We hear it said of an ugly guy, "He has a face made for radio".

Woopie Goldberg has performed brilliantly as an actor in television and in movies.  Her personal commentary however, has been nothing you couldn't hear at the espresso and chi tea bar in any local natural foods store any day of the week.  Hence it is no surprise that her radio show is being axed.  I believe she still has a future in acting.  Therein she has talent.

There remains a significant part of society that can't seem to understand how radio is a business (the business of selling advertising) and that in business you must have something to offer that people, you know, want.

Malkin covers it too.

Hint:  If you have no respect for those who made it big in the business, you just might be on the wrong path.  "I'm gonna be just the opposite of that really, ultra successful guy" might not be the best business plan.  Success, one would think, is the best teacher.

And here's a hint just especially for those on the Left:  We've all heard your message every day for our whole lives, as long as we can remember.  You've gotten your message out, and that is your problem.  A lot of people are sick of hearing it because most of it has something to do with how wrong, greedy, stupid, evil, and endangered we are-- the air we breathe is killing us, the food we eat is killing us, oil is killing us, a shortage of oil is killing us, farming is killing us, starvation is killing us, fat is killing us, dieting is killing us, carbs are killing us, disease is killing us, antibiotics, vaccines, and the drug companies are killing us, freedom and prosperity are especially killing us, poverty is killing us, the good economy is killing us but really the economy sucks, terrorists are killing us (but it's our fault) and the war against terrorists is killing us, and everything, absolutely everything, is killing women and children, the elderly and the minorities the hardest-- and how some form of socialism (government-enforced coercion) is the answer to absolutely every problem, real or imagined.

Does that about sum it up?  Who needs to tune into a radio show to hear that when we hear it everywhere else every day?

More-of-the-same day in and day out nagging and finger pointing and blaming America and our Liberty for the world's problems isn't something a lot of people are going to pay money to have broadcast in their name.  But you don't, and won't, get it anyway.

The teacher who let her students name a Teddy Bear Muhammad was convicted and sentenced to 15 days in jail and will be deported. At least she doesn't have to endure the whipping that was on the list of possible punishments. I thought this was pretty extreme but figured it would be a good lesson for those that think we need to "reach common ground" or some such thing with the Muslim extremists. I couldn't have imagined what a lesson this would actually be.

But it turns out the sentence Gillian Gibbons received is considered much too light for the locals. They are demanding her execution:

Thousands of protesters, many brandishing clubs and swords, took to the streets of Sudan’s capital Friday, demanding the execution of a British teacher who let her students name a teddy bear Muhammad.

Gillian Gibbons, 54, was found guilty Thursday of insulting Islam and sentenced to 15 days in jail. She was spared the more serious punishment of 40 lashes.

That angered many in Khartoum, who rallied in Martyrs Square outside the presidential palace. Protesters waved sticks, knives, axes and swords.

“Kill her, kill her by firing squad!” they chanted. “No tolerance, execution!”

Here is a picture of the evil heretic. I hope she gets out alive.

To be fair, there are some Muslims who are responding appropriately:

In Britan -- where Muhammad is now the second most popular name for baby boys -- the reaction had been shock and disbelief, from both non-Muslims and Muslims.

Muhammad Abdul Bari, secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said Sudanese authorities had  “grossly overreacted.”

“Gillian should never have been arrested, let alone charged and convicted of committing a crime,” he said.

But the Sudanese behavior invokes an opposing extreme response in me and others.

Technically I am the domain owner but I have nothing to do with the content here:

Dr. Hall of Fame
Dr. Hall of Shame

I think a good candidate would the neurosurgeon a physical therapist I know worked with several years ago. The nurses and therapists had a nickname they used for this brain surgeon behind his back. They called him The Veg-O-Matic.

Just a little hint on finding a good doctor if you are new in town and don't know anyone. Go to the hospital and ask the nurses. But you have to be a little sneaky about the way you ask the question. If you ask, "Who is a good doctor?" you will get an answer similar to, "They are all good." But if you ask, "Who would you choose as a doctor for yourself/spouse/child/mother-in-law/whoever?" you will get a much more useable answer.

This is not a summit; it's a kangaroo court, and the outcome is as predictable as the verdicts in the Salem witch trials. Nickels and his gun control cronies merely want a showpiece to alarm the public into supporting their extremist agenda, which is not now, and never has been, in the public's best interest.

Alan Gottlieb and Mark Taff
Guest columnists at the Seattle PI
Alan Gottlieb is founder of the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation.
Mark Taff is executive director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
Nickels' gun summit is all for show
[Via an email from Uncle. See also the background material.

I was seriously considering showing up with my camera and a bunch of handouts of Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution with 18 USC 241 and 242 for attendees as they arrived. Unfortunately I have a appointment with my dentist to get some surgery done on an infected tooth at 8:00 AM that has been waiting a month because there weren't any earlier openings. Then I have a design review at work that I am going to be late for because of the dentist appointment. I just won't be able to attend at an appropriate time. And just after the oral surgery I'm likely to be a bit cranky and of course armed. That wouldn't be the best condition to face the press should they show up.

Does anyone else want to show up with the handouts if I do the printing?--Joe]

The Gun Guys are whining about all the "pandering to the gun extremists" in the CNN YouTube debate last night.

The only whining I would do over it would be that I don't trust Giuliani and Romneny when they say they support an individual RKBA.

But then it occurred to me that I don't know of a single presidental candidate that is even giving the bigots like the Gun Guys and the Brady Bunch a little bit of lip service. That has to be a extremely painful change from ten or twelve years ago.

Count the cats in this picture and win a free cat (check out the comments). Hurry while supplies last!

[But if you get there too late you can have mine.]

I often get frustrated wondering "What are they thinking? Do they actually think? Are they capable of thinking?"

For example, in my mind people are not consistent when they expanded the meaning of the 1^st Amendment to include things that did not exist (such as the Internet) at the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights. Yet those same people intend to negate the 2^nd Amendment by excluding things that didn't exist at the time of it's creation. What's up with that? Are you insane?

This article helps with a certain aspects of those types of questions I have had.

In interpreting the Constitution, judges pay attention to social practices, and not only to judicial precedents. If federal and state governments have long regulated gun use, creating a tradition of such regulation, many judges would be reluctant to invoke the original understanding in order to upset that tradition. Tushnet finds that, since the Civil War, gun regulation has been common--and it has rarely been challenged on constitutional grounds. He concludes that the last century and a half shows a simple pattern: "A substantial body of laws regulating weapons possession and a small number of opinions addressing Second Amendment objections to such laws, with no opinions from appellate courts invalidating any modern regulations, and an apparent lack of interest by the Supreme Court in taking fundamental Second Amendment questions."

[...]

In Tushnet's view, there is an evident conflict between the original understanding and the legal arguments based on judicial precedents and social practices. He urges that in the face of such conflicts, the original understanding tends to yield. In the context of free speech, for example, we have gone far beyond the original understanding, protecting commercial advertising and even political dissent in ways that would have astonished the founding generation. Tushnet thinks that if we reject originalism, we will probably conclude, on the basis of social practices and judicial decisions, that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right.

This gives me a model to conclude they aren't entirely insane. It does sort of make sense. I worry about the Supreme Court in the D.C. v. Heller case considering the impact on all the people that deserve to be locked up but prosecutors only charged them with gun violations because it was so much easier than proving they had committed some violent crime. If the Court comes strikes down the D.C. law there will be lots of people in jail appealing their convictions. The disruption to society could be significant. The historical aspect of the laws and our society have to be somewhere in the minds of the justices.

But translating the logic above to an analogous situation will make my take on this clear:

In the deep south during the last century there was a long history of social practices, judicial precedents, and traditions of regulation of people of color. Therefore it is entirely appropriate during the 1960's the courts should have rejected the original intent of the 13^th Amendment and allowed whatever law the states and cities thought were "common-sense" for their situation.

Not!

There is only one correct way to handle this. If a government entity wants to implement a law that violates some original intent of the Constitution there is a proper way to go about that. They can amend the constitution to allow non-original intent. Anything else is a rationalization, an extremely serious threat to our enumerated powers form of government, and death to freedom.

I had no idea such a thing would be possible from a blow that isn't hard enough to break bones:

Hunter Troxel was hunting with his father, Craig, on Monday in some woods near their home in Harpster in southern Wyandot County when the boy fired his shotgun at a deer and missed, said Wyandot County Sheriff Michael Hetzel.

[...]

The blow from the shotgun hit him at a certain time during the electrical sequence that causes the heart to beat, disrupting the nerve impulses and stopping his heart, Franklin County Coroner Brad Lewis said. His office examined the boy's body Tuesday.

The sheriff said it was possible the boy was not holding his gun properly and that's why it hit him where it did. "He was just a small young man, only 12 years old," Hetzel said.

This type of death is relatively rare, and it isn't completely clear why some blows to the chest stop the heart and others don't, Lewis said.

"It really was a tragic, freak accident," he said. "It's a terrible quirk of fate that you get hit at that particular moment in time."

That was a stupid thing to try. Still, it's sad when someone goes to jail for a victimless crime:

A Nevada man was charged with attempting to smuggle in parts of a World War II-era submachine gun by hiding them inside a Porsche he was importing from Germany to the Port of Long Beach, authorities said Wednesday.

Peter Scharf, 43, of Henderson, Nev. was arrested by federal agents in Los Angeles Tuesday after being charged with smuggling and importing a machine gun without a license, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokeswoman Virginia Kice said.

There's some serious talk going on about increasing the oppression of gun owners in Europe:

Against the backdrop of deadly school shootings in Finland and Germany, European Union legislators Thursday overwhelmingly backed tough new gun control rules they said they hoped would prevent Europe from becoming a gun-friendly culture like the United States.

Under the new rules, hammered out in 18 months of negotiations between the European Parliament, national governments and gun advocates, individuals age 18 and over will be able to buy and own a firearm, provided they are not deemed a threat to public safety. Individuals under 18 will only be able to obtain a gun for hunting or target shooting under the supervision of a licensed adult.

To plug holes in the current system, in which the registration of guns is not consistent across the 27-member bloc, each member state will be obliged to set up a computerized database of firearms, including details about their model, caliber, serial number and the names and addresses of both the seller and the buyer. The data must be kept by authorities for at least 20 years.

European legislators of all political stripes said the new rules were essential to prevent Europe from embracing the gun culture of the United States, where the right to bear arms is written in the constitution.

"We in Europe have a different culture than in the United States and we do not consider the freedom to buys weapons a human right," said Gisela Kallenbach, a German member of the European Parliament from the Green group, who helped draft the proposed law. "All European cows are registered Europe-wide, so why not guns, if it can save lives? Civil liberties can be sacrificed if we can prevent people from being killed."

How appropriate. A German who wants to sacrifice civil liberties to prevent people from being killed. That was done once before by the Germans in 1938:

§1
Jews (§5 of the First Regulations of the German Citizenship Law of 14 November 1935, Reichsgesetzblatt I, p. 1333) are prohibited from acquiring, possessing, and carrying firearms and ammunition, as well as truncheons or stabbing weapons.  Those now possessing weapons and ammunition are at once to turn them over to the local police authority.

The only question is, which lives will they be saving? In 1938 it was the Nazi lives that would be saved by sacrificing the civil liberties of the Jews.

When someone takes a weapon from you it's an exceedingly rare circumstance that your safety will be increased. It's someone else's safety that might be increased.

What's the problem with registration? Registration is a problem because those records were used by the Nazis to find all the Jews with firearms and experience with firearms. Firearms registration fails my Jews in the Attic Test. Firearms registration enables scenes like this:

The European Union doesn't want to be a "gun-friendly culture", instead they want to be tyrant-friendly culture. How many tens of millions of people must be murdered before they learn their lesson?

My QOTD and commentary got some attention from Sebastian at Snow Flakes in Hell. Sebastian also posted a comment on Miller's blog with a link to my posting. That apparently got Miller to stop by for a visit:

[Update: I was wrong. It was someone else from New Jersey. Thanks to Sebastain for pointing out my error. I was able to verify Sebastian is correct. I didn't think there were any progun people left in that state.]

[Update2:  I have deleted part of the orginal message at the request of the real visitor.]

Also of possible interest is it's not the first time Miller came for a visit. Notice the referrals? He came to visit me from each of the following pro-gun blogs:

• http://www.progunprogressive.com/
• http://www.saysuncle.com/
• http://blog.robballen.com/
• http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/

Did you see where he visited boomershoot.org after reading about Ted Nugent's "threat against Hillary and Obama"? And he specifically searched for my comments about him: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Joe+Huffman%27s+comment%3A&btnG=Google+Search.

And that's just what I can determine from my little outpost in an obscure corner of the Internet. Imagine what the total extent of his efforts on the topic must be. I find it difficult to believe him when in response to the Supreme Court granting cert in D.C. v. Heller, "For me, the announcement was a Ho Hum moment."

Since he showed such an interest in my blog I paid him a little visit and left a comment in response to another pro-gun commenter, CavTrooper, who said we didn't have any legal recourse against people publishing anti-gun propaganda:

Posted by JoeHuffman on 11/29/07 at 8:53PM

Actually we do have legal recourse. Miller and his ilk are engaged in a conspiracy against civil rights. Check out 18 USC 241 and 18 USC 242 for government employees acting under "the color of law".

No actual harm need to have occurred. Just that they conspired to oppress, threaten, or intimidate us with unconstitutional laws. It's no different than if they conspired to pass laws prohibiting people with dark colored skin from being outdoors during the night (Miller's idealogical cousins might claim it's a "reasonable restriction" because it's too easy for dark skinned people to commit crimes in the dark).

We are a long way from getting Federal Prosecutors from enforcing 18 USC 241/242 in these cases but it took a long time for the KKK to be prosecuted also. Getting the Supreme court to explicitly state it is an individual right is the first step to seeing these bigots brought up on the felony charges they deserve. One step at a time...

Thanks for stopping by Bryan. Come back anytime. And don't be shy about visiting in real life either. Boomershoot is a real blast.

But, first, a little background - for those of you who have more to do with your time than memorize old, obsolete and unused Constitutional dicta - the 2nd Amendment reads: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As I said, Ho Hum. How seriously must I (or anyone, for that matter) take a sentence so overwhelmingly categorical, yet which has never been used to overturn any gun regulation, ordinance or law in the 200-plus years since it was adopted?

Bryan Miller
November 29, 2007
Supremes take on 2nd Amendment - Yawn
[It's overwhelmingly categorical and never been used to overturn a law since it was adopted, therefore we shouldn't take it seriously and can enact laws that violate it without concern to the constitutionality of the law. Interesting logic. So, Mr. Miller, do you advocate treating the 13^th amendment in the same way?

Section. 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

If so then I claim you, Bryan Miller, as my slave. Maybe then you will suddenly recognize the utility of the 2^nd Amendment. Or maybe since the 13^th amendment is only 142 years old it's too recent to discard. If it needs to be 200-plus years old before we can start ignoring it then I'll let my great-grandchildren know that your descendants gave up their 13^th Amendment rights on your say so. As my descendants, with guns, take possession I'm sure your descendants will "thank" you for giving up your 2^nd Amendment rights earlier. The point is that just because a law hasn't been overturned recently the constitutional provision against such laws is obsolete.

And, Mr. Miller, it's obvious you haven't read this book which demonstrates the Supreme Court has upheld the legal tradition and historical record of private gun ownership, self defense, and armed self defense, since the country began.

My take on Miller's "yawn" response is that is the best spin he can put on what he thinks is impending doom.--Joe]

Once again, Walter E. Williams finds a way to articulate an idea with roughly ten thousand times the clarity I or most anyone else could muster.  I'm sure most of you read Walter's column regularly (what red-blooded, thinking American doesn't?) but this one deserves special attention.

Government allocation of resources enhances the potential for human conflict, while market allocation reduces it.

True of course, but he explains the how and why of it.  It should be a primer course in every elementary school, but then, it's a piece favoring a free market in education:

For a public school system, teaching free market principles would be suicide, wouldn't it?

Uncle sent me a link to this story:

Preventing gun crimes will be the focus of a summit Monday that is expected to draw dozens of police officers and civic leaders from around the state to Seattle.

Mayor Greg Nickels, along with Harborview Medical Center's Injury and Research Prevention Center, is hosting the conference in an effort to draw up better strategies to reduce violent crime and stop criminals from obtaining firearms.

It's expected to draw about 150 people, including police, prosecutors, church leaders and school officials. During the one-day conference at the Bell Harbor International Conference Center, they'll hear from experts who will share how efforts elsewhere have worked.

The thought crossed my mind that it would be interesting to attend but there wasn't information on how to sign up. But after reading the next paragraph I realized it wouldn't be good for my blood pressure (links added by me): 

The Joyce Foundation, a Chicago-based non-profit that advocates for more restrictive gun-control laws, provided grant money to pay for the conference.

Other speakers include: Garen Wintemute, a professor of emergency medicine at the University of California-Davis; Police Chief Scott Knight of Chaska, Minn., who is chairman of the International Association of Chiefs of Police firearms committee; and Nina Vinik, legal director for the Legal Community Against Violence.

Still, it might be interesting to attend for a little while. But then I read the comments to the article and discovered all I needed to know:

Posted by Dave Workman at 11/28/07 7:33 a.m.

I was advised that my name came up early in this discussion, so it seems only right to clarify some things for TerryP (thank you for your kind remarks) and others.

Gun rights advocates were deliberately not invited to this event, which is "Invitation Only."

I certainly was not invited to participate. But there is more to this: I'm a member of the working press, senior editor of 'GUN WEEK' a national-circulation firearms newspaper and it is rather disappointing that Gun Week was not invited to cover this event for its readers.

Mark Taff, executive director of the Bellevue-based Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, had been extended an invitation by a local state senator, but that invitation was apparently nixed by someone in the Mayor's office.

They have no interest in hearing anything other than their predetermined agenda. This isn't a "conference", it's a conspiracy against rights and they should be arrested and be given a fair trial.

BulletFootage-5000.wmv (3.27 MB)

I wish I had a camera that would take video like that of my boomers.

That watermelon is pretty cool though.

[Thanks to Joe D.]

Where there are grazers there will be predators. They said that on Discovery last night in a documentary on undersea micro environments. I think it applies to human society as well.

Lyle Keeney
November 26, 2007
In the comments.
[Yup. There probably are some thresholds due to family and tribal type bonds but as soon as you get a large enough population of "not us" available as prey the predators materialize. I don't think the anti-gun bigots grasp that concept. It appears that they believe it's the availability of weapons not the availability of prey that "creates" the predators.--Joe]

Via Bruce.

All in the name of the War on a Noun:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Firefighters in major cities are being trained to take on a new role as lookouts for terrorism, raising concerns of eroding their standing as American icons and infringing on people's privacy.

Unlike police, firefighters and emergency medical personnel don't need warrants to access hundreds of thousands of homes and buildings each year, putting them in a position to spot behavior that could indicate terrorist activity or planning.

[...]

When going to private residences, for example, they are told to be alert for a person who is hostile, uncooperative or expressing hate or discontent with the United States; unusual chemicals or other materials that seem out of place; ammunition, firearms or weapons boxes; surveillance equipment; still and video cameras; night-vision goggles; maps, photos, blueprints; police manuals, training manuals, flight manuals; and little or no furniture other than a bed or mattress.

Still and video cameras? Photos? Maps? Discontent with the United States?

I would get so many "hits" it would peg their meters even before they got to the guns, ammunition, and explosives.

Moscow is reputed to be the most liberal city in the entire state of Idaho. Half the town population are students attending the University of Idaho. Add in the socialist professors who think they are the anointed and you end up with some very liberal politics. For the most part it isn't a problem because there isn't all that much damage the city government can do when the state politics are so conservative. However Mayor Nancy Chaney feels she needs to do something about all those guns:

MOSCOW (AP) - Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney wants all cities in Idaho to be able to restrict guns in city facilities.

She has asked Representative Shirley Ringo, a Democrat from Moscow, to introduce legislation that will give Idaho cities the ability to ban guns in their facilities.

Chaney has been looking at ways to restrict guns in Moscow facilities since a May shooting rampage in the city left four dead and three wounded. Among the dead was Moscow police officer Lee Newbill. He was the first Moscow police officer killed in the line of duty.

Chaney says some area residents and city employees are concerned about their safety during public meetings. She says she's not looking for a citywide gun ban, but for the city to be able to restrict weapons in such places as city hall.

The attorney general last September told Moscow officials that cities in Idaho don't have legal authority to enforce gun bans in their facilities.

We feel we need to do something too. What I have heard so far is tough to report on a family friendly blog but after you filter out all the obscenities you are left with the word "impeach".

Via reader Rob:

Montclair State Unveils Mandatory 'School Phone'

Students Must Carry And Pay For GPS-Based Cell Device

MONTCLAIR, N.J. (CBS) ―

College students at Montclair State University are all talking about a new requirement that will require students to have a cell phone.

CBS 2 HD has learned more on this required feature that is forcing students to dig into their wallets.

At Montclair State, there is no excuse for being out of touch.

"'School Phone' I use for campus e-mail, different things like that," freshman Angela Vuocolo said.

That's right.

First-year student Vuocolo said 'School Phone' -- as in a Sprint-operated cell phone -- is now mandatory for all students. It's the first program of its kind in the country.

The cost: $420 a year for a base plan which is bundled into the tuition bill.

It includes just 50 peak voice minutes a month, but unlimited text messaging to any carrier, unlimited campus-based data usage, and student activated emergency GPS tracking.

"What it does is allow students to have an extra pair or group of people watching over them when they're going from one location to another," Montclair Police Department Chief Paul Cell said.

The positive impact is already being felt across campus.

"It makes me feel comfortable," MSU freshman Ricky Bodtmann said. "I guess if people want to feel safe."

As Rob pointed out, "It makes them FEEL safer. I’m thinking that the phone won’t stop a bullet."

And it won't do much good against a knife or superior strength either. If safety were the goal that $420/year would be better spent on a gun, ammunition, and some range time. But this is New Jersey where, "When it comes to firearms, the citizen acts at his own peril."

I believe that forced charity is no charity at all, and forced virtue cannot claim credit for itself anymore than a eunuch can claim credit for chastity.

Marko
this i believe.
November 21, 2007
[Via Tam. It's a great post and covers numerous important topics. I think son James will appreciate it greatly.--Joe]

Guns are already illegal so now they are about to make them even more illegal:

TOKYO, Nov 26 (Reuters) - Japan's parliament on Monday passed legislation strengthening gun control following a spate of shootings by gangsters, including the assassination of a city mayor in April and the recent murder of a hospital patient in a case of mistaken identity.

The revision of the firearms control law is the first since 1995, and imposes heavier punishments for gun crimes committed by members of organised crime gangs.

After the new law takes effect, which is expected by the end of the year, possessing a gun as part of organised crime syndicate will result in a sentence of one to 15 years in prison or a fine of up to 5 million yen ($46,100). The current provision is for a prison sentence of one to 10 years.

Under the revision, possessing more than one gun would become a crime, and would carry a prison term of between one and 15 years.

Just One Question.

I doubt that many teenagers will be able to convince their parents of this but it could make for some very interesting dinner time talk:

Early sex may not lead where we think it does.

Teens who start having sex at an early age may be less likely to engage in delinquent behavior in early adulthood than teens who wait until they are older to have sex, a new U.S. study finds.

The conclusion contradicts the widely held belief that early sexual activity is associated with later drug use, criminality, antisocial behavior and emotional problems.

We got a very surprising finding, particularly that early sex seems to forecast less antisocial behavior a few years later, rather than more," said lead researcher Kathryn Paige Harden, a PhD candidate in clinical psychology at the University of Virginia.

"There is a cultural assumption in the United States that if teens have sex early, it is somehow bad for their psychological health. But we actually found that teens who had sex earlier seem to have better relationships later. Now we want to find out why," she said.

"Our hypothesis as a result of this finding is that teens who become involved in intimate romantic relationships early are having sex early and more often but that those intimate relationships might later protect them from becoming involved in delinquent acts."

So many variations of such a discussion between parent and teenager are going through my mind that I couldn't possibly unscramble them.

We must win or else life under such a regime will not be worth living:

KHARTOUM, Sudan - A British primary school teacher has been arrested in Sudan, accused of insulting Islam's Prophet by letting her class of 7-year-olds name a teddy bear Muhammad, her school said on Monday.

Colleagues of Gillian Gibbons told Reuters they feared for her safety after receiving reports that young men had already started gathering outside the Khartoum police station where the Liverpool woman was being held.

Teachers at Unity High School in central Khartoum said Gibbons, 54, made an innocent mistake and simply let her pupils choose their favorite name for the toy as part of a school project.

Police arrested Gibbons on Sunday at her home inside the school premises, said Unity director Robert Boulos, after a number of parents made a complaint to Sudan's Ministry of Education.

Boulos said she had since been charged with "blasphemy," an offense he said was punishable with up to three months in prison and a fine.

[...]

Gibbons, who joined Unity in August, asked a girl to bring in her teddy bear to help the second grade class focus, said Boulos.

The teacher then asked the class to name the toy. "They came up with eight names including Abdullah, Hassan and Mohammed. Then she explained what it meant to vote and asked them to choose the name." Twenty out of the 23 children chose Muhammad.

Since things are "stable" (no change in the situation) this is not news (but the second year of on-going coverage of the Aruba rape case got tons of play last night and this morning, and the History Channel has been busy talking about Sasquatch and the Bermuda Triangle).  Why report that Muslims are burning and looting in response to an accident?

Malkin has some details.

Le Parisien reports that they burned down a Peugeot dealership, sacked a train station and shops, tore up a McDonald’s, stole the day’s receipts and attacked customers, smashed and burned cars, and are still going strong.

Don't they have a protection of gun rights in France? (I'm trying to imagine something like this happening in Idaho, going on for over a year, and I just can't do it)

Yup.  Things are normal in France, so we can concentrate on important stuff like space-alien abductions, haunted houses, Princess Diana, and the Loch Ness monster.

Have "the times changed" in the last few decades? Or has this sort of thing being going on for a long, long time? If it has changed, why did it? Was it the independence of women having greater earning power? Or was it social acceptance of female sexuality? Something to do with the availability of birth control and/or good health beyond menopause? How would one design a study to answer those questions?

Older white women join Kenya's sex tourists:

MOMBASA, Kenya (Reuters) - Bethan, 56, lives in southern England on the same street as best friend Allie, 64.

They are on their first holiday to Kenya, a country they say is "just full of big young boys who like us older girls."

Hard figures are difficult to come by, but local people on the coast estimate that as many as one in five single women visiting from rich countries are in search of sex.

Allie and Bethan -- who both declined to give their full names -- said they planned to spend a whole month touring Kenya's palm-fringed beaches.

[...]

"It's not love, obviously. I didn't come here looking for a husband," Bethan said over a pounding beat from the speakers.

"It's a social arrangement. I buy him a nice shirt and we go out for dinner. For as long as he stays with me he doesn't pay for anything, and I get what I want -- a good time. How is that different from a man buying a young girl dinner?"

Yeah, I know, the "hard figures are difficult to come by" phrase made me laugh too.

There are big differences between me and Sen. Obama on healthcare. I have a healthcare plan that covers every single American. He does not. I have a healthcare plan that will leave no American out. He, by his own admission, leaves at least 15 million people out.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
November 25, 2007
Clinton, Obama dial up the healthcare heat
[And there is a big difference between both of their plans and what the U.S. Constitution says. The Constitution does not give the Federal Government the authority to engage in this kind of activity. That both senators are advocating unconstitutional action is proof neither of them are fit to be on the public payroll in any capacity. That includes dog catcher and "sanitation worker". But the reality is that Henry Kissinger wasn't just speaking about the administration he was working for. It applies to nearly all politicians.--Joe]

If you were just the least bit selective in your data collection you could great really paranoid about big government. Check out this story (via email from Tony) Children herded like cattle into Maryland courthouse for forced vaccinations as armed police and attack dogs stand guard. And Local 2 Investigates Police Secrecy Behind Unmanned Aircraft Test.

Instead of paranoid, I think we should be "very skeptical", "keep your powder dry", and keep your training up to date.

If for some reason it ever becomes necessary to take down one of those planes do it while it is on the ground. If it's already in the air then take out the communication gear on the ground.

I've often said the socialists think of the common person more as cattle to be dehorned, vaccinated, milked, and slaughtered than as people. The "central committee" or the "enlightened leaders" need to keep watch and do what is best for the common good. The right of the individual is unimportant next to the right of society as a whole. It's time give up on these outmoded ideas and work for good of the collective. Those that resist are outlaws or insane and society is completely justified sending them to the work and reeducation camps. It's for the good of society.

Yeah, right. And that is Why Boomershoot.

Update: This post is starting to get legs. The vaccination story above is obviously bordering near hysterical. I figured there was a grain of truth in it and the whole forced vaccination concept bothers me. Here are some more dispassionate versions of the same story:

• One Maryland county takes tough tack on vaccinations (Christian Science Monitor)
• Maryland Parents Told to Have Children Immunized (New York Times)
• Md. Schools Get Tough on Vaccinations (Associated Press)
• Prince George's Co. parents brought to court over vaccines (Baltimore Sun)

Most of the articles just barely, at best, mention the protesters. The Christian Science Monitor has the best coverage of that angle:

But protesters outside the courthouse say that the summons to the courthouse amounted to a campaign of intimidation, and that parents weren't adequately informed of their rights as parents or possible risks to their children.

"I think it's offensive that the government would forcibly vaccinate kids. Individual rights are a good thing, and when you're dealing with health issues, informed consent is an important value," says Donna Hurlack, a Virginia gynecologist protesting outside the courthouse.

"There was a feeling of intimidation. Children were basically put in that building, lined up and given vaccines without any information given to parents about how to monitor their children for adverse vaccination reactions," says Barbara Loe Fisher, president and cofounder of the National Vaccine Information Center, which advocates for more parental rights in immunization.

None mention the police and dogs but I found one picture that confirms that angle (from the Associated Press article above):

My best take on it is that the facts reported in the original article I linked to were probably correct. Yes, the spin on it was extreme but his point is valid. It was a forced vaccination. People were threatened with jail (point of a gun) if they didn't comply. They were being treated a lot like cattle.

We have our great role model out there in the NRA. They know how to do their job and mobilize people.

Phil Goldsmith
November 25, 2007
Why gun control has no shot--Governor's effort to pass new restrictions runs into organized and effective opposition, as usual
President of CeaseFire PA
[In that spirit they should take us up on offers to go to the range together, learn how and why we socialize over guns, and why we oppose victim disarmament laws. They could join the NRA, read the magazines, participate in competitions, attend the annual meeting, Friends of the NRA dinners, and become firearms instructors. They could learn a lot from us.

Some of the most basic things they lack are a way to even join their organization let alone any benefits if someone were to join. And what existing events can they connect with people that might want to join? They have a lot of disadvantages compared to our side. We should fully exploit our advantages. These bigots need to be politically exterminated.--Joe]

If it keeps your daughter safe who cares about the color?

Oleg Volk
November 23, 2007
[And, of course, you know there is an Oleg Volk picture associated with this so click on the link above. Via Roberta.--Joe]

If you are into the battle reenactment scene Ozark Pyrotechnics, Inc. now has wireless Cannon Hit Simulation kits for sale.

This might be the way to realize one of my Boomershoot fantasies. That is where I mock the people unable to connect with targets using their rifles by pulling my iron sighted pistol from it's holster and while standing popping off targets at 375 yards away.

Of course it's not the modern day socialist view of the Pilgrims, but it's not the totally capitalist version as told by Stossel either. Amateur historian Clayton tells gives us the details.

For Thanksgiving I usually make something with lentils since we grow them on the farm and few people do much cooking with lentils. Yesterday, about an hour before we planned to leave for the farm I still hadn't started making anything (yes, I'm who Xenia inherited he procrastination from). I pulled the The Pea & Lentil Cookbook from the cupboard and started looking through it. "Oh, that looks interesting", I thought when I saw the lentil cookies. "Interesting" was to be a word used in conjunction with my cookies many times during the day. I thought we had all the ingredients and started work. It turns out we didn't have enough of everything and I improvised along the way.

Word traveled fast through the house and James came in to look and express his scorn, "Lentil cookies? Have you tried this before?" "No", I replied. As he walked off he said, "I'll be impressed if you pull it off." At the end of the day he came up with my QOTD for today.

Lentil and Chocolate Chip Cookies
Makes 7 dozen, approximately 3 cookies per serving
Lentils lend a rich, nutty flavor and cakelike softness to this classic cookie

1 1/2 cups butter, softened
2 1/2 cups brown sugar, packed
1 cup sugar
4 teaspoons vanilla
5 eggs
1 1/2 cups lentil purée (purée instructions below)
4 cups all-purpose flour
1 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon baking soda
5 cups quick-cooking oatmeal
2 cups semi-sweet chocolate chips
1 cup chopped walnuts

• Preheat oven to 375^o F.
• In a large mixing bowl, cream together butter, brown sugar, and white sugar. Add vanilla and eggs; beat until smooth. Cream lentil purée into butter mixture
• In a separate bowl, sift together flour, salt, and baking soda. Add to creamed mixture and blend lightly. Gently blend in oatmeal, chocolate chips, and nuts, just until evenly mixed.
• Chill dough until ready for handling. Drop dough in rounded tablespoons onto an ungreased cookie sheet. Bake 5 minutes; turn pan and bake another 5 minutes, or until cookies are lightly browned. Cool on wire racks.

Lentil Purée

Add 2 cups water per cup of lentils. Bring to a boil, reduce heat, cover, and simmer. Simmer 10 to 20 minutes for decorticated (skinned) lentils, 35 to 40 minutes for whole lentils. Add more water if cooking time is extended due to high altitude, hard water, or prolonged storage prior to cooking. Stir a few times. Cook lentils until they are very soft but just short of falling apart. Which cooking is complete remove from heat and let cool slightly but do not drain. In small batches purée the lentils with a sieve, food mill, blender, food processor, or potato masher. Purée should be the consistency of canned pumpkin. Add water to thin if necessary.

It turns out I only had 1 cups of brown sugar. I topped it off with white sugar and pour some molasses over it until I figured it was "brown enough". I didn't see the walnuts in the cupboard and crushed some pecans with the potato masher. We only had four cups of oatmeal and I topped it off with Raisin Bran. We only had about 1 1/2 cups chocolate chips and I figured the raisins in the Raisin Bran would be a good enough substitute.

I put the mixture in the freezer while I took a shower and we headed off to the farm.

As I was putting them on the cookies for baking people came in and asked what I was making. The response was universal, "Interesting":