Smoking ban. A ban on foie gras. Now a proposed ban on trans fats.

City Councils around the country are pushing these bans all in the name of the public health.

Translation: We know that you know this stuff is bad for you but, dadgummit, you seem unable to arrive at the correct decisions regarding whether or not you to expose yourself to these things.

So we will just have to decide for you.

In Midland this was tried only with the smoking ban in restaurants. So far.

But the basic conflict remains the same...born regulators know the correct answers and you should never underestimate their willingness to use the power of the state to force the "correct" decision on you.

Sure, they always "hate that they have to do this".....but what does that matter when they are still very willing to?

First they came for the smokers, but I was not a smoker......"

From the Department Unintended Hilarity (DUH) comes this line from an article in today's issue of USAToday:

"He earned a sociology degree two years ago and moved back in with his parents, working as a temp as he tried to figure out his next step in life. "

Whoa. Who could have ever seen that coming?

Speaking of AOHell, didja catch the feature on MSNBC about a guy that called to cancel his account?

You may think that this story is not to be believed, but let me tell you as someone who cancelled an AOL account this week that it is every bit this hard and aggravating. It took twenty five minutes on the phone to complete the cancellation*...and this without my biting on any special retention deals whatsoever. Twenty-five minutes of me saying "No thanks, just cancel the account."

The guy, Vicente Ferrari has a blog and has posted on it. There are over 840 comments to that post that bascially confirm that this is how AOL treats everyone who calls trying to cancel.

So my advice is this:

1) Never, ever, ever, ever, ever.....ever sign up with AOL. Ever.
2) If you should ever violate rule number one, kill yourself...but before you do make sure that your estate will not be paying these rat-bastards until the sun explodes by cancelling the account....and here is the advice part: Tell the AOL person on the phone at the outset that you are recording the call....even if you are not.

* If, indeed, it actually does get cancelled. There are many commenters at Ferrari's blog that maintain that, post cancellation, billing either never stopped or re-started. So even if you do think that you were successful you need to check your bill. Many have resorted to just cancelling the card they used for billing.

So I renew my subscription to PC World and to thank me they send me a disk with some utilities...which is okay...but they also included an AOL disk.

Next time they could save the money and send me the utilities and if they really felt like they needed to send me something in addition to that they could always just blow their nose into the envelope.

Which is essentially the same thing.

Comment of the Week over at Tim Blair concerning the warmenizing Al Gore:

"Boy howdy. Ever watched a 10-year-old lying to a five-year-old? There's Al."

Ouch.

Recently, the New York Times took it upon themselves to "serve the public interest" and reveal a secret operation called the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program, a operation that looks at international financial transactions in order to determine where terrorists were getting their money and to then try and dry up the source of funds.

The program by all counts is constitutional, legal, and all relevant members of congress (of both parties) were fully briefed and were conducting proper oversight.

And now The New York Times has decided to let Al Qaida in on the secret.....in the public interest, of course.

This particular program led to the capture of the mastermind of the Bali bombing that killed 202 people.

Not close enough to home for you?

One of those killed was Midlander Jake Young, who left behind a wife and a two-year old son.

UPDATE (h/t Powerline):

"You may think you have done a public service, but you have gravely endangered the lives of my soldiers and all other soldiers and innocent Iraqis here. Next time I hear that familiar explosion -- or next time I feel it -- I will wonder whether we could have stopped that bomb had you not instructed terrorists how to evade our financial surveillance.

And, by the way, having graduated from Harvard Law and practiced with a federal appellate judge and two Washington law firms before becoming an infantry officer, I am well-versed in the espionage laws relevant to this story and others -- laws you have plainly violated. I hope that my colleagues at the Department of Justice match the courage of my soldiers here and prosecute you and your newspaper to the fullest extent of the law. By the time we return home, maybe you will be in your rightful place: not at the Pulitzer announcements, but behind bars.

Very truly yours,

Tom Cotton
Baghdad, Iraq"

Dear ABC:

Thank you for asking about our experiences with global warming because I distinctly remember remarking on how hot it was on...get this...the same day they came out with the report that the earth had warmed 0.6 celsius over the past century!

The same day!

Am I good, or what?

Carbon Neutral in Midland, TX

P.S. Save the Northern Orange County Ice Sheep!

Dear ABC:

I don't really have an anecdote concerning global warming but I was hoping that I could prevail upon your in-house science experts to answer a question:

My friend Laurie and I took her husband's Gulfstream VI to New York to go shopping. While we were there we also purchased several timed thermostats for each of our various homes.

So my question is this: We are still carbon neutral, right?

Keep up the good work!

Barbra in Malibu

Dear ABC:

I finally left United States because I was disgusted with this administration's environmental policies and on the plane they were showing the documentary "The Day After Tomorrow" and everybody on the plane was like, "yeah, right, the weather is going to go to hell in handbasket in two days", but, lo and behold, in the time it took to complete the plane trip the earth's seasons had completed reversed themselves.

I bet those people on the plane feel pretty damned stupid now, huh?

Stephen in Sydney

More Global warming experiences at Protein Wisdom and Tim Blair and at Ace of Spades. You will discover that polar bears drowning is nothing compared to the plight of the Northern Orange County Ice Sheep.

Feel free to write your own in the comments.

To the winners go the spoils.

Critics of the administration constantly harp on the lack of an exit plan or time table for exiting Iraq. I can't imagine how any exit strategy, short of surrender, can involve a time table, period. Such a thing would serve only to provide the terrorists the date on which they can return from their vacations. Or am I missing something here?

Withdrawal from the conflict in Iraq can only come one of two ways: 1) defeat, or 2) after the completion of certain benchmarks or goals....or thinking outside the box....3) reaching that point where we don't mind leaving the Iraqi people to the same fate as befell some other countries in southeast Asia that will go unmentioned.

The above mentioned critics would complain that the administration has no plan for either item one or item two and I suspect that they would take a plan for either one, two, or three with equal glee if it meant we left Iraq.

The Democrats now have a plan, voiced here by the Party Chairman himself:

[MSNBC Host Nora] O'DONNELL: With all due respect, Chairman Dean, many of these issues were talked about in the 2004 election and so what many voters may be talking about in this election is the way forward. What do we do in Iraq now. Why is it that the Democrats, who just unveiled this new plan last week called the new direction for America make absolutely no mention of Iraq in a plan for Iraq. Doesn't that just reinforce the idea that Democrats are weak on national security, they can't come together and put together a plan?

[DNC Chairman Howard] DEAN: No, actually, the unified Democratic plan does call for something to do with Iraq, it calls for a transition now, it calls for a redeployment of our troops so we get them out of harm's way while we're still able to respond to the terrorist threat.

O'DONNELL: What does a redeployment of troops mean?

DEAN: Well, let me first answer your question. What you were talking about is the House agenda for what they were he going to pass, should they come back in power, which is increasing the minimum wage, balancing the budget, which the Republicans haven't been able to do. In fact, no Republican has balanced the budget for 40 years.

O'DONNELL: You're still not dealing with the issue of Iraq. You have three quarters of the House Democrats who say they want some sort of phased withdrawal, if you will, from Iraq. You have multiple resolutions and amendments being put forward in the Senate, even a new one today by Senators Reid and Senators Levin. So with all this talk out there, why is it the Democrats can't put down on paper exactly what their unified plan is. What are you trying to avoid?

DEAN: Well, first of all, let me remind you that it's the Republicans that run everything. I think it's pretty terrific of the Democrats to put down a plan because the Republicans don't seem to have one of any kind, except a permanent commitment to a failed strategy, which we got into because we weren't told the truth.

Our plan is this is a transition year, which the Republicans have now adopted, which I think is great, and there‘s going to be a redeployment our troops, some to other countries, for example, Afghanistan, some in the region out of Iraq but in the region ready to respond to events in Iraq, some remaining in Iraq for a period of time, in order to train the Iraqis and the guard and reserves coming home. I think that's a good plan, I think it's a Democratic plan, and I think it's far better than the Republicans that have no plan of any kind."

Well, okay, they say they have a plan. It must be inside the box. Purchase required. One of the biggest criticisms of the whole war is that Bush ignored "some top commanders" and didn't send in enough troops in the first place. Now, when the slogging still pretty tough, the Dems say that we really, really need to have a lot less troops there. But it is okay, we can protect the ones that remain from Okinawa.

This is on the heels of Democratic Congressman Jack Murtha's grand strategy of running the operation out of Okinawa......prompting this smackdown from commenter rightnumberone over at Protein Wisdom (6/21 at 12:55pm):

I mean, the only reason John "White Flag" Murtha can suggest that we stage operations in Okinawa is that WE ARE STILL FUCKING IN Okinawa for crissakes."

Priceless.

Okay, point forward on downtown development....

The Wall Street re-do is well underway. It will be good to see how it all ends up. Our disagreements with some of the other goings on notwithstanding there is comfort to be taken in the fact that, once decided, the powers that be execute the plans pretty well (i.e. Airport, Stadium complex, the schools, and the Horseshoe).

We can argue the true need all we want but when it comes time to build it so they will come....well...they seem to do a real good job on the building part. The Vandergriff/Parkhill, Smith/et al architect mafia (I mean that in a good way) that always seem to be involved in these things are a pretty talented group and deliver a good product on time.

So.....I look forward to the Wall Street facelift.

As much as I would like to think that the two servicemen found dead were tortured because the enemy is unbelievably barbaric, I think it is just as likely that the torture was used to try and generate a heated response by other soldiers in retaliation.....with the full awareness on the part of the terrorists that the mainstream national press here will *cough* behave as expected.

UPDATE: John Podhoretz wonders the same thing:

" Al-Qaeda-in-Iraq likely hopes to make service personnel believe themselves at risk of death by torture from any band of Iraqis they encounter - so that they'll act differently: cautious, suspicious, with the hypervigilance of someone in the midst of a battle. If it works, civilians who mean our armed forces no harm may find themselves shot or killed by mistake as a result of the hair-trigger posture our forces will have to assume to keep themselves safe.

Could anyone blame them?

The answer, of course, is yes. If this is a new strategy, it exists not only to terrorize American and Coalition forces but also to divide them from Iraqis - to sow fear and hostility that will go both ways, to cause an upsurge in resentment and anger toward U.S. forces."

And we don't have to lean on any theory on how this will all be reported. We need only make use of the imperical evidence.

There is no deep end so deep that the Children of Kos will not go off into it.

I guess their point here is that these soldiers treatment at the hands of their captors was not so awful that they were driven to kill themselves. Like those at Gitmo. Or something.

Moonbats just being useless to our country would be okay. It is their exteme usefulness to the enemies of our country that is the problem.

UPDATE: One of the reasons that the moonbat left is driven absolute bonkers by Jeff Goldstein is his ability to lay out their thoughts more clearly than they themselves can:

This is horrific news - but that doesn't mean it comes without instructions for how properly to grieve.

For instance, if you are a supporter of the Bush plan to fight terrorism, you are allowed to express regret over the death of these soldiers - but sadly, you lack the moral authority to be outraged over the barbarity of their killing [Don't believe it? See "Jill" in the comments on this post -Ed.] , or the fact that the two soldiers were tortured and their remains booby-trapped. Because you surrendered that right the moment you pledged your support to an administration that would allow prisoners of war to be "humiliated" - interrogated by topless women, splashed with fake menstrual blood, lied to, made to strip naked, shown pictures of Jackie Mason, etc. - not to mention, an administration that is listening in on your grandmother's phone calls and simply won't support gay marriage, no matter how much Andrew Sullivan demands it! In short, you practically slaughtered these soldier yourselves.

And of course, because you were willing to torture your own troops, it follows that there is ample reason to believe that in response to the next terror attack against Americans, you'll support US soldiers abducting and torturing Muslims, then leaving their bodies festooned with explosives near public utility plants. Rumsfeld would happily do it himself, of course, but he's too busy losing the war in Iraq and being an all around arrogant prick to his "Old Europe" betters.

But make no mistake: had U.S. military guards not flushed Korans down Gitmo toilets (I know, I know. But let's pretend they did), these two soldiers would have been treated in accordance to the Geneva Convention. For instance, Nick Berg's head was only asked its name, rank, and serial number once it was sawed from its body by a now-dead terror leader who was practically invented by the US; and Daniel Pearl's head is still being fed three meals a day and allowed to play ping pong and go for nice long walks around the terror compound in the wilds of Pakistan, if you can believe the glowing reports from Human Rights Watch. So don't you go believing any of this garbage, which is likely just empty bravado - and doesn't express how al Qaeda really treats its captives. To whom they provide dates and sesame candies, and women with sinfully painted toenails who dance for them like Salome.

Remember: "as ye sew, so shall ye reap." So no more talking bad about Islam, okay? Or else whatever you get, you deserve - and don't you dare bitch about it, either, because you started this the moment you were born in the belly of the Great Satan. "

Over at Vodkapundit is a post on a New York Times article that reports on the "brain drain" from upstate New York to other areas of the country. Of course, the New York Times does not allow for even a sentence the notion that the high taxes and unfriendly business climate there might have something to do with it.

I any event, I direct you to Vodkapundit because the reader comments on this subject, while anecdotal, are instructive as to the various (well, not so various really) reasons why people leave such places.

From today's London Daily Telegraph comes a quote from Dixie Chick Natalie Maines:

"The entire country may disagree with me, but I don't understand the necessity for patriotism," Maines resumes, through gritted teeth. "Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country… I don't see why people care about patriotism."

But don't question her patrioti....oh, to hell with it.

Here is a little nugget from Walser's research flurry of this morning. From this MR-T article on the purchase of the Midland Savings building:

"Perry attributed much of the credit for the successful deal to architect Gary Vandergriff, who met with Yates and other members of the board of directors of his company, Myco Texas, Inc. Vandergriff said he sat down with officials from the company and explained to them the plans that have been made for re-development of downtown Midland and how the removal of the Midland Savings Building can help bring them to fruition.

"I had an opportunity to enlighten Frank Yates a little on the activities in and around downtown," Vandergriff said. "We talked a lot about current events and I got him and his board up to speed on what's in play and what's active at the time."

So let me get this straight. We approached Frank Yates...who has more money than God, and who already owned the building, and for whom the million dollar* demolition cost is literally chump change "and explained to them the plans that have been made for re-development of downtown Midland".....whereupon he unloaded the building and the lot for $165,000.

Yup, it sounds like he was "enlightened" alright.

(* Today's closing price based on numbers and estimates several years old. And anyway, it doesn't matter. Oh, and you're out of order for asking.)

To answer the question previously asked by someone in some post or comment regarding how much money that the Midland Municpal Managment District will provide towards the "around a million dollars based on numbers several years old" cost of the demolition of the Midland Savings Building the answer can be found here:

"[Current City Counciman and Chairman of the Midland Downtown Development District Wes] Perry said it is possible the City Council will approve the allocation of city funds to help with the cost of demolition. He said it has been previously estimated that demolition of the Midland Savings Building will cost approximately $400,000. Perry said the management district will put in $35,000 toward the cost [emphasis mine], but he expects a large part of it will be funded through private donations."

So unless things have changed the Midland Municipal Management District will contribute roughly 3% towards the demolition of the building.

An as yet undetermined amount will come from private contributors and the balance, of course, will have to be footed by the taxpayers.

To Councilman Dingus' credit he saw the bullet between the eyes coming early on:

"At-Large City Councilman Bill Dingus said Monday he does not believe the responsibility for demolishing the building should fall on the city and that if the city accepts ownership of the property it might make it more difficult to convince members of the private sector to contribute funds toward the demolition."

I hope that the whole private contribution thing works out better in this case than it did for the new *cough* Dog Park.

Interesting quote from a Houston Chronicle article on Midland's downtown revitalization efforts:

The Midland Municipal Management District, an entity headed by [City Councilman Wes] Perry that levies a 24-cent property tax on each $100 valuation for downtown properties worth more than $200,000, bought the Midland Savings Building for $150,000. The city will spend another half-million dollars or more to tear the asbestos-ridden structure down, he said. [Emphasis mine]

The article appeared on Sunday, June 11. Two days before the *cough* discussion and vote here.

So, yeah, I guess you could say it was a lock.

With the above quote in mind, a re-reading of this article in the MR-T and its account of the ongoing "discussion" seems...well...just plain weird.

So why the charade?

From the WaPo (h/t LGF):

CBS executives have decided there is no future role at the network for Dan Rather, making it certain that the man who sat in the anchor chair for 24 years will depart by this fall.

Well, whatever Kenneth's frequency was, it will now be somewhat less...er....frequent.

Concerning Councilman Dingus being out of order in the most recent City Council meeting....try this:

Google the phrase "abstention from discussion" and begin following the links.

From the Better Practices Website at Association Expertise, Inc.

The conflict of interest policy should include:

• The requirement for full disclosure
• Abstention from discussion [emphasis mine] or voting for board members in a conflict
• Abstention from discussion for staff members in a conflict (assuming that they do not have voting status)

Or this from the City of Pulyap, WA Rules of Procedure:

(3) Abstentions: It is the responsibility of each councilmember to vote when requested on a matter before the full Council. However, a member may abstain from discussion [again, emphasis mine] and voting on a question of direct personal or pecuniary interest not common to the other councilmembers.

Not convinced of this concept's universality yet? Even the self-government impaired Palestinians have at least figured this part out:

2. Abstention from discussion and voting: Board, Governance Committee or staff members who have actual or potential conflict of interest should not participate in discussion [emphasis mine] or decisions on matters affecting the grant award. Members must announce their intention to abstain from discussion by ululating three times and firing their AK-47 in the air. [Okay, I made that last part up.]

So, if it is not out of order to revisit the question, which councilman was it that was really out of order? Mr. Dingus or Mr. Perry?

In the previous post I mentioned what I think is a conflict of interest on Councilman Perry's part in that he is a sitting city councilman along with being the Chairman of the Midland Downtown Development District along with being the owner of at least two downtown properties.

Let me be clear, I do not think that Mr. Perry is misusing his various positions for personal gain or is lining his pockets (or even trying to) with public funds either directly of indirectly.

I think I know the councilman well enough to know that he is not that guy and would never do that. In fact, he is to be applauded for his personal financial committment to the ownership and renovation of some downtown properties, most notably the old Shell Building and more recently the old First National Bank Building on the corner of Wall and Main.

What I mean by conflict of interest is this and only this: It is the wearing of too many hats simultaneously that prevents a detached and disinterested analysis of the issues at hand. In other words, any idea that involves the redevelopment and/or revitalization of the downtown area will not receive from a person wearing all three of the aforementioned "hats" the same dispassionate and critical analysis that a different city project focusing on another area of the city would receive.

A case in point: The magic interactive fountain of revitalization. According to news reports, the idea of using public funds to lease a privately owned green area downtown (the Bank of America Plaza at the corner of Wall and Big Spring) in order to construct and maintain a half-million dollar "interactive fountain" is being seriously discussed.

Now we here at this blog are professional soreheads, but if the reaction of people who don't normally pay attention to the machinations of the local economic development establishment is any indication then the idea isn't playing well.

Outside of the downtown development inner circle the reaction is closer to, "What the hell?".

The disconnect is not because these people are not smart. They are. It is not because they are crooked or something. They are not.

The disconnect is because, being downtown property owners, they naturally have a soft spot for downtown projects and that they have access to public funds....read zero personal risk...to implement them. The idea that "everyone benefits" from said half million dollar fountain adds even more comfort in the wisdom of the project. And by zero personal risk I don't mean in the sense that the attitude exists that should the project fail to deliver as hoped that those advancing said project are thinking they are glad that they hung the price tag on some other sucker. I am only arguing that it is impossible that the combination of zero personal risk in these projects with potentially massive personal risks in their actual investments downtown does not color the decision making process.

It is just not possible that there are no competing priorities for the city that are much more worthy of public resources.

Councilman Dingus made a very serious error in judgment in yesterday's City Council meeting. And by that I don't mean his making comments that were ruled out of order by the Mayor.

His error was that he thought the issue at hand being discussed and deliberated upon before the general public in the great hall of the people...in this case the purchase of the old Midland Savings Building by the city....was actually an issue open to question and in line for proper public discussion and deliberation. It was as though he really did not know that this was all decided long before yesterday's meeting.

Kind of cute, that.

And it is not as though Mr. Dingus wanted to put the brakes on the whole project. He was merely wanting to know what other costs might be involved should (should...that's funny!) the city decide to purchase the building.

Dingus proceeded to say he could not support the city's purchase of the Midland Savings Building without receiving a reasonable estimate for the cost of asbestos abatement and demolition. Dingus said he believes removing the building will benefit the city and he would be fine with the city contributing around $500,000 toward demolition, but he would prefer adjacent building owners, who will benefit from the removal of the building, also contribute towards the cost of demolition. Additionally, he said it would be wise for the city to proceed cautiously if the determination were made to make the purchase.

Wow. I had no idea that Councilman Dingus was such a screaming, wild-eyed radical. I, for one, am glad that this whole notion of taking a couple of weeks to determine the total financial exposure of the local taxpayer in such a project before committing to it was relegated back to the fever swamps from whence it came.

If Republicans gaining control of both chambers of Congress has taught us anything it is that, regardless of who is in power, government spending only becomes an issue if there is a viable opposition party. So it is nationally....so it is locally. It is not about the amount of spending it is about who controls the spending.

In the end the council decided to take the advice of sitting City Councilman Wes Perry and purchase the building, said building currently owned by the Midland Downtown Development Corporation whose Chairman is...uh...downtown property owner and...well...sitting City Councilman Wes Perry.

Councilman Perry abstained from voting on the issue but apparently has abstained from little else in the transfer of this million-and-a-half dollar millstone from the MDDD to local taxpayers. This abstention may or may not have been required by statute (I don't really know), but if it was only done to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest it was a colossal failure.

So the city has committed itself to the purchase of the building. Now it will set about finding out the purchase price.

And in the bizarro world of developers developing with other people's money it is Councilman Dingus that is considered out of order.

Out here in Jesusland exposing yourself to a minor pretty much makes you a sex offender.

In Pelosiland it is considered a valid form of political protest.

Apparently Paradise isn't working out quite like Zarkman thought it would:

"...Nothing but AOL dial-up, and for some reason the the only sites I can access are HuffPo and Iowahawk, and nothing but Dixie Chicks on the jukebox. I ordered the raisin & date plate, but I'm pretty sure that ain't dried fruit."

Sounds like a bad motel in Odessa to me. Read the rest here.

Here is an idea for the proposed Magic Interactive Fountain of Revitalization.

Big picture of the crater that was Al-Zarqawi's safehouse on the front page of the paper. This is pleasing.

I was also pleased that the headline did not read "Bush administration policies contributing to Iraq housing shortage".

Remember the under the fold headline from a couple of days ago that trumpeted the "failure" to appoint Iraqi heads of the Defense and Interior ministries?

Technically true. They "failed" to appoint them that day. They appointed them yesterday.

I await the headline trumpeting the success in naming these ministers.

But I'm not holding my breath.

So at what point did gubernatorial candidate Carole Rylander Keeton Leghorn Strayhorn decide that what she really needed was one more name?

If she is determined to do this let me suggest that instead of "Grandma" she just go ahead and change her name to "CHECK HERE IF YOU LIKE PUPPIES".

Zarqawi is dead. This is good news for everyone.

Everyone except fans of iowahawk's Letters From Zarqawi series.

But...still....it is a good thing.

From USAToday.com:

His comments came a day after the abductions of 50 people in downtown Baghdad by gunmen wearing police uniforms and the shooting deaths of 21 Shiites north of the capital, including students pulled from their minivans.

Gunmen. Not terrorists, mind you. Nor even "terrorists" with the quotes. Other places in this article they are called "militias". Or even insurgents....these people who pull students from their mini-vans and shoot them...or leave boxes of severed heads laying around. Because, you know, who knows what they really are and one man's terrorist is another man's yada yada yada.

Yet USAToday has no problem calling Uri Geller a Psychic.

Dog Bites Man story of the day.

Remember the Midland Municipal Management District? That is the taxing entity that was created by the voters of Midland stroke of a pen in Austin at the behest of the well connected in order to be able to assess taxes...er....fees on downtown properties in order further develop downtown Midland.

"Don't worry", we were told...this new taxing entity development commiteee only affects those that own property downtown in excess of $200,000 and they were begging (begging, I say!) to be assessed for such purposes.

Well, most of them were anyway. Except for those troglodyte aginners who can't see the difference between Republican investment and Democratic spending. Poor bastards.

Anyway....that same Midland Municpal Management District bought the old Midland Savings Building for $165,000.

And now they have sold it to......wait for it.......you.

UPDATE:

Perry previously told the Reporter-Telegram he expects it will cost approximately $400,000 to bring the building down. Part of this expense would likely be furnished by the management district, he said, some may be provided by the city and he said he expects a large part of the demolition cost will be provided by private donors.

Let me politely suggest that it would be poor form for the Midland Municpal Management District to come with less than, say, $165,000 dollars to help pay for the demolition of the building.

Any takers?

Continuing unrest in Iran.

Your chances of reading anything about it in the newspaper are slim.

Shown above are four brothers facing execution for organizing protests. Execution. For protests.

Meanwhile, in Hollywoodland, the most heinous form of dissent crushing and speech repression remains being played off early by the orchestra while in mid-rant during your Oscar acceptance speech.

(h/t Gateway Pundit)

Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen of the Allied Expeditionary Force!

You are about to embark upon the Great Crusade, toward which we have striven these many months. The eyes of the world are upon you. The hopes and prayers of liberty-loving people everywhere march with you. In company with our brave Allies and brothers-in-arms on other Fronts, you will bring about the destruction of the German war machine, the elimination of Nazi tyranny over the oppressed peoples of Europe, and security to yourselves in a free world.

Your task will not be an easy one. Your enemy is well trained, well equipped and battle-hardened. He will fight savagely.

But this is the year 1944! Much has happened since the Nazi triumphs of 1940-41. The United Nations have in­flicted upon the Germans great defeats, in open battle, man-to-man. Our air offensive has seriously reduced their strength in the air and their capacity to wage war on the ground. Our Home Fronts have given us an overwhelming superiority in weapons and munitions of war, and placed at our disposal great reserves of trained fighting men. The tidehas turned! The free men of the world are marching together to Victory!

I have full confidence in your courage, devotion to duty and skill in battle. We will accept nothing less than full Victory!

Good Luck! And let us all beseech the blessing of Al­mighty God upon this great and noble undertaking.

General Dwight David Eisenhower

And while we await the feasibility study on [fill in most recent community saving project here] let me just take the suspense out of it.

It will be reported as feasible.

Feasible, feasible, feasible!

Jeff Goldstein at Protein Wisdom comments on Andrew Sullivan having secured his place as the female Cindy Sheehan.

An update on the local paper's vanguard watch on domestic terrorism reveals no further mention of the 17 terrorists arrested in Ontario. Terrorists that had acquired three times more ammonium nitrate than Timothy McVeigh used to bring down a Federal Bulding.

Good news, though.....a search on the MyWestTexas.com website using the search word Ontario brings up an article. In Spanish. (To be fair, it makes sense for the web sites to be locally focused. Why re-hash the same AP articles that can be found other places?)

The latest bombing in Iraq? Front page. Above the fold.

But of course.

And just in case you hear about how those arrested came from a "broad strata" of Canadian society, below are their names.

1. Fahim Ahmad, 21, Toronto;
2. Zakaria Amara, 20, Mississauga, Ont.;
3. Asad Ansari, 21, Mississauga;
4. Shareef Abdelhaleen, 30, Mississauga;
5. Qayyum Abdul Jamal, 43, Mississauga;
6. Mohammed Dirie, 22, Kingston, Ont.;
7. Yasim Abdi Mohamed, 24, Kingston;
8. Jahmaal James, 23, Toronto;
9. Amin Mohamed Durrani, 19, Toronto;
10. Steven Vikash Chand alias Abdul Shakur, 25, Toronto;
11. Ahmad Mustafa Ghany, 21, Mississauga;
12. Saad Khalid, 19, of Eclipse Avenue, Mississauga.

Broad strata my a**.

The Midland Reporter-Telegram, Sunday June 4, 2006:

Front Page: "Dem victories could thwart Bush agenda", an article comprised wholely of early polling, conjecture, and the great, great hope of the newsrooms across the country that speculates on how the President might fare in the advancement of his agenda should his party do poorly in an election that is still five months away.

Page 9A: "Canada says it foiled terrorist attack with arrest of 17 people", a report that 17 homegrown Canadian Islamofascist terrorists have been arrested. They had aquired three tons of ammonium nitrate and other components to manufacture the same kind of bomb that Timothy McVeigh used to bring down the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. McVeigh used about one ton for his bomb....one third of what the Canadian jihadis had acquired.

As is getting to be more and more common in these cases, the majority of the honest information on this story is being handled by the blogosphere. Start here at Michelle Malkin.com.

The Story:

Man buys a laptop computer on eBay that turns out to be not only not as described but also defective.

Seller refuses to refund buyer his money. Then says he will refund the money, but disappears first.

Hilarity ensues.