Out on a limb at Mike Lief.com

Main

September 30, 2007

We're gonna party like it's 1985

The internet is filled with orphaned webpages, abandoned, forlorn, yet still waiting to be discovered because someone keeps paying to renew the domain name.

For those of us who came of age in the '80s, this site is like a Cliffs Notes guide to musical nostalgia.

It looks like the updates stopped in 2003, but the handful of posts are worth reading -- if you liked any of the music that marked the post-disco era.

Posted by Mike Lief at 10:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

How'd they do that?

Posted by Mike Lief at 10:00 PM

Now that's different

This America's Got Talent contestant is like a modern Robin Hood.

If he were a sexy female, contortionist archer.

Posted by Mike Lief at 09:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

What's dangerous for dogs?

National Geographic has posted an interactive graphic illustrating the often little-known dangers dogs face when given treats by well-intentioned owners intent on spoiling Fido.

It's not just which foods that I find surprising, but the small quantities needed to make dogs seriously ill.

This is further illustrated with another chart, this one demonstrating how dangerous chocolate can be. You click and drag a vertical slider until your dog's weight appears; the graphic then shows how much chocolate it takes to kill your pal.

Again, it's the relatively small quantities involved that are so shocking: 3 ounces of cocoa or a little more than 5 ounces of baking chocolate could kill a 55-pound dog -- Bogie's weight.

Other surprising information provided by National Geographic:

• Caffeine in any form can trigger seizures;
• garlic can lead to anemia and kidney failure;
• grapes and raisins can cause acute renal and kidney failure;
• a handful of macadamia nuts can paralyze the hind legs;
• and raw onion and bread dough are dangerous, too.

If you own a dog -- or have friends or family who do -- take a couple of minutes and read the article; it could prevent an easily-avoidable tragedy.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:36 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

FNS Panel: The Dems are to the left of everybody

Bill Kristol, after watching the last Democratic debate, remains convinced that the GOP will likely win the presidency. Why? Because, he says, "The Democratic candidates have more passion in conducting the war on smoking than the war on terror."

Brit Hume says Hillary Clinton recognizes that Dems have been seen as untrustworthy on national security, positioning her to move to the right of the Democratic field (although getting to the right of this bunch still leaves her w-a-a-a-y to the left of Red State voters. Hume adds,"This democratic field is being pulled to the left by organizations like MoveOn.org, who are so far to the left they're out there where the buses don't run." The camera cuts to Juan Williams, who snorts derisively and leans back in disgust.

"Classic Republican losing proposition," going along with Democratic efforts to raise spending and taxes on a program, while trying to limit it, giving the Dems most of what they want, but ultimately leaving the GOP in the position of being the party that won't help the poor, doe-eyed uninsured children.

Whenever I hear something described as being heartless and bad ofr the children, I think it's a good idea ... How stupid do they thiink the American people are?

When you have 3.7M uninsured children in America, you know you've got a crisis.

When Juan worries that the Republican Party will get hurt on an issue, I get happy.

Posted by Mike Lief at 08:32 AM

September 29, 2007

Why do they come here?

Why do foreign nationals come here?

For some recent immigrants, it's certainly not to become "Americans," to leave behind the strictures of the Old World and allow their children to partake of the culture that -- in the past -- turned immigrants from countless nations into one people: Americans.

Assimilate?

Not interested.

Melting pot?

How insulting.

Learn to fit into American society?

Don't be ridiculous.

No, what they want is the economic prosperity and personal security that Americans enjoy, while forcing changes to eliminate those aspects of the United States that conflict with their Old-World customs and mores.

Here's the latest example.

So long, Halloween parade. Farewell, Santa's gift shop.

The holiday traditions are facing elimination in some Oak Lawn schools this year after complaints that the activities are offensive, particularly to Muslim students.

Final decisions on which of the festivities will be axed will fall to the principals at each of Ridgeland School District 122's five schools, Supt. Tom Smyth said.

Parents expect that the announcement is going to add to the tension that has been building since officials agreed earlier this month to change the lunch menu to exclude items containing pork to accommodate Muslim students. News that Jell-O was struck from the menu caused such a stir that officials have agreed to bring it back. Gelatin is often made with tissue or bones of pigs or other animals.

That controversy now appears to have been been dwarfed by the holiday debate, which became so acrimonious Wednesday that police were called to Columbus Manor School to intervene in a shouting match among parents.

"It's difficult when you change the school's culture," said Columbus Manor Principal Sandy Robertson.

Elizabeth Zahdan, a mother of three District 122 students, says she took her concerns to the school board this month, not because she wanted to do away with the traditions, but rather to make them more inclusive. "I only wanted them modified to represent everyone," she said.

Nixing them isn't the response she was looking for. "Now the kids are not being educated about other people," she said.

[...]

Robertson is hoping to strike compromises that will keep traditions alive and be culturally acceptable to all students -- nearly half of whom are of Arab descent at Columbus Manor, she says. Fewer than a third of students districtwide are of Arab descent, according to Smyth.

Following the example of Lieb Elementary School, Columbus Manor School will exchange the annual Halloween parade for a fall festival next month. The holiday gift bazaars at both schools also will remain, but they'll likely be moved to the PTA-sponsored after-school winter festival. And Santa's annual visit probably will be on a Saturday.

I am the great-grandson of Eastern-European Jewish immigrants. I grew up at a time when we still learned about and participated in the non-religious aspects of Christmas, Easter and Halloween.

My memories of singing carols in the annual Christmas show; coloring eggs on Easter; and dressing up for Halloween are some of the happiest of my childhood, notwithstanding the fact that I was not a Christian. I was not scarred, damaged or hurt from being exposed to and participating in these holidays. Decorating my friend's Christmas tree was great fun, and never made me want to have one of my own.

I wasn't threatened by these rituals and celebrations, and I have a hard time believing that it's good for society -- for America -- to neuter our customs in order to avoid offending a group of immigrants who apparently want things to remain as they were back in Kissmyassistan.

This can't be good for us.

Or the U.S.

Posted by Mike Lief at 05:16 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Uh, yeah

In the last post, I drew a response from reader Bill, who said about the X-HEAD, "That's just about the strangest looking rig I have ever seen."

To which I respond, "Have you seen the PIXY + SSC?"

Posted by Mike Lief at 01:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Who says the Japanese have no design chops?

Autoblog.com has been running previews of the Tokyo Autoshow, and the Suzuki X-HEAD caught my eye, with its Tonka Truck-meets-Pinzgauer looks, not to mention the inevitable "HEAD beats Hummer" puns -- ahem -- heading our way.

Looking like it's ready to punch a HUMMER in the mouth and audition for a part in Transformers 2, the mega-trick-looking X-HEAD (dig the "X" tread pattern on the rubber) is all about flexibility (we think). If we're reading the Google-translated press release correctly, the "X" in its name signifies the unknown -- as in unknown or unlimited number of uses. Figure it could be everything from a camper, to a pickup, to a rescue vehicle and beyond.

While the hardcore truck fans are dismissive of the Suzuki (one said it looked like a 1:3-scale model), it strikes me as a drivable version of my childhood Tonkas; can I be the only 40-something with that reaction?

There's a high-resolution version of the picture here.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:43 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 28, 2007

What's the best ammo?

This is an interesting article on the best self-defense rounds, broken down by caliber and weapon type.

Given that it's just the opinion of one guy (although with cites to other works), don't take it as gospel. But it is a good place to start if you're looking for a little guidance.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:06 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Harshing my mellow

William Kuebler, left, and Dwight Sullivan, U.S. lawyers for Guantanamo Bay prisoner Omar Khadr, talk about the detained Canadian in Toronto Monday, June 25. (Tim Fraser/The Globe and Mail)

Just reveived an e-mail from a friend that begins, "Need a blood-pressure boost?"

He knows me well -- and boy, he wasn't kidding.

You may have heard about the decision this week reinstating the charges against Omar Khadr, a Canadian terrorist who, at age 15, killed an Army S[pecial] F[orces] sergeant in Afghanistan with a hand grenade. The WSJ has an editorial today lauding the decision.

I read the decision, and it's a good one. But when I went digging for more information about the case, I found that Khadr's lawyer, a Navy JAG O-4 (and classmate of mine at USD law school), traveled to Canada and spoke, in uniform, to the Canadian Bar Association, urging them to apply pressure to the Canadian government to seek Khadr's release.

I am most disturbed by the image of a U.S. Navy officer, standing on Canadian soil in his Service Dress Blues, calling the U.S. a "lawless regime."

I'm not making this up. There are numerous articles (and even a Wikipedia page) about this.

The speech, of course, was the darling of the Canadian media last month. I don't begrudge Kuebler (the lawyer) his right to zealously defend his client in court, or even in the court of public opinion. But seeking to further his cause by aligning himself with a foreign government -- while maligning his own government -- strikes me as, well, treachery.

I agree. The image of a commissioned officer in the U.S. military, wearing the uniform as he denounces his own nation as a "lawless regime" is repugnant. That he does so on foreign soil in defense of a man who has killed a fellow American soldier is disgusting.

While Kuebler's actions may not be outrageous by the standards of criminal defense attorneys, he is a disgrace to the uniform -- and brings dishonor to himself and the military.

More details here.

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:49 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

It's Good News Friday!

And you thought I was a just a black-hearted pessimist, an unrelenting cynic -- and maybe you were right.

But then a story like this comes along and restores my faith in the possibility of right vanquishing wrong.

Illegal immigrants living in states and cities that have adopted strict immigration policies are packing up and moving back to their home countries or to neighboring states.

The exodus has been fueled by a wave of laws targeting illegal immigrants in Oklahoma, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia and elsewhere. Many were passed after congressional efforts to overhaul the immigration system collapsed in June.

Immigrants say the laws have raised fears of workplace raids and deportation.

"People now are really frightened and scared because they don't know what's going to happen," says Juliana Stout, an editor at the newspaper El Nacional de Oklahoma. "They're selling houses. They're leaving the country."

Hey, wait a minute! All those supporters of the Congressional Illegal Immigration Amnesty Act have hammered those opposed to the amnesty with -- among charges of racism -- the charge that it's impossible to deport 12 million people.

They've ridiculed the answer that many -- if not most -- of the foreign nationals in the U.S. illegally will self-deport, as soon as jobs start drying up and the threat of enforcement becomes real.

And what do you know, seems like that's just what's happening.

Supporters of the laws cheer the departure of illegal immigrants and say the laws are working as intended.

Oklahoma state Rep. Randy Terrill, Republican author of his state's law, says the flight proves it is working. "That was the intended purpose," he says. "It would be just fine with me if we exported all illegal aliens to the surrounding states."

Most provisions of an Oklahoma law take effect in November. Among other things, it cuts off benefits such as welfare and college financial aid.

[...]

In Tulsa, schools have seen a drop in Hispanic enrollment.

About 60% of Kendall-Whittier Elementary School's 950 students are Hispanic, Principal Judy Feary says. Since an enrollment report Sept. 10, she says, 14 have left. Four more said last week that they would move.

Three weeks ago, one couple dropped their three children at school, then returned after lunch with their belongings packed in an SUV and trailer. Feary says they took the kids and said they were moving back to Mexico. "They were afraid and cited the immigration law," she says.

Marshall Elementary, where enrollment is 60% Hispanic, has lost about 10 students this year to the immigration law, Principal Kayla Robinson says. Most moved to Texas. "These are families that have been here for a long time," she says.

Sounds like these schools are enjoying a lower student-to-teacher ratio, which as I recall is generally a good thing, much sought after by edjimication "experts" and teachers' unions.

Illegal immigrants also are leaving Georgia, where a law requires companies on government contracts with at least 500 employees to check new hires against a federal database to make sure they are legally authorized to work.

[...]

Real estate agent Guadalupe Sosa in Avondale, Ariz., outside Phoenix, says migration from the state began about three months ago, shortly after Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, signed a law that will take effect in January. Employers who hire illegal immigrants can lose their business licenses.

Of the 10 homes Sosa has on the market, half belong to families that plan to leave because of immigration tensions.

"They know they might be losing everything today or tomorrow," she says.

Maria Sanchez, 35, joined the migration with her sister and nephew, who are in the country legally. Sanchez was in the USA illegally, but she has gotten a temporary work permit.

The three lived in Aurora, Colo., when Sanchez was fired from her job as district manager of a fast-food chain after she couldn't provide a valid Social Security number.

You'd have to have a heart of stone to not crack a smile at that last sentence; the inference to be drawn is that she provided an invalid Social Security Number, a number not her own. In other words, she probably committed tax fraud and identity theft.

But not to worry, she just moved to a state where they don't care if you're here legally.

Colorado has approved several immigration measures. One gives employers 20 days to check and photocopy documents such as driver's licenses and Social Security cards, which new workers present to prove their legal status.

Because of the laws, Sanchez, her sister and nephew left five months ago. "I moved to Utah because they don't have the same laws here," she says.

State Sen. Dave Schultheis says he hasn't observed a major migration out of Colorado but has heard anecdotal reports that illegal immigrants are leaving. "It's absolutely a good thing," he says. "We want to make Colorado the least friendly state to people who are here illegally."

In Hazleton, Pa., families started moving away after the city passed an illegal-immigrant law last summer, says Rudy Espinal, head of the Hazleton Hispanic Business Association. The law would fine landlords who rented to illegal immigrants and suspend the business licenses of companies that hired them. A companion measure would require tenants to register with the city and pay $10 for a rental permit.

A federal judge ruled the measures unconstitutional in July, but that hasn't stopped people moving away, he says.

"People are still leaving," Espinal says. "Some people have told me that they're leaving because they don't want their kids to grow up in an environment like this."

Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta counters that some illegal immigrants who moved came back after the judge's decision, which the city is appealing. "I see a reversal," he says. "In a small city, it becomes obvious. … Schools are overcrowded and there are five-hour waits in the emergency room."

He says, "We don't want to chase immigrants away, just the illegal aliens who are causing many of the problem we are having."

See, I told you it's not all gloom and doom.

Happy Friday!

Posted by Mike Lief at 08:03 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

September 27, 2007

It's still Burma

Pres. Bush referred to the violence and human rights abuses in Burma during his speech at the United Nations Tuesday, and CNN has it's collective panties in a twist over his failure to call it "Myanmar."

However, lest you judge this to be another tongue-tied fumble by the allegedly doltish leader of the free world, check out this defense from writer James Fallows, no fan of the president.

I'm watching CNN in Beijing, which keeps tut-tutting President Bush for saying "Burma," rather than "Myanmar," in his just-completed UN speech, as if this were merely another of his gaffes.

I'm with Bush. For nearly twenty years, since first visiting the country during the violent protests in 1988, I've followed arguments about the twists and turns of what to call the country in Burmese. The complications mainly involve what the various names say about the relations between the Burmese people proper and other ethnic groups within the nation.

But when it comes to referring to the nation in English, there's little debate. Myanmar is the name invented 18 years ago by the benighted junta, known as SLORC* back then and the State Peace and Development Council now, when it seized power through force. When Westerners say "Myanmar," they're not being culturally respectful to the people of a beautiful but oppressed nation. (We don't call China Zhongguo or Germany Deutschland just because the locals do.) They're bowing to the whims of the generals who still imprison Aung San Suu Kyi.

There is no reason to humor them. Say Burma, as George Bush did. And CNN, grow some backbone when it comes to terminology!

I love it when media types show us how "sensitive" they are by using the most exaggerated exotic tones, trilled "R"s and glottal stops while trying to get us yobs to throw out traditional English words and pronunciation, in favor of using allegedly more authentic substitutes.

The twinkies covering the Olympics for NBC a few years back started in on Turin, sounding like bad waiters evertime they said "Tore-een-o." Rome became "Rrrrrrome-ah," and Venice was "Venn-ee-tz-ee-ya."

I can't wait for the push for English-speakers to adopt the African tribal click-language pronunciation for their cities.

As soon as they build any.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:05 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 26, 2007

Looking sharp

The Navy is looking to its past for some "new" uniforms, reviving the service dress khaki for officers and chief petty officers, and reinstating a real dress white uniform with piping on the cuffs and flap.

The khaki uniform is versatile, as well as good looking; the working khaki uniform (open collar) requires only a black tie and a coat to complete the transition to more formal-wear.

This is, with very minor differences, the uniform worn by the Navy during World War II, an era that sported the best looking servicemen in U.S. history.

Alas, only the Marines have retained their 1940s-era uniforms with relatively few changes; the Army and Air Force are horror shows when it comes to their dress uniforms.

It's a mixed bag with the Navy: while enlisted men still have the "crackerjack" uniform, the dungaree working uniform is being phased out and replaced with a generic, janitorial-looking outfit.

One of the nice things about retaining the traditional uniforms is the degree of continuity it provides between those who serve and those who served.

It makes me proud to see pictures of Dad in his Korean War-era blues -- the same style I wore thirty years later, and it's a kick to see Dad joking and smoking with his shipmates in his bellbottom dungarees, chambray shirt and white dixie-cup hat -- the same outfit I wore aboard ship.

It's a shame the Navy is getting rid of the dungarees; one step forward and one step back, I guess.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:30 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

September 25, 2007

The enemy inside the gates

Posted by Mike Lief at 07:50 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Lt. Lummis

http://tank.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTFjODE1ZTA4ZjQyZjdjY2U3Y2UzYWU2MGY3ZjVlYWY=

Earlier this year, I wrote a piece for Townhall.com entitled, "The New York Giant who died on Iwo Jima."

The story was about one of my favorite larger-than-life heroes: 1st Lieutenant Andrew Jackson “Jack” Lummus Jr., a Texas-born Marine officer and recipient of the Medal of Honor who was killed in an assault after leading his men in a series of wild charges against the Japanese on Iwo Jima.

Lummus, as I wrote, was "a 29-year-old former defensive lineman with the New York Giants and an All-American at Baylor University who – in addition to football – had once signed a minor league baseball contract." But one month after Pearl Harbor, he left the Giants to become a Marine infantry officer.

During heavy fighting on Iwo, Lummus ordered an attack against an enemy gun emplacement:

...As the Marines charged, Lummus stepped on a landmine. The enormous blast that followed could be heard across the entire island.

Numbed and with ears ringing, Lummus’ Marines could still make out the familiar Texas drawl of their platoon commander shouting, “Forward! Keep moving!” They could hear him, but they couldn’t see him. Not until the blast’s smoke and dust cleared. Then they saw the blackened figure of a man bent over and trying to push himself up on one of his elbows.

The Marines initially thought their lieutenant was standing in a hole. Then there was the horror of what they were looking at: Lummus was upright on two bloody stumps: His legs had been blown off, and much of his lower trunk was missing.

Several of the younger Marines, weeping like children, ran to his side. Some of the older Marines briefly considered a mercy shooting. But Lummus kept urging them forward: “Dammit, keep moving!,” he uttered. “You can't stop now!”

According to the official report. “Their tears turned to rage. They swept an incredible 300 yards over impossible ground... There was no question that the dirty, tired men, cursing and crying and fighting, had done it for Jack Lummus.”

Hours later on a stretcher bound for the operating table, an ashen-faced Lummus managed a smile for the Navy surgeon and quipped, "Well, Doc, I guess the New York Giants have lost the services of a damned good end."

Lummus died that afternoon, and was buried at the base of Mount Suribachi...

For months I've known this story was making the rounds throughout Marine Corps circles — a source of great personal pride — but it wasn't until this morning that I learned of the story's greatest impact:

I've just received a congratulatory note informing me that because of my story, the New York Giants and the National Football League have arranged a special national tribute to Jack Lummus, which will take place on Veterans Day at Giants Stadium when the Giants play the Dallas Cowboys.

Yes, I am proud. And no American is more deserving of such a tribute than Jack Lummus.

Details to follow.

Posted by Mike Lief at 07:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

'Frisco to Marines: Piss off

California's coastline is a foetid cesspool of rabid, spittle-flecked moonbats, ranting against Pres. Bush, capitalism, American imperialism, and most of all, jack-booted thugs oppressing peace-loving foreign types -- and the swirling vortex though which that pestilential turd of self-hatred drops, the epicenter of societal self-loathing, is San Francisco, or as the locals hate it to be known, 'Frisco.

How much does 'Frisco hate the American military?

San Francisco, through which hundreds of thousands passed in World War II to the Pacific’s bloody battles, now doesn’t have space either for the USS Iowa, which it refused in 2005 to provide anchorage for a naval museum, and is moving toward exiling the [Blue] Angels from its skies, nor now for the U.S. Marine Corps’ world famous silent drill team to film.

The Bay Area’s ABC affiliate reports that San Francisco’s film commission Executive Director, Stefanie Coyote, denied permission for the drill team to film a recruiting commercial. She claimed that it would interrupt traffic.

Police Captain Greg Corralles, who commands the traffic bureau that works with crews filming commercials, reminds Ms. Coyote that, “the Film Commission often approves shoots for rush hour.” Corrales, a Marine veteran and father of a son serving his fourth tour in Iraq, adds of Ms. Coyote’s action, “It’s insulting, it’s demeaning.” Corrales also said that, "Ms. Coyote's politics blinded her to her duty as the director of the Film Commission and as a responsible citizen."

Instead,

The U.S. Marine Silent Drill Platoon performed Monday morning in New York's Times Square. They filmed part of a recruitment commercial through the start of the morning rush hour -- something they could not do in San Francisco on the anniversary of 9/11.

National Review's Steve Shippert urges a 'Frisco vacation boycott.

I wouldn't mind it being annexed (or sold) to Mexico, or better yet, to Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, who'd find the political climate muy sympatico.

A society that can't honor the warriors who protect it, that treats the bravest of the brave with contempt is itself deserving of nothing but the same. It does not merit the blood of Marines, spilled in defense of 'Friscans who neither comprehend nor value courage, honor, fidelity.

For shame.

Posted by Mike Lief at 07:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 23, 2007

FNS: Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton is being interviewed on Fox News Sunday. She makes my skin crawl. Harsh, flat voice -- like fingernails on a chalkboard -- droning on about her "responsible" plan for state-mandated "universal health care," i.e., socialized medicine.

I am (to be charitible) not impressed; Clinton's forced imposition of "free" healthcare will be unbelievably expensive -- and the standard of care will get worse.

No sale.

But it's on Iraq and the military that she really hits her stride.

"I have been a strong supporter of the military," she says.

Herculean self-control keeps me from spraying coffee on the keyboard. In what alternate universe is the former First Lady who famously directed that she wanted no military uniforms in the White House a supporter of our fiarmed services?

Chris Wallace asks her three times why she voted against a Senate bill condemning the MoveOn.org ad, "Gen. Betrayu," a bill that passed with the support of more than half the Democrats in the Senate.

Clinton refuses to answer the questinon, refuses to condemn the MoveOn.org ad, instead saying she has condemned attacks on honorably-serving members of the military -- like John Kerry.

With every question, Clinton turns it back to pulling the troops out of Iraq and criticizing Pres. Bush.

Do you think Columbia University should rescind the invitation to Ahmadinijad?

"Well, I'm going to leave that to Columbia," she says, then segues into another attack on Pres. Bush.

Gingrich

"Big-government, high-tax plan"

"Why would you think government is an accountable, reliable provider of health care?"

Brit Hume: She was in very good form indeed.

Mara Liasson:

Bill Kristol: She's come up with a cleverer way to dusguise what will ultimately be government-run health care. The vote this week on MoveOn.org was startling. They equate attacks with a politician in the heat of a campagin with an attack on Gen Petraeus.

JW: GOP is moving toward universal healthcare. What a distraction! This is a situation where republicans are playing politics, distracting from the war.

On the NRA:

BH: The record is what it is, and there's no escaping it.

Iran's blood-soaked dictator and the Columbia invitation.

BK You can't make up the idiocy of higher education. The Iranian governemnt is directly responsible for maiming and killing American soldiers.

JW I disagree with you that you would not allow the man to speak. You put people in the positin of having to defend their positions.

BH Across America today, someone is running afoul of the speech code's on campus saying something that makes someone feel uncomfortable. Between the killing of American soldiers at Iranian

JW confirms his status as the discussion-panel member who rode the short yellow bus to school by insisting that "freedom of speech" demands that Ahmadinijhad has a right to speak at Columbia University.

Erm, no, Juan. Foreign tyrants do not

Posted by Mike Lief at 08:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 21, 2007

Profiles in judicial jackassery

National Review's Ed Whelan takes a look at a New York Times Sunday Magazine puff piece on Supreme Court Justice Stevens, including this disturbing glimpse into the mind of a legal giant hack.

Rosen provides a truly bizarre anecdote about how Stevens’s World War II experience shaped Stevens’s views on the death penalty:

[Stevens] helped break the code that informed American officials that Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto, the commander of the Japanese Navy and architect of the Pearl Harbor attack, was about to travel to the front. Based on the code-breaking of Stevens and others, U.S. pilots, on Roosevelt’s orders, shot down Yamamoto’s plane in April 1943.

Stevens told me he was troubled by the fact that Yamamoto, a highly intelligent officer who had lived in the United States and become friends with American officers, was shot down with so little apparent deliberation or humanitarian consideration. The experience, he said, raised questions in his mind about the fairness of the death penalty.

“I was on the desk, on watch, when I got word that they had shot down Yamamoto in the Solomon Islands, and I remember thinking: This is a particular individual they went out to intercept,” he said. “There is a very different notion when you’re thinking about killing an individual, as opposed to killing a soldier in the line of fire.” Stevens said that, partly as a result of his World War II experience, he has tried on the court to narrow the category of offenders who are eligible for the death penalty and to ensure that it is imposed fairly and accurately.

Once again, Stevens’s judgment is a pure policy judgment that has nothing to do with where the Constitution vests decisionmaking authority on the death penalty. Stevens’s particular sympathy for Admiral Yamamoto also seems badly confused. I suppose that we can be grateful that Osama bin Laden never lived in the United States and never became friends with the Americans he killed, or Stevens’s rulings in national-security cases might be even worse than they are.

Stevens' career has been nothing but policy-making, masquerading as judging, resulting in decades of horrendous decisions. Whelan cautions, "[T]he careful reader will discern the incoherence and idiosyncratic willfulness that mark Stevens’s Supreme Court career."

I couldn't agree more.

The passage on the death penalty and Yamamoto is troubling for a variety of reasons, amongst them the implicit elitist belief that the death of one, cultured officer is essentially state-sanctioned homicide, therefore much less palatable than the slaughter of unwashed enlisted men in more random ground combat.

That Stevens could extrapolate from this incident to a broader "principle" with some -- heck, any -- application to death-penalty jurisprudence is risible.

Posted by Mike Lief at 02:43 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Second Amendment? Fred's the man*

Jim Geraghty has been blogging from the NRA convention; Fred Thompson was without a doubt the best of the GOP contenders, some of whom have less-than-impressive records (Rudy, Romney) when it somes to the Second Amendment.

[THompson] repeats the line about Americans sacrificing more blood for other countries' freedom than for any other country; I can't help but wonder if it's a jab at the Washington Post for critiquing it and arguing the Soviet Union might rival that claim.

He got a standing ovation at his finish, and then he did a brief Q & A.

"Some believe that the Second Amendment has different meanings in different places, and that the gun rights of citizens in, say, New York City and Chicago can restricted more than the gun rights of those in Tennessee and Montana. Do you agree?"

Thompson responds with a deep, rumbling, slow, "Noooope." Then he follows with absolute catnip for gun owners: "It's never seemed to me to be coincidental that the places that have the highest crime rates tend to be the places that have the most restrictions on gun ownership in America."

Asked about gun shows, he calls the "part of Americana... There's always been an effort on the other side to go after something high profile or particularly vulnerable, an easy target, but I've always resisted that."

Will he appoint an Attorney General who shares his opinion of the Second Amendment. "Yes."

More applause.

"I think we're winning on the interpretation of the Second Amendment. I have a complicated position on this: The Constitution means what it says."

He gets another standing ovation.

Good stuff. Giuliani's anti-gun record is very troubling, his tough-on-crime record notwithstanding. And Romney's blow-dried, slick, shape-shifting persona on a whole host of issues -- guns just one of them -- doesn't inspire confidence.

On this issue, Thompson's the man.

*But Geraghty's subsequent post on Mike Huckabee makes it clear: there are now two nominees who understand and support the Second Amendment.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 20, 2007

They did what?!

Is there no end to the multi-culti madness?

The Oregon Department of Education and Mexico's Secretariat of Public Education are discussing aligning their curricula so courses will be valid in both countries.

Similar ventures are under way in Yakima, Wash., San Diego, Calif., and Austin, Texas.

[...]

Mexico has made its national curriculum available to communities across the U.S. since 2001 to encourage Mexican adults and youths to continue an education often abandoned back home due to limited resources.

Arrrrgggghhh.

Must. Find. Blood. Pressure. Medication.

Bloody hell. We wouldn't want these students to use the -- what do they call it? -- American curriculum, would we?

At least this reveals the truth about these foreign nationals: they have no interest in becoming Americans, are only here to take advantage of our generosity, impose their agenda on our schools, divert resources from U.S. citizens.

Want to make sure your education is up to (must not giggle) Mexican standards? Here's a suggestion: go to school in Mexico.

Madness. Sheer madness.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:27 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

World's smallest violin

Those poor, put upon Canadians.

With city shelters filled and a surge of further refugee claimants expected to flood into Windsor, Mayor Eddie Francis is pleading for financial help from Ottawa.

"When there is a possibility of adding thousands to the local social assistance system as a result of refugee claimants crossing the border into Windsor, we will become overwhelmed and our current resources will not suffice," Francis wrote in a letter sent Wednesday to Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Over the past three weeks, 45 families and 31 individuals -- approximately 200 people -- entered Canada at the Detroit River crossings and applied in Windsor for shelter and social assistance after filing refugee claims with the Canada Border Services Agency. Municipal agencies dealing with the sudden influx of mainly Mexican refugee applicants are renting out hotel rooms and bracing for predicted thousands more to come.

"We don't have the means, ability or capacity to deal with this additional cost. We are not able to deal with this potential crisis locally," Francis wrote Harper.

"I don't believe that Windsor's residents and taxpayers should have to foot the bill for U.S. immigration policy," Francis told The Star. He was referring to the suspected source of the problem -- a recently begun crackdown on illegal immigrants in economically struggling regions of the U.S. South.

[...]

"This is a problem the U.S. has allowed to create. It's really unfair for Canada to have to face this," said MP Joe Comartin (NDP -- Windsor-Tecumseh), his Party's public safety and national security critic.

"This is very much being driven by (the U.S. Department of) Homeland Security," he said, predicting that, "with few exceptions," most of these "economic claimants" will eventually be sent back.

Welcome to the party, my friends. Illegal immigration sucks, eh?

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Why are they even here?

Did you hear that Nanny Bloomberg was prepared to roll out the red carpet for the Iranian madman during his visit to the U.N.? That is, until the firestorm of criticism led Gotham's sycophantic mayor and lickspittle police chief to decide that a guided tour of Ground Zero for a terrorist, a man who denies the Holocaust, threatens Israel with destruction, and the leader of a nation actively sending troops and arms to kill U.S. troops in the field might not be a good idea.

Seth Leibsohn pines for the '80s, when pols knew what to do.

How far we've come. Rudy Giuliani, when he was mayor, had Yasser Arafat escorted out of Lincoln Center, and was right to do so—he didn't consider ways to make Arafat's visit comfortable.

There is a debate of sorts as to whether the U.N. can legally deny a visa to a head of state such as Ahmadinejad. We denied Arafat a visa in 1988 under the fiction that he was not a head of state. But what about our states? Anyone remember 1983 and how two Governors, Tom Kean and Mario Cuomo, of New Jersey and New York handled their duties? They denied Soviet landing rights in their states as a result of the USSR shooting down KAL 007.

As the U.N. screamed over this lese majeste, threatening to deny the U.S. as home to the U.N., the late Ambassador Charles Lichenstein took it just fine, saying: "We will put no impediment in your way. The members of the U.S. mission to the United Nations will be down at the dockside waving you a fond farewell as you sail off into the sunset."

How I miss the days when city, state, and national leaders took terrorism as seriously as they used to.

Me too. How I wish we'd show the U.N., and it's assortment of sinecures, petty tyrants and courtiers to thugs, the door. We get nothing for hosting the U.N., other than an expensive bill, unpaid parking tickets, and the company of war criminals, terrorists and jealous third-world savages.

There's no upside, so let's send them packing, shall we?

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:53 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

From the front lines

Another brilliant dispatch from Michael Yon, the freelance journalist who is the 21st Century's Ernie Pyle. This time he focuses on how to get killed.

Two men had been killed on the 15 July mission. Our guys shot them. Warning shots were fired, the driver sped up and our guys rained bullets. Slugs kicked up dust, some bullets striking the van, but it kept going. A fusillade commenced, and about 20 seconds after the first shot was fired the van was getting away. It had nearly escaped. A Bradley gunner was tracking the van in his crosshairs. He squeezed the trigger on his 25mm cannon.

BAM BAM BAM BAM

Concussion from the shots slapped the ground and popped up moon dust around the Bradley. It sounded like a giant jackhammer. Each bullet weighs about four times more than a golf ball, and traveling thousands of feet per second, 25mm shots are devastating to human bodies. A single shot can pop a man into barely recognizable chunks and bits. The four bullets traveled at nearly one-mile-per-second toward the van in front of us. Each bullet contained explosives. The first 25mm penetrated above the right rear taillight leaving a bowling ball sized hole, exploding inside with a brief fire ball caught by my video. A benefit of explosive rounds is that after they explode, they don’t travel a mile or two and possibly whack someone who was not involved.

All four rounds hit the van, and instead of the bullets shoving through and knocking a wall down, they exploded in the van. The driver died instantly and crashed off the road into a ditch. His body was blasted partially outside the van, his foot caught by the steering wheel leaving him hanging upside down, oozing and dripping blood and bodily fluids into Iraq. One shot somehow managed to strike the roof behind the driver. The Bradley gun must have been higher than the van. (Bradleys are taller, and the roads seemed flat.)

Yon's writing leaves you stunned; you can practically smell the acrid scent of spent rounds, the copper aroma of blood, feel the searing heat (he says it feels like his eyeballs are sweating), taste the dust.

Nobody -- Nobody! -- is covering the war like this, and Yon's doing it on his own dime. Read the rest, and hit the donation button, will ya?

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 19, 2007

Amnesty update

Go here to see who is committed to stopping this risen-from-the-dead amnesty, and use the links on the right to contact your senators, if they're not on the list.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Illegal Alien Amnesty Alert!

Proving that the feckless, lying crap-weasels who prefer to be known as "Senator" and "Congressman" are relentless, shameless and completely uniterested in what their constituents -- i.e., Americans -- want comes this news, via the incandescently furious Kim Du Toit.

Anyone heard of the DREAM Act? If I were to tell you that it was sponsored by Sen. Dick “Turban” Durbin (Terrorsymp, IL), that it provides amnesty for illegal aliens, and that the Senate is voting on it TODAY, would that help you get off your asses and call your Senators’ offices? Some details (more here):

Senators will consider an amendment (SA 2237) sponsored by Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), which is the DREAM Act. The gist of this proposal, which has been offered by Durbin the past few legislative sessions as a stand-alone bill (including this session as S. 774), is that DHS would be authorized to cancel removal for, or adjust to lawful permanent resident status (in other words, grant amnesty to), an alien who is inadmissible or deportable in cases where the alien demonstrated that he/she:

• has maintained continuous presence in the United States for five years and was not yet 16 years old upon initial entry;
• is of “good moral character” and is not inadmissible or deportable on certain criminal grounds or on the basis of being a risk to national security; and
• has been admitted to an institution of higher education, has attained a high school diploma, or has obtained a GED in the United States.

The DREAM Act also would grant amnesty to illegal aliens who satisfy these criteria as of enactment.

A gaping loophole exists, however, in this iteration of the DREAM Act, for there is no upper age limit. As a result, any illegal alien can walk into a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office and declare that he is eligible. For example, a 45-year-old can claim that he illegally entered the United States 30 years ago at the age of 15.

There is no requirement that the alien prove that he entered the United States at the claimed time by providing particular documents. The proposal merely requires him to “demonstrate” that he is eligible-which in practice could mean simply making a sworn statement to that effect. Thus, it is an invitation for just about every illegal alien to fraudulently claim the amnesty.

Crap. This foul piece of legislative legerdemain has to fall.

Call your Senators now—Schultzie suggests calling their in-state offices, because they’ll try to duck the D.C. calls—and tell them to vote against S.774 and SA 2237.

Bastards. As Rodger says, the MoFos just don’t quit. DREAM? More like a bloody nightmare.

We can get the gallows and firing squads ready later. In the meantime, please call your Senators.

One of Kim's commenters called the offices of Texas GOP Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson; the response was very, very bad:

“She believes the Defense Bill should be pushed through and not held up by discussion of this matter!”

It seems like Durbin has figured out that the only way to get this amnesty through is to attach it -- like a blood-sucking parasite -- to a vital defense-related bill, confident that weak-kneeded Stupid Party members like Hutchinson will roll over and play dead.

Get on the phones, people. Let the feckless crap-weasels know that you won't be ignored.

Posted by Mike Lief at 10:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Marine Corps way

This does a pretty good job summing up the ethos of the Marine Corps, albeit in a way sure to amuse veterans and shooters -- and guaranteed to horrify pacifists, Code Pink whackos and firearm-phobics.

USMC Rules for Gunfighting

1. Bring a gun. Preferably, bring at least two guns. Bring all of your friends who have guns.

2. Anything worth shooting is worth shooting twice. Ammo is cheap. Your life is expensive.

3. Only hits count. The only thing worse than a miss is a slow miss.

4. If your shooting stance is good, you're probably not moving fast enough nor using cover correctly.

5. Move away from your attacker. Distance is your friend. (Lateral and diagonal movement are preferred.)

6. If you can choose what to bring to a gunfight, bring a long gun and a friend with a long gun.

7. In ten years nobody will remember the details of caliber, stance, or tactics. They will only remember who lived.

8. If you are not shooting, you should be communicating, reloading, and running.

9. Accuracy is relative: most combat shooting standards will be more dependent on "pucker factor" than the inherent accuracy of the gun.

9.5 Use a gun that works EVERY TIME.

10. Someday someone may kill you with your own gun, but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty.

11. Always cheat; always win. The only unfair fight is the one you lose.

12. Have a plan.

13. Have a back-up plan, because the first one won't work.

14. Use cover or concealment as much as possible.

15. Flank your adversary when possible. Protect yours.

16. Don't drop your guard.

17. Always tactical load and threat scan 360 degrees.

18. Watch their hands. Hands kill. (In God we trust. Everyone else, keep your hands where I can see them).

19. Decide to be aggressive ENOUGH, quickly ENOUGH.

20. The faster you finish the fight, the less shot you will get.

21. Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet.

22. Be courteous to everyone, friendly to no one.

23. Your number one Option for Personal Security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation.

24. Do not attend a gunfight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with a ".4"

Navy Rules to Gunfighting

1. Go to Sea

2. Send the Marines

3. Drink Coffee

Funny, but true.

Semper Fi, Mac!

Posted by Mike Lief at 06:53 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 17, 2007

On this date in military history ...

The Antietam Battlefield on the day of the battle, photographed by Alexander Gardner on September 17, 1862.

Troops from the U.S.A. and the C.S.A. squared off in Maryland to fight the bloodiest one-day battle in American history: Antietam.

Gen. Robert E. Lee led the Confederate forces against the Union's bluecoats, serving under Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan. When the guns fell silent after 12 hours of fighting, approximately 23,000 men lay dead, wounded, or missing.

It's disheartening that American students learn so little about this nation's history, the men who sacrificed their all for an idea. The last Civil War veteran died within my father's lifetime, yet the anniversary of important battles pass without thought, ancient history, of no importance to today's ignoramuses.

If you've never seen Ken Burn's The Civil War, this would be a good time to rent the first episode and begin watching.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:06 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

When a man says he wants to kill you ...

Jay Nordlinger offers this bit of wisdom in his latest collection of random thoughts and musings.

The Iranian president has done it again: vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. This time, he said that Israel “cannot continue its life.” He keeps telling us, and telling us — telling us, and telling us. Has the world begun to believe that his pronouncements and intentions are sincere? Does Israel believe it?

I repeat one of the stories I have repeated most: A man makes it out of Auschwitz alive. Someone asks him, “What’s the most important lesson you’ve learned in the last several years?” He answers, “When someone says he wants to kill you, believe him.”

(I believe that is a true story — that this exchange actually took place, in 1945 or shortly thereafter. In any case, its message holds true.)

Funny how such an elemental lesson -- proven true time and again throughout the ages-- is so easily forgotten.

Posted by Mike Lief at 10:55 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 16, 2007

Convicted crook advising Clinton -- and it's not Bill

http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2007/09/do-you-care-if-.html

Posted by Mike Lief at 09:16 AM

Stick a fork in him

Larry Craig's done.

Beldar did a little investigative reporting and came up with convincing evidence that Sen. Craig (R-Idaho) -- the men's room Lothario -- doesn't have a prayer of winning his motion to withdraw his plea. Craig has been claiming that he agreed to a plea bargain because he was confused and panic-stricken.

Beldar contacted the prosecutor and got a copy of the proposed plea, wherein all the details and implications were spelled out, for Craig's perusal -- with counsel, if he so desired -- at his leisure.

Sounds like the senator with the "wide stance" is in a rather uncomfortable position.

Heh.

Posted by Mike Lief at 08:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 14, 2007

P.C. kills the academy -- and the academician, too

Check out this tale of political correctness run amuck, and how well-meaning professors dumb-down their lectures to avoid a fate like that of their late, lamented colleague, a liberal driven to the brink, despite his lefty credentials, because he offended the thin-skinned morons otherwise known as "students."

I had a distinguished colleague - Stuart Nagel - whose tale is worth telling. He taught public policy and one day explained that black businesses in Kenya were uncompetitive against Indian-run enterprises since blacks where too generous in granting credit to friends and family. He had been invited by the government of Kenya to study the situation and suggested better business training for black Kenyans. The topic was indisputably part of the course and thus totally protected by AAUP academic speech guidelines. Stuart was also extremely liberal on all racial issues.

Nevertheless, to condense a long story, an anonymous letter from irritated black students complained of Nagel's "racism" and included the preposterous change of "workplace violence." After a protracted and bungled internal university investigation, two federal trials (I testified at one), he was stripped of his teaching responsibilities and coerced into retirement.

Interestingly, having been charged as "racist," his departmental colleagues, save two conservatives, abandoned him. A few years later, partially as a result of this emotionally and financially draining incident ($100,000 out-of-pocket for legal fees), he committed suicide.

I can only speculate that he believed that years spent being a "good liberal" (including service in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division) would insulate him from being denounced as a "racist." Nor would he have anticipated that the university would spend the hundreds of thousands in legal fees to punish a famous tenured faculty member who "offended" two students.

Nagel's sad saga undoubtedly provided useful lessons to many others: stupidity can really be dangerous, even in a university. Better keep quiet.

It reminds me of the Washington, D.C., official, fired because he used the term, "niggardly," denounced by race pimps as an outrageous manifestation of hatred for blacks.

Unfortunately, their spittle-flecked howls of outrage were undeterred by the explanation that "niggardly" is an adjective for one who is miserly, meaning that the ignorant idiots were allowed to redefine the meaning of words they don't even understand.

Talk about dumbing-down society.

I'm not surprised that university classrooms -- despite the guarantees of academic freedom -- aren't immune from the perils of political correctness and McCarthy-style prosecutions for thought crimes.

Pity about Prof. Nagel; I guess he foolishly thought he was teaching open-minded, free-thinking "progressives." Too bad he didn't play it safe and self-censor, delivering an unambiguous, innocuous, elementary-school level lecture. And it's also a shame his university and fellow faculty members threw him to the wolves.

What exactly is to be gained from higher education? Precious little, it seems.

Posted by Mike Lief at 02:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Jeep returns to active duty

Exciting news for fans of the original Army jeep: a new version is being recalled to active duty -- and it's no luxo-SUV, leather-upholstered, pimp-my-ride creampuff, either.

The J8 is based on the Wrangler Unlimited and has been designed for military and civilian government use. It sports a reinforced frame and upgraded suspension that includes the much-discussed rear leaf springs that were pointed out in the earlier spy photos. Maximum payload is 2,952 lbs. as a result.

It'll be offered as both a four-door that looks mostly like the civilian Wrangler Unlimited and a 2-door pickup ... The J8 is designed to be very flexible, and will be available in a variety of seating/cargo configurations in both left- and right-hand drive (again, this explains the RHD version captured in spy photos).

Power comes from a 158-horsepower / 295 lb-ft 2.8L 4-cylinder turbodiesel mated to a 5-speed automatic and Jeep's Command-Trac 4WD system. The powertrain affords the J8 a maximum towing capacity of 7,716 lbs. Another feature unique to the J8 is its air-intake system, which uses a hood-mounted snorkel that lets it ford bodies of water up to 30 inches deep and operate in sandstorm conditions up to five hours.

What's the bad news? Well, it's being manufactured in a Cairo factory (WTF?!) and it's not slated for sale to civilians. Let the letter-writing campaign begin.

Want to see pictures? Click here.

Posted by Mike Lief at 10:42 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 13, 2007

A disgusting act of cowardice

Vandals have defaced the Vietnam War Memorial.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

They say he's my guy

But I'm skeptical. Romney seems too ... fake, too much the political hack, with far too many signs that he's been willing to do and say anything to curry favor with the voters in Massachusetts, aka The Commonwealth that Loves Teddy Kennedy.

Romney strikes me as a classic conservative squish, verging on RINO status, which doesn't bode well for my support, given the abiding suspicion that he's willing to do and say anything to curry favor with the voters (sound familiar?).

Perhaps the most interesting thing about the quiz (which is easier to get to by clicking here) are a couple of features found after you answer the 30 questions. There are links that provide a side-by-side comparison of your answers to the candidate's position, question by question, as well as an opportunity to compare three candidates at a time, allowing for an easy to see, compare-and-contrast style reference.

In any event, my answers agreed with Romney approximately 67% of the time -- but that's still a D. I'd like to think there's at least one candidate with whom I'm a better match, at least a B-minus.

I just hope it's not Hillary Clinton.

...

I kid, I kid!

It could be worse; at least I'm not Dallas Morning News editorial board member Rod Dreher.

Posted by Mike Lief at 08:05 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 12, 2007

Overheard in court

Something I never thought I'd hear in the Ventura courthouse, told to me by a defense attorney who has practiced in other jurisdictions:

"The defendants get better deals in Ventura than I used to see in San Francisco."

When I was a new D.A., attorneys from Los Angeles lamented the tough sentences imposed by our local bench. There was a saying, popular amongst the defense bar, "Ventura County: Arrive on vacation, leave on probation."

Apparently that's no longer true -- at least when it comes to misdemeanor sentences. Although my office still asks for probation on cases where we think it appropriate, that request is often denied, with defendants getting little more than "credit time served," a slap on the wrist. I can recall a time when Ventura judges would "stack" sentences, running them consecutively. On one occasion, I saw a judge impose five one-year terms, sending the defendant to do more than fifteen-hundred days in the local jail.

The perception was that the local judges were tough on crime -- not just serious and violent felonies, but the misdemeanor, quality-of-life crimes that the public more commonly encounters, like petty theft, drunk in public, DUI, vandalism and graffiti.

Now, to be fair, this is just a comment from one defense lawyer, but it speaks to a perception amongst some of his colleagues and, after all, perception is reality.

Seems like crooks are better off committing their crimes in Ventura County -- instead of tough, law-and-order jurisdictions.

Like San Francisco.

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:40 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

The law is an ass

Clayton Cramer is bothered by the school ban on the American flag (see below), and offers this take on the issue:

One of the recurring problems of free speech law is the concept of being "content-neutral." A government agency is allowed to prohibit certain forms of speech as long as the content of the speech is not a factor in making the decision. Thus, a public university can prohibit speeches by uninvited speakers as long as the decision isn't based on the content. If they let uninvited speaker A deliver a speech about the evils of capitalism, they can't let uninvited speaker B deliver a speech about how capitalism is a good thing.

A high school in North Carolina has banned the American flag on campus -- as a result of one of these insane triumphs of ACLUism over common sense.

[...]

Does it bother anyone besides me that the laws of the United States have been twisted to put a symbol of the United States at the same level of protection as symbols of other nations? I'm not sure that I am keen on a ban on flags from other countries -- which I suspect is aimed at Mexican nationalists who, for some odd reason, love Mexico so much that they have to move to the U.S. -- but banning the flag of our country just to prohibit antipatriotic uses of the Mexican flag is nonsensical.

Thus do bright-line tests and rigid rules of law hammer common sense into oblivion.

Posted by Mike Lief at 10:51 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

She's a grand old flag!

As Bogie gazed across the neatly manicured lawns, he seemed deep in thought. According to the Dog Mumbler, this is what was on his mind.

"A house, the Stars and Stripes, cool grass to lay on, Pepper Kitty for me to chase and a human to feed me and scoop up my messages to America-hating leftist moonbats. Does life get any better than this?"

No, my friend, it probably doesn't.

Posted by Mike Lief at 07:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Can we question their patriotism?

Or do we simply attribute the behavior of these "educators" to nothing more than cowardice or stupidity?

SAMPSON COUNTY, N.C. – On the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, students at one high school were not allowed to wear clothes with an American Flag.

Under a new school rule, students at Hobbton High School are not allowed to wear items with flags, from any country, including the United States.

The new rule stems from a controversy over students wearing shirts bearing flags of other countries.

Gayle Langston said her daughter, Jessica, was told to remove her stars and stripes t-shirt.

“Today she wanted to wear her shirt, and I had to tell her no,” said Langston. “She didn't like it at all because I knew it would get her in trouble. Of all days, 9/11, she could not wear her American Flag shirt.”

The superintendent of schools in Sampson County calls the situation unfortunate, but says educators didn’t want to be forced to pick and choose which flags should be permissible.

It's hard to believe that less than 40 years ago -- in California public schools, no less! -- I was taught to respect, admire and revere the American flag, our nation's founding fathers, and our military heroes.

That these values still seem to exists outside academia and the educational establishment means something, don't you think? Can it be a coincidence that civilizational self-loathing, a reflexive disdain for flag, country, courage and honor arouses such disdain in our educators? Does it trouble you that we entrust the indoctrination education of our children to these people?

I guess only us rubes and unsophisticated types believe in such outdated notions as "America" and its -- hell, our -- flag.

Posted by Mike Lief at 07:31 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 11, 2007

Remember

Posted by Mike Lief at 07:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Another year passes

It seemed like they were always there, in the background. I never really liked them; too sterile, too modern, lacking any of the lush style and flair of the older buildings that made Manhattan such an architectural delight.

Rockefeller Center; the Empire State Building; the Chrysler Building. Man, they're beautiful.

But the behemoths that claimed lower Manhattan for themselves were so cold, devoid of human warmth or scale. The plaza between them was always a windy, barren patch of concrete, too cold and desolate for even the bums and pigeons. One hurried through the space as the wind howled, anxious to get inside, blind to the hidden charms of the twins.

But now, paging through a stack of old vacation photos, I spy a shot taken from Brooklyn, and there, in the background, they stand, beneath an oddly dark cloud.

And now they're gone, with their thousands of occupants and the brave firefighters and policemen who perished with them, too.

Only now do I realize that I miss them, never mind their ugliness or their ever-so-sophisticated design. They were a part of Manhattan, and if they were going to be stay or go, well, that was our decision.

As recently as a year ago, whenever I looked at the skyline, I thought it just looked wrong, and then I'd get mad. Because the appropriate response wasn't sadness or sorrow or mournful contemplation.

Last year I still felt rage. White-hot fury. The need -- NEED, damn it! -- for vengeance. Now, the anger has cooled from rolling boil to simmer, damped down by the enervating, ceaseless onslaught of anti-American bile from the loons on the Left, the increasingly-discouraging sense that Americans don't really believe we're at war -- not surprising, given the refusal of the MSM to show us the images from the day the jihadis killed 3,000 of us.

And what of those ugly Twin Towers, laid low by our enemies? I miss the skyline I knew and once took for granted, and all the New Yorkers I'd never met -- and never will after 9/11.

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 10, 2007

Michael Ramirez

Posted by Mike Lief at 10:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

What's the fastest Windows laptop?

The MacBook Pro.

Says who? How 'bout PC World Magazine.

For people who appreciate finer laptop accoutrements such as a backlit keyboard and a slot-fed DVD drive, Apple has crafted another tasty offering in the form of the 17-inch MacBook Pro. Sleek, powerful, and able to run Windows as well as the Mac operating system, the MacBook Pro makes a strong case for becoming anyone's ultimate notebook.

[The] test unit set new speed records. The MacBook Pro outperformed the rest of the notebooks we tested, all of which claim Windows as their primary--nay, their only--operating system. We loaded Windows Vista Home Premium on the Apple notebook, and it snagged a WorldBench 6 Beta 2 score of 88. In games it achieved a blazing frame rate of 141 frames per second in Far Cry (with antialiasing turned off).

That should give PC users hesitant to make the switch a little more confidence that they'll be able to continue using their buggy Windows software and see it run better faster than ever -- at least until the program crashes.

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 09, 2007

The Wind in the Heights

Gerard Van der Leun proves (once again) what a fine writer he is with this beautiful, melancholy piece on Brooklyn Heights, its history, its sights and smells -- and what it was like living there, especially on a beautiful Fall day in 2001.

Trust me, it's worth a read.

Posted by Mike Lief at 09:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Worst

If you wanted proof that the Pulitzer Prize is meaningless, check out Time Magazine's latest issue, featuring The 50 Worst Cars of All Time, compiled (and presumably written) by Dan Neil, the Los Angeles Times' auto critic -- and a recipient of the Pulitzer Prize for journalism.

Amongst the cars targeted by Neil for abuse are the Ford Model-T, because it encouraged working-class people to drive; the Explorer, because it's an SUV; the Excursion, because it's a big SUV; and the Hummer H2, because it's a quasi-military SUV.

I laughed out loud when I saw that the Model-T was on the list; the social commentary trying to justify its inclusion was ludicrous. The Ford revolutionized the world: it standardized assemby-line production; provided affordable transportation for the non-rich; created unparalleled freedom to travel; offered the possibility of living further than a horse ride from work; and introduced the idea that workers deserved decent wages -- all the better to be able to afford their very own Fords.

This makes it one of the 50 worst cars of all time?

The article is a horror show; if you didn't know it had been written by a "professional" car critic, you'd assume it had been thrown together by a bicycle-riding, Birkenstock-wearing, vegan, Manhattan-dwelling Luddite.

If there's ever a list of the 50 Worst Lists of All Time, this has a lock on #1.

Pathetic.

Posted by Mike Lief at 09:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

I love a good western

There’s a new cowboy movie in town, and Pajiba has the scoop.

[A] good Western, a chance for two men to square off with guns on a desert plain in some great big unholy shootout, damned to hell and joylessly grinning as they ride off to face destiny — that’s unbeatable. And that’s what director James Mangold brings to 3:10 to Yuma, a violent, sweaty Western that inhabits the genre’s melodramatic hallmarks while also functioning as a modern-day drama about a dysfunctional family. It’s a big, sprawling, believable story, and the plot’s few stumbles are balanced by the scope and skill of the whole thing.

The film is a remake of a 1950s feature starring the wooden Glenn Ford (whose stardom has always mystified me) as badguy Ben Wade, based on a story by Elmore Leonard, the writer better known today for penning "Get Shorty."

In the new version, a down-on-his-luck farmer named Dan Evans (Christian Bale) finds that his fate has become entangled with that of bankrobbing gunslinger Wade (Russel Crowe). After a series of twists and turns, Dan is tasked with helping escort the dangerous prisoner to a waiting train.

The transporting of Wade takes up the bulk of the rest of the film, and that’s what sets it apart from many other Westerns. The drama here largely comes from the battle of wills between Dan and Wade, who hold a grudging respect for each other even as they loathe what the other man stands for.

Dan … and a couple of lawmen set out with Wade for Contention with the goal of putting Wade on the 3:10 train to Yuma, where he’ll be hanged at the prison. It’s a simple plot, almost elegant: Move the man from point A to point B in X amount of time. But that simplicity is the source of the film’s tension, as Dan deals with Wade’s mind games and the entire gang tries to stay one step ahead of Wade’s gang, who want their boss back and would happily slaughter any who stand in their way. And more than a few men, good and bad, do get slaughtered, but the body count is never ridiculous, nor the bloodshed extreme.

There’s a believability about the film that borders on the low-key, even in the multiple shootouts between the posse and Wade’s gang, and a big part of that comes from the central dynamic between Bale and Crowe, who are so perfect in their roles that they at times seem to be in another movie altogether, something dark and weird and Shakespearean, where two men face off against each other not out of need or desire, but out of some twisted sense of fate.

Crowe’s Wade is a ruthless killer, but never once loses his composure; hell, he never even gigs his horse or yells at it, just makes soft clucking sounds to guide the animal down the path. His eerie calm grounds the character, making him that much more formidable an opponent for Dan.

Bale, meanwhile, brings the right note of desperation to Dan, who’s weary and heavy-laden enough to do anything to save his family. Wade tempts Dan throughout the film with offers of a cash reward if Dan will let the killer go free, and the legitimate conflict between a burdensome right and an easy wrong is played out beautifully on Bale’s face.

[…]

“No one will think less of you” if you let Wade walk away, Dan’s wife, Alice (Gretchen Mol), tells him. He gives a sad grin and says, “No one can think less of me.” Taking Wade to justice is Dan’s chance to finally be recognized not for finally doing the right thing, but for doing the right thing all along. He’s not a warlike man, but he’s willing to become one if that’s what it takes to do his duty and save his family.

Mangold’s tightly focused film is a good example of the glorious possibilities of mixing a compelling character story with a richly detailed genre setting, as well as the latest in a series of modern Westerns — Unforgiven, The Proposition, “Broken Trail” — that herald a comeback for the field. It’s about time, indeed.

Sounds like it might be worth braving the trip to the local cinema – if I can stand the chattering id’jits and their incessant texting and ringing cell phones.

Grrrr.

But I do love a good western, and Crowe and Bale are two actors that always make a film – any film – better for having them in it.

Posted by Mike Lief at 02:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 07, 2007

What -- or who -- killed the Edsel?

Although "Edsel" has come to symbolize all manner of crap-tastic products, Joe Sherlock has a bone to pick with self-professed car mavens who tout the conventional wisdom that Ford's 1950s newcomer was a lousy auto.

So, how to explain the failure of the Edsel marque, named for Henry Ford's dead son? Sherlock points the finger at a man responsible for mayhem everywhere -- and I do mean everywhere -- he's worked over the last 5 decades: Robert McNamara.

Check it out.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 06, 2007

Michael Ramirez

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

iPhone vs. Blackberry

How one guy decided to pass up the iPhone and stick with his not-so-cool crackberry.

With my battered, aging BlackBerry on its last legs, I went back to the Apple store to try to join the crowd and sell myself on trading brands. But after a few hours of side-by-side comparisons, I'm convinced more than ever that the iPhone isn't the device for me. I'll be replacing my BlackBerry with ... another BlackBerry.

The iPhone is definitely a cool, sexy gadget. As I wrote in January, it's less a phone packed with extras than a full-fledged computer for your pocket. Its big display and touchscreen interface make Web surfing and video watching a whole lot easier than on any other smartphone. It bundles support for Gmail, AOL, and Yahoo! Mail. It doubles as an iPod. It does YouTube. And it's even more hackable than a BlackBerry. Along with this week's price drop, Apple has added a built-in iTunes Music Store, so you can buy and download tracks whenever you're in range of a Wi-Fi network. At $400, an iPhone is incredibly tempting.

But in my career as a writer, I need my phone to do work. I have tight deadlines, and I need to communicate with lots of people in a hurry. When I'm in a tight spot, my BlackBerry always helps me out. It also sends a subtle signal to my correspondents that I'm getting a lot done. An e-mail that says "Sent from my BlackBerry" gives the impression that you're on the move but still chained to work, e-mailing from the elevator. An e-mail that says "Sent from my iPhone" conjures an image of a doofus who wants you to know he has an iPhone. More important, the BlackBerry packs three crucial features that leave iPhone owners fumbling behind me.

He's got more details, with specific features he likes (or needs), here.

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Pure genius

Sure, compact multi-tools are as common as bent U.S. Senators in Minnesota airport mens' rooms, but how many can do what this one does -- and with such style, too?

Available just in time for the Christmas and Chanukah, too!

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

"Arms in the Hands of Jews Are a Danger to Public Safety"

The abstract for a paper by Stephen Halbrook explains this post's title:

The above title to this article is a quotation from an arrest report of a Jewish gun owner just weeks before the Nazis launched the pogrom known as the Night of the Broken Glass in 1938. His name was Alfred Flatow, and he was an Olympic champion who had registered firearms before the Nazis came to power. Once in control, the Hitler regime used the registration records to disarm their enemies so they could not resist.

The article begins with an examination of three arrest reports which reveal much about the campaign to disarm the German Jews. It then examines original sources to trace how such arrests were part of a systematic plan to render Jews defenseless. When the Night of the Broken Glass was sparked, the Nazis conducted massive searches and seizures of Jewish homes and business to complete the disarming as well as to burn and loot property and to fill the concentration camps with victims.

There is considerable debate today about the Second Amendment and whether the populace at large should have access to firearms or whether they should be restricted to the military and police. This article eschews any policy debate, and instead traces exactly how the Nazis utilized firearm laws and decrees to disarm the German Jews as a prelude to comprehensive repression. Based in large part on German archival resources, the article contributes to a neglected topic in human rights and Holocaust studies.

Did you know that gun control (i.e., the confiscation of all privately-owned firearms upon penalty of death) was a priority for Germany during the years of Nazi rule?

Of course, they never wanted anyone's guns, other than the Jews'.

At first.

Interesting parallel: many American gun control statutes were implemented in order to deny blacks the means of self-defense, only later becoming more widely used against other groups of citizens.

Posted by Mike Lief at 01:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

An actor who gets it

James Gandolfini doesn't want to talk about Tony Soprano. He's got something else, something that matters, on his mind.

When I went [to Iraq], I came back, and I was struck by the silence ... here in this country, about what's going on over there.

And then when I talked to these soldiers, I was struck by -- you can be cynical on both coasts or wherever you are -- honor, duty, loyalty to your country. It hit me. I guess some people forget about that. Or, don't think about it.

I feel like some people think they're disposable people, or something. They just don't pay attention to this. What's going on? We're at war.

Good for you, Gandolfini. I've been asking myself the same question.

Posted by Mike Lief at 12:30 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 05, 2007

Movies about the Good War

War films are perhaps my favorite motion picture genre, and movies about World War II are (for me) the most compelling subset. War often illustrates the best -- and worst -- in mankind, and the Second World War represents perhaps the last, best, unambiguous conflict between good and evil.

Screenwriter Robert Avrech offers his list of the best films "obscure and interesting films" about World War II, and invites his readers to offer their own suggestions in the comments.

Many of his choices mirror my own, and his reasons for their inclusion are sound.

It's a good read; I intend to see some of the movies that I've overlooked, beginning with The Winter War and Too Late the Hero.

Avrech says about Winter War:

This obscure Finnish film is one of my all time favorites. In 1939 Russia invaded Finland and the tiny Finnish nation fought an incredible 100 day war against the might Russian army. This movies tells the story of a group of ordinary farmers who fight in a reserve unit. The battle scenes are authentic and gripping. There is very little heroism, just a group of desperate men fighting to survive the relentless onslaught of an overwhelming enemy. Powerful and beautifully acted. Scenes at the home front will just tear at your gut as wives, mothers and sisters watch their men march off to almost certain slaughter.

Avrech recommends the Russian film, Come and See, cautioning that its portrayal of the Nazi's brutality is unflinching and harrowing, a reminder of the incredible savagery inflicted upon the Soviet people by the Germans -- and an explanation for why the Russians repaid the gore-flecked debt in kind when they conquered the Third Reich and took Berlin in 1945.

This might be the most powerful and brutal war movie I have ever seen. It's a Soviet film that tells the story of young Florya, a naive 16-year old Byelorussian, who joins the partisans to fight the Nazis. Soon he finds himself in a scorched landscape where slaughter is the norm. Glascha, a mystical peasant girl, joins him in his odyssey and scenes of incredible brutality alternate with scenes of great lyricism—Glascha doing the Charleston in the rain in a primevil forest. There is a long, harrowing set-piece where an S.S. unit slaughters everyone in a Byelorussian village. It's so powerful, so painful, so authentic in its portrayal of casual mass murder that I chewed my lip raw. This is a great and powerful film; there are no great heroic battles, no charges to take pill boxes, just slogging through mud, the utter chaos of battle, the gut-crunching fear of death, the desire for blood vengeance, and the animal desire to stay alive. Do not let your children see this film, nor is it for the faint-hearted.

I heartily second his praise for Band of Brothers, the fantastic HBO miniseries about the men of Easy Company, following them from their training in the U.S., to the flak-filled skies over Normandy, from the French bocage to the frozen, blood-stained snow of Belgium's Battle of the Bulge.

Each episode begins with the real soldiers of Easy Company, old now, some frail, others suprisingly hale and hearty, remembering their days on the field of battle. The camera captures those quiet moments when, 56 years later, their eyes fill with tears at the memory of a friend dying in their arms, their voices thick with emotion as they speak of the almost indescribable bond they shared with their comrades.

Each episode manages to create a perfect representation of what it was like to be an American GI in Europe during 1944-45. Don't take my word for it; the survivors of Easy Company said the show was as close to the real thing as is possible.

There's a moment in the last episode when one of the aged vets tells of a letter he received from one of his men, recounting a conversation he had with his grandson.

"Were you a hero, Grandpa?" he asks. "No," his grandfather answers, "but I served in the company of heroes."

The man telling the story, Dick Winters, the former commanding officer of Easy Company, can barely finish telling the story, so intense are his emotions.

And I can't watch him tell it without weeping -- for him, and the eternally-young men who slumber the dreamless sleep of the dead in cemeteries across the battle-scarred (and ungrateful) European Continent.

It's a stunning achievement, all the better when viewed uninterrupted on DVD, rather than the edited and commercial-plagued version on the History Channel.

Posted by Mike Lief at 11:03 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

September 04, 2007

No Shame

http://www.ytedk.com/jacoby.htm

Posted by Mike Lief at 08:19 AM

U.N. follies

Dean Barnett guest hosted for Hugh Hewitt and had a chance to ask Brit journalist Mark Steyn about the latest madness out of the United Nations.

DB: [T]he United Nations is once again convening one of its stop racism conferences, and I believe they’ve chosen the perfect country to lead that conference. Can you fill us in on that?

MS: Yeah, Libya is going to chair this latest…well, they hold these world conferences against racism at the UN every couple of years. The last one was held the weekend before September 11th. And basically, it was an orgy. It was supposed to be a conference against racism. It was an orgy of racism. It was anti-American, it was anti-Zionist. The United States wound up pulling out entirely, and other countries, such as Canada and Britain and the European Union guys, so-called downgraded. And you know what I always find so pathetic about these things, they’re always the same. You know, somebody had claimed that the Holocaust had never existed, and so Israel was therefore an improper racist state. And Mary Robinson says oh, well, what we need to do, as the UN high commissioner at that time, says oh, we need to stay in, this proves we need to stay in the conference and discuss it. In other words, there’s no chance of persuading the Syrian foreign minister that six million Jews were killed, but perhaps we can, if we stay in there and we negotiate all night with him, he’ll concede that you know, maybe ten, fifteen thousand were killed, mostly troublemakers who were asking for it. I mean, I think this level, negotiating those kind of statements and pretending that the foreign ministers of these gangster states are like regular diplomats, I think is really disgraceful and repugnant, and I don’t know why we go through this charade every couple of years.

DB: Now as you mentioned, Libya is chairing this forthcoming conference against racism. And that’s coming up in 2009, something to put on your calendars immediately, that Libya isn’t exactly a Quaker-like state in terms of its view towards other races, is it?

MS: No, it’s not. It’s not at all. I mean, these are explicitly…Libya, like most Muslim states, is a state that explicitly discriminates against non-believers, and takes a very robustly nationalist view of the Arab world in general. And I think it’s very interesting that we supposedly had all these reforms…this comes under the UN Human Rights aegis. We supposedly had all these reforms to end the farce by which you have gangster states on the Human Rights Commission. For example, Sudan was a member at the time Sudan was killing all those people in Darfur. They’ve nearly killed everyone now, so the job’s almost done. But at the height of the killing frenzy, they were appointed to the UN Human Rights Commission. Can you imagine that? You’re trying to kill hundreds of thousands of people, and they’re trying to tie you up in UN meetings all day long. And we were told that the UN reforms would end the charade of countries like Sudan of being on the Human Rights Commission. It hasn’t. It’s always the same. The UN is dysfunctional in its very identity, and we should stop lending credibility to these kinds of circuses.

What a waste of time and money. I spent a semester at the U.N. back in the mid-'80s; there was a moment, sitting in the gallery, looking down at the General Assembly, when it struck as risible that dictatorships and tin-pot banana republics had the same number of votes as did Western democracies.

The hopes of the world for peace and tranquility rested upon the United States and its allies winning the votes of countries like Communist China and the Soviet Union, two governments responsible for more deaths than Adolf Hitler; persuading maniacs like Idi Amin, thugs like Castro, lunatics like Ghadaffi and Khomeni.

Steyn's observations are accurate -- and a reminder that the United Nations long ago failed, replacing the League of Nations as the most ineffective organization ever created.

Ineffective, unless the goal is to perpetuate totalitarian regimes, lend legitimacy to the enemies of Western-style economic, religious and political freedom. If your heart is set on seeing the West laid low, well, then the U.N. is your kind of place.

Posted by Mike Lief at 07:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack