Gotta love this site!!! http://www.eaglecamera.com/
IT IS FAKE!!!
If you are on dialup, don't bother clicking on the link above. It's ''broadband only''...
UPDATE: This is NOT a live video feed!!! I GOT HOAXED!!! By who? Glad you asked:

Quite phony:

For days I THOUGHT it was a LIVE 24/7 video feed of a nesting bald eagle.
I WAS WRONG. MY BAD... posted by YIH @ 9:55 PM on Sunday, April 30, 2006  : 

And this product is under a recall for being defective and unsafe... posted by YIH @ 3:50 PM on  : 

I come from ''upstate NY'', which had a rather odd attitude about gambling/gaming. Gambling is considered wrong, morally, but horse tracks, OTB (where you can place bets on live TV ''simulcast'' horse racing) and ''the state lottery'' is normal.
I moved to FL in '78 where there was (at the time) no ''state lottery'' and if you wanted to gamble you could go to a horse track, dog track, or hi-li fronton. Don't ask me to explain hi-li. I've never been to a fronton (the arena where hi-li is played) I literally don't know the rules of the game or what it means to win or lose a hi-li match.
But when I first visited FL in '77 there was hi-li, and people actually placed bets on the outcome of the matches (quite legally in fact).
I have had little interest in wagering (never been to a horse or dog track or Vegas, Atlantic City, on board a cruise ship and I don't bother with the FL lottery) but I understand the concept of gambling...
more as needed... posted by YIH @ 1:37 AM on Saturday, April 29, 2006  : 

I think our Nation is in deep trouble. Do I think voting Republican can help ''nation build'' the USA? Nope, not at all. So I think voting Democrat will help ''nation build'' the USA? Again, NO.
Do I think Our Nation can bring ''freedom'' to ''repressed people all over the world''? NO! We CAN'T ''fix the world''. I was convinced that the rulers of Afganistan (the taliban) presented a threat to The Nation that we call the USA and needed to be dealt with, HARSHLY.
And because the ''judge'' in Afganistan was NOT BLATENTLY told ''Here's how it works, we don't care what islam says; WE WILL NOT LIVE UNDER shari'a. And you won't either''.
We FAILED to make it crystal-clear to EVERYONE in Afghanistan, ''IT CANNOT be a crime in Afghanistan to not be a muslim''.
When someone is arrested, put on trial and sentenced to execution for the ''crime'' of not being muslim in iraq I don't think will we have the SPINE to make it crystal-clear to all iraqis that IT CAN'T BE A CRIME TO NOT BE A MUSLIM.
To be updated as needed... posted by YIH @ 12:34 AM on  : 

Rush Limbaugh got busted. The official name of the charge is ''Perscription Fraud''.
No, not forging perscriptions, the term for what he did was ''doctor shopping''. Which is going to multiple Physicians in order to obtain multiple perscriptions usually for controlled substances (such as Vicodin, Oxycontin, ect. ect.).
My perspective on this is that Rush IS INDEED a narcotics addict. Literally, a 'junkie'. No, you don't need to stick a needle in your arm to become addicted to narcotics.
All opiates can be administered in tablet/capsule form, turned into powder and ''snorted'', turned to liquid and injected intraveiniously (the ''junkie'' stereotype) or even smoked.
My opinions on Limbaugh come from my interest in Pro Football. Most (likely including Limbaugh himself) have heard of the likely future Hall of Fame quarterback Brett Farve. As anyone who has even watched a football movie knows, the quarterback is often 'the star player' and the focus of attention.
He also is the player who often absorbs the most physical abuse on the football field during the play of the game. Brett Farve is notable for the fact that he led the Green Bay Packers to several winning seasons, playoff appearances and even a few Super Bowl victories. I mention him because while he was doing these things he ''became medically addicted'' to Vicodin. And being a star QB it was no trouble at all to go to a doctor and say ''look doc, you saw it, I got the hell beaten out of me this past game, i'm in pain and i need something''. The Packers team doctor would merely grab a bottle of Vicodin off the shelf and say ''Here, take these as needed for pain''.
So Brett did. And because all he needed to do to obtain Vicodin was merely ask the team doctor (or just about ANY doctor in Wisconsin) for a perscription for ANY kind of pain medication he wanted. At that point he realized ''HEY, not only do these kill the pain (of football injuries), they make me feel nice and happy as well''. To put it bluntly, he quickly went from taking Vicodin for pain relief to taking Vicodin to feel good. The next thing he knew when his Vicodin was running low he not only felt the pain of his football injuries, he also felt sick when he didn't have enough of it (that's the physical addiction part of narcotics). In an article in Esquire magazine, he decribed himself taking quite a bit of Vicodin, getting nauseauos, vomiting, picking out the pills he just swallowed and vomited up and swallowing them again.
That's when he realized he ''had a problem'' and went into rehab.
I personally belive Rush is physically addicted to opiates, and like Brett Farve always will be. For Rush, it's worse because he built up his IMAGE as (and I quote) ''a paragon of morality and virtue'', with ''talent on loan from God'', ''with half his brain tied behind his back''.
No one ''put him on a pedestal'', he climbed up there himself and stood there beaming with pride. By the late 90's his success was so solid he was able to ''Van Halen'' his career.
(If you are wondering what I mean by 'Van Halen'ing, it comes from the the claim that the rock band 'Van Halen' stipulated in their live performance contracts that a bowl of M&M's be provided backstage with all the brown M&M's removed. BTW, according to Snopes.com, that story is TRUE).
He became THE ''superstar'' of talk radio (and in fact, still is as I write this). I quit listening to ''The Rush Limbaugh Show'' because I decided that his show had become, well, boring and repetitive: ''Democrat bad, Republican good, next verse, same as the first''...
I'll update as needed... posted by YIH @ 10:05 PM on Friday, April 28, 2006  : 

Looks like I'm not the only one who is less than impressed WITH THE HYPE of ''free city-wide Wi-Fi'':
For those who don't know, I chose this specific movie poster to turn into an 'editorial cartoon' for the city's efforts at Wi-Fi because this movie WAS filmed in St. Cloud, FL.

Pioneering Wi-Fi city sees startup woes

APR. 23 9:16 P.M. ET Joe Lusardi's friends back in New York couldn't believe it when he told them he'd have free Internet access through this city's new Wi-Fi network. It's free all right, but residents are, to some extent, getting what they pay for.

More than a month after St. Cloud launched what analysts say is the country's first free citywide Wi-Fi network, Lusardi and others in this 28,000-person Orlando suburb are still paying to use their own Internet service providers as dead spots and weak signals keep some residents offline and force engineers to retool the free system.

"Everybody's happy they were going to have it, but I don't know if they're happy right now," said Lusardi, a 66-year-old retired New York City transit worker.
The same troubles with the small town's big Internet project could be lessons for municipalities from Philadelphia to San Francisco considering similar networks.

St. Cloud officials are spending more than $2 million on a network they see as a pioneering model for freeing local families, schools and businesses from monthly Internet bills. It also promises to help the city reduce cell-phone bills and let paramedics in an ambulance talk by voice and video to hospital doctors.

Instead, what they have so far is a work in progress.

"All technology has its hiccups, and sometimes more than hiccups," St. Cloud Mayor Donna Hart said. "I think that it's going to be a major challenge, and it'll probably be a major challenge for some time until the technology is such that it works properly."

Wi-Fi is the same technology behind wireless Internet access in coffee shops, airports and college campuses around the country.

Several cities have Wi-Fi hotspots, but St. Cloud's 15-square-mile network is the first to offer free access citywide, said Seattle-based technology writer Glenn Fleishman, who runs a Web site called Wi-Fi Networking News.

Other cities like Tempe, Ariz., have networks over a larger area (187 square miles), but access isn't free. Planned projects in places like Chicago and Philadelphia would also dwarf St. Cloud's network, but also require a fee for access.

Google Inc. and EarthLink Inc. are teaming up to build a $15 million Wi-Fi network across San Francisco, and their proposal is entering final negotiations. EarthLink's faster offering would cost $20 per month, while Google would provide a slower, free service financed by advertising.

St. Cloud launched the network on a trial basis in May 2004 in a new division of town to help give businesses an incentive to relocate. After further exploring the benefits, officials decided to expand it citywide.

Project supporters say increased efficiency in city government will cover the network's $2.6 million buildout and estimated $400,000 annual operating expense.

For example, phones that use the Wi-Fi network will allow it to cut cell-phone bills for police and city workers. The city can avoid adding 10 more building inspectors because the network will existing employees to enter and access data onsite instead of driving back to the office.

The network also could keep the estimated $450 that St. Cloud households now spend each year on high-speed access in the local economy.

As of last week, nearly 3,500 users had registered for the network, logging 176,189 total hours of use. St. Cloud contracted with Hewlett-Packard Co. to build the project and provide customer support.

"HP is working with the city and its partners to optimize the solution and install additional access points to help improve signal strength in isolated areas of the city," the company said in a statement.

So far, there have been plenty of calls from frustrated residents. Some can see receivers from their homes and still can't sign on -- even on the porch. Others have tried to connect countless times.

Still, HP said that there were only 842 help-line calls out of more than 50,000 user sessions in the first 45 days of service.

At first, a desktop computer in Lusardi's house could use the Wi-Fi network with no problem, but his laptop would only work outdoors. Even then it was too slow and unreliable, so he kept his $20 per month Sprint DSL service.

Now the desktop doesn't even work, and he's completely abandoned the idea of dropping his pay service and using the network.

"It's just total frustration," Lusardi said. "I'm going to stay with the DSL and just forget it, because I don't think it's going to work. Very few people are going to use it, and they're going to say it's underutilized and they're going to shut it down."

Lusardi didn't shell out the money for a signal-boosting device St. Cloud recommends for those having trouble connecting -- City Hall sells them for $170.

Fleishman said the fact that others share Lusardi's frustration is a crucial technical and public relations problem for the vanguard project. He said residents should understand many won't be able to use the free network without additional equipment to strengthen the signal.

"It's very large and it's very ambitious, so they're going to hit some of these problems before some of the marketing and technology is out there," he said. "Products have to catch up to this new market."

Fleishman said other cities would likely have the same problems -- in bigger cities, even larger ones -- if they didn't fully inform the public of necessary equipment and network limits.

Former Mayor Glenn Sangiovanni, who spearheaded the project, stressed that kinks were still being worked out, but noted that not everyone was having problems.

"There's a lot of variables, and that's part of it," Sangiovanni said. "It could be the block construction you have, it could be the tin roof you have. There's lots of different things that could be unique to your environment as opposed to my environment.

"We went into this with the expectation that it's really a year plan that we're going to implement," he added. "You don't know what you're going to get into when you take on the whole city because you can't stress test that."

Ashley Austin, a freshman at nearby Florida Christian College, said she likes using the network to do homework on the city's picturesque downtown lakefront. She said it's also the only way to get online if Internet service is down at the wireless telephone store where she works.

"So far I haven't had any problems with the use that I've gotten out of it," she said.

Resident Chuck Cooper, a former city commissioner, bought an antenna, but still gets a shaky connection. Navigating from one site to another still produces errors.

Generally, he says, it's slightly faster than dial-up access. But even critics like him are quick to praise the endeavor in between grumbles over early problems.

"All in all, I guess it's a good idea," Cooper said. "I equate it to cell phones 10 to 15 years ago. You used to have a lot of dropped calls, but now they're substantially better. Hopefully, this will get a little better a lot quicker.".

Mr. Cooper, thank you for ''the money quote'':
''Generally, he says, it's slightly faster than dial-up access.''.

Personally, I don't think 'the tech' can make THE DREAM come true.
Wi-Fi was DESIGINED to have a MAXIMUM useful range of 100 feet/30meters.
THERE IS NO 'rabbit that can be pulled out of the hat'.
I have tried and tried and tried. The hat is empty, there is no rabbit in there.
I WANT TO BELIVE IT CAN WORK!!!
BUT I CAN'T PROVE IT WORKS!!!
And there is the problem... posted by YIH @ 6:03 AM on Tuesday, April 25, 2006  : 

He knew...
Synthesizing Tyranny
by Samuel Francis

Pace W.B. Yeats, mere anarchy is not loosed upon the world. What we enjoy in this country, and to a large extent in most other Western nations, is a bit more complicated than mere anarchy. It is, in fact, the unique achievement of the political genius of the modern era: what, in 1992, I called “anarcho-tyranny,” a kind of Hegelian synthesis of two opposites—anarchy and tyranny.

The elementary concept of anarcho-tyranny is simple enough. History knows of many societies that have succumbed to anarchy when the governing authorities proved incapable of controlling criminals, warlords, rebels, and marauding invaders. Today, that is not the problem in the United States. The government, as any taxpayer (especially delinquent ones) can tell you, shows no sign of collapsing or proving unable to perform its functions. In the United States today, the government works efficiently. Taxes are collected (you bet), the population is counted (sort of), the mail is delivered (sometimes), and countries that never bothered us are invaded and conquered.

Yet, at the same time, the country habitually wallows in a condition that often resembles Thomas Hobbes’ state of nature—nasty, brutish, and short. Crime rates have indeed declined in the last decade or so, but violent crime remains so common in larger cities and their suburbs that both residents and visitors live in a continuous state of fear, if not terror. The most obvious sign of what would normally be called anarchy is the immigration invasion. By some serious estimates, no fewer than 11-to-13-million illegal aliens now live in the United States, most of them from Mexico or Central America. The Mexican government actively encourages this invasion and, as the press recently reported, even provides to its own citizens a guidebook on how to carry it out. Our government does nothing serious to stop the invasion, to apprehend the invaders, or to deter the aggression that the Mexican state is perpetrating. The invaders—as residents of Arizona, where some 40 percent of illegal aliens enter the country, constantly complain—threaten the lives, safety, and property of law-abiding American citizens; depress wages; gobble welfare; and constitute a new underclass that is an object of demagogic political manipulation by both American and Mexican politicians. (The illegals in this country cannot legally vote, though that does not necessarily stop them, but they remain voters in Mexico, and Mexican politicians now routinely campaign for their votes inside the United States.) The federal government invaded Iraq, although Iraq never harmed or threatened us, but it does virtually nothing to resist the massive invasion (and eventually the conquest) of its own country and the deliberate violation of its own laws by Mexico.

What we have in this country today, then, is both anarchy (the failure of the state to enforce the laws) and, at the same time, tyranny—the enforcement of laws by the state for oppressive purposes; the criminalization of the law-abiding and innocent through exorbitant taxation, bureaucratic regulation, the invasion of privacy, and the engineering of social institutions, such as the family and local schools; the imposition of thought control through “sensitivity training” and multiculturalist curricula, “hate crime” laws, gun-control laws that punish or disarm otherwise law-abiding citizens but have no impact on violent criminals who get guns illegally, and a vast labyrinth of other measures. In a word, anarcho-tyranny.

One example of the coexistence of anarchy and tyranny must suffice. On January 9 of this year, a man named Mustafa Mohammed, a Somali immigrant, was arrested at the retirement home in Alexandria, Virginia, where he worked, for repeatedly slashing the faces of the residents. Some six elderly residents were injured, one with a broken neck and another requiring 200 stitches. Mr. Mohammed, the alleged perpetrator, has been in trouble before, for a violent altercation committed while working at a local pharmacy. When some other workers made fun of him, he began hitting one of them, a fellow Somali immigrant, in the face. Charges against Mr. Mohammed were dropped after his victim declined to testify (“because other members of the Somali community begged him not to go forward,” as the Washington Post reported). It is understandable why the prosecution went nowhere, but why did Mr. Mohammed wind up with a job in a retirement home?

At the same time when the police, courts, and Somali community were dealing with Mr. Mohammed, the Washington police were engaged in more serious business. They were deploying yet another four hidden cameras in the District of Columbia to catch speeders. Despite earlier assurances from the District government that the purpose of the cameras was public safety, D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams acknowledged in authorizing the four new devices that “the continued processing of District tickets and the collection of District revenues” were the reasons for them. Since August 2001, similar hidden cameras have raked in the tidy sum of $63 million for the District.

Under anarcho-tyranny, the control of genuinely dangerous elements like Mustafa Mohammed is put on the back burner. The real problem is how to squeeze money out of ordinary citizens who will not complain, will not fight back, and will not start slashing people in the face.

Anarcho-tyranny, of course, is not confined to the United States. In Western Europe, by some estimates, there are some 800 people now imprisoned for what can only be called “thought crimes”—for violations of the laws of various countries against racial “defamation” (usually, using racial or ethnic epithets and slurs), denying the holocaust, complaining about immigration, talking about racial differences, and even criticizing non-Western religions. Last December, British police arrested two leaders of the anti-immigration British National Party—Nick Griffin and the BNP’s founder, John Tyndall—because hidden cameras (not for speeders or for collecting revenue but for spying) had recorded them saying unkind things about Islam. Mr. Griffin reportedly called it “a wicked religion.” The West Yorkshire police boasted that they had deployed a team of officers for the Griffin case “five days a week, ten hours a day.” As Rod Liddle, a reporter for the London Spectator, commented in an article about the case:

Now at this point in the article, a really good journalist would tell you how big that team of policemen was. And how much the investigation had cost the taxpayer. And also cross-referenced it with how many burglaries, muggings, etc., had been carried out in the West Yorkshire area from July to 12 December. Especially unsolved ones. But I haven’t been able to find that stuff out: the police won’t tell me. But let’s just remember: a team of police officers, five days a week, ten hours per day.

Just as hidden financial interests were the immediate reasons for the deployment of traffic cameras in Washington, there were hidden political reasons for the round-up of Mr. Griffin, a Cambridge-educated lawyer who was planning on standing for Parliament in the constituency of David Blunkett, then home secretary in the Blair regime. The Home Office, as the Spectator article made fairly clear, seems to have had more than a little to do with the Griffin bust. Mr. Blunkett, Mr. Liddle suggests,

wished to placate New Labour’s enormous Muslim constituency which has been querulous of late, partly over the war against Iraq, partly over the arrests of suspected Muslim terrorists here in the UK. What better way to do a bit of placating than round up the ghastly racists of the BNP?

But pragmatic motives like wanting more money for government or muzzling political rivals are not the real motors of anarcho-tyranny. Nor is the simple calculation of many law-enforcement personnel that speeders and red-light runners do not usually shoot back. Only real criminals do, so it is much safer to get tough with the pseudocriminals than with the real ones. But these and similar cases are merely instances of how essentially corrupt politicians and administrators exploit the anarcho-tyrannical system for their own immediate gain or use it to avoid doing the often dangerous and difficult jobs they are supposed to do. What really drives the system is the revolution of our time, the internal onslaught against traditional identities and values that is usually termed the “culture war.” When we think about which laws are enforced and which are not, this becomes clear.

The laws that are enforced are either those that extend or entrench the power of the state and its allies and internal elites (the police, the military, the bureaucracies, the teaching and brainwashing class, the tax collectors, the professional social engineers whose business it is to design and implement the revolution, etc.) or else they are the laws that directly punish those recalcitrant and “pathological” elements in society who insist on behaving according to traditional norms—people who do not like to pay taxes, wear seat belts, or deliver their children to the mind-bending therapists who run the public schools; or the people who own and keep firearms, display or even wear the Confederate flag, put up Christmas trees, spank their children, and quote the Constitution or the Bible—not to mention dissident political figures who actually run for office and try to do something about mass immigration by Third World populations. Such dangerous elements are the main targets of the tyranny part of anarcho-tyranny.

For that matter, they also happen to be the main targets of the anarchy part. The laws that do not get enforced are those that protect such elements and their families and communities—laws against immigration itself as well as laws that are supposed to protect ordinary citizens against ordinary criminals. In the revolution, you see, the ordinary criminal, as well as the illegal immigrant, is at least an honorary member, if not a full-fledged officer, of the revolutionary class, like Karl Marx’s proletariat or Herbert Marcuse’s countercultural college students and hippies. By contrast, common hoodlums who commit rapes, robberies, and murders serve as the de facto field troops of the culture war, and it is hardly an accident that there is now a growing movement to extend the vote to those criminals unlucky enough to have landed in prison. Having served the revolutionary elite well, they deserve a promotion.

Anarcho-tyranny, then, is not just a deformation of the traditional system of government nor a symptom of “decadence.” The state today is perfectly capable of enforcing laws against illegal immigration and catching and deporting the illegals who are already here. It is also entirely capable of catching and imprisoning or executing the killers, rapists, and robbers who continue to haunt our streets and neighborhoods, just as it is entirely capable of catching speeders and red-light runners. The conventional conservative explanation of such “failures” on the part of the state, as the result of “weakness of will” or something, does not wash. The state and those who control it clearly have the will to enforce those laws they wish to enforce. The state does not “fail” to enforce the rest; it has no intention of enforcing them nor any desire to do so.

Anarcho-tyranny is entirely deliberate, a calculated transformation of the function of the state from one committed to protecting the law-abiding citizenry to a state that treats the law-abiding citizen as, at best, a social pathology and, at worst, an enemy. Having captured the state apparatus, the anarcho-tyrants are the real hegemonic class in contemporary society, and their function is to formulate and construct the new “culture” of the new order they envision, a culture that rejects as repressive and pathological the traditional culture and civilization.

The conservative misunderstanding and mischaracterization of anarcho-tyranny as “decadent” or the result of “weakness of will” (or, alternatively, of “relativism” or “nihilism”), in fact, only helps mask and consolidate the system’s real purposes and functions. As long as those who recognize that there is something at all wrong with the system think it is only a kind of glitch—the result of corruption, typical bureaucratic inefficiency, or decadence, etc.—then they will think it can be “fixed” through conventional political means. Just kick the bums out and elect a new set of good honest Republicans and movement conservatives who read National Review, and all will be well. They will enforce law and order and beef up the border patrol. Everything is OK.

Of course, everything is not OK, because anarcho-tyranny is the system itself, not just a problem in the system, and one important reason it has been able to triumph and lock itself into power is that it depends on the very passivity and conservatism it instills in the population it rules. The population it is enslaving does not need to resist like the violent criminals the anarcho-tyrants refuse to control, but it does need to be willing to act like the citizenry of the real republic that anarcho-tyranny has subverted and displaced. Only if the serfs are willing and able to assume the tasks and duties of governing themselves rather than merely to endure whatever their masters hand down to them will the twin anarchy and tyranny that the current system imposes begin to crumble. “Who would be free,” wrote Lord Byron, “himself must strike the blow.” posted by YIH @ 2:33 AM on Sunday, April 23, 2006  : 

Is the one the foolish step into... posted by YIH @ 6:23 AM on Saturday, April 22, 2006  : 

From the official Easter Bunny of Your Image Here and me:

HAPPY EASTER!!!

BTW, if you're thinking ''Hey, this doesn't look like a 'generic Blogger' blog'', you're right.
I know how websites work and how to customize them to my tastes.
Some examples: Notice that "Blogger'' search bar at the top is missing. I dislike it and know how to remove it. So I did.
Notice that the next to the ''http://'' has been replaced with . I know how to do that as well.
On a serious note, there IS one topic that is ''off limits'' here. My employment. All I will say here is yes, I am employed and that's why updates might not be as frequent as other blogs you may have seen.
Otherwise, I DO NOT discuss my employment here. This blog can be seen by ANYONE, ANYWHERE that can punch up ''http://americanfreedoms.blogspot.com/'' on the Internet. I understand what can be found on the Internet.
If I say nothing about my employer, there is nothing my employer can print out and ask me to explain. I have no problem discussing my blog to co-workers, but even WHO I work for will not be mentioned here.
Otherwise, this is a hodgepodge of things. Cool things I find on the Internet, whatever I feel like ranting about, even some politics. What you WON'T find here is foul language, (I know ''The seven dirty words'', I just seldom see any need to use them) or ''stuff that will give old ladies heart attacks or scare little kids''.
Unless it's something like;
(scroll down)


























(keep scrolling)


















(keep scrolling)




















From the Your Image Here Council of Physical Fitness and Sports:
DO NOT BECOME GOVENOR OF CALIFORNIA... posted by YIH @ 4:01 AM on Friday, April 14, 2006  : 

NO, seriously, Bert racing:

See the whole wacked-out thing here... posted by YIH @ 3:33 AM on Thursday, April 13, 2006  : 

At the end of my discussion of Claire Berlinski’s FrontPage interview on Europe and Islam, I mentioned how Irving Kristol at the 1994 National Review Conservative Summit had lightly said that our civilization was finished, but it was “going slowly. So enjoy it while you can.” This offhand dismissal of everything we are and everything we are supposedly fighting for received the laughter of the conservative audience. However, at least one person in the audience was disturbed by the contradiction between Kristol’s cheerful acceptance of the looming demise of our civilization, and a major article he had written just a year earlier in which he had issued a ringing call for conservatives to wage a 100-year-long culture war. Observe the way Kristol responds to this sincere conservative who was evidently hoping to find a measure of intellectual consistency and leadership:

Audience Member: I have a question for Mr. Kristol. You wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal about the coming 100 years of conservatism which was rather optimistic, and it seems to me what you said today is not really consistent with that. And what I’d like is for you to tell us why.

Irving Kristol: Did I write that?

Audience Member: You did.

(Laughter)

It cheered me right up when I read it.

(Laughter and applause)

Irving Kristol: I’m sure I was right.

(Laughter)

But —

Robert Bork: Both times.

Irving Kristol: But I don’t remember exactly what I said. It has to be looked at and interpreted in a certain way.

(Laughter)

I’m sure if I read it again, I could figure out how to interpret it so that it’s consistent with everything I’ve said.

(Laughter)

Robert Bork: This is neoconservative deconstruction.

(Laughter and Applause)

[National Review Institute, Conservative Summit, Washington, D.C., Sheraton Washington Hotel, March 5-6, 1994.]

It sure is great that they were having so much fun, isn’t it? I guess Kristol was simply following his own advice to “enjoy it while you can.”

My 2¢;
What bothers me is this ''Thelma and Louise'' undercurrent that seems to be THE DRIVING FORCE of modern ''conservitism''.
The mentality that ''the cliff is up ahead, FLOOR IT!!!''.
DON'T TOUCH THAT STEERING WHEEL, DON'T TOUCH THAT BRAKE PEDAL, just grind that 'gas pedal' into the floor.
If what I just wrote made no sense to you, read the above RED TEXT, and when you are done reading it, read it again.
And when you are done reading the above RED TEXT again, read it again... posted by YIH @ 9:08 PM on Sunday, April 09, 2006  : 

Got this photoshop from Fark... posted by YIH @ 2:35 AM on Monday, April 03, 2006  : 

WWE: Illegal Mexican Wrestlers Taking Smackdowns American Wrestlers Don't Want

March 29, 2006 | Issue 42•13 | Onion Sports

STAMFORD, CT—In response to criticism over World Wrestling Entertainment hiring policies, World Wrestling Entertainment Chairman Vince McMahon defended the league's reliance on Mexican wrestlers as "the only way fans can witness the grueling, bone-crunching maneuvers that American wrestlers want nothing to do with.".

Where did this come from? This website is known as ''The Onion''. This site has been around since the 90's (it might actually be 10 years old now). Those who have heard of ''The Onion'' know what it is. Unlike supermarket tabloids, ''The Onion'' has no pretense whatsoever about reporting news. It's a humor site, it's fiction. This ''news story'' is 'made-up', phony and bogus.
The reason I posted this is, like all good comedy, it holds a mirror up to the truth...

posted by YIH @ 1:56 AM on  : 

Even on IE I can FINALLY override the default Blogger icon. It WAS NOT EASY to get it to work on IE (*&^^%$#@ micro and soft!!!).
Getting my icon to work on was easy to do for Firefox or Opera.
All I had to do was use HTML to say ''here it is, use it'' and it works with no problem whatsoever.
With IE it was ''it must be in a certain image format (solved THAT puzzle), located on a website in a certain way (solved THAT puzzle) and coded to a website hosting service in a certain way (finally solved THAT puzzle as well).
What SUCKS is the fact that I had to try and try and try to get this to work. And I can't even say if my solution will work for you. EVEN IF I EXPLAIN HOW I DID IT!!!
This has NOTHING to do with ''computer security'', it's just beuracratic and stupid.
It is a de facto MONOPLY decreeing ''you will do as we say''.
Quite troubling... posted by YIH @ 8:10 PM on Sunday, April 02, 2006  :