When you have a wife and family, two jobs, and blog, you get a little tired and your mind wonders sometimes to this.

No Kidney For You!!!

Cairo, Aug 22, 2008 / 10:42 am (CNA).- The Doctors’ Union of Egypt, led by the “Muslim Brothers,” a extreme faction of Islam, has decided to prohibit the transplant of organs between those who profess the Islamic faith and Christians, generating a series of protests and unrest in both communities.

According to the EFE news agency, a spokesman for the Coptic Church said in response to the decision, “We all have the same Egyptian blood, and if the purpose of the measure is to prohibit the traffic of organs, we reject it because that could occur as well among the faithful of the same religion.”

The spokesman said the union’s decision was “very grave,” since it could lead to other steps such as the prohibition of blood donations between Christians and Muslims or prevent a doctor from examining a patient of a different faith.  “We fear that in the future there will be hospitals for Christians and hospitals for Muslims,” he said.

The director of the union, Hamdi El Sayed, said the new norm aims “to protect poor Muslim from rich Christians who buy their organs and vice versa” and “to prevent any attempt to deceive the infirm and rob them of their organs, especially if this occurs between Christians and Muslims, because in this case it does open the door to a crisis between both communities.”

Abel Moti Bayumi, an expert with the Center for Islamic Studies of Al Azhar, said the norm is “discriminatory, since it violates human rights, the Constitution and national unity.”  “If the union does not annul the decision, there will be more conflicts between Christians and Muslims,” he warned.

Why not? He picked Biden because he knows nothing about foreign policy. Google would be perfect since the guys over there know more about energy than Obama. Oh and they both hate America. A perfect match. The only hard part will be breaking the bad news to Paris Hilton. No Secretary of energy job for you. From www.earthtimes.org

San Francisco - Web giant Google unveiled a new national energy plan for the US Wednesday that it said would largely wean the country of fossil fuels by 2030. The 4.4-trillion-dollar plan was developed by Google's philanthropic arm Google.org, which predicted that the county would reap net savings of 1 trillion dollars over the idea's 22-year term.

The plan called "Clean Energy 2030" was unveiled in an online posting by Jeffery Greenblatt, Google.org's climate and energy- technology manager. It is based on halting the generation of electricity from coal and oil by 2030 and instead relying on power from wind, nuclear and geothermal sources.

It also entails cutting oil use for cars by 40 per cent. It calls for heavy investments in transmission capacity for wind and solar power in the Great Plains and desert Southwest to help cut 88 per cent of fossil fuel use and 95 per cent of carbon-dioxide emissions by 2030.

In addition, the plan calls for tapping geothermal energy as key technologies mature during the next few years.

Specifically, the plan calls for the replacement of all coal- and oil-fired electricity generation with national gas and renewable electricity, including 380 gigawatts of wind power, 250 gigawatts of solar power and 80 gigawatts of geothermal power.

Other elements of the plan include reducing energy use by 33 per cent via energy-efficiency measures, boosting sales of plug-in hybrid vehicles to 90 per cent of new car sales in 2030, increasing the average fuel efficiency of conventional vehicles from 31 miles per gallon to 45 miles per gallon in 2030, and turning over the country's current fleet of vehicles more quickly so that cars are driven only 13 years, instead of an average of 19 years today.

"With a new administration and Congress - and multiple energy- related imperatives - this is an opportune, perhaps unprecedented, moment to move from plan to action," Greenblatt said. "We see a huge opportunity for the nation to confront our energy challenges. In the process we will stimulate investment, create jobs, empower consumers and, by the way, help address climate change."

For something to be funny there has to be a grain of truth in it. Look at what the Left thinks the truth is about Sarah Palin and John McCain. From www.borowitzreport.com

McCain Replaces Palin with Startled Deer

Hoofed Running Mate Could be Game-changer

With less than a week to go before the crucial vice-presidential debate, GOP presidential nominee John McCain announced today that he was replacing his running mate, Alaska governor Sarah Palin, with a startled deer.

According to campaign insiders, the decision to select a hoofed mammal to replace Gov. Palin evolved after Sen. McCain watched his running mate's performance in a series of interviews with CBS's Katie Couric.

"Good Lord, a startled deer could do better than that," Sen. McCain reportedly said, prompting his aides to draw up a shortlist of startled deer.

The Arizona senator supposedly brushed aside concerns that a startled deer would wilt under the pressure of a televised debate, telling aides, "At least a goddamn deer won't go on about Alaska being close to Russia."

The McCain campaign said today that Sen. McCain's new running mate, Bucky the Red Deer, would not be made available to the press prior to the debate.

"Bucky is very much a work in progress," said McCain campaign manager Rick Davis. "Right now we're working on keeping him from bolting off the stage."

Bucky's opponent in the upcoming debate, Delaware senator Joseph Biden, appeared today to be trying to manage expectations for the high-stakes face-off with his four-legged rival.

"Bucky the Red Deer is articulate, bright and clean," Sen. Biden said.  "That's storybook, man."

Elsewhere, former "American Idol" star Clay Aiken revealed that he was gay in an exclusive interview with Duh magazine.

AND THEN THIS PIECE OF TRASH.

Poll: Obama Faring Poorly Among Racists

Bigots Oppose Barack by 1000-1 Margin

In a potentially ominous sign for the presumptive Democratic nominee, a new poll shows Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill) trailing far behind G.O.P. standard bearer Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) among voters who identify themselves as racists.

Pundits and pollsters alike have wondered about the role racists might play in the 2008 presidential contest, but the new survey released today was the first concrete attempt to take the pulse of this key voting bloc.

The poll, conducted by Duh Magazine, suggests that Mr. Obama faces an uphill battle in his effort to win the votes of dyed-in-the-wool bigots.

"We wanted to know, why isn't Barack Obama closing the deal among racists?" said Charles Plugh, editor-in-chief of Duh.  "The answer seems to be, because he's black."

In a head-to-head match-up, likely bigots chose Sen. McCain over Sen. Obama by a margin of one thousand to one, with a majority of racists saying they "strongly disagree" with Sen. Obama's decision not to be white.

Asked under what conditions they would conceivably vote for a black presidential candidate, 95% of racists responded, "Only if he was running against someone from a group I hated even more, such as Arabs."

Duh editor Plugh says the poll indicates that Sen. Obama "has his work cut out for him" if he is going to make up lost ground among racists.

"Sen. Obama made a choice at the beginning of this campaign to run as a black man," Mr. Plugh said.  "He could change his position on that, but racists might see that as too little, too late."

Note the proofs for a young earth.

Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin is once again coming under attack because of her Christian faith.

A recent Los Angeles Times story claimed that as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, Sarah Palin espoused young-earth creationism. The report prompted liberal Internet columnist Robert Paul Reyes to brand Palin a "religious fanatic" with a "Neanderthal faith" who "thinks that 'The Flinstones' is a reality show."
 
Reyes suggests that during tonight's vice-presidential debate, Palin should be questioned about her reported belief that God created the earth 6,000 years ago and that dinosaurs and men coexisted.
 
Mark Looy is co-founder of the creation apologetics ministry Answers in Genesis. He says many members of Palin's church, Wasilla Bible Church, are supporters of Answers in Genesis and believe that humans and dinosaurs did coexist. Looy says although it is unclear whether Palin also holds that view, such a belief is not extreme.
 
"That is not that bizarre a concept, especially when you note that there are pictures of dinosaurs that appear in caves all around the world, [and] that three years ago a T-Rex bone was found in Montana -- it was broken open and had soft tissue and blood vessels in it, indicating that that dinosaur was around in relatively recent times," Looy explains. "And plus, the Bible, I think, refers to dinosaurs when it discusses dragons and also the creature called 'behemoth' in Job, Chapter 40."
 
Looy points out there are many scientists, albeit a small minority, who believe that dinosaurs have been around in the last few hundred years. (See related video from Answers in Genesis, "The Bible Explains Dinosaurs")

Ok people you need to VOTE REPUBLICAN. From Focus On The Family.

Tom Minnery

September 2008

Dear Friend,

What if the Left takes over?

We’ve been examining that question around here for the past year, and with Election Day now just weeks away, the answer is as troubling as ever. If Barack Obama wins the White House and liberals fortify their ranks in Congress, here are some headlines that you and I can expect to read:

• Obama signs Freedom of Choice Act, invalidating all state and federal pro-life laws
• Defense of Marriage Act repealed; gay lobby celebrates federal benefits and marriage rights
• Largest tax increase in history to pay for new entitlements, foreign aid
• ‘Out’ in the barracks: Homosexuality hits the armed forces
• It’s Hillary! Obama’s Supreme Court pick should sail through Senate

If reading that list gives you heartburn now, just imagine how you’ll feel if those headlines become reality. As an organization that champions virtue in public policy, we’ve pondered that eventuality. And that’s why we’re doing everything we can to alert values voters about where their candidates stand and what’s at stake this fall. Let me share with you what your support is allowing us to do in two ways—publicly and privately.

The public battle: Informing voters through the media
You may have noticed that the major news outlets have been citing Focus Action a lot lately. That’s not by accident. The media team here at Focus Action does a remarkable job of taking the work that we do and marketing it to the media in a way that captures their attention. That allows us to use their own megaphones to get our message out to far more people.

Two great examples of this are recent Focus Action radio broadcasts in which we addressed the presidential race. First, Dr. Dobson took the lead in exposing the truth behind the Obama speech in which the Illinois senator essentially mocked the authority of Scripture and twisted the plain meaning of the Constitution.

The marketing ingenuity of our Focus Action media team turned this into a major national story, with clips from our broadcast airing on ABC’s World News Tonight, CBS and every major cable news network. Media coverage was intense: The Associated Press’ coverage of the broadcast was the top story on The Drudge Report (TheDrudgeReport.com) for several hours, and by the end of the day there were more than 400 TV news reports and radio stories within the country’s top 20 markets alone. In addition, our message went out in 332 newspaper articles. The total potential audience of all that coverage was more than 100 million viewers, listeners and readers. The “earned media” value of this coverage (what it would have cost us to purchase the airtime and print space) was more than $2 million!

A second Focus Action broadcast also became a big story. For months, there has been significant discussion nationally about Dr. Dobson’s comments that were critical of John McCain. Like many of you, I suspect, Dr. Dobson was not a fan of Sen. McCain during the primaries. In fact, he even said there was no way he could vote for McCain, even if the Arizona senator should win his party’s nomination.

As the general election choices became clear, however, Dr. Dobson felt compelled to re-evaluate his position and let his radio listeners know that he might vote for McCain. Once again, our media department put together a stellar plan for multiplying the impact of this broadcast, and the results were astounding. Another Associated Press story was quickly carried nationwide, and Dr. Dobson’s encouraging comments about McCain turned up everywhere from The New York Times and USA Today to Hannity & Colmes and CNN Headline News. The media strategy spawned more than 150 TV and radio stories that reached a total potential audience of more than 50 million—with an earned media value of more than half a million dollars.

Ultimately, there were four reasons for Dr. Dobson’s re-evaluation of McCain: 1) Sen. McCain’s powerful comments during the Saddleback Forum with Rick Warren, 2) The Republican Party platform, which is the strongest pro-life, pro-family platform in memory, 3) McCain’s selection of Gov. Sarah Palin and 4) The policy positions of Barack Obama. Even as I write, Dr. Dobson continues to get major media coverage on these points from The New York Times, Fox News and elsewhere.

The private battle: Targeting voters directly
As important as the mass media is, there’s no substitute for direct contact with individual citizens—letting them know where their candidates stand and encouraging citizens to take action. Your support for Focus Action is allowing us to do that in a big way in up to 16 states with key U.S. Senate and House races.

When a voter in one of these areas receives a mailer or an e-mail with a side-by-side comparison of the candidates, it doesn’t make a big, public splash like a TV ad. But dollar-for-dollar, it’s the most effective way to reach that voter and convince them to take action. We’re also making it easy for them to share the information with others by copying, printing or forwarding. And we’ll be using carefully targeted radio ads.

Finally, you may recall that earlier this year I told you about Tim Gill and his stealth, multimillion-dollar effort to take over state legislatures for his pro-homosexual agenda. His success in several states in 2006 has prompted us to launch a major research project that has uncovered—in advance this time—his targets for 2008. We’ll be putting that information to use by again using a two-pronged strategy—public and private—to let voters in those specific states know what he is doing.

I’ll hold off on more details or samples right now to avoid revealing too much information to our ideological opponents, but I’ll report back to you later on. You can keep abreast of the latest election news each week with me and Stuart Shepard via our new Focus Action Election Update video features.

Meanwhile, though, thank you for your sacrificial gifts that allow us to do this work on your behalf. Above all, please be in prayer for our work and for the nation.

Sincerely,

Tom Minnery
Senior Vice President
Focus on the Family Action

From deseretnews.com.

SAN FRANCISCO — In this city long associated with the peace movement, some teens are taking an unlikely stance — campaigning to keep the armed forces' Junior ROTC program in public schools.

If a school board decision stands, San Francisco would become the first city to remove a Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program. But supporters, including many college-bound Asian-American students who make up the majority of cadets here, initiated an advisory measure on the November ballot. They hope it will persuade a new school board to save JROTC.

Board members who decided to kick JROTC out of town see it as arm of the military that reaches into schools, discriminating against gays by enforcing the "don't ask, don't tell" mandate, and recruiting teenagers for an unpopular war.

"It's a broader issue about the Bush administration and military recruiting through JROTC," said board member Eric Mar. "It's clear with the military, if you're gay and out, you don't get the same opportunities," he said.

He was among board members who voted two years ago to phase out JROTC and replace it with programs not linked to the military. The deadline was set for 2008, but the board later extended JROTC until next June because an alternative was not developed in time.

Participants, called cadets, wear uniforms, study military history, practice marching and drilling and can win awards for things like marksmanship. Armed forces retirees serve as instructors, and cadets can get academic credit in fields such as physical education.

If the aim is recruitment, however, JROTC in San Francisco is a failure. Only two of the 1,465 cadets there signed up for the armed forces after graduation in 2006-2007, the latest year for which numbers are available.

Supporters view the elective course as valuable self-improvement — teaching them discipline, responsibility and leadership skills they say they do not get in other classes. JROTC rules prevent instructors from trying to recruit participants.

"It's helped me stand up for myself, have more confidence, and to fight for what I want," said Trina Mao, 16, standing on a corner in Union Square passing out fliers about the program.

They also say the arguments about the war in Iraq and the Pentagon's policy toward gays miss the point: The program in San Francisco is inclusive, with 90 percent minorities and 40 percent women, they say.

Some gay and lesbian student groups have come out in support of JROTC and the ballot measure, saying some of their members have found a home in the program.

Even as the debate went on and board members held their ground, students and their parents gathered enough signatures to put an advisory measure on the ballot asking voters to show their support for keeping JROTC.

"It's become a 'Bonfire of the Vanities,' San Francisco-style — a lot of people want to use JROTC for their own purposes," said Mike Bernick, co-chair of a campaign to keep JROTC here and father of an ROTC graduate.

With confusion over the future of the program, enrollment in San Francisco's JROTC has declined by about two-thirds in the past year.

But participation in JROTC has climbed steadily around the country, with additional funding approved by Congress. The program reached 3,351 schools and 503,306 cadets in 2006 — the latest numbers available from the Pentagon — and there is a waiting list of more than 700 schools that have requested JROTC.

"We're watching the San Francisco situation very closely," said Curtis Gilroy, an official in the Defense Department's office for personnel and readiness.

The U.S. Department of Defense does not keep track of how many cadets later enlist in the military, but ROTC critic Mar said that, no matter the numbers, "14- and 15-year-olds are too young to be susceptible to their recruitment."'

The American Civil Liberties Union and the American Friends Service Committee agree that military-backed programs are not appropriate for public schools.

The ACLU intervened in cases where entire classes were enrolled in JROTC without giving students a choice, or where cash-strapped schools used JROTC to substitute for physical education, said Jennifer Turner, a researcher with the group's Human Rights Program.

"The United States is unique in the world in having this type of program that targets kids as young as 14 operating in public school, where students sometimes don't even have a choice," she said. "It is apparent that the JROTC program is a recruiting tool."

www.familysecuritymatters.org

Gabriel Garnica, Esq.

We have all seen how guilty children deal with the truth. They either pretend that it does not exist or call the one telling the truth a "liar" and act really angry. We have all seen how those same children deal with those trying to tell on them. They either try to stop them from telling or call them "liars" when they do. Do we see a pattern here? More importantly, do we see a familiar strategy elsewhere?

Frankly, the Obama campaign's familiar pattern of trying to smash or defame anyone trying to tell the truth about their candidate, of calling such people "liars" and of generally playing pretend is getting quite old. A case in point is David Freddoso's The Case Against Barack Obama, which has spent weeks on the New York Times bestseller list. The Obama people have tried to keep Freddoso off a popular Chicago radio show, characterized both the author and his work as spreading "dishonest, extreme hate-mongering."

The candidate himself has set the tone for this kind of juvenile reaction to the truth. Faced with the clear evidence that he has been the champion against "Born Alive" legislation and the worst enemy of infants who survive abortions, Obama has resorted to the infantile reaction of calling people discussing his stance in this area liars as well, despite the fact that there is tons of evidence that, for Barack Obama, an abortion survivor is more a nuisance than anything else.

Any of us who have ever witnessed spoiled children know that behind every spoiled child there is an enabling adult pandering to that child in some way, directly or indirectly, consciously or not.

The spoiled children of the Obama campaign and their equally spoiled leader are no different. Their pandering enablers are the mainstream media, who have done everything in their power to present us with the fairy-tale Obama. This pretend version of the Marxist Messiah is suave, sophisticated, social, spiritual, friendly and might even be able to walk on water if asked enough times.

The truth is, faced with trying to sell someone with enough background issues to re-sink the Titanic; the liberal media has decided that it is not enough to simply favor their candidate over the other. It now blatantly ignores anything about its candidate which might not sit well with the American public, which would be about half of his background. It now blatantly winks at lie after lie about the opponents of its prized politician, as the entire despicable array of lies and myths about Sarah Palin sold as fact proves.

I would laugh if it were not for the fact that crying makes so much more sense. We have reached the point in this country where a blatant liar who cannot even face up to his scheming past and who calls everyone who tries to reveal it dishonest is taken seriously. The problem here is that this country is no cookie jar; it is our home and hopefully that of our children. We have a duty to protect, defend and fight for it. That includes exposing hypocrisy and deception from someone who wants to take the controls of this nation's security and welfare, both internal and external.

Someone please tell me why any candidate for the White House exhibiting a pattern of distorting, hiding from and twisting the truth is not a matter of national security. Better yet, someone please tell me that it is not the height of absurdity that someone who represents the kind of ideology that our brave men and women have fought and died to stop is now on the brink of taking the helm of our government. If we let this man win this election, we will make a mockery of the blood they shed to keep precisely his kind of thinking out of this country.

All the manifestations  of Soft Jihad are only made possible due to the creeping influence of the left in this country. They both share the same hatred of an America out of their control. An Obama victory will be a seminal moment in the efforts of the Jihadists to get a foot hold in America. Obama and his Lefty multiculturalists will make concession after concession, continuing the infultration of the Jihadist into the U.S. setting up more devistating attacks in the furture.
From www.onenewsnow.com

Jihad's silent creep into America

A former Reagan Defense Department official and founder of a conservative military think tank believes radical Islam's threat on the U.S. is more than just people flying airplanes into buildings.

Frank Gaffney served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs under Ronald Reagan. As president of the Center for Security Policy, he is trying to spread awareness about a concept known as "soft jihad."
 
According to Gaffney, since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, most Americans have been very aware of what he calls the "hard jihad" being waged on the United States, as witnessed by efforts of mass destruction. He notes the concept of soft jihad is less understood.  
   
"You now have foot baths that are being demanded; you have time off for prayers. You have holidays -- a group of Somali refugees who now work with Tyson foods decided they wanted to have one of the Muslim festivals replace Labor Day as a paid holiday. And that wouldn't apply just to the Somali workers in the plant; that was initially going to apply to all workers," Gaffney explains. "And so it's that kind of activity that is 'soft jihad' that is moving us inexorably in the direction..., unless it's countered, of accommodating and enabling a seditious program aimed at the destruction of our government and our society."
 
Gaffney says radical Islamists believe that, when the violent part of jihad is either unworkable or impractical, all Muslims are obligated to engage in, at the least, the soft jihad to bring about the destruction of nations that stand in the way of their goals of destruction and domination.

From The Great www.nysun.com.

Ideal of the Scoop

Following are excerpts of remarks by the Editor of the Sun, Seth Lipsky, to the newspaper's staff:

It is my duty to report today that Ira Stoll and I and our partners have concluded that the Sun will cease publication. Our last number will be the issue dated September 30, the first day of Rosh Hashanah. I want you to know that Ira and I, and our partners, explored every possible way to avoid having to cease publication.

We have spoken with every individual who seemed to be a prospective partner, and everywhere we were received with courtesy and respect. I tend to be an optimist and held out hope for a favorable outcome as late as mid-afternoon today. But among other problems that we faced was the fact that this month, not to mention this week, has been one of the worst in a century in which to be trying to raise capital, and in the end we were out not only of money but time.

So we are at this sad moment. It is sad for any newspaper to go out of publication, and it is particularly sad for one that is as loved as much as all of us here love The New York Sun and the readers we have won in our six-and-a-half years of publication. But I want you to know that the decision to close the paper has not been an acrimonious one. It is a logical decision following a hard-headed assessment of our chances of meeting our goal of profitable publication in the near future.

This was always a risk, and all the greater is the heroism of our financial backers. Even at the end they were offering millions of dollars if we could find the partners we needed. I don't mind saying to you, as I have to them, that I very much regret — I will always regret — that we were not able to return to them the capital that they invested in us. Yet we have not heard a single regret from any of them on this head, which underscores the fact that it was not only for the possibility of profit that they invested in this newspaper. They invested also for other ideals, as well.

They invested in the ideal of the scoop, the notion that news is the spirit of democracy, and in the principles for which we have stood in our editorial pages — limited and honest government, equality under our Constitution and the law, free markets, sound money, and a strong foreign policy in support of freedom and democracy. They liked the way the Sun reflected the dynamism of our city and spoke for its interests in the national debate.

They invested, too, in the joy with which you illuminated the cultural life of New York, in our willingness to spring to the defense of so many who are not always defended, in the thrill of our sports coverage, the verve and warmth of our society coverage, and in our efforts to bring together a community and give it voice.

Our backers asked me to tell you that they are enormously proud of what you accomplished, a sentiment that was expressed for all our partners pointedly in the most recent meeting by our founding chairman, Roger Hertog. I am sure the reference was not only to our reporters and editors, who come in for the public attention, but the advertising, circulation and business departments, whose staffers have gone out every day into the an environment in which most newspapers are losing advertising and circulation and yet managed to produce consistent gains. This month, our last, was a record month for advertising revenues, which were up more than 60% over the year earlier month and ahead of the budget goals, with year-to-date advertising revenues up nearly 25%.

* * *

We have all been taken aback and, I would say, humbled by the surge of support that has been conveyed since the announcement a month ago that we might have to close. Mayor Bloomberg, despite our differences on many issues, was our constant reader and encourager. We had messages from some of our greatest rabbis, and from His Eminence Edward Cardinal Egan. Three of New York's former governors spoke of the importance of the Sun, including Governor Pataki, who called what you have created "the best paper in New York." Much as I appreciated the remark, I wouldn't want to make too much of it — for me, it was privilege enough to be simply one among the newspapers in this magnificent newspaper town.

Some of the messages that touched me most were readers who sent in checks, with letters about what the Sun meant to them, and calls or comments from those with whom we don't often agree on policy. The Central Labor Council and the president of the teachers union, Randi Weingarten, or Speaker Quinn or Comptroller Thompson, the Public Advocate, Betsy Gotbaum, and all the others who talked to our reporters, or wrote, or called to let us know how much they appreciated the intelligence, the passion, and the energy you brought to your beats. I sense in some of my conversations with them that they appreciated the fact that you covered their important work at all and that you dealt with them on the substance, and they will miss you as much as you will miss them.

* * *

It is in the nature of things that there are going to be some jeers as we go out, as there were when we came in. Do not be discouraged by this. To those who say to you, "I told you so, I knew you would fail" you can say this: "No wonder you didn't join us." And you — reporters, editors, critics, photographers, secretaries, sales executives, book-keepers, circulation staff, technology geniuses, drivers — all of you will be able to tell your children and your grandchildren or simply your friends that not only did you appear in arms in a great newspaper war but that you did so on your own terms, for principles you believed in, and worked with some of the greatest newspaper craftsmen and craftswomen of your generation — and you covered yourselves with distinction.

At our last board meeting, Ira Stoll mentioned that this is not the first time he and I have lost a newspaper we loved. We learned, in the years after the Forward, that one great newspaper adventure can lead to another, even greater one. As we shook hands after the meeting, Ira said to me that he wanted just to thank me for giving him these seven years at the Sun. He said he wouldn't trade them for anything. I thanked him in return. I couldn't have had a more magnificent partner. I wouldn't have traded these years for anything, either. Ira and I thank you all as well. It has been the honor of our lives to have been in harness with you, and I am positive you all will go on to ever greater assignments.

"blowin' in the wind"

"The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind
The answer is blowing in the wind"

When ever a Moderate or Independent needs to decide an important political issue they lick their finger, stick it in the air, and determine which way the political wind is blowing from. Once they discover which way the sheepeople are going, the Moderates and Independents, fall in line behind them. Obama sounds good in a speech, or gives a "good" debate performance, and to Moderates/Independents that equates to "qualified to be president". Being a Moderate or Independent means never having to have an original thought or needing to make up their own mind.

Here is you theme song Moderates and Inpendents.

Here is the pull qoute. From www.newschief.com.

Opponents worry that if the eruv is established, Westhampton Beach - a wealthy community but one less glitzy than its better known neighbors Southampton and East Hampton - may evolve into an Orthodox enclave.

Yep we would not want a bunch of Jews hanging around. I bet the people in Europe would give their right eye to trade an Orthodox enclave for the "No Go" zones the Islamist have set up in their cities.

Here is the whole story. Can you say Elitist Atheist. Or is that redundant.

Battle of religious symbol roils Hamptons village

By FRANK ELTMAN Associated Press Writer

Dublin, Ireland - Babies who are breastfed for six months are better at identifying and comparing colours, letters, numbers and shapes at the age of three than babies who have not been breastfed, a study of two sets of 18,819 babies born in Britain between 2000 and 2002 by University College Dublin (UCD) revealed recently. The study examined the optimum duration of breastfeeding and cognitive development as measured by the Bracken School Readiness Assessment, Orla Doyle, a lecturer at UCD's School of Public Health and Population Science, told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

She added: "We found that there is almost no difference in cognitive ability at the age of three for children breastfed for a duration of six or 16 weeks or any period in between. After four months, there is a gradual improvement, peaking at six.

"There was no evidence to suggest that breastfeeding for longer than six months would help improve a baby's mental development, she said.

The research suggests that the "optimal switching point" from exclusive breastfeeding to a combination of complementary foods and breast milk, as recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the American Academy of Paediatrics (AAP), occurs at six months and should continue until 10 months.

Debate on the optimum duration of breastfeeding has consequences in terms of maternity leave which comes to six months in Ireland followed by a discretionary six months' unpaid allowance. Recent policy initiatives have been taken in Britain to extend paid maternity leave to 38 weeks and to 52 by 2010. Parents can then decide who stays at home with the infant.

Hitherto studies have usually focused on physical growth and development and while Canadian researchers have found that breastfeeding can improve IQ,Doyle pointed out that cognitive ability and IQ are not identical, but are linked.