Mood:
celebratoryTopic: News
Libtards all over America are suffering in silent mourning...
Taliban commander shot in night raid
QALAT, Afghanistan (April 18) -- A Taliban senior commander has been killed and two other militants have been captured during a raid by police in the southeastern Afghan province of Zabul.
The police, having received a tip that the militants were planning an attack on Qalat, the provincial capital, surrounded the band Monday night, shooting Mohamad Haleem and arresting two of his accomplices, China's Xinhua news agency reported
.
Local authorities said Haleem and his men were responsible for many attacks on government officials and schools in the province.
Zabul province, which borders Pakistan, has been the site of numerous attacks in recent months and even now has many Taliban supporters. Mullah Abdul Salim "Rocketi," a notorious Taliban commander, ran and won a seat in Parliament from Zabul province
.
United Press International ** Taliban commander shot in night raid
Posted by yaahoo_2006iest
at 1:58 PM EDT
Updated: Thursday, 20 April 2006 2:00 PM EDT
silly
Popular Nonsense
An unfair and ill-conceived attempt to ditch the Electoral College.
Opponents of the Electoral College have conjured up yet another scheme by which they hope to undermine America's unique system of electing presidents. If they are successful, the Electoral College could essentially be eliminated at the behest of a handful of states, without the bother of a constitutional amendment.
As Ronald Reagan might say, "There they go again!"
This latest anti-Electoral College effort, the 
NPV touts the ease of this change as one of the plan's best features. Electoral College opponents have tried and failed many times in their efforts to obtain a constitutional amendment. Such a process requires the consent of two thirds of Congress and three-fourths of the states. It's much easier to obtain the consent of a mere eleven states. And if eleven states get to change the rules of the presidential-election game, without so much as a nod to the remaining thirty-nine states, then why should NPV supporters care? After all, presidential elections can already be won with the votes of only eleven states. So any unfairness in the NPV plan merely reflects the inherent unfairness of the Electoral College system.
It is true that America's presidential-election system technically could allow the eleven largest states to pick the president. But the incentives inherent in the Electoral College work in the opposite direction, making such an outcome extremely unlikely. The Electoral College encourages presidential candidates to build national coalitions of voters. The compromises that a presidential candidate would have to make to obtain the votes of, say, California and Texas, guarantee that any candidate who manages to obtain the votes of the eleven largest states will also obtain the votes of a majority of states. The last presidential candidate to accomplish this feat was Reagan in 1984, and he obtained the votes of every state except Minnesota. (He also lost the District of Columbia.)
NPV's legislation, on the other hand, does not ensure national coalition building. To the contrary, the proposal gives the eleven largest states incentives to work against the remaining states: Getting rid of the Electoral College would allow presidential candidates to win with positions that are not at all in the interest of less populous states. To be sure, and as NPV points out, candidates now focus largely on battleground states, but the only reason other states aren't battlegrounds is because they are, by and large, happy with one of the candidates positions. Moreover, so-called "safe" and "swing" states change constantly. As recently as 1988, California voted consistently Republican. Texas was a safe Democrat state until it began voting Republican in 1980.
Proponents of national presidential elections point out that the president almost always wins the popular vote anyway. But the question is how these votes were won. Changing the system would change the way in which presidential candidates campaign. NPV proponents make much of their slogan "Every Vote Equal." It's a nice sounding slogan which appeals to a sense of fairness. But if every vote counted exactly the same, the system would end up being quite unfair to the less populous states. The true question here is whether the nation should vote in a state-by-state presidential election or a national presidential election. Changing from one process to the other would have significant ramifications.
John F. Kennedy once stated that America's presidential election system is like a solar system of governmental power. If one aspect of the solar system is changed, others will inevitably be impacted. If the gravitational pull of the sun is changed, then the Earth will be pulled out of its orbit. In the same way, if the Electoral College is removed from the nation's system of electing presidents, then other aspects of the political system will inevitably change. For example, the two-party political system will likely be seriously undermined. Also, presidential candidates will have less incentive to build national coalitions, and they will instead campaign primarily in high population areas.
If NPV succeeds in passing its legislation, citizens living in a majority of states will likely have been denied the opportunity to have a say in the decision about whether America will live in this political solar system or a new one. If getting rid of the Electoral College is such a great idea, then why do its proponents seem to want to bypass the people in enacting it? If it is such a great idea, and one that will serve our interests, why not go national with their case? Apparently they're not so into voting after all.
Tara Ross is the author of 
chillin'
USA records largest drop in annual deaths in at least 60 years
ATLANTA - In a powerful testament to U.S. health improvements, the annual number of deaths in the country dropped by about 50,000 in 2004 - the largest such decline in more than 60 years.
Drops in the death rates for heart disease, cancer and stroke accounted for most of the surprising development, health officials said.
Overall, age-adjusted death rates fell to a record low of 801 deaths per 100,000 population in 2004, down from almost 833 deaths per 100,000 in 2003.
"These are preliminary data," said Paul Terry, an assistant professor of epidemiology at Atlanta's Emory University. "But if it holds up, it's obviously very good news."
The government also said Wednesday that U.S. life expectancy had inched up again, to a record high of 77.9 years.
The total number of U.S. deaths recorded for 2004 was 2,398,343, according to preliminary mortality data released by the National Center for Health Statistics.
That represents a 2% decline from the 2,448,288 recorded for 2003. The last decline in annual deaths occurred in 1997, a modest drop of 445 deaths from 1996, said Arialdi Mini Ino, the statistician who is lead author of the report.
The last drop in deaths of this magnitude occurred in 1944, when the number of deaths dropped about 48,000 from the previous year, he said.
"We were surprised by the sharpness of the decrease (in 2004). It's kind of historical," Mini Ino said.
spacey
Whatever the case, 
Apparently, Garofalo either didn't understand or didn't care about the often-reported links between the privately-funded "New York Rescue Workers Detoxification Project" touted on her Friday night show and Scientology.
CultNews began reporting about the Scientology-linked project more than two years ago and the story was later picked up by the New York Times and Associated Press.
The so-called "Purification Rundown," which is a Scientology religious ritual, is at the heart of the program. Hubbard invented the process, which includes large dosing of niacin, sweating in a sauna and ingesting cooking oil.
Apparently, Janeane's not alone:
Scientology frequently uses its celebrities to get media time for essentially what can be seen as an infomercial promoting its programs, services, and of course its founder the late L. Ron Hubbard.
CultNews previously reported how TV talk show host Montel Williams was beguiled by Scientology celebs Juliette Lewis, Anne Archer, Catherine Bell and Kelly Preston (Mrs. John Travolta). Williams consumed two of his hour-long program slots promoting celebrity Scientology-linked projects.
But of all people has the seemingly cynical Janeanne Garofalo now been bitten by the celeb bug and followed in Montel's footsteps?
Could I Hate Myself Productions, the name of her company, provide a key clue? Garofalo, a notoriously unhappy person, would seem an easy target for these groups.
d'oh
Gen. Anthony Zinni: USS Cole Blunder Is My Fault
Former CENTCOM Commander, Gen. Anthony Zinni - who has called for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign because of Rumsfeld's alleged incompetence in running the Iraq war - admitted six years ago that he made the disastrous decision to have the USS Cole use the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling, where the ship was blown up by al-Qaida terrorists.
Worse still, at least one report indicates that Gen. Zinni may have played a role in an August 1998 leak that tipped off Osama bin Laden to an impending U.S. cruise missile attack - allowing the top terrorist to escape.
Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee in October 2000, a week after the Cole attack, the then-recently retired Zinni said: "I pass that buck on to nobody."
The Rumsfeld critic explained that he personally signed off on berthing the Cole in Yemen even though "their coast is a sieve for terrorists."
"The threat conditions in Aden were better than elsewhere," he insisted, citing risk assessments for Sudan and Saudi Arabia.
Gen. Zinni said that cutbacks in the size of the Navy's fleet during the Clinton years made it necessary to use regional ports for refueling, noting: "Ten years ago, we did all refueling at sea" using Navy oilers.
Still, prior to the Cole attack,
there's no record that Gen. Zinni ever complained about Clinton era defense cuts.
In what may be an even more troubling development, a report indicates that the leading Rumsfeld critic may have inadvertently played a role in tipping off Osama bin Laden to an impending U.S. cruise missile attack two years before the Cole episode.
Two days after President Clinton ordered the attack on bin Laden's encampment in Khost Afghanistan, the Associated Press reported:
"Kuwait's Al-Watan newspaper, quoting unidentified sources in London today, reported that Pakistan leaked to bin Laden news about an impending U.S. strike. The sources said the leak was aimed at limiting casualties, so that bin Laden would have less justification for a counterattack.
"A Pakistani government source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Gen. Anthony Zinni, commander of the U.S. Central Command, was in Peshawar the day before the attack to meet with Pakistani officials.
"Other Pakistani sources said Zinni came with a team of U.S. intelligence experts whose task was to pinpoint the camps and determine bin Laden's exact whereabouts."
Soviet Communism as Fashion Statement -- Again
Given Vincent's identical attire and the same background of Rockefeller Plaza, NBC's headquarters, I'd presume both segments were taped at the same time last week.
Video clip from April 17 (23 seconds): 
Midway into co-host Nancy O'Dell's April 17 set up of Vincent, the show cut to a spit screen with Vincent in the communist shirt: "Next year, Nicole Kidman will star, alongside Daniel Craig, in The Visiting, a re-make of sci-fi classic Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Tim Vincent not only got on the set, but was an extra, as well. Tim."
Tim Vincent in full screen from Manhattan, with Rockefeller Plaza in the background: "Nancy, what an addition to my growing film resume: Acting with Nicole Kidman. My first job on the set: Breaking that news to Nicole."
The program then cut to a story, narrated by Vincent, which showed him on a movie set as he wore a white button-down shirt with a dark suit.
The 
Vincent, a veteran of the BBC as detailed in 
bright
Black-Owned Businesses Thriving in U.S. 
The number of businesses owned by black entrepreneurs grew more than four times the national rate for all businesses from 1997 to 2002, the federal government said Tuesday.
Black entrepreneurs owned 1.2 million businesses in 2002, an increase of 45 percent from 1997, according to a report by the Census Bureau.
"It's encouraging to see not just the number but the sales and receipts of black-owned businesses are growing at such a robust rate, confirming that these firms are among the fastest-growing segments of our economy," Census Bureau Director Louis Kincannon (right) said in a statement.
Revenues from black-owned businesses increased by 25 percent during the period, to about $89 billion.
The report is the third in a series of Census Bureau reports on businesses owned by women, Hispanics and blacks. Together, the reports show that the three groups are underrepresented in business ownership but are narrowing the gap with white men.
From 1997 to 2002:
♠ The number of all U.S. businesses grew by 10 percent, to about 23 million.
♠ The number or female-owned firms grew by 20 percent, to 6.5 million.
♠ The number of Hispanic-owned businesses grew by 31 percent, to nearly 1.6 million.
Overall, black entrepreneurs owned 5 percent of U.S. businesses in 2002, Hispanics owned about 7 percent, and women of all races and ethnicities owned 28 percent, according to the Census Bureau.
The overwhelming majority of black-owned businesses were small - 92 percent had no employees other than the owners. By comparison, about three-fourths of all U.S. businesses have no employees.
"I'm proud," said Harry Alford (right), president and CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce. "We're the fastest-growing segment."
Alford said black entrepreneurs have been helped by improved education levels and increased incomes among black consumers and business owners.
Blacks as a group still trail whites in education and income, but they have made gains in the past half-century. In 1950, only 14 percent of black adults had high school diplomas, compared with 36 percent of whites, according to the Census Bureau. The gap narrowed by 2000, when 72 percent of black adults had at least a high school diploma, compared with 84 percent of whites.
"We've got the first generation of significantly educated people," Alford said. "There's a black middle class like never before."
The report is based on administrative records and a survey of 2.4 million businesses. The Census Bureau defines black-owned businesses as private companies in which blacks hold at least 51 percent of stock or interest. The report does not classify public companies, with publicly traded stock, because they can be owned by many stockholders of unknown races and ethnicities.
Black-owned businesses are not concentrated in any sector. The largest sector was health care and social assistance, with 246,000 back-owned firms. The second largest was other services, such as personal services, repair and maintenance, with 210,000 firms.
However, in some states, black-owned firms are concentrated in urban areas. About 80 percent of all black-owned businesses in Illinois were in Cook County, home to Chicago. Los Angeles County was home to nearly half the black-owned firms in California.
New York state had the most black-owned firms, with 129,324. It was followed by California, Florida, Georgia and Texas
.
Honda Eyes Production Cut as Accord Hybrid Sales Fall
The move highlights the industry's uncertainty over the technology's popularity and future.
Honda Motor Co. may be learning a hard lesson about hybrids: It's better to hold the horses.
A Honda executive said Thursday that the automaker might reduce production of its gas-electric Accord hybrid sedan because the vehicle, marketed as a performance model rather than a fuel miser, hasn't been selling as well as hoped.
It was the second time this week that auto executives attending the New York Auto Show have raised questions about the popularity of hybrid technology.
Nissan Motor Co. Chief Executive Carlos Ghosn said Wednesday that hybrid sales appeared to be slowing, something he has frequently suggested could happen as consumers weigh hybrids' extra sticker cost against their fuel economy.
Accord hybrid sales are off 51% from last year, when the model was introduced and was still a novelty because it mates a V-6 engine with Honda's hybrid electric drive system that gives it 253 horsepower, versus 244 in the non-hybrid model.
Dick Colliver, executive vice president of Torrance-based American Honda Motor Co., told the Associated Press that the gas-electric Accord was having "a hard time in the market." Consumers haven't been convinced that the hybrid Accord would provide much in the way of fuel savings, he said.
The hybrid model does deliver about 25% better fuel economy than the conventional V-6 gasoline Accord, but it also has a sticker price of $33,540, about $3,700 more than the gasoline model.
Not all hybrids are hurting: Sales of Honda's smaller Civic hybrid are up 32% this year.
But Toyota Motor Corp.'s Prius, while still the best-selling hybrid in the market, has dropped 3.3% below last year's pace to 22,123 sales for the first three months.
J.D. Power & Associates estimates that, overall, about 260,000 hybrids will be sold in the U.S. this year - about 1.5% of the passenger vehicle market.
Toyota still seems to believe that the idea of a performance hybrid will catch on - at least among luxury buyers.
The company's Lexus division announced Wednesday that it would introduce a sedan in 2008 that pairs a V-8 engine with a hybrid system, supercharging the gas engine. The new Lexus LS 600h would have about 420 horsepower - a record for a hybrid.
(Origional story requires registration)
Conservative Books Equate to 'Sexual Harassment'
read a few books from a conservative perspective.
According to the Alliance Defense Fund -- a legal alliance that aggressively defends religious liberty -- a librarian at Ohio State University at Mansfield has been 
"The Professors" by David Horowitz, "Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis" by Bat Ye'or, and "It Takes a Family" by Sen. Rick Santorum, Savage was put under "investigation."
The Alliance Defense Fund reports that three professors filed a complaint of discrimination and harassment against Savage because the list of books he suggested made them feel "unsafe."
"Universities are one of the most hostile places for Christians and conservatives in America," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David French, who heads ADF's Center for Academic Freedom. "It is shameful that OSU would investigate a Christian librarian for simply recommending books that are at odds with the prevailing politics of the university."
The Alliance Defense Fund
sent a letter to school officials informing them of the librarian's constitutional rights -- just in case they forgot. But, according to the ADF, the university is proceeding with its investigation saying it takes "any allegation of sexual harassment seriously."
Even more troubling, this ridiculous "sexual harassment" claim was supported by the school's entire faculty as they voted without dissent to file charges against Savage. Later they voted to allow the individual professors to file charges, according to the ADF.
But, apparently, this policy doesn't extend to conservatives.
I also found an incomplete list of the "
And They Say They Support the Troops?
A new anti-military book is being promoted by Code Pink called "10 Excellent Reasons Not to Join the Military". The author is Elizabeth Weill-Greenberg with Cindy Sheehan writing the guest introduction. While the cover is a vile mockery of wounded soldiers, the contents of the book are even worse. I was able to download Chapter 10 of the book, written by Rae Abileah, via the Code Pink website. Abileah just happens to be a member of Code Pink. Just reading this chapter reinforces how much Code Pink and its comrades really despise our military.
Abileah begins the chapter explaining how she evolved from wanting to join the military in high school to a loather of the military. She explained that the more she learned about the "way that the United States has repeatedly invaded other countries using military force in the name of democracy and freedom, joining the military began to look less valiant and honorable." The clincher for Abileah was the "immature and retaliatory response to terrorism" when the USA went to war in Afghanistan. Once again, it is all about Bad America and the evil done by the United States. That is nothing more than socialist drivel spewed by the hate America first crowd of Castro-lovers.
Abileah hypes the media myth that the majority of recruits enter the military only to get money for college. She claims the military offers none of the advantages promoted by recruiters. Abileah encourages the reader to dedicate their life to working for social change instead of the "media hyped" American pride mentality of the military. She calls "teachers, community organizers, activists, engineers, public defense attorneys, lobbyists and artists" the "true patriots". I wonder if she includes Jack Abramoff in this category - after all he was a lobbyist. Why is pride in your country offensive to the anti-war crowd?
The chapter also promotes the "class" myth of the military - that most low-income young adults choose the military because it is the only way out. Abileah claims that "the institutionalized violence that the military represents" gives the potential gang-banger an outlet for their street survival skills. In addition, the added testosterone of wearing an Army uniform is too much for the youngsters to resist. Facts do not support this so-called theory and have been put to bed by recruiting statistics. The soldiers serving in our military are not the dregs of society forced into servitude with the armed forces. To imply such is to reveal the depth of your ignorance.
The very last line of the chapter sums up the anti-military opinion of the so-called "peace activists". Abileah writes, "It is not the time to give in to this child-killing machine called the military; it's time to resist." Abileah was right about it not being the time to give in. It is not the time to give in to appeasement and weakness. It is time to call these anti-war groups exactly what they are - anti-Americans that would like nothing more than United States to fail. But don't forget - they support the troops.
