America’s Toughest Sherriff is taking away one more luxury the residents of Tent City enjoy - their Kool-Aid.

Instead of it, and other flavors of Kool-Aid, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio will limit his 10,000 inmates’ drink choices to water. He began phasing out Kool-Aid, which the inmates call “bug juice,” last week.

Discontinuing the powdered, sugary soft drink will save $43,000 a year, Arpaio says. And Kool-Aid has little nutritional value, he added.

“When you’re in jail, you should not live better than you do on the outside,” he said. “That’s an extra kind of thing, as far as I’m concerned.”

No Kool-aid? That’s a human rights violation! Cue ACLU lawsuit in 5….4….3….

Remember this story about the armed citizen who stopped a knife attack in Memphis, TN? Remember this quote?

“We commend him,” Higgins said. “But we don’t encourage people to take that kind of risk. He could have been hurt.”

The Higgins quoted is Sgt. Vince Higgins of the Memphis PD. And in what is one of the more brazen misrepresentations I’ve ever seen, Sgt. Higgins appears to have been quoted out of context at best.

It’s a shame the media couldn’t report this story without an anti-gun slant.

Jake sent me a link to this hilarious interview between Comedy Central’s Stephen Colbert and DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton. Watch it here.

A few weeks ago, I said I’d be heading to Oklahoma in August. Well, if you want to say hi, I’ll be speaking at the Oklahoma Rifle Association’s Annual Meeting Saturday, August 26th.

I’m really looking forward to getting back to the Sooner State, even if it’s only for 24 hours or so.

Computer science geeks at the University of Arizona have developed the world’s largest intelligence database on terrorist organizations.

Many terror and extremist groups, foreign and domestic, have made the Web a primary source of communication by using sophisticated home pages and other online tools to spread their messages and lure recruits. Three years ago, UA’s Artificial Intelligence Lab created a virtual library that uses supercomputers to store millions of Web pages, capture chatter on terrorist forums and copy videos showing gruesome attacks and murders.

Although this is typically the domain of federal law enforcement, university researchers say their main goal is to perform long-term academic studies on terrorist and extremist groups to better understand their activity on the Web. The lab’s director, Hsinchun Chen, said researchers have shared their data with the U.S. government, but he would not say which federal agencies were involved.

“Even the people we talk to in the federal agencies are hampered by the amount of information that’s being collected. They don’t know how to analyze it,” Chen said. “It’s a new virtual battleground.”

“The Web is the al-Qaida university. They season you, and they recruit you, and they give you all the materials to train you,” he said. “It’s a very significant international phenomenon.”

It’s a little alarming to hear the government can’t keep up with the intelligence U of A researchers provide. Especially since these same researchers are telling the feds the web is the place terrorists operate. I hope someone put two and two together and realized they need more resources to get this job done. I hope the politicians in Washington will provide those resources.

Isn’t it refreshing to see a University working to fight terrorists, rather than inviting them to address students and faculty or attend the University on a scholarship?

Oh, and since blogger transparency is a big deal now - my undergraduate degree is from the University of Arizona. The Husband is a computer science geek who worked on projects with the Army and various intelligence agencies while studying at the U of A.

It’s no contest. Bolton wins by a knockout.

As the only contributor to this blog who has boobs (thank goodness, Cam with boobs ick!), and who breastfead her little boy, I’m going to chime in on this one outside of the comments.

First, regarding the magazine cover, it’s a fantastic picture. It’s a very intimate moment caught on film in the most innocent manner. Breastfeeding isn’t just about feeding the baby, it’s about bonding too. Making a connection with that little being you created. The brightest moments in the haze of the early months of my son’s life were when he opened his eyes and looked at me while he was nursing. Made my (cold as ice) heart melt. This magazine cover captures that feeling well.

That said, I’m very uncomfortable around other women nursing their children. Yes it’s food, but like I said, it’s an intimate moment. I don’t feel comfortable sharing it with other women, even if they don’t mind. I nursed my son in public only once. I excused myself and found a secluded area. When I’m around other women who need to nurse their baby I try to excuse myself in a polite manner. I feel like I’m intruding, and that makes me uncomfortable.

If these ladies would like to nurse in public, and let the whole world in on their special moment with their child, that’s their choice. Many other intimate moments are shared in public, why not this one? Because a breast is involved? I’ve seen and been a party to plenty of intimate moments in public where breasts were involved. I survived. I didn’t become some sexual predator because of it.

Anyone who objects to this picture or breastfeeding in public, because of the sexual connotation is projecting their own insecurities and issues with sex and sexuality. Maybe it’s something to do with guilt associated with religion and sex. Maybe it’s being aroused by the picture, knowing you shouldn’t be according to social norms, and taking the shame out on the mother.

Whatever it is, it’s not just because she’s bearing her breast and breasts are objects of arousal. That’s such a lame ass excuse, there has to be something more behind it.

Over at Fark, they’ve got a link to this story about some people who are offended by this month’s cover of “Baby Talk” magazine, which features an infant nursing.

One mother who didn’t like the cover explains she was concerned about her 13-year-old son seeing it.

“I shredded it,” said Gayle Ash, of Belton, Texas, in a telephone interview. “A breast is a breast — it’s a sexual thing. He didn’t need to see that.”

Okay, now you can see the cover for yourself here.

A breast is a breast, but is that image in any way sexual? Not to me.

I don’t know if my position would be considered conservative or liberal, but I really get annoyed with people who get offended by women breastfeeding in public. It’s food. That’s all. Do we really have to freak out every time a woman bares a breast for a split second in order to feed her child?

Hillary Clinton Museum of Sex.

Gah. My eyes.

So the guy that said (when discussing his 527 “reform” bill):

“While the rhetoric of speech being protected is sometimes bantered around without much thought, it is not actually the speech that is Constitutionally protected, but the individual who is protected to speak his or her thoughts. Speech is not naturally occurring. It is not created of matter and therefore exists outside of the human realm. It is the individual who is protected. Under this amendment, the individual is protected. He or she can speak their will. But, again, I repeat, the public is given the right to know who is speaking”

is apparently also the guy who hired blogger Patrick Hynes of Ankle Biting Pundits back in May.

My buddy Jim broke the story, and I must admit I’m surprised by the relative lack of attention being paid.

For the record, I’ve enjoyed Ankle Biting Pundits over the past year or so, but Patrick really should have said something about this back in May. It doesn’t have to be a huge announcement, but some sort of disclosure (maybe a list of paid clients in a sidebar on the blog?) would be nice. Notice the upper right hand of this blog. Yes, I work for NRAnews.com. I’m not trying to hide it and Hynes shouldn’t either.

I swear, between this and the sock puppetry, this hasn’t been a good week for demonstrating the awesome power of the blogosphere.

… this is really lame.

“You’re a Mini Cooper owner. You’re special. You’re so special we’re going to tell you a secret coded message. This message is only for Mini Cooper owners, so don’t tell anyone, mmkay?”

It’s a car, people. It’s only a car. It’s a small overpriced car at that. Somehow I’ll have to try and find a way to sleep tonight, even without the secret knowledge given to Mini Cooper owners.

Bushie sends the military to the border, and ILLEGAL border crossing drops by 45%.

“We have more eyes and ears on the border, more agents and apprehensions are down,” said Customs agency spokesman Michael Friel. “I think it’s logical to say that we are gaining control of that piece of the border,” Friel said. “Something’s going on.”

Something IS going on. More agents/military on the border = more enforcement = less ILLEGALS crossing in that area.

If only the knuckleheads in Washington could figure out the relationship between border enforcement and the decline in ILLEGAL immigration.

This scary headline makes you think that we’re all a bunch of tubbies who can’t fit in a CAT scan tube. Read into the story though and you find out that:

Overall, 7,778 or 0.15 percent of 5,253,014 reports were habitus limited,”

So, less than 1/4 of 1 percent of people getting these CAT scans, MRI’s, and X-rays are too fat to get a good diagnosis. Well stop the presses and alert Drudge… we’ve got a big (no pun intended) story on our hands!

Kim du Toit’s gotten a New York paper to set the record straight after it published some very bogus stats.

Remember when FEMA wasn’t allowing residents of their emergency housing to exercise their 2nd amendment rights (the NRA threatened a lawsuit and FEMA backed down)?

Apparently they’re having a hard time understanding the 1st amendment too.

In addition to the kick ass bumper sticker, I also saw a rather hippieish looking man (you know the kind - rather earthy looking) driving a Toyota Prius this morning. Nothing unusual anymore, but this Prius had a vanity plate that said “GR84RTH”. Mr. Hippie Prius Driver even went so far as to order the Arizona Environmental vanity plate, where $17 of his registration fee goes to natural resource conservation programs. He’s putting his money where his social beliefs are.

Bully for him, but it got me thinking.

Federal and state gas taxes are assessed on the population via a per gallon charge. Money to pay for maintaining and constructing highways comes out of the funds collected via this consumption tax. Arizona residents pay $.374 per gallon in taxes on each gallon of gas. (Federal gas taxes of $.184/gal plus Arizona gas taxes of $.19/gal) If one person is using less gas, where does the tax burden shift to?

Well, it shifts to me. I knew that. Better mpg means less gallons of gas, less gas taxes paid. Being the anal retentive accountant that I am, I needed to whip out my calculator and see just how much more I’m paying because Mr. Hippie Prius Driver is paying less.

Would you believe me if I told you it costs me 60% more to drive the same roads as Mr. Hippie Prius Driver?

Here’s the math. To compare apples to apples, let’s assume that both Mr. Hippie Prius Driver and I drive a total of 300 miles each week, all highway driving within Arizona.

My evil SUV gets 19mpg on the highway. That means I’m using 15.79 gallons of gas each week. Gas taxes of $.374/gal result in me paying $5.91 per week and $307.32 per year in gas taxes.

Mr. Hippie Prius Driver’s Toyota Prius gets 51mpg on the highway. He’s using 5.88 gallons of gas each week. His gas tax burden comes to $2.20 a week and $114.35 per year.

We’re driving the same amount, the same highways in Arizona, but I pay the Federal and state government 60% more to do so.

I understand it is my choices that utimately makes this the case. I could trade in the evil SUV for a more fuel efficient vehicle. But I don’t want to - it’ll be paid off in a year and I am looking forward to not having a car payment. Nor do I want to restrict Mr. Hippie Prius Driver’s ability to drive a Prius or Insight or any other hybrid vehicle he may choose. I’m pro-choice - pro-ability for people to make their own choices.

What I would like, is a little appreciation. Some thanks from Mr. Hippie Prius Driver. Thank me for picking up part of his tab for nice highways and city streets. Smile and nod in grattitude when I pull up next to him at the gas station, instead of smirking and giving me the evil eye. And could he refrain from giving me dirty looks when the evil SUV passes him on the highway? Is that so much to ask?

Well yes, I’m sure it is. But a girl can hope, can’t she?

**UPDATE**

I have to share a funny story. My mother-in-law is a Howard Dean lefty, and is some sort of chairperson for the Arizona Democratic Party. She harbors some anger towards me for “convincing her son Republicans were the good guys”. One day we were loading Baby Rahn and all his gear into the evil SUV, and she made some snarky comment about how her mini-van was so much more convenient and better for the environment. Here’s how the conversation went:

MIL: Our Town & Country is great for hauling large amounts of cargo. You should think about getting a mini-van. You could put Jackson, your dogs and all your stuff in the back and still have room leftover. And it gets better gas mileage than your SUV.

Me: I like my Pathfinder. It works well for what we need. I’d feel so old and domesticated if I bought a mini-van.

MIL: Well then, what are you going to do then when you have more kids? Stuff them in the cargo hold or put their car seats on the roof?

Me: I’d just buy a bigger SUV.

MIL: ……. (Stunned silence and horrified look on her face)

Good times.

Saw a fabulous bumper sticker on the way to work this morning. It’s quite possibly the best bumper sticker I’ve ever seen.

The Federal Government Philosophy: If it ain’t broke, fix it ’til it is.

Perfect, no?

Phew! Almost 9 hours without access to the blog. Don’t know about you, but I was going through withdrawal.

Thanks to the good folks at WiredHub for working their tails off to get us back online.

Jeez. The Wall Street Journal goes after knives.

I just can’t make this stuff up.

Bunny style.

Did you get the memo?

Note - Potentially NSFW. Contains Bunnies in adult situations using adult language. Turn the volume low enough so only you can hear it.

qualified deduction student interest loanloan ratio to value irandefinition loan underwritertitle a loan withcharity automobile loan your toloanisland2000 loansautomobile loans Map

I’m about to do something I thought I would never, ever do.

I’m going to defend Hillary Clinton.

Yes, I can hear y’all gasping at the shock of it. I know, I’m surprised myself. But the NY Post’s piece on her campaign spending is a tad bit over the top. Especially the snarky detailing of her hair and makeup expenditires. In my humbled, fabulous female blogger opinion of course.

Clinton, the likely 2008 Democratic White House front-runner, ponied up nearly $3,000 in campaign cash for her blond tresses to get some presidential pampering from acclaimed D.C. stylist Isabelle Goetz.

Recently released federal fund-raising records show Clinton shelled out $1,500 in April for Goetz to carefully craft her coiffure and another $1,000 for a camera-ready clip in May.

She passed off both styling sessions as “media production” expenses.

Clinton was so desperate for Goetz to style her gilded mane, she picked up the scissor siren’s $405 travel tab in April and a $38 expenses tab in May.

Goetz, a fixture at the swank Cristophe salon and the favored stylist of John Kerry, has been clipping the former first lady’s locks for years - she’s credited for updating Clinton’s coif from country to chic. To complement the touch-up of her tresses, Clinton invested another $3,000 for makeup maestro Barbara Lacy to brush on some blush.

….

Clinton paid Lacy an eye-popping $1,600 for some eye-lining in mid-May and another mind-boggling $1,300 for some makeup two weeks later.

Forget for just a minute the last name here is Clinton and we’re talking politics. Let’s pretend we’re talking about Hillary Duff and Hollywood instead. Spending $1,500 on hair doesn’t seem so ridiculous, now does it? Why not? Because Hillary Duff is a cutie? Or because we expect celebrities to look fabulous, so spending large amounts of money on a hair cut isn’t so eyebrow raising? They’re in the image business after all.

It’s been said that politics is Hollywood for ugly people. That may be, but it’s still about image. Politicians (D or R) know this, and they want to look their best. There are some very unflattering pictures of Senator Clinton floating around the net. She’s human, and (although some don’t believe this) she’s female. She’s going to care about her appearance. Her image is more important now, during this important campaign season, than it was ever before.

Now for those of you that are going to contend she’s using campaign funds for personal expenses, I won’t argue with that. I don’t know the law on PACs and their expenditures. Don’t know if it’s legal, and I’m not arguing that it is or isn’t. However I leave you with this - when celebrities do it, it’s tax deductible (in a roundabout way). At least Senator Clinton isn’t slapping these expenses onto her 1040.

And for those of you who want to argue spending $1,500 on hair cuts proves the Democrats are elitist and out of touch, I leave you with this - I’ve spent close to $900 already this year on my hair cuts. And that doesn’t include any product my wonderful stylist tries to sell me. Does that make me an elitist and out of touch? I don’t think so. Does it make me crazy? I’ve been told so. I’m sure I’ll be told so again.

Purchase PropeciaPurchase ProzacPurchase RenovaSoma PurchasePurchase TamifluPurchase TramadolPurchase UltracetValium PurchaseValtrex PurchaseViagra Online Purchase Map

A Nobel Peace Prize winner wants to kill Bushie.

“I have a very hard time with this word ‘non-violence’, because I don’t believe that I am non-violent,” said Ms Williams, 64.

“Right now, I would love to kill George Bush.” Her young audience at the Brisbane City Hall clapped and cheered.

“I don’t know how I ever got a Nobel Peace Prize, because when I see children die the anger in me is just beyond belief. It’s our duty as human beings, whatever age we are, to become the protectors of human life.”

Protectors of human life, so long as it’s not Bushie’s life I guess.

I often wonder, do these people even listen to themselves? Does the fact that they contradict themselves in the same breath even register? I don’t know what’s worse - if they’re totally clueless, or if they do realize it, and do it anyway.

I’m really torn on this this story.

OKLAHOMA CITY - A woman whose Marine son died while serving in Iraq is fighting to keep his name off anti-war T-shirts.
Judy Vincent learned last year that Cpl. Scott Vincent’s name is among about 1,700 included on a T-shirt being sold by an Arizona man over the Internet. The front of the shirt reads “Bush Lied” and the back reads “They Died.”

The woman, whose son was killed in April 2004, pushed for Oklahoma legislators to pass a law that makes it a misdemeanor to use a soldier’s name or likeness for advertising purposes without consent. The law goes into effect this November.

The shirt vendor, Dan Frazier of Flagstaff, Ariz., issued an open letter to family members praising the soldiers’ bravery and sacrifice, but said he would not stop selling the merchandise.

I completely understand this woman’s desire to keep her son’s name off of this shirt. At the same time, I understand that this guy is making a political statement (one that I completely disagree with, but it is a political statement).

So I’m torn. I wish the guy would have respected this woman’s wishes, and I don’t necessarily have a problem with the law, but I don’t want to get into a situation where we can’t mention people because we’re critical of their actions.