I added a few more Mark Twain quotes to my Favorite Quotes section. You know the old cocktail party question, "If you could have dinner with someone from history, who would you choose?"? I'm certainly not a Mark Twain expert, but just based on Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, and his wonderful quotes, he'd be on my short list.

I've decided to run the Sarasota Half-Marathon in February, a 13.1-mile race. I've never run that kind of distance before, and I have had doubts that my knees and back would be able to handle it. On Sunday, I took a big step in the right direction by running further than I ever have: 9 miles. I'm pleased.

I love this cartoon.
Speaking of media bias, I wonder if, at the end of 2008, the media will report that it was one of the coldest years we've had recently (yes, I am making a prediction here). Nah, if I'm right, they will bury the story. It would put another nail in the man-made global warming coffin. 2008 will mark the 10th year in a row that has been cooler than 1998. Does that sound like a crisis to you? Does that sound like a situation that demands an upheaval of capitalistic economies or burdensome, ridiculous schemes like "cap and trade"?

Although the polls are tightening a little, one has to assume that the combination of these factors will ensure Obama's election:

• The Messiah's massive war chest, permitted by his broken promise to accept public campaign financing and comprised partly of illegal foreign donations (oops, that's a secret -- don't tell anyone!)

• The credit crunch and the associated dive in the stock market, due in large part to the Dems mismanagement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the pressure exerted on banks by Barack's ACORN to make high-risk loans (oops, that's a secret -- don't tell anyone!)

• The media lap dogs who, at the beginning of this election cycle, finally gave up trying to hide their biased reporting and switched to outright advocacy (oops, that's a secret -- don't tell anyone!).

• The amazing ability of The One, who was rated the most liberal member of the Senate, to hide his liberalism as he lurches to the center (oops, that's a secret -- don't tell anyone!).

• The lack of enthusiasm conservatives and moderates feel for John McCain. Yes, he is a war hero. Yes, he is great on defense and spending. Yet he is terrible on other issues like campaign finance reform, drilling in the Alaska wasteland, the treatment of terrorists, and climate change. He has a long history of poking conservatives in the eye and, in combination with his innate lack of charisma, he has left the Republican Party unenthusiastic about him. What enthusiasm we do have is strictly due to our fear of the alternative.

I hate doom and gloom. I hate end-of-the-world statements. I hate unwarranted hand-wringing. But I have to wonder if the election of Barack Obama will be the beginning of the end of the United States as we know it. I don't mean that the U.S. won't survive, but it might be in a form unrecognizable to our founding fathers.

I'm afraid we will see the Democrats move us toward their beloved socialism and Marxism.

I'm afraid the press, emboldened by the realization that they still trump the alternative press and having invested everything into The Messiah, will continue their worshipful ways and will continue to avert their eyes at his transgressions.

I'm afraid for freedom of speech since the "Fairness" Doctrine is lurking the in wings, and the Dems have already shown us they are more than willing to shut down the speech of those with whom they disagree.

I'm afraid that we will have reached a tipping point in our tax code, where majority will not pay income taxes and will realize they can make the productive minority pay the tab.

I'm afraid for our strong ally Israel and its fate, if a feckless Obama doesn't support them and stop Iran from developing a nuke.

I'm afraid our Supreme Court will be stacked with law makers instead of Constitution interpreters.

I'm afraid chimeras like global warming will stifle business and productivity with insane regulations.

I'm afraid corruption will go unchecked.

I'm afraid terrorists will be emboldened and will attack us on our own soil.

I'm afraid government will get so large that it cannot ever realistically be changed and that the nanny state will be with us forever.

I'm afraid the people of Iraq won't get the support they need, and our victory there will turn into defeat.

I hope and pray that my fears are unwarranted. I hope and pray that should my fears be proven justified, the nations will wake up, and a wave of conservatism will sweep over the mid-term elections, as it did during the Clinton administration.

All that said, my happiness isn't a function of which party or person is in the White House. Some people "own" the election internally, and will be extremely upset if the results don't go their way. I used to be that way. I'm wiser now. Yes, I'll be disappointed in the judgement of that portion of the electorate that voted for Obama, but life goes on regardless.

Assuming the Chosen One does actually go on to become president, here's what we can look forward to: The Coming Liberal Thugocracy, by Michael Barone.

Barone is as cool-headed, even-handed, and respected in anyone in politics. So when I man of his stature observes anti-free speech behavior of Obama and his supporters, which is so very typical of the hard leftists these days, and when he predicts more of the same under an Obama priesthood administration, it should be a wake-up call to all sane Americans.

Also sounding the klaxon is Paul Mirongoff with his Guilty by Participation: Barack Obama’s radical associations and what they mean. Can you imagine if George W. Bush had the kind of associations that Obama has when Bush was running for president? OK, neither can I, since Bush is just not that kind of person. But if he had those kinds of "friends," my God, we would have been hearing about nothing else in the press. But because Barry is The One, the mainstream media is (nearly) silent.

We've been warned.

Rays win! Rays win!
Another giant hurdle crossed as the Rays make it to the American League Championship Series against the Red Sox. They used to be intimidated by Boston and by the Yankees, but no longer. Still, it should be a very close series. I predict the Rays will take it 4-3.

It is bitter irony that Obama will probably end up being elected Messiah President of the United States due, in part, to his support of the corrupt ACORN organization, ACORN's and Obama's intimidation of banks to make high-risk loans, the mismanagement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by Democrat Harold Raines, and the Dems' (especially Chris Dodd's and Barney Frank's) success in blocking Republican efforts to reign in those organizations a few years ago -- all of which helped created the mess in the financial markets, which a large, ignorant portion of the electorate blames on... wait for it... Republicans. Having the mainstream media totally and completely in your pocket sure has it benefits.

Speaking of the economy, while the market is alarmingly volatile these days, there are three strong developments: oil prices, which had been the cause of so much angst, have plunged to well under $100; the dollar has strengthed dramatically; and real estate inventories, at least in the Sarasota area, have plunged, a sign of increasing residential recovery. But if good news trees fall in a forest and there is no one there to hear them, do they still make a sound?

It's crystal clear that Gov. Sarah Palin has the Obama camp and the mainstream media (OK, OK, I know they are one and the same) frightened. Obama is reduced to saying that he is more experienced than Palin (never mind that she is not running for President) because, well, he has run a presidential campaign with a big budget! No, really! As Power Line puts it,

Apparently Obama hadn't heard about Palin being Governor of the State of Alaska, which has a budget in excess of $11 billion annually and more than 24,000 employees. Also, on Obama's theory, the act of running for President gives you the experience you need to qualify to be President. That's convenient for a guy who has accomplished so little in his career in public life.If our intrepid reporters could focus on something other than Bristol Palin for a moment, maybe they would notice that Obama continues to make a fool of himself on a near-daily basis.

Plus, unlike the Messiah, Gov. Palin has an actual track record of reform, battling corruption, and reaching across party lines. She doesn't just talk about those things, she has gotten them done.

The MSM, for its part, is absorbed with Bristol Palin's pregnancy as a way of trying to undermine Gov. Palin, who represents such a threat to the Democrat Party. They are mystified that Bristol isn't going to have an abortion. They can't believe she is actually going to do the right thing and get married and raise the child. I guess they have forgotten the mother of His Most Holy Obama conceived the Savior when she was only 18.

National Review has more on the disgusting bias in the media. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: liberal bias is the #1 problem in not only the United States, but in the world today. When almost all news, issues, and problems are filtered through liberal lenses before reaching the public... whoops, I need to stop -- that's a topic for another post.

The Republican convention, or really just the fact that Republlicans exist on the planet, has brought the hard-core Dem wackos are out in force. Check out Power Line to learn about attempted murder and attacks on Cub Scout buses. Then stop by From the Duke for samples of Dem hatred and irrationality.

Of course, these disgusting incidents go unreported by the MSM, since they can't report anything unsavory about Obama's supporters, much less about His Holiness Himself.

Wikipedia, the most often referenced encyclopedia in the world, is both a fantastic source of information and a swamp of liberal bias.

I have looked up all sorts of subjects on Wikipedia, with generally good and informative results. I consider it to be a valuable resource, however it is terribly, terribly flawed when it comes to any subject that is the least bit political.

Most people, I would wager, don't realize anybody can edit a wikipedia entry on, say, President Bush or global warming. They also don't realize there are favored people with great authority who can cancel out those edits on a whim. And those people are, seemingly without exception, liberals. They strongly enforce the liberal world-view in Wikipedia, ignoring their own guidelines.

The chief editor is William Connolley, who is an office-seeking member of England's Green Party. If that doesn’t get your attention, nothing will.

Lawerence Solomon wrote a piece for National Review Online that summarizes the unfortunate situation.

So, the next time your child's teacher suggests using Wikipedia as a reference, pay attention to the subject matter. The life-cycle of the butterfly? Fine. The history of farming? Wonderful. Global warming or the Iraq war? No way. I have come to learn when I can rely on Wikipedia and when I can't. I'm not confident that the average teacher, parent, or student has learned the same lesson.

Unfortunately, Wikipedia has such a large mind-share (a internet-style monopoly, much as Google has among search engines), that it's hard to see how the situation can be corrected. Yes, there is a Conservapedia, but not only is it tiny by comparison, it also swings too far to the right. Encyclopedia.com seems be more of link factory to other informational sources. Microsoft's Encarta might be worth a good look.

By far the most interesting alternative to the Wikipedia hegemony, that I know of, is the online version of the Encyclopedia Britannica. It is very comprehensive, but it costs $70 a year. I don't know if Britannica displays a liberal bias or not, but they certainly have a strong record as a serious provider of information.

As my kids get a little older and start to write reports and need a reliable encyclopedia, I will steer them away from Wikipedia. I may take the plunge on a subscription to Britannica. $70 a year might be money well spent.

I haven't posted a lot lately, but that doesn't mean I haven't had anything to write about. I just haven't had much time. Time to clear the decks with these quick hits.

First, if you live in Sarasota and you don't know about From the Duke, a conservative blog by Rich Swier, do yourself a huge favor and check it out. Rich writes well, posts every day, and, among other things, takes on the monumental task of refuting the liberal nonsense that pervades the Sarasota Herald-Tribune. Highly recommended.

Next, here is one of those news stories that, upon reading it, will divide people into conservative or liberal camps. No, that's not strong enough. Let me elaborate. When you read this story, your reaction will be one of the following:

1. "That's great! I love it! It's about time we got serious about being green! But are they going far enough?"

If this is your reaction, you are insane or, if not insane, then at least completely out to lunch. You live in a fantasy world. You are lost in the deep end of liberalism. You are beyond help. Please, please don't ever get into a position of power.

2. "OK, that's fine with me. It makes me feel good."

You aren't insane, but you have been lightly brainwashed by the media and other members of the left. You aren't strong in critical thinking skills. You are not beyond help, but it will take a jarring episode to snap you out of your trance.

3. "Wow, that seems a little extreme. It makes me a little uncomfortable."

You are a moderately conservative and sensible individual, but probably not one who spends much time thinking or reading about politics. However, your horse sense tells you when something is wrong.

4. "The idea that those people will be running our country if Obama is elected scares the living bat poop out of me."

You are a rock-ribbed conservative, and you know the direction this country is headed, and you know well the dangers of liberalism.

Concerning Obama

The Friends of Barack Obama. Can you imagine the mainstream media's reaction if George Bush, when he first ran for President, had the kind of slimy friends that Obama has?

But Can He Walk On Water? Of course Obama gets away with so much because he believes he is a Messiah figure, and the press and other liberals agree.

Opportunism Knocks. As a Messiah, he gets away with flip-flops...

Obama Rejects Public Financing. ... and more flip-flops...

Cocky Ignorance. ... and can say whatever he wants, however ridiculous, and...

Does Obama Know What He's Talking About? ... then say some more ignorant things. It doesn't matter. He's the Obamessiah.

Obama's Own Presidential Seal. He can even create his own presidential seal. The arrogance of this guy knows no bounds. Again, imagine the reaction if George Bush the candidate, running against Al Gore, had made his own seal. Can you imagine the mockery?

Total Confusion. ... he gets away with moments of complete confusion and stumbling. If you haven't seen the video shown at that link, please do so. The point is not that Obama got completely lost. It happens to everyone now and then (well, maybe not to such a degree). The point is that Obama gets away with it. Can you imagine if McCain had lost himself in the same way? The media would have fallen all over themselves in calling it a "senior moment" and evidence that he is too old. They would have played the video on a continuous loop for weeks.

Obama's Web Site: How the Jewish Lobby Works. It's amazing how many unsavory people are attracted to Obama...

Communist Party of the USA Endorses Obama. ... like communists.

10 Concerns About Barack Obama. How did they possible narrow it down to just 10?

Concerning Radical Environmentalism

The Truths Shall Set You Free. A nice summary of the unintended consequences that result from overbearing liberal environmental policies.

Who's To Blame For High Gas Prices? A nice reminder of how we got where we are.

Our Greener Planet. Greener because trees, crops, and other vegetation love the extra CO2 in the atmosphere.

Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month. Is there an award for the biggest hypocrite of all time? If so, Gore has it absolutely locked up. No one else is even in the same league. They can name the award "The Gore," and call off all future competitions. Just retire it. No one else will ever be close.

Concerning Iraq

As Surge Succeeds-- Iraq Coverage Declines 92% In One Year. Gee, what a surprise. We are winning in Iraq, so the press is no longer interested. Actually, I would argue, as I have for quite awhile, that we have won, period. The war is over. What we are seeing and doing now is really police action to clean up stragglers. The Iraqi army and civilians have asserted themselves to such an extent that there is no turning back. Finally.

Bush Announces Withdrawal of 30,000 US Troops From Iraq (In Victory). This story was completely ignored since reporting it would help Bush and McCain way, way too much, and would completely trash the liberals' fantasy of defeat in Iraq.

Whew! That's enough for now. My mind is cleared of negativity. Next time, some positive thoughts.

The Sarasota Herald-Tribune (SH-T) today joined other liberal media in criticizing the 5-year Iraq war and the Bush administration. As was entirely predictable, the SH-T is relentlessly negative in its editorial, ignoring all accomplishments and signs of real progress. They must be relying on their own paper for their Iraq news.

Let me provide an overview of Iraq and a different perspective.

First, I believe it is more accurate to describe the affair as the Iraq liberation, rather than the Iraq war. After all, liberation of the Iraqi people from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein and the establishment of a democracy were two of the main goals of the conflict. Here's a status check on all the goals:

1. Overthrow the brutal, murderous, tyrant Saddam Hussein, a man that had supported terrorism, developed and used weapons of mass destruction (against his own people!), and ran torture chambers and rape rooms. Saddam and his two monstrous sons were overthrown and no longer soil the planet. Mission Accomplished.

2. Stop the Saddam's development of WMDs. Imagine if the terrorists who perpetrated 9/11 had access to nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons instead of airplanes. Imagine the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of people they could have killed. Imagine the complete chaos it would cause to our economy. After 9/11, we could no longer sit back and hope that Saddam wouldn't give his WMDs to terrorists bent on murdering us.

And everybody thought he had stockpiles of WMDs. The CIA did. The Clinton Administation did. Our allies did. And most importantly to Saddam, Iran did. In fact, although it makes liberals gnash their teeth, we did find WMDs in Iraq. Yes, they were part of an older batch than the one we were looking for (I'm still not sure why that matters), but WMDs were found. Regardless of the quantity or quality of those WMDs, or whether stockpiles were moved to Syria (as the number two man in Saddam's Air Force claims), one thing is certain: WMDs are no longer being developed in Iraq and will not end up in the hands of terrorists. Mission Accomplished.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members...

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well, effects American security.

This is a very difficult vote, this is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction."

Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)Addressing the US SenateOctober 10, 2002

3. Provide a level of security to Iraq while a democratic government is formed. The period of time after the overthrow of Saddam through 2005 was marked by increasing peace and security. Then al Qaeda came up with what was really a smart strategy: spark a civil war, setting Shia against Sunni. With thousand-year-old animosities and rivalries already in place, it was relatively easy to set the factions against each other, but the key moment seemed to be the bombing of the Golden Temple in Sammara. Military and civilian deaths soared as violence became the norm.

It is undeniable that the Bush administration did not foresee the level of terrorism and violence that al Qaeda could generate, but neither did anybody else. In fact, al Qaeda decided to make Iraq its central front in its war against the West. It took way too long for the Bush administration to develop a new strategy to deal with al Qaeda, but it finally did with the Surge, and with changing the way the military interacts with Iraqi citizens and neighborhood.

Thanks to the new strategy, backed by John McCain but decried by liberals, Iraq has since grown more peaceful each month. Terrorism is way down. Civilian deaths are way down, military deaths are way down, and the bond between the Iraqi people and our military has never been stronger. Iraqis have turned against al Qaeda, and we have virtually eliminated them from Iraq. Sure, there are still stragglers and small pockets of trouble, but the bottom line is this: we have defeated al Qaeda in Iraq and have established a level of peace necessary for a democratic Iraqi government to continue to form. Mission Accomplished.

4. Hand over governmental responsibilities to the Iraqi government. This is still a work in progress. The pace has been excruciatingly slow, thanks to old animosities, complex demographic considerations, and the shear scale of the undertaking. This is, I believe, the toughest challenge of the Iraq liberation. While the Iraqi government is functioning (and the Iraqi people give it high marks in polls), it is not yet at a level where we can walk away. The Iraqi people do not want us to leave. How do we speed up the process? I don't know that we can. It will take time. Mission Partially Accomplished.

5. Establish a beachhead of democracy in a region of the world that desperately needs it. Imagine how the liberation of Iraq, the defeat of al Qaeda, and the birth of democracy must be affecting the citizens of, say, Iran or Syria. The example Iraq sets will be the greatest enduring benefit of the Iraq war, but the benefits will likely be realized over the course of years and decades. History, I believe, will be very, very kind to President Bush. Fair-minded historians will see Iraq as turning point in the Middle East and the war on terrorism.

There are signs already that Iraq has turned the tide against terrorism. We have not had a terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11/01, an astounding 2,381 days and counting. The London bombings on 7/7/05 were almost three years ago. Al Qaeda has been chased and hounded by the Bush Administration and our numerous allies all over the world, and al Qaeda's defeat in Iraq is a major part of that story. Yes, al Qaeda, WMDs, and terrorist-supporting regimes still exist, and we could suffer an attack tomorrow. But the track record so far is undeniable strong. Mission Partially Accomplished.

Now, consider the cost of the Iraq liberation. As of today, 3,251 members of our military have been killed in action in Iraq. (The media love to quote the higher figure of deaths in Iraq (3,988), but of course, there are accidental deaths all the time in the military, even among those stationed in the U.S. in a time of peace.) While 3,251 deaths is certainly devastating for the friends and family members of those who gave their lives, any clear-eyed assessment must conclude that it is a tiny fraction of both the pre-war estimates of hundreds of thousands of deaths and the number of deaths in previous wars. Compare 3,251 to the 100,000+ dead in WWI. Compare it to the 400,000+ dead in WWII (the Marines lost more than double the number lost in Iraq in just one battle: Iwo Jima). Compare it to the 54,000 dead in Korea or the 58,000 dead in Vietnam. Yes, losing 3,251 of our finest men and women is a heavy cost. But human cost of other wars has been much, much higher.

Financially, Operation Iraqi Freedom has cost a fortune, and continues to do so. Not only does supporting the troops cost billions, but so does all the reconstruction we are doing to stabilize and improve the lives of the Iraqi people. We are up to $500+ billion with a long way to go. Without question, Iraq has been a substantial drain on our national treasury. That's why it is so important to take the long view of Iraq, the Middle East, and the war on terrorism. If we and the Iraqi people are successful, the cost in both lives and money will have been well-spent. If we aren't successful (and the only way it appears we won't be is if we abandon the Iraqi people too soon), the lives lost and billions spent will have been in vain.

Liberals are fully invested in the idea of defeat in Iraq. The Sarasota Herald-Tribune (although it initially supported the war, if I recall correctly), like so many liberal organizations, refuses to acknowledge the truth that much good is happening in Iraq and the war against al Qaeda and terrorism. They can't. Any such acknowledgement of progress and positive developments would upset their world-view that Operation Iraqi Freedom is a disaster and the Bush Administration is incompetent, so it must be ignored. To show you the depth of the SH-T's state of denial, they fret in their editorial that the "depth of the American news coverage of the war" has waned. Could it be that the coverage has waned because the news has been good? Not only does good news not sell newspapers, it also destroys firmly held beliefs. Better to ignore it.

As I mentioned in a recent post, I been living a happier life these days by paying less attention to the media. For conservatives, the incessant liberal bias can become too much to swallow. My family just got back from a wonderful ski vacation in Park City, Utah. Naturally, we spent a fair amount of time in the airport waiting for our flights and were therefore subjected to the Clockwork Orange-type indoctrination that is airport CNN. As a regular FoxNews viewer is it always a jarring experience to be subjected to CNN. Still, some of the bias was so blatant, it was laugh-out-loud funny.

I specifically recall a dark intonation that the company that supplies water to our troops in Iraq (along with thousands of other supplies) and which supplied a bad batch sent to some of the troops was formerly run by... Dick Cheney! Oh, no, not Dick Cheney! What an evil company!

Why, oh why, does CNN have a monopoly on airport news? For the love of all that is good and just, would some other news network please outbid them? The idea that millions of Americans (and, I'd guess, millions of non-Americans around the world, in some foreign airports) are subjected to such slanted reported, whether they like it or not, is galling.

I also recall seeing a quick blurb that the Pentagon released a report which, according to CNN, said that there was no link between Saddam Hussien and al Qaeda. That struck me as very odd, since I had read of extensive links in previous reports by the Weekly Standard, among others. Being at the airport at the time, and without an internet connection, I couldn't check out the story for myself, so I dismissed it as probably another example of misleading reporting.

I was right.

Powerline has a nice summary of the situation, based on reading the actual Pentagon report, something the mainstream press either did not do, or chose not to accurately report. Here's part of the report's abstract:

Captured Iraqi documents have uncovered evidence that links the regime of Saddam Hussein to regional and global terrorism, including a variety of revolutionary, liberation, nationalist and Islamic terrorist organizations. While these documents do not reveal direct coordination and assistance between the Saddam regime and the al Qaeda network, they do indicate that Saddam was willing to use, albeit cautiously, operatives affiliated with al Qaeda as long as Saddam could have these terrorist-operatives monitored closely. Because Saddam's security organizations and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance of and, in some way, a "de facto" link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust. Though the execution of Iraqi terror plots was not always successful, evidence shows that Saddam’s use of terrorist tactics and his support for terrorist groups remained strong up until the collapse of the regime.

No link or connection, huh?

Tony Blankley has written an very amusing piece for RealClear Politics on the Goracle: Gore Wins; Facts Lose.

As I read the piece, I couldn't help but recall a recent headline in the local Sarasota Herald-Tribune: "Gore Vindicated". The SH-T has become increasingly liberal over the years, especially since they were bought by the Mother Ship, the New York Times. They used to have a single conservative editorial writer (Rod Thomson) among their liberal throng, but he left (or was asked to leave, I don't know which) and now they have no conservative writers at all.

Blankley shreds the notion that Gore was in any way vindicated, and so did Dr. William Gray, the famed meteorologist in a story carried by the Sydney Morning Herald, in which he says Gore winning a share of the Nobel Peace Prize is "ridiculous" and the product of "people who don't understand how the atmosphere works". Other highlights from the article:

"We're brainwashing our children," said Dr Gray, 78, a long-time professor at Colorado State University. "They're going to the Gore movie [An Inconvenient Truth] and being fed all this. It's ridiculous."

..."We'll look back on all of this in 10 or 15 years and realise how foolish it was," Dr Gray said.

..."The human impact on the atmosphere is simply too small to have a major effect on global temperatures," Dr Gray said.

..."It bothers me that my fellow scientists are not speaking out against something they know is wrong," he said. "But they also know that they'd never get any grants if they spoke out. I don't care about grants."

What's interesting is that the SH-T hangs on Dr. Gray's every word when he makes his hurricane predictions for the upcoming season or revises his predictions as the season progresses. But they, along with almost all of the mainstream media, did not carry a story on Dr. Gray's comments at all, even though they took place the day after Gore was given his prize. Did the SH-T think that its Florida readers would not be interested in the renowned hurricane forecaster's viewpoint concerning Gore's doomsday predictions?

I guess Dr. Gray's comments were too inconvenient for the liberals at the Sarasota Herald-Tribune.

In Saturday's Sarasota Herald-Tribune, two stories appeared which, taken together, are a classic example of liberal bias.

First was a global warming story on the front page, above the fold (naturally, since the Herald-Tribune has drunk deeply from the vat of global warming alarmism Kool-Aid), entitled "Scientists claim relief effort on warming is affordable." The story talks about proposed "affordable" measures that would cost about the same as an increase in gas prices of one dollar a gallon. So, a dollar a gallon is affordable. OK, fine.

However, on the front page of the business section, above the fold, there was the headline "Counting every last penny." It's your standard economic doom-and-gloom story about the price of gasoline, etc. In this story, however, we are told about a consumer "cringing" when he fills up his truck with gas and other shoppers "counting every penny."

So, in the media's eyes, the equivalent of a dollar rise in gas is affordable when it supposedly combats global warming, but a less-than-a-dollar increase in a gallon of gas over the several months has a major impact on consumers. Hmmm, so which is it?

The mainstream media, in its never-ending quest for defeat in Iraq, buried the results of a survey in which, by a margin of almost 2-to-1, Iraqis say that the life is better now in Iraq than under Saddam Hussein. Joel Mowbray covers it in a Washington Times editorial.

Hmmm, the survey goes against the established "consensus," doesn't it? Iraq has a long way to go, and plenty of mistakes have been made, but the decision to liberate the country was the right one. A successful conclusion to the liberation is made all the more difficult when the MSM only gives us, and the rest of the world, the bad news.