The New Prime Minister

It looks like Gordon Brown is proving to be a worthy successor to Tony Blair. Hopefully, his strong stance against genocide will rub off on the Presidential candidates who have said that they're unwilling to utilize U.S. troops to stop genocide in Darfur (Clinton and Obama) or are willing to pull U.S. troops from Iraq even if it causes genocide (Obama).

British PM to Address United Nations
ABC News

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown planned to use a speech Tuesday at the United Nations to press countries, businesses and individuals to back ambitious plans to revive a stalled global development plan.

His call for a push on aid and diplomacy follows a two-day summit with President Bush, where the new British chief pledged support for military action in Iraq and Afghanistan and tough measures to tackle terrorism.

British officials have insisted Brown's foreign policy will be marked by his desire to mix the use of force and sanctions with backing for development and economic aid programs. Brown has called it a balance of "hard power and soft power."

His attempts to lead the international community in efforts to break an impasse on stalled world trade negotiations and on halting violence in Sudan's Darfur region are read by some as a bid to atone for predecessor Tony Blair's unpopular backing for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Brookings Scholars: "...we might win"

Even the liberal Brookings Institute has come around regarding the Iraq Surge. What should be self-evident to everyone paying attention is reflected in the Brookings op-ed in yesterday's New York Times. The Surge is working and stability is coming to Iraq.

A War We Just Might Win
The New York Times

VIEWED from Iraq, where we just spent eight days meeting with American and Iraqi military and civilian personnel, the political debate in Washington is surreal. The Bush administration has over four years lost essentially all credibility. Yet now the administration’s critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place.

Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.

After the furnace-like heat, the first thing you notice when you land in Baghdad is the morale of our troops. In previous trips to Iraq we often found American troops angry and frustrated — many sensed they had the wrong strategy, were using the wrong tactics and were risking their lives in pursuit of an approach that could not work.

Today, morale is high. The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in Gen. David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference.

Everywhere, Army and Marine units were focused on securing the Iraqi population, working with Iraqi security units, creating new political and economic arrangements at the local level and providing basic services — electricity, fuel, clean water and sanitation — to the people. Yet in each place, operations had been appropriately tailored to the specific needs of the community. As a result, civilian fatality rates are down roughly a third since the surge began — though they remain very high, underscoring how much more still needs to be done.

In Ramadi, for example, we talked with an outstanding Marine captain whose company was living in harmony in a complex with a (largely Sunni) Iraqi police company and a (largely Shiite) Iraqi Army unit. He and his men had built an Arab-style living room, where he met with the local Sunni sheiks — all formerly allies of Al Qaeda and other jihadist groups — who were now competing to secure his friendship.

Quote of the Day

"[I]n America we may reasonably hope that the people will never cease to regard the right of keeping and bearing arms as the surest pledge of their liberty."

- St. George Tucker, Virginia law professor and judge, in annotations of Blackstone's Commentaries of the U.S. Constitution, published in 1803.

Northwest woes

Northwest is having yet another month-end surge in cancelled flights. Not surprisingly, this is leaving customers in the lurch and Northwest is doing next to nothing to help, even those it's their scheduling inabilities which are causing the problems.

There's a voluntary, market-driven solution to this. Many individuals have proposed a "Passenger's Bill of Rights" which has, rightfully, been shot down as an unwarranted intrusion into business which would unduly burden the airlines.
The solution to this is a voluntary "Passenger's Bill of Rights" that airlines can optionally choose to apply or not to their business. Each travel booking website and travel agent would be required to make clear what flights and what airline are following the "Passenger's Bill of Rights" and allow consumers to choose which airlines to utilize. If consumers are willing to pay more for airlines which follow the "Passenger's Bill of Rights", those flights and airlines will be available. If consumers are unwilling to pay more for those flights, airlines and flights would be available to them.

Another month-end surge in cancellations riles Northwest travelers
Detroit Free Press

Northwest Airlines' pattern of cancellations continued Sunday, with more than 200 flights dropped as pilots who were pushed to the limit of hours they are allowed to fly each month stayed home from work.

The airline blamed the pilots, who in turn blamed the airline for failing to address staff shortfalls after it canceled more than 2,000 flights in June, many of them toward the end of the month.

Passengers suffered again Sunday, especially at Detroit Metro Airport.

"It's their own internal problem but they just pass it on to you," said Joe Czarnecki, who was trying to fly to New York with his wife after attending a wedding in Detroit.

The Czarneckis learned through a voice mail that their flight home was canceled and that they were rescheduled on a flight today. Because that would force them to miss work, the couple bought two $500 tickets with Continental for a Sunday flight, only to find out that flight was grounded, too, because of bad weather in the East.

The couple said Northwest's customer service kept disconnecting them because of the high call volume.

"They give you a recording because they don't have any guts," Joe Czarnecki said.

"We're not trying to silence anybody"

Once again, the Liberal Elite show their disdain for the right to free speech. As should surprise no one, Liberal activist groups are doing whatever they legally can to punish Fox News for the views of some of their editorialists. This time, they’re monitoring commercials and then contacting advertisers to try to get them to pull their funding. Of course, even though they’re trying to attack the funding source of the stations due to editorialist views of some of their personalities they are adamant that they’re “not trying to silence anybody”. Because, after all, trying to get ads pulled based on editorial content definitely isn’t “trying to silence anybody.

Home Depot Spokesman Jerry Shields seems to have the right attitude: "We're not in the business of censoring media."

Liberals Going After Fox Advertisers
AP

NEW YORK (AP) - Liberal activists are stepping up their campaign against Fox News Channel by pressuring advertisers not to patronize the network.

MoveOn.org, the Campaign for America's Future and liberal blogs like DailyKos.com are asking thousands of supporters to monitor who is advertising on the network. Once a database is gathered, an organized phone-calling campaign will begin, said Jim Gilliam, vice president of media strategy for Brave New Films, a company that has made anti-Fox videos.

The groups have successfully pressured Democratic presidential candidates not to appear at any debate sponsored by Fox, and are also trying to get Home Depot Inc. to stop advertising there.

At least 5,000 people nationwide have signed up to compile logs on who is running commercials on Fox, Gilliam said. The groups want to first concentrate on businesses running local ads, as opposed to national commercials.

"It's a lot more effective for Sam's Diner to get calls from 10 people in his town than going to the consumer complaint department of some pharmaceutical company," Gilliam said.

What is this?

This is appalling.

Spain accused of abusing Africans
Chicago Sun-Times

MADRID, Spain - A human-rights group accused Spain on Thursday of keeping migrant African children in appalling conditions, including windowless "punishment" cells where they are beaten and denied access to toilets.

The report by New York-based Human Rights Watch said the abuses took place in holding facilities on the Canary Islands, which lie off Africa's northwest coast of and been swamped by a surge in African migration in recent years.

More than 900 children -- mostly boys from Senegal and Morocco -- are crowded into four ''prison-like'' detention centers on Spain's Canary Islands.

Immigrants who are caught are returned to their home countries, but the process can take months.

Simone Troller, European children's rights researcher for Human Rights Watch and the report's author, said that under Spanish law, migrant children are not technically allowed to be detained.

In practice, she said, they are ''kept in almost prison-like conditions.'

More U.S. nukes = No Iranian nukes?

In London's Independent, a senior Iranian official confirms that Iran has enough centrifuges running to be able to obtain enough refined nuclear material for a nuclear weapon. They won't, though, for moral reasons. In his words: "What is it good for? If we attack Israeli with one bomb, American would attack us with thousands of bombs. It's suicide."

So, the reason not to build and, more importantly, not to use a nuclear bomb has nothing to do with the moral issues with slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians but rather with simple self-interest.

How is it that this doesn't prove the need for the United States to have an overwhelming need for the U.S. to have an overwhelming nuclear arsenal and the requirement that the Administration makes clear that certain circumstances would lead us to use it?

Iran's message is softly spoken, yet clear: It will enrich uranium
The Independent

Iran has issued its strongest signal to date that it will defy UN demands for a suspension of uranium enrichment - a possible route towards a nuclear bomb - threatening to respond to any further sanctions and accusing the Americans of "running away" from negotiations to end the crisis over the Iranian nuclear programme.Iran's chief nuclear negotiator told The Independent yesterday that uranium enrichment was "like breathing" for his country, and that Iran would not halt the spinning centrifuges at its main enrichment plant in Natanz, even if the Bush administration offered security guarantees.

Ali Larijani reports directly to Iran's spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and to Iran's radical President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who appointed him. To be granted an interview in the Supreme National Security Council is a rare event for any foreign journalist.

Mr Larijani was unusually forthcoming about his negotiations with the European foreign policy envoy, Javier Solana, who has been trying to coax Iran back to the negotiating table while the UN Security Council prepares a new round of economic sanctions. The Europeans have taken the lead in dealing with Iran, which has not had diplomatic relations with Washington since 1979. They want Iran to suspend uranium enrichment as a precondition for negotiations. This has been rejected. The Iranians say that the last time they agreed to a voluntary suspension, a three-week suspension ended up lasting two and a half years. They say they will not be caught out again.

Asked whether Iran might reconsider its refusal to suspend enrichment if it were to receive security guarantees from America and a promise that the US would not seek regime change, Mr Larijani responded: "We are in no need of US security guarantees. I do not see a relation between these two matters. This example of yours is like saying, 'if the Americans provide you with a security guarantee are you ready to give up breathing?'"

Earmarks in the defense bill? Really?

The Democrats are politicizing spending and sending pork back to their constituents? I thought they were supposed to be ending this sort of thing now that they're in power...

Earmarks in the House defense bill
The Crypt - The Politico

Check out the list of earmark requests in this year's defense spending bill.

Porkbusters.org posted this handy spreadsheet to track what requests are in the House bill that passed out of subcommittee yesterday.

Rep. C. W. Bill Young (R-Fla.), who chaired the subcommittee last year and previously chaired the full committee, tops the list with 59 projects. Rep. John P. Murtha, the Pennsylvania Democrat who chairs the subcommittee that oversees defense spending, came in second with 46.

In total, there are 1,776 special projects in the bill that was reported to the full committee -- a coincidental number that conservatives should have plenty of fun with ("It's a spending revolution ... " etc.).

Whatever your take on lawmaker-requested projects, this new era of disclosure sure gives everyone plenty of paper to pore over.

Who wanted the fairness doctrine back?

An AP story about the FCC's decision not to revive the "fairness" doctrine, the author points out that "several Democratic lawmakers" are encouraging its return. Of course they don't mention that principal among the lawmakers are Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Hillary Clinton.

FCC Chair: Fairness Doctrine Not Needed
AP

The Federal Communications Commission has no intention of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine imposing a requirement of balanced coverage of issues on public airwaves, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said.

Martin, in a letter written this week to Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., and made public Thursday, said the agency found no compelling reason to revisit its 1987 decision that enforcing the federal rule was not in the public interest.

Several Democratic lawmakers suggested that Congress take another look at the doctrine after conservative radio talk show hosts aggressively attacked an immigration reform bill when it was on the Senate floor, contributing to its defeat.

Pence and other Republicans in both the House and Senate countered by introducing legislation to bar the FCC from reinstating the rule.

Under the doctrine, first instituted in the late 1940s, broadcasters could lose their licenses if they failed to give free airtime to opposing sides on controversial issues.

Caught a trout!

What a surprise! A democratic investigation launched for purely political reasons into conduct which isn't criminal might result in perjury charges. Never expected that...

Democrats urge perjury probe of Gonzales

WASHINGTON - A group of Senate Democrats called Wednesday for a special counsel to investigate whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales perjured himself regarding the firings of U.S. attorneys and administration dissent over President Bush's domestic surveillance program.

"We ask that you immediately appoint an independent special counsel from outside the Department of Justice to determine whether Attorney General Gonzales may have misled Congress or perjured himself in testimony before Congress," four Democratic senators wrote in a letter Wednesday, according to a draft obtained by The Associated Press.

"It has become apparent that the Attorney General has provided at a minimum half-truths and misleading statements" to the Judiciary Committee, they added.

"Safe and competent" snake oil salesman

According to the Daily Mail, there's a rising trend among UK universities to grant degrees in "complimentary medicine." Complementary medicine is, of course, a term used to try to legitimize the use of quackery like herbalism, “natural” remedies, and other unscientific, unproven, ineffective means to treat illness. Of course, the snake oil remedies are defended by the instructors of these classes in order to ensure that the “practitioners are safe and competent.” I’m sure that will help, someone who’s competent with the mystical potions which have no proven effects as they fraudulently peddle them to an ever-increasing market. The other justification? That there are now millions of people who are seeking to buy these products despite huge evidence that they’re worthless. It’s good to know that if you can con enough people into ignoring the mountain of scientific evidence that you’re a fraud you can even get a job at a university teaching other frauds.

Row over surge in 'scandalously un-academic' university courses
The Daily Mail

Universities were today accused of offering "scandalously unacademic" courses such as complimentary medicine to boost their funding.

Spiralling numbers of students are flocking to the courses while scientific disciplines such as anatomy and pharmacy are suffering.

Now angry dons are breaking ranks to claim many so-called soft degree subjects represent a cynical attempt to generate income with little regard for academic standards.

Latest official figures reveal how degree course applications are up 5.3 per cent across the board on last year.

Yet some subjects are registering much steeper rises. Complementary medicine has drawn 31.5 per cent more applicants, so far receiving 1,908.

Physics is up 12.5 per cent but other science subjects have seen relatively modest increases, such as pharmacology, toxicology and pharmacy on 6 per cent. This represents barely any improvement at all, given the 5.3 per cent rise in applications overall.

The figures prompted leading pharmacologist David Colquhoun to accuse universities of "cashing in" on subjects such as complementary medicine.

The professor of pharmacology at University College London, told the Times Higher Education Supplement he was "appalled" by the trend.

"These courses are basically anti-science" he said.

"Universities that run them should be ashamed of themselves."

Look who's stallling now...

I love the audacity of the Democrats accusing the Republicans of stalling on appropriation bills. The idea that the Democratic circus this year – hearings to conduct political fishing expeditions over incidences when no crimes took place and their repeated statement votes about the Iraq war – aren’t to blame for the Congress’s inability to get things done is ridiculous. The Democrats came into the House promising bipartisanship and then immediately launched investigations whose sole purpose was to score political points and hope that someone might perjure himself. Followed that up with a few votes about Iraq whose only meaning were scoring political points and providing propaganda for the enemy, some more hearings, and then more meaningless votes on Iraq and we’re here. They promised to balance the budget, then increase spending. They promised to cut out earmarks, then fill every spending bill as full of earmarks as possible. It’s rather amusing to think that they can pass off this line.

Democrats Say GOP Complaint of Spending 'Shutdown' Strategy Doesn't Add Up
CQ

Republicans are uttering a word that for 12 years has been utterly unspeakable.

Shutdown.

It's a word that can send shudders through those who saw the last one — actually, two — play out after Republicans took control of Congress in 1995. The Newt Gingrich-Bill Clinton standoff was so traumatic that since then, neither party has ventured anywhere in that direction.

This year's appropriations tug-of-war between a new majority in Congress and a president of the opposing party does not appear to be headed for a government shutdown, but a rhetorical taboo was lifted when the word became part of the partisan message of the moment.

"The obvious plan of the Democrats is to not do appropriations bills but put everything together in a giant omnibus appropriations bill in a kind of legislative blackmail with all of the policy and increased spending, to in effect threaten the president to either sign the bill or be accused of shutting down the government," Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the chairman of the Republican Conference, said Wednesday.

President Bush has threatened to veto seven appropriations bills because together they would exceed his discretionary spending limit by more than $20 billion.

Nothing will change

Apparently, the Democrats are starting to realize that they're now about 1/4 of the way through this Congress and they've done nothing of significance, except pass a bill which is sure to increase inflation and unemployment among the poor. Coming into this year, they promised a while host of reforms, claiming that they were going to come to issues in a bipartisan fashion. Of course, they're promptly started pushing insignificant statement votes and their political fishing expeditions trying to nail anyone in the Bush administration with whatever they can - usually, trying to incite perjury when "investigating" incidents where no crimes occurred.

People are going to notice, however, that while they've been trying to score political points they've done nothing to address social security, health care, job creation, the flood of illegal immigrants, the education gap between whites and minorities, the poverty rate, energy policy, or securing our ports and borders. Why bother actually doing something of substance when they can try to exploit the situation for political gain to leverage a democrat into the White House in a year and a half?

Democrats Pushing to Avoid a 'Do-Nothing' Label
The New York Times

Congressional Democrats celebrated the first minimum wage increase in a decade on Tuesday with a festive labor rally across from the Capitol. But they know they will have to accomplish considerably more to avoid the sort of do-nothing labels they hung on Republicans not too long ago.

“It is not enough, but it is a great start,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said as she told the cheering crowd that the wage increase that took effect Tuesday was just one element of a middle-class economic program that includes college tuition help, expanded health care coverage and other emerging proposals.

Democrats hope to post more legislative victories in a few days, including enacting into law some of the remaining recommendations of the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission. They also want to pass a lobbying overhaul that was central to their campaign last year against the “culture of corruption” so they can start their late-summer recess on a high note.

Republicans agree it would represent real progress if Democrats could get those measures through and tee up a few others for the fall. But they are withering in their criticism of what the Democratic majority has — and has not — done since taking power in January.

“They’ve wasted the first seven months by being excessively partisan and creating unnecessary, in my view, disputes with a pretty robust minority of 49,” said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader.

Temperment?

Does anyone else think that putting a red panda in an enclosure with big cat cubs is a bad idea? The last time I checked, as big cats grow up they tend to be pretty playful and a 15 pound puma cub can do some serious damage with those claws. I'd be concerned that the pumas might end up playing with the red panda and either injuring or killing it. Probably just my pro-cat stance, though.

Red panda joins feline pals at zoo
Chicago Sun-Times

To the Lincoln Park Zoo, the raccoon-like red panda has the heart of a lion.

The fury creature joined its feline friends Tuesday in a $1.75 million upgraded exhibit at the Kovler Lion House.

"I think that they're really cute," 7-year-old Hadley McCarthy said, admiring the panda and his new roommates: two puma cubs, a trio of long-haired Pallas' cats, a baronial snow leopard and an Afghan leopard.

Grand Jury clears doctor of Katrina mercy killings

When you have a D.A. who feels a grand jury that lets off a murderer did the right thing, you have some serious problems. Dr. Pou and two nurses admitted to injecting four hospital patients with a lethal level of pain killers in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Either the doctor intentionally killed the four patients - and should be imprisoned for the rest of her life - or committed one of the most egregiously gross acts of medical malpractice I've heard of, and should still be imprisoned for manslaughter and barred from practicing medicine.

When in our society did it become acceptable for people to murder the innocent?

Grand jury clears doctor of Katrina mercy killings
Chicago Sun-Times

NEW ORLEANS - A grand jury refused on Tuesday to indict a doctor accused of murdering four seriously ill hospital patients with drug injections during the desperate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, closing the books on the only mercy-killing case to emerge from the storm.

Dr. Anna Pou acknowledged administering medication to the patients but insisted she did so only to relieve pain.

Pou (pronounced ''Poe'') and two nurses were arrested last summer after Attorney General Charles Foti concluded they gave ''lethal cocktails'' to four patients at the flooded-out, sweltering Memorial Medical Center after the August 2005 storm.

Quote of the Day

"Now that [Arizona Cardinals Quarterback] Matt Leinart realizes that he's going to have to pay a ton in child support he's waging what he refers to as a "gung-ho fight for custody." I love those kinds of fathers, the ones who all of a sudden want to have custody because the kids' child support is costing them a load of money."

- Drew Lane, on Drew and Mike in the Morning on WRIF

Does this make sense?

Does "eat local," as Elizabeth Edwards is suggesting, really make sense when the loss of efficiency in the system means an increase in hunger and that the majority of fossil fuel used procuring food is the trip to and from the supermarket.

No tangerines for you?
The Politico

The politics of global warming got very concrete, and oddly difficult, in a meeting with local environmentalists in the coastal town of McClellanville today, where Elizabeth Edwards raised in passing the importance of relying on locally-grown food.

"We've been moving back to 'buy local,'" Mrs. Edwards said, outlining a trade policy that "acknowledges the carbon footprint" of transporting fruit.

"I love in North Carolina. I'll probably never eat a tangerine again," she said, speaking of a time when the fruit reaches the price that it "needs" to be.

Edwards had talked about "sacrifice," at the meeting, but Elizabeth's suggestion illustrated just how difficult it is to sell the specifics of sacrifice.

Asked about her comment immediately after the event, John Edwards avoided the question twice, then said he wasn't sure.

"Would I add to the price of food!" he asked. "I'd have to think about that."

UPDATE: Just to be clear, he's not talking about a food tax. The basic point is that any plan that imposes new costs on carbon emissions is going to make anything that's transported long distances with fossil fuels cost more. It is, in a way, a moment of clarity in this debate.

Ward Churchill fired

Ward Churchill has finally been fired and it has nothing to do with his inflammatory remarks a few years ago. Of course, he and his lawyer are going to pretend it's a free speech thing. The bottom line is that an academic review panel unanimously found him to have falsified, fabricated, and plagiarized his academic work and in doing so failed to comply with established standards and accepted practices. Anyone who thinks that he needs to stay under those circumstances is gravely mistaken.

'I'm going nowhere' says Churchill after firing

BOULDER – The University of Colorado Board of Regents voted to terminate controversial professor Ward Churchill on Tuesday evening.

The Board of Regents passed a motion to accept the recommendation from CU President Hank Brown to fire Churchill from his position in the Ethnic Studies department.

The measure passed with an 8 to 1 vote. The vote was made just after 5:30 p.m. and Cindy Carlisle was the dissenting vote. The move came after academic committees found in 2006 that Churchill was guilty of academic misconduct, including plagiarism.

The board's decision came more than an hour after it was initially expected. It is unclear what caused the delay.

Immediately after the decision was announced people in the crowd booed and some swore at the board members.

Churchill and his supporters then participated in a Native American ceremony outside of the building.

"I am going nowhere," said Churchill. "This is not about break, this is not about bend, this is not about compromise."

No comment

I'd comment about this, but I have standards.

Lawsuit Claims NYC Pipe Blast Triggered Sept. 11 Memories
Fox News

MELVILLE, N.Y. — A woman whose sister died in the Sept. 11 attacks filed a lawsuit over last week's steam pipe eruption in Manhattan, saying Tuesday that the explosion brought back horrible memories.

Francine Dorf's lawsuit accuses Consolidated Edison of negligence, saying the utility didn't properly maintain the pipe that ruptured outside her office and sent a geyser of steam, mud and asbestos-tainted debris over the neighborhood near Grand Central Terminal.

"I thought a building was going to collapse," said Dorf, 52, a legal secretary. She is seeking unspecified damages.

Dorf's attorney, Kenneth Mollins, said Dorf suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and "a legacy of fear" from the 2001 attacks. He said the lawsuit is intended to force Con Ed to improve maintenance of its infrastructure.

Her sister, Maria La Vache, was an employee of insurer Marsh & McLennan and was on the 99th floor of the north tower of the World Trade Center when it collapsed. Her body was never recovered.

Dorf said she called her brother and mother after the steam pipe rupture last Wednesday to say goodbye.

"I can't sleep, I can't eat. If I lay down I can see the smoke," she said. "And I think of my sister over and over again. What she must have went through on 9/11."

A Con Ed spokesman said the utility does not comment on pending litigation.

John Edward's poverty tour

Anthony Bradley’s analysis of John Edwards’ poverty initiatives is spot-on. Where he fails, however, is in addressing the issue fully.

He is absolutely correct in his analysis that having fathers involved in the lives of their children is a critical component in making sure those children stay out of poverty. Other than that, though, it’s bereft of alternate solutions.

America's poverty rate exceeds 18%, which is a national shame and embarrassment. Increased job opportunities, improvements in education, reduction of crime, and mentoring the youth to encourage the next generation to advance are all critical in the fight on poverty. Republican principals of economic development, personal responsibility, and reduction in crime can be instituted along side the existing support institutions to help people move to independence. Advocating policies which support job creation, reduced crime, improved education, and mentoring can solve the problems causing poverty, not just addressing its effects. Unlike the Democrat anti-poverty initiatives, which have shown decades of failure, investing money directly in the means to bring people out of poverty will result in a net increase of tax revenues as the people moving out of poverty get higher paying jobs and pay more in taxes than they received in benefits.

Edwards' poverty tour embraces failed policies
The Detroit News

The oft-quoted saying from the book of Ecclesiastes, "There is nothing new under the sun," is especially true of Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards' well-intentioned but misguided "poverty tour." Edwards' proposals to help the poor are nothing more than a remix of Franklin Roosevelt's "New Deal" and Lyndon Johnson's "War on Poverty" and, like those previous initiatives, miss the mark.

Edwards proposes to raise the minimum wage as high as $9.50 an hour from the current $5.85, strengthen labor laws and promote "responsible families." Government wealth redistribution schemes, more unions and expanded government social programming have not helped the poor in the past and will continue to fail the truly disadvantaged in the future.

Raising the minimum wage does not help the poor over the long term. As James Sherk of the Heritage Foundation points out, a higher minimum wage causes employers to cut both the number of workers they hire and their employees' working hours, which reduces overall job opportunities for the poor. Economic research shows each 10 percent increase in the minimum wage reduces employment by roughly 2 percent.

In addition, few minimum-wage earners actually come from poor households. Most minimum-wage earners tend to be in nonpoor groups, such as suburban teens.

Labor unions don't help the truly disadvantaged either. They pursue their own protectionist interests, which include minimum wage increases that make unskilled labor too expensive for employers.

Fuzzy Math

Diana Seales, Executive Director of the East Michigan Environmental Action Council in Bloomfield Hills, takes aim at the auto industry’s estimates of increased vehicle costs to comply with CAFE increases to 35 mpg. She refutes the idea that it would take $5,000 per car to comply with the new standards. She states that “…a typical fleet… could easily reach an average of 37 miles per gallon, using existing technology without any reductions in safety or performance.”

What she leaves unsaid is exactly what those technologies are and how much they cost. The two methods most readily available are hybridization and diesel engines. Hybrids increase the cost of a care between $1,500 and $6,000 depending on the model. Diesel engines usually cost about $1,500 to $3,000 more. Both technologies together would be required to come close to a 37 mpg standard, meaning an increase of $3,000 to $9,000 per vehicle. The $5,000 estimate as a fleet-wide average seems about reasonable.

What is particularly frustrating about the whole process is that past CAFE standards have not resulted in any reductions in pollution or in fuel consumption. The auto industry has been singled out as the great bogyman destroying the environment even though only about 1/6 of greenhouse gases come from passenger vehicles. Many other means could be used to get the same greenhouse gas reductions and would cost substantially less than $5,000 every three to four years: mandating programmable thermostats, revising building codes to improve insulation, eliminating incandescent light bulbs and replacing them with LED or compact fluorescents, requiring that rechargeable devices in the house have full switch-off mechanisms so they do not use electricity when not charging, improved efficiency standards for household appliances, reductions in the maximum temperature of hot water heaters, more energy efficient windows, etc.

The auto industry has been made a scapegoat and the result will be tens of thousands of lost jobs and the real possibility of at least one of the Big Three collapsing. Other methods of doing the same thing are out there if we act in a comprehensive manner. Why lay the entire responsibility on the heads of the American auto workers?

Don't believe scare tactics on gas mileage
The Detroit News

The July 9 story, "Carmaker's push fuel bill harder" manipulated the facts surrounding Rep. Ed Markey's (D-Mass.) fuel efficiency bill.

The article claims it would "cost domestic automakers at least $85 billion, adding as much as $5,000 to the cost of each vehicle. They could also force automakers to stop selling the largest vehicles, shrink the power of engines and add more hybrids." However, it fails to point out that this is nothing more than a scare tactic used by the auto lobby that stands in direct conflict with the facts.

An independent study has shown that within the next 10 to 15 years, a typical fleet including midsize cars, minivans, and large pick-up trucks, could easily reach an average of 37 miles per gallon, using existing technology and without any reductions in safety or performance. Markey's proposal is more than doable.

Rather than limit consumer choice and the viability of our auto industry, such legislation could spark innovation and broaden the appeal of American cars sold at home and abroad. We desperately need these long-waited reforms to bring Detroit back up to speed.

Diana Seales
Executive Director, East Michigan
Environmental Action Council
Bloomfield Hills

Democratic economics at work

The new Federal minimum wage goes into effect today. The net effect on the economy? Unemployment of the poorest Americans will increase, inflation will rise slightly, and economic growth will soften. The vast majority of workers, however, are making more than the minimum wage so the degree of the effect of this will be relatively small. However, many small companies are going to feel the wage crunch and will respond by cutting hours, cutting employees, or cutting benefits while raising prices.

Minimum wage hike kicks in Tuesday
USA Today

A new federal minimum wage will go into effect Tuesday, the first in a series of wage increases heralded by some low-income advocates but criticized by business leaders as a potential financial blow.

The minimum wage that takes affect today will boost pay for covered, non-exempt employees to $5.85 an hour from %5.15. The next jump will occur on July 24, 2008, to $6.55 an hour, and then to $7.25 an hour effect July 24, 2009.

"The first step is incredibly modest, a 70-cent increase," says Liana Fox, an economic analyst at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a non-profit think tank that receives some funding from labor groups. "But by the third wage increase, 12.5 million workers will see wages go up. People see this as the right, moral thing to do."

Already, 30 states and the District of Columbia have minimum wages higher than the federal, so only 20 states will be affected by the first wage increase today. More than 70% of workers live in states where state minimum wages already trump the new federal wage increase, according to EPI.

In cases where an employee is subject to both the state and federal minimum wage laws, the employee is entitled to the higher of the two minimum wages.Marc Freedman, director of labor law policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, says the higher federal minimum wage could mean fewer hours for employees, fewer pay increases for other employees, benefits reductions, job losses and waning job creation.

Quote of the Day

"Historic Historic CNN YouTube Debate - Hello, Florida! Am I crazy or did Barack Obama just get suckered into saying that as President within a year he'd personally meet with Fidel Castro?"

- Kausfiles

Harry Potter for 8-year-olds? (no HP7 spoilers)

Hey, I’m a huge Harry Potter fan. The series is one of the most brilliantly written series of books I’ve ever had the pleasure of reading. The biggest misconception, however, is that they are children’s books. Despite the books having started out as children’s novels, they have grown up along with the protagonist. As the books move along, they get darker, they get more mature, and they get much more violent. From the fourth book on, the books turn more and more into war novels. Generally, the rule of thumb is that whatever age Harry is in the book is an appropriate age for the reader. As the books go on, torture (including torture of children), murder, terrorist attacks, slavery, and an all-out war are featured prominently. Characters are very clearly, very evidentially killed and the discussions of life and death are critical to the narrative of the series as a whole. In short, this is not subject matter for an 8-year-old. It does make one wonder, then, why Barak Obama is reading them to his own young child.

AP Interview: Michelle Obama says husband is the 'Harry Potter parent'
Chicago Sun-Times

BOCA RATON, Fla.---- Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama is the ''Harry Potter parent'' who has read all six books about the boy wizard's adventures with his older daughter, his wife said Thursday.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Michelle Obama said her husband has read the books aloud with 9-year-old Malia and saw the latest movie, ''Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix,'' with her last Sunday.

Both are awaiting the release of J.K. Rowling's seven and final book in the series, ''Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,'' this weekend, but finding time to read won't be easy, she said.'The challenge will be scheduling Harry Potter reading time in between Iowa and New Hampshire and fundraising, but I guarantee you they will figure out a way to do it,'' Michelle Obama told the AP. ''Harry Potter is huge in our house.''

Sheer Brilliance

Putting criminals back out on the streets? Brilliant! Hey, if you can't figure out a way to cut your prison expenses, just put the prisoners out on the street. Such stunning leadership!

Cox slams Granholm prison plan
The Detroit News

State Attorney General Mike Cox and a coalition of law enforcement and county government officials on Monday denounced Gov. Jennifer Granholm's proposal to cut state prison costs by reducing some criminal penalties and sending more prisoners to county jails.

Saying the plan was dangerous and wrong-headed, Cox said it was based on mistaken and misleading information. People in prison, even those serving time for relatively minor or nonviolent convictions, often have violent backgrounds, he said. And virtually all criminals have victims.

The proposals, part of the governor's budget-balancing plan, would reduce the number of inmates by about 3,300 over the next three years, according to prison officials. Cox and his colleagues said that is too many.

"Public safety is the first responsibility of government," Cox said. "It shouldn't be the first thing cut."

Who won't Bush talk to?

What was it that Hillary said last night about Bush and diplomacy? Who won't he talk with?

U.S.-Iran Talks Resume in Baghdad
ABC News

The U.S. and Iranian ambassadors to Iraq sat down Tuesday for a second round of groundbreaking of talks on stabilizing Iraq, a session marred by a tense exchange over American allegations that Iran is fueling the violence.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki opened the meeting with an impassioned appeal for help from the two nations to stabilize Iraq and warned that militants from al-Qaida and other terror groups in Iraq were now fleeing and finding refuge elsewhere.

"We are hoping that you support stability in Iraq, an Iraq that doesn't interfere in the affairs of others nor wants anyone to meddle in its own affairs," he said, according to excerpts of al-Maliki's remarks released by his office.

"The world ... must stand together and face this dangerous phenomenon and its evils, which have gone beyond the borders of Iraq after terror and al-Qaida groups received strong blows and are now running away from the fight and moving to other nations," he said.

Democrats on Genocide

Barack Obama last week made it clear that he was willing to cause genocide and ethnic cleansing if it meant withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. Last night during the YouTube debates, Hillary Clinton made it clear that she was unwilling to put troops into Darfur in order to stop genocide and ethnic cleansing. I am, frankly, shocked at the stance.

What sort of polling did they do, what sort of morbid calculus did they come up with that leads them to take a stance towards genocide that could only generously be called ambivalent.

I thought that the Democratic candidates, Obama in particular, were suffering from simple denial about the real existence of ethnic cleansing. It turns out that I was wrong: they know it's there but they either don't care or or they don't feel it's important enough to try to stop.

Assumption of Risk

It really bothers me that in our country we have set up a system wherein we allow people to assume vast amounts of risk to their persons and property and then, if catastrophe strikes, the individual is indemnified by the system. Why should I pay for the rescue of people who refuse to evacuate during mandatory orders? Why should I pay to rebuild houses people knowingly put in the paths of hurricanes and then refuse to insure? In our society, our continued bail-out of those who put themselves and their property in the way of natural disasters without the ability or means to protect themselves is increasingly the threat to lives and property. Those able-bodied individuals who knowingly refuse to evacuate during a mandatory order should be fined heavily to pay for the costs of pulling them out. Those who choose to build houses in the path of hurricanes, floods, or earthquakes should be required to have insurance to cover those catastrophes. Should catastrophe strike, it's not the government's place to step in where your own failings have taken you.

Sure, some people can't afford to pay for earthquake insurance in California or hurricane insurance in Florida or flood insurance in Louisiana. If you can't afford the insurance, then you either need to assume the risk yourself or move somewhere else - like Washington, Illinois, or Virginia. move away from the obvious catastrophe sites and move towards safer areas.

Poll: Coastal Residents Won't Evacuate
Associated Press

MIAMI - About one in three people living in Southern coastal areas said they would ignore hurricane evacuation orders of a storm threatened their community, up from about one in four ast year, a poll released Tuesday shows.

The survey found the most common reasons for not evacuating were the same ones that topped last year's Harvard University poll: People believe that their homes are safe and well-built, that roads would be too crowded and that fleeing would be dangerous. Slightly more than one in four also said they would be reluctant to leave behind a pet.

Robert Blendon, the Harvard professor who directed the survey, said the mild 2006 Atlantic hurricane season probably put more coastal residents at ease. "It just shows how people can become complacent if they're not immediately threatened," Blendon said.

Residents were asked how worried they are about hurricanes, what supplies they have in their homes, how confident they are about being rescued and how else they had prepared for possible storms. The poll found 78 percent felt prepared if a major hurricane struck their community in the next six months.

Thirty-one percent of respondents said they would not evacuate. Another 5 percent said their decision would depend on the circumstances.

More of the same - more nothing

Senate Democrats today are holding hearings. Surprise anyone? Are they going to be dealing with American poverty, AIDS in Africa, immigration, job creation, education, balancing the budget, closing the gap between taxes owed and taxes paid, third-world infrastructure development, or trying to deal with the problems in either health care or social security? Of course not. No, instead they're going to spend their time questioning the Attorney General about alleged "improper" firings. Why bother dealing with a real issue when you can hammer an Administration official over something that maybe, might have been "improper." Not illegal, mind you, but rather just "improper."

Gonzales Faces More Senate Questioning
ABC News

The return of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to the Senate Judiciary Committee is in some ways the story of Democratic failure to drum up enough pressure to force President Bush's hand.

Not so long ago, Republicans as well as Democrats thought they'd seen Gonzales sit before them for the last time as attorney general. There was no way Gonzales could survive the controversy over the prosecutor firings, nor the exposure of other missteps, they said. Certainly he could not resist the widespread calls for his resignation one, from a Republican to his face as the proceedings were broadcast live.

They were wrong. Gonzales was called to testify again Tuesday. A Senate vote of no confidence in Gonzales has failed, and Bush has noted that the U.S. attorneys probe did not uncover any clear wrongdoing. And, armed with the president's support, Gonzales has made clear that he does not intend to leave office before Bush does.

Democrats say the wrongdoing is Gonzales' broader failure of leadership that extends to the FBI's abuse of so-called National Security letters and a withered tradition of independence from the political interests of the White House.

"This attorney general has a severe credibility problem," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said in remarks prepared for Tuesday's hearing. "It is time for the attorney general to fully answer these questions and to acknowledge and begin taking responsibility for the acute crisis of leadership that has gripped the department under his watch."

Gonzales' statement to the committee was full of regret for his agency's troubles and included a commitment to repair the damage. He made no reference to the fired U.S. attorneys. Only briefly, Gonzales mentioned the controversy that has sunk morale at the Justice Department and has called the fairness of its attorneys into question.

"I will not tolerate any improper politicization of this department," Gonzales said in remarks prepared for his Senate testimony. "I will continue to make efforts to ensure that my staff and others within the department have the appropriate experience and judgment so that previous mistakes will not be repeated.

Disgusting

This is a disgusting little bit: parents stealing their children's financial identities.
I will only say one thing about this: a biometric ID card, standardized across the country, and required for any sort of major financial transaction would help defend against this sort of victimization.

Parents Steal Children's Identities
ABC News

On paper, Randy Waldron Jr. was $2.5 million in debt and a convicted felon. He owed hundreds of thousands of dollars to credit companies, owed back taxes to the state of Florida, and had liens and civil actions against him.

In reality, Waldron was a 17-year-old high school junior living in New Hampshire, who in 1998 couldn't get a student loan for college or a credit card because his Social Security number had been stolen when he was just 1 year old.

Making matters worse, the man who stole Waldron's identity was his father.

"My father was charismatic, attractive and successful. He always had money and was never broke," Waldron told ABC NEWS.com.

"He maintained that image until 1998 when I was getting ready to graduate from high school. I wanted to be an airline pilot and applied to every college with a program, but was rejected by all of them. I couldn't understand, because my grades in school had always been good," he says.

"At about the same time, I received rejection letters from credit card companies and financial aid institutions. … I wrote to get my free credit report and when it came back it was 50 pages long," he says. "I was 17 years old and had liens against me. I owed Master Card and Visa hundreds of thousands of dollars and back taxes in Florida."

Soon after Randy was born in 1981, his father, Randy Waldron Sr., left his mother and moved to Florida. By 1982 Waldron Sr. was fraudulently using his son's spotless identity as his own

We'll take 'em all!

Nolan Finley has a great column calling on Kwame to open the doors of Detroit to Iraqi immigrants to help build a new life - both for the immigrants and for Detroit - here. It's a great idea and should definitely be considered.

Rebuild Detroit with immigrants
The Detroit News

Warren Mayor Mark Steenbergh says he doesn't want a flood of new Iraqi immigrants overwhelming his city. His loss. Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick should stand up and shout, "I'll take 'em all!"

A massive influx of immigrants looking to build new lives and willing to help rebuild an old city would fit right into Kilpatrick's plans to revive Detroit's neighborhoods.

Immigrants are already proving they can make a difference in Detroit. Drive out Vernor Highway from the near west side to Dearborn, first through the Hispanic neighborhoods and transitioning to the Arab community, and you'll see once abandoned storefronts filled with small businesses -- bakeries, markets, dry cleaners, auto shops -- serving their new customers.

Or go to the growing ethnic enclave around the State Fairgrounds for a look at the ability of Iraqi newcomers to make something out of nothing.

The refugees arriving from the turmoil in Iraq could repopulate city blocks that have been losing residents for nearly 50 years.

The immigrants would bring with them children to fill the 60,000 empty seats in Detroit Public Schools classrooms and, if they are anything like their predecessors, an undeniable entrepreneurial drive to strengthen the city's small business base.
Most will be educated and have skills attractive to employers.

Actively recruit refugees

Detroit should be actively recruiting these Iraqi immigrants, and others from around the world, offering relocation and acculturation assistance. The city should put together a package of enticements to make sure they land here instead of somewhere else.

For example, the large inventory of city-owned abandoned homes could serve as bait to lure immigrants. Give them the keys to a house and tell them to fix it up and return it to the tax rolls within three years and it's theirs to keep -- free. That's a better option than continuing to roll bulldozers through Detroit's blighted neighborhoods.

Immigration could be a growth industry for Detroit. But becoming America's new immigrant capital will require the city's leaders, specifically some members of the City Council, to get over their Afrocentric vision of Detroit and recognize that diversity is a route to revival.

As long as a growing immigrant population is seen as a threat to black political power rather than an opportunity to build a culturally rich city, the new arrivals are going to choose more welcoming locales.

Already, resentment is rising among Detroit's Latino and Middle Eastern populations over a lack of political representation and the perception that their needs get a low priority from City Hall.

When Detroit was booming, it was because migrants from everywhere -- Poland, Italy, Germany, Ireland, the American South -- swarmed to the city searching for security, hope and opportunity.

Now, 40 years after the '67 riots pushed down the accelerator of decline, Detroit has a chance to boom again on the strength of new immigrants seeking those very same things.

Is this how you raise your country?

This may be one of the most intellectually brain-dead articles I've had the misfortune to read. A column in the Independent argues in favor of increased trade tariffs in the third world, with the justification that these apparently will help third world development.

First off, the suggestion that somehow developing countries are in any way at all similar to developing children is one of the most idiotic comparisons I've seen in a long while. That being said, the idea of investing in a child's education - the comparison used somehow for increased tariffs - is comparable to infrastructural and educational development, not economic protectionism.

Most importantly, though, is the thrust of his argument: somehow increased tariffs on imports are going to help the domestic industries in countries. Somehow, eliminating foreign investment is going to increase domestic development.

I'm personally not sure how increasing the prices of goods is going to help. Inflation is the great bugaboo of economic development. The more that goods cost, the fewer that can be purchased and the less money is left for reinvestment. It should be obvious, but apparently isn't for everyone. It has been shown empirically throughout history that increased protectionism yields reduced economic development.

As to the other suggestion, that somehow foreign investment is problematic. This is just idiotic. European countries in the 19th century were existing under the very real threat that other, equivalently powerful countries would use economic means to cripple them to allow for conquest. Frankly, should the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Russia, or other world power want to invade and conquer a third world country, domestic control of industry isn't going to stop it. The added money coming into the country is what will allow industry to flourish.

The real problem facing the developing world, and the area where an outside concerned party can help, is with the essential infrastructure development. Elementary school education, clean drinking water, solid roads, crop irrigation systems, and basic medical care for all individuals are the issues critical to economic development. Instead of blathering on about protectionism versus free-markets, the focus should be on delivering the essential infrastructure which is required for any development.

Bring them in...

Absolutely we should be bringing in more Iraqi refugees. Most of the refugees coming from Iraq are highly educated individuals who have fought in support of their country at our request. They are exactly the types of people we want in this country.

A suggestion was made on the Drew and Mike show this morning on WRIF that we should offer these individuals a chance to come to Detroit and settle in the city. There are plenty of houses which have either been abandoned or seized due for tax or mortgage reasons. These refugees should be offered the opportunity to have the houses if they are willing to rebuild them.

While the idea obviously has some problems, there might be something to it. It would be an interesting opportunity to bring in highly qualified immigrants, help people who would have helped us in Iraq, and help the neighborhoods of Detroit come back. Not sure if it's the best way to go about things, but it deserves a look.

US ambassador says Iraqi aides will quit unless granted asylum
The Guardian

The United States ambassador in Iraq, Ryan Cocker, has called for all Iraqis working for the US government to be granted refugee status in recognition of the dangers they face.

Mr. Cocker warned in a cable obtained by the Washington Post that unless Iraqi employees were given hope of finding safe haven in America they would quit, weakening the ability of the Bush administration to make an impact in Iraq.

He said that Iraqis in US government employment "work under extremely difficult conditions, and are targets for violence including murder and kidnapping. Unless they know that there is some hope of a [visa] in future, many will continue to seek asylum, leaving our mission lacking in one of our most valuable assets".

The US government and its main coalition partner in Iraq, Britain, have both been criticised by human rights and refugee organisations for failing to allow significant numbers of Iraqi asylum seekers into their countries. The US has admitted 825 Iraqis since the invasion in 2003.

The British government granted asylum to about 100 Iraqis between 2003 and 2005, but figures since then are unknown. It has refused to consider applications from among the 2 million Iraqis who have fled to Jordan, Syria and other neighbouring states.

In the wake of heavy criticism, the Bush administration expanded its Iraqi refugee programme, promising to admit 7,000 by October. However, it has processed just 133 since last October.

The United Nations estimates that up to 20,000 Iraqis will never be able to return to Iraq. Other countries have accepted many more Iraqi refugees. Sweden has taken in more than any other nation, despite the fact that it is not part of the coalition.

Last week it emerged that Denmark had secretly airlifted out about 200 Iraqi interpreters and their families. The move was made in advance of the imminent withdrawal of 470 Danish troops stationed in Iraq.

Nice...

Yeah, let's leave peacekeeping to the United Nations. Nothing bad will happen, right?

How is it, again, that we're the bad guys? Peacekeepers in the Ivory Coast are engaged in widespread rape of women and children, trafficking of sex slaves, and the United States is the country of evil? Perhaps it's just me, but keeping a terrorist from being able to sleep for a couple of days just doesn't strike me as bad as having widespread open-season raping women and children.

UN probes 'abuse' in Ivory Coast
BBC News

The United Nations is investigating allegations of widespread sexual abuse and exploitation by peacekeepers serving in Ivory Coast.

The UN said a unit of its contingent in Bouake, a northern rebel stronghold, had been confined to base.

It would not give the nationalities of those troops under investigation.

Claims of sexual abuse have been made against UN troops on various missions, prompting ex-UN chief Kofi Annan to declare a "zero tolerance" policy.

'Utterly immoral'

"There have been crimes such as rape, paedophilia and human trafficking," he said in December 2006, shortly before leaving office.

He said sexual exploitation and abuse were "utterly immoral" and at odds with the UN mission, and would be punished.

Sexual abuse and exploitation by peacekeeping personnel hit the headlines in 2004 after a UN report detailed widespread abuse in the DR Congo involving UN troops.
More than 300 members of UN peacekeeping missions around the world have been investigated for sexual exploitation and abuse since 2004, including some stationed in Congo, Cambodia and Haiti.

A chance at recovery?

In an Associated Press article regarding the upcoming UAW talks with Ford and GM, Laurie Harbour-Felax, managing director at Stout Risius Ross Inc., a firm which studies auto company costs, is reported to agree "with the union that companies must do more to cut costs and become more efficient." Did I miss something? When did the UAW start feeling that the companies should "do more to cut costs and become more efficient"? The biggest problem that has plagued Ford and GM is the Union's staunch anti-modernization stance. They've long been the bastion of refusal for change. That's the primary reason Ford and GM spend more to build a car: it takes them more man-hours to do the work so it costs more. The added per-employee costs only compound the issue. If, as is suggested, the Union is willing to allow Ford and GM to modernize their processes and factories to be faster and less labor intensive, the companies have a chance at recovery.

Assuming, of course, that John Dingell's commitment to raising CAFE doesn't cripple the companies first.

UAW to Hold Talks With Ford, GM
ABC News

Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp. have more at stake than usual as they begin their traditional talks with United Auto Workers: cutting labor costs may be key to their survival.

The traditional handshake ceremonies with the union were to begin Monday with GM in Detroit and Ford in Dearborn, although talks already have been under way for months. The union formally opened negotiations with Chrysler Group on Friday, and the national contracts with all three expire Sept. 14.

The three automakers lost a combined $15 billion in 2006 and are in the midst of shrinking themselves and rolling out new vehicles to better compete with Japanese companies. Industry analysts have said reducing labor costs is critical.

Ford is in the worst shape of the three, having mortgaged its factories to set up a $23.4 billion line of credit to cover losses and pay operating expenses while it restructures. Ford lost $12.6 billion last year and $282 million in the first quarter of this year, and it doesn't expect to make money again until 2009.

Analysts say Ford likely will seek deeper concessions than the other two automakers, perhaps including temporary wage cuts.

All three say the talks need to bring them into labor cost parity with Japanese automakers, who make about $2,000 per car more in profits.

The Detroit automakers say their hourly labor costs are about $25 more than those of Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co. when health care, pension, retiree and other costs are factored in.

Glad to see they're getting something done

Looks like Feingold is doing his best to continue to get nothing done in Congress. He could be working on immigration issues, trying to create jobs in order to reduce the poverty rate, working to secure the ports, writing legislation to insure the uninsured without bankrupting the country or reducing the health care for the vast majority of Americans who have insurance, balancing the budget, closing the gap between what people owe in taxes and what they pay, fighting genocide in Darfur, fighting AIDS in Africa and South-East Asia, fighting global poverty, insuring elementary school education for the worlds poor, working to stop nuclear proliferation, encouraging the spread of democracy and human rights, building essential infrastructure in the developing world, or address the woefully inadequate education our nation is providing to our poor and minority children.

Why bother, though, when he can make yet another useless statement about how much he disapproves of the President?

Sen. Feingold Proposes Censuring Bush
ABC News

Liberal Democrat Sen. Russ Feingold said Sunday he wants Congress to censure President Bush for his management of the Iraq war and his "assault" against the Constitution.

But Feingold's own party leader in the Senate showed little interest in the idea. An attempt in 2006 by Feingold to censure Bush over the warrantless spying program attracted only three co-sponsors.

Feingold, a prominent war critic, said he soon plans to offer two censure resolutions measures that would amount to a formal condemnation of the Republican president.
The first would seek to reprimand Bush for, as Feingold described it, getting the nation into war without adequate military preparation and for issuing misleading public statements. The resolution also would cite Vice President Dick Cheney and perhaps other administration officials.

The second measure would seek to censure Bush for what the Democrat called a continuous assault against the rule of law through such efforts as the warrantless surveillance program against suspected terrorists, Feingold said. It would also ask for a reprimand of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and maybe others.

"This is an opportunity for people to say, let's at least reflect on the record that something terrible has happened here," said Feingold, D-Wis. "This administration has weakened America in a way that is frightful."

At the White House, spokesman Trey Bohn said, "We realize that Senator Feingold does not care much for the president's policies."

Liberals vow to block continued Iraq funding

Two comments:

1) No one ever said that the war would be paid for out of Iraqi oil money. It was said that Iraqi oil money would pay for the rebuilding of Iraq from the horrors of decade of Baathist brutality and the damages from the war.

2) This is helpful as it is a list of all those individuals who believe that we should abandon the Iraqi people to ethnic cleansing and genocide.

Liberals Vow to Block Continued Iraq Funding
The Politico

Seventy House Members, nearly all liberal Democrats, vowed today that they would not support any more funding for Iraq military operations unless tied to a complete withdrawal of combat troops.

This is a big development. Earlier this year, liberals grudgingly voted for Iraq funding bills because they didn't want to give Nancy Pelosi a defeat. Now it seems that their patience has run out.

The next Iraq funding bill won't come up until the fall, so this showdown won't happen for a few months, but it appears to be shaping up as an epic battle between liberals in Congress and President Bush. This may be the beginning of the end for the Iraq War.

The liberals' full letter to Bush:

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing to inform you that we will only support appropriating additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq during Fiscal Year 2008 and beyond for the protection and safe redeployment of all our troops out of Iraq before you leave office.

More than 3,600 of our brave soldiers have died in Iraq. More than 26,000 have been seriously wounded. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed or injured in the hostilities and more than 4 million have been displaced from their homes. Furthermore, this conflict has degenerated into a sectarian civil war and U.S. taxpayers have paid more than $500 billion, despite assurances that you and your key advisors gave our nation at the time you ordered the invasion in March, 2003 that this military intervention would cost far less and be paid from Iraqi oil revenues.

We agree with a clear and growing majority of the American people who are opposed to continued, open-ended U.S. military operations in Iraq, and believe it is unwise and unacceptable for you to continue to unilaterally impose these staggering costs and the soaring debt on Americans currently and for generations to come.

Sincerely,

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (CA); Rep. Barbara Lee (CA); Rep. Maxine Waters (CA); Rep. Ellen Tauscher (CA); Rep. Rush Holt (NJ); Rep. Maurice Hinchey (NY); Rep. Diane Watson (CA); Rep. Ed Pastor (AZ); Rep. Barney Frank (MA); Rep. Danny Davis (IL); Rep. John Conyers (MI); Rep. John Hall (NY); Rep. Bob Filner (CA); Rep. Nydia Velazquez (NY); Rep. Bobby Rush (IL); Rep. Charles Rangel (NY); Rep. Ed Towns (NY); Rep. Paul Hodes (NH); Rep. William Lacy Clay (MO); Rep. Earl Blumenauer (OR); Rep. Albert Wynn (MD); Rep. Bill Delahunt (MA); Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC); Rep. G. K. Butterfield (NC); Rep. Hilda Solis (CA); Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY); Rep. Jerrold Nadler (NY); Rep. Michael Honda (CA); Rep. Steve Cohen (TN); Rep. Phil Hare (IL); Rep. Grace Flores Napolitano (CA); Rep. Alcee Hastings (FL); Rep. James McGovern (MA); Rep. Marcy Kaptur (OH); Rep. Jan Schakowsky (IL); Rep. Julia Carson (IN); Rep. Linda Sanchez (CA); Rep. Raul Grijalva (AZ); Rep. John Olver (MA); Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (TX); Rep. Jim McDermott (WA); Rep. Ed Markey (MA); Rep. Chaka Fattah (PA); Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (NJ); Rep. Rubin Hinojosa (TX); Rep. Pete Stark (CA); Rep. Bobby Scott (VA); Rep. Jim Moran (VA); Rep. Betty McCollum (MN); Rep. Jim Oberstar (MN); Rep. Diana DeGette (CO); Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA); Rep. Artur Davis (AL); Rep. Hank Johnson (GA); Rep. Donald Payne (NJ); Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (MO); Rep. John Lewis (GA); Rep. Yvette Clarke (NY); Rep. Neil Abercrombie (HI); Rep. Gwen Moore (WI); Rep. Keith Ellison (MN); Rep. Tammy Baldwin (WI); Rep. Donna Christensen (USVI); Rep. David Scott (GA); Rep. Luis Gutierrez (IL); Lois Capps (CA); Steve Rothman (NJ); Elijah Cummings (MD); and Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX).

They still think it's about oil?

Tim Grieve somehow still thinks that Iraq is about the oil. Right. We spent half a trillion dollars when we could have bought all of Iraq's oil for a hundred billion dollars and now we're letting upwards of 95% of it go to other countries. If this is a war from oil, why haven't we gotten any?

Grieve is correct that the intentions of neoconservatives have been transparent right from the start. They even put up a website and made it clear what they wanted. They felt, and still feel, that having a free, liberal democracy in Iraq would take the region from tyrannical dictators intent on annihilating the Israelis and instituting a world-wide caliphate and spread free, liberal democracy to everyone.

"Sex Ed" for Kindergarten

When Barack Obama is talking about sex education for kindergarten aged children, what is he talking about? Recent quotes make it appear as though he's talking about teaching children how to avoid pedophiles and what is inappropriate behavior from adults. This doesn't really strike me as "sex ed" so much as teaching the children how to avoid societal dangers. Teaching children that they should report "inappropriate touching" and what types of touching is inappropriate doesn't strike me as more problematic than teaching them to look before crossing the street or wear a helmet while biking.

Sex Ed for Kindergartners? Romney-Obama Debate Heats Up
Romney Asks, 'How Much Sex Education Is Age Appropriate for a 5-Year-Old?
ABC News

When Democratic presidential hopeful Barak Obama reaffirmed to Planned Parenthood this week that he believes elements of sex education should begin in kindergarten, Republican Mitt Romney saw an opening -- and he pounced.

"I was governor four years,' said Romney. "I never had one person coming to me and say, 'You know what, governor, I'm concerned about something.' What's that? 'I'm concerned about sex education. I'm concerned my kids aren't learning enough about sex.' I never heard that."

Romney may have never heard that because Massachusetts -- the state where he served as governor from 2003 to 2007 -- has a decidedly progressive sex education curriculum. Under the state's non-binding framework, school districts can begin working towards the state's sex education goals as early as pre-kindergarten.

By the end of the fifth grade, it not only encourages schools to teach children the basics about puberty and the reproductive system, it also encourages them to know how to define "sexual orientation using the correct terminology (such as heterosexual, and gay and lesbian)." Before the end of fifth grade, the Massachusetts framework also aims to teach children about inappropriate touching.

Robert Byrd should shut up

While I certainly understand anger at the despicable torture that is dog fighting, for obvious reasons Robert Byrd shouldn't be the one talking about executing Michael Vick.

Michael Vick Dogfighting Case Makes Way to Floor of U.S. Senate
Fox News

Richmond, Va. - The Michael Vick dogfighting case made its way to the floor of the U.S. Senate Thursday when its most senior member publicly declared his outrage, saying he's witnessed one execution but wouldn't mind seeing another "if it involves this cruel, sadistic, cannibalistic business of training innocent, vulnerable creatures to kill."

The strong words from Sen. Robert Byrd, D-WV, widely known for his devotion to animals, come as dogfighting controversy swirls around the Atlanta Falcons star quarterback. Vick and three others were indicted earlier this week on felony charges of competitive dogfighting, procuring and training pit bulls for fighting, and conducting the enterprise across state lines.

The dogs were housed, trained and fought at a property owned by Vick in Surry County, Va., under an outfit named "Bad Newz Kennels," the indictment says.

Among the grisly findings: Losing dogs either died in the pit or were electrocuted, drowned, hanged or shot. The indictment said purses climbed as high as $20,000 for fights.

Byrd called the activities described in the Vick case "sadistic" and "barbaric." At one point, Byrd began shouting and pumping his fist.

"Barbaric!," he yelled. "Let that word resounding from hill to hill, and from mountain to mountain, and valley to valley across the broad land. Barbaric! Barbaric! May God help those poor souls who'd be so cruel. Barbaric! Hear me! Barbaric!"