people down, good people.

Cuprisin writes that Maher will be talking presidential politics on Thursday night at the Riverside. He'll also be talking religion.

Maher fans will have more than this live performance and his HBO show to feast on.

...He even has a big-screen movie coming out in October, "Religulous" - a title, Maher said, that combines the words religion and ridiculous.

"Comedically, religion is the side of a barn door. If you can't hit this target comedically with the talking snakes and the man who lived inside of a whale, you just really shouldn't be in the comedy business."

View a clip from the movie and the trailer here.

The documentary bills itself as an "uproarious nonfiction film about the greatest fiction ever told."

Greatest fiction?

I don't consider my faith to be ridiculous.

I would be lost without it.

It's not as if I'm incapable of enjoying good-natured humor about my religion, but there's a difference between jokes and ridicule, wit and disrespect.

But Maher said he's not doing this just to get a reaction.

"I certainly never do anything just to push people's buttons," he said. "I just tell it the way I see it. And if that pushes their buttons, so be it.

"I'm never looking for a fight, but I never run away from one."

I don't buy that.

Maher knows exactly what he's doing and it's clear why he's doing it.

Obama Mideast Tour Dress Code: No Green

From Politico:

An Obama campaign ban on green clothing during the candidate’s visits to Israel and Jordan has created wide puzzlement among observers of the Middle East.

In a memo to reporters, described as “a few guidelines we sent staff before departure to the Middle East,” Obama advance staffer Peter Newell laid out rules on attire for Jordan and Israel.

First among them: “Do not wear green.”

An Obama aide explained to reporters that green is the color associated with the militant Palestinian group Hamas. But while the color does appear on Hamas banners, there is no particular symbolism to wearing green clothes, experts said.

Moreover, green is more generally seen as a symbol of Islam.

“A ban on wearing green seems bizarre,” said Richard Bulliet, a professor of Middle Eastern history at Columbia University, who said the color is associated with the family of the Prophet Mohammed.

“I would hazard the guess that the campaign's concern is more with distorted—and religiously inaccurate—reporting by Obama's detractors than with any actual signal that might be conveyed,” he said, referring to false rumors that Obama is a Muslim. “You don’t want to have some blogger come along and say ‘Obama is showing his true color.’”

“I think they’re just being overcautious to a ridiculous degree,” Bulliet said.

Mohamad Bazzi, a professor of journalism at New York University and former Middle East bureau chief for Newsday, called the instruction “very strange.”

If Obama doesn't want to wear green, that's his prerogative. He doesn't want to appear to be a Muslim or a Hamas sympathizer. OK.

But for the campaign to recommend that journalists follow Obama's dress code is pretty weird.

If the concern is that "some blogger [would] come along and say 'Obama is showing his true color,'" I don't see why journalists should keep from wearing green. Is some blogger going to say a journalist is showing his true color? I don't see why.

Are the journalists considered to be part of Obama's campaign?

I guess that would make sense.

How to Get Your Op-Ed in the NYT

The New York Times won't print just any op-ed piece. Just because it comes from a U.S. senator and the presumptive Republican nominee for president doesn't give it any added weight.

The editors are tough.

The Times is struggling to make its case that the rejection of McCain's piece wasn't politically motivated.

Times officials said that the decision not to publish Mr. McCain’s submission should not be considered a total rejection of the article by the presumptive Republican nominee. Rather, David Shipley, editor of the Op-Ed page, kicked back the original version while offering suggestions for changes and revision.

Here’s Mr. Shipley’s email response on Friday to Michael Goldfarb, a member of the McCain team and frequent writer for the senator’s blog, McCainreport:

Dear Mr. Goldfarb,

Thank you for sending me Senator McCain’s essay.

I’d be very eager to publish the senator on the Op-Ed page.

However, I’m not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written. I’d be pleased, though, to look at another draft. Let me suggest an approach.

The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans.

It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq. It would also have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory — with troops levels, timetables and measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate. And it would need to describe the senator’s Afghanistan strategy, spelling out how it meshes with his Iraq plan.

I am going to be out of the office next week. If you decide to re-work the draft, please be in touch with Mary Duenwald, the Op-Ed deputy. …

Again, thank you for taking the time to send me the Senator’s draft. I really hope we can find a way to bring this to a happy resolution.

Sincerely,

David Shipley

Shipley, a member of the "Clinton Administration from 1995 until 1997 as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Presidential Speechwriter," is hoping for a happy resolution. Isn't that nice?

McCain's "draft" just didn't make the grade, not enough details. It didn't meet Shipley's high standards.

Mark Levin understands the New York Times.

Levin offers this advice:

"How to get your op-ed in the NYT - Label it 'U.S Government: Top Secret'"

That would do it. That would get it on the front page.

Chris Matthews and Jay Leno

Oh joy!

Chris Matthews was Jay Leno's guest on the Tonight Show. What a great way to start the week!

Of course, Matthews was giddy, thrilled to talk about what he calls the "most exciting election in our lifetime."

He said, "It's gonna start the 21st century, a little late."

Good grief.

What have you been doing the past 7 or 8 years? Did you get that the 21st century has been on hold? I wasn't aware of that.

The libs have been waiting for savior Barack Obama. I guess time began when Obama started running for president, at least in Matthews' world.

Leno brought up Obama's Middle East tour. He didn't call it the hype of this new century or the photo-op tour. He didn't mention the ridiculousness of the U.S. media reporting on every footstep Obama takes.

Like a little boy, or maybe more like a school girl, Matthews gushed, "How 'bout that hoop? Did you see the shot he took at that basketball court? The guy hit a 40-footer."

"These demonstrations of confidence are good... We like to see these guys be able to perform outside their element a little bit."

Matthews is beyond being a cheerleader for Obama. He has a crush on him. It's uncomfortable to watch. It's creepy.

Leno brought up that the Iraqi government seems to endorse Barack Obama's plan for troop withdrawal.

Matthews could barely contain himself.

"How would you like to be George Bush right now? You're out there fighting the war, and the guy you set up in charge of Iraq says, 'Oh by the way, I think I like this guy Obama's way of looking at things.'

"That's a revolting development if you're McCain...and McCain is the good soldier and he gets completely undercut by these guys."

Matthews mocked Bush for his stance on no surrender in Iraq, no cutting and running.

About Bush, Leno said, "This is my favorite thing: He said, 'We're not for a timeline. We're for a time horizon.' Doesn't that sound like a retirement community in Florida?"

It was an Obama love fest all around, and at the expense of McCain and Bush. This wasn't just a pro-Obama conversation. It was an anti-McCain segment.

Leno brought up Matthews' "thrill up my leg" moment.

Matthews admitted that he's inspired by "Barack."

He said, "Some journalists only report what a guy says... I report all senses. I report all reactions."

Referring to his lack of objectivity, Matthews said, "I know this isn't old school..."

Matthews spoke of being enthralled with Obama's family background and how Obama grew up.

He said, "He has seen this country from two different directions like so few of us have seen on both sides of that San Andreas Fault of race in this country."

Matthews declared, "He's seen us as the world sees us. I just think it's inspiring. I admit it, OK? You can call it what you want. I was inspired by it and I said so at the time. And I took some heat for it, but I'd rather be honest and say what I feel than sit there like some kind of statue and say, 'Oh, that was noteworthy.'

"You know, I mean, I'm a frickin' American. I do have a reaction to things. I do react emotionally to my country. I care about this country. I want to look out for it. It's my job. I'm not just some umpire. I take a side -- us. That's who I'm rooting for."

Translation: Vote for Obama. I mean, Barack.

Matthews repeatedly called Obama "Barack." Have you noticed that the Dems and their mouthpieces in the lib media have taken to calling Obama by his first name?

Barack, Barack, Barack. I don't hear them calling McCain "John."

Then Matthews went into his unabashed Obama campaign shtick. He said that he hoped when Americans go to vote that they look at the candidates' background and the age of the two candidates and open up their hearts and not think about race.

He started yapping about kids not thinking about race and that the country really has changed since the 1960s. Apparently, Matthews believes that young America is a colorblind society.

He said to think about your kids' future and think the way they think. He called on the 70- and 80-year-old people to open up their hearts to the prospect of change and something different. He called on them not to be suspicious.

Matthews alerted the audience that he was about to speak completely objectively.

That's a joke.

He said Americans under 50 years old would vote for Obama and those over 50 would vote for McCain.

Matthews started to ramble more incoherently than he had before. He said, "We know there's gonna be not just an ethnic or racial divide. I don't like that phrase 'racial.' We're all the same race, but we know there's a generational divide."

He said one could predict the outcome of the election based on that.

What's so strange is that only minutes earlier Matthews talked of the San Andreas Fault of race in the country. Then, he dismissed racial divisions.

"It's not so much about gender or ethnicity. It's really about age."

Matthews was practicing ageism without hesitation.

He said, "It's just a different country. We have evolved as a country. And a lot of people find that scary and a lot of people find that wonderful."

So according to Matthews, race is not a factor, but if you want to discriminate based on age, no problem.

Matthews encouraged people to talk to their grandparents and encourage them to "open their hearts." In other wordsk, tell the old folks to vote for Obama.

While discussing McCain's choice of running mates, Matthews said, "Everybody knows McCain, at his age, will probably serve four years, and I'm not knocking it, but..."

Leno interjected, "Let's hope."

Matthews broke up laughing. Leno kept giggling.

I didn't think it was funny. Not at all.
__________________

More Tonight Show news:

Conan O'Brien will take over the "Tonight" show next June - and what happens to deposed host Jay Leno after that is anybody's guess.

Leno's last show will be Friday, May 29, and O'Brien will start the following Monday, June 1, NBC executives told a Television Critics Association meeting Monday.

NBC is angling to keep Leno with NBC Universal but the late-night king has indicated he's ready to jump ship. Eager NBC competitors, including other networks and syndicators, are prepared to help him make the leap.

Ben Silverman and Marc Graboff, NBC Entertainment co-chairmen, were asked about the specter of Leno being hired by ABC and overpowering O'Brien and top-rated "Tonight."

"We really believe in the decisions we've made with our partners, including Jay," and stand by them, Silverman replied.

Graboff disagreed with the premise of the question, saying talks aimed at keeping Leno within NBC Universal post-"Tonight" are continuing.

But, Graboff added, "we've made our decision, we're happy with it, we're very confident the `Tonight' show will remain dominant in its time period."

New York Times: McCain's Editorial Unfit to Print

Drudge reports:

An editorial written by Republican presidential hopeful McCain has been rejected by the NEW YORK TIMES -- less than a week after the paper published an essay written by Obama, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The paper's decision to refuse McCain's direct rebuttal to Obama's 'My Plan for Iraq' has ignited explosive charges of media bias in top Republican circles.

'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece,' NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an email late Friday to McCain's staff. 'I'm not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written.'

...NYT's Shipley advised McCain to try again: 'I'd be pleased, though, to look at another draft.'

...A top McCain source claims the paper simply does not agree with the senator's Iraq policy, and wants him to change it, not "re-work the draft."

What a difference 6 months makes!

The New York Times endorsed John McCain during the primary season. The paper also endorsed Hillary Clinton.

The sense of possibility, of a generational shift, rouses Mr. Obama’s audiences and not just through rhetorical flourishes. He shows voters that he understands how much they hunger for a break with the Bush years, for leadership and vision and true bipartisanship. We hunger for that, too. But we need more specifics to go with his amorphous promise of a new governing majority, a clearer sense of how he would govern.

The potential upside of a great Obama presidency is enticing, but this country faces huge problems, and will no doubt be facing more that we can’t foresee. The next president needs to start immediately on challenges that will require concrete solutions, resolve, and the ability to make government work. Mrs. Clinton is more qualified, right now, to be president.

Apparently, those reservations are gone. Obama has magically become more qualified, "right now," to be president.

McCain doesn't even have the right stuff to write a piece for the editorial page.

It's no surprise that the Times has flopped into Obama's corner.

It's no surprise that the Times is so unfair and so unbalanced that it won't print McCain's column.

It's just another glaring instance of media bias, but that makes it no less disgraceful.

The fact is the New York Times is a propaganda rag. That's OK, Freedom to Spew.

What's not OK is to pretend that the New York Times is the country's paper of record. It's not. It's an active arm of the Obama campaign.
_______________

More, from ABC News.

Fish Pedicure: No Thank You

Having fish nibble my feet is not my idea of being pampered.

ALEXANDRIA, Va. -- Ready for the latest in spa pampering? Prepare to dunk your tootsies in a tank of water and let tiny carp nibble away.

Fish pedicures are creating something of a splash in the D.C. area, where a northern Virginia spa has been offering them for the past four months. John Ho, who runs the Yvonne Hair and Nails salon with his wife, Yvonne Le, said 5,000 people have taken the plunge so far.

"This is a good treatment for everyone who likes to have nice feet," Ho said.

Patsy Fisher, 42, of Crofton, Md., center, checks on the progress of KaNin Reese, 32, of Washington. (Photo/AP)


July 17, 2008: Tracy Roberts, 33, of Rockville, Md., has her toes nibbled on by a type of carp called garra rufa or doctor fish. (Photo/AP)

He said he wanted to come up with something unique while finding a replacement for pedicures that use razors to scrape off dead skin. The razors have fallen out of favor with state regulators because of concerns about whether they're sanitary.

There are questions about razors being sanitary. I understand that. But are the fish sanitary? What do regulators think about little fish teeth scraping off dead skin? Do they harbor any weird bacteria?

I disagree with Ho. This is not a "good treatment for everyone who likes to have nice feet."

No. No way.

I do not want "doctor fish" chewing on my feet.

YUCK!

HYPE: The Obama Effect

There's a new documentary that explores the hype behind Barack Obama's meteoric rise.

Watch the trailer.



Watch the 30 second TV ad.
___________________

More, from the New York Times.

Revolutionary Michelle Obama

Barack Obama has said it repeatedly. His wife Michelle is off limits. Do not criticize her. Everyone is on notice. Leave Michelle alone.

Obama's orders are meant to give Michelle a pass, but she has another shield to prevent challenges from opponents. She has something else to protect her -- the color of her skin.

From Sophia A. Nelson, in the Washington Post:

There she is -- no, not Miss America, but the Angela-Davis-Afro-wearing, machine-gun-toting, angry, unpatriotic Michelle Obama, greeting her husband with a fist bump instead of a kiss on the cheek.

It was supposed to be satire, but the caricature of Barack Obama and his wife that appeared on the cover of the New Yorker last week rightly caused a major flap. And among black professional women like me and many of my sisters in the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority, who happened to be gathered last week in Washington for our 100th anniversary celebration, the mischaracterization of Michelle hit the rawest of nerves.

Welcome to our world.

We've watched with a mixture of pride and trepidation as the wife of the first serious African American presidential contender has weathered recent campaign travails -- being called unpatriotic for a single offhand remark, dubbed a black radical because of something she wrote more than 20 years ago and plastered with the crowning stereotype: "angry black woman." And then being forced to undergo a politically mandated "makeover" to soften her image and make her more palatable to mainstream America.

Sad to say, but what Obama has undergone, though it's on a national stage and on a much more prominent scale, is nothing new to professional African American women. We endure this type of labeling all the time. We're endlessly familiar with the problem Michelle Obama is confronting -- being looked at, as black women, through a different lens from our white counterparts, who are portrayed as kinder, gentler souls who somehow deserve to be loved and valued more than we do.

...You name it, and black women have achieved it. The most popular woman on daytime television is Oprah Winfrey. Condoleezza Rice is secretary of state.

And yet my generation of African American women -- we're called, in fact, the Claire Huxtable generation -- hasn't managed to become successfully integrated into American popular culture.

Nelson concludes:

...With all the challenges facing professional black women today, we hope that Michelle Obama will defy the negative stereotypes about us. And that, now that a strong professional black woman is center stage, she'll bring to light what we already know: that an accomplished black woman can be a loyal and supportive wife and a good mother and still fulfill her own dreams. The fact that her husband clearly adores Michelle is both refreshing and reassuring to many of us who long to find a good man who will love and appreciate us.

...It's how so many black professional women feel. And our hope is that if Michelle Obama becomes first lady, the revolution will come to us at last.

Allow me to sum up this piece:

America is a racist country.

Black women are treated differently than their white counterparts, "who are portrayed as kinder, gentler souls who somehow deserve to be loved and valued more than [black women] do."

Michelle Obama is attacked because she's black, not because of the content of her statements and not because of her remarks or her positions on issues.

Successful white women aren't attacked the way black women are.

If you criticize Michelle, count yourself a racist.

That's a load.

Criticism isn't an outgrowth of skin color. Cindy McCain has been ripped apart by Dems, and she hasn't said anything nearly as controversial as Michelle Obama. Cindy McCain is attacked on a very personal level. Her statements aren't questioned. Her personal attributes and her appearance are being picked apart.

Of course, there are racists. There are still people caught in the past, but the racists are in the minority now.

Legitimate criticism is grounded in what an individual has to say and how an individual conducts herself.

Michelle isn't attacked for being black. She's being held accountable for what she has said. That's as it should be.

Nelson's view of reality, that white women are "portrayed as kinder, gentler souls who somehow deserve to be loved and valued more than [black women] do," is wrong.

It's an absolutely ridiculous, sweeping comment.

White women in general aren't portrayed as kinder and gentler. Does the name Hillary Clinton ring a bell? Give me a break. White woman Hillary was portrayed as a bitch.

Nelson's racial views are inaccurate, but they are how she sees things. So, she puts her hope in Michelle, that as first lady she'll bring "the revolution" to black women like her at last.

Apparently, Barack Obama isn't the only savior in the family.

Springsteen and the Berlin Wall

November 9, 1989 is considered the day that the Berlin Wall collapsed.

Nineteen years later, a new twist is being put into the history of the fall.

Reuters reports that a 1988 concert by Bruce Springsteen in East Berlin sparked East Germans to rebel.

When Bruce Springsteen spoke out against the Berlin Wall at the biggest concert in East German history in 1988, no one in the crowd of 160,000 had the faintest idea that the symbol of the Cold War would soon be history.

But now — 20 years after the American rock star went behind the Iron Curtain — organizers, historians and people who witnessed it say his message came at a critical juncture in German history in the run-up to the Wall’s collapse.

...Springsteen, an influential songwriter and singer whose lyrics are often about people struggling, got permission at long last to perform in East Berlin in 1988.

Even though his songs are full of emotion and politics, East Germany had welcomed him as a “hero of the working class.” The Communists may have unwittingly created an evening that did more to change East Germany than Woodstock did to the United States.

Annoyed at the billing “Concert for Nicaragua” that Communist East German leaders stamped on his July 19 performance, Springsteen stopped halfway through the three-hour show for a short speech — in heavily accented German:

“I want to tell you I’m not here for or against any government,” Springsteen said, as he pointedly introduced his rendition of the Bob Dylan ballad “Chimes of Freedom.”

“I came to play rock ’n’ roll for you East Berliners in the hope that one day all the barriers will be torn down.”

...Other Americans had spoken out against the Wall in Berlin.

But both presidents John F. Kennedy in 1963 (“Ich bin ein Berliner”) and Ronald Reagan in 1987 (“Tear down this Wall”) gave their addresses in West Berlin.

Springsteen delivered his words in the heart of East Berlin, where Communist East Germany had long portrayed the United States as a decadent and belligerent “class enemy.”

“Springsteen’s concert and speech certainly contributed in a larger sense to the events leading up to the fall of the Wall,” said Gerd Dietrich, a historian at Berlin’s Humboldt University.

Not to take anything away from the impact of Western artists performing in East Berlin and specifically that Springsteen concert, but to trace the fall of the Berlin Wall to that concert is more than a bit over the top.

Comparing Springsteen's role in defeating Soviet oppression to the roles played by Kennedy and Reagan is really a stretch.

The tremendous influence that Pope John Paul II had on the people oppressed under Soviet domination, the unfaltering steadfastness of Ronald Reagan in standing up for freedom and liberty, as well as the era of "perestroika" ushered in by Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, were far more significant to bringing about the toppling of the Wall than a single concert.

Let's get a grip.

Gutfeld: Cowards Become Cowboys

Another good piece from the brilliant mind of Greg Gutfeld--

Gutfeld explains the Left, offering three theories on its despicable displays of heartlessness.

He writes:

Call me a dog who likes to return to sniff his own vomit, but whenever someone on the right dies, I check out blogs like Daily Kos and Gawker.

There, I find the typical ghouls, triumphing the death of Jesse Helms or, to a lesser extent, Tony Snow, as if their own personal politics have been validated by cancer. I could quote all the vile stuff, but it might make you violent.

Instead, let's discuss why the left — the champions of tolerance — takes so much glee in their ideological adversaries croaking. Here's three theories:

One, they're stupid and therefore cannot understand that different opinions don't always mean the person you disagree with is evil.

...Two: conservatives reject moral relativism, so it's easier for them to see the world as a range of bad things to good things. So while they hate Ted Kennedy for good reason, he's no Hitler. He's not even a Michael Moore. For a leftist though, relativism allows such thinking, so Tony Snow can be just as evil as Saddam Hussein or even Bob Saget.

...Finally, on the Web, cowards become cowboys. Anonymity makes it easier to threaten adversaries, as well as dance on their graves. It's a disgusting display by callow fiends, which is why I'll be glad when these people die.

Cowards do become cowboys on the Internet.

They're losers in every sense of the word.

Tomatoes and Me

Are you afraid to eat tomatoes? Having trouble getting over the warnings about salmonella?

I ate fresh tomatoes yesterday.

So far, so good.

I'll keep you updated.

Pregnant at 100

From FOX News:

Pregnancy at 100? A newborn giving birth?

Both may be possible in 30 years, according to Davor Solter, a developmental biologist at the Institute of Medical Biology in Singapore.

Solter, writing in the journal Nature, claims that advancements over the next 30 years should make it possible for women at any age to give birth.

Solter said this will be possible if scientists continue advancing germ cell technology, which involves turning skin cells into sperm and eggs, and then combining the two into human embryos.

"It means every person regardless of age will be able to have children: Newborn children could have children and 100-year-olds could have children," he wrote. "It could easily happen in the next 30 years."

...Dr. Manny Alvarez, managing editor of health for FOXNews.com, said while pregnancy at 100 may be possible some day, it likely would not be recommended by most doctors because "there are numerous health risks to women — and their babies — who decide to give birth late in life."

"The stress that is put on the heart, kidneys and liver put the lives of older women in danger," he said. "And babies have the risk of not getting enough nutrients because the vascular system would be so compromised in the wombs of 100-year-olds."

..."Today you can't experiment on human embryos because it's considered morally repugnant — and they are difficult to get," [Solter] wrote.

"If embryos could be grown in culture like any other cell line, this latter problem would disappear. It would mean you could introduce any kind of genetic modification," he continued. "The cell lines could be used to correct a mutation or to engineer an improvement, and used to make a mutant embryo for research purposes."

Solter said he also envisions a future where babies are grown in artificial placentas for research purposes.

How creepy!

This Solter sounds like a real Dr. Frankstein. He looks forward to the day when he can freely play with embryos. That's morally repugnant.

In any event, a 100-year-old woman should not be having a baby. This isn't about what can be done but what should be done.

Why would such an old woman want to become a parent anyway?

Even if it were possible, no responsible individual of sound mind would have a baby at 100.

It would be a terribly selfish act.

McCain and the Internet

This is a cheap shot.

From the Associated Press:

If Sen. John McCain is really serious about becoming a Web-savvy citizen, perhaps Kathryn Robinson can help.

Robinson is now 106—that's 35 years older than McCain—and she began using the Internet at 98, at the Barclay Friends home in West Chester, Pa., where she lives. "I started to learn because I wanted to e-mail my family," she says—in an e-mail message, naturally.

Blogs have been buzzing recently over McCain's admission that when it comes to the Internet, "I'm an illiterate who has to rely on his wife for any assistance he can get." And the 71-year-old presumptive Republican nominee, asked about his Web use last week by the New York Times, said that aides "go on for me. I will have that down fairly soon, getting on myself."

How unusual is it for a 71-year-old American to be unplugged?

That depends how you look at the statistics. Only 35 percent of Americans over age 65 are online, according to data from April and May compiled by the Pew Internet Project at the Pew Research Center.

But when you account for factors like race, wealth and education, the picture changes dramatically. "About three-quarters of white, college-educated men age over 65 use the Internet," says Susannah Fox, director of the project.

"John McCain is an outlier when you compare him to his peers," Fox says. "On one hand, a U.S. senator has access to information sources and staff assistance that most people do not. On the other, the Internet has become such a go-to resource that it's a curiosity to hear that someone doesn't rely on it the way most Americans do."

Good grief.

"McCain is an outlier when you compare him to his peers."

Even a 106-year-old woman knows more than McCain.

I guess that settles it. This guy is not qualified to be president.

What a joke!

McCain spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan presented a somewhat updated picture when contacted by The Associated Press on Friday: "He's fully capable of browsing the Internet and checking Web sites," Buchanan said. "He has a Mac and uses it several times a week. He's working on becoming more familiar with the Internet."

That's a good thing, says Tobey Dichter, CEO of Generations on Line, a group that helps bring seniors—including the 106-year-old Robinson—into the digital age.

"He needs the self-empowerment" of going online himself, says Dichter. "There are too many people surrounding John McCain who are willing to print an e-mail for him" _or do a search on his behalf, like the aides who, he says, show him the Drudge Report.

"But that cheats him of an opportunity to let his own mind take him to the next link," says Dichter. "If he doesn't know what links are available, he will only get exactly what he's asking for, and nothing more."

The AP paints McCain as a doddering old coot.

If aides help him, he's being cheated out of an "opportunity to let his own mind take him to the next link."

"He needs the self-empowerment" of going online himself."

McCain is being treated so condescendingly. Let the old man's mind get a little exercise. He needs self-empowerment.

He's the Republican candidate to be president of the United States!

That's rather self-empowering.

This article is really disgusting. I am so sick of McCain being mocked because of his age.

It not only insults him but it insults millions of older Americans. It's ageism, pure and simple.

Racism isn't an issue in this campaign as much as ageism is.

Age isn't revered in American culture, unless you're an old lib like Walter Cronkite.

I'll be waiting for the AP to do a piece on how many people Obama's age smoke.

Is he an outlier when you compare him with his peers?

What's his problem that he can't kick his addiction?

I don't know if he's up to the job of being leader of the free world if he can be defeated by a cigarette.

Wouldn't it be self-empowering if Obama could just manage to stay away from nicotine for good and not fall back into such a bad and so often deadly habit?

I think he needs that.

Al Gore on Meet the Press

Al "the Hypocrite" Gore was selling his snake oil this morning on Meet the Press with Tom Brokaw.

Transcript excerpt:

MR. BROKAW: