GOVERNMENT & POLITICS

News from the swamp: Minding the store

It appears that congressional Republicans may have finally learned from their election drubbing that corruption is not a virtue. Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA) stepped down from the Appropriations Committee this week after it was revealed that the FBI raided his Virginia home in search of documents linking him to Jack Abramoff. Close behind was Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ), who exited the Intelligence Committee after the FBI raided his wife’s insurance agency looking for information about questionable land deals. Now if only Sen. Harry Reid would display some integrity regarding his own questionable real estate dealings…

After all, as Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA) declared, “Oversight is just as important, if not more important, than legislation.” Apparently that sentiment led Democrats, in a matter of about 15 minutes on Wednesday, to consider subpoenas for six White House officials, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on, believe it or not, questions regarding Saddam’s pursuit of WMD. Indicating she might not comply, Rice said, “This is an issue that has been answered and answered and answered.” And answered and answered. Moreover, since taking the reins, the Demo detectives have hired more than 200 investigative staffers to conduct their witch-hunts. Why not? The White House never has seemed overly interested in defending itself.

Speaking of overzealous partisan hacks, presidential candidate and Rep. Dennis “the Menace” Kucinich (D-OH) has introduced articles of impeachment for Vice President Dick Cheney, much to the chagrin of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has long promised there would be no such articles. Kucinich wants Cheney impeached for plotting the war in Iraq and manipulating intelligence to that end. When asked why he did not target the President, Kucinich replied, “If the same charges would relate to the president as related to the vice president, you would then have to go through the constitutional agony of impeaching two presidents consecutively.” Now that’s principled leadership.

Lobbying continues to grow in DC

In the past, power shifts in Washington usually meant dark days for lobbyists who had solicited the party being removed from power, but with Congress closely divided and an active GOP administration in the White House, Republican lobbying firms are still pulling in big business. Match this with the sharp rise in Demo lobbyists looking to gain access to the new committee leaders on the Hill, and we have the makings of a lobbying boom. In the months since the 2006 elections, new lobbying registrations totaled 2,232, up from 1,222 this time last year. Clients at Patton Boggs, DC’s largest firm, have tripled, and many other firms are also experiencing double-digit growth. Some organizations like the Carmen Group are going bipartisan and hiring new lobbyists to handle the surge in clients looking to work with both parties.

This sharp rise in the growth of lobbying firms is the surest sign that lobbying reform—fortunately—is dead and buried in Congress. While we don’t condone the unethical behavior of some lobbyists, efforts to stifle the free speech of any constituency group are not the solution to corruption. Democrats came to power promising a change in the way lobbyists work on Capitol Hill, but we don’t think this is the change they were promising.

The gun debate continues

In the wake of last week’s shooting rampage at Virginia Tech, some Democrats cannot resist the urge to advocate more stringent gun control. New York Democrats Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy have introduced legislation that would grant $250 million to state agencies and $125 million to state courts to pay for computer upgrades so that information such as an individual’s mental-health history could more readily be made available to the FBI. Said Schumer: “[H]ad it been in place last week, [it] may well have stopped last week’s unspeakable tragedy.” As columnist Ann Coulter quipped, “We’ve banned mass murder and that hasn’t seemed to work. So now we’re going to ban mass murderers. Yes, that will do the trick!” Any chance we could enact a ban on mentally ill senators?

Federal workers taking taxpayers for a ride

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported this week that federal employees have been ripping off the government’s commuter program for millions of dollars—$17 million in Washington, DC, alone. Under the program, federal employees receive benefit vouchers that cover their commuting costs to and from work. However, some federal workers have been overstating the cost of their commute, while others sell their vouchers at a discount on Ebay and then carpool, and still others, who no longer or never did work for the federal government, continue receiving vouchers. Witness the glories of bureaucracy.

The full program, which costs taxpayers $250 million a year, has no oversight! Only now are common-sense recommendations being suggested. Confirming a worker’s government employment is a good start. Logical next steps include providing individual employees with either free parking or with mass-transit vouchers—not both—and, finally, verifying a worker’s travel expenses.

With Yeltsin gone, Russia rests in peace

Boris Yeltsin, the first leader of post-Soviet Russia, died this week at the age of 76. Obituaries across the United States and the Western world (in contrast to the great majority of the Russian ones) have hailed Yeltsin as the charismatic figure spearheading Russia’s transition from totalitarianism to democracy. Yeltsin’s notorious drunkenness, cronyism, social escapades and sanction for corruption have been glossed over as unfortunate footnotes in the life of an otherwise great man. In truth, most of these eulogies for Yeltsin have been thinly veiled condemnations of his predecessor, Mikhail Gorbachev, and his successor, Vladimir Putin. Some have even gone so far as to call Yeltsin Russia’s “first democratic leader… and maybe its last.”

To the contrary, if Gorbachev accidentally opened the door to democracy (with no small help from one Ronald Reagan,) it is equally true that Boris Yeltsin accidentally walked through it. His “transitional” leadership from 1991 to 1999 proved anything but an experiment in democratic governance.

His scheme for the privatization of the economy—the so-called “shock-therapy” plan partially formulated and fully endorsed by the Clinton administration—resulted in the corrupt sell-off of state-owned resources to political insiders. Yeltsin and his entourage benefited directly from these overnight billionaires, also known as the “oligarchs,” and they took untold millions in kickbacks and bribes. Consequently from 1992 to 1998—the bulk of Mr. Yeltsin’s presidency—Russian GDP plummeted by half, an economic debacle unequaled by Soviet central planning or even the Nazi occupation.

Also at fault were Yeltsin’s unpopular wars against Chechnya: the first (aborted) war of 1991 and the second bloodier but equally unsuccessful war from 1994 to 1996. Russian press accounts from the period suggest that under the auspices of privatization, Yeltsin and his inner circle stood the most to gain from the war. The Grozny refinery—by far the largest in the Caucasus—was divided among Yeltsin and his political allies. Subsequently, unrefined oil from northern Russia was diverted south to line the pockets of cronies, even while northern refineries (under the control of political enemies) were forced to operate far below capacity.

In the end, with an approval rating hovering around two percent, Yeltsin rigged the appointment of Vladimir Putin as his handpicked successor, circumventing the democracy he supposedly revered. Condemned by the Western media as a communist retrovert, Putin’s popularity has soared with the Russian public—the people who have elected him twice since his appointment in what even critics concede to have been free and fair elections. Putin’s theme of “law and order” has resonated with a Russian people weary with the corruption, war and economic devastation of the Yeltsin years. He has reined in the oligarchs and rid the government of Yeltsin’s corrupt inner circle. Putin may not be at the top of our list for dinner parties, but according to the average Josef, he may be about the only good thing Boris Yeltsin ever did for his country.

New & notable legislation

The House Judiciary Committee passed The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (H.R. 1592) this week, sending it to the full House for a vote next week. The bill adds what we call gender disorientation to the list of victims for “hate crimes.”

NATIONAL SECURITY

Congress sends Iraq bill to White House

The House and Senate finally delivered their $124-billion war-funding bill to President Bush, complete with a veto-inducing stipulation that he begin withdrawing troops from Iraq as early as July, but no later than April 2008. The bill, which includes money sorely needed to continue operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, also contains restrictions for resting, training and equipping troops that the President can waive if he publicly states his case. There are also a number of benchmarks imposed on the Iraqi government that include disarming militias, reducing sectarian violence, easing the de-Ba’athification of the government and passing an oil-revenue-sharing law. If the benchmarks are not being met by 1 July, American troops would start coming home; if they are met, then troops would start packing up no later than 1 October, with the surrender… er, withdrawal complete by 1 April 2008.

President Bush remains steadfast in his promise to veto the bill, rejecting any congressional timetable that would hinder ongoing operations. Both houses not only fell short of the two-thirds necessary to override the coming veto, they barely mustered a majority—by only one vote each. The House vote was 218-208 and the Senate 51-46.

Democrats, of course, hope to put the onus on the President for “rejecting” military funding as the Pentagon’s coffers run low—allowing them to avoid blame for short-changing the troops. However, it is clear that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are guilty of playing politics with the lives of our troops and our national security. Traitorous Reid stated that “the war is lost” and that no progress has been made, contrary to reports from the troops on the ground. Pelosi refused to end the House recess early to speed up the bill’s debate schedule, and she even skipped a briefing with Gen. David Petraeus on the progress of operations. This behavior, following her recent trip to Syria to cuddle with Bashar al-Assad, makes it clear that San Fran Nan cares not for America’s security.

When this tainted piece of legislation returns to Congress post veto, we can only hope that more level-headed members will produce a bill that does what it is supposed to: Provide unconditional support to our troops so that we can win the fight over there—and not bring it back here.

This week’s ‘Alpha Jackass’ award:

“We are going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war.” —Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, putting politics first in a time of war

On cross-examination

“Senator Reid has taken many positions on Iraq. He has threatened that if the President vetoes the current pending supplemental legislation… he will send up Senator Russ Feingold’s bill to de-fund Iraq operations altogether. Yet only last November, Senator Reid said there would be no cutoff of funds for the military in Iraq. So in less than six months’ time, Senator Reid has gone from pledging full funding for the military, then full funding but with conditions, and then a cutoff of funding—three positions in five months on the most important foreign-policy question facing the nation and our troops…Senator Reid said the troop surge was against the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group. That is plainly false. The Iraq Study Group report was explicitly favorable toward a troop surge to secure Baghdad. Senator Reid said there should be a regional conference on Iraq. Apparently, he doesn’t know that there is going to be one next week… What’s most troubling about Senator Reid’s comments… is his defeatism. Indeed, last week, he said the war is already lost.” —Vice President Dick Cheney

“Long War” Gets Short Shrift

Evidently the phrase “Long War” has fallen from grace as the expression of choice to describe the ongoing conflict against radical Islam. Employed by General John Abizaid, former commander of CENTCOM, the term aptly highlights the long-term resolve needed to defeat Islamofascism. Unfortunately, the expression quickly became passé following the arrival of CENTCOM’s latest commander, Admiral William Fallon, who quietly abandoned the much-used label in the wake of concerns over cultural sensitivities. It seems the use of an expression suggesting an extended U.S. presence didn’t wow the Middle East audience. Who knew?

More ominously, the banishment of the expression from CENTCOM’s lexicon may also be an indirect indication that President Bush is showing signs of succumbing to the pressure to wrap things up in Iraq while still in office. We can only pray otherwise, for if the lessons of Vietnam are not to have been learned in vain, both the President and the American people must understand that counterinsurgencies cannot be defeated overnight. Islamofascists certainly understand this fact, as evidenced by numerous missives from bin Laden directing “wait-them-out” tactics.

Unlike conventional conflicts, the key to victory against insurgencies is not the military (in fact, one of the goals of insurgencies is to render the military irrelevant). Rather, it is the relevant population and the government. Insurgents’ primary goal is to delegitimize the existing government or to render it unable to protect those under its charge.

Meanwhile, with seditionists—AKA Democrats—advocating a flank-speed retreat from Iraq, any guesses as to whom the enemy will be rooting for in ‘08?

Missile defense in Europe

Seeking to extend its anti-ballistic missile (ABM) shield to cover European allies, the U.S. is pressing ahead with negotiations to allow deployment of ABM interceptor missiles in Poland and radars in the Czech Republic in order to counter potential missile threats from Iran and other rouge states. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was in Europe this week to discuss the plans with NATO members, while also trying to ease the concerns Russia has over an ABM system being deployed in its backyard. The plan includes making Russia a full partner in the effort by sharing information, jointly developing new ABM technology, and possibly combining the two countries’ ABM radar systems.

The Russian response, however, has been to call the U.S. plan “destabilizing” and a potential threat to Russia. Russian President Vladimir Putin has gone so far as to suspend Russia’s obligations under the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, established at the end of the Cold War between NATO and member nations of the Warsaw Pact. The treaty limits development of conventional forces on either side of the old Iron Curtain.

Unless Russia plans to launch a missile attack against Europe, it’s hard to see how a defensive system could threaten them. If the Russians can overcome their typical paranoia, this could be a win for all parties involved. Meanwhile, Iran continues its missile and nuclear-weapon development, and the clock keeps ticking.

As we forgive our debtors

The Washington Post reports that Saudi Arabia has agreed to write off 80 percent of the $15-billion-plus debt owed it by Iraq. Considering Iraq’s total debt is an eye-watering $380 billion, that’s a good start. Previously, Sunni-led Riyadh had been disinclined to forgive the debt of Shi’ite-majority Iraq. Lately, however, Saudi Arabia has begun to realize that as Iraq goes, so goes the region. The Saudis aren’t the only ones concerned about the region: Altogether, 52 countries—including the U.S. —have written off 80 to 100 percent of debt, according to Iraqi Finance Minister Bayan Jabr.

Why all the debt forgiveness? Try the lessons of history, for one. A major contributor to the genesis of the Persian Gulf War was Iraq’s inability to shed debt resulting from its war with Iran in the 80s. Creditor nations refused to relieve Iraq’s burden, and the ensuing economic misery left the nation primed to invade oil-rich Kuwait. If this analysis seems a little far-fetched, consider that the world has already traveled down this particular memory lane in much grander style, following World War I. The tremendous “piling-on” by the victors of the Great War gave rise to Hitler and set the stage for World War II. Of course, if there is anything the Middle East lacks, it certainly isn’t Hitler wannabees. Let’s just hope the world does indeed remember its painful lessons.

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

Democrats cut taxes?

Angling to position themselves as the party of lower taxes, the Democrats are targeting the growing blight of the middle-class taxpayer, the Alternative Minimum Tax. Because it is not indexed for inflation, the AMT annually hits more and more Americans at progressively lower income levels. In 2008, taxpayers earning as little as $50,000 may find themselves slammed by this stealth tax.

To exploit this crisis politically, Democrats have offered a proposal excluding families making under $250,000 from the tax. While exempting approximately 98 percent of taxpayers from the AMT, the Democrats’ proposal would hike taxes on the wealthiest taxpayers by anywhere from five to 13 percent. Filers earning more than $1 million would see a tax hike of $52,000.

This should not come as a shock, however, as not all Demo “cuts” are offset by reduced spending, but by concurrent tax hikes on wealthier members of society. More often than not, small-business owners get hit hardest—they already carry the bulk of the American tax burden and are forced to subsidize massive government entitlement programs. Economists caution that the looming rise in taxes—by as much as $200 billion—could spell disaster for the economy.

Minimum-wage hike will happen with tax cuts

Congressional Democrats finally agreed to a minimum-wage bill including nearly $5 billion in tax breaks for small businesses hiring disabled veterans and residents of poor neighborhoods. While House negotiators wanted a stand-alone bill, Senate Demos led by Edward Kennedy knew that no such bill would survive without some form of tax relief to offset the $2.10-an-hour wage increase. Some Republicans, including Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, said that the relief does not go far enough. A number of economists have long believed that increasing the minimum wage will have little impact on the working poor—other than killing jobs, hurting business and creating inflation. All in a day’s work for Kennedy. Still, the President is expected to sign the legislation when it hits his desk.

On taxes in the states

“Marxist Michigan”? One attendee at a recent anti-tax rally in Lansing fears this may become the new state motto if a tax hike proposed by Democrat Governor Jennifer Granholm takes effect. Reminiscent of the Communist Manifesto’s inheritance tax, Granholm’s levy calls for a 16-percent death tax as well as new taxes on business, income, alcohol and cigarettes. Granholm, whose anti-business policies have kept Michigan mired in a one-state recession since she took office in 2003, claims that her “Invest in Michigan” plan will help the state’s economy through increased spending on education, technology, transportation and corporate-welfare programs. However, as one small business owner countered, “How can we invest more in this state when government keeps taking all our money?”

Nearby Minnesotans staged their own tax revolt as thousands gathered to protest a hike backed by a full-page newspaper ad that at best is the antithesis of free enterprise and at worst an open hint at backdoor dealings between state legislators and political contributors. Paid for and signed by the Gang of 200—a cohort of wealthy liberals and business groups, 95.6 percent of whose political contributions go to Democrats and many of whom enjoy state subsidies funded by, who else, Minnesota taxpayers—the ad calls for a $2-billion tax increase. However, its members have yet to forego any future government kickbacks… hmm. While liberal Minnesota think tanks believe higher taxes would make the tax code “fairer,” in a state where more than 50 percent of taxes come from the pockets of ten percent of the people, we fail to see any semblance of equity in the plan.

Embattled Wolfowitz digs in

Determined to keep his job, World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz has retained DC super-lawyer Robert Bennett to advise him during the investigation into the hullabaloo over raises given to his girlfriend, Shaha Riza, a Bank employee. The World Bank executive board charged a committee with looking into “conflict of interest, ethical, reputational, and other relevant standards” in Wolfowitz’s conduct. He will be allowed to make the case for keeping his job before the committee.

The matter may be yet another attempt to smear the Bush administration using guilt by association, however. According to, of all sources, The Washington Post, “Wolfowitz called the potential conflict of interest to the attention of the Bank’s ethics committee which suggested [Riza] leave the bank; that she should be given a raise because she had already been ‘short-listed for promotion’; then reviewed the situation six months later after receiving an anonymous complaint from a Bank employee; concluded that ‘on the basis of a careful review’ the anonymous complaint did not raise ‘ethical issues appropriate for further consideration’.” As political analyst Rich Galen sums it up, “Oh. Hmm. That appears to cast a slightly different light on things.”

Medicare sounds the alarm

The Medicare and Social Security board of trustees recently released a report stating the Medicare hospital trust fund will become insolvent by 2019. The trustees also concluded long-term growth rates of both Medicare and Social Security are not “sustainable under current financing arrangements” and, more ominously, that Medicare’s severe financial crisis will arrive sooner than those confronting Social Security. New projections reveal the share of Medicare costs paid out of general taxation would exceed 45 percent by 2013, which will trigger the delivery of a required fiscal-impairment warning to Congress. More realistic assumptions suggest this threshold may be crossed by 2010.

In order to save Medicare, it is estimated that a 122-percent increase in the federal payroll tax would be required, or a 51-percent cut in program outlays—or a combination of both.

What will Congress do? Probably focus on cost cutting by reducing physician reimbursements again, despite the soaring percentage of medical providers who already turn away most Medicare patients because reimbursement rates are too low. The remaining providers, naturally, focus on increasing the quantity of those services with the greatest profit margins, which in the long run does not save Medicare any money.

Hillarycare looms again

No federal entitlement program ever died from lack of use. In 1997 a Republican Congress made a Faustian Bargain with the Clinton Administration known as the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). In return for a balanced budget from the White House, Congress provided a block grant to fund a health-insurance program for children in low-income families. As a block grant, states were required to contribute to the program, which would benefit only the poorest children. Now, only ten years later, the Democrats who control Congress have discovered that SCHIP is “under-funded” by some $60 billion. In reality, SCHIP is over-utilized, as states increasingly expanded the scope of the program without increasing their contributions. Instead of being shocked or angered that a government program could face bankruptcy by actively recruiting too many dependents, liberals have resolved to ask for additional federal largesse and a reallocation of funds from more fiscally prudent states.

Never one to let a false crisis escape un-exploited, Hillary Rodham Clinton is pushing the expansion of SCHIP as a backdoor route to single-payer universal healthcare. While this approach to legislation is akin to traveling from New York to Tahiti by way of the Canary Islands and Valparaiso, it is consistent with Mrs. Clinton’s singular political skill—an uncanny ability to revive a dead horse for future beatings. Congressional Democrats will not likely curb her ambitions either. The only thing that will curtail this foolishness is President Bush’s veto pen, which has been woefully absent for six long years.

Jobs, immigrants and entitlements—oh my!

A recent study conducted by economist Giovanni Peri for the Public Policy Institute of California found that, at least in California (home to 30 percent of all foreign-born workers), there is “no evidence that the inflow of immigrants over the period 1960-2004 worsened the employment opportunities of natives with similar education and experience.” He went on to note, “[D]uring 1990-2004, immigration induced a 4 percent real wage increase for the average native worker.” These findings are not really all that surprising. As The Wall Street Journal indicates, “Most immigrants fall into one of two categories: unskilled laborers with less than a high-school diploma and skilled professionals with advanced degrees.” In other words, immigrants complement the American workforce. Perhaps counter-intuitive, but so are many other truths.

On the other hand, low-skilled workers cost taxpayers a bundle in entitlements. Namely, for every dollar these workers pay in taxes (if they pay), they reap three dollars in government benefits. Illegal aliens are, by and large, unskilled workers, and many receive these benefits. So the problem is two-fold: It is an immigration problem, to be sure, but primarily it is an entitlement problem. The Constitution does not provide for these entitlements to begin with, so we should not be surprised when the system is gamed by illegal aliens.

CULTURE

The FCC seeks to regulate TV violence

If the regulatory commissars have their way, the FCC will be coming a step closer to your living room. Congress received a report from the FCC this week that found the V-chip and other parental control technology has not done enough to keep children from being exposed to TV violence.

The FCC believes the solution lies in legislation and has asked, among other things, that Congress consider limiting such violent entertainment to late-night TV. While lawmakers have debated the issue of TV violence for years, a law addressing the issue never has been passed. According to FCC chairman Kevin Martin, legislation is necessary because while “[p]arents are always the first and last line of defense in protecting their children… legislation could give parents more tools.” Restrictions will give parents more options? We’re unclear on the concept.

For once, the ACLU is using a sound argument to rail against such restrictions. “The government should not replace parents as decision makers in America’s living rooms. There are some things that the government does well, but deciding what is aired and when on television is not one of them,” said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU’s Washington office.

All this leaves us scratching our heads and wondering why it’s so hard for parents to just turn off their televisions. Now that’s an option.

Texas legislature rebukes Gov. Perry

They say everything is bigger in Texas. Well, the Lone Star’s State Senate proved the point this week by handing down a big “NO” to Governor Rick Perry’s February executive order requiring that 11- and 12-year-old schoolgirls entering the sixth grade be vaccinated against human papillomavirus (HPV).

Holding that it is the legislature and not the governor who has the authority to pass such a requirement, the Senate, by an overwhelming 30-1 margin, knocked down Perry’s mandate. This echoed the House’s 118-23 vote to the same effect last month. The bill now heads to Perry’s desk, but with a solid veto-proof majority, this Texas-sized victory for the rule of law is sure to stand.

How not to talk to your kids

Hollywonk Alec Baldwin, the America-hater who once proclaimed that Rep. Henry Hyde should be stoned, recently subjected his daughter to the effects of his own arrested development and anger-management problems. Baldwin is in the midst of a custody battle over his 11-year-old daughter with ex-wife Kim Basinger. Apparently, his daughter is not completely on his side, but the expletive-laced missive he left on her voicemail certainly won’t help his cause. He shouted, “I don’t give a (bleep) that you’re 12-years-old or 11-years-old or that you’re a child or that your mother is a thoughtless pain in the (bleep) who doesn’t care about what you do as far as I’m concerned.”

Baldwin didn’t stop there: “I am going to get on a plane, and I am going to come out there for the day, and I’m going to straighten your (bleep) out when I see you!” He finished with “You are a rude, thoughtless little pig!”

For his part, Baldwin now says: “Although I have been told by numerous people not to worry too much, as all parents lose their patience with their kids, I am most saddened that this was released to the media because of what it does to a child.” Now isn’t that just quintessential liberal blame-shifting—Baldwin isn’t saddened because of his words to his daughter, but because it was released to the media and “what [that] does to a child.”

His ex-wife said in divorce proceedings that she was physically and emotionally abused. Imagine that.

Rosie’s rear view

It’s official. Rosie O’Donnell, the anti-American, pro-terrorist, homosexual daytime-talk-show queen has relinquished her “View” pulpit because she and ABC could not agree on a new contract—at least, that’s the word on the street. While O’Donnell reportedly wanted to renew her contract for another year at $10 million, ABC was willing to offer her only a three-year contract at $30 million. “[M]y needs for the future just didn’t dovetail with what ABC was able to offer me,” the non-committal O’Donnell explained.

During her year on “The View,” O’Donnell made waves with her often irrational arguments, claiming that 9/11 was a U.S. government conspiracy and that terrorists should not be feared because “They’re mothers and fathers.”

O’Donnell’s latest news-making stunt occurred at the media’s Matrix Awards this week, where the emcee’s foul antics and language reportedly caused co-host Barbara Walters to bury her head in her hands. O’Donnell is no stranger to controversy, and fortunately for her, the media loves it—which tells us all we need to know about the media.

And last…

Singer Sheryl Crow has been “trying to come up with easy ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming.” Somehow, though, we’re not convinced that’s what people are looking for when they buy her CDs or tickets to concerts. After much inner deliberation, she came up with a solution. “I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting.” Whence comes such brilliance? “Now, I don’t want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where two to three could be required.” After the publicity stunt ran its course and she found herself being lampooned from every side, Crow claimed that her idea was “a joke.” Right, Sheryl, keep it rollin’.

Veritas vos Liberabit—Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot’s editors and staff. (Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families—especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty, while prosecuting the war with Jihadistan.)