Day: April 24, 2007

New Mexico U.S. Attorney Fired for Being a Vet

Trish

Only in the George Bush years could something like this happen.

The Office of Special Counsel, charged with enforcing both the Civil Service Act and the Hatch Act, is looking into the firing of New Mexico federal attorney and Navy Reserve Capt. David Iglesias. If you recall, Iglesias was fired after Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) called him at home and blasted him for not speeding up fraud prosecutions of Democrats before the 2006 elections.

The Office of Special Counsel is also responsible for protecting the job rights of National Guard and Reserve members who are called away for military duty. In that capacity, [Agency Director Scott] Bloch is looking into whether David Iglesias, one of eight U.S. attorneys dismissed earlier this year, was punished for missing work to serve in the Navy Reserve.

Iglesias, who was the U.S. attorney for New Mexico until he was replaced in February, was cited as an “absentee landlord” in a Justice Department document laying out reasons for his termination. William Moschella, the No. 3 official at Justice, told a House subcommittee in March that Iglesias was fired because he delegated too much responsibility to his deputy.

Good lord. How low can these people go?

Fly the Flags at Half Staff for Slain Students – Why Not for Soldiers?

Jon Ponder

I got an interesting note from my friend Judy today:

We made the correct decision to fly our flags at half mast when the students were murdered last week. What is the difference between their promising young lives of the students and the daily deaths of young soldiers in a wasted war? Shouldn’t our flags fly at half mast until there are no soldiers being killed in the Bush/Cheney war?

I can’t think of a better symbol for the antiwar movement than a Old Glory at half-staff.

DeLay Does a Coulter to Sell Books, Accuses Reid, Pelosi of Treason

Jon Ponder

Pathetic: While he waits for his trial on corruption-related charges to begin, Tom DeLay is out promoting his book. (I seriously can’t think of the title and don’t feel like looking it up.) Sales must not be going well because today he stole a page out of Ann Coulter’s playbook and emitted something deeply controversial in front of a video camera:

The worst thing we could do to Tom is ignore him.

DELAY: I think Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are getting very, very close to treason.

INTERVIEWER: Treason. Now that’s a pretty serious charge.

DELAY: And I’m serious about it. For the Majority Leader of the United States Senate in the time of war, with soldiers dying on the ground, announcing that we had lost the war, is very close to treasonous.

I looked it up while we were driving over here, what the definition of treason is. It’s the betrayal of trust. I have never in my adult life, nor in my understanding of history, seen something so blatantly outrageous for political reasons.

There is so much wrong with this it’s hard to know where to begin. During the Clinton era, DeLay said this:

“[Milosevic is] stronger in Kosovo now than he was before the bombing. … The Serbian people are rallying around him like never before. He’s much stronger with his allies, Russians and others.” Clinton “has no plan for the end” and “recognizes that Milosevic will still be in power,” added DeLay. “The bombing was a mistake. … And this president ought to show some leadership and admit it, and come to some sort of negotiated end.”

And treason is not simply a “betrayal of trust” — or every cheating spouse would be hanged for treason. Here’s the actual definition:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

But even with all that being said, the worst thing we could do to Tom is ignore him.

Checklist: Is Your Husband Gay?

Trish

As a public service to help other women avoid becoming the next Mrs. Gov. Jim McGreevey or Mrs. Rev. Ted Haggard, there’s a new book and handy checklist. Bonnie Kaye has produced, “Is He Gay? A Checklist of Women Who Wonder.”

Editor’s note: Shouldn’t that be, “A Checklist FOR Women Who Wonder?”

Anyway, listen up if you have that nagging feeling hubby just isn’t all that into you. Or your best friend. Or your sister.

“The Gay Husband Checklist”

1. If your husband thinks you are a nymphomaniac or “pushy and aggressive” because you want sex twice a week.

2. If sexual activity steeply declines within the first few years of marriage.

3. You’re always more sexually aggressive than your husband.

4. If your husband is turned off by the thought of touching your vaginal area or performing oral sex on you.

5. If his best friend is gay.

6. If he hangs out in gay bars.

7. If he enjoys watching gay porn movies and surfing gay porn Web sites.

8. If he is excessively homophobic, mocking and imitating other gay men.

9. If he brags about gay men complimenting him on his looks.

She left out number 10, but I think it’s, “If your husband has seen Brokeback Mountain six times but you’ve seen it eight.”

I have to ask about numbers 6 and 7. Can you say, “Duh?”

Quote du Jour

Buck Banks

If we were to do the Second Coming of Christ in color for a full hour, there would be a considerable number of stations which would decline to carry it on the grounds that a Western or a quiz show would be more profitable.

— Edward R. Murrow

Help Gays Pursue Their Agenda

Buck Banks

I keep bugging Editor-In-Chief Jon about it, but he won’t give it up. You know what I’m talking about — the homosexual agenda. Wingnuts and Bible thumpers are convinced that there is a homosexual agenda, that gays have banded together and developed an agenda of some sort, and are actively pursuing it. But Jon won’t tell me what it is.

Nonetheless, this being the Benighted States of America, I believe that homosexuals should be able to pursue their own agenda — whatever it is — with all the freedoms granted to them by the Bill of Rights and the United States Constitution.

Always astute editrix Trish alerted us to the latest assault on the homosexual agenda, courtesy of the American Family Association, which asked this pressing question: Should corporations be promoting homosexuality?

Several corporations are now supporting the homosexual agenda. These companies have been convinced by homosexual activists and the mainstream media that in order to be “fair and tolerant,” companies must make special rules for homosexuals and provide company money and resources to help promote their lifestyle. Many companies, at the urging of these groups, have also begun to support same-sex marriage.

The AFA, in pursuit of its own agenda of “motivating and equipping citizens to change the culture” is cleverly couching its anti-gay slant in a totally non-sectarian survey here. It’s a simple, one-question questionnaire:

If a corporation supports the homosexual agenda, would you:

  • Be more likely to do business with that company
  • Be less likely to do business with that company
  • It would not affect my buying decision

Doesn’t get much more straightforward than that, does it? And now you see my problem — how can I honestly answer that question without knowing what the “homosexual agenda” is? Well, the AFA discovered the homosexual agenda, as promulgated in 1987 by “gay revolutionary” Michael Swift and reprinted as a public service by the AFA along with footnotes that chronicle how successful gays have been in advancing their agenda.

So do the homosexuals a favor and vote in the AFA’s survey. Currently, enlightened folk who are more likely to do business with a corporation that supports gay rights are running far behind, with less than 6,300 votes, versus 189,000 nimrods who say they would be less likely to do business with a corporation that supports the homosexual agenda.

I think it’s the only way we straights are ever going to be able to figure out what the heck those pesky homosexuals are really up to with their agenda and all that. Maybe if we vote for them, they’ll tell us what it is. Right Jon?