Sotomayor reversal expected...at least by some

It's been interesting following some of the reaction to the Supreme Court decision today that reverses the decision by Judge Sonia Sotomayor related to the white firefighters in Connecticut. While some believe it will have an impact on her confirmation hearings, some actually hope it will would probably be a better statement. Yet, according to this CNN Commentary it's not as unusual as some may think:

The reversal was expected and is not the first time an appointee has been reversed by the court he was about to join.

Indeed, two of Chief Justice Warren Burger's opinions for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals were reversed in 1969, the year he joined the court. One was Watts v. United States, in which the defendant had been convicted for threatening the life of the president.

By a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court reversed, holding that Watts' supposed threats were really nothing but hyperbole. The decision came down one month before President Nixon nominated Burger. More significantly, after Burger had been confirmed, the Court reversed him again, this time in a major case -- Powell v. McCormack.

I also think this piece in Forbes is an interesting one on why Republicans should not oppose Sotomayer.

Blogging from your backyard

I love my tower and I don't plan to get rid of it any time soon, but I have to admit I do like the ability of going outside using my laptop and our wireless connection. While my outdoor furniture is not totally conducive to a comfortable typing scenario for hours on end, right now I am sitting on my back deck, enjoying a cool breeze, yelling at the dog to stop eating grass...

Okay so it'd be more perfect if the dog wasn't eating grass, but I spend too much time inside and since I was behind on a variety of writing assignments this was one way to be able to be outside, and still be able to get some things done. As well as to take a break and post something here, since I have been behind here as well.

Now, if I had a waterproof laptop, I could blog while I was floating on a raft...

:-)

Online sales helps nutrition and diet industry

You may not think about it when you see websites, emails or other ads for diet or nutrition products but it's become an over $226 billion global nutrition industry. Part of that is directly related to the internet and it's ability for people to see, hear, review and buy products online. Search engines and key words like best weight loss pills help push some products up to the forefront that in years past would have had to spend much more on other forms of advertising.

Obama job approval slipping but not with Democrats

A friend sent me a link to the Gallup Daily and at first glance Obama's approval ratings are dropping, though they are still over 50%. When you look just a bit deeper:

Thirty-three percent of Americans now disapprove of the job Obama is doing as president, just one point shy of his record-high 34% disapproval score from early June.

Since Obama took office in January, his approval rating in Gallup tracking has averaged 63%, and most of his three-day ratings have registered above 60%. Approval of Obama did fall to 59% in individual readings in February, March, April, and early June; however, in each case, the rating lasted only a day before rebounding to at least 60%.

The latest decline in Obama's approval score, to 58%, results from a drop in approval among political independents as well as among Republicans. Democrats remain as highly supportive of the president as ever.

Obama's approval rating was 60% from June 13-15, at which time 88% of Democrats, 60% of independents, and 25% of Republicans approved of the job he was doing. In the June 16-18 polling, Democrats' approval of him stands at 92% -- up slightly -- whereas approval is down among both independents (by seven points) and Republicans (by four points).

It's interesting if you compare the approval rankings of other Presidents as to what their highest approval rating was - as an example, George Bush's highest approval rating was in 2001 at 90%.

From wiki:

Highest approval rating

George W. Bush holds the record with 90% (9/21-22/2001 -- after the September 11 attacks).
George H. W. Bush is second highest, with 89% (2/28/-3/3/1991 -- after the Persian Gulf War).
Harry S Truman is third highest, with 87% (6/1-5/1945 -- after V-E Day).
Franklin D. Roosevelt is fourth highest, with 84% (1/8-13/1942 -- after Pearl Harbor).

Lowest approval rating

Harry S Truman holds the record, at 22% (2/9-14/1952 -- during the Korean War).
Richard Nixon is second lowest, with 24% (7/12-15/1974, 8/2-5/1974 -- during Watergate).
George W. Bush is third lowest, at 25% (10/3-5/2008, 10/10-12/08, 10/31-11/2/08 -- during the Late 2000s recession).
Jimmy Carter is fourth lowest, with 28% (6/29-7/2/79 -- during the Iran hostage crisis and ensuing Operation Eagle Claw).

Lowest maximum approval rating during the president's time in office

Richard Nixon holds the record with 67% (1/26-29/1973).
Ronald Reagan is second lowest with 68% (5/8-11/1981).
Barack Obama is third lowest with 69% (1/22-24/09).
Bill Clinton is fourth lowest with 73% (12/19-20/1998).

If you are thinking about planters...

I used to love to garden, it would be fair to say I still do but I don't make enough time for it. I do have a window box planter but it's one that could use some TLC and some more plants. Right now it's more weeds than plants, though at least I can argue that some of the weeds are kind of pretty. Many weeds don't look like weeds, or at least that's the story I'm sticking with at this point. :-)

There are an amazing number of different styles of outdoor planters out there of almost every price range. Which makes it fun to dream online about which type I'd like to have for the new house since the porch there is huge and is the perfect type to have garden planters and who knows, maybe a fountain...That would be even easier to maintain.

Iran becomes world’s biggest prison for journalists

Reporters without Borders is reporting that 33 journalists and cyber-dissidents are being jailed in Iran. One of those is a Newsweek reporter. As the traditional media tries to figure out ways around Iran clampdown, this puts into perspective the request that was made much of that Twitter consider it's timing as to an update that would have put Twitter in Iran temporarily off line.

China leads the ranks with 30 journalists and 49 cyber-dissidents jailed...

And in Palestine, it's easy to suggest a solution you know the other side will never accept...

It's hard to imagine anyone taking the latest endorsement of a Palestinian State seriously despite the attempts to make it seem as if "Bibi" has done something dramatic. Perhaps some not in touch with reality will take his statement as some type of a huge change but it's clear that the caveats are such that Palestine would never agree. Even Time while making much ado about how Obama has pressured him points that out:

Just so you don't get too much of your hopes up, Netanyahu's support of a two-state solution comes with conditions that Palestinians have never accepted before and have shown no signs of accepting now. He plainly urged the Palestinians to accept Israel. "We need courage and sincerity not only on the Israeli side: we need the Palestinian leadership to rise and say, simply 'We have had enough of this conflict. We recognize the right of the Jewish People to a state its own in this Land. We will live side by side in true peace.'"

He also explicitly denied Palestinians their greatest dream: the right of some 5 million Palestinian refugees to return to what is now Israel. "Justice and logic dictates that the problem of the Palestinian refugees must be solved outside the borders of the State of Israel. There is broad national agreement on this," he said, to thunderous applause from a stage at Bar Ilan University. He also reiterated Israel's intention to keep a grip on Jerusalem, which the Palestinians also want as their capital. The Palestinian reaction was unsurprising. Said Palestinian Chief Negotiator Saib Arekat: "In a thousand years no Palestinian leader will accept this."

As pointed out in the New York Times:

“Benjamin Netanyahu spoke about negotiations, but left us with nothing to negotiate as he systematically took nearly every permanent status issue off the table,” Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said in a statement. “Nor did he accept a Palestinian state. Instead he announced a series of conditions and qualifications that render a viable, independent and sovereign Palestinian state impossible.”

And Al Jazeera:

Nabil Abu Rdainah, a spokesman for Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, dismissed the speech, saying: "Netanyahu's remarks have sabotaged all initiatives, paralysed all efforts being made and challenges the Palestinian, Arab and American positions."

Saeb Erekat, the Palestinians' senior negotiator, called on Obama to intervene to force Israel to abide by previous interim agreements that include freezing settlement activity in the West Bank.

"The peace process has been moving at the speed of a tortoise. Tonight, Netanyahu has flipped it over on its back," he said.

In Iran, questions of election rigging....

A variety of articles I recommend on this story. CNN:

Khamenei praised the large voter turnout at Friday's election, where President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was re-elected with more than 62 percent of the vote, and said the result showed Iranians value "resistance against oppressors," the agency reported.

But clashes between police, supporters of the president and protesters opposing Ahmadinejad, dominated the capital Sunday.

Supporters of Mir Hossein Moussavi, an opposition candidate many analysts believed could unseat Ahmadinejad, allege the vote was rigged.

Hundreds of regular and riot police were on the streets as civil unrest continued for the second straight day.

But it was non-uniformed activists, on foot and on motorcycles, who appeared to be behind the most violent incidents.

Al Jazeera:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's incumbent president, has defended his disputed re-election at a public rally in Tehran, insisting that the vote was not "distorted" as claimed by his rivals.

The speech was delivered amid reports of arrests of several reformist politicians who supported Mir Hossein Mousavi, Ahmadinejad's main challenger, and a formal appeal by Mousavi for the cancellation of Friday's vote.

Supporters of the conservative Ahmadinejad, waving Iranian flags and his portraits filled the capital's Vali Asr Street on Sunday to listen to his speech after the authorities declared that he had won a second four-year term by a huge margin over Mousavi.

What makes this interesting is the voter turnout which Mousavi supporters point out would have created millions of votes being counted within a few hours. They are claiming that the results were switched, appearing to believe that it was really Mousavi who had the over 62% majority.

Time is reporting the Iranian regime has cracked.

Even some of the most astute Iran-watchers are taken aback. "I don't think anyone anticipated this level of fraudulence,” says Karim Sadjadpour of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “This was a selection, not an election. At least authoritarian regimes like Syria and Egypt have no democratic pretenses. In retrospect it appears this entire campaign was a show: Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei wasn't ever going to let Ahmadinejad lose."

Things I envision...

While we are still early in our house renovation project, a girl can still dream, which I do often when it comes to things inside and outside of the house that we will live in after the work is done. The yard at the house is three times larger than the one we have now, which has made me think about conflicting dreams, gazebos, Asian themes or keeping with my goal of the house as it was first built in 1905 (color wise I'm not going back to no heat and outhouses).

I can imagine what type of garden the house would have had, as I debate that versus trying to have plants and flowers that are native to this area. Of course it will probably be years before we get to the landscaping, but when we do? By then I will have decided...It is fun however to dream...

Lawmakers take issue with Pennsylvania & Ohio losing most

Interesting article that caught my attention Lawmakers Chide Automakers Over Dealership Cuts:

Out of the 1,323 General Motors dealers targeted for elimination, the most will come from Pennsylvania. Ninety dealerships will be forced to wind down in the state. Pennsylvania is followed by Ohio with 79, Illinois with 66, California with 65 and New York with 60.

This is going to have a big impact on these states, and there has been a great deal of discussion if there is any political motivation to the closings.

CNN has more:

The dealers and John McEleney, chairman of the National Automobile Dealers Association, argued that closing dealerships does not affect the automakers' bottom lines. Dealers are independently owned and operated, and do not receive significant administrative support from manufacturers, they said. Furthermore, many of the dealerships set for termination are profitable.

"Everyone agrees that both Chrysler and GM need to decrease costs and increase revenue to survive, but eliminating dealerships does neither," said McEleney, in testimony. "The manufacturer's costs do not vary whether there are 6,000 dealers or 3,000 dealers."

The dealership owners agreed. "Our dealerships do not cost auto manufacturers a penny," said Alan Spitzer, who owns Spitzer Automotive Group of Elyria, Ohio, which has seven dealerships that are slated to be shut down by GM and Chrysler. "All products and services, which Chrysler and GM provide to a dealership, are charged back to the dealership at a profit. If we lose money it comes out of our pocket, period."

Which if that is true, leads to interesting questions as to why this is being done...

Easy way to find out changes to Social Security

I get lots of questions at times from people for help on finding information on a variety of topics. It's really a matter of asking a search engine the right question, like recently I was asked for information on how much a person could expect to earn on Social Security, which is online, the Social Security Press Office has that information.

There are also a variety of companies out there that can help people with social security, especially when it comes to social security disability. One company that's been doing this since 1984 is Allsup, they state they have a 98% success rate and they are upfront with what their fees are. It is possible to file a disability claim without having to use a service, but many people find the paperwork process cumbersome and confusing and it can be a faster process when you are armed with information.

James Von Brunn may have acted on his own, but he's hardly alone.

Newsweek has the story Really A Lone Wolf? that references a previous deeper look into some of the hate groups out there and some of the reasons why they think they are on the increase.

One point written there I wanted to explore:

Are attacks like this simply desperate one-time acts?
Within the white-supremacist movement there is a strong notion of leaderless resistance. The notion is this: look, we can take over the country just by having small cells or lone wolves commit key acts of violence because the rest of the country, at least the whites, will then go along with you. It's called the "propaganda of the deed"—you know who the enemies are, you go out yourself and hopefully people will take notice and act together in resistance.

These ideas were promoted by Louis Beam, a KKK member, and published in The Seditionist, his newsletter, in the early '90s. It came out around 1991, but the idea has been pushed in the white-supremacist movement for a long time since. He has been a big influence on the white-supremacist movement. He's a very scary guy. He was noteworthy because he was also part of the militia movement in the '90s. He's not the inventor of leaderless resistance, but he's remembered for being the most important modern proponent of leaderless resistance in the neo-Nazi world.

I've actually read some of Louis Beem's work, including Leaderless Resistance where he credits who was the original person who came up with the premise. He's been in the background and he hasn't been openly involved in the past few years. Though as pointed out in 2002 he's been known to disappear then re-appear.

According to Hatewatch:

Von Brunn runs the website holywesternempire.org, which was listed in 2008 as a hate site by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Von Brunn has a long history of associations with prominent neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers. In the 1980s or early 1990s, von Brunn was employed by Noontide Press, a part of the Holocaust denying Institute of Historical Review, which was then run by Willis Carto, one of America’s most prominent anti-Semites.

Von Brunn is the author of the 1999 book, “Kill the Best Gentiles,” a racist and anti-Semitic tome that argues that whites are seeing “today on the world stage a tragedy of enormous proportions: the calculated destruction of the White Race and the incomparable culture it represents. Europe, former fortress of the West, is now over-run by hordes of non-Whites and mongrels.” A raging anti-Semite, von Brunn blames “The Jews” for the destruction of the West. The book is dedicated to prominent neo-Nazis and racists including Revilo Oliver and Wilmot Robertson.

What's also interesting is the rush for many sites to pull information, from the Free Republic to Yahoo to Wikipedia, comments made by Von Brunn are disappearing at times temporarily other times permanently. It's as if trying to hide some of the public comments he made makes them go away. They don't...

Tuxedo or Jellicle cats...

The amusing things people believe when it comes to one particular kind of cat caught my attention, in part because my home is experiencing a cat war because of a tuxedo cat. First most of the cats people call "tuxedo cats" are not really so, to be a true tuxedo cat, the cat has to have a solid black coat with white fur on the paws, belly, chest and throat. In other words, it has to look like the cat is actually wearing a tuxedo.

Fans of these cats have made some outrageous statements, such as tuxedo cats are 200% more intelligent than other cats and that the google search term for tuxedo cats is slightly less than Paris Hilton. I've had many cats, the variations of their intellectual ability has never appeared to have been a factor...if anything my Siamese cats appeared to be smarter than the others, or at least more crafty...

These black and white cats are also called by some to be Jellicle Cats, based on the book Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats, written by T. S. Eliot, which of course inspired the musical "Cats."

Our tuxedo cat is named "Yoko" and some of you will remember how I ended up with her living here in disharmony with my other cats. Yes, this is the cat that my ex-husband bought for my youngest without my consent and left in a taped up box on my porch because he moved into an apartment that didn't take cats and couldn't be responsible enough to either a) find a home for the cat or b) rent someplace that allowed cats. Perhaps because she was used to being an only cat or perhaps just because she's so much younger than my other cats (who range in age from 8 to 18), she picks on them, to the point three of them are afraid to use the litter boxes in the basement because she was lying in wait for them and then attacking them when they tried to use it. This has caused a great deal of hassle, and discussion which resulted in creating a Yoko free zone, which is unfortunately my bedroom. At least until we move into the house we are renovating that won't be done for months, but perhaps then since the house is twice as big as the one we have now, either there will be more peace or a bigger area for her to be territorial over...

How can you be "pro-life" then murder someone?

Apparently the answer to my question asked in the title, is that they believe it is justifiable homicide. There are quite a few media reports out there, CNN as one example, but one of the better articles out there giving full information on the man who was charged in the murder of Dr. George Tiller, Scott Roeder, is on McClatchy that comes from a Kansas City Star article.

Part of it:

Those who know Roeder said he believed that killing abortion doctors was an act of justifiable homicide.

"I know that he believed in justifiable homicide," said Regina Dinwiddie, a Kansas City anti-abortion activist who made headlines in 1995 when she was ordered by a federal judge to stop using a bullhorn within 500 feet of any abortion clinic. "I know he very strongly believed that abortion was murder and that you ought to defend the little ones, both born and unborn."

Dinwiddie said she met Roeder while picketing outside the Kansas City Planned Parenthood clinic in 1996. Roeder walked into the clinic and asked to see the doctor, Robert Crist, she said.

"Robert Crist came out and he stared at him for approximately 45 seconds," she said. "Then he (Roeder) said, 'I've seen you now.' Then he turned his back and walked away, and they were scared to death. On the way out, he gave me a great big hug and he said, 'I've seen you in the newspaper. I just love what you're doing.'^"

Roeder also was a subscriber to Prayer and Action News, a magazine that advocated the justifiable homicide position, said publisher Dave Leach, an anti-abortion activist from Des Moines, Iowa.

"I met him once, and he wrote to me a few times," Leach said. "I remember that he was sympathetic to our cause, but I don't remember any details."

Leach said he met Roeder in Topeka when he went there to visit Shelley Shannon, who was in prison for the 1993 shooting of Tiller.

"He told me about a lot of conspiracy stuff and showed me how to take the magnetic strip out of a five-dollar bill," Leach said. "He said it was to keep the government from tracking your money."

Roeder, who in the 1990s was a manufacturing assemblyman, also was involved in the "Freemen" movement.

As some media sources have pointed out, Roeder posted on a message board with the suggestion that people should show up at Tiller's Church, it's also been reported that anti-abortion protesters had shown up on a frequent basis to protest outside the church.

Tiller had recently reported threats were increasing, he had a body guard who was not at church. It's not clear if the body guard never accompanied him to church or for some reason did not this particular Sunday. It's also clear there are people now saying that there should have been "red flags" about Roeder, and while Wichita police Detective Tom Stoltz has stated, "At this time we feel this is an act of an isolated individual" -- I don't agree with that, you have groups that readily admit in public that they advocate/justifying killing doctors who perform abortions and consider it "justifiable homicide" -- you have publications out there advocating it -- it's fairly easy to realize if there were groups advocating terrorism here in the US, openly talking about killing people and even having publications that advocate this, there would be a heck of a lot more action taken.

I believe in freedom of speech, but I also believe if you have a group that is advocating violence and murder? That should warrant a bit more action. It's not as if this is anything new, it's been known for decades, that some believe this and this is not the first time someone had tried to kill Dr. George Tiller, Shelley Shannon is still in prison from the 1993 attempt. Whether you feel this type of action is Domestic Terrorism or not, who's really watching these groups, is a question that should be asked...