1970 musical redux.

CBS's Dennis Dodd on the current state of Tennessee football: "It's one that can be cleaned up in time, but let's be straight about this: Maybe the best thing the Vols' new coach has going for him right now is his surname. Dooley is son of one of the most respected men in the sport. Not being Lane Kiffin is a huge plus too. In Knoxville, those two things will get Vince Dooley's son through a season or two as Tennessee tries to cap its current oil spill."

Dodd is basically on target. It is certainly true that, to UT fans, the BP Gulf oil spill looks like a minor spill on the kitchen floor compared to the mess in the Tennessee football program these days.

For what it's worth -- and I'm a Tennessee fan -- my prediction is the Vols will go a dismal 4-8, with wins over UT-Martin, UAB, Memphis and Vanderbilt. I also anticipate that anything over a 3-9 season will be hailed by the program and the pundits as a successful campaign. That's three wins. Nine losses. And for this team, the athletic department wants a $2,500 mandatory "donation" plus the ticket prices for two decent seats in the stadium. For the math-challenged out there, that's something like $188 per seat, per game. No wonder so many long time fans like me are peeved to the point of apathy with the program. Love the team; hate the program.

Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Pigeon Forge welcomes the USS Enterprise Association reunion this week.

Social Media Monopoly: Have we gone too far down the Facebook road? "The premise of the game is that social media masters like Mashable founder Pete Cashmore, Digg founder Kevin Rose, Tom from MySpace, Web Nation host Amber MacArthur, and Huffington Post founder Ariana Huffington are competing for total control of the social media scene on the board, and must gain capital and power while avoiding fees and jail (which is, perhaps appropriately, MySpace.)"

My Space is Jail? Funny.

Would you spend 27 years in a Texas state prison for $2.2 million?

Why does everyone think that this state begins and ends in Nashville?

Busking is not illegal. On the other hand, what is busking?

Busking is not illegal. On the other hand, what is busking?

Lebanon Bookkeeper Accused Of Stealing $425K from Nursing Home Patients. What's curious is that her alleged embezzlement was discovered in December 2008, almost two years ago. What took so long to indict her?

Stop crime: use Facebook!

In a shameless self-promotion, check out our Facebook page by going to Facebook.com and searching for Slovis, Rutherford & Weinstein.

Shootings in West Knoxville.

Now the federal smoking nazis are preventing families from sending cigarettes to their soldiers fighting overseas. Ridiculous. If we can send our people to fight and die in wars, at least we can let them have a smoke if they want one.

Gallup: 79% of those in the "tea party movement" identify themselves as Republicans. 62% consider themselves conservative Republicans.

So much for the notion that this tea party hoo-ha is bi- or non-partisan; it's merely rebranding: "...the presence of a new political force that is not called Republican and is not tied to George W. Bush has given the GOP a glorious opportunity to remake its image, at a time when trust in the party is very low. Some liberals deride the Tea Party as a new bottle for old Republican wine. But rebranding works...."

Sarah Palin:

"Refudiate," "misunderestimate," "wee-wee'd up." English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!

This is the person who might have been a heartbeat from the presidency?

Haslam team credits calls for win. Well, that and $10 million....

Two indicted in botched drug deal, shooting. For God's sake, if you've got to got out to do this kind of thing, get a babysitter.

DeGeneres quits American Idol. I really don't care, and I hate AI, but I had to crow about this, because Howard Stern has been saying for months how bad and unqualified DeGeneres is on that show.

Franklin High School students to protest flip flop ban. I lived with a dress code for six years in junior high and high school. I have never believed in any of the rationales for them. All a school dress code is is a way for the politicos to look like they are doing something.

Litigant v. Judge Joe Brown: The Judge wins. Judge Brown is a retired Tennessee judge, by the way.

Zach Wamp has been bothering me for quite some time. While in D.C., he lives at -- and refuses to comment on -- the C Street Center, which began as an anti-New Deal organization in the 1930s when the founder believed that God gave him a revelation that government regulation was a tool of Satan’s. This outfit is tied to the Fellowship Foundation, whose leader often presents Hitler, Stalin and Mao as leadership models even as he acknowledges they are "evil men."

Here's what's got me concerned and not a little steamed. In Wamp's commercial featuring "Rusty," some overweight guy sitting at a diner delivers the following line at 19 seconds in:

He even teamed up with New York Mayor Bloomberg to take away our guns.

I emphasized "Bloomberg" because the [presumed] actor emphasized it in his delivery. So here's my question: why did Wamp find it necessary to use the name of the New York City mayor? Was it because it's a Jewish-sounding name? My suspicion is exactly that. Is this Jew-baiting of the smarmiest sort? If so, we'll be lucky to see Wamp shown the door, figuratively. One thing is for sure: I hate this type of almost-true-but-not-quite type of negative campaigning. It's not quite enough to call the guy an out and out liar, but it ain't the truth, either. It's contemptible, frankly.

I'm not a Haslam guy, although he did go to Webb School a couple of years ahead of me. However, I don't blame him a bit for responding to this crap commercial with his Enough is Enough spot, and I think the way he responded was just right.

But why has no one raised the anti-semitism issue? There's an argument that this implicit anti-semitism is rife on the Internet and other media, to the point where no one really notices any more. And that's the road to perdition.

Photo of the week. Fortunately, no one was injured.

And this is why I seldom head up to the mountains....

Vanessa Coleman gets 53 years for double murder. The prosecutors sought 77 years, so this is fundamentally a prosecution victory. As Judge Baumgardner a veteran Criminal Court Judge said, "This is one of if not the most troubling, horrific, shocking criminal episodes that I've ever encountered."

Lamar Alexander praises President Obama on education. It's sad that a Republican lauding a Democrat has become so rare that it's newsworthy.

I'll never forget when, in 1983, while watching Alexander deliver the Tennessee State of the State address as governor, Senator John Rucker leaned over to me in the gallery and whispered, "would you buy a used car from that man?" It was all I could do to keep from falling off my chair with chortles, because I wouldn't!

Not that I fly all that often, but this stinks.

Tanker truck swerves in traffic, jacknifes, goes down embankment; driver killed. A cautionary tale to always leave yourself a good following distance. In our ADD gogogo world, we all too often ride up on the rear of the vehicles in front of us. Sometimes, that leads to tragic results.

Hit and run suspects captured at nearby hotel. Some people are just too dumb to be allowed to drive. I hope the victim wasn't hurt too badly.

Federal judge blocks key parts of Arizona immigration law. On a related note, anybody see where the Nazis are coming to town? As Woody Allen said in Manhattan:

Woody Allen: "Has anybody read that Nazis are gonna march in New Jersey? Ya know? I read it in the newspaper. We should go down there, get some guys together, ya know, get some bricks and baseball bats, and really explain things to 'em."

Victor Truro: "There was this devastating satirical piece on that on the op-ed page of the Times – devastating."

Allen: "Whoa, whoa. A satirical piece in the Times is one thing, but bricks and baseball bats really gets right to the point of it."

Helen Hanft: "Oh, but really biting satire is always better than physical force."

Allen: "No, physical force is always better with Nazis."

Here's the video, too!

Extraordinary color movies of Israel, before, during and after the 1948 War of Independence. Thanks to Howie Feinberg for the link.

TVA's air pollution is NOT an interstate nuisance. Basically, "Because the air pollution standards set by EPA are stricter than the rules under common law, Wilkinson wrote, a company that is in compliance with federal requirements cannot logically be a public nuisance."

Details on the Tennessee titans lawsuit against Lane Kiffin. For those so inclined, here's a copy of the actual Complaint filed in Davidson County [Nashville]. Kiffin registers surprise about getting sued.

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Rabid bat found at U.T. Medical Center: This does not infuse me with confidence.

Kentucky nursing home under investigation. Getting old is not for sissies. Sadly.

Hit an run victim dies. I hope, for the family's sake, that the victim had uninsured motorist coverage.

One injured in watercraft accident. I had a case somewhat similar a few years back. My client was in his bass boat, putting along and minding his own business, when two wave runners violated the right of way and broadsided him. The client's hip was fractured and his knee was messed up, AND his boat was sinking, but he managed to get it to a dock and pull himself out before it did a Titanic at the dock. If memory serves, we got him six figures for his injuries.

Oh good lord. Street racing? Can anyone say "James Dean?"

Stop the presses! Meg Ryan cancels Israel appearance in "cultural boycott." Well, the bloom is off the rose, officially; I'm no longer ga-ga over Meg. Besides, with a photo like this, well, yuck.
I happened to catch part of her strong 1995 performance in "When A Man Loves A Woman," and she was so gorgeous. Why did she do that to herself? I think her vast popularity drop-off is directly attributable to the rotten plastic surgery she obviously has had. That, and the fact that she apparently is a political idiot.
UPDATE: Compare the photo above with the video here [move to about 1 minute in], and tell me the difference is solely because of the intervening 15 years. Right....

Double Standard: British decry Israel for [allegedly] using forged British passports; British ignore Russian spies using forged British passports.

The British apparently still view Israel as the pariah state of states. Genteel anti-semitism? Or are they still peeved over bailing out of Israel in 1948?

Jonathan Chait on pseudo-journalism:

The problem is that the product of sites like Breitbart's Big Government and the Daily Caller is not journalism but pseudo-journalism. It does not hew to conventional journalistic standards. It is opposition research — bits of data placed in the most damaging possible context and packaged in such a way as to encourage other reporters or pundits to pick it up and hopefully repeat its analytic thrust.

Now, opposition research can be useful, and it often produces good journalistic leads. But people who do hew to conventional journalistic standards do need to be very cautious when handling pseudo-journalistic stories. You can't assume that the information is being provided in context, or that the interpretive frame bears any relation to reality.

I think he hits the nail on the head here.

The difference between news and propaganda. The righties are fond of saying that the mainstram media is dominated by the left. My take for years has been that the media is dominated by whatever the hottest story is -- they want to sell papers, or magazines or get ratings, or whatever.

I don't pretend to understand -- or care much about -- what Glenn Beck says. But he gets his history and theology wrong in this clip, and sounds borderline anti-semitic, too. Your basic two-fer.

UPDATE: B'Nai Brith's open letter to Beck on his erroneous statement, as "inconsistent with Christian teaching that Jews collectively must never be portrayed as responsible for the death of Jesus. This teaching, and the related reflection on the need to present religious scripture with great thought and care, has allowed the development of unprecedented reconciliation, in our day, between Christians and Jews."

Air Conditioning: Bad. Here is an example of how anyone can make an argument that, on its face, seems reasonable, when it is so much hogwash. As a Knoxville native who lived in D.C. for nine years, and as a recent tourist in broiling Atlanta, I can say with absolute certainty that the invention of air conditioning might be the single greatest innovation of the 20th century.

Can you imagine going through the last month and a half of 100 degree days without AC? I mean, really.

Democrat denied the right to vote in the Republican primary: something's wrong here. "A three-judge political panel?" I have taken a quick look at the Tennessee statutes in question -- T.C.A. sec. 2-7-115(b) and 2-7-126 -- and sure enough, there is language about bona fide party affiliations. However, what if you are not affiliated with either party? The election commission's position would suggest that an independent would be barred from voting altogether.

I hope this gets challenged.

A fatal car wreck in Anderson County.

Poll: George W. Bush wins (loses?) on question of who is more to blame for our current economic woes"

When asked whether Bush or Obama was responsible for the recession, 53 percent of likely voters said Bush and 26 percent said Obama, according to the poll from Third Way, a think tank with close ties to centrist Democrats. Another 21 percent of respondents said they didn’t know.

Bush had 8 years to take the biggest boom economy of our lifetimes and run it into the ground. Obama's had a year and a half to try to straigten us out. The question remains, however, is the Administration's economic strategy the right one, and is it working?

President to Republicans: help the unemployed.

Anne Applebaum on the hypocrisy of the right. It's awfully curious that the Right is beating up on the Administration for not doing enough to stop the oil flowing in the Gulf of Mexico. Aren't they the same ones who keep saying that government is bad and should be reduced/eliminated?

I guess they don't quite believe that when there is political hay to be made.

Slowly but surely, we move into the modern age. Facebook and Twitter links are now on the web site. Just scroll down to the bottom and you'll see 'em!

Thanks for the positive comments about my dog samaritan story earlier today. Just because I'm a dog lover and I've got a photo on the computer, here's a picture of the late Murray the WonderDog. I paused before taking time I didn't have to help that dog this morning, but then I thought of Murray, and figured, "this is what dog people do."

While I don't often toot my own horn, here is my good deed for the week. I'm writing about it because it might actually help others in the future.

So, I'm at the place where I get my haircut this morning. As I'm walking into the building, I see a dog -- an australian shepherd -- hanging around by the door. She was quite tame and friendly, but also had that look of the lost animal. She had a collar on, which turned out to be an Invisible Fence collar similar to the one pictured above. What I mean is that it has an electrical doodad on it that hits the dog with a shock, uh, correction, if it gets too close to the invisible fence wiring. Unfortunately, aside from the generic-looking collar, there was no other sign of who owned the dog.

Control freak problem solver that I am, I called my wife, who works for Petsafe, which now owns Invisible Fencing. She got the Invisible fencing guy on the phone, and she told me to unscrew the electical leads sticking out from the underside of the collar. Once they were off, I removed the actual collar from the electrical doodad, and there was a serial number on the doodad. I read that out to Jill, who gave it to the IF guy, who was able to track who the owner was! About 10 minutes later, in the middle of my haircut, the guy called and came right over and retrieved his dog. A life saved. Woo-hoo!

The moral of the story is this: if you find a stray with one of these type collars on it and no other owner information, you can track the owner based on the invisible fence's serial number, now that you know where to look. If you ever find a pet that has such a collar, try calling your local dealer, who might be able to track the owner.

This explains why the immigration debate is so heated.

UT,other Tennessee schools, sell student info. Is this an invasion of student privacy, or compliance with some open records law?

Texting while driving is now illegal in Kentucky. Kentucky tracked 57,000 crashes as a result of texting actvity in 2009 alone! Frankly, considering how many lousy -- and dangerous -- drivers there are out there because of constant chattering into a handheld phone, I'm in favor of banning all automotive cell phone activity unless on speakerphone or via headset.

A new trailer for Mel Gibson's "What Women Want." Much more realistic than the original. WARNING: Lots of cussing; not for children or tender ears.

Yipee! Tennessee football is getting national press from ESPN.com! Oh, shucks, I spoke too soon. This kind of publicity I don't need.

Soldier Threatens Knox County Chancellor. Many times have I disagreed with a judge's or chancellor's ruling. Never have I thought to threaten the judge or chancellor. The veneer of civilization runs awfully thin....

Isn't this racist? At 5:44 into the video, Michael Meyers, constant Fox News talking head and Executive Director of the New York Civil Rights Coalition, says, "The NAACP is now a politcal arm of the White House. Al Sharpton and the NAACP people are in the White House so often they ought to have rooms designated . . . ."

Considering we have an African-American president, calling the NAACP a politcal arm of his administration strikes me as insensitive, at least. Even assuming that Sharpton and the other guy to whom he unintelligibly refers have visited the White House, does that make the NAACP a tool of the Administration? Not without something other than vague circumstance, it doesn't.

UPDATE: Criticizing Meyers's hygiene? Fair or unfair? You decide. He is a poet. Don't you know it.

It's official. Our own Glen B. Rutherford has designated as a Cityview Top Attorney for 2010 in the area of Social Security Disability. To see the listing, go to the link and then type 104-105 in the page box at the bottom left.

Congratulations go out to Glen for this long-overdue accolade, as well as to our colleagues in the Knoxville Bar who voted for him.

Here we go again. Now, I realize that to be a big time football player, you really need to have a sense of invulnerability. But how can these players not realize that they are in the spotlight no matter where they are? Rogers hasn't played a down yet for Tennessee and he's already in trouble. Myles is now on his second altercation since April. Getting in bar fights is just stupid. And unacceptable. Hey guys, ever heard of just walking away?

Glenn is looking at lawyers and what people think about them. As a lawyer, I usually am disappointed at how badly lawyers are portrayed in contemporary TV/movies. Even a pro-plaintiff picture like Erin Brockovich is about how the non-lawyer paralegal -- Julia Roberts -- forces the lawyers, against their own apparent natures, to do the right thing and strike a blow for the people.

The question we need to be asking is why there is such an anti-lawyer bias being played out in contempo media? What happened to the lawyer heroes -- Perry Mason, Owen Marshall, Counselor at Law, even the L.A. Law characters? Why is it that the current view of lawyers seems to be out of Boston Legal: the schmuck [James Spader] or the buffoon [William Shatner]?

24 years into law practice, I can guarantee that the jerks portrayed on TV wouldn't last long in the real world. The vast majority of lawyers I have known over the past quarter century have truly been devoted to serving their clients and maing a living doing so.

But I guess that doesn't make a good movie or TV show. Wait -- except for this one.

Finally, I can post. I've been trying since last Thursday, and the stupid Blogger New Post window wouldn't work. I am now using Firefox 3.6.3, and it seems to operate. Google offers no interactive help, either.

Cheesiest Lawyer Advertising?  I am proud to say it's not from Slovis, Rutherford & Weinstein!  I will agree with Hunter's two finalists, although I won't identify them in this post.  I mean, they ain't plugging me; I ain't gonna plug them.  And they're really cheesy, too.

Historically, Hunter is a little inaccurate, referring to Ward "Wheelchair" as the earliest big TV lawyer advertiser.  In fact, it was this firm -- then known as Lockett, Slovis & Weaver -- that was doing the biggest TV buys in town, round about 1991.

And finally, I should give some credit to my attorney competitors  colleagues.  A wise marketing guru once told me to "look at what the other advertisers are doing -- and you do the exact opposite."  That's why we're concentrating on information-based marketing and not insulting the intelligence of the public, like the other guys.

Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing.  Former Bushie Shannen Coffin and Powerline's John Hindraker are still out to get Bill Clinton and anyone associated with him.  Including the current Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan.  The issue: did Kagan, while working for the Clinton Administration, improperly or deceptively cause language to be inserted in language from the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology [ACOG] that made it easier for a federal court back in 2000 to overturn Nebraska's ban on partial birth abortions?  Answer: No, not really.

Here's the deal.  The ACOG statement, according to Coffin in National Review Online, said, “in the vast majority of cases, selection of the partial birth procedure is not necessary to avert serious adverse consequences to a woman’s health.”  Kagan suggested language to ACOG -- which ACOG was under no obligation to accept -- adding the following: “An intact D&X [the medical term for the procedure], however, may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.”

When ACOG initially says, "In the vast majority of cases...." it is admitting that there are indeed some cases where the procedure would be justified.  Which is exactly what Kagan's suggested language says: "may be the best procedure in a particular circumstance." (emphasis added).  There's nothing deceptive or inconsistent about adding that language; it merely clarifies the ACOG position, which is probably why ACOG unilaterally agreed to include it in the first place.

Believe me, ACOG is no real friend of Democratic Party philosophy or ideology.  I learned that back in the late 1990s, seeing how ACOG tried to make it harder to prove and win obstetrical malpractice cases, by manipulating its practice standards relative to the causes of and terminology relating to fetal distress during labor.

Kagan must be awfully well-qualified for the Repubs to scrape the bottom of the barrel like this.  It illustrates how zealots will attempt to demonize innoccuous actions taken long in the past, using fauly analysis and half truths.  All to gain a momentary political advantage.   That's the shocking part.

Are you breaking the law when you record encounters with police officers?  Apparently, you are in Maryland.  In Tennessee, however, I would argue that Tennessee Code Annotated sec. 39-13-601(b)(5) applies:

It is lawful under §§ 39-13-601 — 39-13-603 and title 40, chapter 6, part 3 for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication, where the person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to the interception, unless the communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the constitution or laws of the state of Tennessee.

In any event, it is absurd to say that a police officer on duty in public has some expectation of privacy, where the person he is encountering does not.

Iguess this guy just couldn't get a date.

Three burning legal questions.

Woman Follows Directions, Gets Run Over.  Because there were no sidewalks on the route she followed, she walked on the street, got hit by a car, and is suing Google.  Maybe she should have looked at the street and used some common sense? 

Criminy, I've got a Google Map linked to my web site, too.  Please don't sue us....

Nurse practitioners operating independently of actual M.D.s?  Well, it is likely that such nurse practitioners and physician assistants are in effect doing that now, even though operating in the context of a medical practice.  My worry certainly is the oversight and the liability concerns.  If I go to a nurse practitioner's office and as a result I am injured, is that medical malpractice, or just general malpractice?  It's an important distinction, as it is much more difficult and expensive to sue a doctor for medical malpractice than, say, a motorist for an automobile accident.

Here's a lawsuit going somewhere to happen.

Is BP putting its money where its mouth is?  We'll see.  As a lawyer that handles claims all the time, what is important is NOT that money is being reserved, or set aside, but instead whether claims will be quickly, properly, and fairly administered and paid.  Interestingly, "The fund will be controlled not by BP, but by an independent, third party...."  Attorney Kenneth Feniberg is supposed to be "in charge" of the fund, whatever that means.  Here's a bio on Feinberg from his firm's web site:

Kenneth R. Feinberg has been key to resolving many of our nation's most challenging and widely known disputes. He is best known for serving as the Special Master of the Federal September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, in which he reached out to all who qualified to file a claim, evaluated applications, determined appropriate compensation, and disseminated awards. Mr. Feinberg shared his extraordinary experience in his book What Is Life Worth?, published in 2005 by Public Affairs Press. Just a few years later, Mr. Feinberg became Fund Administrator for the Hokie Spirit Memorial Fund following the tragic shootings at Virginia Tech. Mr. Feinberg also has served as Special Master in Agent Orange, asbestos personal injury, wrongful death claims, Dalkon shield, and DES (pregnancy medication) cases.

Clearly, this guy has a lot of experience with mass tort/accident/injury situations.  Let's see if he can get it done.  In the meantime, the oil continues to fill up the Gulf.  Ugh.

For those dozens of you who have checked back at this site over the past several years, you will note a new template and a (somewhat) new direction. 

When I started this blog back in 2003, I was railing about Big Insurance and its efforts at tort reform.  As those efforts largely were proven unsuccessful, I broadened the scope to include general legal stuff that interested me, and later just blogged on any subject that caught my eye.

Now, I have decided to integrate the blog more closely with my law firm website and get serious about blogging once again.  I have also -- after playing website developer games for over two months, dumped the website developer, and made content and feature changes in the firm's web site myself.  I was able to do in three days what they couldn't do in two months.  There's a whole frustrating story there for the telling.  Some day....

In any event, I hope you'll check out the site, and especially the new FAQs/Videos page, which has a bunch of Q & A on legal matters, as well as some videos, one of which I posted here a few weeks ago.  I have also posted the videos on Youtube, here, here, here, here, and here.

Constructive comments about the site and this blog are welcome.  Remember -- I'm doing this myself, so be kind if you can!

Well, I guess I had it wrong the whole time. This video certainly convinces me that them Palestineans were in the right after all!

Here is the first video for my law firm web site. For anyone who views this, I would really like to know if there are technical problems. Specifically, does the audio stay in sync with the video?

ELECTRIC CARS FOR RETAIL SALE IN 2011. In Israel. 350 mile range. Sales and maintenance pricing equivalent to gas-powered equivalent vehicles. (To view video scroll across to the story "Electric Cars By Next Year"). When will they hit Tennessee? Marty Peretz wrote it up, too.

Earthquake in Grand Cayman. Apparently, there are no casualties or damage, though. Thank goodness....

Here's a scholarly article -- with citations to authority -- demonstrating the true state of affairs leading up to and immediately following the establishment of Israel. The piece is especially noteworthy for its use of recently declassified British Mandate sources. Not surprisingly, it reiterates the truth always known, but covered up recently via use of the Big Lie propaganda technique. It's a must-read for anyone interested in the accurate history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. An excerpt:

As the Jews set out to lay the groundwork for their nascent state while simultaneously striving to convince their Arab compatriots that they would be (as Ben-Gurion put it) “equal citizens, equal in everything without any exception,” Palestinian Arab leaders pledged that “should partition be implemented, it will be achieved only over the bodies of the Arabs of Palestine, their sons, and their women.” [Fawzi Qawuqji, the local commander of ALA forces] vowed “to drive all Jews into the sea.” Abdel Qader Husseini stated that “the Palestine problem will only be solved by the sword; all Jews must leave Palestine.”

[Citation: Ben-Gurion, Bama’araha, Vol. 4, Part 2, p. 260; Hebrew translation of Hajj Amin Husseini’s interview with Le Journal d’Egypt on Nov. 10, 1947, HA, 105/105a, p. 47; Radio Beirut, Nov. 12, 1947, in Foreign Broadcasts Information Service (FBIS), European Section: Near & Middle East and North African Transmitters, 13 Nov. 1947, II2, 5; “Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 64,” issued by HQ British Troops in Palestine (for the period 2359 hrs 10 Mar.-2359 hrs 23 Jan. 48), PRO, WO 275/64, p. 4; Arab Press Service (Cairo), FBIS, European Section: Near & Middle East and North African Transmitters, Dec. 16, 1947, II1; “Weekly Summary for the Alexandroni Brigade, Mar. 2, 1948,” HA 105/143, p. 105; “In the Arab Public,” Mar. 30, 1948, HA 105/100, p. 14.]

And on the subject of Arab departures from their homes:

[I]n early April [1948] a Jewish delegation comprising top Arab-affairs advisers, local notables, and municipal heads with close contacts with neighboring Arab localities traversed Arab villages in the coastal plain, then emptying at a staggering pace, in an attempt to convince their inhabitants to stay put [Citation: Ezra Danin, Zioni Bekhol Tnai (Jerusalem: Kidum, 1987), Vol. 1, pp. 216-17; Zafrira Din, “Interview with Josh Palmon on June 28, 1989,” HA 80/721/3.] . . . .What makes these Jewish efforts all the more impressive is that they took place at a time when huge numbers of Palestinian Arabs were being actively driven from their homes by their own leaders and/or by Arab military forces, whether out of military considerations or in order to prevent them from becoming citizens of the prospective Jewish state. In the largest and best-known example, tens of thousands of Arabs were ordered or bullied into leaving the city of Haifa on the AHC’s instructions, despite strenuous Jewish efforts to persuade them to stay [Citation: I have documented the Haifa episode at some length in “Nakbat Haifa: the Collapse and Dispersion of a Major Palestinian Community,” Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 37, No. 4 (October 2001), pp. 25-70].

Read the whole thing.

And I thought nobody knew who I was. But would I even want the job if I got it?

It never ends:

The nursing home industry, lending new meaning to the term audacious, is pushing legislation to limit its liability in Tennessee courts at a time when violations for neglect and abuse of residents are higher than ever before. It may seem outrageous to many, but inside Tennessee’s ethically challenged legislature, the measure’s chances of passage are better than even.

When I first blogged here in 2003, I advocated against limiting liability in medical malpractice cases. We've seen over the last five years that the only group that has benefited from that spate of legislation has been Big Insurance. Now, the "forces of darkness" are at it again, trying to screw the old and infirm by sliding this legislation through with lots of cash and legislative insider connections. They're even using the same threat: protect our profits or we may have to close nursing homes.

Anyone who wants to register their opinion with their legislator can locate him/her here.

UPDATE: Comment below: "I notice you haven't jumped into either the medical profession or the nursing home business but instead have chosen, ahem, to be a lawyer." It's funny, that comment. I keep saying, when I see some other type of work that is really lucrative, "I picked the wrong line of work again!" Seriously, though, regardless of whether I decided decades ago to be a lawyer, a doctor, or a nursing home proprietor [and who tells mommy and daddy when they're groing up, "I want to be a nursing home operator when I grow up!"], that does not excuse a doctor when he screws up, or a nursing home when it maltreats its residents.

ANOTHER UPDATE: I love all the folks that bash trial lawyers. They're the same people for whom trial lawyers are their best friends, when they need help.

YET MORE TO SAY: I do have to say this to the commenter who said that consumer law benefits lawyers always, but consumers only sometimes. Unless the comenter is referring to insurance defense lawyers who defend cases by the hour, that statement is just not true. I handle most or all of such cases on a contingent fee, i.e., I make no fee unless the client recovers. Thus, the client will make a recovery before I get paid. It's just a terrible distortion of the way things really are to paint all trial lawyers as profiting while their clients are losing. In my practice, and every other trial lawyer I know and respect, that just ain't the case. Like it or not, most trial lawyers are in this business to make a living by helping people solve their problems. Putting aside the top 1 or 2% of the lawyers who make the big money in the plaintiff's bar, most of us work for very modest wages. Frankly, what is extraordinary to me is what the big firms are paying the top 1 or 2% of law school graduates these days -- $150,000 and up. Now that's obscene [and how do I get some of that?]!

Surprise! Study: Inkjet printers are filthy, lying thieves

I've been using Canon single-ink cartridges for several years, and the nice thing about the Canon cartridges is that they are clear; You can visually confirm they are empty. So I ignore the low ink warnings, which do start up many, many pages before the out-of-ink message flashes. And when that message comes up, I can see that the particular color is, in fact, empty.

Crisis? What Crisis: Malpractice Rebate for Md. Set at $84 Million

Maryland's Republican Governor in 2004 called the legislature into a special session to push through the subsidy, based on hysterical premium increases and threats that doctors would have to stop working in the state. Overreaction? History suggests exactly that.

Note that Maryland's Medical Mutual Liability Insurance Society planned to pay two-thirds of the rebate to the state and one-third to the physician shareholders of Medical Mutual, despite the fact that the surplus funds were generated by a taxpayer-financed subsidy. While the new Maryland Insurance Commissioner has mandated that all the rebate go to the state, guess who remains screwed: you guessed it, the taxpayers who had to pay it out in the first place.

I'm glad I don't live in Maryland any more.

It has bothered me for some years how the Republicans and right-wing types have been referring to the other party as "the Democrat Party" in a perjorative fashion. Now it bothers me even more. According to Marty Peretz, the practice hasn't been used in half a century, and was a product of Joe McCarthy "who, with his twisted mouth often oozing the charming brew of beer and saliva, would snarl out the words "Democrat Party," as if they referred to vermin."

Boy, that'd make me proud, if I were a Repub.

Resports -- largely unreported -- of routine torture in U.S. facilities in Afghanistan:

When Captain Carolyn Wood assumed control of the prison in the summer of 2002--she ran it until taking over Abu Ghraib a year later--interrogation tactics came to include beatings, anal violation with sharp objects, blows to the genitals, and "peroneal" strikes (an incapacitating blow to the leg with a baton, a knee, or a shin). We know about these tactics because an internal Army investigation into two prisoner deaths was obtained by The New York Times. These detainees--a 22-year-old taxi driver and the brother of a Taliban commander--were found dead and hanging from the wrists by shackles. A coroner's report said the two men died after being subjected to dozens of peroneal strikes. According to the coroner's report, the "pulpified" legs of one of the corpses looked as if they had "been run over by a bus."

Dammit, that's not who we are, or need to be. At least, so I thought.

Sad news from Grand Cayman. Back in August 2006, I got a chance to dive with a Grand Cayman policeman named Paul, who was from England. Last weekend, he was hit by a car and critically injured. My thuoghts and prayers go out to him and his family. My log of that August 2006 dive follows:

Got a 3d dive for this day. I hooked up with Paul, a CI policeman from London originally. He's been here about 9 months, I believe. He's a good diver, and blows his air even faster than me! We surface swam out to the far buoy, and dropped down on the Nicholson, a sunken landing craft that I last dove in 2003. Right next to the Nicholson was a half eaten carcass of a nurse shark; the rear was intact, but everything in front of the dorsal fin was eaten away. All I could see was the white fibrous tissue.

On the Nicholson, we swam into the small cabin toward the stern, and then up and out through a hatch above us. A close fit; I took it real easy going up through it.

Then it was a short swim to the mermaid. From the bow of the Nicholson, we swam at a 10:00 angle. Some fish were hovering around me, and wouldn't be shooed away. Strange. Then I felt a gentle nip under my left arm on my torso. A grouper or red snapper had actually nipped at me! That was a first for my 80 or so dives in GC. A grey angelfish and one of those yellow trimmed jacks were also getting too close for comfort. I spend some energy paying attention to them and trying to get them away from me, because they were FOLLOWING me. Territorial, or just looking for a food handout, I don't know.

We got to the mermaid, and it was again an anti-climax. As we left the mermaid, the fish finally laid off. We swam back toward the ladder with Pau leading. I think he thought I was short on air [I wasn't], and we avoided the rain, which had started and stopped while we were down. A good dive, except for the aggressive fish!

This news only underscores the new philosophy I've been trying to inculcate: Carpe the diem; you never know what's going to happen tomorrow, or the next week, or the next month.

Glenn has posted at times on red light traffic cameras. Courtesy of the Howard Stern Show [he doesn't endorse, he just reports], here's a product that defeats the camera system. Seems a good way to thwart the inevitable mistakes these automated systems make. And by the way, how does one cross-examine an automated camera, if one contests one of these tickets?

Is this Photoblocker spray legal? Who knows? I recommend you speak with your jurisprudential professional before using it, though

All of a sudden, conservatives everywhere are shocked, SHOCKED, at Ann Coulter. While I agree wholeheartedly with Sean Hackbarth's sentiments, I nevertheless must say, "too little, too late." As one of the commenters to the linked open letter said, this invective is nothing new for Coulter. Like it or not, she is one of the leading faces of the conservative movement.

You lie down with dogs, and you get up with fleas.

Well, I've started an entirely new blog, called FlickMaven.com. Certain distinguished bloggers -- clearly sick to death of listening to my off-the-cuff movie, TV and media reviews -- suggested that I do a blog containing all those (ha!) controversial views. So go link. Enjoy. Click through. Etc.

Gee, thanks for all the comments, and to Instapundit for the shout out. Just responding to a few of the commenters:

It's not, in my opinion, a question of tailoring your ideology to whatever will get you elected, so much as it is choosing the candidate whose ideology connects with the maximum number of voters. The two concepts are radically different. Also, it's not just ideology anymore; it's also electability, i.e., that certain something that causes a voter to want to vote for a particular candidate. Bill Clinton had that quality; Hillary does not. I still don't believe Obama has it, at least enough to both win a nomination and a general election.

I apparently misspoke when I said that McGovern won his home state -- it was Massachusetts. My point is even more strongly made, though. McGovern stood for deeply felt left wing ideology in favor of withdrawal from Vietnam under any circumstances. As a result, he didn't even carry his home state. It was one of the most lopsided victories in recent memory.

I agree that Edwards is being ignored to a certain extent. Whether he is OK with being under the radar screen, only his campaign can say for sure. I just think that, whether its deliberate or a by-product of the MSM hysteria over Hillary v. Obama, it's smart for him to lay low. It's a marathon, not a sprint.

Whether Edwards is more vulnerable to attack than Hillary is highly debatable. Of all the candidates in the field, he's got that certain something I alluded to earlier. People LIKE him, just like they LIKED Bill Clinton. That could carry him very far. He's also the most "populist" of the candidates, which bodes well in a general election campaign, should he get the nomination.

Whether this race is "fun" is in the eye of the beholder. Some people like to watch train wrecks, too.

Dudley Smith is right that Edwards is just as subject to "inexperience" criticism as the other candidates, except maybe Richardson. It's mostly a wash; the only ones who have presidential experience are, uh, ex-presidents. Perhaps being a governor helps in the public mind, inasmuch as the past two presidents were state governors. I disagree that Edwards is a Jimmy Carter clone, for no other reason than I just don't see it.

As to charges that Edwards is an unserious "huckster," again, I just don't see it that way. He's smart, educated, and his positions on the issues are mostly where I like them. He made a successful career helping those who needed help against the unlimited resources of Big Insurance. I love those perople who deride trial lawyers; they're always the ones who run to lawyers when they need 'em. By the way, what makes a candidate a huckster, anyway? Is ANY candidate exempt from such a characterization?

Hillary/Obama on the ticket? Matching primary adversaries is certainly not new, but if that happens, then the Republicans will take the general in a 1972-like landslide. For any Democratic strategists out there, that ticket is the fervent dream of any die-hard Republican out there. For God's sake, don't give them what they want.

As to Bill Clinton not being the focus of right wing hatred, I disagree strongly. For years, I would see bumper stickers around town that said, "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for Bush." The right wing-funded litigation was going after Bill, not Hillary. Ken Starr persecuted [literally] Bill, not Hillary. And, the Republican Congress impeached and tried the President -- not the First Lady -- for no other reason than he was unfaithful to his wife, and in the face of a 65% approval rating. No, they were after Bill, because they just couldn't bear to have been beaten by a Democrat. Especially a Democrat that they had targeted, on which they had attempted political homicide, and who just wouldn't go away when a lesser man would have quit. Clinton's perserverence, and the continuing efforts by the Right to downplay his two Administrations, simply reinforce my theory that the Republicans will do anything -- anything -- to win.

And finally, the Catholics and Jews issues are red herrings. He didn't piss the Catholics off, a blogger associated with the campaign irked a virulently pro-Catholic pundit. Edwards was reported in a Peter Bart op-ed in Variety [that bastion of journalistic accuracy] to have said that "Perhaps the greatest short-term threat to world peace. . .was the possibility that Israel would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities." I disagree with that assessment [that's not the greatest short-term threat to world peace, whatever "world peace" is], but it's not an anit-Israel comment, and it's not an anti-semitic remark, either. Assuming he even said it.

Does anybody else think that it’s ridiculous for presidential candidates to be going at it hammer and tongs a full year before the first primary? The real and implicit vitriol between the Clinton and Obama camps this early in the process is nothing short of idiotic. At this rate, those two candidates will have dropped out from exhaustion long before the voting actually begins.

Is that why John Edwards is waiting, and watching, and generally keeping his mouth shut? If so, I would call that good strategy, and urge him to keep a low – and statesman-like – profile, for as long as possible.

What nobody seems to be looking at is the substantive qualifications of either Clinton or Obama to be president. The former has completed one term in the Senate, and is the wife of a former president. The latter is still in his first term in national office. Aside from name recognition [Clinton] and perceived charisma [Obama], what do these candidates bring to the table?

Of course, one could have asked the same questions about Bill Clinton in 1992, or George W. Bush in 2000, as well. Well, at least they had experience governing. So, maybe it’s unfair for me to question these candidates’ qualifications on such a basis. On the other hand, and as a middle-of-the-road Democrat, neither one excites me much, either as to presentation of their positions, or more importantly, their ability to be elected in a general election.

Because that’s what it’s all about, folks. Who stands the best chance of winning a general election in an electorate that clearly is in the middle of the road? If you don’t care about winning, it’s all well and good for the far left [or far right] candidates to stake out a marginal position, and then go down gloriously and virtuously in flames, because their message did not sell to the electorate. George McGovern did just that, and look how well he did in the general election – against a wartime president and during a war that was perceived as widely unpopular [McGovern won just one state, his own, and D.C.]. The comparisons between 1972 and 2008 are illuminating, to say the least. You cannot lead your party’s voters where they don’t want to go, and the majority of Democrats don’t support the position of getting back at Bush at the expense of our troops. The Republican anti-Clinton sentiment fed the impeachment proceedings; in the same vein, the anti-Bush feeling fans the fires of this "withdraw from Iraq under any circumstances" position.

To govern, you’ve got to get elected, and the Democratic candidates seem to have forgotten that small point. They seem to be marginalizing themselves by making a litmus test over the vote for war in 2003, or support for the troops on the ground. Thus, the perception is that to get the Democratic nomination, you’ve got to be vocally and vociferously anti-Bush [read anti-war, anti-war funding]. Anti-Bush is fine, but a candidate who commits to cutting support for troops on the ground is doomed to failure in the general election. After all, that candidate can’t take that position back once the nomination is secured.

The Republicans love this in-fighting between Clinton and Obama. They don’t really care which one takes the nomination, because they can cut either candidate off at the knees. And they particularly love that the Democratic candidates collectively are painting themselves into an un-winnable position, by moving farther to the left on the war issue than the electorate can tolerate.

Have the Republicans, who appear to have a better grasp of the long-term picture than the Democrats, maneuvered the Democrats into this corner? It makes some sense:

* Push Hillary, who they can beat under almost any circumstances, given her negatives.
* At the same time, get Hillary to punch herself out with Obama, who is aggressively anti-war, African-American, and inexperienced in national/foreign affairs and governance generally.
* Ignore and thus minimize the candidates who pose the biggest general election threat – Edwards, Richardson – and flog Clinton and Obama.
* MSM, the beast who must be fed, and the bloggers [son of the beast?] will go [and are going] to town just for the splashiest story.
* Chiefly because of the far-left anti-war stances the candidates are being forced into, the perception is created that Democrats are all wild-eyed lunatics who want to cut and run, and don’t support our troops [see Vietnam].
* Following the internecine primary carnage, whoever gets the nomination is already bloodied and exhausted.
* The nominee also has major baggage picked up with the positions they had to take just to win the nomination, as well as the underlying negatives [in Clinton’s case]. If Hilary is the nominee, then they pound her negatives, as well as the northeastern liberal mantle she inevitably carries. With Obama, they grind him down on his inexperience, and, subtly his color [see Harold Ford campaign
in Tennessee].

Either way, the Republicans dance to victory in November ‘08. As icing on the cake, they finally “get” a Clinton, even if Hillary isn’t really the one they wanted to “get.”

It really doesn’t matter whether the Republicans are sly enough to maneuver the Democrats into this position, or whether the Democrats are dumb enough to do it to themselves. The result would be the same: Democratic sacrifice of the presidency on the alter of the far left’s “principles.”

The Democratic leadership wants to believe the mid-term elections were a mandate for the far left. Not so. The mid-terms were a rejection of the far right in favor of centrist populism. If the far left holds sway over the Democratic presidential contest, the electorate will reject that nominee just as handily as it did the far right. Which is OK by the Republicans.

The Democratic leadership ignores these realities at its peril. We’re talking realpoltik here. To govern, you’ve got to win. To win, you’ve got to appeal to the broadest base. Given popular dissatisfaction with Republicans in general, the Democrats, as in 2004, would have to work real hard to lose this election.

Oops.

This is what law students [and lawyers, regardless of age] have to go through. And for anyone who went to school in the D.C area, the punch line at the end of the piece really rings true.

Jimmy Carter -- No Friend of Israel:

Carter was also a vocal critic of Israeli policies and “view[ed] the unarmed young Palestinians who stood up against thousands of Israel soldiers as ‘instant heroes,’” wrote Brinkley. “Buoyed by the intifada, Carter passed on to the Palestinians, through Arafat, his congratulations.”

Carter's anti-Israel penchant was apparent to me at the time. I voted Republican for the only time in my life in 1980, because I could not bear to vote for Carter. The final straw was when Andy Young at the UN "accidentally" failed to veto a Security Council resolution condemning Israel. At that level, one doesn't make mistakes like that. The linked commentary places that vote in the appropriate historical light.

THE THREE CIRCLES OF EVIL:

An Israeli physicist's 2004 analysis of the nature of the conflict between the Muslim world and the West. Interesting and compelling. The only reservation I have is relative to Iraq. To what extent prior to 2003 was Iraq actually sponsoring international terrorism? Let us assume it was. Nevertheless, the stated reasons for invading Iraq were to prevent it from using WMDs against the West. If this argument is another effort to recast the rationale for military action in Iraq to simply fighting terrorism, I don't buy it.

The other comment is the writer's spot-on analysis of "democratic" elections leading to fanatic regimes. He failed to mention, however, the abject failure of elections in Gaza, that led to Hamas being elevated to power. His theory is correct; he just failed to mention the most obvious example of his theory in action.

Aside from those comments, a cogent and worthwhile analysis.

EMAIL FROM THE TENNESSEE REPUBLICAN PARTY [from Nashville City Paper editorial]:

Certainly, Americans are at their wit’s end with the oil industry. Rising gasoline prices are changing how people run their businesses, take their vacations and lead their lives.

We are an oil-addicted nation, and it is beginning to impact our lives in ways we had never thought imaginable until gas prices at the pump began to soar and soar.

The national Democratic Party, though, has gone too far in their bid to win Tennessee’s U.S. Senate seat in accusing a Tennessee company of being “big oil” and part of the country’s gas crisis.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) launched attack television advertisements last week against Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Corker’s supposed ties to “big oil.”

The target of the attacks was Tennessee’s largest privately held company, Pilot Oil, based in East Tennessee, and its CEO, Jimmy Haslam. Haslam is also Corker’s campaign chair and a long-time supporter of the GOP in solidly Republican East Tennessee.

Branding Pilot Oil as “big oil” is a disingenuous political ploy that hopefully Tennesseans will see through as they make their way to the November general election.

The DSCC is the arm of the Democratic Party in charge of electing Democrats to the U.S. Senate. Their attacks on this Tennessee company are in tandem with Democratic Senate nominee Congressman Harold Ford Jr.’s own set of attacks on the Corker and Haslam connection.

Ford and national Democrats are glibly obscuring a few facts about Pilot Oil as well as their own ties to the oil industry.

As Haslam has explained to the state’s media, Pilot Oil is a gas retailer and has no control over the per-barrel price of crude oil or the world energy market.

Yet Pilot Oil is the largest seller of biodiesel fuel in the country and the largest seller of ethanol in Tennessee — both gasoline alternatives that national Democrats and Republicans have held out as possible solutions to our nation’s energy crisis.

In addition, the Corker campaign maintains the DSCC itself has taken six figures in campaign contributions from the oil and energy industry.

National Democrats and Ford should tell the whole story about Tennessee companies if they are going to make them part of the debate about who should lead the U.S. Senate. Yes, the Haslam family and Pilot Oil have done very well over the years. Haslam is also as politically active as a citizen can be without being a candidate himself.

But suggesting Pilot Oil in some way is partly responsible for the nation’s energy crisis and a “big oil” player on the world stage is simply unfair and inaccurate.

DSCC PRESS RELEASE:

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee issued the following statement on Bob Corker's efforts to cover up his relationship with the oil industry and divert attention from the fact that he is big oil's favorite senate candidate:

"Every time you pull up to a gas station in Tennessee, you see two signs: One says gas is $3 a gallon and the other says Bob Corker for Senate," DSCC spokesman Phil Singer said.

"Bob Corker has taken more money from the oil and gas industry than any other Senate challenger running this year. His campaign finance chairman is the CEO of Pilot Oil Company – a company that has given him nearly $35,000 in contributions.

"So who do you trust more to lower gas prices? Harold Ford, Jr. who has put out a plan to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, or Bob Corker who is bought and paid for by big oil?"

Well, Pilot and the Haslams may not be in control of crude oil prices, but they nevertheless are reaping the benefits of high oil prices. It seems apparent that Pilot's health is directly proportional to the health of the oil industry itself. The oil industry looks mighty healthy these days. Because Corker accepts big money from Pilot, and because Pilot's honcho is his finance chair, it would appear that "oil money" is front and center behind Corker.

While I am not in favor of going negative so quickly [and wonder whether the ad was cleared by the Ford campaign first], and while the spot itself is somewhat lurid, there is some truth to it.

I also wonder why Corker won't release his tax records. He only released a one page summary of income from 1976 through 2005. You gotta ask what he doesn't want us to see.

He did report almost $5 million in 2005. Yeah, I'm sure he can empathize with the average working person. Is this the case of another rich guy looking to buy public office?

JUDGE SENTENCED AND FINED FOR MASTURBATING DURING TRIALS:

Donald Thompson, who retired from the Oklahoma trial bench in 2004, was just convicted of using a penis pump to masturbate while presiding over several trials between 2001 and 2003. He was sentenced to four years in prison, and ordered to pay a $40,000 fine. Here's more, including the probable cause afidavit that spells out the allegations in, er, gory detail. I also wonder, along with the blogger: how did the Court come up with the amount of the $40,000 fine for these acts?

Yuck. One may only hope that this guy isn't representative of our, uh, fine jurists across the country. Oh, God, I hope not.

ATLA has released an indictment of the insurance industry's questionable tactics post-Katrina as well as following other natural disasters. The report focuses on Big Insurance's spinning the hurricane from the outset, as "the Great New Orleans Flood." The report also notes that Big Insurance showed a whopping $44.8 billion profit in 2005, and raised its surplus more than 7% to $427 billion. Reference to previous natrual disasters demonstrates that Big Insurance has a long track record in such potentially fraudulent, bad faith tactics.

Here's a neat web site, which shows the power of the Internet when used by motivated private individuals. This Israeli couple put together various informational presentations, among which is "Pipeline of Hatred."

This nifty Powerpoint-type presentation graphically illustrates how classic anti-semitism [hatred of Jews as a religious group] is being morphed by Islamic radicalism into a contemporary form of anti-semitism [hatred of the Jewish State of Israel]. The presentation also shows graphically how geographically insignificant Israel is, compared to Islamic staes throughout Africa and the Middle East. The other slide that got to me was the graphic illustration of the number of violent conflicts involving radical Islam currently ongoing in the world. It strikes me that this surge of violent Islamic fundamentalism is much more dangerous to our western way of life than was communism in its heyday.

Well worth a few minutes of your time.

MORE ON JOHN EDWARDS:

The New Republic Online has an [unscientific] poll on Edwards'spotential as Democratic standard-bearer in 2008. Its conclusion: "A shoo-in for 2008, perhaps? TNR readers have answered that question with a resounding, Eh, maybe. How about Al Gore?"

Some of the comments cited were kind of ridiculous. One commenter thought he was too young [he's in his 50s, for God's sake], and some were turned off because he used to represent injured victims of negligence. Others were suspicious of a "thin resume."

But consider this: Edwards made a [very good] living representing people, as opposed to the insurance industry, big business or faceless corporations. He is plenty old enough, in fact older, I believe than JFK or Bill Clinton were when they first entered the presidency. And, in terms of resume, Edwards is not a professional politician. He actually was out in the real world working for a living; he came to public service in his middle age. Given the no-substance platitudes we are accustomed to hearing from the professional pols, I think it's refreshing to have someone want the job bcause he wants to serve.

In any event, who else on the Democratic side is centrist enough to actually have a chance of winning in 2008. I mean, I hate to be a spoilsport, but it is about winning. I think I've said it before: I'm sick of goint down with the ship of "rightness." I'd rather find the candidate that really represents the political center, and give myself the best chance of prevailing. Appropos of the lottery, you can't serve if you don't win.

The New Republic bemoans the Connecticut result, somewhat echoing my earlier post that the results will be felt significantly in the 2008 presidential. One kind of inaccurate point in the piece, though. The article says, "The news that Wesley Clark and John Edwards will stump for Lamont. . . ." Well, the link as to Edwards simply says that he called Lamont to congratulate him: "John Edwards called Lamont to congratulate him last night--which presumably means he'll find his way to Connecticut to offer his congratulations and support in person."

There's a big difference between a phone call and stumping in the state. That the blogger speculates that he'll campaign for Lamont is unsupported, as far as I know. Edwards would be smart to steer clear of Connecticut for the next three months.

Let's see if I've got this right. Conventional wisdom says that the country has gone progressively to the center/right. The last two Democratic presidents were centrists. The Democrats desparately want to regain control of Congress in 2006, and the White House in 2008. Joe Lieberman was the Democratic standard-bearer just six years ago, along with Al Gore. the DSCC and the Democratic establishment [aside from President Clinton] provided little or no help to Lieberman in his campaign, which is the same as opposing him. And many left-leaning Democrats are now gleeful over his defeat by a "trust fund baby" in the Connecticut primary, which makes the party as a whole look like total freaking disloyal idiots to the rest of the country.

What's wrong with this picture?

Not for nothing, but it does strike me that this deepening division in the Democratic party benefits -- wait for it -- the Republicans. Why? When push comes to shove the Repubs can hold their base, as they did in the last two presidentials, as well as in the mid-terms. The Dems, however, are so divided that only chaos will result. Result [and prediction]: Repubs will hold onto their congrssional majorities in 2006. If the Dems continue this exercise in mass denial, we'll have another "northeastern liberal" [or some such] running in 2008, and the White House will be lost again. The Republicans couldn't have done better if they had planned it. Hmmm, did they plan it?

Who knows, but I, for one, am sick to death of going down in flames, but feeling good about myself in the process. If I don't win, I can't govern. I can't win unless I am a centrist candidate. Polarizing the party plays directly into Repub hands.

The left wing of the Democratic party better get its collective head out of, er, the clouds, or they'll have it handed to them come election day.

By the way, I wouldn't be the least surprised if Lieberman runs as an Independent, kicks Lamont's ass in the general, and then sticks it to the Democratic party forever. I wouldn't blame him. And I say that as a loyal Democrat.

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION: Presidential bill-signing statements expressing reservations about signed legislation violate Constitution:

If left unchecked, the president's practice does grave harm to the separation of powers doctrine, and the system of checks and balances that have sustained our democracy for more than two centuries.

ABA's point is well-taken. If the President really believes a bill he is signing is unconstitutional, then why doesn't he veto it?

The first photo in this post, by the way, proves conclusively that Glenn does NOT have a "comb-over." My opinion on his tendencies toward being the Anti-Christ vary, based on my daily level of psychosis.

The dog in the second photo is Mojo, who has her own photo on the board with the "other" DiveTech staff. her job description is listed, I believe, as "dive master summoner."

I was lucky enough to take the rebreather course along with Glenn -- I think I took that shot he put up on his blog, in fact -- so many thanks to him for letting me tag along as well to the great folks at DiveTech for making the rebreather experience such a memorable one.