Taken out by a Stop Sign

I was parked near one of these cars today. I gotta tell you. I'd rather spend another $30 to fill up my tank and get to know the guys at the gas station than own one of these cars. Who wants a car that you can bench press or get toppled by a pair of middle school cheerleaders?

What happens if you hit a tree or a stop sign? Hitting something like a fire hydrant will probably send you through the windshield. If you get hit by a truck, you're done.

These cars aren't the answer to our gas woes. We need new technology, not just microscopic versions of what we already have.

These European cars simply aren't practical over here. Things are bigger. The streets are bigger. Other automobiles are bigger. Our infrastructure just isn't compatible.

No thanks.

Cheney's Trade Tirade

VP Dick Cheney blasted Democrats for their trade policy. He said that Democrats are on a "destructive path" to protectionism.

Hey, VP Outsource. Go check out some cities in the Midwest and see how your free trade policies have affected them. During this administration's tenure alone my hometown of Muncie, IN has lost 3 major factories that employed more than half the town.

Take a trip to the local mall or grocery store. Where are all of those very low prices that we were promised because of NAFTA? Why hasn't the jobs that Americans lost been replaced by jobs from Mexico and Canada like they said would happen? Why are Canada and Mexico abusing the oil market like the sheiks over there in OPEC? Corporations are getting the cheap labor that they always seek. Where's the flip-side return for consumers and job-seekers that free?

Take a look at our dollar. We have lost more ground to foreign currency than anytime in recent memory.

Yeah, VP Outsource. I think that you guys have been paving a pretty good path to destruction yourself.

Fox News calls Michelle Obama "Obama's Baby's Mama"

This is getting crazy. I'm getting tired of this BS.

Yesterday, Fox News ran a clip calling Michelle Obama "Obama's baby mama". Unbelievable. Most people wouldn't imagine that something so disrespectful would be used to classify a woman who, according to all recent polls has a very good chance of being our First Lady in a few months.
"Baby mama" is a term that implies the "inconvenience" of having a child out of wedlock. It assumes no real formal ties, no relationship, no unity. It's almost as if they called her a whore on national television. From fellow blogger Too Sense:

"And it's really true. You can be an Ivy League grad two times over, married with two wonderful children, and some people still can't see you past the color of your skin to see you as a human being."

Using that term to identify a married, professional woman (let alone someone who will probably will First Lady) is disrespectful, condescending and a slap in the face to husbands and wives who have spent years working on their marriage. It is a slap to the children involved. For them to have the audacity to go out of their way to use that term so casually without merit and completely inapplicable, articulates how they devalue and discredit black family units. We're not husbands, wives, mothers and fathers. We're only a bunch of baby daddys and baby mamas.

This is much worse than describing their "knuckle punch" as a "terrorist fist-jab". This is a bigoted personal attack against black families in general.

This is more than partisan politics. They wouldn't dare use that term to describe Laura or Barbara Bush. Would they use it to describe Hillary Clinton? Why is it okay to use it with Michelle Obama?

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Detainees

This is huge. The Supreme Court just ruled in favor of the detainees in Guantanamo Bay. Their opinion is that they should be given the rights to challenge their detention. We cannot simply hold them without charges indefinitely.

According to the majority decision, the justices felt that our Constitution is applicable at all times, not only when convenient:

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the court, said, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."

Our basic charter cannot be contracted away like this. The Constitution grants Congress and the President the power to acquire, dispose of, and govern territory, not the power to decide when and where its terms apply.... Abstaining from questions involving formal sovereignty and territorial governance is one thing. To hold the political branches have the power to switch the Constitution on or off at will is quite another. The former position reflects this Court’s recognition that certain matters requiring political judgments are best left to the political branches. The latter would permit a striking anomaly in our tripartite system of government, leading to a regime in which Congress and the President, not this Court, say "what the law is."

Beautiful.

Decisions like this help secure the rights for all Americans. The government cannot simply pick and choose when it wants to follow our Constitution. For the first time in years, our founders can stop rolling in their graves.