I most definitely believe that there is a strong liberal bias in most of the major media, with Reuters and the AP really being no different than the television sources. On the other hand, I feel that many conservative bloggers will sometimes go a bit far when trying to make an established media outlet look bad.

Case in point, the following photograph from the Associated Press which is making its rounds on the web and being criticized along the way:
Read the rest of this entry »

As you all likely know by now, time has selected ‘You’ as it’s 2006 Person of the Year. By you they mean everyone who uses the internet. As the describe in the article:

This seems all well and good on the surface, especially with the way that blogs and the social media revolution have spread across the internet like wildfire and impacted our everyday lives in recent years. There are, however, some suspicious choices in Time’s profile of 15 influential web personalities.

As Michelle Malkin points out over at Hotair.com, the people profiled are not exactly representative of the entire internet community. Those profiled include a number of liberal bloggers and assorted MySpace, Facebook, and YouTube personalities. Noticeably missing are major conservative bloggers, including those who debunked the now infamous Reuters photos during the Israel-Lebanon conflict. Something seems a bit strange, doesn’t it?

I encourage you to head on over to Hotair.com to see Malkin’s full report on the controversy. And while you’re at it, think twice before basking in the glory of your Person of the Year award.

News:
According to a report by Britain’s TimesOnline, officials from the Scotland Yard have come to the conclusion that the Polonium used to kill former KGB Agent Alexander Litvinenko cost more than $10,000,000. This staggering amount was actually more than ten times the lethal dose, and make it look more and more like the Russian Government was either involved or at least had some knowledge of the plot.

While the $10 million price tag could easily be footed by a unscrupulous businessman or organized terrorist organization, it would be very difficult for any entity not connected to, or at least allied with, a government or government official to obtain. As one British source put it: “You can?t buy this much off the internet or steal it from a laboratory without raising an alarm so the only two plausible explanations for the source are that it was obtained from a nuclear reactor or very well connected black market smugglers.”

Although little information is being released, mostly for diplomatic reasons, it also seems that there are heavy suspicions on two Russian businessmen, Andrei Lugovoy and Dmitri Kovtun, who met with Litvinenko in the weeks leading up to his death. Perhaps most incriminating of all, traces of Polonium have been found in places that they visited as early as October 16th, before the poisoning ever occurred.

Views:
If I were Vladimir Putin, I’d be sweating bullets right about now. I don’t care what the official explanations turn out to be: there is some connection to wither thew Russian Government or high ranking Russian officials, and perhaps the Russian President himself.

With the KGB being as scary, ominous, and corrupt an organization as it was back in the days of the Soviet Union, I am truly amazed that someone like Putin - former head of the KGB - could have ever been elected in the first place. Russia is a corrupt country, no doubt, but when you have former spy and secret police officials in positions of great power, problems are bound to occur - whether they mean to or not.

Surely, SOMEONE in the Russian administration must have known about or supported the plot. I simply don’t see how someone or some group acting without the help of an official could have pulled of such a dangerous.

The other question that this whole incident raises in my mind is just how safe and secure the United Kingdom’s borders are. I want to know how the Polonium was smuggled in and why nothing was done to stop it. Could this be the beginning of truly extensive use of radiation detectors? I don’t know, only time will tell.

What I really think this comes down to is the fact that there are going to have to be some major shakeups in Moscow. I’m not expecting Putin to step down or anything like that, but I have a gut feeling that someone is going to loose either his or his life over this whole fiasco. If it turns out to be the former, we’re going to get real answers; if its the later, than I’m not sure there’s ever going to be an answer.

Common Sense:
If you’re a Government official or prosperous businessman, stay out of assassinations and other terrorist-like operations: there is no good that can come out of it. If you’re a former spy for a corrupt former superpower, be extremely careful with what you say and do if you value your life.

The Global Language Monitor has issued their annual list of the Top Ten Politically Incorrect Words for 2006. This year’s selections range from coffee ordering to business presentations and includes classics from the midterm election as well as an attempt at changing history.

I can’t say that I agree with them, but the list is still quite entertaining and a good review of some of the strangest and more obscure news stories and social trends of the year.

The Top Five Politically Incorrect Words of 2006:

1. Macaca
2. Global Warming Denier
3. History
4. Flip Chart
5. 1a and 1b

To view the full list of ten and complete explanations, head on over to the Global Language Monitor website.

Four or five years ago, not long after I first really started using broadband on a regular basis, one of my favorite websites was the Moving Image collection at the Internet Archive. Over the years, I’ve downloaded and watched dozens upon dozens of videos - from old television commercials to Cold War preparedness films, from how to behave videos to newsreels, and just about everything between.

With that in mind, I’ve decided to start a new, weekly feature on News. Views. Common Sense. Each Friday, I will post a collection of two or three ‘ephemeral‘ videos with a common theme that I have found of particular interest.

This week’s selection is the two part docudrama, A Day Called ‘X’. This 27 minute film was produced and aired by CBS Television in the late 1950s (approximately 1958) and illustrated what might happen if a nuclear bomb was headed for a major US city. The film was made during an evacuation drill in which the entire city of Portland, Oregon actually rehearsed it’s emergency plans. If nothing else, the video provides an interesting look at what cities did to be prepared during the heart of the Cold War.

Part One:

Part Two:

We no longer live in a world where there is a constant fear of nuclear attack from places like the Soviet Union as existed in the Cold War. We are no longer taught the seemingly useless ideology of ‘Duck and Cover‘ in schools. Most people probably don’t even know what to do in a nuclear attack.

What we do face is a world where ex-KGB agents are poisoned with rare isotopes and there is an exceedingly minute but ever present danger of a dirty bomb or rouge nuke finding its way into a major city. North Korea and Iran seem to be advancing in the nuclear realm and may well be the Soviets of a new Cold War. Although none of it is something to worry about, it is something that people should think about at least once in while. Maybe as nothing more than a ‘what if,’ but there none the less. Yet I digress.

What is really interesting is how the human body reacts to radiation. Be it the dropping of a nuclear bomb or the ingestion of a little Polonium-210, humans face forces of radiation all around them. Radiation is nothing to be feared, and is a perfectly natural part of our everyday lives, yet it still holds a certain mystique and fear in many people’s minds.

With that I get to the real point of this post. For those of you who have ever wondered what would happen if your were exposed to a large dose of radiation, Healthbolt.net has a very interesting and informative article on the effects of Ionizing Radiation and exposure to it. I know I at least found it interesting.

Check out the full article over at Healthbolt.net

For months now, news reports on the War in Iraq have had overwhelmingly negative overtones, with far too many deaths and far too little cooperation between the various factions and forces throughout the country.

With all the brave American troops stationed over there, one would expect some of them to have some real ideas for change. One such person was Captain Travis Patriquin, who was recently killed in the very type of attack he was working so hard to prevent.

Despite his untimely end, his idea and the simple cartoon he created to illustrate it still stand, providing both a strategy that really seems to make sense and an interesting viewpoint on what the war must be like for those brave souls defending freedom and democracy around the world. If nothing else, I suggest that everyone take a look at the cartoon for their own enlightenment.

Check out the PDF over at Geardo.com

INDCJournal Via HotAir.com

Once again, GOPbloggers.org is conducting a straw pull for the 2008 Republican nominee. Go ahead and vote (which you can do below) and take a look at how things are going.

Every year for the past four years, the White House has released a Christmas video starring Barney, the first dog. In this light-hearted post, I encourage everyone to check out the latest video. It’s really not political, but it is kind of funny and a unique Christmas greeting.

Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/barney via Hotair.com

The Constitution could not be any more clear when it comes to the separation of Church and State:

There is no provision in the constitution requiring the total separation of church and state.

Despite this fact, cities and towns across the country seem to believe it is there duty to prevent any potentially religious objects from finding there way into public ‘holiday’ displays. Most of the time they seem to take the ax (pun intended) to Christmas trees and manger scenes. This year, however, the fight seems to be going another direction entirely.

News:

Views:

Needless to say, I find the whole thing entirely retarded. I am a Christian, but I respect the Jewish people and their religion a great deal. In a world where we usually hear about people fighting for Christmas trees and manger scenes, it is almost a bit refreshing to see that other groups sometimes have to go through the same hoops. Not that such a situation makes it any better, but it demonstrates a level of ‘equality’ that often seems to be missing.

Getting back on topic, there is no reason - so far as I can tell - to deny permission for a private religious group to erect a temporary holiday symbol on the same public property that is shared by other, more secular symbols (such as ‘holiday trees’). If anything, I would view the city’s decision as limiting the rights of freedom and expression and of religion of those being denied the permission.

By no means would allowing a religious holiday symbol in the display constitute a government ‘endorsement’ of religion. In fact, by allowing various holiday symbols they would be showcasing the diversity that most places seem to flaunt endlessly. It is the threats from the ambulance-chasers of religion - your friends at the ACLU - that are responsible for a great deal of this. On that notion, I encourage everyone to check out an organization actually defending your rights to practice and share your religion and related holidays - the Alliance Defense Fund and their special Christmas Page.

I also applaud Senator Allard on his support of the effort and scheduled attendance at the lighting ceremony - it is people like him that will lead the fight against those who want to trample over our traditional values and implement nonsense levels of diversity and sensitivity. I also encourage all people in Fort Collins who are religious - regardless of your denomination - to join in the lighting ceremony to show your support.

When it really comes down to it, I feel that the whole problem can be solved with two simple changes:

1. Allow the Menorah to be built
2. Pass a law requiring future symbols to be granted permission unless a valid reason can be found not to.

Common Sense:

Holidays are meant to be celebrated and enjoyed. If a group wants to construct a temporary religious symbol on public property (as long as it is reasonable, legal, and non-damaging - no sacrifice pits or things of that nature) they should be allowed to. It does not represent a government endorsement of religion and helps to encourage diversity in the community. It would truly be a win-win situation.