Saturday, November 03, 2007
But I have to tell you, those paintballs, when fired at close range, sting like hell. And I've got four nasty bruises to show for it.
I'm now working up a lengthy enemies list ...
I have it on good authority that certain members of the Virginia blogosphere frustrate the living hell out of certain members (who will remain nameless) of the Roanoke Times editorial staff. Sometimes they even let it show.
Take for instance the editorial that appears in today's paper - "Welcome to 21st-century politics." In it, House Majority Leader Morgan Griffith comes in for some criticism, perhaps undeserved, perhaps not, for his having threatened legislation that would keep childish pranksters like Franklin County Democratic Committee Chairman Joe Stanley from pulling the kind of malicious stunt that he attempted recently in which he purchased a website domain ... (I'll not go into it; read the details here). Suffice it to say, Stanley got caught and is probably embarrassed beyond words.
The Times pats him on the bottom, which is a good thing, with this: "Stanley's choice was childish and ridiculously inappropriate."
And the Times takes Griffith to task for his not knowing anything (they surmise) about domain names. Which is fine.
But then I read this:
If a candidate or a blog alliance isn't wise enough to register its own name and some obvious iterations, it deserves all of the resulting satire.Hello?
Maybe I should go into this a bit deeper. This character, Joe Stanley, an important and rising player in Virginia's ruling political party, the party of Warner and Kaine (and the Roanoke Times), took the Old Dominion Blog Alliance name (after a number of members of that organization - my organization - went after his pal, Senator Roscoe Reynolds), purchased the domain name olddominionblogalliance.com, and directed all hits to a website belonging to America's most notorious group of admitted pedophiles. Child molesters.
They call that "satire?" And it's somehow our fault because we didn't purchase some internet name? Are they serious?
It's understandable that this bunch at the Times, being the moral relativists that they proclaim themselves to be, having demonstrated on numerous occasions on their editorial page that they have no problem whatsoever with sexual perversion, would find Joe Stanley's cowardly (he performed his actions anonymously) and reprehensible stunt to be nothing more than a bit of irony. They probably even giggled at the creativity that went into it as they were lighting farts in each other's direction across the boardroom.
To more mature adults, however, it was no laughing matter. And we accept no blame. Especially coming from them.
Judge loses job after tossing coin to settle custody battle
By Larry O'Dell, Associated Press
Richmond -- A judge who ordered a woman to drop her pants and decided a custody dispute by flipping a coin was removed from the bench Friday by the Virginia Supreme Court.
The court, acting on a complaint by the Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission, said that Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court Judge James Michael Shull of Gate City failed to uphold the dignity of the judiciary.
According to the court, Shull admitted tossing a coin to determine which parent would have visitation with a child on Christmas. Shull said he was trying to encourage the parents to decide the issue themselves, but later acknowledged that he was wrong. (link)
Here's the better story:
The pants-dropping incidents, the court said, "were even more egregious."If Shull had been named Bubba and had been President of the United States, he could have gotten away with this. But being only a judge, propriety and decorum were required ...
Those incidents occurred during a hearing in which a woman was seeking a protective order against a partner who, according to the woman, had stabbed her in the leg. Shull knew that the woman had a history of mental problems and insisted on seeing the wound, the court said.
The woman dropped her pants once to display the wound, then a second time after Shull left the bench for a closer look to determine whether the woman had received stitches.
A court bailiff testified before the commission that after the hearing, he asked Shull, "Did you see what that lady had on?" According to the bailiff, Shull replied: "Yeah, a black lacy thing. ... It looked good, didn't it?"
Shull denied making the comment.
Farm Belt FolliesThis lament will fall on deaf ears, of course. Congress is completely out of control now, with no legislator, Republican or Democrat, willing to stand up for fiscal restraint. It's everyone for himself.
The Senate has one last chance to rid the country of an irrational, outdated and unfair 70-year-old program of federal farm supports that enriches the few at the expense of the many, distorts international trade and damages the environment. It has one last chance, in other words, to produce a farm program of which the country can be proud.
The old-fashioned bill, which is only marginally better than a similarly retrograde measure approved earlier this year by the House, would perpetuate a system that directs more than half of all farm payments to less than one-tenth of the farms, most of them concentrated in eight states and most of them producers of big row crops like corn, cotton, soybeans, wheat and rice.
To make matters worse, these lucky few get their billions regardless of market conditions — and conditions now happen to be particularly good, given the strong demand for corn-based ethanol as well as for American farm products abroad. (link)
There's no better example of their profligacy run amok than another item in today's news:
The Senate approves $14 billion.
Bush vetoes water projects bill
By Jennifer Loven, Associated Press Writer
Washington - An increasingly confrontational President Bush on Friday vetoed a bill authorizing hundreds of popular water projects even though lawmakers can count enough votes to override him.
Bush brushed aside significant objections from Capitol Hill, even from Republicans, in vetoing legislation that provides $23 billion for projects like repairing hurricane damage, restoring wetlands and preventing flooding in communities across the nation.
The water project legislation originally approved by the Senate would have cost $14 billion and the House version would have totaled $15 billion. (link)
The House approves $15 billion.
They compromise at $23 billion.
And now the farm bill is looming.
I fear for my country.
Oh, by the way, I'll let you know how those who are paid to protect our interests in Washington vote on the override and on the farm bill.
Here's the invite ... er, invitation: Oh, wait. Her luncheon is for the rural folks who live in Washington D.C. now that I look a little closer. At a lobbyist's office no less, according to ABC's Jake Tapper.
Guess that conference call dial-in number is for us non-urban rural folks. She don't want to smell up that office, don't ya know ...