Welcome to My World

Creative Lifelong Learning Money Manager

Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:47:01 GMT

I took the 43 Things Personality Quiz and found out I'm a

Creative Lifelong Learning Money Manager

Terrorists Declare War on US - Obama Issues Arrest Warrant

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 22:50:28 GMT

DON’T LET PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA TRY FOREIGN TERRORISTS IN US CIVILIAN COURTS

“I’ll talk to you guys when you take me to New York and I can see my lawyer.”

- Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, lead planner of 9/11 attacks, after his capture

- Uncle to convicted terrorist Ramzi Yousef who was responsible for the 1993 WTC bombing

"In previous terrorist attacks — for example, the first attack against the World Trade Center, we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in U.S. prisons, incapacitated."

- President-Elect Barack Obama

The Bush Administration, as imperfect as it may have been, set up military tribunals to prosecute inmates held at Guantanamo for good reason.

Obama team ponders what to do with Guantanamo inmates

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/10/obama.transition.guantanamo/index.html

PLEASE FORWARD TO ANYONE YOU KNOW WHO MAY BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ISSUE

Bush says what he means, does Obama?

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:50:21 GMT

“Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success.”

– George W. Bush, Sept. 20, 2001, Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People

Secret order lets U.S. raid Al Qaeda around the world

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/10/america/10military.php?page=1

Maybe this is what John McCain had in mind when he told Obama not to telegraph publicly that you are going to perform military operations in Pakistan. Obama has said he will continue to aggressively go after al Qaeda, but he also referred to prosecutions of the 1993 WTC bombers as a success despite it occurring after the fact and not going after those tied to them who carried out 9/11. Hopefully, with the Presidential level intelligence briefings Obama is now receiving that he will have better informed opinions, which will lead to the best decisions possible.

SERIOUSLY

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 16:52:49 GMT

It's amazing how some in the media are trying to chracterize McCain's most recent actions.

If Obama had been the one to "suspend" his campaign and suggest postponing the first debate, the majority of the mainstream media, which is clearly in the tank for him, would be gushing at his leadership and decisiveness; trying to solve the problem supposedly created only by non-Democrats.

Obviously Obama can't relate to McCain's desire to work in a bipartisan manner and actually get something accomplished. So by default he thinks it was merely a political stunt. I disagree, while McCain must have considered the political fallout, the decision was much more than a stunt. McCain's record proves he is about more than pure stunts.

The deal was clearly DOA. Yet some are trying to blame McCain's appearance in Washington for the deal falling through. McCain rightly pointed out early on, there would be no concensus on the initial proposal, and rightly went to Washington to LISTEN before then coming up with a deal that will be passed. Yet we see critcism that he didn't speak enough... yet somehow that was responsible for the deal falling through... typical logic coming from liberals.

McCain must take Obama to task tonight in the debate, which will presumably include much more about the economy, rather than the originally proposed foreign policy and national security debate (which is unfortunate, Obama thinks the handling of the 1993 WTC bombing was a success, this faulty thinking sums him up well in my mind). However, McCain will still be able to outshine Obama on the economy, despite this current crisis supposedly helping Obama in the polls, but for the life of me I can't figure out why. McCain is the one who tried to pass a bill and predicted the dangerousness of the situation two years ago.

Obama's Campaign is a Pipe Dream

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:57:31 GMT

Statement by Senator John McCain, May 25, 2006:

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Congress, with a slim Democratic majority, did not act. Now the FBI is investigating these companies, who have directly impacted the economy in a major detrimental way. The Obama campaign can no longer spread the false and empty spin that McCain is weak on the economy and on proper regulation without losing whatever credibility they have left.

Apparently John McCain does know something about the economy...

Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:37:41 GMT

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS:

For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.

If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different.

[...]

But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it...

That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: "It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing."

Now that the collapse has occurred, the roadblock built by Senate Democrats in 2005 is unforgivable. Many who opposed the bill doubtlessly did so for honorable reasons. Fannie and Freddie provided mounds of materials defending their practices. Perhaps some found their propaganda convincing.

[...]

Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.

Obama is Running on Empty

Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:58:43 GMT

Barack Obama's campaign is unbelievable.

Their attacks and criticisms of McCain and Palin are so empty it is scary.

McCain's campaign has stretched the truth somewhat in some of their ads critical of Obama, but nowhere near the degree that the Obama camp has been doing. I can't even call what the Obama campaign is doing as stretching the truth, because they're not even starting with the truth in much of their criticism.

First they continually try to link McCain to Bush, despite that fact that:
- McCain has had several disagreements with the Bush administration on some key issues over the last eight years.
- Joe Lieberman, the man who ran against Bush in 2000, who AL GORE picked as his VP candidate, is supporting McCain.

They also claim McCain (and Palin?!) is more of the same old politics, despite the fact that:
- Obama is from the notoriously corrupt Chicago political arena, and what is his record of reform there?
- Obama is now engaging in more negative attacks than McCain
- McCain has a reputation of bipartisanship in the Senate to actually accomplish something
- McCain picked a running mate who unseated an incumbent Republican and did act to reduce corruption
- Obama chose Joe Biden as his running mate

They criticize Palin's experience, despite the fact that:
- Palin has more executive experience than Obama, who has little if any executive experience
- Obama is at the top of his ticket while Palin is appropriately in the VP slot
- Obama was criticized by Democrats for being too inexperienced during their primary

And to top it off, the Obama campaign has been running spanish language ads that take two Rush Limbaugh quotes way out of context, and then try to link McCain to Limbaugh! Do we have to pull out all the non-out-of-context anti-McCain quotes from Limbaugh during the Republican primaries? These ads are clearly designed to inflame racial/ethnic tensions, so we have to ask ourselves; what kind of change is Obama really promoting here?

Barack Obama is running on empty. At some point you have to believe that the Democrats are going to get tired of losing Presidential elections.

VP Palin!

Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:17:37 GMT

At first glance, John McCain's pick for VP may seem like a stunt to woo women and Hillary supporters. However, this is definitely not solely a pick based on gender. Although it is a factor and makes the ticket much more exciting, she actually does have Executive experience, both as mayor (yes only 7,500 people or so, but that's 7,500 more than Obama has ever governed) and Governor (of an important state with regards to our energy future).

People are always complaining about politicians and how they are not like regular people, well this woman is! She is a mother of 5 and her husband is a union worker. Why not put someone who is more in touch with average Americans into the VP spot?

She has a proven track record in unseating an incumbent Republican and getting things done for her state. Regardless of her gender, we can look at what she's done, even in a relatively brief period, versus Obama's lack of accomplishment.

I'm not even sure how many Hillary supporters will be won over by this, probably not many, because they are too liberal and do not think logically enough. Palin is too anti-abortion for many Hillary supporters among other things. What this pick will do most is annoy the heck out of Democrats since they did not have the first woman elected to the White House.

I am very excited about this election, we need a mostly moderate ticket that has shown it is willing to negotiate across party lines to get things done like McCain/Palin. Obama proclaims change, but he is in reality a Chicago Machine politician. McCain/Palin will get things done!

Country First 2008

Larry King needs a History Lesson, badly...

Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:54:44 GMT

During his show last night Larry King made it clear how little he knows about terrorism and 9/11. It was freightening to hear him claim that everyone who planned 9/11 was dead and that he did not know that the plot and training for it began during the Clinton administration. As a TV personality on a news channel he should be more informed than that.

Excerpt from Transcript on Larry King Live following Barack Obama's DNC speech:

KING: Other things he could have put in: there were no weapons of mass destruction, which he sold the whole war. Didn't mention that.

ELDER: It's interesting why they didn't mention that.

KING: Maybe just the same mistake...

ELDER: Because Bush didn't lie about it, because they know that he didn't lie about it. Almost his whole position...

KING: There are those who say he did.

ELDER: During this whole convention, they had all these speakers there. There was ample opportunity to say that Bush lied about it. I didn't hear a single one say that.

KING: Or that he was grossly mistaken then.

ELDER: He had the same CIA director, George Tenet, as who served under Bill Clinton.

KING: So it's Bill Clinton's war now?

ELDER: George Tenet is the one who said it was a slam dunk. Well, under Bill Clinton's administration, al Qaeda was planning to do 9/11.

KING: It's Bill's fault?

ELDER: And Bill Clinton had five or six chances to get Osama bin Laden and didn't do it.

KING: George Bush had nothing to do with this, then?

ELDER: I didn't say he didn't.

STEIN: I don't think anyone blames George Bush for 9/11. I mean, no one in their right mind blames...

KING: He said they didn't bring up 9/11.

STEIN: I know, but nobody blames...

KING: It happened on the Republicans' watch.

STEIN: I know, but the fact that it hasn't happened since. There's always been...

KING: It didn't happen on Clinton's watch.

ELDER: They had planned it on Clinton's watch. On the first attack...

KING: They planned it, then?

ELDER: In the first attack on the World Trade Center, he treated it like a law enforcement matter rather than a war. The 9/11 Commission said he had five chances...

KING: I'm lost -- your history's better than mine. I'm lost. I thought it was during the Bush administration.

STEIN: It was. Everyone knows that al Qaeda planned it and led up to it and got away with it.

ELDER: You didn't know it was planned under Clinton?

KING: You know something? You're better than me. You know when it was planned. All the guys who planned it are dead. They're dead on a plane, you know when. You interviewed them during the flight.

Anyway, you got it better than me. You know more than me.

ELDER: Read the 9/11 Commission report.

[ ... ]

KING: By the way, gentlemen, before we can comment, I just want to clear things up. You mentioned 9/11 was not mentioned. Here's what he said: "While Senator McCain was turning his sights to Iraq just days after 9/11, I stood up and opposed the war, knowing that it would distract us from the real threats we face. When John McCain said we would muddle through in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11 and made clear that we must take out Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants when we had them in our sights."

STEIN: I think if I may correctly say so, what is meant by lack of mention, as mentioned, of the incredible sorrow and horror we feel and that the losses to the American families...

KING: Should he have mentioned that?

STEIN: Oh, absolutely. It's the worst thing that ever happened on American soil in the 20th century.

KING: I'm just asking. I'm an independent. I'm just asking.

ELDER: Larry, you're an independent?

KING: Wait until you see me next week.

ELDER: And that's what brought about 9/11, a complete different change in our national security.

My thoughts on recent comments from Nancy Pelosi

Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:32:46 GMT

"I think that women, we have to get away from the politics of victim. This is about you go out there and you fight." - Nancy Pelosi

Some words of actual wisdom from the House Speaker. Democrats seem to be notorious for using the "politics of victim" - not only in regards to women, but as well as racial/ethnic issues as well. This is not to say that there aren't legitimate issues to be dealt with, but it's a matter of how you go about it. Treating a certain group of people (however you want to categorize people) as victims, and continually telling them that they are, never really seems to actually help them.

"You name it, there isn't anything that's been improved in this [Bush] administration. We must turn this around and take the country in a new direction. I'll leave it to the academics and later I'll see what happened and analyze it, but right now we're in a fight." - Nancy Pelosi

Not a single thing? Maybe she's blind to the fact that the Democrats have continually blocked Bush's attempts to improve things (Social Security being one of several) which is in my view their plan, to deny Bush credit for anything good, at the expense of the country or not.

She's also clearly blind to the fact that our policies towards combating terrorism, while still not perfected/ideal, have been dramatically improved over the Clinton years (which is of course when al Qaeda was executing several attacks against the US as well as planning 9/11 and other plots).

Isn't her statement about not analyzing anything in the present and leaving it to others for later quite interesting?! I for one prefer to analyze things for myself, in the here and now, to the best of my ability with the resources I have, while taking in others analysis to supplement my own as well. I also see it as a sign that she realizes Bush & co. may receive higher marks from historians in the future than people give them now. Of course she can't admit any of that, wouldn't be good for her party, screw the country, right Dems?

John McCain 2008 - Country First

READ THIS - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121918996082755013.html

Back on LJ for the Next Election...

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:02:53 GMT

Excerpt from Online Article:

"Let me be clear: I will let no one question my love of this country," Obama said to applause.

McCain stood before the same audience a day earlier and said Obama "tried to legislate failure" in the Iraq war and had put his ambition to be president above the interests of the United States. He said the Illinois senator did this by pushing for a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq and by voting in the Senate against a major appropriations bill to help fund the troop increase.

Responding to Obama's comments, McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said: "Barack Obama has made it clear that unconditional withdrawal in Iraq is more important to him than victory in Iraq. That's not a criticism of his patriotism, that's a criticism of his judgment."

A decorated Vietnam war veteran and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Arizona Sen. McCain has sharply questioned whether the 47-year-old Obama has the experience and character necessary to serve as commander in chief.

Source: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080820/D92LN0D00.html

NEXT UP: VP Picks & Future Website

Tribute to Robert B. Maieski (My Grandma's Brother)

Wed, 10 Jan 2007 02:52:42 GMT

MAIESKI-Robert B. of Mineola on January 8, 2007, after a long and courageous battle with Parkinson's disease. Beloved husband of the late Marion. Cherished father of James, Barbara and Robert. Adoring grandfather of Melissa, Keith and James. Loving brother of Mary T. Cassidy and the late Frank A. Maieski. Also survived by many loving nieces and nephews. Proud Navy Veteran of WWII, who served on the U.S.S. Tousdale in the Pacific Theater. Retiree of Grumman Corp. and helped put man on the moon with his work on the Lunar Module. He also worked on the F-14. Friends may call Wednesday and Thursday 2-5 and 7-9:30PM at the Thomas F. Dalton Funeral Home, 412 Willis Ave. Williston Park. Mass of Christian Burial Friday 9:45AM, at Corpus Christi, R.C. Church. Interment Holy Rood Cemetery.
Published in Newsday on 1/9/2007.

Mon, 25 Dec 2006 06:56:25 GMT

Your Christmas is Most Like: A Very Brady Christmas

For you, it's all about sharing times with family.
Even if you all get a bit cheesy at times.

What Movie Is Your Christmas Most Like?

Wed, 06 Dec 2006 08:13:37 GMT

NEWSWEEK: In public and private statements, Scowcroft has been deeply skeptical of the dream of the neoconservatives to bring democracy to the Middle East. Scowcroft consistently and openly warned that invading Iraq would not herald a new age of freedom in the region but rather inflame old sectarian passions. Better, Scowcroft urged, to aim for policies that would promote stability in the region. Those policies might keep despots in power, but they would at least keep the region from exploding into violence that could cut off America's vital pipeline to Middle East oil and create generations of resentments that could breed more terrorists.

I think our friendly relationships with despots in order to keep our oil flow going also incites resentment towards us. After all, most of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Appeasing despots is a false stability that only exists on the surface, but generates underlying hatred towards the US. Generation upon generation of Arabs are already indoctrinated with hate against Jews and the United States of America. Appeasing dictators for the sake of "stability" for a reliant oil supply will not solve this problem. The transition to democracy in the Middle East may be violent at times, but so was our own in the US. The so called stability of brutal regimes ruling the Middle East is also violent and only perpetuating terrorism.

NEWSWEEK: To the neocon faithful who shaped Bush 43's world view after 9/11, Baker is often depicted as a creature of Washington who favors compromise over conviction. For the record, Baker mostly makes jokes about his cautious approach when it comes to the use of force. "I used to get asked why I didn't want to push on to Baghdad [in the 1991 gulf war]," Baker likes to say. "I don't get asked that question much anymore."

Mon, 04 Dec 2006 01:18:28 GMT

My Response to the President of Iran's Open Letter to the American People

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 20:03:20 GMT

Dear President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,

I am forced to question the sincerity of your open letter to the people of the United States of America. If what you say in this letter is true, then why do you support the aggressive actions of Hezbollah and Hamas? Why do you perpetuate violence in Iraq? I think you forgot to write your true feelings of "Death to America" somewhere in your letter. I think you forgot to mention that you deny the Holocaust ever occurred. The USA is an imperfect nation, but we are forced into action by the extremely violent, uncompromising, and relentless assault by terrorists and fascists throughout the world. You criticize our so called "diminishing of civil liberties" while offering your citizens restricted freedom of speech and gender inequality among other human rights violations. I am not blind to the rising and continuing threat that Islamic-fascism poses to me, my family, friends, neighbors, country, and the world. You have not addressed the true intentions of your nuclear program. You are not being fully honest and are in fact deceptive. This is a personal matter for me, and you will have to do better than that, I can see through your rhetoric.

Tue, 21 Nov 2006 04:50:42 GMT

You scored as C.G. Jung. You are more of a spiritualist than would be immediately apparent. Some of your notions are questioned by the cynical, but deep down you know the human consciousness is more than the flesh and tissue can account for. You tend to take a scientific observationist look on matters the average person wouldn't even begin to analyze. You personally are responsible for most of the ideas that are floating around in modern psychologist's/psychic's paltry little skulls. On the down side, you tend to be associated with that asshole Freud.

</td>

C.G. Jung

75%

Mother Teresa

58%

O.J. Simpson

58%

Adolf Hitler

58%

Dante Alighieri

58%

Friedrich Nietzsche

58%

Jesus Christ

50%

Stephen Hawking

50%

Miyamoto Musashi

42%

Elvis Presley

33%

Sigmund Freud

33%

Steven Morrissey

33%

Charles Manson

17%

Hugh Hefner

What Pseudo Historical Figure Best Suits You?
created with QuizFarm.com

Trailer - Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against The West

Sat, 11 Nov 2006 08:46:33 GMT



"Trailer - Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against The West" on Google Video
www.ObsessionTheMovie.com - a powerful new documentary that exposes the threat of Radical Islam in ways never before seen in the mainstream media. Check out the website for a longer 12 minute excerpt from this hour long documentary.

A Victory for Freedom

Thu, 09 Nov 2006 05:11:38 GMT

Well, the Democrats took control of both the House and the Senate tuesday. At least our electorate has the ability to self-correct itself every once and awhile. The Republicans made enough mistakes to not earn back a majority in Congress. The Dems now have enough power to cause some trouble and/or hopefully get some positive things accomplished. We shall see. I hope anyone reading this who is an eligible voter participated in this election, there were some seriously narrow margins of victory. If you aren't registered yet, I suggest you do for the 2008 election. I can't understand being apathetic, but apparently some people are.

Troops Response to John Kerry's "Botched Joke"

Thu, 02 Nov 2006 05:34:41 GMT

Kerry's Strategy: Insert Foot into Mouth

Tue, 31 Oct 2006 22:05:33 GMT

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. And if you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
- John Kerry (10/20/06)

What logical person wouldn't consider this a swipe at people who decide to voluntarily join the US armed forces? Especially considering, that although Kerry claims it was a botched joke at the Bush administration, he went to the same college as George W. Bush and they both more or less got straight C's. What on earth was Kerry trying to imply? We don't need more jokes in these historic times, we need solutions, something too many democrats fail to offer, instead they provide jokes and criticism.

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 01:39:21 GMT

Dave, you are Balanced-brained, which means that you rely equally on both the left and right hemispheres of your brain.

You have a balanced brain — able to draw on the strengths of both the right and left hemispheres depending on context. Typically, people with balanced right and left hemispheres are very comfortable with switching between local and global perspectives — that is, paying attention to both small details and larger issues when the circumstance indicates. That means they can identify elements that make up an image or situation and also attend to the larger, more holistic pattern or unified whole that those details comprise.

You are able to capitalize on the left hemisphere's skills in verbal communication as well on the right hemisphere's focus on patterns and association making. This rare combination makes you a very creative and flexible thinker.

Depending on the situation, you may rely on one hemisphere or the other. Some situations may lend themselves to using your right brain's creativity and flexibility while other situations may call for a more structured approach as dictated by your left brain.

Your test results show that you are a visual learner.

Other balanced-brained people who are visual learners are scientist and theoretician Buckminster Fuller, painter Pablo Picasso, news anchor Tom Brokaw, and scientist Stephen Hawking.

http://web.tickle.com/tests/brain/index_main.jsp

Terrible Indictment by District Attorney Nifong

Sun, 15 Oct 2006 21:16:26 GMT

I never thought I'd see one one of my classmates from HS on tv in this manner. The DA working this case is terrible, there should not have been indictments. Virtually all of the facts favor the defense, and the accuser has very little credibility. By indicting innocent people, you still ruin their lives, at least temporarily, if not altering it forever.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

(CBS) The three Duke lacrosse players indicted for a rape they say they didn't commit are indignant over the effect the charges are having on their lives and their families.

In their first interviews, they speak to Ed Bradley.

...

The district attorney, Mike Nifong, took to the airwaves giving dozens of interviews, expressing with absolute certainty that Duke lacrosse players had committed a horrific crime. His comments fueled explosive news coverage and fed public suspicion of the team, before much of the evidence was gathered.

"There’s no doubt in my mind that she was raped and assaulted at this location," he said on Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor."

D.A. Nifong referred to the lacrosse players “a bunch of hooligans” whose “daddies could buy them expensive lawyers.” He played up the racial aspects of the case, but insisted that his public comments had nothing to do with the hotly contested election campaign he was waging in a city with a large black population.

...

But based on 60 Minutes' six-month review of the case file, it appears that standard police procedures were violated and evidence disregarded – evidence that may have pointed toward the players’ innocence.

...

"I mean, we were kinda, I mean, shocked by the fact that we – that we had to actually go to a police station to give DNA. But everyone – we were told it would help to clear everything up. So we were happy to go," Finnerty explains.

They were even happier when the results came back: there was no match. No DNA from any member of the lacrosse team was found on or inside the accuser or on her clothing. Reade Seligmann thought the case would now be closed, but he was wrong.

"It’s so frustrating because that was an opportunity for us to exonerate ourselves, and we were told that," he says. "We trusted that you know if we cooperated, we would, you know, those that were innocent would be shown to be innocent. And that's just, it didn't play out that way."

District Attorney Mike Nifong, who had declared that DNA would be the crux of his case, played down the results, speculating that the absence of DNA meant that the attackers may have used condoms, although the accuser had already stated that there were “no condoms used”, and that at least one of her three attackers had ejaculated inside her. Although it was a major setback for his case, the D.A. said he was undeterred.

...

Without the DNA evidence he had hoped for, the D.A. needed the accuser to identify the three men who had raped her. Days after the party, she was shown photo lineups of 36 lacrosse players and didn’t pick out anyone as her attacker. In fact, she didn’t recognize David Evans at all, and was fairly certain only that she had seen Reade Seligmann somewhere at the party. So, two weeks later, the D.A. supervised another line-up, this one showing mugshots of all 46 white players on the team.

"It felt like Russian roulette," Seligmann recalls. "It could have been any single one of us. Kids were even calculating their chances of what the percentage was that you would get picked."

...

Still, the players were indicted, based largely on the results from that final photo line-up. How did that happen?

60 Minutes asked James Coleman, a prominent law professor at Duke University Law School who helped establish guidelines in North Carolina designed to protect against false identifications in police line-ups. He says this line-up broke one basic principle: there were no “filler” photos, no pictures of people not connected to the case. The accuser only saw photos of lacrosse players who police told her were at the party.

...

Professor Coleman says the line-up ordered by the D.A. for the Duke lacrosse case violated local, state and federal guidelines. The D.A. has been quoted as saying that will be up to a judge to decide.

Asked why a district attorney would order a line-up that breaks virtually every rule in the book, Coleman says, "Well that's a good question for the D.A. But I assume that, you know after his initial performance, in this case, he needed to indict at least three players. And charge them with what he said was a rape that had occurred."
...

Asked if he thinks the D.A. committed prosecutorial misconduct, Coleman says, "Yes, I mean I think that’s the whole point. And if this case resulted in a conviction, I think there would be a basis to have the conviction overturned based on his conduct. I think in this case, it appears that this prosecutor has set out to develop whatever evidence he could to convict people he already concluded were guilty."

CBS freeSpeech segment

Thu, 05 Oct 2006 03:24:47 GMT

I'm saddened and shaken by the shooting at an Amish school today, and last week’s school murders.

When my son Dan was murdered on the sidewalk at Columbine High School on April 20, 1999, I hoped that would be the last school shooting. Since that day, I’ve tried to answer the question, "Why did this happen?"

This country is in a moral free-fall. For over two generations, the public school system has taught in a moral vacuum, expelling God from the school and from the government, replacing him with evolution, where the strong kill the weak, without moral consequences and life has no inherent value.

[Note: The columbine killers talked about evolution in their tapes they made before killing.]

We teach there are no absolutes, no right or wrong. And I assure you the murder of innocent children is always wrong, including by abortion. Abortion has diminished the value of children.

Suicide has become an acceptable action and has further emboldened these criminals. And we are seeing an epidemic increase in murder-suicide attacks on our children.

Sadly, our schools are not safe. In fact, we now witness that within our schools. Our children have become a target of terrorists from within the United States.

- Brian Rohrbough (10/2/2006)

Excerpt from Bush Speech:

Wed, 06 Sep 2006 07:24:23 GMT

The experience of September the 11th made clear, in the long run, the only way to secure our nation is to change the course of the Middle East. So America has committed its influence in the world to advancing freedom and liberty and democracy as the great alternatives to repression and radicalism. (Applause.) We're taking the side of democratic leaders and moderates and reformers across the Middle East. We strongly support the voices of tolerance and moderation in the Muslim world. We're standing with Afghanistan's elected government against al Qaeda and the Taliban remnants that are trying to restore tyranny in that country. We're standing with Lebanon's young democracy against the foreign forces that are seeking to undermine the country's sovereignty and independence. And we're standing with the leaders of Iraq's unity government as they work to defeat the enemies of freedom, and chart a more hopeful course for their people. This is why victory is so important in Iraq. By helping freedom succeed in Iraq, we will help America, and the Middle East, and the world become more secure.

During the last five years we've learned a lot about this enemy. We've learned that they're cunning and sophisticated. We've witnessed their ability to change their methods and their tactics with deadly speed -- even as their murderous obsessions remain unchanging. We've seen that it's the terrorists who have declared war on Muslims, slaughtering huge numbers of innocent Muslim men and women around the world.

We know what the terrorists believe, we know what they have done, and we know what they intend to do. And now the world's free nations must summon the will to meet this great challenge. The road ahead is going to be difficult, and it will require more sacrifice. Yet we can have confidence in the outcome, because we've seen freedom conquer tyranny and terror before. In the 20th century, free nations confronted and defeated Nazi Germany. During the Cold War, we confronted Soviet communism, and today Europe is whole, free and at peace.

And now, freedom is once again contending with the forces of darkness and tyranny. This time, the battle is unfolding in a new region -- the broader Middle East. This time, we're not waiting for our enemies to gather in strength. This time, we're confronting them before they gain the capacity to inflict unspeakable damage on the world, and we're confronting their hateful ideology before it fully takes root.

We see a day when people across the Middle East have governments that honor their dignity, and unleash their creativity, and count their votes. We see a day when across this region citizens are allowed to express themselves freely, women have full rights, and children are educated and given the tools necessary to succeed in life. And we see a day when all the nations of the Middle East are allies in the cause of peace.

We fight for this day, because the security of our own citizens depends on it. This is the great ideological struggle of the 21st century -- and it is the calling of our generation. All civilized nations are bound together in this struggle between moderation and extremism. By coming together, we will roll back this grave threat to our way of life. We will help the people of the Middle East claim their freedom, and we will leave a safer and more hopeful world for our children and grandchildren.