Even after forcing the government to back down, and guarantee them jobs for life (if they can get them), the students in France are still protesting. Give them a centimeter, and they’ll take a kilometer.

France–a country run by college students. All is now explained.

Senator Coburn has put up a government web site to track government waste and overspending.

What does Spiderman creator Stan Lee have to do with Hillary?

“Doug from Upland” has the answer:

Yesterday morning I had the pleasure of speaking on the phone with legendary superhero creator Stan Lee. The creator of Spiderman acknowledged to me information that could become a sticky situation for one Hillary Rodham Clinton, the smartest woman on the planet.

On the link above – 4th false FEC report – turn to page 34. You will see that a $225,000 in-kind contribution is attributed to Stan Lee personally.

Lee was very surpised when I told him that, on the 4th FEC report from the Hillary 2000 campaign, he is listed as the largest donor — $225,000. He could not understand how that could be. He has testified under oath that he never gave any money. He didn’t have any money to give. He told that to the FBI, to the FEC, and to the Justice Department.

Treasurer Andrew Grossman, Hillary, and, of course, David Kendall, know very well that this is the fourth fraudulent report. They know very well that Lee gave no money. This continuing crime is being pulled off in broad daylight, and the Justice Department does not seem to want to do anything about it.

That report is the 4th time that Andrew Grossman and Hillary Clinton have had the opportunity to tell the truth to the FEC. Four strikes and you’re out? Apparently, not in Hillary’s world.

As someone over there points out, if I were Stan Lee I’d sue her Highness for defamation of character, for accusing me of such a thing.

This is amusing as well:

Note: although Hillary has been removed as a defendant (it will be appealed) in the case Paul v. Clinton, she will be ordered to testify. She and her defendant husband are expected to be in Los Angeles for a sworn deposition in as soon as 60 days. Does anyone remember the last time William Jefferson Blythe Clinton testified under oath?

No, actually. I have no recollection of that…

What happened to Hillary’s books?

…here is a FASCINATING observation I have made. I have thus far seen NOT ONE of the Hillary books at either flea markets or thrift stores. Have you? Think about it. This book supposedly has MILLIONS of copies floating around out there and yet somehow they just don’t make their way thru the normal book recycling system like other books. So what happened to all the Hillary books?

…Could the vast majority of the Hillary books (except for the autographed copies sold for profit on eBay) end up in warehouses? That is my suspicion and most likely they are still SITTING there. And who bought those books only to warehouse them? Labor unions? Other organizations? Using Freakonomics observations makes me suspicious that Hillary has received campaign contributions via PHONY book sales.

Someone might want to look into this. But most won’t.

Amidst all of the media hyperventilating over the Bush “leaks,” the WaPo actually has a sensible editorial today. The post title is its first three words:

Mr. Wilson subsequently claimed that the White House set out to punish him for his supposed whistle-blowing by deliberately blowing the cover of his wife, Valerie Plame, who he said was an undercover CIA operative. This prompted the investigation by Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald. After more than 2 1/2 years of investigation, Mr. Fitzgerald has reported no evidence to support Mr. Wilson’s charge. In last week’s court filings, he stated that Mr. Bush did not authorize the leak of Ms. Plame’s identity. Mr. Libby’s motive in allegedly disclosing her name to reporters, Mr. Fitzgerald said, was to disprove yet another false assertion, that Mr. Wilson had been dispatched to Niger by Mr. Cheney. In fact Mr. Wilson was recommended for the trip by his wife. Mr. Libby is charged with perjury, for having lied about his discussions with two reporters. Yet neither the columnist who published Ms. Plame’s name, Robert D. Novak, nor Mr. Novak’s two sources have been charged with any wrongdoing.

As Mr. Fitzgerald pointed out at the time of Mr. Libby’s indictment last fall, none of this is particularly relevant to the question of whether the grounds for war in Iraq were sound or bogus. It’s unfortunate that those who seek to prove the latter would now claim that Mr. Bush did something wrong by releasing for public review some of the intelligence he used in making his most momentous decision.

…as a campaign theme for the Donkeys. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Alan Mollohan, Democrat:

The National Journal, distinguishing between the Abramoff-DeLay nexus and the Cunningham bribery case, opined that

…as a campaign theme for the Donkeys. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Alan Mollohan, Democrat:

The National Journal, distinguishing between the Abramoff-DeLay nexus and the Cunningham bribery case, opined that

…as a campaign theme for the Donkeys. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Alan Mollohan, Democrat:

The National Journal, distinguishing between the Abramoff-DeLay nexus and the Cunningham bribery case, opined that

In the parlance of Usenet, IANAL (I am not a lawyer), but even still, I’ll bet I could have offered her better legal advice than her lawyer did (if she was sufficiently competent to have one–not a safe bet). Of course, I’d be a lawyer who doesn’t buy into her legal theory of “play the race card at the beginning of the game.” So it’s also unlikely that she’d hire me, given the nature of the lawyer she would choose.

Anyway, if I were her lawyer, in addition to advising her to not hire a private thug to accompany her on Capitol grounds, here’s the speech I would have written for her yesterday.

Esteemed colleagues, and the American people.

I wish to apologize for my actions last week in striking a Capitol police officer who was simply doing his job, and doing it well.

I was in a hurry and distracted, and didn’t hear verbal requests to stop, or realize that they applied to me, because I thought that I had clearance to pass, as a member of Congress, and didn’t realize that I didn’t have my required lapel pin on. I was surprised when he grabbed my shoulder, but that is no excuse for my behavior, and I realize now that there was no other way for him to get my attention.

Our Capitol police force has a great responsibility to ensure the safety of Congresspersons like myself, our staff, and this historic and priceless building in which we all work for the American people. As a result of this incident, in these troubled times of threat against our great nation, I also now realize that careless behavior like mine, in both neglecting to wear my pin, and in paying insufficient attention to security locations and procedures, simply makes their job that much harder.

I want to apologize not only to the officer that I carelessly struck, but to this body as a whole and to the American people whom they represent. I understand that I violated the law, and that such violations are not vitiated by apologies–nonetheless, I am deeply sorry.

Moreover, I also wish to apologize for my accusations over the past few days of inappropriate behavior and racism against the Capital police force. They are hard working, and diligent, and undeserving of such, and as they follow their orders in enforcing the rules, so should I have in following them. I was upset about the incident and fearful of its potential consequences, but again, that is no excuse for this unjustified slander against them.

I hope that they, my colleagues, and the American people can forgive me, as I will have difficulty in forgiving myself. I can only promise that having said all this, that I will not repeat this offence, and that I will go before the courts and accept whatever penalty the law demands for my thoughtlessness. As a member of Congress, who makes the laws, I realize that I must set an example for other citizens, and now fully intend to do so.

Thank you for this time, Mr. Speaker.

As I said, if she’d had competent legal advice (doubtful, because she’s not the sort of person who would solicit such), that’s what I’d advise she’d say, and if I were really competent, I’d persuade her to say it.

Such a speech would have completely defused the political situation. Such a speech would guarantee that in whatever court proceeding resulted, she would do no time, and get off with an admonition and at worst a probation. Such a speech would remove the situation that has been such a gift to the Republicans, removing the distraction from what the Dems have thought was a political advantage over the past several days. Such a speech would remove the possibility of even a censure by the House, let alone an expulsion (which they remain perfectly within the authority of the Constitution to do, because there’s little conduct more disorderly than hers, both in the original event and in the demagoguery that has followed it). Such a speech would have at least temporarily stopped reminding people of everything that is despicable about the race-baiting wing of the Democrat Party.

Unfortunately, such a speech is one that Cynthia McKinney is constitutionally incapable of delivering, and one that her fellow Democrats (or her lawyer, chosen precisely because he’ll pander to her base political creed) is incapable of persuading her to deliver. Such a speech would be rare for a politician in general, but for a person like Cynthia McKinney, it is inconceivable. Hence we got instead the utterly predictable, “he started it,” “I regret that it happened” (not “I did anything wrong”) speech she gave yesterday.

In the parlance of Usenet, IANAL (I am not a lawyer), but even still, I’ll bet I could have offered her better legal advice than her lawyer did (if she was sufficiently competent to have one–not a safe bet). Of course, I’d be a lawyer who doesn’t buy into her legal theory of “play the race card at the beginning of the game.” So it’s also unlikely that she’d hire me, given the nature of the lawyer she would choose.

Anyway, if I were her lawyer, in addition to advising her to not hire a private thug to accompany her on Capitol grounds, here’s the speech I would have written for her yesterday.

Esteemed colleagues, and the American people.

I wish to apologize for my actions last week in striking a Capitol police officer who was simply doing his job, and doing it well.

I was in a hurry and distracted, and didn’t hear verbal requests to stop, or realize that they applied to me, because I thought that I had clearance to pass, as a member of Congress, and didn’t realize that I didn’t have my required lapel pin on. I was surprised when he grabbed my shoulder, but that is no excuse for my behavior, and I realize now that there was no other way for him to get my attention.

Our Capitol police force has a great responsibility to ensure the safety of Congresspersons like myself, our staff, and this historic and priceless building in which we all work for the American people. As a result of this incident, in these troubled times of threat against our great nation, I also now realize that careless behavior like mine, in both neglecting to wear my pin, and in paying insufficient attention to security locations and procedures, simply makes their job that much harder.

I want to apologize not only to the officer that I carelessly struck, but to this body as a whole and to the American people whom they represent. I understand that I violated the law, and that such violations are not vitiated by apologies–nonetheless, I am deeply sorry.

Moreover, I also wish to apologize for my accusations over the past few days of inappropriate behavior and racism against the Capital police force. They are hard working, and diligent, and undeserving of such, and as they follow their orders in enforcing the rules, so should I have in following them. I was upset about the incident and fearful of its potential consequences, but again, that is no excuse for this unjustified slander against them.

I hope that they, my colleagues, and the American people can forgive me, as I will have difficulty in forgiving myself. I can only promise that having said all this, that I will not repeat this offence, and that I will go before the courts and accept whatever penalty the law demands for my thoughtlessness. As a member of Congress, who makes the laws, I realize that I must set an example for other citizens, and now fully intend to do so.

Thank you for this time, Mr. Speaker.

As I said, if she’d had competent legal advice (doubtful, because she’s not the sort of person who would solicit such), that’s what I’d advise she’d say, and if I were really competent, I’d persuade her to say it.

Such a speech would have completely defused the political situation. Such a speech would guarantee that in whatever court proceeding resulted, she would do no time, and get off with an admonition and at worst a probation. Such a speech would remove the situation that has been such a gift to the Republicans, removing the distraction from what the Dems have thought was a political advantage over the past several days. Such a speech would remove the possibility of even a censure by the House, let alone an expulsion (which they remain perfectly within the authority of the Constitution to do, because there’s little conduct more disorderly than hers, both in the original event and in the demagoguery that has followed it). Such a speech would have at least temporarily stopped reminding people of everything that is despicable about the race-baiting wing of the Democrat Party.

Unfortunately, such a speech is one that Cynthia McKinney is constitutionally incapable of delivering, and one that her fellow Democrats (or her lawyer, chosen precisely because he’ll pander to her base political creed) is incapable of persuading her to deliver. Such a speech would be rare for a politician in general, but for a person like Cynthia McKinney, it is inconceivable. Hence we got instead the utterly predictable, “he started it,” “I regret that it happened” (not “I did anything wrong”) speech she gave yesterday.