Immigration and Congress

Our politicians are very divided on how to legalize illegal immigragion for the betterment of our labor force, consumers, national security and international decency. This very important domestic issue is beginning to shape up nicely, I think. As it stands, it seems the main battles are between different Republican factions. There is, of course, the business (fiscal) Republicans who realize that many American businesses need immigrants who are willing to do the lousy work if we ‘white folks' are to maintain our obscenely wonderful standard of living. ....I happen to side with that group - and the President - but not necessarily for those reasons. The other group of Republicans are the harder to define folks who include those driving big wheeled pickup trucks with rebel flags waving, those who live in abject fear of terrorist attacks, those bigots who don't want to see the tanning of our European whiteness, and those fundamentalist Christians who still don't believe that Catholics are actually Christians - and you'd be amazed at how many FC's actually believe that - and how many also flunked history classes in highschool! As to the politicians involved... (I don't even consider the House of Representatives which is always on Darth Vader's side of any issue)... the most malevolent in the Senate is probably Arizona's Senator Kyle who has coauthored a very mean spirited proposal with Texas Senator Cornyn. Their bill, among other denigrating features would exact a $2,000 annual fee to allow a non-citizen worker to earn his paltry $10,000 income - assuming he's lucky enough to get $5 bucks an hour. Reminds me of the protection rackets of Chicago back in the twenties and thirties! Arizona's main Senator, McCain, has co-produced a much more humane plan with Senator Kennedy. I should add that in fairness to politicians I generally don't like, that even Senator Brownback of Kansas subscribed to the McCain bill passed by the Judiciary committee! It seems that the politicians are going to stall the legislation until after the election which may be a good idea since it is at least my hope that the next Congress will become more progressive. In fact, Senator Kyle is being challenged here in Arizona by an active Democrat/businessman who could with a lot of luck and hard work replace this embarrassment to Arizona politics. I certainly know how I'm going to vote! Some of the legislative details are summarized below: Consensus on Immigration Bill Elusive By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - Should they stay or should they go, those 11 million illegal immigrants living in the United States? While that question hangs over a Senate debate on border security and immigration, most senators agree on allowing undocumented workers to stay at least temporarily. The fight is over whether they should have to leave three years to six years down the road. Even senators who oppose providing a path to citizenship to illegal immigrants are willing to grant them temporary legal status as long as they register with the government, pay fines and eventually leave. "Our first obligation is to bring them out of the shadows, make sure we know who they are, why they're here, make sure we have a name and some kind of identification for them," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said in an interview with The Associated Press. "Then there will be a period of time, whether it's three years or six years ... but they can continue to work here and at that point in time — that's where the debate is — do they have to go home or are they put on some sort of path to citizenship?" Frist said. As the Senate opened two weeks of debate Wednesday night, Republicans clashed over whether providing a path to legal citizenship would lead to more flouting of U.S. immigration laws. House Speaker Dennis Hastert raised the possibility that a program letting illegal immigrants continue to reside in the U.S. for a period of time might be considered by the House if the Senate approves one. "Our first priority is to protect the borders. We also know there is a need in some sectors of this economy for a guest worker program," Hastert told reporters Wednesday. The House has passed legislation limited to tightening borders and making it a crime to be in the United States illegally or to offer aid to illegal immigrants. However, there is a growing consensus among lawmakers that any merging of the House and Senate measures so that Congress could send a bill to President Bush won't occur until after the November election. "What you end up doing is the House has passed a bill, the Senate passed a bill and everybody declares victory and you don't get anything out of conference between now and the elections," said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa. Grassley chairs the Senate Finance Committee that is drafting a measure dealing with steps employers would have to take regarding illegal workers. President Bush reiterated support for a temporary worker program as he took off for a meeting in Cancun, Mexico, with host President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Bush said workers should be given tamper-resistant identity cards and go to the back of the line when they seek citizenship. "I think it makes sense to have a temporary worker program that says you're not an automatic citizen to help, one, enforce the border; and, two, uphold the decency of America," Bush said Wednesday. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., who has proposed with Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., allowing illegal immigrants earn a path to citizenship through work, was buoyed by Bush's comments. "We should reject temporary status and required departure because they are bad for business," Kennedy said. "What do we gain if millions of immigrant workers who fuel our economy are required to spend weeks — or years or decades under some plans — waiting outside the United States for permission to continue their work?" Frist dodged the question of what to do about illegal immigrants in the country in the bill he introduced. But other bills that could be offered as amendments tackle that issue. On Monday, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., shepherded legislation containing the McCain-Kennedy proposal through the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 12-6 vote. He insisted the bill is not amnesty because illegal immigrants would have to undergo background checks, pay fines, back taxes and clear other obstacles before getting on the "citizenship track." They wouldn't have to leave the United States. Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., rail against what they call "amnesty" but would give illegal immigrants six months to register with the government. Those who do, could stay in the U.S., but only for up to five years. They would have to pay $2,000 fines annually for the privilege. Those who don't could be deported. The immigrants who register could return as guest workers, but would have to apply for legal permanent residency — a step to citizenship — from their home countries. Under current law, a person who is in the country illegally for more than 180 days cannot re-enter the U.S. for three years. A person in the country illegally for more than a year cannot re-enter for 10 years. Those prohibitions would be waived for immigrants who register with the government under the Cornyn-Kyl plan. Associated Press Writer Nancy Zuckerbrod contributed to this report.

Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints....

Despite my own general disinterest in sex as a subject of conversation, I know that those of you who are much younger than I are still fascinated by the subject. And I still do most vehemently retain my personal abhorrence of men who take advantage of children sexually, so..... I would be remiss if I didn't report the latest in the trial of six members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who are presently on trial here in Kingman. Their leader, Warren Jeffs has been ‘on the lamb' for over a year with a reward on his head from the FBI on down. [One might wonder that if they can't find him then what chance does the government have of finding Bin Laden?] Actually, there is little doubt that Jeffs is located in their new enclave in Texas but after the experience with the freaks at Waco I suspect that the government is ‘skered' to go there - what would Rush say! In case you don't know, the FLDS is a segment of the old Mormon church which refused to renounce polygamy in the late 1800's when the main church relented to federal government demands and abolished the practice. They located in remote parts of the state of Utah and Arizona to continue their outlawed religion. They got away with it until finally the states of Utah and Arizona got their act together and started enforcing their child molestation laws in a joint venture. You can read much more, including the very interesting history of the cult at http://tinyurl.com/m469b . I'm sure it is very frustrating to local law enforcement that there is a part of Arizona's Mohave county (where I live) which requires one to drive up into Nevada and then east to the north rim of the Grand Canyon in order to get to the twin towns of Colorado City, Az and Hildale, UT located across from one another on the state line between Arizona and Utah. This is, of course, because of the Grand Canyon, there is no road between Colorado City and the rest of Arizona. Religion on short leash in FLDS trials By Jeff Pope Miner Staff Writer [KingmanDailyMiner.com] KINGMAN – The history and practices of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints will be part of the trials of six men from Colorado City. In doing so, Superior Court Judge Steven Conn said on Tuesday he would keep the lawyers on a short leash as to the scope of the polygamist sect's culture that would be allowed. The information must be relevant to the charges against the defendants, he said. The defense's motion to include the relevant cultural information about the church is intrinsic to the charges, Conn said. However, he added that religious beliefs would not be a defense against the allegations. "If we attempt to present this case as if the FLDS has no involvement in it and that the defendants are not motivated by what may very well be very strongly-held sincere religious beliefs, then this case is going to be presented no differently than a child-molest case," he said. "I believe that much of the church teachings are not going to be relevant in this case." Kelly Fischer, Donald R. Barlow, Vergel B. Jessop, Dale E. Barlow and Terry D. Barlow are all charged with sexual conduct with a minor and conspiracy to commit sexual conduct with a minor. Rodney H. Holm is charged with three counts of sexual conduct with a minor. The state based its charges on the birth certificates of the children that resulted from the alleged sexual acts. The mothers listed on the documents would have had to be under 18 years old when the pregnancies occurred, Chief County Attorney Matt Smith said. Defense attorney Bruce Griffen filed eight motions to either dismiss the case on various legal grounds or allow the defense to argue that the charges persecute his clients' religious freedoms. "We seek this information to educate the jury. We included some authorities in our motion that certainly made clear that from a due process perspective we ought to be able to define our case, present what we think the appropriate information is that is essential to the jury's understanding of the issues," he said. By allowing the background to be introduced, Smith said he could present evidence that the women of the FLDS culture do not have much education to be able to think for themselves and the influence that the fugitive leader of the church, Warren Jeffs, has on the community. "I think on the one level… there's a pretty strong argument that could be made that what the defense is seeking to introduce is not relevant," he said. "The only issue is: did these defendants engage in sexual intercourse with young women that they were not married to that were under the age of 18 and did it happen in Mohave County?" Conn also struck down motions claiming the state's anti-polygamy clause and sexual conduct with a minor statute are laws targeted directly at religion. Griffen argued that the First Amendment's free exercise clause implies actions are protected as well as beliefs. According to FLDS church beliefs, polygamy is required and sanctioned by God. The sect broke away from the mainstream Mormon Church after it abandoned multiple marriages in 1890. "It is difficult to accept at this point that because of the way the world was more than 100 years ago and the fear that our forefathers had and our federal government had about where this population would land if we didn't outlaw polygamy, that we are still governed by that antiquated reasoning today," Griffen said. "The anti-polygamy clause is simply bad law." In denying the motion on the grounds that invalidating the clause now would not affect prior actions, Conn also doubted he had the authority to nullify a provision of the state Constitution. In the other motions, Griffen argued the state does not specify the dates that the alleged acts took place. Conn dismissed defense motions that the charges were duplicitous, vague and too broad and included a defective time frame. Conn also denied the change of venue motion but said Griffen could file it again if finding an impartial jury becomes a problem. In January, Judge James Chavez also denied the same motions against Randolph J. Barlow and David R. Bateman. Chavez said he would rule what evidence would be admissible closer to the trial date of Bateman scheduled for May 30. He is charged with sexual conduct with a minor and conspiracy to commit sexual conduct with a minor. Randolph Barlow is charged with two counts of sexual assault, but the charges do not specify the victim was a minor.

FUNDRAISERS

We went to a fund raiser for the local Democrats, tonight. No, it wasn't a black tie, $1000 per plate type of Republican orgy but rather a $20 buffet in a run-down café/hotel ‘historic place' - "the Brunswick" in ‘Old Town' Kingman where we got to meet the Democratic candidates, hear why they are running and sign their petitions so they can actually get on the ballot. The highest level politician there was running for the House of Representatives from our district - he wore a suit and tie! The catered food was simple, but actually rather good (not overdone) - rolled up thingies and chicken wings and other nondescript finger foods, we went back for more - and there was plenty because there were probably not many more than one hundred people milling about - that's about 0.4% of Kingman's population, I figger. And the beer at the no-host bar not only provided intellectual relief (I asked the bar girl, "What's a nice Republican girl doing in a place like this?"), but also stools for my Betty and I to sequester ourselves on throughout the speeches - which were blessedly short. Hell, at this point I wouldn't vote for a Republican if his name was Jesus and he wore sandals! So I certainly didn't go there for the speeches! My Betty, looking out over the crowd asked, "Where are the young people?" My reply was, "Are you kidding at twenty bucks a plate?" I mentioned to my Betty that I recognized quite a few people there - and, indeed several had come over and shook hands with us - all people who were involved during the Kerry campaign. My Betty commented that she didn't see anyone she knew - a lie, of course, but not unnoticed when you've been married for fifty-four years! It must be fun trying to be a politician because you believe in something and want to make a change in your society – and then come to the realization that most people simply don't give a damn! I can sit here in the peace and quiet of my den with cats and wine to keep me company and make comments about how the world should be – so much easier than being a politician and actually trying to achieve some of those things...........

Google Avoids Surrender

Google Avoids Surrendering Search Requests By MICHAEL LIEDTKE, AP Business Writer In my opinion, as you will see below, this ruling is really important to our Democracy and the future freedom of all of us. If the Bush administration or any other future (hopefully Democrat) administration can monitor our private communications with others and also monitor our requests for information such as at libraries and, in this case, Internet search engines such as Google to determine our patriotism toward them - not necessarily the patriotism we should have to our fellow Americans -- then our Democracy and freedom is down the drain and the book "1984" is true - just a bit late! No 9/11 nor other catastrophe is worth paying that price! Many more Americans have sacrificed their lives for our freedoms than were lost in 9/11 when you consider Vietnam, Korea, and WWII the numbers are overwhelming. Just the American lives lost in Iraq not counting our sacrifices in Afghanistan, already outnumber those lost in New York by the terrorists! - and those poor souls thought they were defending their country because they were lied to by the President of the United States, their commander in chief! That is disgraceful and perhaps criminal! Could it be, that in this country which has been my family's home for over 350 years (about 130 years before the United States even existed), that I should live in fear of a knock on the door and grim faced men march me off to Guantanamo or one of their torture locations never ever to be seen again? It is not impossible. It has happened throughout the ages and especially in Germany in the 1930's - and in much the same ways we are seeing today. They weren't always Jews who were taken to the concentration camps. They were people who were a threat to the government. Now, is not the kind of thinking I express here on Upstream, a ‘threat' to the present government? Yet, under our system, it is healthy to criticize one's government and attempt to bring about change, peacefully, of course. Unfortunately, governments with all of their power - if not limited by the courts, tend to choose force to suppress their opposition - guess it is human nature to do whatever is in your power to do..... As you will see in the article below, that the government could have the Internet addresses of 5,000 people who used Google but NOT what we asked to search! Well, since "everyone" uses Google, that could mean almost anyone and certainly wouldn't be of any use to the government - like a list of who buys lettuce at the supermarket. What the government really wanted was a list of people who wanted to search for certain things (anti-Bush?) on Google! Ostensibly, they claimed they wanted statistics on Internet pornography which sounds laudable, except that all of us at one time or another have been curious and at least taken a peek - and it actually isn't THAT easy to find. My point is that I don't believe the government has an overwhelming interest in pornography but they are vitally interested in what we citizens think, who we communicate with and what we learn from Google in our searches which is contrary to what our government wants us to know. After all, if they were only interested in pornography statistics they wouldn't need to know who we are would they - unless they had other plans? ...AG SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge on Friday ordered Google Inc. to give the Bush administration a peek inside its search engine, but rebuffed the government's demand for a list of people's search requests — potentially sensitive information that the company had fought to protect. In his 21-page ruling, U.S. District Judge James Ware told Google to provide the U.S. Justice Department with the addresses of 50,000 randomly selected Web sites indexed by its search engine by April 3. The government plans to use the data for a study in another case in Pennsylvania, where the Bush administration is trying to revive a law meant to shield children from online pornography. [Sure they are....AG] Ware, though, decided Google won't have to disclose what people have been looking for on its widely used search engine, handing a significant victory to the company and privacy rights advocates. "We will always be subject to government subpoenas, but the fact that the judge sent a clear message about privacy is reassuring," Google lawyer Nicole Wong wrote on the company's Web site Friday night. "What his ruling means is that neither the government nor anyone else has carte blanche when demanding data from Internet companies." Attempts to reach a spokesman for the Justice Department late Friday weren't immediately successful. The government had asked for the contents of 5,000 randomly selected search requests, dramatically scaling back its initial demands after Google's vehement protests gained widespread attention. When the Justice Department first turned to Ware for help in January, the government wanted an entire week's worth of Google search requests — a list that would encompass queries posed by millions of people. [Can't win ‘em all, huh?, Georgie boy?... AG]

Frist wins Republican straw poll....

I wonder why the parties do this sort of thing since such limited polls looking so far in the future mean absolutely nothing. They must be essentially publicity stunts to keep which ever party is doing them in the news. Frist will not necessarily be the candidate for the 2008 election any more than Hillary is a shoo-in for her party. Both parties have other candidates who are considered to be as qualified.

In a sense, I like Frist in that, as a doctor, he has an appreciation for the value of stem cell research for the future health of millions of people throughout the world - certainly much more important, I think, than worrying about a few terrorists.

However, I still can't abide by a party which places women in a secondary and subservient roll because of their sex nor can I abide by a party which favors the profitability of corporations as more important than the lives and welfare of living, breathing, and often suffering citizens.

On the other hand, I agree with many others that it is time for the Democrats to close ranks and define themselves behind a common sense leader - even a "brittle" woman. That is a difficult task for Democrats because we are so diverse.

Immigrants and unions don't always see eye to eye nor do small business people agree with either of them! There are many Christian Democrats who are not enthralled with the idea of catering to homosexuals with a gut feeling of disgust for the practice - nor do they feel charitable towards women and girls who lead reckless lives, get in trouble, and expect society to make it easy for them. No one likes to pay taxes but many, but not all, feel that we do need some services - or at least paved roads!

Each of the above items - and many more, is evaluated by most of us to determine how we choose a candidate or vote in an election. Unfortunately for Democrats, it seems that Republicans are able to focus on only one or two objectives and are able to ignore any other misgivings - that gives them great power and among other factors, allows them to win. They are focused and disciplined!

I think finally, that all of us agree that just as in Vietnam, the war in Iraq was a terrible mistake - the whole nation knows it as do both parties. The problem now is how to get out of it with a modicum of credibility and to minimize the further needless loss of American and Iraqi lives.

So the candidate from either party who can best figure that out will have a leg up in the 2008 election because, Iraq will still be a problem, I'm sure, until then - that is, unless Congress gets a mandate from the people in the elections in 2006!.

Another consideration will be the ability of the Bush government to handle next year's Hurricane season and the devastation bestowed upon what Gulf coast city? - perhaps even New Orleans again? Mother nature is still by far the most vicious terrorist! The tsunami in Sumatra killed 100 times more innocent people than 9/11/01 or 12/7/41! So how effective will our government be this time unless it performs some first class readjustments within the next six months. Considering budgetary constraints due to wars, etc., I'm not holding my breath that last year's problems will not be repeated this next year.

Deja vous all over again?

The Daily Show: Chicago, etc.

Ill. Governor Stumped by Hate Crimes Panel
By CHRISTOPHER WILLS, Associated Press Writer Fri Mar 3

[Speaking of tempests in teapots! If I were the poor governor of Illinois, at this point I'd eliminate the entire Commission on Discrimination and Hate Crimes (CDHC) since it obviously has not been very functional and is filled with a highly discriminatory membership consisting of probably the most provincial and warring tribes in the country - especially Chicago -don't ever go there after dark! Each member most likely represents the extremes in his own myopic culture, i.e.: Blacks, Jews, Gays, and certainly a few white supremists tossed in. So now, these agitators get up in arms because a "black Muslim" [Nation of Islam] gains membership! What do they not understand about the words Discrimination and Hate? Duh! (Sorry, trite phrase analyst)

Most of my commentary is posted below and addresses the article, point by point. ...AG]


SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - It started as a routine gubernatorial appointment to a feel-good commission — so routine that the governor says he didn't even know the details.

But the naming of a Nation of Islam official to a commission that fights discrimination has exploded into an election-year furor for Gov. Rod Blagojevich, putting him in the middle of a conflict among blacks, Jews and gays.

Even if Blagojevich makes his way through the racial and religious minefield this issue presents, his claim of ignorance about the appointment could reinforce his image of a detached, uninformed governor.

"No matter what he does, he's going to tick somebody off," Rick Garcia, political director of the gay rights organization Equality Illinois, said Friday. "It's completely a no-win situation."

Four Jewish members of the Governor's Commission on Discrimination and Hate Crimes resigned this week rather than serve alongside an aide to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, known for his disparaging remarks about Jews, whites and gays.

The third and fourth resignations came Friday, when Howard Kaplan of the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago said he could not serve on a commission "that, by implication, accepts divisive and bigoted standards."
[Boy! that is the pot calling the kettle black!..AG]

Democratic state Rep. Lou Lang, who was appointed just a day earlier to fill one of the vacancies, also stepped down.

[Chicken! ...AG]

In dueling news conferences, Jewish and gay lawmakers called for Sister Claudette Marie Muhammad to disavow Farrakhan's comments or step down from the commission, while black lawmakers defended her right to serve.

"I think she has the intellect and also the humanity to do what this commission was put together for," said state Sen. Donne Trotter, a Chicago Democrat.

Blagojevich appointed Muhammad to the commission in August, but she drew no public attention until she invited other commissioners to a Farrakhan speech last month. Some commissioners began complaining of her presence on the panel, and the criticism increased after Farrakhan's speech Sunday included references to "Hollywood Jews" promoting homosexuality and "other filth."

[Louis Farrakhan, hate monger, has been around for years having started his own version of Islam which is certainly not related to middle eastern Islam but is more self-serving and is in reality a black supremist counter to the prolific white supremists in that neck of the woods.

Now, "Hollywood Jews" we're all well aware of, right? They are not Jews like, say, those of the garment or diamond industry of New York. Some, who are mostly dead now, were the moguls of the film industry - and others were entertainers drawn out from the Catskills where the New York garment Jews went on their vacations (I don't think diamond market Jews take vacations).

However, I suspect that most Jews still in Hollywood are stylish converts. In that town a few years ago it was popular to be "Jewish" - one of the crowd - like, for example, Sammy Davis Jr. a member of "the Rat Pack" - and many many others. However, they don't make policy.

I think that Farrakhan was using the term Jew symbolically to fit the ancient Catholic inspired stereotype of Jews being money grubbing greedy people (like the Rothchilds) and thus representative of big business efforts to satisfy the prurient demands of our present society - namely, smut.

It would be more accurate for him to be honest and admit that the large majority of those people are, in fact, Republicans - if not very evangelical! Now, isn't that interesting if you really think about it? ...AG]

The Democratic governor, in a recent interview with The Associated Press, said he did not realize he had appointed a Nation of Islam official until learning about it from news reports.

He nodded vigorously when asked whether his staff should have discussed the appointment and its implications with him, but would say little else about the incident.

But he did say Muhammad should stay on the commission so long as she supports its goals of fighting discrimination.

"I strongly disagree with the things Minister Farrakhan said. They're wrong and hateful and they're harmful," Blagojevich said. "I also oppose guilt by association. Ms. Muhammad didn't say those things."

[Minister Farrakhan has always been hateful - that is how he gets his following! He does represent a lot of very angry blacks! ...AG]

Muhammad did not return messages left for her at the Nation of Islam, where she is Farrakhan's chief of protocol [what protocol? ..AG] and director of community outreach, but she issued a statement promising to support the commission's work "to eradicate hate and discrimination against any group or person."

[No wonder they don't like her! ...AG]

Blagojevich's aides have refused to answer questions about how Muhammad was appointed.

The commission, with 20 to 30 members, was established in 1999 but eventually fell into disuse. Blagojevich appointed a new set of unpaid commissioners last summer. Their mission is to promote tolerance by working with law enforcement, religious leaders, educators and social service agencies. The full commission has met in full only twice since it was reconstituted.
[My recommendation is to disband the whole thing and let them all wallow in their own filth! ...AG]

The biggest political risk to Blagojevich is that the controversy could alienate black leaders who are already grumbling because he won't raise taxes to generate more money for schools and social services. One black state senator, who is also a prominent Chicago minister, has talked about launching a third-party challenge.

[Yeah, and then you'd get a Republican governor who is going to raise taxes? Speak of shooting oneself in the foot!.. AG]

The Rev. Michael Pfleger, the white pastor of a mostly black Chicago church and a friend of Muhammad's, said Blagojevich would generate enormous anger if he removed Muhammad from the commission.

"If you are not willing to stand up in difficult times, don't pretend to be a supporter of black issues, of the black community," Pfleger said. "Now is a test for him."

Meanwhile, Blagojevich is being accused of "appeasement" and cowardice by gubernatorial rival Edwin Eisendrath, who trails badly in the Democratic primary. Republicans are also calling on Blagojevich to remove Muhammad.
[Of course, they're drooling for the backlash!..AG]

People on both sides of the question are shaking their heads over the Blagojevich administration's failure to anticipate the problem. Some likened it to Blagojevich's statement last month that he had no idea "The Daily Show" was a comedy when he sat down for an interview that ended up mocking him.

[Perhaps the governor is too naive for the job in such a degenerate place. But even my omniscience was not aware of The Daily Show which, I find, to be a production of Comedy Central a channel which is seldom funny. Those of us who never watch pap sucking for the masses - including the character building Jerry Springer show - would certainly not be in the know - at small loss, it seems to me. ...AG]

Garcia, the gay rights leader, praised Muhammad and said he wants her to stay on the commission. But he said of the Blagojevich administration: "How they could not see it as a potential problem down the road is mind-boggling to me."

[Maybe he was busy being Governor of the state and not micro managing the slums of Chicago which should be the Mayor's job! ...AG]