Article & Journal Resources

Concerning "If not now, when?," I fail to understand why Republicans aren't most adamant about impeaching President Bush. They must not be as intelligent as power-hungry Democrats, who know that if Bush is allowed to set a precedent of imperial power for the presidency to stand until the end of Bush's term in office, then once a Democratic president takes over, they will be able to implement things that a radical liberal previously could only dream of.

Some consider the voting of congressional funding for Bush to be tantamount to supporting war, but according to our Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Congress can support war only by using its power "To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water."

Bush is also guilty of acting as commander in chief when, according to our Constitution, Article II, Section 2; "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States."

The president calling our military into actual service does not make him commander in chief. If Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are not impeached for their high crimes, the office of president will become nothing but an elected dictator, like the chancellor of Germany during the Third Reich.

Duane Grindstaff
Kent

Linda Boyd (Nov. 25 guest column, "If not now, when?") gets it: If we do not put our foot down and tell this administration -- and all those who follow -- that we will not tolerate an imperial presidency, we deserve what we get. The sad part is that the rest of the world has to live with a superpower that is out of control.

Jessica Lisovsky
Vashon

BRUSSELS, Dec. 12 (Xinhua) -- All eyes are on Ireland for the fate of the Lisbon Treaty as it is the only country that will hold a referendum on the text, said an expert with a think tank on European Union (EU) policies.

The Lisbon Treaty, which is to be signed by EU heads of state and government in Lisbon on Thursday, must be ratified by all 27 EU member states before it enters into force.

"The only country in which the ratification is at risk is Ireland because it is the only country where a referendum will be held," Antonio Missiroli, head of studies at the European Policy Center, told Xinhua in a recent interview.

"Referenda, by definition, are unpredictable," he said.

All Euroskeptics across the EU, particularly those from Britain, will flock to Ireland in order to campaign for a "NO," he said.

The Irish referendum, which is required by the country's constitution, is expected to take place in spring 2008, almost the same period when the British House of Commons, where Euro skeptics abound, is expected to ratify the treaty.

There might be uncertainties in these two countries, said Missiroli.

He warned that the dynamics and the timing are important when it comes to the ratification process: which country will be the first to ratify; which will be the last? will there be hiccups in the process?

Missiroli also expressed concern that ratification can be dragged on in certain countries, for example, Belgium.

The complexity of the political system in the country dictates that ratification of the treaty must go through seven chambers. The situation is exacerbated by the lack of political agreement on the formation of a new federal government six months after general elections.

There were initially controversy even over the capacity of care-taker Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt as the representative of Belgium to sign the treaty in Lisbon.

EU leaders hope that all member states can ratify the treaty by the end of 2008 so that elections of the European Parliament in 2009 will not be disrupted.

Missiroli expressed "qualified optimism" over the ratification process of the treaty. However, he cautioned that Ireland is going to be a big question mark given the fact that voters in that country vetoed the Nice Treaty in 2001.

"If Ireland has a NO, there will be ripple effects elsewhere. Other parliaments will suspend ratification; there will be calls for referendums in other countries. That is the possible domino effect."

Missiroli said British Prime Minister Gordon Brown would have no choice but to stick to parliamentary approval as a referendum would almost certainly kill the Lisbon Treaty.

Brown would not yield to conservative pressure to put the text to a referendum unless something dramatic happens within his Labor Party because a veto of the Lisbon Treaty would not only be disastrous for the EU, but also for Brown himself, said Missiroli.

Poland had pledged to hold a referendum. But the newly installed government of Prime Minister Donald Tusk has announced that it will seek parliamentary approval instead.

The Czech Republic, which was tough in negotiations for the Lisbon Teaty, will not be a problem either as the country holds EU presidency in the first half of 2009, said Missiroli.

"They cannot afford to be disruptive if they want to be a credible (EU) presidency," he said.

Both France and the Netherlands, where voters rejected the EU Constitution in 2005, have announced that the Lisbon Treaty will be ratified in parliament.

The veto in these two countries stalled the constitutional process and as a result EU leaders were forced instead to aim for a new treaty -- the Lisbon Treaty -- to address institutional reform.

France has to change the constitution in order to ratify the Lisbon Treaty as the French constitution has reference to the EU constitution.

Although French President Nicolas Sarkozy will need the support of opposition Socialist Party, there are no signs that the Socialists will work against the treaty.

The Lisbon Treaty was agreed upon by EU heads of state and government at an October summit in Lisbon.

The treaty was designed to make EU decision-making more efficient by revamping its institutions. It installs a new foreign policy chief for the EU and a long-term president for the European Council to replace the current six-month rotating presidency. The treaty also introduces the double majority voting system in decision-making, reduces the size of the executive European Commission, and gives national parliaments more power.
Editor: Mu Xuequan

Posted by George James Malik December 12, 2007 13:23PM

Very cool:

December 12, NHL.com: Detroit Red Wings teammates Nicklas Lidstrom and Henrik Zetterberg top all Western Conference defensemen and forwards, respectively, in the XM / NHL All-Star Fan Balloting, Presented by 2K Sports. Lidstrom's 301,245 votes lead the West overall while Zetterberg's 210,890 votes are the most among forwards. More than 7.9 million votes have been cast in the all-digital voting program.

The voting will determine the starting lineups for the 2008 NHL All-Star Game, which will be played on Sunday, Jan. 27 in Atlanta (6 p.m. ET, VERSUS, CBC, RDS, NASN, NHL Radio). Fans can vote for six Eastern Conference All-Stars and six Western Conference All-Stars: three forwards, two defensemen and one goaltender for each team. If a player is not listed on the ballot, a space is provided for write-in votes. The three forwards, two defensemen and one goaltender from each Conference receiving the most votes will comprise the starting lineups. Each of the 30 NHL Clubs has at least two representatives on the ballot.

Lidstrom and Dion Phaneuf (203,326) of the Calgary Flames are the top defensemen in votes. Zetterberg, Red Wings teammate Pavel Datsyuk (174,141) and Calgary Flames right wing Jarome Iginla (149,550) are the top three forwards. Roberto Luongo of the Vancouver Canucks (154,591) leads all goaltenders.
...
XM / NHL All-Star Fan Balloting, Presented by 2K Sports Western Conference (as of 12/10/07)

Forwards:

Henrik Zetterberg Detroit 210,890
Pavel Datsyuk Detroit 174,141
Jarome Iginla Calgary 149,550
Joe Sakic Colorado 115,080


Defensemen:

Nicklas Lidstrom Detroit 301,245
Dion Phaneuf Calgary 203,326
Chris Pronger Anaheim 133,259
Rob Blake Los Angeles 112,718
Francois Beauchemin Anaheim 103,071
Brian Rafalski Detroit 84,000

Goaltenders:

Roberto Luongo Vancouver 154,591
Pascal Leclaire Columbus 135,447
Dominik Hasek Detroit 73,152

By Jesus P. Estanislao

MANY of us may not realize this, but we all have a duty to build ourselves up as reliable and dependable individuals, who bring to day-to-day life our love for our country and people. It is a serious duty for all of us to have so much good to share such that we can then "hand out this (goodness) to others," particularly our fellow citizens. The long and short of it is simple: We have to be as good as possible so we can then help others become better.

It is to help our fellow Filipinos to become much better in every facet of life – from the material and the physical to the social, professional, cultural and spiritual – that we should always be "striving to change the course of our life in whatever way is necessary, so that we can bring (ideas and ideals) to those who live without ideals." This is a tall order, especially in this day and age, in our country, where many have narrowed their focus on one main ideal, the material comfort and pleasure they can have in life.

To serve such a tall order, we should be under no illusion. We – all of us – are called upon to show and spread "charity and love" in our land. These are the "great and marvelous treasure." They give real "consolation (that) really brings home the certainty of having God close to us, and (this certainty) shows itself in the charity our neighbors have for us and in the charity that we have for them." These are big words, but can they be made real in our land?

They can become reality mainly through the small acts of love and care we show each other every day as we go about discharging our ordinary duties at home, at work, and in our social inter-action with friends and peers. These acts we perform in the normal course of living our day. They may be so regular and ordinary that hardly anyone notices. They may "pass unnoticed, (nonetheless they are) most effective"; and the operative principle to go by is to "shun public display." We need not call attention to the many good, small deeds we do each day. This advice is well worth following: "try to ensure that people don’t notice when you lend a helping hand; try not to be praised or seen by anyone… so that, being hidden like salt, you may give flavor to your normal surroundings…and you will be helping to give to everything about you a natural, loving and attractive tone." This is radically different from what we see every day in our midst, where we have too many people calling a lot of attention to the things they do that only on surface look good. We are dazed and dazzled by so much spin that blows out into a mountain of publicity even a molehill of good that is being done.

We do have to change course and redirect our orientation. The course we need to take is towards more substantive good and less propaganda. The orientation we need to have is much more towards others, whom we must genuinely help, and much less to ourselves, who should go with less self-praise and self-aggrandizement. Indeed, the proper course, the "only one worth while (is to) have a loyal friendship with all" our fellow citizens so they too would be "noble, generous and cheerful." Each and every Filipino, across generations, should be in our radar screen: And their personal improvement in all facets of life should be our consuming passion: We should not rest until we have accomplished so much in this regard, in a quiet and often unheralded manner, sans publicity and hoopla.

History of 'In God We Trust'

The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861. It was written to Secretary Chase by Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, Pennsylvania, and read:

Dear Sir: You are about to submit your annual report to the Congress respecting the affairs of the national finances.

One fact touching our currency has hitherto been seriously overlooked. I mean the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins.

You are probably a Christian. What if our Republic were not shattered beyond reconstruction? Would not the antiquaries of succeeding centuries rightly reason from our past that we were a heathen nation? What I propose is that instead of the goddess of liberty we shall have next inside the 13 stars a ring inscribed with the words PERPETUAL UNION; within the ring the allseeing eye, crowned with a halo; beneath this eye the American flag, bearing in its field stars equal to the number of the States united; in the folds of the bars the words GOD, LIBERTY, LAW.

This would make a beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object. This would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed. From my hearth I have felt our national shame in disowning God as not the least of our present national disasters.

To you first I address a subject that must be agitated.

As a result, Secretary Chase instructed James Pollock, Director of the Mint at Philadelphia, to prepare a motto, in a letter dated November 20, 1861:

Dear Sir: No nation can be strong except in the strength of God, or safe except in His defense. The trust of our people in God should be declared on our national coins.

You will cause a device to be prepared without unnecessary delay with a motto expressing in the fewest and tersest words possible this national recognition.

It was found that the Act of Congress dated January 18, 1837, prescribed the mottoes and devices that should be placed upon the coins of the United States. This meant that the mint could make no changes without the enactment of additional legislation by the Congress. In December 1863, the Director of the Mint submitted designs for new one-cent coin, two-cent coin, and three-cent coin to Secretary Chase for approval. He proposed that upon the designs either OUR COUNTRY; OUR GOD or GOD, OUR TRUST should appear as a motto on the coins. In a letter to the Mint Director on December 9, 1863, Secretary Chase stated:

I approve your mottoes, only suggesting that on that with the Washington obverse the motto should begin with the word OUR, so as to read OUR GOD AND OUR COUNTRY. And on that with the shield, it should be changed so as to read: IN GOD WE TRUST.

The Congress passed the Act of April 22, 1864. This legislation changed the composition of the one-cent coin and authorized the minting of the two-cent coin. The Mint Director was directed to develop the designs for these coins for final approval of the Secretary. IN GOD WE TRUST first appeared on the 1864 two-cent coin.

Another Act of Congress passed on March 3, 1865. It allowed the Mint Director, with the Secretary's approval, to place the motto on all gold and silver coins that "shall admit the inscription thereon." Under the Act, the motto was placed on the gold double-eagle coin, the gold eagle coin, and the gold half-eagle coin. It was also placed on the silver dollar coin, the half-dollar coin and the quarter-dollar coin, and on the nickel three-cent coin beginning in 1866. Later, Congress passed the Coinage Act of February 12, 1873. It also said that the Secretary "may cause the motto IN GOD WE TRUST to be inscribed on such coins as shall admit of such motto."

The use of IN GOD WE TRUST has not been uninterrupted. The motto disappeared from the five-cent coin in 1883, and did not reappear until production of the Jefferson nickel began in 1938. Since 1938, all United States coins bear the inscription. Later, the motto was found missing from the new design of the double-eagle gold coin and the eagle gold coin shortly after they appeared in 1907. In response to a general demand, Congress ordered it restored, and the Act of May 18, 1908, made it mandatory on all coins upon which it had previously appeared. IN GOD WE TRUST was not mandatory on the one-cent coin and five-cent coin. It could be placed on them by the Secretary or the Mint Director with the Secretary's approval.

The motto has been in continuous use on the one-cent coin since 1909, and on the ten-cent coin since 1916. It also has appeared on all gold coins and silver dollar coins, half-dollar coins, and quarter-dollar coins struck since July 1, 1908.

A law passed by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956, the President approved a Joint Resolution of the 84th Congress, declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States. IN GOD WE TRUST was first used on paper money in 1957, when it appeared on the one-dollar silver certificate. The first paper currency bearing the motto entered circulation on October 1, 1957. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) was converting to the dry intaglio printing process. During this conversion, it gradually included IN GOD WE TRUST in the back design of all classes and denominations of currency.

As a part of a comprehensive modernization program the BEP successfully developed and installed new high-speed rotary intaglio printing presses in 1957. These allowed BEP to print currency by the dry intaglio process, 32 notes to the sheet. One-dollar silver certificates were the first denomination printed on the new high-speed presses. They included IN GOD WE TRUST as part of the reverse design as BEP adopted new dies according to the law. The motto also appeared on one-dollar silver certificates of the 1957-A and 1957-B series.

BEP prints United States paper currency by an intaglio process from engraved plates. It was necessary, therefore, to engrave the motto into the printing plates as a part of the basic engraved design to give it the prominence it deserved.

One-dollar silver certificates series 1935, 1935-A, 1935-B, 1935-C, 1935-D, 1935-E, 1935-F, 1935-G, and 1935-H were all printed on the older flat-bed presses by the wet intaglio process. P.L. 84-140 recognized that an enormous expense would be associated with immediately replacing the costly printing plates. The law allowed BEP to gradually convert to the inclusion of IN GOD WE TRUST on the currency. Accordingly, the motto is not found on series 1935-E and 1935-F one-dollar notes. By September 1961, IN GOD WE TRUST had been added to the back design of the Series 1935-G notes. Some early printings of this series do not bear the motto. IN GOD WE TRUST appears on all series 1935-H one-dollar silver certificates.

Below is a listing by denomination of the first production and delivery dates for currency bearing IN GOD WE TRUST:
DENOMINATION PRODUCTION DELIVERY
$1 Federal Reserve Note February 12, 1964 March 11, 1964
$5 United States Note January 23, 1964 March 2, 1964
$5 Federal Reserve Note July 31, 1964 September 16, 1964
$10 Federal Reserve Note February 24, 1964 April 24, 1964
$20 Federal Reserve Note October 7, 1964 October 7, 1964
$50 Federal Reserve Note August 24, 1966 September 28, 1966
$100 Federal Reserve Note August 18, 1966 September 27, 1966

WASHINGTON — The following is a partial transcript of the Dec. 9, 2007, edition of "FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace":

"FOX NEWS SUNDAY" HOST CHRIS WALLACE: We continue our series "Choosing the President" today with two of the frontrunners for the Republican nomination. First, perhaps the biggest story in politics right now, Mike Huckabee.

Take a look at this new poll from Iowa where the former governor of Arkansas has soared to a 22-point lead over Mitt Romney. Well, joining us now from the campaign trail in Florida, the Cinderella man of the GOP race, Mike Huckabee.

And, Governor, welcome back to "FOX News Sunday."

REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE MIKE HUCKABEE: Thank you very much, Chris. Great to be back.

WALLACE: As you rise in the polls, I don't have to tell you that your past is becoming more of an issue.

It now turns out that when you ran for the Senate back in 1992, you called for quarantining AIDS patients, you opposed increased federal funding to find a cure, and you also said that homosexuality was a, quote, "sinful lifestyle that could pose a dangerous health risk."

Do you stand by any of that now, Governor?

HUCKABEE: Chris, I didn't say that we should quarantine. I said it was the first time in public health protocols that when we had an infectious disease and we didn't really know just how extensive and how dramatic it could be and the impact of it, that we didn't isolate the carrier.

Now, the headlines yesterday started saying that I called for quarantines, which if you'll go back and read my comments, I did not.

I had simply made the point, and I still believe this today, that in the late '80s and early '90s, when we didn't know as much as we do now about AIDS, we were acting more out of political correctness than we were about the normal public health protocols that we would have acted — as we have recently, for example, with avian flu, which — I spent hours and hours, and months, in fact, as a governor dealing with a pandemic plan that we were looking at which called for isolating carriers if they contracted that disease.

WALLACE: But, Governor, forgive me. I don't think that's right. All the way back in 1985, this wasn't political correctness. The Centers for Disease Control back in '85, seven years before you made your statement, said that AIDS could not be spread by casual contact.

HUCKABEE: There was also the case of Kimberly Bergalis, who testified before Congress in 1991. She had contracted AIDS from her dentist.

We didn't think that there was a casual transmission. There were studies that showed that. But there were other concerns being voiced by public health officials.

Now, would I say things a little differently in 2007? Probably so. But I'm not going to recant or retract from the statement that I did make because, again, the point was not saying we ought to lock people up who have HIV/AIDS.

I knew people who had AIDS. I had a close friend who died of it in the 1980s. He was a hemophiliac. He contracted it through a blood transfusion. I had other friends of mine, one of whom passed away — he was, in fact, homosexual.

But my point is that I was trying to talk about the different public health protocols that we were dealing with. I think what it really does show, though, is that when people are digging back into everything I've ever said and done — and I understand that, it's part of the political process.

But what I'm not going to do is to go back and now try to change every story I've ever had. I'm going to simply say that that was exactly what I said. I don't run from it, don't recant from it.

Would I say it a little differently today? Sure, in light of 15 years of additional knowledge and understanding, I would.

WALLACE: Mitt Romney talked about his faith this week, and conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote a column this week under the title "Huckabee plays the religion card."

He accused you of seeming to take the high road of tolerance by refusing to declare Mormonism a cult; indeed, declaring himself above the issue, yet clearly playing to that prejudice by leaving the question ambiguous while making sure everyone knows that he, for one, is a Christian leader.

Governor, Krauthammer says that you're exploiting religious differences for political gain.

HUCKABEE: You know, Charles is probably one of my very favorite columnists. I don't know of anybody who I love to read more than him, and I love almost every column he writes except the ones he writes about me.

In this case, he's just mistaken. I've not tried to say anything about Mitt Romney or anybody else. In fact, I've done everything I can to say I'll be happy to talk about my faith. I'm not going to evaluate someone else's.

In fact, if people will look through the entire record of my comments, they'll see me defending Hillary Clinton and her faith in this campaign. Several months ago when asked to sort of make a comment when she had talked about her Methodist faith, I defended her.

I said I have no reason to doubt her sincerity. In fact, I said that, you know, her faith may be practiced a little different in the Methodist church than mine is in a more almost charismatic Baptist church where I attend. But I said just because some people eat their soup louder than other people doesn't mean the soup tastes better.

Now, if I had defended Hillary Clinton and said let her defend her religion, let me defend mine — I've done the same thing with Mitt Romney and the same thing I've done with any other candidate.

I think it's my responsibility to answer questions when they're posed to me if they're reasonable and in a context of being president. But I'm not going to go out there and start taking apart every other candidate's faith and trying to evaluate their theology.

WALLACE: I want to come at this a slightly different way, because this raises the whole question of prejudice and, as Krauthammer seemed to be saying, that you were playing the religion card.

Do you think it's intolerant — do you think it's prejudice — for voters — I'm not asking you; for voters to consider the tenets of Mormonism in judging Mitt Romney?

HUCKABEE: I do think that's inappropriate. I think people should judge Mitt Romney on his record. Is he consistent? Does he say and believe the things now that he said and believed before? That's what ought to be the criteria.

I don't think his Mormonism ought to be a factor in it. And I wouldn't vote for or against somebody because they were Mormon. It simply wouldn't be that big of an issue for me.

If it is for others, they'll have to explain that. It isn't for me, and it shouldn't be for anyone.

WALLACE: Let's turn to immigration, because you put out a new immigration plan this week. You called for building...

HUCKABEE: Yes.

WALLACE: ... a border fence, for cracking down on employers, for telling illegals to go home.

But last year in an interview, you said something somewhat different. You said this, "I think that the rational approach is to find a way to give people a pathway to citizenship."

Governor, in your new plan, the only path is to go home and to get on the back of the line, which, of course, would mean years of waiting. Why the change?

HUCKABEE: Well, I don't think there's an inconsistency. When I said a pathway, I didn't say what the pathway was.

I now believe that the only thing the American people are going to accept — and, frankly, the only thing that really makes sense — is a pathway that sends people back to the starting point.

But this idea of the waiting years — no, I don't agree with that. In fact, look, if we can get a credit card application done within hours, if we can get passports done within days, if we can transact business over the Internet any place in the world within seconds, do a background check instantaneously — it's our government that has failed and is dysfunctional.

It shouldn't take years to get a work permit to come here and pick lettuce. So part of the plan that I have is that we seal the borders. You don't have amnesty and sanctuary cities. You do have a pathway that gets you back home.

But that pathway to get back here legally doesn't take years. It would take days, maybe weeks, and then people could come back in the workforce.

Let me tell you why that's important. Two reasons. Number one, the American people say, "Do something. Do it now. We don't want to have this country ignoring the illegal problem." I get it.

Secondly, I want people who are in this country to hold their heads up high. You know, right now there are a lot of people who really are here because they're trying to feed their families. I don't begrudge them that.

I say every day I thank God I'm in a country people are trying to break into, not break out of. But let's give them a means by which they can get here through the door legally, and when they're here they don't have to hide, they don't have to keep their heads down and hope nobody catches them, they have their heads held high.

Everyone living within the borders of the United States ought to do so with dignity and with a sense of pride, not a sense of fear.

WALLACE: Governor, you got touched up this week when it turned out that you didn't know about the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran more than 24 hours after it was released. You said you'd been too busy on the campaign trail.

But it reinforced doubts that some people have about your foreign policy experience. And let me ask you about that larger question.

HUCKABEE: OK.

WALLACE: This week you came out against waterboarding and you also came out for closing Guantanamo Bay because you said that it had become a, quote, "symbol," that it represents to the rest of the world about something bad about America.

As president, how important would foreign policy be — rather, foreign opinion be in your determining your policies?

HUCKABEE: Well, I wouldn't let foreign opinion determine our policies, wouldn't let it dictate it. But we do have to make sure that we live in such a way as Americans that we have friends, not enemies, across the world.

And over the past several years, it seems as we've made even our friends our enemies. We've got to change that.

I don't want to ever give up one ounce of U.S. sovereignty. Our soldiers would never march to the orders of somebody else's generals. I wouldn't give up our territory. I wouldn't give up our rights. I wouldn't give up our strength.

In fact, I'd want to strengthen this country. I think the greatest way to export democracy is not to force it, but rather to build the best possible version of it right here so people are attracted to it.

But I also want to make clear that there is an important role that the United States has as the most powerful nation on earth militarily and economically, to act in such a way that people respect us and that people also realize that we are a great nation, not one that wants to push ourselves on others.

As it relates to that NIE report, it actually, I recall, was released at 10 o'clock that morning, and it was late that afternoon that I sat down with some reporters. You know, there's been a lot of talk about it.

There were 16 different intelligence agencies that contributed to that report. What I think it shows more than anything is not what I didn't know. It shows what our own intelligence community didn't know. They were confused. They had conflicting reports from 2003 to 2005.

One of the things that I would do as president is clearly try to make sure we get some better intelligence-gathering, and that we have more consistency, and that we have intelligence with greater credibility than we obviously have now.

WALLACE: Governor, we've only got a couple of minutes left. What do you make of the CIA destroying the tapes of those two investigations — or those two interrogation interrogations? And as president, what would you do about it?

HUCKABEE: Well, it goes back to this whole issue whether or not we should have torture. You're about to have a guest on this program for whom I hold in high esteem, and that's Senator John McCain.

I think it's absurd, and I've said this many times, for anybody running for president to think they know more about torture than John McCain.

One of the reasons that I came out this week — and I had said so earlier, but nobody was paying attention. Now people are paying attention to what I'm saying. But I don't believe that we ought to torture. I think it's a policy that is beneath us. It is obviously unproductive.

And every single military person with whom I've spoken, people who actually have been trained and who have been on either side of this issue, either being tortured or being asked to do it — I've got to tell you, I can't find anybody who says that ought to be the policy of the United States.

So when we start destroying documents, what are we destroying them for? Are we doing it for security purposes or to cover somebody's rear end?

If we're covering somebody's rear end, we need to expose their rear end and kick their rear end for doing something that's against the best interest of the United States and the responsibility and the respectability of this country.

WALLACE: Governor Huckabee, we're going to have to leave it there. I want to thank you for joining us, as always, for giving us some straight answers, and we'll see you along the campaign trail, sir.

HUCKABEE: Chris, I look forward to it. Thank you.

By ANDREW DeMILLO – 3 days ago

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — Mike Huckabee once advocated isolating AIDS patients from the general public, opposed increased federal funding in the search for a cure and said homosexuality could "pose a dangerous public health risk."

As a candidate for a U.S. Senate seat in 1992, Huckabee answered 229 questions submitted to him by The Associated Press. Besides a quarantine, Huckabee suggested that Hollywood celebrities fund AIDS research from their own pockets, rather than federal health agencies.

Huckabee said Saturday that his comments came at a time when "the AIDS crisis was just that — a crisis. We didn't know exactly all the details of how extensive it was going to be. There was just a real panic in this country. If I were making those same comments today, I might make them a little differently."

In 1992, Huckabee wrote, "If the federal government is truly serious about doing something with the AIDS virus, we need to take steps that would isolate the carriers of this plague."

"It is difficult to understand the public policy towards AIDS. It is the first time in the history of civilization in which the carriers of a genuine plague have not been isolated from the general population, and in which this deadly disease for which there is no cure is being treated as a civil rights issue instead of the true health crisis it represents."

The AP submitted the questionnaire to both candidates in the 1992 senate race; only Huckabee responded. Incumbent Sen. Dale Bumpers won his fourth term; Huckabee was elected lieutenant governor the next year and became governor in 1996.

When asked about AIDS research in 1992, Huckabee complained that AIDS research received an unfair share of federal dollars when compared to cancer, diabetes and heart disease.

"In light of the extraordinary funds already being given for AIDS research, it does not seem that additional federal spending can be justified," Huckabee wrote. "An alternative would be to request that multimillionaire celebrities, such as Elizabeth Taylor (,) Madonna and others who are pushing for more AIDS funding be encouraged to give out of their own personal treasuries increased amounts for AIDS research."

At a news conference in Asheville, N.C., on Saturday, Huckabee said he wanted at the time to follow traditional medical practices used for dealing with tuberculosis and other infectious diseases.

"Medical protocol typically says that if you have a disease for which there is no cure, and you are uncertain about the transmission of it, then the first thing you do is that you quarantine or isolate carriers," Huckabee said.

When Huckabee wrote his answers in 1992, it was common knowledge that AIDS could not be spread by casual contact. In late 1991, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said there were 195,718 AIDS patients in the country and that 126,159 people had died from the syndrome.

The nation had an increased awareness of AIDS at the time because pro basketball star Magic Johnson had recently disclosed he carried the virus responsible for it. Johnson retired but returned to the NBA briefly during the 1995-96 season.

Since becoming a presidential candidate this year, Huckabee has supported increased federal funding for AIDS research through the National Institutes of Health.

"My administration will be the first to have an overarching strategy for dealing with HIV and AIDS here in the United States, with a partnership between the public and private sectors that will provide necessary financing and a realistic path toward our goals," Huckabee said in a statement posted on his campaign Web site last month.

Also in the wide-ranging AP questionnaire in 1992, Huckabee said, "I feel homosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk."

A Southern Baptist preacher, Huckabee has been a favorite among social conservatives for his vocal opposition to gay marriage. In 2003, Huckabee said that the U.S. Supreme Court was probably right to strike down anti-sodomy laws, but that states still should be able to restrict things such as gay marriage or domestic partner benefits.

"What people do in the privacy of their own lives as adults is their business," Huckabee said. "If they bring it into the public square and ask me as a taxpayer to support it or to endorse it, then it becomes a matter of public discussion and discourse."

Grantley Bernard

December 13, 2007 12:00am

BRIAN Goorjian recently joked that the NBL All-Star Game is the only game he never gets nervous about.

That doesn't mean he doesn't want to win. So you just know that when the game -- any game -- gets to the fourth quarter and it's close, he'll be driving his team like a hire car: his foot will be flat to the floor and he'll be giving it everything.

Even in an All-Star Game such as last night's at The Cage, Goorjian's competitive juices usually win out as the Australian team no doubt suspected going into the exhibition that is more to do with threes and dunks than discipline and defence.

Down on the other bench, World coach Al Westover was not banking on needing anything to reduce the stress because there wasn't any. Not unless his trademark cowboy boots were giving him blisters.

"I think it will be boots up on the couch," Westover said before the game. "Just let 'em play and rotate the bench and make sure everyone gets their minutes. We want it to be a fun night, so we'll just give 'em the ball and let 'em go."

That is the perfect game plan for an NBL All-Star Game. Roll the balls out, give the players the green light for 48 minutes and forget the defence. Which might be the biggest adjustment Goorjian ever had to make, given every team he ever coached has had defence drummed into it.

Except in All-Star Games, where the average scoreline in 14 editions going into last night was 142.3 to 129.6. That's enough to give Goorjian a nervous tick. So imagine what he would have been like when the South Stars beat the North Stars 168-154 in 1991.

At least Goorjian had the benefit of Chris Anstey last night. The Melbourne Tigers centre has a competitive streak to match Goorjian and was well aware the win-loss record in his past two NBL All-Star Games was 1-1 and he was coming off a defeat.

Goorjian also had the benefit of big-bodied Nathan Jawai, who threw down an array of dunks as he showed why he is the future of Australian basketball and maybe a better prospect than Andrew Bogut, who is already in the NBA.

Having gone from the AIS to the Cairns Taipans, Jawai is on track to be a unanimous pick as NBL Rookie of the Year and certainly made an impression as All-Star Game MVP with 24 points and 12 rebounds as the Aussies won 146-141.

It was Jawai's first All-Star Game and Anstey's third, but Anstey (eight points, 10 rebounds) relished being on the floor with blokes who are normally foes, appreciating their games up close rather than trying to close them down.

"You know you can just go out and play and do what you do," Anstey said. "If it comes off, fantastic. If not, the consequences aren't as significant."

Except when the game's in the fourth quarter and it's close and pride is on the line. Just as it was last night when the World made a run that came up just short against the shooting of Stephen Black (27 points, seven threes).

"Everyone wants to win," Anstey said. "Any time you get 10 or 20 athletes together in a game, they want to win. Absolutely."

So Goorjian and Westover might not have been nervous early in the game. However you knew, just like the players out on the floor, the bottom line was they really wanted to win.

Mitt Romney has a passion for data. A great president needs a passion for principle.

BY JEFFREY LORD
Wednesday, December 12, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

Mitt Romney loves data and lusts after process.

In a recent cover profile in The Weekly Standard by the magazine's Fred Barnes, Mr. Romney is portrayed as the man who would be the CEO of America. Says Mr. Barnes, quoting Mr. Romney, a Harvard M.B.A.: "His idea of the perfect deal is not when one side wins but when 'you find a new alternative that everybody agrees is the right way to go. That doesn't always happen.' "

Indeed.

Mr. Barnes says Mr. Romney's "approach to government is not ideological." A Romney adviser is quoted as saying of his candidate: "He's super-pragmatic. He's an eclectic conservative." And Mr. Romney himself says flatly that as president he would "insist on gathering data . . . and analyze the data looking for trends."

Uh-oh.

Make no mistake. If the leading candidates in the GOP presidential race are to be litmus-tested as conservatives, all would cause conservatives sleepless nights. If the Reagan coalition was of economic and social conservatives combined with national security hawks, each group has something to be disturbed about with this batch of front-runners. Rudy Giuliani famously has his issues with social issues, John McCain his prickly insistence on First Amendment censorship and an addiction to sounding like Al Gore on global warming and Hillary Clinton on immigration. Mike Huckabee amazingly sounds like Ted Kennedy in his attack on supporters of economic growth as greedy, while Fred Thompson was not only assisting the pro-choice movement as a lawyer, but has an apparent bent for trial lawyers.

Yet the Romney approach as described not only by Mr. Barnes but more importantly by Mr. Romney himself is an approach that goes far beyond any particular issue. It is, as Mr. Romney himself freely admits, all about process. Whatever the issue--economic, social or national security--Mr. Romney would gather the data, look for a trend and thus "you make better decisions."

This should cause conservatives to break out in cold sweats.

Let's take Mr. Romney back to two of the most important Republican presidencies in the history of America. Let's make him a ghostly observer as the presidents in question deal with "the data" being presented to them by their advisers.

Mr. Romney's first visit would be to the Lincoln White House in 1864. There was no Oval Office in 1864, so Mr. Romney finds Old Abe in his office upstairs on the second floor of the residence. Lincoln has just been handed a memo by his secretary of war, and the data look pretty grim

Lincoln is staring at a sheet filled with numbers. The numbers are of Union casualties in the 10 most casualty-filled battles of the Civil War thus far. The banality of ink-on-paper belies the horrific human impact behind the figures. Over 13,000 Union casualties at the battle of Shiloh, 16,000 at Second Manassas, 12,000 at Antietam and yet again at Stone River, 17,000 at Chancellorsville, 23,000 at Gettysburg. And so on in one battle after another stretching over the past three years.

So as our ghostly Mr. Romney studies these "data"--now what? The conservative fear, of course, is that the "superpragmatic" Mr. Romney who places such faith in the process of data and trends would say to Lincoln exactly what the Democratic nominee of 1864, a battlefield general of the war, was saying in his campaign against Lincoln. The war is a "failure," said George McClellan. Stop it--right now. The numbers, the kind of data so prized by a possibly future President Romney, are unmistakably ghastly. Union kids and Confederate kids--Americans all--are being slaughtered on a scale that dwarfs the imagination.

But what of principle here? What of the passion for the principle--and passion plays no small role in Lincoln's adherence to principle--that no man, woman or child should be a slave in America? What about the fundamental principle of human freedom? What about keeping the Union together? The startling thought occurs that Mr. Romney would be whispering to Lincoln that the data speak for themselves. Passion should yield to process. And that would be that, if Mr. Romney carried the day as Lincoln's adviser.

Move Mr. Romney back to the future, or at least the relatively recent past. This time his ghost is hovering over Ronald Reagan's shoulder. President Reagan is one happy guy. His tax and budget cuts have passed, and he signed them into law. The Reagan revolution has begun. But it's now 1985, and there's a problem. David Stockman, Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget, a former congressman from Mr. Romney's native Michigan, the state where Romney's father was a star of the Republican liberal movement, is staring at reams of data. The results, as Mr. Stockman would write shortly after his angry departure from the Reagan White House, were--from Mr. Stockman's view--"frightening." The very idea that Reagan would stick with his tax cuts was a sign the president was in "dreamland." He was campaigning for re-election in 1984 on "false promises." Mr. Stockman--both in real time and in his bitter memoirs published in 1986--was nothing if not a fountain of data. And the data's conclusion, insisted Mr. Stockman, was that the Reagan revolution was a "failure." Reagan should abandon his passion for the principle of low taxes and cutting federal spending while restoring the military. Presumably, the Romney ghost sitting in the room with Reagan and Mr. Stockman would have agreed with . . . Mr. Stockman.

If decisions were all about data, then the McClellan/Stockman view of the world--a worldview that is apparently Mr. Romney's as well--would be the triumphs most celebrated in American history. Lincoln and Reagan would be rated not at the top of the presidential greatness scale but somewhere well down towards the bottom.

They are, of course, not viewed that way at all. The principles of Lincoln and Reagan carried the day precisely because each man was able to stare at the "data"--however gruesome or frightening they might be--and not blink. They are seen as great presidents and great leaders today because they understood at a visceral level that they should hold fast, refuse to yield to overwhelming demands from critics that they follow the data or that they adhere to a process that used something other than casualties or deficit projections as a measuring stick. Lincoln would not cave in on the principles of holding the Union together and the most basic principle of America--freedom. Reagan would not yield on the central conservative principle that tax cuts and less government spending were in fact the keys to America's future economic vitality.

In other words, in a battle between data and principle, both men rated recently in a poll as the top two greatest presidents in American history (Lincoln first, Reagan second) chose principle. They have not only been vindicated but are held out as treasured exemplars of what a president is supposed to be. Mr. Romney, already struggling with charges he has changed his principles on abortion and gay rights and indeed on when he decided it was OK to admit he was an enthusiastic Reaganite, is basing his entire campaign on the very notion that process is everything.

Gulp.

One of the subtle images of Mr. Romney's recent speech on religion is perhaps not understood by Mr. Romney's advisers. Where did Mr. Romney go to deliver his talk on principle? And who introduced him? The site was the presidential library of former president George H.W. Bush--the former president himself in his always gracious fashion introducing Romney.

Yet Mr. Romney did not need a visit to the Bush Library to understand why the Library does not contain the papers of a two-term president. The reason, of course, is that then-Vice President George H.W. Bush campaigned for the presidency in 1988 on the principle he phrased as "read my lips--no new taxes." He won. Yet in the name of precisely the process Mr. Romney lovingly describes--gathering data and looking for trends--the first President Bush was persuaded by Romneyesque advisers like then-Treasury aide Richard Darman to surrender bedrock conservative principle and raise taxes. The senior Mr. Bush was advised to choose data and process over principle. He did--and in short order had lots of time on his hands to decide the process for building a library about a one-term president while Bill and Hillary Clinton took charge.

Not to be left out of this point is the Democrat who successfully campaigned for president based on fixing the process in Washington--Jimmy Carter. As a nuclear engineer, naval officer, successful businessman, Mr. Carter's central point in the 1976 election was about his devotion to process. Then there was that Romney predecessor as governor of Massachusetts, Democrat Michael Dukakis, who earnestly campaigned in 1988 against Bush I on a process issue, competence in government.

Would Mitt Romney make a better president than anyone on the other side? With no disrespect for Oprah, of course.

But if conservatives have learned anything since 1964 it is this: principles count. A principle presidency always trumps a process presidency. Lincoln did better than Hoover, Reagan did better than Bush I or Carter. Better heading in the right direction with a faulty process than zipping along in the wrong direction simply because the process and the data are telling you things are wonderfully efficient. A train making exceptional time to Boston is useless if in fact you wanted to go to Miami.

Mitt Romney is clearly one decent guy, one very, very accomplished human being. He has announced where he stands on the issues of the day, putting himself head and shoulders above a Clinton, Obama or Edwards. But as conservatives head into caucus and primary season, they should not be hesitant to question what appears to be his addiction to process for the sake of process.

Go back to Fred Barnes's Romney quote, the one in which Mr. Romney says he looks for a "new alternative that everybody agrees is the right way to go." What Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan shared was a core belief that in fact it was a better thing for some principles to triumph over others. "Everybody" did not agree with Lincoln that freedom was better than slavery, that keeping the Union together was better than not, or with Reagan that the free market and tax cuts philosophy was a better philosophy than one of big government and tax increases. But they went ahead anyway.

Is there a place for data? Is there value in process? Sure.

But base an entire presidency on the importance of data and process over principle? Is this what Mitt Romney would do? Is this where a Romney presidency would lead? If so, conservatives have been here before.

It is not a good place to be.

Mr. Lord is creator, co-founder and CEO of QubeTV, a conservative, user-generated video site. A former Reagan White House political director and an author, he writes from Pennsylvania.

Tuesday December 11, 2007 @ 06:40 PM EST

As you know, the All-Star game isn’t that far away, and fans like me are casting their votes to see their players get honored as this years starters for the All-Star Game. Lets not sit around…here are my picks:
p.
EASTERN CONFERENCE
Forward #1=Jaromir Jagr-NYRLets face it, Jagr is a beast, a man among men. But damn is he a great player. Jagr is once again donning the Captain’s C on his blue shirt and he’s doing a terrific job, keeping his team in the 1st place race in his division before the All-Star break comes around. He is second on his team in every offensive category, 7 goals, 14 assists, and 21 points. He has 2 Power Play Goals and he has a whopping, team leading 3 game winning goals. Definately a great pick for Atlanta this year.
Forward#2=Maxim Afinagenov-BUF
This was an interesting pick for me, but nonetheless a good one. He might not be as offensively talented as Jagr is, but he is still a phenomenal player. Hockey iosn’t all about the offense, its about how you start plays that get you goals. Afinagenov can clearly do that. He is a hell of a playmaker, which is probably why he has vaulted the Sabres to a 6-4 record in the past 10 games. Despite Buffalo’s poor start, he was an integral part of their playoff run last year, and an integral part of their offense this year. He’ll send the East to a win again.
Forward #3=Sidney Crosby-PIT
Don’t roll your eyes at me, come on, even I recognize that Sidney Crosby is the next coming of Gretzky. This guy is the Pittsburgh offense and is keeping them close in the race for 1st in their division (only 5 points back). He leads in every offensive category except Power Play goals: 14 goals, 26 assists, 40 points, 4 PP Goals and 2 Game winners. The youngest kid to don the “C”? Come on, gimme a break, of course he deserves to go to Atlanta.
Defenseman #1=Zdeno Chara-BOS
Now this is a great positional defnseman. Zdeno Chara is an amazing playmaker and exhibits great awareness on the ice. He isn’t an offensive powerhouse, but just like Afinagenov earlier, he can start plays. This season he has 4 goals, second place team-wise 14 assists, 18 points and 2 PP Goals. he sets up people to score and thats what wins the Bruins games. Did I mention that Boston is 2nd in the Atlantic? Did I also mention that Chara is their Captain? There you have it…your defenseman for Atlanta this year.
Defenseman #2=Mike Commodore-CAR
Despite the lack of pretty much any stats for him at this point, Mike Commodore is my pick really just to be able to play. He is a very skilled defenseman who, when given the puck, can shoot. Not neccessarily score, but shoot, and we all know that shooting is what gets pressure on a goalie to see if he can think on his feet. He has had 28 shots on goal, which shows he can phase out a goalie enough for his team to find a weak spot. Overall he is a well-rounded positional player, and I’d like to see him play in Atlanta this year.
Goalie=Henrik Lundqvist-NYR
When you have a goalie that is either #2 or in the top 10 of every Goalie Stat category out there, who has been nominated in his rookie season 2 years ago for the Vespa trophy, you have to let this calibur of goalie start. He is second in the NHL in goals against average with 1.94, shutouts with 5, and tied for 1st with 15 wins. He is currently tied for 6th in save percentage with .924.If Lundy doesn’t start this game I will be very dissappointed. He deserves it after keeping his team in a 1st place race only 1 point behind the Devils for 1st in the Atlantic Division. Lundy, pack your bags for Atlanta.
WESTERN CONFERENCE
Forward #1=Pavel Datsyuk-DET
Pavel Datsyuk is a trooper, and don’t forget that. 12 goals, 24 assists, 36 points…come on, you have to let him in. Hes an Assistant Captain and hes pullin the load of a Captain…3 PP Goals and 2 game winners prove how good he is at makin plays happen and gettin the puck to the back of the net when you need it. He should definately start in Atlanta.
Forward #2=Jonathan Cheechoo-SJ
Now heres a guy and team that aren’t getting much credit unless you’re Barry Melrose.I personally think his performance is coming from the new look they have. But lets get on with this. Although he has 4 goals, 5 assists, and 9 points, he rarely gets the credit for half the teams work. He put up 65 shots this season, which shows how much pressure he can get on a goalie. He can pass, he can shoot, he can make plays happen even if he isnt the one starting them. He should pack up for the ATL.
Forward #3=Ryan Getzlaf-ANA
now you want genuine production, then youve got it right here. Getzlaf is once again proving his worth this season, adding onto his resume of his Stanley Cup year last season. This year he leads the team in points and assists, with 22 and 35 respectively, has 13 goals, second behind Cory Perry, 3 PP Goals and 1 game winner. He starts plays, and plays great positional hockey, knowing where hes supposed to be at all times, aand also knowing when to get involved in the play as well. I reccomend Getzlaf to travel to Atlanta and give some great competition this year.
Defenseman #1=Brian Rafalski-DET
Now I know full well this guy is old, but that doesn’t mean he can’t play. Like he always was in New Jersey, Rafalski starts plays and watches them unfold. Despite having only 3 goals so far, he has 20 assists, thus proving the playmaker point. I know this one is short, but hes a playmaker, and more importantly a veteran deserving such an opportunity to play in Atlanta this year, and thats what matters.
Defenseman #2=Chris Pronger-ANA
He went form the goal scorer to the goal maker this year, just like many defenseman did coming in from last year. Chris Pronger was not only an integral part of the Cup run last year, but he has played an amazing playmaker role as well this year. Scoring 4 and starting 20, he has helped Anaheim stay in the race for 1st back 2 points from Dallas. He is the Captain of this squad and has shown it on and off the ice this year. I look forward to seeing him in the ATL.
Goalie=Dominik Hasek-DET
There goes that look again. Come on, Hasek is daring, skillfull, has lots of dexterity, is consistent, and he’s a seasoned veteran. It’s hard to see where his season is going because he splits the majority of the starts with Chris Osgood, his equally skillful counterpart, but in his 15 starts he has 8 wins with 1 being a shutout, 5 losses, and 1 OT loss. His Goals Against average has dwindled to a 2.48 and his save percentage is below .9, but I’m sure he’ll come around in the second half of the season. I would like to see him play rather than start, but we’ll see how the cards deal out.
Those are my predictions this year. Later on, we’ll see how I did and my prediction of the All-Star Game.

Word Count: 835

The Federal Reserve cut interest rates again yesterday, and equity markets promptly sold off because it was only a 25-basis-point reduction. This is probably good, if paradoxical, news. The Fed has become so Pavlovian in its response to Wall Street's begging that even this modest declaration of independence is a welcome reminder that easier money is not the solution to every economic problem.

Wall Street's argument is that the housing recession and credit crisis threaten a larger downturn. The 30-day T-bill rate (under 2.9%) has sunk far below the fed funds rate of 4.25% after yesterday, so the Fed is ...

Bang! Showbiz | Thursday, 13 December 2007

Jessica Simpson is desperate to strip naked in a Hollywood movie, it has been reported.

The blonde beauty wants to be taken seriously as an actress and believes baring all is the best way to earn the respect of Tinseltown, even if it goes against her family's wishes.

A source said: "Jessica is in the running for a role that, if she gets it, will put her right on the map in terms of acting.

"The only hitch is that the script requires a number of quite graphic scenes including a full-frontal nude scene. Jessica is so desperate to land the role and get the industry's respect that she's ready to go against her better judgement, and her family, by agreeing to bare all."

Earlier this year, Jessica's father Joe Simpson forced her to turn down a potentially Oscar-winning role as a porn star - insisting she keep her clothes on.

He said: "The last script that came to us was for Jessica to be a porn star.

We were promised we would win an Oscar with that. I told them, 'I think we'll just buy a statue of a little man and keep our clothes on'."

Jessica's movie career has stalled of late, with her most recent film Blonde Ambition failing to gain a cinema release and being branded a "disaster".

Doha, Qatar, pursues the 2016 Olympics.

BY JONATHAN KOLATCH
Wednesday, December 12, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

When Doha launched its bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics on Oct. 25, with a sound and light show on the Corniche overlooking the Persian Gulf, the world responded with a mighty O-h-h-h? Tokyo, Chicago, Madrid, Prague, Rio de Janeiro and . . . the mouse that roared?

But to those of us who chanced to be in Doha, Qatar, in December 2006 for the 15th Asian Games--the second largest sporting event after the Olympics, attended by 8,060 athletes and 4,100 team officials from 45 countries representing more than half of mankind--the bid came as no surprise.

When I met with the energetic 36-year-old secretary-general of the Qatar Olympic Committee, His Excellency, Sheik Saoud Bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani, a distant cousin of the royal family and a New Mexico State graduate in engineering, he walked me through the rationale for hosting the Asian Games: (1) to put Qatar--with the world's third-largest natural gas reserves, but with low international profile--"on the map"; (2) to increase tourism by establishing an annual circuit of international sporting events in Qatar; and (3) to instill discipline in Qatar's young people by providing facilities to enable them to participate in sports. An Olympics in Qatar was a key ingredient in that vision, he added. Preparations had been in the works since 2004.

Qatar, the sheik told me, had put up $3.8 billion to build a state-of-the-art sports facility and to import some 25,000 foreigners to run the Doha Asian Games. What he didn't say, but numerous expatriates did, is that the reason so many foreigners were needed is that Qataris, for whom the good life has come easily, are not used to hard work. In any case, there weren't enough of them with the skills to do the job.

To the standard 28-event Olympic menu, the Doha Asian Games added 11 events, including kabaddi, a centuries-old Indian village tag game played barefoot, which is also popular in Pakistan and Bangladesh. You could learn as much about Qatar and its Olympic pretensions from the gold-medal match between India (35) and Pakistan (23) as you could about kabaddi itself. Although some 750,000 people live in Qatar--a peninsula-state about the size of New Jersey jutting into the Persian Gulf from Saudi Arabia--only 170,000 are its citizens. The balance are Indians (the majority)--numbering more than 200,000--Pakistanis, Filipinos, Iranians, Bangladeshis and a host of other groups who come to Qatar in search of work and sometimes end up staying the rest of their lives. As at most events, very few Qataris were seen at the kabaddi hall, whose seats were filled mainly by the immigrants who do the work that keeps Qatar running.

The Doha Games were executed almost flawlessly. Chinese gold medal weightlifter Li Hongli was among the many athletes I spoke to who felt that the accommodations, the food and the competition facilities reached the highest standards. The complex transportation system to the venues, the media services, and the computerized information system all functioned seamlessly.

And in the most memorable moment of the superb Opening Ceremony--which lavishly traced the history of Qatar from antiquity until today--the captain of the Qatar equestrian team, Mohamed bin Hamad Al-Thani, the son of the Emir, galloped up a specially constructed ramp to the top of Khalifa Stadium to light the Asian Games' eternal flame. The Closing Ceremony, following the theme of "A Thousand and One Nights," raised the bar for future Olympic closing ceremonies.

Perfection . . .. But a catering company from England fed the Athletes' and Media Villages, a Dutch company ran the lnfo2006 system and Asian Games News Service, foreigners handled the accreditation, did the announcing at the competitions, and managed and operated the transportation system. Foreigners ran the Athletes' and Media Villages, as well as the scoreboards, the media centers, and the TV camerawork. Foreign janitors did the cleanup. And the 16,000 volunteers who complemented the paid staff were drawn overwhelmingly from Qatar's immigrant communities. Seven hundred Australians put together the Opening Ceremony program; even the horse at the Opening Ceremony was trained in Australia. Only in the security detail was there any identifiable Qatari presence. A simple "Keif halaq" ("How are you?") addressed in Arabic to a Doha Asian Games worker almost always brought a blank response. The Opening and Closing Ceremonies aside, there was little of the flavor of Arabia at the Doha Games. Qatar simply gave the go-ahead and wrote the checks.

To escalate from an Olympic Applicant City to a Candidate City, Doha must answer by Jan. 14, 2008, 25 questions posed by the IOC dealing with motivation and legacy, political support, finances, venues, accommodations, transportation, and security. The IOC Executive Board will use this application to determine next June if Doha is qualified to be one of the finalists. If chosen, Doha will prepare an elaborate "bid book." The 2016 host city will be announced in October 2009.

With the support of the royal family, Doha will have no difficulty satisfying the economic requirements. A price tag of $20 billion (Beijing's round-figure investment) was within budget, Sheikh Saoud said.

Where Doha will fall far short of the current host, Beijing 2008, is in popular participation, in what the IOC calls "sustainability," and in the legacy an Olympic Games in Doha will leave behind. Beijing has made a maximum effort to use local resources and, in the process, is learning the ways of the world. Its tourist services, its translators, its caterers, its computer technicians, its TV cameramen will all be better for the experience. Doha, on the other hand, would bring in almost everything from outside the country. Its thousands of mostly expat volunteers could never match Beijing's 70,000. At the end of a Doha Olympic Games, most of the imported skills will leave with the contractors.

Already, the writing is on the wall. When you click on the Media Centre tab at www.doha2016.org, up pop two contacts from the international image maker, Burson Marsteller. In Beijing, at the same stage in the application process, the public face was Chinese.

But the big unanswerable questionabout Doha's 2016 bid is "What after?" For the 2006 Asian Games, Qatar had 7,000 hotel rooms to accommodate 20,000 visitors. Beijing 2008 will offer more than 100,000 hotel rooms. After the Beijing Games, China will still have the Great Wall, the Forbidden City and the Temple of Heaven to attract tourists to those rooms; Qatar only sea, sun and sand.

On balance, hosting the 2016 Olympics would be a tremendous boon for Qatar, well satisfying Doha 2016's bid slogan: "Celebrating change." At the extreme, it might force Qatar to deliberate whether a country whose citizens are a 20% minority can be viable. In time, this might force liberalization of Qatar's naturalization laws and, by example, influence other Persian Gulf ministates.

In analyzing Doha's 2016 bid, the International Olympic Committee needs to answer two essential questions: Is nation-building on the agenda of the IOC? Are the Olympic Games up for sale?

If the answer to these is "yes," Doha 2016 would put on a whale of a show.

Mr. Kolatch is the author of the just-published "At the Corner of Fact & Fancy" (Jonathan David).

The Associated Press
Published: December 12, 2007


UNITED NATIONS: Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged all nations on Wednesday to stand united against terrorism, calling it "the scourge of our times."

But he said the United Nations will not be deterred in its mission "to help those most in need."

In a live video address from Bali, Indonesia, to the 192-member General Assembly, Ban expressed "shock and outrage" at Tuesday's twin truck bombings in Algiers by an affiliate of al-Qaida that targeted U.N. offices and a government building killing at least 31 people.

"Let us know that this attack on the U.N. is an attack on us all and our highest ideals," he said. "I call on this General Assembly to stand united. We must all condemn this deed, just as we must work, together, to bring its vile perpetrators to justice."

Diplomats in the General Assembly hall responded to Ban's brief speech with applause.
Today on IHT.com
Italian truckers defy back-to-work order
Romney accuses Huckabee of 'attacking' his religion
Car bomb kills Lebanese general

Ban said the dead were still being counted and the wounded were still being treated.

At least 11 U.N. workers, possibly more, were killed in the attacks which badly damaged two U.N. buildings, U.N. officials said Tuesday. The attack was the worst against U.N. staff since an August 2003 bombing at U.N. headquarters in Baghdad killed 22, including the top U.N. envoy in Iraq, Sergio Vieira de Mello.

"In Algiers, we have today one more ugly reminder that terrorism remains the scourge of our times," Ban said. "The international community must be resolute in opposing those who prey on the innocent and vulnerable and those, like the United Nations, who seek only to help them."

Ban recalled the attack in Iraq, saying "The Baghdad attack will not deter us. Neither will this most recent attack. Our colleagues in Algiers would ask no less."

About 175 U.N. employees worked in Algeria, including about 115 locally based staff, Okabe said.

Before Tuesday, more than 250 U.N. civilian employees had been killed either by violence or in accidents since January 1992, when such record-keeping began, U.N. officials said. Those figures do not include the deaths of U.N. staff from peacekeeping missions.

Word Count: 286

Al Qaeda apparently struck again yesterday, this time with a pair of truck bombs outside United Nations offices in Algiers. The dead -- at first count 26 but perhaps dozens more -- included numerous U.N. workers. The attack was the worst on that body since the 2003 truck bombing on U.N. headquarters in Baghdad that killed 22.

Posted Sat Dec 8, 2007 5:18pm AEDT


Los Angeles police say they spent over $100,000 responding to an online threat on a shopping centre which was traced to a Melbourne computer.

LA police alerted Victorian police to a message posted on a website, which said there would be a shooting attack at the Grove shopping complex.

A 20-year-old man from Frankston was detained and questioned yesterday, and has been released without charge, with investigations still continuing.

Deputy chief Michael Downing from the LAPD says the message was posted soon after after eight people were shot dead in a mall in Nebraska.

"We pulled out all the stops," he said.

"We deployed nearly 100 officers in high visibility uniform assignments and plain clothes assignments.

"All the other malls around - they were on a heightened alert as well."

"Until which time we were absolutely sure it was this individual who had no operational capability, and had never been to the United States, that was it.

"We expended approximately a little bit over $100,000 on this case in the past 30 hours or so."

Bubbles cannot be safely defused by monetary policy before the speculative fever breaks on its own.


BY ALAN GREENSPAN
Wednesday, December 12, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

On Aug. 9, 2007, and the days immediately following, financial markets in much of the world seized up. Virtually overnight the seemingly insatiable desire for financial risk came to an abrupt halt as the price of risk unexpectedly surged. Interest rates on a wide range of asset classes, especially interbank lending, asset-backed commercial paper and junk bonds, rose sharply relative to riskless U.S. Treasury securities. Over the past five years, risk had become increasingly underpriced as market euphoria, fostered by an unprecedented global growth rate, gained cumulative traction.

The crisis was thus an accident waiting to happen. If it had not been triggered by the mispricing of securitized subprime mortgages, it would have been produced by eruptions in some other market. As I have noted elsewhere, history has not dealt kindly with protracted periods of low risk premiums.

The root of the current crisis, as I see it, lies back in the aftermath of the Cold War, when the economic ruin of the Soviet Bloc was exposed with the fall of the Berlin Wall. Following these world-shaking events, market capitalism quietly, but rapidly, displaced much of the discredited central planning that was so prevalent in the Third World.

A large segment of the erstwhile Third World, especially China, replicated the successful economic export-oriented model of the so-called Asian Tigers: Fairly well educated, low-cost workforces were joined with developed-world technology and protected by an increasing rule of law, to unleash explosive economic growth. Since 2000, the real GDP growth of the developing world has been more than double that of the developed world.

The surge in competitive, low-priced exports from developing countries, especially those to Europe and the U.S., flattened labor compensation in developed countries, and reduced the rate of inflation expectations throughout the world, including those inflation expectations embedded in global long-term interest rates.

In addition, there has been a pronounced fall in global real interest rates since the early 1990s, which, of necessity, indicated that global saving intentions chronically had exceeded intentions to invest. In the developing world, consumption evidently could not keep up with the surge of income and, as a consequence, the savings rate of the developed world soared from 24% of nominal GDP in 1999 to 33% in 2006, far outstripping its investment rate.

Yet the actual global saving rate in 2006, overall, was only modestly higher than in 1999, suggesting that the uptrend in developing-economy saving intentions overlapped with, and largely tempered, declining investment intentions in the developed world. In the U.S., for example, the surge of innovation and productivity growth apparently started taking a breather in 2004. That weakened global investment has been the major determinant in the decline of global real long-term interest rates is also the conclusion of a recent (March 2007) Bank of Canada study.

Equity premiums and real-estate capitalization rates were inevitably arbitraged lower by the fall in global long-term interest rates. Asset prices accordingly moved dramatically higher. Not only did global share prices recover from the dot-com crash, they moved ever upward.

The value of equities traded on the world's major stock exchanges has risen to more than $50 trillion, double what it was in 2002. Sharply rising home prices erupted into major housing bubbles world-wide, Japan and Germany (for differing reasons) being the only principal exceptions. The Economist's surveys document the remarkable convergence of more than 20 individual nations' house price rises during the past decade. U.S. price gains, at their peak, were no more than average.

After more than a half-century observing numerous price bubbles evolve and deflate, I have reluctantly concluded that bubbles cannot be safely defused by monetary policy or other policy initiatives before the speculative fever breaks on its own. There was clearly little the world's central banks could do to temper this most recent surge in human euphoria, in some ways reminiscent of the Dutch Tulip craze of the 17th century and South Sea Bubble of the 18th century.

I do not doubt that a low U.S. federal-funds rate in response to the dot-com crash, and especially the 1% rate set in mid-2003 to counter potential deflation, lowered interest rates on adjustable-rate mortgages and may have contributed to the rise in U.S. home prices. In my judgment, however, the impact on demand for homes financed with ARMs was not major.

Demand in those days was driven by the expectation of rising prices--the dynamic that fuels most asset-price bubbles. If low adjustable-rate financing had not been available, most of the demand would have been financed with fixed rate, long-term mortgages. In fact, home prices continued to rise for two years subsequent to the peak of ARM originations (seasonally adjusted).

I and my colleagues at the Fed believed that the potential threat of corrosive deflation in 2003 was real, even though deflation was not thought to be the most likely projection. We will never know whether the temporary 1% federal-funds rate fended off a deflationary crisis, potentially much more daunting than the current one. But I did fret that maintaining rates too low for too long was problematic. The failure of either the growth of the monetary base, or of M2, to exceed 5% while the fed-funds rate was 1% assuaged my concern that we had added inflationary tinder to the economy.

In mid-2004, as the economy firmed, the Federal Reserve started to reverse the easy monetary policy. I had expected, as a bonus, a consequent increase in long-term interest rates, which might have helped to dampen the then mounting U.S. housing price surge. It did not happen. We had presumed long-term rates, including mortgage rates, would rise, as had been the case at the beginnings of five previous monetary policy tightening episodes, dating back to 1980. But after an initial surge in the spring of 2004, long-term rates fell back and, despite progressive Federal Reserve tightening through 2005, long-term rates barely moved.

In retrospect, global economic forces, which have been building for decades, appear to have gained effective control of the pricing of longer debt maturities. Simple correlations between short- and long-term interest rates in the U.S. remain significant, but have been declining for over a half-century. Asset prices more generally are gradually being decoupled from short-term interest rates.

Arbitragable assets--equities, bonds and real estate, and the financial assets engendered by their intermediation--now swamp the resources of central banks. The market value of global long-term securities is approaching $100 trillion. Carry trade and foreign exchange markets have become huge.

The depth of these markets became readily apparent in March 2004, when Japanese monetary authorities abruptly ceased intervention in support of the U.S. dollar after accumulating more than $150 billion of foreign exchange in the preceding three months. Beyond a few days of gyrations following the halt in purchases, nothing of lasting significance appears to have happened. Even the then seemingly massive Japanese purchases of foreign exchange barely budged the prices of the vast global pool of tradable securities.

In theory, central banks can expand their balance sheets without limit. In practice, they are constrained by the potential inflationary impact of their actions. The ability of central banks and their governments to join with the International Monetary Fund in broad-based currency stabilization is arguably long since gone. More generally, global forces, combined with lower international trade barriers, have diminished the scope of national governments to affect the paths of their economies.

Although central banks appear to have lost control of longer term interest rates, they continue to be dominant in the markets for assets with shorter maturities, where money and near monies are created. Thus central banks retain their ability to contain pressures on the prices of goods and services, that is, on the conventional measures of inflation.

The current credit crisis will come to an end when the overhang of inventories of newly built homes is largely liquidated, and home price deflation comes to an end. That will stabilize the now-uncertain value of the home equity that acts as a buffer for all home mortgages, but most importantly for those held as collateral for residential mortgage-backed securities. Very large losses will, no doubt, be taken as a consequence of the crisis. But after a period of protracted adjustment, the U.S. economy, and the world economy more generally, will be able to get back to business.

Mr. Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, is president of Greenspan Associates LLC and author of "The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World" (Penguin, 2007).

World powers, the UN and ASEAN were talking tough over Myanmar's brutality, but with the passage of only weeks it turns out they were all talk

By Seth Mydans
NY TIMES NEWS SERVICE, BANGKOK
Wednesday, Dec 12, 2007, Page 9



The streets are quiet in Myanmar. The "destructive elements" are in jail. The international outcry has faded. The junta's grip on power seems firm.

Two months after they cracked down on huge anti-government demonstrations led by Buddhist monks, the generals who rule Myanmar have reason to feel relief.

It seems they have ridden out their most difficult challenge in two decades and are set to maintain control through force and fear, offering only small concessions to the demands of their critics abroad.

If change is coming in Myanmar, experts say, it is likely to be a long process and to emerge from within the power structure.

Diplomats and human rights groups say that an unknown number of protesters and monks remain in prison today, that many monasteries in the main city, Yangon, have emptied out and that new arrests are reported almost every day.

"This is the soft continuation of the crackdown of August and September," said David Mathieson, an expert on Myanmar for Human Rights Watch, which released a report on the uprising on Friday.

During the crackdown, the report said, security forces fired into crowds, beat marchers and monks and arbitrarily detained thousands of people.

The report documented 20 deaths in Yangon, but said it believed the toll was much higher.

"Without full and independent access to the country it is impossible to determine exact casualty figures," it said.

The government admits to only 15 deaths.

Meeting with reporters here last week, the top US diplomat in Myanmar, Shari Villarosa, said the continuing repression "raises questions about the sincerity of the military in pursuing what we will consider to be a genuine dialogue leading to national reconciliation."

In what seems to be a sign of Washington's waning clout in the region, China, India and Myanmar's Southeast Asian neighbors have brushed aside Washington's calls for an economic embargo and the diplomatic isolation of the junta.

As the attention of the world shifts elsewhere, the generals have made it clear that they intend to follow their own course, as they have through a half-century of self-imposed isolation.

On Monday, they signaled their defiance by announcing that a constitutional drafting committee had begun its work and was not going to listen to outside voices. The constitution is one step on what the junta calls a "road map to democracy." Many analysts call it a dodge to evade genuine reform.

"The road map will, of course, lead to a military-dominated civilianized government, which will perpetuate themselves in power," said David Steinberg, a leading expert on Myanmar at Georgetown University in Washington.

As it has in the past when it has faced international pressure, the junta has offered small gestures of compliance. But analysts say that whatever happens, the generals are not about to give real ground to the demands of the UN.

In one of these concessions, UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari will visit Myanmar this month for the third time in an attempt to nudge the government toward a dialogue with its opposition.

He follows in the footsteps of a half a dozen other UN envoys over the past 17 years who have failed to moderate the behavior of the junta.

In another concession, a government official has held three meetings with Aung San Suu Kyi, the pro-democracy leader who has spent 12 of the last 18 years under house arrest. The official, Minister of Labor Aung Kyi, said on Monday that more meetings were planned, though he was vague about the time frame.

"We need to consider what to discuss and why," he said. "We are choosing what and why. So we will take where, how and when into consideration in the future."

It was possible to read, in this dismissive comment, a note of confidence that the generals hold the upper hand in their dealings with the outside world.

"This is not what the Security Council has called for -- a genuine process to heal the country," a Western diplomat said by telephone from Yangon.

"The name of the game is for them to barrel on regardless, see off every challenge and pretend there's no problem," said the diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

At a briefing for diplomats and reporters on Monday, Information Minister Kyaw Hsan belittled the protests as the work of a few agitators and dissident monks who were acting with the support of foreign powers.

"Actually, the August/September protests were trivial for the whole country and in comparison to other events in other countries," the information minister said.

They dissolved "because the general public did not take part and our security forces were able to make pre-emptive strikes."

The monks who took part "were not in touch with worldly affairs" and fell victim to the fabrications and instigation of anti-government groups, he said.

The crackdown, witnessed abroad in smuggled photographs and on videotape, drew condemnation and warnings from around the world.

Notable among all of the critics was ASEAN, whose sharp words suggested a real hardening of world opinion against Myanmar, which is one of its members.

In a statement by Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, ASEAN said the videos and photographs "have evoked the revulsion of people throughout Southeast Asia and all over the world."

But this mood seems to have passed.

A meeting of all 10 members in Singapore last month offered an occasion to join hands with the US to bring pressure on the junta. Instead, the association seemed at pains to accommodate the generals.

At Myanmar's request, ASEAN canceled an invitation to Gambari, the UN envoy, to address the meeting. It also changed the language of a much-trumpeted new charter to weaken its section on human rights.

As if nothing had happened in Myanmar in recent months, ASEAN Secretary-General Ong Keng Yong said: "We don't want to come across as being too confrontational in a situation like this."
This story has been viewed 190 times.

Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:55pm EST

NEW YORK, Dec 11 (Reuters) - Vikram Pandit, the new chief executive of Citigroup Inc (C.N: Quote, Profile, Research), the largest U.S. financial services company, said on Tuesday he will undertake a review of all of its businesses, with his priorities including enhancing productivity and allocating capital correctly.

Earlier Tuesday, Citigroup named Pandit, head of its institutional clients group, as chief executive, ending weeks of speculation over who would take the helm.

Pandit said on a conference call after his appointment that a top priority was simplifying structure, reallocating resources and capital. (Reporting by Tim McLaughlin and Joseph Giannone; Writing by Megan Davies; Editing by Jeffrey Benkoe)

December 11 2007 at 07:50PM

By Angelique Serrao


When school reopens next year, several Gauteng schools will be without new curriculum textbooks.

This comes as the company responsible for delivery of the books - EduSolutions - has failed to deliver the books despite a November 30 deadline given by the MEC for Education, Angie Motshekga.

And this means that many of next year's Grade 12 pupils - the first group of matriculants to work with the outcomes-based curriculum - will start the year on the back foot as teaching will begin only once the new books have been delivered.

EduSolutions, a distribution company employed by the Gauteng Department of Education (GDE) to distribute stationery and textbooks to government schools, was recently found to be charging exorbitant prices for pencils and other items, some of which the schools hadn't ordered.

Schools were due to get their Grade 12 textbooks through EduSolutions, after a specific subsidy had been made available by the national Department of Education to ensure that all matrics have their books.

Monday, the department was not prepared to comment on the non-delivery of the textbooks.

On October 3, Motshekga said the deadline for the delivery of textbooks was November 30, and she promised that all schools would have their books.

Marks Ramasike, spokesperson for the Schools Governing Body Association in Soweto, said many secondary schools in the area had not received any books, while only some have had stationery delivered to their schools.

"I have questioned many of the secondary schools in Soweto and many of them have had no books delivered.

"The department, in terms of their management plans, promised that all books would be delivered by November 30. Schools have now closed, so I have to question whether books will be in schools by day one of the 2008 school year."

Since schools closed, Ramasike has been in meetings with GDE officials to try to find out why there have been no deliveries to certain schools.

"They told me they would be delivering during the school holidays. But who will they be delivering to?" he asked.

Ramasike said members of school-governing bodies in other areas across Gauteng had told him they were experiencing the same problem.

"I'm not even sure how the primary schools have been affected because so far I have only questioned secondary schools."

Kathy Callaghan, from the Governors' Alliance, said her organisation had meetings with schools across Gauteng on November 28 and most schools had not received their textbooks.

"To the best of my knowledge, schools have not had textbooks delivered. I am talking particularly about the Grade 12 textbooks," Callaghan said.

She said the late delivery of books was something schools had had to put up with every year.

"This is an ongoing problem we have had with EduSolutions since their tender was awarded in 2003. All our complaints over the years - and we have done everything we can to stop this - have fallen on deaf ears," Callaghan said.

"The first few weeks of school are a write-off, and some schools don't even get anything after the first quarter of the year. Generally the delivery of books is quite poor."

Callaghan said most schools were made aware that they had to order Grade 12 textbooks only in November.

"People from EduSolutions came by and dropped off the catalogue in November. Schools were told they had one day to fill them in, which is an impossible task.

"To add to this, their charges are outrageous. They charge a levy and a delivery fee. We had a case of one school being charged R60 000 for that alone," Callaghan said.

One school in Joburg's northern suburbs showed The Star a delivery slip from EduSolutions for books that were delivered in November.

The slip showed the same book printed twice on the slip, first in small letters and then in capital letters, and the charge for the book, more than R16 000, was printed twice.

The school received 146 books, although they were charged for 292.

The Democratic Alliance's spokesperson for education, David Quail, called on Motshekga to conduct a forensic audit into EduSolutions.

Reuters reports from Boston on a claim of religious discrimination against the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution:

Nathaniel Abraham, an Indian national who describes himself as a "Bible-believing Christian," said in the suit filed on Monday in U.S. District Court in Boston that he was fired in 2004 because he would not accept evolution as scientific fact. . . .

The zebrafish specialist said his civil rights were violated when he was dismissed shortly after telling his superior he did not accept evolution because he believed the Bible presented a true account of human creation. . . .

Abraham, who was dismissed eight months after he was hired, said he was willing to do research using evolutionary concepts but that he had been required to accept Darwin's theory of evolution as scientific fact or lose his job.

The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination dismissed the case this year, saying Abraham's request not to work on evolutionary aspects of research would be difficult for Woods Hole because its work is based on evolutionary theories.

We really do hate to break it to the editorial board at the Wall Street Journal, but the simple fact of the matter is that the FairTax is not calculated like other sales taxes. The FairTax is included in the price, not added on top of the price. Perhaps the board would be less inclined to misstate the terms of the FairTax if they actually read the book or H.R. 25, but we're patient people, so we'll explain this one more time:

(a) Current state sales taxes: You look at the item on the shelf. The item is priced at $100.00. You take that item to the cashier. The cashier adds the state sales tax to the $100. If that sales tax is 7 percent, you pay $107, take your receipt and walk out.

(b) FairTax: You look at the item on the shelf. The item is priced at $100. You take the item to the cashier. The cashier asks you for $100. You pay your $100, take your receipt and walk out. You look at the receipt. The receipt tells you that 23 percent of the $100 you paid for that item is the FairTax and will be forwarded to the federal government. You call upon your years of education and quickly calculate that $23 is 23 percent of $100.

From Ames, Iowa, the Associated Press brings us the latest in hard-hitting campaign coverage:

Campaigning for his wife, former President Clinton says that when they were starting out he was so struck by her intellect and ability he once suggested she should just dump him and jump into her own political career.

That didn't happen, of course, and on Monday he gave an Iowa crowd his version of why it didn't.

"I thought it would be wrong for me to rob her of the chance to be what I thought she should be," said [Mr.] Clinton. "She laughed and said, 'First I love you and, second, I'm not going to run for anything, I'm too hardheaded.' " . . .

"She has spent a lifetime as a change agent when she had the option to do other things," he said.

"I thought she was the most gifted person of our generation," said Clinton, who said he told her, "You know, you really should dump me and go back home to Chicago or go to New York and take one of those offers you've got and run for office."

December 11, 2007

Indiana University added another entry to its list of “first time since ...” accomplishments this season.

Former Pike standout Greg Middleton, Austin Starr and James Hardy were named All-Americans on Tuesday.

Starr made the second team, and Hardy and Middleton were on the third team. Middleton set a school record and led the nation with 16 sacks.

They’re the Hoosiers’ first All-Americans since 2001, when Antwaan Randle El and Levron Williams were honored.

Seventeen year old Middletown native Joey Logano has been named to the 2007 All-American Auto Racing Team by the American Auto Racing Writers & Broadcasters Association.

The AARWBA has named an All-American team since 1970.

Logano was named to the second team in the touring series category.

Logano, a developmental driver for Joe Gibbs Racing, captured the Busch East Series title this season, becoming the first rookie to accomplish the feat. In the process Logano became the youngest driver ever to win events in both the Busch East and NASCAR West divisions, winning in his series debuts in both divisions. Logano won 5 Busch East series events and finished in the top-10 in 10 of 13 races.

Logano is expected to make his Nationwide Series (formerly the Busch Series) debut next May at Dover International Speedway.

Whelen Modified Tour champion Donnie Lia of Jericho, N.Y. was named to the third team in the touring series category. Lia helped Mystic car owner Bob Garbarino to his first career Modified Tour title in 2007.

Five drivers are now in contention for the Jerry Titus award, given each year to the team’s top vote getter. Those in the running include NHRA Top Fuel champion and 2006 Titus award winner Tony Schumacher, ChampCar champion Sebastien Bourdais, IndyCar Series champion Dario Franchitti, Nextel Cup winner Jimmie Johnson and Craftsman Truck Series champ Ron Hornaday.

AARWAB 2007 All-American Team

First Team
Drag Racing: Tony Pedregon, Tony Schumacher
Open Wheel: Sébastien Bourdais, Dario Franchitti
Stock Car: Jeff Gordon, Jimmie Johnson
Short Track: Jerry Coons Jr., Donny Schatz
Touring Series: Ron Hornaday Jr., Frank Kimmel
At Large: Alex Lloyd, Jaime Melo/Mika Salo

Second Team
Drag Racing: Greg Anderson, Jeg Coughlin
Open Wheel: Scott Dixon, Tony Kanaan
Stock Car: Clint Bowyer, Carl Edwards
Road Racing: Timo Bernhard/Romain Dumas, Rinaldo Capello/Allan Mcnish
Short Track: Levi Jones, Joey Saldana
Touring Series: Joey Logano, Bobby Gill
At Large: Frank Manzo, Randy Pobst

Honorable Mention
Drag Racing: Bruce Litton, Dale Creasy Jr.
Road Racing: Max Angelelli, Olivier Beretta/Oliver Gavin
Short Track: Steve Francis
Touring Series: Mike David, Donny Lia, Michael Mcdowell
At Large: Raphael Matos, Carl Renezeder

Shawn Courchesne, 3:37 p.m.