Unhappy New Year

Perhaps Paul would have avoided his sniffly start to the year had he joined his French brothers in arms in protesting the whole concept of 2007. Here is the text from their petition:

Deeply disturbed by the lack of a United Nations resolution certifying the coming year as legitimate and internationally sanctioned,

Noting with approval the current partial adoption of “Common Era” nomenclature to replace the religiously biased “Anno Domini” epoch system,

Observing the lack of uniformity in current major time units,

Recognizing the undue burden placed upon the developing nations of Tonga and Fiji by the current positioning of the International Date Line,

1. Demands that the United States of America halt the current progress of 2007 until the year can be officially sanctioned and endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly,

2. Calls for the international adoption of the “Common Era” and “Before Commen Era” nomenclature for historical epochs,

3. Condemns the use of the birth year of the Christian religious figure Jesus of Nazareth for the dividing point between the current and previous historical epochs,

4. Proposes the creation of a committee with representatives from all national, ethnic, cultural, and religious groups to propose and adopt an unbiased new epoch divider year,

5. Requests the international adoption of a metric based time system to replace the current, but antiquated, time unit system,

6. Encourages the movement of the International Date Line so as not to place an unwarranted time and date burden on developing nations.

Yep. Those nutty French. Although it is a pleasure to see them finally admitting that the United States does; in fact, have complete control over the time-space continuum (bold).

Starting the Year Right!

With a cold.

In 3 1/2 years in Arizona, I never once caught a cold or sinus infection---things I routinely fought with while living in California. This is our second winter back and my second cold.

I'm sensing a trend and I don't like it.

Along the Avenue

Lompoc residents living around the 600 block of West Ocean Avenue are organizing and preparing to make a stand at tomorrow night's city council meeting where the city's planning commission decision allowing Good Samaritan Shelter Inc. of Santa Maria to open a detox center and shelter at what has been the home of Avenue Flower Shop for for decades:

Residents who oppose placing a drug and alcohol detox center on West Ocean Avenue near downtown are circulating petitions and encouraging opponents to attend the Lompoc City Council meeting Tuesday night, when the Planning Commission's approval of the center will be reviewed.

The center, proposed by Good Samaritan Shelter Inc. of Santa Maria, would provide perinatal services to 16 women in recovery and include a separate co-ed detox building with six beds. The program would be residential and the residents would be monitored for substance abuse of any kind, including regular drug testing.

There is no such recovery center in Lompoc. Recovering drug users must go to the Good Samaritan center in Santa Maria.

Several hundred signatures already have been gathered and a large crowd is expected at the meeting, according to Alice Milligan, one of a group of residents that appealed a Planning Commission decision to allow the detox center to open at 608 West Ocean Ave., the current home of the Avenue Flower Shop.

Milligan said petitions are being left at stores and passed around in neighborhoods. They include the name and telephone numbers of each council member.

“There is a lot of support for the appeal,” said Milligan, a community volunteer who has been involved in the effort to revitalize downtown. “We want to show the City Council that there in concern in the community about the location.”

“We need a detox center, but not on our main drag,” she said.

As an interested party--for more than a few reasons--I have to call time-out here. First off, H street is now the main drag in Lompoc.

A quick trip down Ocean will make that clear when you take the time to drive it. It's 40 year old, in-some-places-empty-facades speak of the town that was, not the one that is. The city center that "is" runs along H street from College all the way to the Mervyn's center just south of the airport.

The current owner at Avenue knows it. I'm left to wonder why long-time residents don't recognize it.

Additionally, something that I haven't seen much commented on is this one little tidbit from the original plan proposed by Good Samaritan:

Sylvia Barnard says a staff will monitor the group 24 hours a day, and they cannot leave the facility without supervision. And arrangements are also being made to build a police substation inside the center.

"You're going to have a uniformed and non-uniformed presence continually on-site," says Lompoc Police Sergeant Chuck Strange. "So if there are any issues that crop up, we'll be able to handle them."

That it's being completely ignored in the criticisms (and I'm not saying that the critics have no legitimate concerns) leaves me wondering why. Is it that the provision is unknown to them? Is it known but ignored because it takes away a powerful talking point? Has it disappeared from the proposal altogether?

In looking forward to Tuesday's City Council meeting, will the question be addressed there? It would seem the perfect opportunity for answering this one lingering fear of the community about Good Samaritan's presence on Ocean Avenue just 1 1/2 blocks from Ryon Park and 1 1/2 blocks north of Lompoc Valley Middle School.

If a police sub-station is still in the mix, I'd urge the Council to carefully and clearly articulate that message to the community if it is truly interested in getting the townspeople's buy-in. Likewise, if it has been struck from the proposal, articulate how and why.

Either way, it's too important a situation to rubber-stamp anything; the city needs to engage it's citizens on a subject they obviously feel so strongly about.

Flying Beneath a Radar Near You

From WaPo:

There are moments that make you question your fundamental assumptions about the world. One of them took place a few days ago, when news emerged that Monica Lewinsky had just graduated from the London School of Economics. She did not!! Lewinsky, 33, is known more for her audacious coquetry than for her intellectual heft, and the notion of her earning a master of science degree in social psychology at the prestigious London university is jarring, akin to finding a rip in the time-space continuum, or discovering that Kim Jong Il is a natural blond. Even more staggering, the same bubbly gal who once described the act of flashing her thong at the president as a "small, subtle, flirtatious gesture" has now written a lofty-sounding thesis. Its title, according to Reuters: "In Search of the Impartial Juror: An Exploration of the Third Person Effect and Pre-Trial Publicity."

Whaaaa? *doubletake*

Well, good for her. It's nice to see that she has found a way to get beyond the miserable situation she was confronted with at such a young age by people who were entrusted with her care.

New Year's Resolutions

Well, I wanted to get 2007 off on the right foot by getting on here and fulfilling my commitment to myself from last night. Although it was hazy when I openly declared my intentions, one of my New Year's resolutions for 2007 was to blog more.

Paul, God bless him, has done a great job keeping My Dogs afloat for the last year. And he's done so with literally zero help from me. Following my move from NYC in November 2005 and starting a new job at roughly the same time, I really haven't had the time to blog with the regularity, much less the intensity I had previously. The combination of the new job replete with big projects and travel, enjoying being around family for the first time in a decade, a re-commitment to some interests that I had not pursued in some time, laziness and a new relationship have all contributed to my pitiful blogging performance. But kudos go to Paul for sticking it out and keeping the darn thing going.

What some of you non-bloggers might not recognize is what a commitment it is to post something every day. It requires even more commitment when you wonder if anyone is actually reading or not. One thing that lightens the load somewhat is to collaborate with a partner. You're motivated to keep things flowing if you have someone contributing at the same time. You also know that if for some reason you can't get something up, your partner will be out there making it happen in your absence. And that's the way it generally worked here for a long time. But in mid-2005 when Paul took a leave of absence to move to Cali, I took over much of the posting. I was glad to do it. I got into a regular routine and while it was sometimes challenging I managed to do pretty well with it.

When it came time for me to take some time away, we flipped roles and Paul became the de facto Dog at My Dogs. As the days stretched into months and the months into a year, poor Paul had to listen to my empty promises about "getting back into it" or "posting something on Monday." Sure, I had the best of intentions. But with all of the changes in my personal life and simply falling out of the habit, it's been really difficult to climb back on the bike and start pedaling. To his credit, Paul has shown remarkable commitment, consistency and patience with me during this interlude. And at times, I think we readers have sensed his frustration in wondering why he bothers. Well, Paul, on behalf of all of the readers let me say thank you. You consistently submit interesting, well-written posts and as you get linked by the big time bloggers, I think you have to feel good about that.

With that as background, let me say that it truly is my intention to write more in 2007. Writing is a great passion of mine and something I want to make greater use of in my career. Plus, my "fanbase" gives me lots of encouragement and compliments. They've often griped at me over the last year, asking "when are you going to post again?" Who knew they were such loyal readers? So, there you have it. Look for more from me in 2007.

Now, I'll start off by saying I might be a little slow getting started. I have to deliver a big project for a client in Monterey, CA on the 9th (and I'm way behind due to the holidays), then the next day fly to NYC for a meeting with another client, then on the 12th fly to San Diego to catch the Chargers first round playoff game. So blogging will surely be light over the next couple of weeks. But I'm going to try to get some stuff out at least every couple of days during this period. So be patient with me.

Here's hoping that all of our readers will stick with us in 2007, that new ones will join us and that all of us enjoy a safe, happy and prosperous new year.

Why do we try?

A cheery New Year's thought:

Nothing was more evident of the moral impoverishment of the Palestinians than their collective lamentation over the fate of this mass killer of the Kurds and Arabs. We gave the Palestinian Authority hundreds of millions of dollars for housing, schools, and security and they hate us; Saddam gave them a few thousand dollars as bounty for suicide murderers and they loved him.

That says it all.

Live from Iraq: Hitchens on the scene

Christopher Hitchens provides us with a thought-provoking missive from Iraq. Money quote:

If there is a flickering pulse that holds any of this together, it is kept going by two sources. The first is the astonishing actual and potential wealth of the country. The budget negotiations, which were occupying all parties during my visit, were to discuss the allocation of more than $41 billion. This is not a paper figure: New oil fields are being prospected in parts of the country that haven't been explored yet, and there is no reason in principle why Iraq could not be one of the most prosperous countries on earth. For the moment, feuding sects use their control over ministries to enrich their own supporters, but even the most blinkered tribalist can glimpse the idea that a shared country would be more beneficial to each than a shattered one. The second source of life is the presence of the coalition, where yet again even the most hard-line factionalist will admit that as bad as things are, they would be instantly worse (and instantly worse for his own group) in the case of a withdrawal. These facts are stubborn: The idea that we could even consider abandoning such a keystone state, and so many decent people, to the forces of the faith-based is as inhumane as it is unrealistic.

Blogging for Impact

Boy, do we.

Not.

Friday we passed 30,000 total visits. A modest milestone relative to many, but none the less something I thought worthy of a little celebration. As the momentous occasion approached late in the afternoon, I wondered to myself where would that visit come from. Turns out, my own back yard. Literally.

I was the 30,000th visit to my own blog. Why do I do this again?

Happy New Year

The Myth of the Strongman takes a blow:

With Saddam’s execution the myth of the Strong Man takes another major hit. We should all be thankful. The Arab Strong Man, the Serb Strong Man, the Albanian Strong Man, the Somalia Strong Man, the Soviet Strong Man, the fill-in-the-blank Strong Man — the thugs in charge claim that obedience and submission lead to ideological or ethnic or nationalist or tribal or fill-in-the-blank victory. It’s a scam, of course, a scam to obtain and maintain their own power. Ultimately, the tyrant’s show is narcissicism empowered by ruthlessness and the secret police. Saddam’s comment on his way to the gallows is indicative: “On the way to the gallows, according to Ali, “Saddam said, ‘Iraq without me is nothing.’” (From Newsweek’s article which interviewed the videographer who filmed Saddam’s execution.)

The Strong Man expects to die in one of two ways — with a nine millimeter ballot (ie, assassination) — or old age. That has certainly been the case in the Middle East. A public, legal trial followed by court-sentenced execution? That isn’t going to happen unless…unless a democracy replaces a tyranny. This is astonishing news — history altering news. For centuries the terrible yin-yang of tyrant and terrorist has trapped the Middle East. In 2003 the US-led coalition began the difficult but worthy effort of breaking that tyrant’s and terrorist’s trap, and offering another choice in the politically dysfunctional Arab Muslim Middle East.

Saddam’s demise serves as object lesson and example. In late 2003 every Middle Eastern autocrat saw the haggard Saddam pulled from the hole; now they’ve seen him hung. The larger message: To avoid Saddams fate means political liberalization. The message extends beyond the Arab Muslim Middle East. Iran’s mullahs see it. At some reptilian level, destructive despots like Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe also understand it.

Ding-Dong, the Witch is still Dead

Click to see the video of the still shown here.

Read Josh Trevino on the lunacy of the left. For proof, read the 40+ comments.

Generally Speaking

I was a fan while living in Trent Frank’s district in NW Phoenix. But this, from yesterday, is just silly.

Jonathan Martin offers this observation as a potential motivation:

Methinks Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) choice for president in '08 may have something to do with the committee he serves on in Congress. Franks is a member of the House Armed Services Committee — the panel that until the, um, recent unpleasantness Duncan Hunter chaired.

Still silly, no matter the reason.

Ding-Dong The Witch Is Dead

Confusing the Agenda

The Army has subpoenaed two journalists in connection with their writings about an officer facing courts martial who publicly denounced the war in Iraq and further, refused deployment with his unit. As Instapundit noted, they aren't happy about it:

The Army's subpoenas, which the journalists said they received last week, put them in the uncomfortable position of being ordered to help the Army build its case against 1st Lt. Ehren Watada, who faces up to six years in prison if convicted.

"It's not a reporter's job to participate in the prosecution of her own sources,'' said Sarah Olson, an Oakland freelance journalist and radio producer. "When you force a journalist to participate, you run the risk of turning the journalist into an investigative tool of the state.''

But Olson, who received her subpoena Thursday, acknowledged she has no legal grounds to refuse to testify, since she is being asked only to confirm the accuracy of what she wrote about Watada and not to disclose confidential sources or unpublished material.

Normally, she said, "no one, myself included, has any problem verifying the veracity of their reporting.'' The ethical problem in this case, she said, is that she would be aiding the prosecution of one of the dissidents and war critics who regularly trust her to tell their stories to the public.

What it seems that Olson doesn't recognize, is that she has other responsibilities here. Under the UCMJ, Watada has committed a crime. If Ms. Olson published details of a crime in Oakland, would it be unreasonable to think her cooperation would be sought by civil authorities?

There are more important things in this world than confidentiality. Glenn's summarizes it well:

That's not ethics. That's politics. But many "journalists" seem to confuse the two.

Imagine

It's not hard if you try:

Two months after the coup that brought in a government that offered a kinder and gentler approach to solving the Islamic terrorism in the south, that terrorism has gotten worse. Before the coup, terrorists killed about 49 people a month. Now it's up to 56 murders a month. There are now over twenty bombings a month down there, and about seven school a month are being destroyed. The terrorists continue to concentrate on suspected pro-government Moslems, non-Moslems and government workers. Most of the mountainous back country villages have been terrorized, and "cleansed" of infidels (non-Moslems) to such an extent, that the terrorists can move about openly in daytime.

The Dumbest guy Ever

This week's edition anyway:

According to police reports, Claude King, 31, approached Caroline Funkey's black GMC Envoy while it was stopped at a red light on the Glades Road exit off Interstate 95 in Boca Raton. Upon stepping up to the car, King smashed the driver's side window and pulled the driver out of the vehicle. Once inside, police said King began to punch the other four passengers.

Not smart but wait, it gets better:

...once King removed the passengers from the SUV, he began to drive wildly around the area, finally heading southbound down I-95.

Police said that, while heading southbound, King struck a white Chevrolet pickup and decided to turn around and head north. According to the report, he then struck another vehicle along the way and decided to pull over in Palm Springs.

A few minutes after the carjacking, police said they received a 911 call from a pay phone at Second and Congress Avenues in Palm Springs. It was King.

"Um, I committed a crime," he told the dispatcher. "I stole a vehicle."

When the dispatcher asked for his name, King told them, "I'd rather do this: Could you just send the police over here?"

The dispatcher then asked where the stolen car was located, to which King replied, "I couldn't even tell you. I don't even know where I'm at."

Palm Springs police Officer Lt. Mark Hall said they found King sitting on the curb near the stolen SUV.

I'm hopeful that the Police video will end up on You Tube at some point in the foreseeable future. The thought of seeing Mr. King sitting disconsolately on the curb waiting for the cops is priceless.

Edwards '08

The former vice presidential candidate quoted the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, saying America must overcome racial and socioeconomic prejudices to unite as “one nation, underprivileged, indivisible, with subsidy and justice for all.”

Scott Ott strikes again!

But on a serious note, it's nice to see folks still pimping the America-hates-blacks line:

Those cheering on Mr. Edwards's antipoverty crusade include party strategist Donna Brazile, who was Al Gore's campaign manager in his 2000 presidency bid. Recalling Mr. Edwards's past emphasis on the "Two Americas" theme, she says: "In 2004, that message went largely unheard. To his credit, he kept at it. And Katrina demonstrated the validity of that message."

Not on the Agenda

Journalist and author Richard Miniter wonders: Evidence of Iran’s involvement in the Iraq war is overwhelming. In the past two months, U.S. forces have sized caches of brand-new small arms of Iranian manufacture. That’s right, new guns just off the assembly line in Iran. What are they doing in Iraq? Iran’s state-run radio has admitted for years that it holds “under house arrest” more than 500 al Qaeda operatives—but refuses to turn them over. U.S. military intelligence has long complained that Iran is used as a transit point for al Qaeda (including the recently slain Omar al-Farouq, al Qaeda’s mover of money and men in Basra) and other enemies of democracy in Iraq. Saad bin Laden, Osama’s oldest son, now lives in Iran and is married to a daughter of an Iranian Revolutionary Guards general. And so on.

Iraq is not in civil war. It is being torn apart by a proxy war waged by Iran and its puppet Syria. These arrests—indeed this story—should be front page news. Instead, it doesn’t even make the front page of the New York Times’ web site.

I don't know that I fully agree with Miniter's conclusion but to say the least, something is fishy. How is this not a huge story?

Sounds about right

Cliff May posted something he called Marine Notes today. It sounds about par for the course if you've read any milblogging or related commentary of late. That is to say it reflects the narrative coming from many folks on the ground who are doing the actual work, not just "reporting" it from the Green Zone.

The take-away: [M]orale among our guys is very high. They not only believe that they are winning, but that they are winning decisively. They are stunned and dismayed by what they see in the American press, whom they almost universally view as against them. The embedded reporters are despised and distrusted. They are inflicting casualties at a rate of 20-1 and then see shit like "Are we losing in Iraq" on TV and the print media. For the most part, they are satisfied with their equipment, food and leadership. Bottom line though, and they all say this, is that there are not enough guys there to drive the final stake through the heart of the insurgency, primarily because there aren't enough troops in-theater to shut down the borders with Iran and Syria.

Boo hoo!

From the "Cry me a River" files...

Markos is a bit bent out of shape over the House GOP response to proposed rule changes at the behest of Nancy Pelosi:

So Pelosi and House Democrats have decided that they're not going to stiffle the minority party in the House, changing the very rules that kept Democrats marginalized and irrelevant for the last decade.

And how do Republicans repay this completely unnecessary act of kindness?

Republicans are hoping Democrats stick to their guns and allow the minority a stronger voice on legislation. The opposition leadership said it would take the opportunity to put forward initiatives that could be potentially troublesome for newly elected Democrats in Republican-leaning districts who within months will have to defend their hard-won seats.

“There are going to be days when we will offer alternatives in ways that are going to be very appealing to Democrats in districts the president carried just two years ago,” said Representative Roy Blunt of Missouri, who will be the second-ranking House Republican in the 110th Congress.

Republicans see the ability to force tough votes — which they avoided in the majority by stifling Democratic alternatives — as having two potential benefits: It can put vulnerable Democrats on record with positions that might not be popular at home, or it can fracture the untested Democratic majority. Mr. Blunt noted that even senior Democrats who served in Congress when Democrats held control had no experience dealing with a relatively thin, 16-seat majority that will not allow many lawmakers to avoid tough votes.

He rightly points out that we currently find ourselves in an era of hardball politics, but I'd love to ask a question right 'bout now: Can Markos take us back to the era of good feeling in the Senate and point out all the cooperation the majority received at the hands of the Democratic minority from 2003 through 2006?

It's hardball. You get half-credit for recognizing it as such but then it's taken right back for all the whining.

Buck Melanoma

Just as funny as the first time you saw it...