And just think how well they will do at giving you “free” health care.
And just think how well they will do at giving you “free” health care.
My response to the useful idiots who are bringing Lynne Stewart to their campus to lecture on ETHICS of all things:
It seems that you need to add one more item to your slogan:
Unpopular Clients, Difficult Cases, Zealous Advocates, Convicted Felons
Lynne Stewart is a convicted felon. A disbarred disgrace to her profession and her country. She is completely unrepentant about her activities in support of the terrorists who bombed the WTC and murdered 6 people. Your characterization of her as ” who has defended many unpopular clients over the years” completely mis-represents this terrorist sympathizer.
That you believe this person might offer anything other than lies in talking about ethics, certainly does one positive thing. It tells anyone who might be in contact with someone with a law degree from Hofstra that they should disassociate themselves completely and utterly. Your lawyer has been taught by terrorists and felons. Probably not a good advocate.
If you find any sort of sanity, you might consider dis-inviting Ms. Stewart. Do I expect you to? Of course not. After all – she might be able to make sure that you aren’t one of the first ones killed in the next terrorist attack. Maybe that’s why you are bringing her “wisdom” to your campus.
From Ann Coulter’s latest column:
The ultimate Democrat constituent would be a public schoolteacher on welfare who needed an abortion and was suing her doctor.
A really excellent insight from TigerHawk:
The Pew Center has issued a new “World Values Survey,” and according to the A.P.’s write-up it reveals that Americans no longer regard children as the principle basis for a happy marriage:
Without having read the survey, it seems to me that there must be a difference between the keys to a happy marriage and reasons for getting married. Surely people do not get married in order to “share chores.” Never mind that, though. Take a gander at this absurd “conclusion”:
Virginia Rutter, a sociology professor at Framingham (Mass.) State College and board member of the Council on Contemporary Families, said the shifting views may be linked in part to America’s relative lack of family-friendly workplace policies such as paid leave and subsidized child care.
Without in any way characterizing the brains required to become “a sociology professor at Framingham (Mass.) State College,” I respectfully suggest that Virginia Rutter is spewing nonsense on stilts. Are we to believe that the family-friendliness of America’s “workplace policies such as paid leave and subsidized child care” has gotten worse since 1990? If not, how can the change in attitudes since then be attributed to the absence of European-style rules and subsidies? More to the point, how is she able to square America’s substantially higher fertility rate with profoundly infertile European countries that have those policies? Finally, does the Associated Press locate “experts” such as Professor Rutter because they will advocate for huge new social programs on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, or are the A.P.’s ideological blinders so opaque that it does not comprehend what it is doing? Is there a possible third explanation?
There have been a lot of comments about Edward’s Memorial Day 10 things – but Protein Wisdom has one of the best wrapups I have seen:
Or, to put it more bluntly, how craven and ego-driven does one have to be to sell out two entire countries for the remote opportunity he might pick off a few primary victories by pandering to the anti-war base and maybe secure himself a vice presidential nod?
In other words, turn Memorial Day weekend into a sixties-style war protest, publicize it, photograph it, pat yourself on the back for presuming to speak for soldiers whom you don’t speak for, then have a couple of hot dogs and some cole slaw before emailing out links to John Edwards website, where you can point you pals to the photo of you essentially spitting in the face of the men and women fighting in Iraq.
Of course, it’s a loving spit. Because you’ve prayed for them. And presumed to dictate their mission. For their own good. Because you care so much and all.
That this man was elected to the Senate even once is a disgrace. That he is considered Presidential material says more about the descent of the Democrats into the abyss than anything else.
Here is what Memorial Day is all about:
We Americans need to remember why Memorial Day is special. It’s not about picnics or trips to the beach. It’s not about making pro- or anti-war statements. It’s not about supporting political candidates. It’s about honor, duty and the ultimate sacrifice. It’s about people who have decided that the United States is worth dying for.
In online ad offering everything in the house for free left one landlord with quite a shock. By the time she realized what was going on, the house had been stripped of its light fixtures, hot water heater — even the kitchen sink.Laurie Raye said she traced the damage to a fake ad on craigslist, a San Francisco-based Internet site for classifieds.
“The instigator who published this ad invited the public to come in and vandalize me,” Raye told Seattle television station KING. She said the rental home wasn’t occupied at the time because she had recently evicted a tenant, but it had other items inside.
Even the front door and a vinyl window were pilfered, Raye said.
“In the ad, it said come and take what you want. Everything is free,” she said. “Please help yourself to anything on the property.”
And you know the response from the loving, caring folks at this “online community” would be:
Raye said she contacted craigslist and received an e-mail saying officials would need a subpoena or search warrant to release information about who posted the ad.
I hope she sues the “operators” of this caring little community into the ground. And that the scumbag who originally put up this ad gets a long stretch in jail.
And is it any wonder that illegals feel they can cross our borders with impunity?
Guidelines issued by U.S. attorneys in Texas showed that most illegal immigrants crossing into the state had to be arrested at least six times before federal authorities would prosecute them, according to an internal Justice Department memo.
and the Bush Administration can’t blame this on someone else since:
It is unclear when the memo was written, but the Justice Department reviewed the guidelines sometime after a February 2005 performance review of Carol Lam, the top federal prosecutor in San Diego from 2002 until she was fired last month. Some Republican lawmakers had complained that Lam failed to aggressively prosecute immigration violations.
That whole tough enforcement is really working here:
The memo says one Texas district prosecutes migrants if the Border Patrol catches them at least six to eight times. The other district prosecutes after someone is caught at least seven times.
The San Diego office, which covers an area stretching from the Pacific Ocean to the Arizona state line, does not prosecute “purely economic migrants” as a general rule, according to the memo. (apparently here you can break the law forever if you are ‘economic’ – I wonder if I can claim ‘economic migrant’ on my taxes?)
The Arizona district, the nation’s busiest corridor for illegal crossings, “almost certainly” declines to prosecute on a first or second offense, the memo says. The New Mexico district makes decisions based on criminal records in the U.S.
The excuses? Not enough jail space, would overwhelm the courts, blah blah blah. How about the fact that if we started setting up some tent cities and started getting these people in front of judges, this just might discourage everyone and their kittens from breaking out laws.