Hamilton's Pamphlets

The Death of Fatherhood

Soooo... After my blood pressure came down from the airport screeners posting, I foolishly blundered into the Malkin Zone.  I like Michelle Malkin, she writes well and usually has interesting stuff, sometimes she gets a little girlie/mom ish, but for the most part, top notch stuff.  But today I read this really disturbing thing about an obituary for a Seattle area father (AN UNBELIEVABLE OBITUARY).  I'm from the Seattle area, but we were out of town over Thanksgiving and completely missed the story behind the obit.

What Michelle (and Ambra Nykol at Sound Politics) said was that this wonderful glowing obituary (actually a paid death notice - paid for by friends and family) about a man who loved life, lived well, adored his daughters, great father, blah, blah, blah...was about a man who just last week killed those two daughters and then killed himself.  On the surface Michelle seemed on the mark.  This was outrageous.  Glowing praise for a man who murdered his own daughters?  In my opinion, UNBELIEVABLY TASTELESS.  But that's where Michelle leaves it.  She harangues the liberal Northwest apologists (and rightfully so) about a related Seattle Times article, but that's it.  No introspection on why an otherwise normal decent guy would do this.  Sorry Michelle but that's just a little too shallow for me.

Disclaimer:  I'm a divorced Dad with two kids that live with their mother.  I have biases and experiences that Michelle doesn't.  I see something like this and I see more. 

Don't get me wrong.  I am in no way condoning what Stephen Byrne did.  There is no excuse for his actions.  They were wrong on so many levels and in so many ways.  So don't think I'm going to defend him.  Personally, I hope he burns in Hell for what he did to those girls.

So what I'm I getting at?  Back to the question that Michelle didn't ask, but should have.  What would push a guy over the edge to do something this terrible?

Two words:  Family Court. 

Speaking from experience, the Family Court system provides NO JUSTICE and NO FAIRNESS to fathers. In custody disputes, the ovaries win every time. If you have ovaries, you win. If you don't you lose. I know of at least a half a dozen guys that were cleaned out by lying cheating ex's and the ex's got the kids (myself included). The courts did not take their behavior into consideration at all. Not relevant. You simply cannot seperate a child from their mother, regardless of how badly they behave. In some cases where the father can prove drug use or prostitution they have a chance, but only if they can prove it and it usually has to occur in front of the children for it to make a difference. Think I'm kidding? I'm not.

So before you write Stephen Byrne off as just some psychopath child killer, you have to ask "what would push a man to commit this kind of atrocity"? And when are we, as a society, going to do something about it?

Gestapo Trained Airport Screeners

Every morning while drinking my first cup of coffee for the day (and due to acid reflux, usually my last...) I read blogs.  This morning it was more than the coffee that lit off the acid pumps.  Ann Althouse posted her thoughts about a NY Times article on how people, especially women, felt mishandled at airport screening checkpoints.  Here's the Times article (I posted the whole thing cause you have to register with the Times to read it and that's a pain).

Another Shoe Drops on the Subject of Airport Security

By JOE SHARKEY

Published: November 30, 2004

E have been hearing a lot from women who object to the way they are being handled, literally, at airport checkpoints. The chorus of protests from women about what they strongly regard as inappropriate body pat-downs has been loud, sustained and persuasive.

What about men? Do they have similar complaints?

Among the several hundred responses I've had to recent columns on the ratcheting up of airport pat-downs and other security measures, a handful have been from men complaining that they have been rudely groped. The Transportation Security Administration says that the more invasive procedures are necessary to comply with recommendations by the 9/11 Commission to guard against someone smuggling nonmetallic explosives onto airplanes, and that women are not being singled out. By large numbers, the women I have heard from beg to differ.

But something has obviously gone off the rails recently, and women aren't the only ones noticing it. While women's protests about being groped are certainly much more serious in nature, men are weighing in on other matters. The policies on shoe removal, the inconsistency with which the agency's posted rules are enforced from one airport to another, and the demeanor of screeners themselves are among them.

Let's hear from Mike Coop, who is so confounded by the shoe-removal policy that he's taken to testing it out of curiosity.

"Have you had to take your shoes off lately?" Mr. Coop asked the other day.  "I routinely take them off because I don't want to get involved in arguments," I replied meekly.  Mr. Coop, who is from San Jose, Calif., says he will travel about 160,000 miles this year. "If I have enough time, I will decline to take my shoes off, just to see what's going to happen on the other side," he says.

He travels in shoes that he knows will not set off the metal detector. Nonetheless, in the last few months, he has been ordered to undergo more invasive secondary screening every time he passes through a checkpoint because he declines to remove his shoes.

The rule as posted on the agency's Web site (www.tsa.gov) is this (bold-faced capital letters are courtesy of the agency):

"You are NOT REQUIRED to remove your shoes before you enter the walk-through metal detector. However, TSA screeners may encourage you to remove them before entering the metal detector as many types of footwear will require additional screening even if the metal detector DOES NOT alarm."

Mr. Coop said, "The shoes I wear are loafers with no steel shanks that never set off the magnetometer. This was fine until recently. Now, without fail, every time I've declined to take them off, I've had to go to secondary screening."

He routinely questions the agency's on-site supervisors and says that while most are cordial, he has yet to get a sensible answer. "One said, 'Well, if you won't take your shoes off, that means we're looking for other things about you,' " Mr. Coop said.

The interpretation, as Mr. Coop sees it, is that any degree of defiance elicits a punitive response. He says he will be happy to follow any rule that is clearly spelled out, as any sensible security procedure should be.

"I'm not trying to stir up any trouble with these guys," he said. "I don't want to end up on some no-fly watch list. But I'm an information-security consultant. Most of my work is in homeland defense. I commute on a pretty regular basis between the West Coast and Washington. Most of the folks I deal with are Department of Defense. We also deal with the Homeland Security folks.

"I've been on enough military bases in the last three years I have no expectation for privacy, but I would really like to see these guys be consistent with their policies."

Incidentally, frequent travelers say that most screeners are polite. The agency says it receives relatively few complaints about screeners. On its Web site, the agency says: "Please be assured that T.S.A. puts a high priority on customer service and we have procedures in place to address all concerns." The agency's customer service hotline is 866-289-9673. Online comments can be sent to [email protected].

Next, let's hear from Gary Stevens, a businessman who travels frequently and who also commutes among homes in Connecticut, Florida and Washington State. He had a problem last week at security at the airport in White Plains, where he was about to board a US Airways flight to Florida with a connection through Philadelphia.

In his carry-on bag were two bottles of a favorite commercial carpet cleaner that he was bringing back after "my wife called and said the dog left some spots on the rug," he said.  The carpet cleaner was flagged during a secondary inspection. The screener said the carpet cleaner was contraband, and then continued rummaging through his small carry-on bag.

"I said if it's that big a deal, just keep it," he said. "But then the screener gets really officious with me. He's taking everything out and looking at it, and then they're calling my flight, which inexplicably they call 30 minutes early. I kept saying, 'Look, I got to get going.' I look toward the gate."

"The screener says: 'You cannot look away from me. You have to have your eyes on me at all times,' " Mr. Stevens said. "Every time I would turn, this guy would stop and say, 'Do not look away!' I said, 'O.K., I'm sorry. Please just get me out of here.' "

That only brought over reinforcements. "Then a big fat guy who was sitting there eating comes over and says, 'If he does that again, we're going to throw him out of here.' "  "Every time I tried to reason with them they got nastier and nastier," until a supervisor came over and told the two screeners to allow him to proceed, Mr. Stevens said.  He made his flight. But Mr. Stevens, a former military reservist, had two words on his mind when he took his seat in the plane: boot camp.

Here's Ann's post: Just deal with it.  The gist of what Ann said was that no matter how badly the screeners treat you, suck it up and well, "just deal with it".  Further summarizing Ann, she basically says that you need to be prepared to deal with the inconveniences and hassles for the sake of security.  You should know what the rules are and you should be nice to the screeners.  The screeners are just trying to do their jobs, and very important jobs at that.  Hopefully I've captured the gist of what Ann said (she and I traded emails all day and she promised to link to this, so if I'm off base, I'm sure she'll let me know).

Ann is very smart.  She is a lawyer, she is a law professor.  Therefore, I did not enter into an arguement with her lightly.  In my experience, arguing with lawyers is not something you can expect to win.  Victory in this case would be at best a draw.

Here is my response:

I travel quite a bit, and some of the screeners are professional and take their jobs seriously.  The majority are sloppy, unprofessional and could easily pass for a concentration camp guard.  The do not know their own rules and enforce them so
hap-hazardly that it is a wonder anyone makes it through the process with their carry-on and dignity intact.

I am in the military.  I was assigned to the Pentagon on September 11th.  I appreciate good security and understand the need for it.  What we have now is "Chicken Soup for the Airplane Travelers Soul".  Platitudes and window dressing that make people feel safe that add very little real security.

As far as being treated with dignity, the lines going through airport screening more closely resemble the lines to the box cars on the way to concentration camps than free peoples choosing to travel.  If you think about it, it is creepy how alike it is.  Take off your shoes and belt, put your valuables in this container...this way to Treblinka...

Mr. Stevens was treated very badly.  There is NO RULE that says you must keep eye contact with the screener in secondary screening.  I checked the TSA website to confirm, here's the link RULES .  Out of curiosity I also checked to see if the carpet cleaner was prohibited.  I checked both the TSA website and the FAA website.(TSA, FAA)  Three conditions could have made it prohibited: 1) if it contained chlorine, 2) if it was flammable, and 3) if it was in an aerosol can.  Mr. Stevens says in the article they were bottles, so no aerosol cans.  He also says it is carpet cleaner, if it has chlorine in it, then it is probably going to ruin the carpet. I doubt that it had chlorine in it.  I also doubt that it was flammable, especially since he mentioned that it was for pet stains.  Carpet cleaners for people with pets are typically non-toxic (and therefore usually not flammable).  Strike three for TSA.

So in the case cited the screener does not know (or understand or care) the rules and also is not able to distinguish what is prohibited from what is not.  By demanding that Mr. Stevens keep eye contact with him, he was just being a bully
and abusing the authority WE, as taxpayers, gave him.  So after demanding compliance above and beyond the rules and treating Mr. Stevens like a criminal (don't we have constitutional garauntees against that sort of thing?), somehow we are supposed to blame Mr. Stevens for not sheepishly complying with the screener's Gestapo tactics.  I think not.

As freedom loving Americans we should demand useful and effective security measures to ensure as safe as possilbe air travel, but handing over our basic human rights and dignity just to get on a airplane is rediculous.  Behaving like sheep and submitting to nameless faceless government authorities in the name of "security" is wrong.  We as Americans know better, we should not be putting up  with this nonsense.

I think I've made some solid points, but I've learned over the years that when I argue with a lawyer and feel like I'm winning, then I'm missing something and I'm about to get it right between the eyes!  At any rate, I still disagree with your points, but I sure enjoy the debate.

I really do log somewhere between 20,000 and 40,000 air miles a year.  I've seen the inside of many airports here in the U.S. and abroad.  What we call security is little more than organized passenger harassment.  If we really want to beef up security for airline travel and prevent any further 9/11 type highjackings we should put armed air marshalls on every flight. 

We should xray ALL luggage.  I mean seriously, just because I tell the check-in counter, "yes, I packed it myself" and "no, there are no prohibited items or bombs in my luggage" doesn't make anyone safer.  Wouldn't it be better to xray them all and have bomb sniffing dogs and bomb detecting equipment check them?  I truly don't believe that a terrorist will tell the nice person at the check-in counter, "why yes, I do have some prohibited items in there.  When Abdul packed it for me, he said the bombs in there would launch me straight to Allah".  Get real. 

And what about Cargo?  There is virtually NO security to speak of.  No screening, no xrays, nothing, nada, zip.  If the manifest says computer parts then that's what must be in there, right?  Uh huh, sure.

Don't even get me started on profiling... did you know that according to TSA rules muslims are not required to remove their headress.  I have a security clearance and work for the U.S. government and I have to remove my shoes, my belt, my coat, and my watch, take out my laptop and have my ID ready.  We are at WAR with Fundamentalist Islamic Terrorists and they don't even have to take off their head coverings.  This goes beyond stupid.

We waste enormous resources on screening equipment and screening staff to harass predominantly innocent travelers and there's no money left to implement REAL security measures.  I hope the new head of Homeland Security fixes this...

UPDATE:  Well, Ann did link me, but she says I  have a negative view on it (Mrs. Hamilton's Pamphlets agrees with Ann by the way, oh well).  I think I am pretty negative on the whole screening process, but it comes from my own personal experience, so I think it's valid.  CNN has picked up on the story too (not MY story, but the Screeners Story):  Airport patdowns too intrusive? Maybe this will get some traction and we'll see some positive changes...

Pat Tillman for Sportsman of the Year

Matt over at Blackfive is encouraging everyone to vote for Pat Tillman in the Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year Fan Poll.  Here's the link to Matt's post: SI Sportsman of the Year - Vote For Ranger Pat Tillman

Matt is spot on.  Pat Tillman is the epitome of the citizen-soldier-athlete.  He was a rare and unique individual whose likes we may not see again.  Go vote for him.  Follow the links and instructions on the Blackfive post.  Make a difference.  Pat did.

UPDATE:  I just checked to see who was winning and Tillman is still in third.  Michael Phelps, who just got popped for DUI, has taken over the number 1 spot from Lance "I dumped my wife and kids when I got really famous" Armstrong.  I know this isn't the "humanitarian of the Year", but when a teenage drunk driver and a cheating husband are ahead of a guy like Pat Tillman, something is very wrong.  Go.  Follow the link.  Vote!

The Will of the People - Why Christine Gregoire Should Concede

Seriously.  I can think of 1,372,484 reasons she should concede.  That's how many people voted for Dino Rossi.  Christine Gregoire received 1,372,442 votes.  That's after the automatic recount (and King County's psuedo hand recount).  Very close, but still a loss for Christine Gregoire.  So close, many might argue that a meticulous hand recount is necessary to ensure that the will of the people is discerned.

The will of the people in the state of Washington was to give Senator John Kerry 1,510,201 votes.  About 7% more than they gave to President Bush.  That means that 137,759 times people who felt that Democrat Candidate John Kerry would make a good president DID NOT feel that Democrat Candidate Christine Gregoire would make a good governor.

The will of the people in the state of Washington was to give Senator Patty Murray 1,549,708 votes.  About 12% more than they gave to Congressman George Nethercutt.  That means that 177,266 times people who felt that Democrat Candidate Patty Murray would make a good Senator DID NOT feel that Democrat Candidate Christine Gregoire would make a good governor.

In the Washington Congressional Districticts with Incumbent Democrats the Average Margin of Victory was 34.67%.

The will of the people in the state of Washington was very clear.  In a state where both Senate seats are held by Democrats and six of the nine seats in Congress are held by Democrats and the Governor has been a Democrat for 20 years, Democrat Christine Gregoire could not win the election on the first or the second count.  Hundreds of thousands of voters crossed over to vote for Republican Dino Rossi.  The people of Washington want a change in the Governor's Office.  The people have spoken, Christine Gregoire should concede.

Stefan Sharkansky and Matt Rosenberg have some great posts over at Sound Politics on the subject as well.  Worthwhile reading.  Go check them out.

John Fund on The Wall Street Journal online (via Powerline) has a good article on this today, check it out at: Florida Northwest Will Democrats Steal the Washington Governorship?

UPDATE:  One of the cross over Dems (Josef), a self proclaimed Dinocrat posted links to his blog in the comments.  Worth a look, and I'll save you the trouble of going to the comments click here.

UPDATE II:  Stefan Sharkansky posted some great analysis late last night on Sound Politics (and linked to this post, which I think is very cool).  If you're a number cruncher you have to check it out.  Scariest thing I saw in his analysis is that even if you take away Seattle or even all of King County, George Nethercutt didn't carry the state.  He didn't even keep all the Bush voters (he lost about 100,000 of them!).  That's not good for 2006.  The WA State GOP has some work to do.

UPDATE III:  Thanks to The Big Trunk at Power Line for the link.  Glad he linked Sound Politics too, they have great coverage and Stefan Sharkansky has been on top of this from the get go.  Welcome aboard to the Power Line readers, glad to have you.  Hope you enjoy the visit (and come back soon!).

UPDATE IV: Yes, I am that lazy.  I just don't want to start a new post.  Dinocrat Josef is having some blog problems and asked that I post a pretty good article from the P-I (I know a "good" article from the P-I?  Strange, but true).  Here's the article GOP's Rossi: Governor-elect, but not governor-for-sure . Josef also pointed me to the local NBC affiliate King5 that has some interesting articles especially for the number crunchers.  Check them out at King5 (registration required, but free).  Thanks Josef, now get your blog problem fixed!

UPDATE V:  This is getting worse than all the Rocky sequels... Josef emailed me that his blog is fixed and he has some great updates.  Go check.  One of the many updates is that the Election has been certified by the Secretary of State, now we wait for Christine Gregoire to do the right thing and concede.  The smart money says we'll be waiting a long time.  Although the WA Dem's don't have the cash for the recount yet, they'll ask for one by the Friday deadline.  Standby cause it will only get worse from there.  I predict this will get uglier before it is all over...

Public Safety Versus Revenue Generation

OK.  Back from the other side of the state.  There must have been at least a million cops on the road.  Looks like retailers aren't the only ones banking on Thanksgiving to boost revenue.  We didn't get a ticket, but a whole bunch of folks were pulled over...

I think the logic goes "we need to put more police on the roads for public safety, but we have to pay them overtime etc., so they have to write more citations to generate revenue to pay for the increased presence and overtime".

Here's a crazy idea.  The police departments (including the Highway Patrol) build their budgets with Thanksgiving, New Years, 4th of July, etc. factored in and we pay our taxes to support their budget and leave the poor schmucks alone trying to squeeze in a trip to grandma's between work and family obligations and Christmas shopping.

This sort of "Police State" thinking really bugs me.  Same as the two Highway Patrol cars I see every Sunday while I'm on my way to Church.  Sitting there waiting to nail the family that's late for Church and going a little over the speed limit.  Again I haven't been a victim, but I've seen plenty of folks pulled over.  Nailing those dangerous Church people on their way to Church is an important public safety mission, you know. 

I'm guessing that this isn't the cops just going after people who value visiting relatives at Thanksgiving or Church-goers.  This is about money.  Cops know that folks want to get to grandma's and get home cause there's work and Christmas shopping and stuff to do, so their going to push the speed limits.  Same for Church, Sunday morning is unforgiving (no pun intended), Church starts with or with out you and someone is inevitably running late, so they again push the speed limit.  Most folks in these cases keep it within reason, 5 or 10 miles an hour over the limit.  No big deal.  For them, I say leave 'em alone.

The people who are driving like they're running 3rd at the Daytona 500 and have a shot at the checkered flag, need pulled over.  But they have radar detectors and never seem to get caught.  Then there is the reverse image of those people.  You know the ones doing 10 miles an hour under the speed limit in the far left lane.  Making everyone slam on their brakes as they come up on them and forcing everyone to pass them on the right.  If the police want to perform a public service get those guys.

It's time to turn traffic enforcement back into a public safety mission and get away from a revenue generation mission.  I pay taxes to support law enforcement to keep our towns and cities and roads and highways safe - not to provide the state/local government with another outlet to generate revenue for their coffers.

If Its Not Close, They Can't Cheat

The title of Hugh Hewitt's latest book and what is happening in the Washington Governor's Race.

According to Stefan Sharkansky at Sound Politics, as of this morning Dino Rossi's lead is 287, with only King County (read Seattle) still outstanding.

Even if the disputed 710 votes go as the previous King County votes did (60/40 in Gregoire's favor) Rossi still ekes out a narrow victory.

The Democrats are calling it a "Tie", despite Rossi winning the first AND second count.  They are demanding a hand recount.  They want to "cherry pick" the counties where Dem's do well.  In 2000 the U.S. Supreme court determined that was unconstitutional, but that doesn't seem to faze the Dem's here...go figure.

At this rate it will be Christmas before the race is decided and in a "hand count" the opportunity for fraud is abundant.  This could get very, very ugly.

Christine Gregoire should concede if Rossi wins this recount.

Over the River and Through the Woods...

To Grandmother's House we go...  Five hours in the SUV (thank God it's a huge one, take that tree huggers!).  We're off to the relatives along with a few million of my closest friends on the highways and byways for Thanksgiving. 

No highspeed internet access, but I might drag the laptop with me just in case... I predict light to no blogging until at least Sunday...

Hope everyone has a happy Thanksgiving.  I have tons of things to be thankful for this year (and some not so thankful moments...), all in all, a good year.

Drive careful and be safe!

Feels Like Florida...

Really.  Here we are in Washington (State) and it feels like Florida, but without the sun.  And the heat.  But with rain.  And mountains.  And snow.  And did I mention rain?

What the heck is going on here?  It feels like Florida 2000 all over again, what with the King County (or is it Broward or Palm Beach County?) recount follies.  Stefan Sharkansky over on Sound Politics (and in Polipundit)  is reporting on the shananigans (that's the second time in as many days that I've used that word and I honestly don't ever remember using it before...weird...) going on in Seattle.  From the post:

King County vote counters have surgically enhanced 710 previously rejected ballots after county officials divined the voter's intent.

Just exactly how are they doing that?  Devining their intent, I mean.  Really.  If they screwed up their ballots, then its done.  Sorry, but we're all grown up now and that means no "do overs".  If the ballot says fill in the circle beside the name of the candidate of your choice and you circle their name, put a check mark in the circle, or doodle all over the ballot, then your vote doesn't count.

I voted here in Washington and the Poll Workers and the ballots and the voters guides ALL clearly tell you how to mark the ballot and that incorrect and stray marks can cause your vote not to count.  King County uses optical scanning ballots and machines.  When you turn in your ballot the poll worker puts it in the machine to see if it gets rejected or accepted.  If it gets rejected, they try it again and if it is rejected a second time they give it back to you to make corrections.  You fix whatever you marked incorrectly so that it can be checked and accepted.  If it STILL won't go through they give you ANOTHER ballot mark the old one as spoiled and put it aside.  I'm not 100% sure if the new ballot is handled as if your old one never happened or if they are put together to prove you didn't vote twice or not (little fuzzy on that part).  So, now King County is telling us that given all that, they still had 710 voters that couldn't get it right?  The state is not disenfranchising these voters, they disenfranchised themselves.  If you can't color in the little circle after THREE tries, then you probably are not competent to vote.

Allowing the King County vote counters to "devine" the voters intention opens the door to fraud.  All reasonable precautions and preparations were taken to ensure a fair election.  This election should not be decided on the basis of a few hundred ballots that are invalid.  I would feel that way even if all 710 had Dino Rossi circled, check marked or whatever those knuckleheads did that made their ballots uncountable.  One person, one vote and on election day!  Not a group of "King County Vote Counters" get to cast 710 votes two or three weeks after the election.

For current and up to date vote counts (county by county, no less) and the latest news and info check out Sound Politics and Stefans vote tally spreadsheet (as of about noon today Rossi's lead is 297, of course that's not counting King County...).

UPDATE:  As of 4:27pm  Rossi's lead is 316.  According to my math, even if the 710 votes go 60/40 for Gregoire as the rest of the King County votes have, she still can't win.  I'm sure some other smart folks have done the math and come up with the same conclusion.  That can only mean one of two things:  One, Gregoire concedes or Two, the lawsuits hit high gear...

To Rather Or Rather Not

ABC News (Via lgf) is reporting that Dan Rather announced today that he will step down as the Anchor of the CBS Evening News on March 09, 2005 (Read the Story).

About time. 

His partisan reporting and editorializing "the news" has done considerable damage to honest open communication in our society.  My parents watched the network news when I was growing up and took those reports as gospel.  However, since Viet Nam the public has trusted the Main Stream Media less and less.  From the '50's and '60's when "if it was on the news, it was a fact" to today has been a long downhill slide.  Mom & Dad get their news from FOX and think the networks "are out of touch with America".  Dan Rather has been a prime mover in this downward spiral for the last 24 years.

Dan Rather retiring still isn't enough.  The network news still hasn't bottomed out yet.  I think they'll sink lower before they institute true reforms that get them back to REPORTING the news and letting the people decide how they feel about it. 

Don't kid yourself, the majority of Americans still get their news from the networks.  We in the wired world with cable, internet, satellite TV, TIVO, etc. long ago lost faith in the networks, but we are the minority!  The vast majority of the "Greatest Generation" and the older Baby Boomers get their news from the networks.  They look at Brokaw and Rather as familiar faces and contemporaries.  I doubt that they will have that same bond with the "new" anchors.  I'm predicting that will drive ratings down and force them to evaluate how they do business and perhaps make changes that will bring back viewers.  That's why I say it will get worse before it gets better.  Rather's retirement is a first step of a long and painful journey for the MSM.  How long and how painful is really up to the networks.  It will certainly be interesting to watch this play out.

Meanwhile, for Rather and CBS, as usual, the lies and spin continue.  According to Rather, "He and the network began discussing his future during the summer, he said, adding that he looks forward to getting back to working as an investigative reporter full time.".  I translate that to "this was in the works before that whole forged memo thing, so don't you go making any assumptions...especially you pajama clad blogger types!".  And that tripe (nice word, Mom will be so proud) about getting back to being an investigative reporter...sheesh, I take that to mean he is going to work FULL TIME now to prove the Texas Air National Guard Story was factual, even if there are no facts to back it up...

I see Rather as the next Walter Cronkite.  A few years from now he'll be blathering about bizarre Rovian Conspiracy Theories on Larry King too...

UPDATE: Jim Geraghty over at the Kerry Spot already has some thoughts on the "retirement".  Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit fame has linked to Jim and has thoughts as well.  The basic jist of what they're both saying is "Where's the results of the Investigation on the Forged Memos Story?!?!"  Worth a look.

Habitat for Humanity

Well... a few days ago I mentioned that Mrs. Hamilton's Pamphlets and I were going to help out on a Habitat for Humanity project this weekend, and so we did.  I have always thought that Habitat was a good program and from the outside looking in that it should be something that I should support and be involved with.  Saturday we spent most of the day on a project and I have to admit, it was a little disappointing.

First, the directions provided by Habitat to get to the project were TERRIBLE!  On the bright side, we got to see parts of the county we live in that we had never seen before (and my wife grew up here!).

Second, the Habitat folks told us not to bring any tools, etc.  that they would have everything we needed at the site.  Not so.  We were short of just about everything we needed, except volunteers.  Lots of people, but very little for them to do because of a lack of equipment and coordination. 

Third, the aforementioned lack of coordination.  We had loads of volunteers, but could not effectively use them.  That's a shame.  Good people giving up their Saturday only to be used poorly and not feel like they made much of a contribution.  Not good.

We did manage to get some things done and a least make a dent in some of the work that needed accomplished, but we left feeling that we could have done so much more.  It was great being around so many people who wanted to make a difference in our community and the energy and willingness to help others was really awesome.  Next time I'll have to take a more "hands on" approach to how I'll fit in and be utilized, that's for sure.  Overall, I would definitely give it another go.  One day of mix ups and lack of coordination doesn't negate all the good Habitat is doing.  Yeah, I'll definitely give them another shot.