Pennsylvania Man Survived Second Lightning Strike. 

HAMLIN, Pa.  —AP- Lightning can strike twice. Just ask Don Frick.

Frick said he survived his second lightning strike Friday — 27 years to the day of his first bout with a bolt — and emerged a bit shaken with only a burned zipper and a hole in the back of his jeans.

“I’m lucky I’m alive,” Frick said in a phone interview Sunday night.

Frick was attending Hamlin’s Ole Tyme Daz festival on Friday afternoon when a storm came up quickly. He and six others sought refuge in a nearby shed shortly before lightning struck the ground nearby. The strike sent a shock through Frick and four others in the shed.

“It put me up against the wall,” the 68-year-old Frick said. “When I came to and realized I was alive, the first thing that came to my mind was that I’m pretty lucky.

“It burned my zipper off, burned my pockets, but didn’t burn me.”

Burned his ZIPPER OFF? What are you DOING in these thunderstorms, Don?

Allah Pundit, Hot Air. posts two excellent reasons why republicans should never agree to a Youtude/CNN debate, two twits with cameras.

I am sure bloggers can come up with some serious intelligent questions and that CNN will never select them.

?

Swedish film direcctor Ingmar Bergman has died at age eighty-nine.  Adam Bernstein, Washington Post:

Ingmar Bergman, , an Academy Award-winning Swedish writer-director whose name came to define an entire genre of stark movies about the human condition, such as “The Seventh Seal,” “Wild Strawberries” and “Persona,” has died at his home at the age of 89, Swedish media reported Monday.

Credits, IMDB.

Hat tip photo: Filmsick.

?

K. C. Johnson, the other day:

Beyond illustrating the flawed conception of academic freedom too prevalent in the contemporary academy, the Churchill case illustrates what happens when universities abandon excellence as the primary criterion in the personnel process. Well before Churchill ever uttered his “Little Eichmanns” line, the University of Colorado – a Tier I research university – had hired, then tenured, and then promoted to department chairman a woefully underqualified academic charlatan. In this respect, the affair provides a case study of “diversity” hiring practices gone awry.

Churchill was hired through a “special opportunity” position, designed by the university to help “recruit and hire a more diverse faculty.” He had an M.A. from little-known Sangamon State University and no Ph.D at all. As documents from the time noted, his qualifications included only two items: strong lobbying from Evelyn Hu-DeHart, the chair of the Ethnic Studies program, and the now-disputed fact that “Ward is a Native American,” meaning his hire would contribute “to increasing the cultural diversity on campus.”

Johnson has it absolutely correct here.  But his point, I think, is even broader than he makes it.  This is not against Churchill specifically, but more about the politically correct and “diversified” process by which he umpteen his position.

A number of years ago, (June O3, I think) I posted an extended analysis of the Bakke and Grutter decisions.  I discussed it more recently, here... in a slightly different context. Given Churchill’s unsubstantiated claim of Indian heritage, I suppose it could be argued that race Anderson to this.  But one of the subtexts of that entire discussion than I did not get into it that time, was the actual academic fitness of the students involved with those rulings.  Many argue that the time, and still do, that we are placing students into positions well beyond their ability, simply because they are of the right color, gender, or ethnic background.  This results in a lowering of academic standards, overall, because the unqualified people simply can’t cut it.  This, of course doesn’t do the student much good, nor does it do any good to those who hire said student after they are handed a diploma. (Notice, please, that I am reluctant to use the word “graduate” in that context.)

What Johnson is tacitly suggesting, here, (and, perhaps even he’s unaware he’s doing it ) is that the problems that are created for students involved in such “diversity” oriented escalation programs, are now clearly identified as causing the very same qualification issues involved in the same type of “diversity” escalation programs for faculty of our places of higher learning.

Churchill, clearly, exposed himself as being totally unqualified for the position that he held. Certainly, this brings up the question of whether or not academics are doing enough to police themselves, but inherent in that question, is whether not academics are being honest with both themselves and with us as regards the actual qualifications of the people so elevated…. Both students and faculty.

When I say honest, I mean as regards the politics of the situation.  As Johnson himself points out, the outcome of the Churchill situation, exposes the fact that ….

…in politicized fields such as African-American Studies, Women’s Studies, and Ethnic Studies, the message too often trumps quality. In this case, it appears that Churchill’s extremist arguments that the U.S. government engaged in genocide against Native Americans blinded his academic reviewers to the poor quality of his scholarship. Indeed, some Churchill sympathizers, led by Cornell professor Eric Cheyfitz, have continued to maintain that the former professor’s writings constitute appropriate scholarship for the field of Ethnic Studies.

The honesty, and integrity, of not only Churchill, not only of the faculty at Colorado university, but our entire higher educational system, is on the line here.  We now see clearly the wages of the sin of placing political correctness over the quality of scholarship.  Of “the message” over the truth.

Correcting this situation, is problematic at best.  That’s because the people who we are relying upon to change that situation, are responsible for dickering in the first place.  And, they got us into this situation, because of their predilection to placing political correctness over quality of scholarship.  Of “the message”, over the truth.  How, then, can they be depended upon, to solve the problem that they created, when their non-reasoning leftism behind what they created has not changed?

Michelle Says:

Kudos to this judge:

A 73-year-old man has been ordered to clean a veterans memorial with a toothbrush for taking part in a scam to solicit scrap yards for metal, saying it was to be used to build a memorial for soldiers in the Iraq war.

Philip Kolinski and another man were arrested after scrap yards reported the men soliciting metal donations for a sculpture. Detectives said the men sold the metal and kept the money.

“You certainly should be ashamed,” Saginaw County District Court Judge A.T. Frank said as he sentenced Kolinski to clean the veterans memorial in front of Governmental Center on Aug. 7. “You will have a toothbrush and bucket with a placard saying you stole from veterans,” Frank said.

I hope someone takes pictures.

More importantly, how I hope somebody posts them.  The reason however that this caught my eye was as an extension to the post about honor, earlier today. somehow, I don’t see a great deal of difference between Kolinnski, here, and Jack Murtha.  Both dishonored those who have served us so well, for their own personal gain.

 

IRAQ WAR PUSHBACK ON THE WAY!

 

10,000+ To Take to Streets

Supporting Missions of Troops in Iraq

Above: Collage of photos from Move America Forward’s

past pro-troop national caravans.

 

STORY POSTED ONLINE HERE: http://www.moveamericaforward.org/index.php/MAF/MAFNews

 

(SACRAMENTO) – With General David Petraeus set to report to Congress by September 15^th on the progress of “the surge” of U.S. troops in Iraq, supporters of Operation Iraqi Freedom are preparing to launch a massive public effort to show support for the missions of U.S. troops in Iraq.

 

From September 3, 2007 through September 15, 2007 the nation’s largest grassroots, pro-troop organization, Move America Forward (website: www.MoveAmericaForward.org) will lead more than 10,000 supporters in a cross-country caravan called the “FIGHT FOR VICTORY TOUR.”   The caravan will stop for more than 25 pro-troop rallies along the way.  Thousands of Americans have already signed up to join the tour in just the first few days since it was announced online.

 

 

“We need to convey to our troops and the world in general that America doesn’t lose. We don’t turn our backs on our courageous men and women in uniform and we don’t walk away from the Iraqi people who desperately seek democracy and freedom,” said Lt. Colonel Buzz Patterson (USAF, Ret.) who serves as Vice Chairman of Move America Forward.

 

“The Fight for Victory Tour is absolutely essential to demonstrate our support of our troops and to send a clear signal to the anti-military folks in this nation that we will not let them bring about an American defeat in Iraq or the greater war on terror. Victory is the only option and we’re not backing down from the fight at hand,” Colonel Patterson said.

  

The caravan will be led by veterans of Operation Iraqi Freedom & Operation Enduring Freedom, along with Gold Star Families (who lost a loved one in Iraq) and Blue Star Families (who have a loved one serving in Iraq).

 

“We’re going to send a message of support for our troops that will be heard from the shores of the Pacific Ocean all the way across this country to the Atlantic Coast – we support our troops and their missions and we won’t let anyone force them to surrender to the jihadists,” said Melanie Morgan, Chairman of Move America Forward.

 

The current schedule for the caravan includes pro-troop rally stops in more than 2 DOZEN cities across America including: 

 

* Carson City, NV

* Sacramento, CA

* San Francisco, CA

* Modesto, CA

* Fresno, CA

* Los Angeles, CA

* San Diego, CA

* Yuma, AZ

* Phoenix, AZ

* Tucson, AZ

* Las Cruces, NM

* El Paso, TX

* San Antonio, TX

* Waco, TX

* Crawford, TX

* Dallas, TX

* Oklahoma City, OK

* Wichita, KS

* Kansas City, MO

* Des Moines, IA

* Cedar Rapids, IA

* Chicago, IL

* Indianapolis, IN

* Cincinnati, OH

* Columbus, OH

* Pittsburgh, PA

* Washington D.C.

 

More details can be found about the upcoming “Fight for Victory Tour” at: www.MoveAmericaForward.org

 

Leadership. An intangible quality which is innate in some and must be taught and nurtured in others. But in combat, there is no substitute for good leadership. And the Marine Corps is among the best organizations in the world for preparing leaders to face the rigors, risks and demands of infantry combat.

Today we honor a true leader, CPT Joshua L. Glover who was awarded the Silver Star while serving as 81mm Mortar Platoon Commander with Weapons Company and Quick Reaction Force Platoon Commander, 1st Marine Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom on April 13, 2004 in Al Fallujah.

So says McQ over at Q&O, yesterday.  It strikes me, the difference between Captain Glover and the people we were discussing in the post “Of Honor” A study in contrast.

Project Hero, is a worthy attempt on McQ’s part to remind us that we have heroes among us. Further, that these need to be honored as such. We at BitsBlog are proud to lend our voice to such a project.

I guess I’m not surprised that the conversation about honor, the specifically as regards Scott Thomas Beauchamp, over at Q&O, is still going. Equally unsurprising, is that there are several offshoots to the conversation.  And, again, it doesn’t surprise me that we find Scott Erb putting up a defense for Beauchamp, and suggesting that honor has nothing to do with veracity of his story.

Leaving aside Erb and his (I think intentional) misconceptions, for the moment;

We are finding, as we go forward, the wacko leftist routes from which this moron came. His writings our testament to his world view. His world view, four years before he became active in the military, does not strike me as what you would find in the military. After all, the military is a commitment to a way of thinking, at least. And, of course, actions based on that thinking.

I am left with the question of just how it is we find him in uniform, to begin with? I mean, I can certainly understand how it is that he is an underperformer, and a pebble in the shoe of any outfit that he is assigned to. But that’s after the commitments’ been made. How is it that someone with his mindset, ends up volunteering?

It is suggested that the reason could very easily be the GI bill. I tend to agree…It’s plausible, but that still leaves other hurdles that should not have been able to be crossed by Beauchamp…

Steyn, the other morning, looks at his writings and comes to the conclusion that we’re dealing with Self-loathing by the bushel. I think he’s quite right, even absent the politics of the issue. I am reminded of Michael Savage, and his statement that liberalism is a mental disease. I’m not a listener of his, but I can’t imagine he’s not going to be playing off on this moron for the nest few years as backing for his axiom. So, then the question also comes, how was it that someone with his mindset makes it through the screening process?

Now, those points aside, let’s address the defense of Beauchamp and such numbnuts by Erb and others, shall we?

At the outset, let’s admit that there is a very central reason to why TNR chose to print this fantasy. That Beauchamp is still, for the moment, in uniform… (though that will doubtless change in the next weeks and months once the board of inquiry gets ahold of this scuzzy butt.) The central reason, is not that he had been engaged to a staffer at TNR, though that helped. it wasn’t that is writings were particularly good, (they were not) it wasn’t that his writings were verified as fact (Again, they were not) it was that the writings of Scott Thomas Beauchamp….. met two criteria:

1: It contained Bush Derangement Syndrome -generated hysteria
2: Because he does have the green suit on for the moment, the rest of us are not supposed to question him.

Ann Coulter addresses this one quite well, indeed, in “Godless”

Finally, Democrats hit on an ingenious strategy; They chose only messengers whom we’re not allowed to reply to. That’s why all Democratic spokesman these days are sobbing, hysterical women. You can’t respond to them because that would be questioning the authenticity of their suffering. Liberals haven’t changed the message, just the messenger. Although most prominent Liberal spokesman are people with “absolute moral authority”. Democrats with a dead husband , a dead child, a wife who works at the CIA, a war record, a terminal illness, or as a last resort being on a first name basis with Nelson Mandela.

In this case, it wasn’t a female, but it is somebody we are not allowed to question. The slightly altered tactic has proven to work in the past with such luminaries as John Kerry and Max Cleland to name a couple. The reason that we aren’t supposed to question them, of course, is they were once in uniform.

Obvious holes in their story, obvious idiocy in their politics, obvious political avarice, nor obvious mental illness… none of these rise to the level that will trump that they were in uniform.

It’s funny, though, how the people who were in uniform , and their widows, and their children, seemingly don’t account for much, when they’re not in liberal lockstep… or is it goose-step? I forget.  There are, for example, an awful lot of windows in those categories who support the president. Coulter goes on later to point up the idea that the “Jersey Girls” never really caught the support of the wives of the firemen who died in those towers, that day. It seems by the lights of the democrats, there are a very selective few when we cannot question. I note, for example, that we are not allowed to question Jack Murtha, because he was in uniform.  Yet, being in uniform, apparently didn’t account for much when the targets were actually on the front lines and serving, and the topic was his baseless and now disproven accusations in the incident at Haditha.
Interesting, isn’t it…. How the ones we can’t question are the ones supporting Democrat party politics, and how the remainder are people that we just shouldn’t take as seriously.

But they.. that remainder, aren’t trying to turn their personal tragedy into a tool by which to dictate national politics toward the Democrats, are they?

As to Erb himself, who unsuprisingly says flatly:

Honor is not a term I run across often in my world

I note another comment are, over there answering this very well;

The fact that you dont understand this doesnt surprise me. This is why liberals in general and a LOT of academia have trouble understanding the military culture. It is also why they cant understand that people like John Murtha and John Kerry disgust us. Not that they have a different opinion than us but that they have used their military service as a badge to justify or in some way try to condone things which are viewed by the military culture in general as dishonorable acts.

Precisely so.

I suggest that trust is a product of honor.  The left is demanding that we trust the word of such people as Beauchamp, yet they don’t understand the relationship between honor and trust.  So it is, that they do not understand why such people as Beauchamp, Murtha and Kerry disgust us so. These people who are making the most noise about how we should leave Iraq, have repeatedly shown themselves to be completely bereft of honor. No surprise, then, at least to those who understand that relationship, that they are also bereft of trust.

But of course, none of this matters to the narrative in question. Without the credibility that honor brings, why bother bringing these charges at all?  The answer is simple in its description, and breathtaking in its lack of honor.  As Dave Schuler points out in a different topic over at OTB, in a post called “waging information war” ..

A key problem in waging war at the information level is that the truth or falsity of the stories may make no difference.  They will be taken as true or false as suits the predilection of the audience.

That is precisely the situation that we find ourselves in here.  Our war on terrorism, has always been at least 50% and information war.  It is a war that the left in this country has wholeheartedly joined …. on the side of the terrorists. Joe Wilson, for example.  Or, Jack Murtha. That the troops involved in the Hadditha incodent were innocent, and have been so found, doesn’t matter. The harm is already done, by the accusers. which is precisely the intent of the accusation.  (Are you listening, Murtha?) And Beauchamp, and the TNR.

But at what point, has it ever been honorable to join with the side of the enemy of your country? I wish one of our suppose of news people would have sufficient testicular mass to ask that question of Jack Murtha. the resulting meltdown would rival Mount Saint Helens.

Not that they care much about honor, being a word they don’t use much, in their world.

Columbia Journalism Review’s Paul McLeary

How dare a college grad and engaged citizen volunteer to join the Army to fight for his country! (Which is something that most of the brave souls who inhabit the milblog community prefers to leave to others.)

Courtesy of Baldilocks, who is kind enough to inform McLeary, that Milblog stands for Military Blogger.

Hat tip:  Don Surber.

 

Reports Fox’s Bret Baier:

The head of the Environmental Protection Agency says he will investigate a threatening letter sent to a global warming skeptic by the head of a group advocating the use of renewable energy.

The Washington Times reports American Council on Renewable Energy President Michael Eckhart wrote to Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Marlo Lewis — “It is my intention to destroy your career as a liar. If you produce one more editorial against climate change, I will launch a campaign against your professional integrity.”

The EPA is a member of ACORE — and so are several other government agencies. Eckhart told the Times he apologizes to all who were offended by his choice of words, and says the letter was a private communication in the context of what he called “personal combat and jousting.”

No, Mr. Eckart. Those are in legal terms, called “Threats”. More specifically, it’s trying to control the conversation, by means of threats.  Clearly, you consider yourself unable two when the conversation with logic and science, (understandably) and so we revert to threatening your opponents.

Ladies and gentlemen this is precisely how weak the AGW argument is.

I was tempted to write about Chuckles’ lastest joke, However John Hinderacker, Power Line, trashs Chuckie pretty well.  It is not like opposing the President’s judicial nominees is anything new for Chuck.  He simply has opposed them all.

John gives the small picture, and small is indeed the word for Schumer.  Leave it to the Sister see the big picture:

The Democrats have declared war on this President.

She cites the evidence:

I’d say if you consider how Democrats have routinely questioned the President’s right to claim executive privilege, the President’s right to commute sentences and pardon people, the President’s right to make recess appointments, the President’s right to fight back against political smear campaigns (think Joe Wilson), the President’s right and obligation under the Constitution to protect the American people at home and abroad in a time of war, and now this threat over the nomination of USSC justices? That certainly sounds like an attempted coup to me.

No wonder Congress has a fourteen percent approval rating.

Hat tiip image: Freedom’s Phoenix..

?

There is an old adage about how PETA nutballs target rich women wearing fur, instead of motorcycle gangs wearing leather, because the rich women wearing fur are not likely to people living crap of you.  So we find Insta-Glenn this morning:

ADVERTISING AGE ON THE LATEST MOVEON STUNT: “What’s left unsaid in the AP piece is that MoveOn has been pitching this story for weeks now. . . . And if the owner of a local business has gone through the trouble of specifically buying an ad on Fox News, it’s because he wants to be there and he wants to target Fox News viewers. And such an advertiser more than likely has certain views about MoveOn. I can only imagine what the conversation will sound like when a self-appointed MoveOn monitor calls up Joe’s Bait, Tackle & Hunting Supply to say he should remove his ads from Fox News.”

Its my considered opinion, gained through long experience, that most of these morons would know what to do with a real man if they had an instruction manual.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts and Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito “duped” the U.S. Senate into confirming them, a top Democratic lawmaker charged on Friday, days after a key Republican questioned if they had lived up to their promises.

Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a member of the Judiciary Committee that held hearings on the two, said they staked out moderate positions in congressional testimony but became part of a conservative bloc that issued restrictive rulings on issues from free speech to civil rights.

Schumer, in a speech to the American Constitution Society, talked about the confirmation of Roberts and Alito in 2005 and 2006, respectively.  “Were we duped?” he asked.  “Were we too easily impressed by the charm of nominee Roberts and the erudition of nominee Alito?” Schumer asked. “Did we mistakenly vote our hopes when our fears were more than justified by the ultraconservative records of these two men?”

So, Chuckles… that means you’re an idiot, right? That you are easily blinded?  That you are totally unable to make the big decisions without placing blame for screwing them up on somebody else?  Or does it mean that you’re simply jumping on the political opportunity in this case? That you’re playing ‘the victim’? How very Democrat of you.

Yet, what does it say about you, that you have to follow the lead of supposed Republican?

And what does it say about the RINO status of Arlen Specter?

As for your branding those two judges “ultraconservative” by your point of view, anyone to the right of Fidel Castro is “ultraconservative”.  Which pretty much tells us where you are, doesn’t it, Chuckles?

Investors Business Daily, has today’s Snark of the Day;

In an article, titled Richard Milhous Spitzer they suggest that

“At least Nixon waited a little while before using the tools of state against his political enemies.”

When Spitzer said he would bring a new level of ethics to the table, he wasn’t kidding. But it seems to me an indication of just how bad things have got in here in the Vampire state,  when the more truthful and ethical person turns out to be Andrew Cuomo.

Recently, we have seen article after article, misstating flatly the California despite all the illegal influx, is losing population.  On Liberty Just In Case, we see the reasons why.  Here’s a sample;

What started out as an amazing melange of things to do, people to meet, and places to see has turned into a bilious dissonance- of social ills, warped values, and deleterious mores.

In short, California has become incredibly toxic.

The gangs, the crime, the moral equivocation festoons your life. It threatens children, family, and everyone you love. My initial excitement and attraction to California has been replaced by jaundice and acrimony.

Well, at least now we know why drugs are so popular out there.  You need them to survive in that kind of environment. Only trouble is, they tend to make you think that ended nonsense is normalcy.