DADvocate

Want to improve the quality of your health care? Begin by taking better care of yourself. We usually ignore our own role in our health care. Are you too heavy? Do you smoke? Do you drink too much alcohol? Do you get enough exercise?

During my physical exam a couple of years ago, my doctor told me I would live to be 100. I don't take that literally but I've always been physically active. I had let myself get too heavy but started exercising more and lost some weight.

More recently at work, we had health risk assessments done. I scored 91, with 100 being the best score. This score reflected not only current physical health but healthy, safe practices such as wearing seat belts, speeding, drinking, food habits, etc.

Sure, there are maladies, injuries, etc. that occur to us despite our best efforts. But, the U.S. may be the fattest country in the world. The doctor can try to fix you and patch you up once you break. Only you can do what it takes to keep yourself in good running condition.

At 56 years old, I can ride a bike further than my kids want to go. I can hike, backpack, throw ball, demonstrate basketball skills, chop down trees with an axe and more. Much more than Mr. Moore who wants to deride the U.S. health care system.


It seems to me that if Mr. Moore truly wants to improve the health and lives of the American people he would set a better example.

I think he just wants to get rich off the mindless left-wingers who eagerly lap up his blather. He must weigh double his recommended weight.

A Fort Thomas, KY woman was charged this past Monday with murdering her husband, the first homicide in Fort Thomas in over 10 years. Fort Thomas is a middle class/upper middle class town in northern Kentucky, close to Cincinnati, OH.

Sympathy immediately flows for the woman to the extent that the victim's own father solicits an attorney to defend her.

Attorney Dennis Alerding said the woman’s father-in-law asked him to defend her in court.

"I asked this man is that what you want to do and he said, ‘Yes, Cheryl is a good mother, a good wife, a wonderful person, and I want to help her and there's got to be some explanation,’" Alerding said.

Friends told News 5 nothing seemed amiss when they saw the couple Sunday morning at Saint Thomas Church, but police said they were called later that afternoon to a domestic dispute at the house.

A family friend told News 5 he sometimes heard the McCaffertys argue in the background as he spoke by telephone to their teenage daughter.

Yes, there must be "some explanation" that justifies the woman's actions. As we all learned many times, most recently in the Mary Winkler case, when a woman murders her husband something must be wrong. She's mentally ill, abused, etc. She's never simply a bad person or monster like men are when they murder their spouses.

And, God forbid, a husband should ever argue with his wife. That's absolutely a capitol offense. Since police had been called to the house over a domestic dispute but murder charges were sill forth coming, I wonder what the nature of the dispute was.

Sure enough, Cheryl McCafferty pleaded "not guilty" to the murder of her husband and the claims of abuse have already started.

“They were just picture perfect and you would have never known,” said family friend Kelly Hergott, whose husband coached Knothole baseball with Robert McCafferty. “You would have never in a million years known what was going on, and we still don't. We still really don't know.”

Police said Robert McCafferty died as the result of a single gunshot wound to the head, and a police report indicated that Cheryl McCafferty told investigators she shot her husband in self-defense.

Cheryl McCafferty is a 43-year-old Cincinnati Enquirer account executive. She was taken to Saint Luke Hospital East for evaluation for several hours before being driven to the jail on Monday.

Hergott said she spoke to her last week and everything seemed fine.

"Both of our husbands were out of town and she told me she didn't know how I did it with my husband gone so much,” Hergott said. “Bob was gone quite a lot, but not as much as mine and we just talked about life and raising kids."

Hergott said she wished she had known her friend was in trouble.

"It just breaks my heart that if she, if they were both hurting this way, that they couldn't reach out,” she said,

There seems to be a lot of sympathy for the perpetrator. I don't recall ever seeing that kind of sympathy for a male perpetrator since Ted Kennedy drove off a bridge in Chappaquiddick.

The prosecutor says the motive in unknown and there were no reports of abuse.

"At this point in time, all evidence sent to the grand jury is consistent with the one shooter, ... that being Cheryl McCafferty," Porter said.

Porter said he could not explain why the killing happened: "We know what occurred, but why it occurred is another issue."

Even if detectives never uncover a motive in the investigation, Porter said he is confident of a conviction.

Even though investigators returned to the McCafferty home Tuesday to remove items from the daughter's bedroom, Porter said the mother is the only suspect. Items taken from Molly's room included a broken picture frame containing a photo of her and her father and a card her father sent her.

Porter said there is no evidence to support a statement made by the sister of Cheryl McCafferty that she was a victim of physical abuse.

"We don't have any physical evidence at this time that there was any domestic abuse," Porter said, adding that no one from the McCafferty family has contacted his office to share any information they might have about past abuse.

A Fort Thomas lawyer that the family retained Thursday said Robert McCafferty's "extended family and friends are devastated and greatly upset by the desperate, reprehensible smearing of Bob's excellent reputation."

"The McCafferty family vigorously objects to this case being tried in the media or through gossip, rumor and innuendo in the community," lawyer David Bender said in the statement.

Other than a 911 call the day before the shooting to report a domestic issue between the couple, Porter said there are no law-enforcement records to indicate domestic abuse.

Cheryl McCafferty, an Enquirer advertising account executive, and her son met officers half a block from the house. They told officers everything was fine, and no arrest or police report was taken.

No evidence of abuse, no problem. Why would a woman lie about abuse? To get away with murder? Never!

Cheryl McCafferty is not a male dominated woman stuck in a house without outside contact. You can see that she is an advertising account executive for the Cincinnati Enquirer, the regions largest newspaper with a circulation of over 100,000. Having been an advertising account executive at a newspaper for a short time, I know that they have contact with dozens of people each day.

Finally, the victim's family came to his defense. I waited several days to blog on this in order to learn more of the facts. There is such a thing as justifiable homicide but this doesn't appear to be one, except, possibly, to militant feminists.

The immigration bill fell 14 votes short of the needed 60 to end the debate, effectively killing the bill for now. Both of Ohio's Senators changed their votes from Tuesday. I believe Voinovich could see the writing on the wall after his disastrous interview with Sean Hannity yesterday.

I heard part of it live on the radio yesterday while driving home from work. Voinovich's lack of knowledge of the bill and potential problems was frightening. Hannity's not that tough of an interviewer but Voinovich destroyed himself. I still will not support him for re-election. Please give me a real Republican or a good independent candidate.

I love reactions to the vote by the bill's authors and supporters.

till, Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., who co-authored the legislation along with Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl, said the bill would live to see another day.

"The United States Senate was created just for this kind of issue. ... You cannot stop the march for progress in the United States, and on this issue I have every hope and every expectation that we will ultimately be successful.

Emphasis added.

March for progress? What a bunch of BS. Not all change is progress. I fail to see how this bill promised any progress in controlling illegal immigration. It's most probable effect would have been the opposite. Ultimately, every immigration Mr. Kennedy has helped write has been unsuccessful.

George Bush:

"Legal immigration is one of the top concerns of the American people and Congress's failure to act on it is a disappointment. The American people understand the status quo is unacceptable when it comes to our immigration laws. A lot of us worked hard to see if we couldn't find a common ground — it didn't work," he said.

No, Mr. Bush, the status quo that is unacceptable is your failure to enforce the laws we have. The same laws you swore to uphold twice. It seems you desire to further enrich powerful friends, corporations, your friends and yourself is more important than your sworn word. Our greater disappointment is your failure to act, Mr. Bush. Your failure to enforce the laws.

Howard Dean, the Democratic Party chairman, said it was "a reminder of why the American people voted Republicans out in 2006 and why they'll vote against them in 2008."

Huh? The immigration bill was primarily a Democratic bill. The bill was defeated because of thousands, maybe millions, of phone calls, emails, letters, etc. sent to Senators by constituents. Does Dean think those same constituents will support politicians who go against their wishes?

The supporters of this bill have questionable motives. Undoubtedly one of the worst pieces of legislation for serving the best interests of the people, i.e. citizens of the U.S.

Now the "Fairness" Doctrine has risen its ugly head again. Again, by liberals. The reasons for this are obvious. Liberal ideas are fairing poorly with the free exchange of ideas on radio and the Internet. McCain/Feingold attempted to silence voices unfavorable to incumbents. Fortunately, the Supreme Court ruled parts of McCain/Feingold unconstitutional the other day. Another great victory for freedom.

The House has to ban the "Fairness" Doctrine. Things are looking up here, also.

Why is it that liberals (and incumbents) so badly want to squash free speech and freedom of the press? Do they want to eliminate dissenting voices? It certainly seems so. Have they forgotten that their duty is to serve the people. It certainly seems so. It seems many in Congress have come to view themselves as the ruling aristocracy and believe that the American people should serve them. How many years has Kennedy now served? Should anyone serve that long without a serious challenge? No wonder he's so arrogant.

This commenter to the Voinvoch/Hannity interview at Hot Air hit the nail on the head.

Somehow, over the past 231 years or so we have created an aristocracy in the country. The Senate, the House, the presidency no longer serves the people. We exist to only serve the royal ones. They travel and live like royalty and we as their subjects must never question their judgements.
Voinovich, is a perfect example of all of this. He thought Hannity was there to entertain him. Oh Sean, do some juggling bit or such. What? You dare question me? How dare ye?
I was never in favor of term limits until now.

hoosierken on June 28, 2007 at 8:04 AM

We may rest easy tonight but must be prepared to fight again tomorrow and each day afterwards. We must continue to remind our so called public servants in Congress and the White House who is in charge. If they can't perform up to standard, fire 'em!

Excellent advice for Congress from Instapundit.

Learning about worms' contribution to global warming yesterday, I decided to stick with the worm theme, especially since the Senate is filled with a bunch of worms who turned against the citizens whose best interests they are sworn to represent. Our nation faces a slew of problems and the Senate now sees fit to increase our problems. Fuel crisis, water shortages in the western U.S., terrorism, global warming, health care, plus all the others don't provide enough of a challenge. Now the Senate wants to take on social responsibility for 20 million or so people whose very presence in our country is a criminal act.

Considering all the potential outcomes, my children's future concerns me the most. At the rate we are going, we will be the first generation of our nation to leave the next generation with less than what we have. This shamnesty bill does nothing to "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,..." With out of control, rich, oligarchic politicians controlling our Federal government, I fear for my children's future. All the politicians care about is money, power and votes. Every politician in supporting this bill is hoping to acquire more of at least one of these.

Earlier today, Bush "misspoke" considering the bill.

"You know, I've heard all the rhetoric -- you've heard it, too -- about how this is amnesty. Amnesty means that you've got to pay a price for having been here illegally, and this bill does that," Bush said, according to the official White House transcript.

Tony Snow and others are trying to write this off as a slip. It sounds more like a Freudian slip where the truth accidentally escaped. Any psychiatrist will tell you that much truth is revealed in Freudian slips.

In Ohio, one's party affiliation is determined by in which primary they vote. I'll vote in the Republican primary, again. This time it'll be for whomever is running against Voinovich or Brown when they are up for re-election. If that doesn't work, I'll vote for their opponent in the general election. It's time Congress remembers who they are supposed to represent, the citizens and legal immigrants of this country, people not corporations and other moneyed interests.

A regular guy thinking pointed out this interview with an illegal alien to me. My favorite part:

Juan: It is of no matter. I have a right to be here and work.

Jim: What is the "right" you speak of?

Juan: The right of all Aliens. It is found in your Constitution. Read it!

Jim: I have read it, but I do not remember it saying anything about rights for Aliens.

Juan: It is in that part where it says that all men have Alien rights, like the right to pursue happiness. I wasn't happy in Mexico, so I came here.

Jim: I think you are referring to the declaration of Independence and that document speaks to unalienable rights ... Not Alien rights.

Juan: Whatever.

Bizarre. But it's really not about people from Mexico and other Latin American countries. It's about corporations seeking cheap labor, and politicians seeking power. The American middle class must be shoved out of the way to accomplish this goal.

For more visit Michele Malkin.

Worms are destroying the Earth's climate. Ordinary, seemingly harmless worms like you find in your garden or put on you fishing hook.

First we learned rice paddies are a major source of greenhouse gases. And, now it's worms. Where will it all end.

The ‘wiggly ones’ naturally produce nitrous oxide gases when they are put into the process of composting.

...Frederickson said: “Everybody loves them because they think they can do no harm but they contribute to global warming. People are looking into alternative waste treatments but we have to make sure that we are not jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

...“The emissions that come from these worms can actually be 290 times more potent than carbon dioxide and 20 times more potent than methane. In all environmental systems you get good points and bad points.”

To make matters worse, if you cut a worm in half to kill it it regenerates into two worms. This is worse than aliens attacking. (Well, they're not really attacking. They're just coming across our borders in greater numbers than ever, hoping the amnesty bill will pass.)

The worms produce nitrous oxide. Maybe, we'll all die laughing.

I heard this on WLW radio earlier today. Teddy Kennedy sings in Spanish on a Spanish language radio station. Kennedy and the Dems smell votes in the illegal immigration issue. They don't give a damn about legal immigrants and legal citizens. It's too hard getting their vote but illegal immigrants could provide a voting base for the next 50 years.

Listen to is at Michelle Malkin and see how many Scotchs you think Kennedy had before singing.

How much Scotch did Teddy Kennedy have before singing in Spanish?
	One Scotch
	One big Scotch
	One really big Scotch
	Half a fifth (a tenth of a gallon)
	A fith
	A whole damn case
pollcode.com free polls

During some brief research for a comment to a post by DrHelen, I came across an interesting tidbit in the Faculty Handbook for the University of Tennessee, my beloved alma mater. What caught my eye was Appendix 4 - Non-Sexist Language Guidelines of the handbook.

Sexism refers to discrimination on the basis of gender or sex. Sexist language reflects and creates discrimination. Since language is the basis for thought, sexist language is not only an indicator of but also a contributor to sexist attitudes and behavior. Thus, removal of sexual discrimination in language is necessary to eliminate sexism.

In all University settings, members of the University community should:

1. Use gender equivalent construction. Equivalent or parallel construction should be used for males and females. Thus, if males are referred to as “men,” females should be referred to as “women,” not as “girls” or “ladies.”

---

4. Use person-oriented job and occupational titles. Many titles were developed by attaching “man” as a suffix to the job or occupation. Alternatives to such titles should be utilized, such as: chair, head, presiding officer, (not chairman);mail carrier (not mailman) etc.

5. Avoid sex-role stereotyping: provide parallel treatment of women and men.

(a) Women (as well as men) should be described on the basis of relevant characteristics rather than on the basis of gender.
(b) Jobs, tasks, and behaviors should not be characterized in a stereotypical fashion on the basis of sex. Avoid identifying all doctors, lawyers, pilots, researchers, and the like as males while identifying all secretaries, nurses, flight attendants, and cooks as women.

6. Exhibit non-patronizing, non-condescending ways of describing and addressing women, particularly women in traditional occupations, e.g., secretaries, clerks, nurses. Both men and women should be sensitized to the negative effects which result from usage of terms such as “girl,” “gal,” “coed,”, “girl Friday,” the “girls in the office,” and the like.

Wow! You can get in trouble for using the word "ladies," "coed," or "mailman."

The guidelines appear quite sexist to me in the way that is perfectly acceptable to the PC crowd. "Avoid identifying all doctors, lawyers, pilots, researchers, and the like as males while identifying all secretaries, nurses, flight attendants, and cooks as women." Plus, they only discuss protecting those poor, helpless, frail females from the cruel fate of hearing a discouraging word.

More women (not coeds or ladies or girls) are attending and graduating from medical and law school. Watch the Food Channel and you'll find that plenty of men are cooks. Quick! Who's the most well known chef in America? Could it be a MAN named Emeril?

The association I made with all this is contrasting this "we must protect the fragile egos of the delicate females" attitude of the male chancellor to Helen Reddy's feminsit anthem, "I Am Woman."The second half of the chorus goes:

If I have to, I can do anything
I am strong (strong)
I am invincible (invincible)
I am woman

The fade at the end:

I am woman
I am invincible
I am strong
I am woman

Yes, I am strong, I am invincible, I am woman!!

But refer to me as a "lady," "coed," or use the term "policeman" instead or "police officer," then I am irreparably harmed. I am crushed. I am INJURED!!

And such is the bizarro world of political correctness.

BTW - Answer me this: "Alma mater" means "nourishing mother," shouldn't we find a less sexist term to describe the schools from which we graduate?

We already know John McCain doesn't care much about free speech. Now the left is renewing their assault on free speech and freedom of the press.

Our conclusion is that the gap between conservative and progressive talk radio is the result of multiple structural problems in the U.S. regulatory system, particularly the complete breakdown of the public trustee concept of broadcast, the elimination of clear public interest requirements for broadcasting, and the relaxation of ownership rules including the requirement of local participation in management. […]

Ultimately, these results suggest that increasing ownership diversity, both in terms of the race/ethnicity and gender of owners, as well as the number of independent local owners, will lead to more diverse programming, more choices for listeners, and more owners who are responsive to their local communities and serve the public interest.

In other words, Think Repression Progress wants more governmental regulation because nobody wants to listen to their ideas and blather.

Reportedly, Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer think denying freedom of speech and freedom of the press is just fine.

This is the game the left plays to continually rob you of your freedom. We must have "fairness", "diversity", "clear public interest", "more diverse programming", etc. What they're really saying is that not enough people listen to us to support a significant number of radio talk shows, so we recommend forcing you to listen. Who's going to determine "clear public interest", "fairness", and all that? They will of course.

The concept of freedom of speech and freedom of the press is quite simple. You say what you want, you write what you want, you publish what you want. You express yourself in other ways, like putting a crucifix in a bottle of piss or ripping pictures of the Pope in half.

Every regulation encroaches on these freedoms in some way. McCain/Feingold wanted to force bloggers to register, just like you must register guns. Incrementally they will steal all our freedoms if we let them. The thefts will be justified in the name of fairness, diversity, public interest and whatever other obfuscation the left can dredge up. Don't let them succeed.

Better starve free than be a fat slave.

Newt Gingrich speaks on YouTube concerning the Kennedy/McCain immigration bill. He points out basic, significant problems with the bill.

Remember, John McCain says your too soft to pick lettuce for $50 an hour. John McCain doesn't support 1st amendment rights.

Ted Kennedy has already failed twice at immigration reform. Why is this loser leading another immigration "reform?"

Mitch McConnell is indebted to the tobacco and other agricultural interests in Kentucky as well as corporations. Farms are not held to minimum wage laws like other businesses. Farmers can get illegal aliens to work for much less than legal citizens. Living in Kentucky at the time, ten years ago I made more working tobacco than illegal aliens are paid now.

I wonder how much illegal aliens would be in demand as a work force if employers were required to pay them legal wages. Some thoughts from the AFL-CIO:

We have NO national policy on immigration, but let’s ask a few questions and really think about this for a minute…Number one -why won’t Americans do those jobs the illegal immigrants are doing? Are they too technically complex or too physically demanding? Is there a worker shortage in the U.S.? Are we not producing enough children each year to fill the labor market? Is the U.S. labor market that tight? If so, is that why American workers’ wages are soaring through the stratosphere? Oh, that’s not right…U.S. wages aren’t soaring. Real wages are actually falling after adjustment for inflation? Humm…that is curious! What’s going on, then? If we have unemployed, out-of-work U.S. citizens, why won’t they apply to work the jobs that are being filled by illegal immigrants?

I think we all know the answers to these questions. These jobs are only available to illegal immigrants. Tens of thousands of law-breaking U.S. employers want illegal immigrants they can cheat and exploit, not American citizens who know their workplace rights, demand fair wages and fringe benefits…These very same unscrupulous employers who are hiring these illegal immigrants are the very same neo cons who support the Bush “guest worker” program…why?

Why not eliminate the problem of human exploitation in the U.S. once and for all…forget the red herring of immigration reform and all the emotional divisiveness it brings to the table. Instead, let us focus on the root cause of illegal immigration. Let us ask our government to represent us for a change and to pass laws that guarantee a real living wage payable to any worker working any job in the United States regardless of immigration status or citizenship. Let us work toward eliminating America’s abject poverty and human suffering, once and for all. Why should America continue to tolerate a permanent under class here in our great nation? Demand that Congress pass and the federal government enforce real workers’ rights laws that are citizenship “blind” and that take the burden off the backs of exploited workers…Tell Congress to focus on laws making hiring of illegal immigrants a crime and level felony criminal charges against employers who knowingly violate workers rights and labor laws.

Emphasis added

Don't be fooled by the politicians. They no longer care about you or me. They only care about money and power. The reason we have this mess is that President Bush refused/failed to live up to his sworn duty. Congress has failed us equally. It just may be that our government "of the people, by the people, for the people,..." has perished.

For a more intelligent analysis (and if you can't easily see the truth) read Regular Guy Thinking.

Recently in Petersburg, KY, near Cincinnati, the Creation Museum opened. The museum reportedly tells the story of creation from a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible. Typically, I laugh/shrug off such things and I do with this.

But some people are quite upset. The BBC even sent a crew to cover the museum. What I love is a couple of the quotes from those offended by the museum. According to the article, Gene Kritsky, evolutionary biologist, says, "At the risk of sounding really mean, it's almost like intellectual molestation."

Intellectual molestation? Is that where you whisper dirty words and suggestive statements into the ear of an unwilling person? Sorry, Gene, you don't sound mean, just stupid. I find the use of "molestation" in this manner to be sign of shallowness in Mr. Kritsky's part. The psychological impact on a child taken through this museum unwillingly by his parents would amount to being mildly upset. Molestation scars one for life.

Kritsky also claims "...they're using dinosaurs as an eye candy." To lure kids into the museum and into the museums mode of thought. Surely, we need a government regulation against this.

Further on the article attributes Edwin Kagin, attorney, who is legal director of American Atheists, with these words. "What they are doing is no less an attack on the very way that science and enlightened thought works to produce the modern world. They want to substitute mythology for knowledge. Ignorance is a form of terrorism."

Terrorism!?!? Well, Kentucky must be full of terrorists because there's plenty of ignorance, such as attorneys who grossly overstate their case. Terrorists kill people, destroy buildings, blow up things, etc. The Creation Museum gives many of us a little chuckle or, again, a very boring tour for a child.

Why is it that atheists feel the need to push their religious point of view with the same fervor, or greater, than any Christian out to convert you?

Cincinnati sports a fine Museum of Natural History and Science. If the Creation Museum upsets you that much send some money to the Museum of Natural History and Science. But, beware, it has dinosaurs too! (And you might have to give up a latte or two.)

Sorry, Mr. Kritshy and Mr. Kagin, you scare me more than the museum. I can teach my children about evolution and science. I don't need City Beat, nor the two of you protecting me from fundamentalist Christians. Fundamentalist Muslims, maybe, but not fundamentalist Christians.

We returned this evening from our trip to Tennessee for my son to attend football camp. His experience at Phil Fulmer's football camp was a success and my daughter and I got to spend some time with just each other.

That means taking her to the mall and buying her an outfit. Fortunately, her taste are rather reasonable. We found a nice casual outfit at American Eagle and some accessories at Claire's. She and I generally had a great time. She's very funny. One of her greatest talents is creating descriptions that make perfect sense but use an unusual combination of words. She explained that she had to buy a larger size blouse than she expected because she has a "robust chest."

She is also a social butterfly. Tomorrow my company will be having our annual picnic. Yesterday a female account manager from my work called on my cellphone. Not to talk to me but to talk to my daughter to see if my daughter would be at the picnic. Geesh.

We also spent a lot of time with my 82 year old mother, which was nice. One night we ate dinner at a restaurant named "Little Italy" in Alcoa, TN. I highly recommend eating there. The food was good and very reasonably priced. Tables were neatly arranged with plenty of room. The decor consisted primarily of Italian themed pictures.

Eating there, I recalled restaurants from my younger days where the food was good and the decor wasn't overwhelming. Too many places nowadays inundate you with "atmosphere" by cluttering the walls and ceilings with everything from jet skis and bicycles to newspapers and old signs. A simple, clean, tasteful setting provided a nice change.

We watched my son going through instruction and drills some at football camp. He said it was the hardest he had ever worked. He did well though. Although campers went up to age 18 and my son is 14, he was one of the bigger linebackers in camp (6' 1"; 215 lbs). He also turned out to be faster than I thought. This adds up to an over-sized load coming at you real fast.

He is brimming with enthusiasm, as am I. He is one of the most talented persons I know. Musically inclined, instruments he has played include the violin and double bass. He currently plays the baritone horn in the school band. With three friends, he has a rock band in which he plays guitar, bass guitar and drums. (They rotate instruments.) He is also an honor student as well as an excellent football player.

Frankly, he amazes me. I try to stay out of the way, give him whatever encouragement and support he needs and just watch.

God couldn't have given me better kids. I am truly blessed.

I'm leaving today for parts unknown (Tennessee) to enjoy mountains, clean streams and for my son to attend football camp at the GREAT University of Tennessee. I'll be back Friday.

GO VOLS!!

Driving home today, I saw a young couple seated close together in a pickup truck. Such sights are common in the rural area where I live. What made this sighting noteworthy is that the girl was driving and the guy was sitting in the middle of the seat to be close to her. Another step forward for women!

Poor Paris Hilton was in jail, then out, and now back in. What a cruel fate for America's favorite skank. I've avoided blogger about her but couldn't resist any longer. She's such a tempting target.

I do believe that Paris' sentence is probably too harsh but I haven't researched her case and don't plan. Paris fails to present herself as deserving of much compassion in this situation. Most people I know rejoiced at her being sent to jail and then being sent back.

My greatest wish is that the media would ignore Paris so that she could no longer be a self-destructive, lousy role model for my 11 daughter and other girls. What is it with the drunken, substance addicted, slutty young female celebrities?

Paris, Lindsey Lohan (whom I just loved as a child actress), Britney Spears and other minor young female celebrities have grabbed the media spotlight for their poor, very poor behavior.

The other night I saw Geraldo Rivera and Bill O'Reilly debating the video of the Will Ferrell and the cursing baby. One of Geraldo's points was that the cursing baby is OK because the mother must have approved. Paris', Lindsey's and Britney's mothers apparently approved their upbringing, too. Look at then now.

There's more to life, much more, than what these girls are showing our daughters. Moms and Dads, cover you children's eyes and cover their ears when anything about these highly disturbed celebrities comes on TV or the radio.

But, to quote a local TV personality (I can't remember which one), it just pisses me off that I know who they are.

BTW - Paris went back to jail and the DOW went back up. Is there a connection?

Read this excellent comment by Michelle Malkin.

I predict a steep increase in sales for Boost Plus health drink.

The first amendment is simply a formal apology. Congress and President Bush would formally apologize to the American people for failing to fulfill their constitutionally appointed duties. Mr. Bush would especially apologize for failing to enforce the laws of the country as instructed in The Constitution. Ted Kennedy would make an apology for his role in two failed immigration bills and helping write a third that promises to be worse than the other two. These apologies would be more than the signing of the bill.

For Bush, the apology would be nationally televised and during the next 12 months every public speaking appearance would include a brief apology. All Senators and Representatives would hold formal public apologies in their respective states and districts.

Secondly, the federal government would give to the citizens of the U.S. any and all funds predicted to be collected and from illegal immigrants in back taxes, fines , etc. as well as any funds collected above the predicted amount for the next ten years. Note the word "predicted." If the government doesn't collect the money, we get it anyway. And, no new taxes. Cut programs if necessary.

Lou Dobbs has some thoughts about why Congress has forgotten the American people.

Almost five decades ago, there were only four Congressional caucuses. Today there are about 200, most of which are dedicated solely to particular countries, regions, races, ethnicities, specific issues and special interests.

Group and interest politics have overwhelmed not only our public dialogue but also our legislative process. When our elected officials spend more time and effort legislating on behalf of specific interest groups, the common good and national interest are subordinated by the very people we elect to serve all citizens and the nation. It should be no surprise that approval ratings of the president and Congress are so low or that so many of us believe this country is headed in the wrong direction.

Are we as a nation well-served by a Congress that created the Albanian Issues Caucus, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, the Organic Caucus, the Caucus on Indonesia, the Caucus on Swaziland, the Congressional Israel Allies Caucus or the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans?

What about the 280 million working men and women and their families? We would be better served if we rid Congress of these spurious and divisive caucuses that serve narrowly focused special interest groups and instead create the We the People Caucus.

I'm still amazed by Bush's arrogant statements.

Yet Bush now condemns them as unwilling to do “what’s right for America” and accuses their allies in Congress of using “empty rhetoric” to misrepresent the bill as a form of amnesty for illegal aliens. Bush appealed for “a chance to fix the problems in a comprehensive way that enforces our border and treats people with decency and respect.”

Bush accuses the immigration bill's opponents of not wanting to do what's "right for American" and "empty rhetoric." Then he talks about treating people "decency and respect." I wonder if he listens to himself.

It's all about money. Both parties are interested in making sure the agricultural industry, construction industry and their other corporate friends have a large supply of cheap labor. What a great way to look good. Raise minimum wage as if you're helping the poor. Then bring in the cheap labor to ensure real wages stay low. PsychoPhil talks about losing 35% of his family income because minimum wage was raised in his home state.

a regular guy makes some excellent comments. The Immigration Reform and Control Act (1986) -
"It created a law against hiring illegal immigrants AND it gave amnesty to Illegal Immigrants that worked in the USA since January 1982. At that time 2.7 million Illegals where given amnesty. Sound familiar? It's deja veu all over again."

"President Bush asked commented just last week that the main reason people do not have confidence in this bill, is due to the Government's perceived inability to enforce it. He said, ' give us the chance to show you'. Mr. President, you did show us...this is called history."

"The 1986 bill is still intact and being abysmally enforced. The new bill [S1348 in the Senate] in fact gives the same offerings, yet the amnesty happens over a longer period.
Does it not makes sense to tighten the controls fist, get the rules and processes in place first a.k.a. a foundation, then consider how to handle the tonnage of illegal immigrants."

This editorial in The Examiner pretty much sums up Bush's blunders regarding illegal immigration. However, it misses a few details.

President Bush wants Congress to approve an immigration compromise bill that will be supported mainly by Democrats. He’s no longer worried about getting re-elected, so in his pushing for the bill’s passage, Bush has now told millions of voters to get lost. These are the people who have been his most loyal supporters on virtually every other issue.

Yet Bush now condemns them as unwilling to do “what’s right for America” and accuses their allies in Congress of using “empty rhetoric” to misrepresent the bill as a form of amnesty for illegal aliens. Bush appealed for “a chance to fix the problems in a comprehensive way that enforces our border and treats people with decency and respect.”

I just love how George has the gall to berate opponents to the bill by saying we have "a chance to fix the problems..." Gee, I wonder how these problems came into being. Could it be that the executive branch of the federal government, headed by Mr. Bush, totally and completely failed to do its constitutionally mandated duty of enforcing the laws of the nation? The answer is a resounding "YES!" But Mr. Bush fails to take any responsibility.

Whatever happens with the immigration bill now being debated in Congress, Bush’s greatest failure has been his consistent refusal to take concrete and credible steps to secure America’s borders, especially the nearly 2,000 miles shared with Mexico.

Bush is quick to take credit for the absence of terrorist attacks in the U.S. since 2001. But the ugly truth is we still don’t know how many terrorists are here and we have no clue where they are. For that matter, nobody knows with any certainty if there are 12 million, 16 million or 20 million illegal aliens in this country.

I have to agree with Barack Obama, "we live in a more dangerous world, not a less dangerous world..." (This doesn't mean I'll vote for him. The chances of that are very slim.) It is quite obvious that when 12 million or more people can illegally enter our country, we are not safer.

The truly empty rhetoric here is coming from Mr. Bush and his cronies, such as John McCain who is yet to realize he has a snowball's chance in Hell of being elected president. No matter what you think of Mr. Bush as a person (he seems like a decent sort personally), what you think about the war in Iraq (I'm ambivalent, his tax cuts (Love'em.), the one word that will be most associated with his administration is "failure."

Liberals, Democrats, environmentalists, etc with consider Bush a failure for one set of reasons. Conservatives, Republicans, and other sane people will consider him a failure for other reasons.

I looked forward to leaving the partisan bickering and liberal idiocy of the Clinton years behind when Bush was elected. But, Bush replaced the idiocy with his own brand and left us in more quagmires then when he started.

Hat tip to PsychoPhil.

Instapundit continues to cover the disappearing honey bees story with alarming intensity. As a result, last weekend, I asked a beekeeper I know how her bees were doing. "Just fine," she said.

My friend keeps honey bees in southeast Ohio. She stated that no one seems to know why some bees are disappearing or diminishing. The three primary culprits she mentioned are feeding bees corn syrup to help them through the summer, the insecticide used to combat mites and, for commercial pollination bees, the stress of traveling in trucks.

Global warming and cell phones were not mentioned. Since she is an aging hippie type, I'm certain she would have mentioned global warming if she had the slightest inkling that it caused bee problems.

After talking with this experienced beekeeper and reading Instapundit's many posts on the subject, I see little reason for panic. But be prepared to rising honey prices that make gasoline look cheap.