This video is featured very prominently on the Defend DeLay website. Now, I have very little respect for Mr. DeLay, but I would at least have assumed that someone who had reached the powerful position that he had in the US government would have the ability to recognise sarcasm when he saw it.Apparently not.

HT: The Carpetbagger’s Report

I’ve made a very tiny change to BlogWatcher as it relates to Xanga. The good folks at Xanga have finally decided to officially release the URL for their RSS feeds. Unfortunately, it’s different than the one I’ve been using. The old one works, but there’s no guarantee it will continue.

So I’ve swtiched over to the new one. Those of you who subscribe to Xanga users shouldn’t see any difference, but please let me know (using the “Contact Me” link or comments here) if you run into any difficulties.

Mr Roberts opens at Baytown Little Theater one week from tomorrow. That’s Friday, June 2, at 8PM. It runs for three consecutive weekends. People may be familiar with the movie of the same name, starring Henry Fonda, which is based on the play. Jack Lemmon was also in the movie, and got an Oscar for best supporting actor (Kent Pool plays that role in our show)

This should be a good show. We’ve got a good mix of “old timers” to the BLT stage, and many new faces. Anne Dickens is directing — I believe this is her first foray into directing a full-length production, and she’s doing a fine job. I play “Doc,” John Meiners plays “Mr. Roberts,” John Brokaw plays the Captain (James Cagney in the movie) and Kent Pool plays Ensign Pulver.

I would encourage anyone who’s in the area of Baytown to come check it out. It should be a fun show.

Alan over at A Different Perspective calls for people to “please get upset” about the NSA’s data mining of the phone records of millions of Americans. And I agree, we should be upset. Anyone who’s read my blog will know that I’m an advocate of privacy. But I have to admit that I reacted more with apathy than indignation at the recent announcement.

Then I found out about the Washington Post-ABC News Poll which basically shows that 2 out of 3 Americans support this sort of privacy invasion, if it results in more security.

Now, I have a problem with the structure of the survey, which implies an inverse correlation between privacy and security. I don’t think that relationship has been established. But, be that as it may, the results are what they are. A strong majority of Americans favor giving up some degree of privacy in exchange for an increased feeling of security. Am I wrong to see a problem with this? more…

On Friday, President Bush declared today, May 1, 2006, as both Law Day and Loyalty Day. My first reaction on reading the Law Day declaration was to be amazed at the audacity of the man. Then I dug a little deeper, and found that these two declarations have a history that goes back well before this president (1958 and 1961, respectively.) So that changes my perspective, somewhat.

He probably didn’t have much of a choice about issuing the proclamations. At least, not if he wants to hold onto the fiction that his actions are all governed by the Constitution and the rule of law. But I’m still amazed at the theme he chose for this year’s proclamation: “Liberty Under Law: Separate Branches, Balanced Powers.” Anyone who has read here for a while will know that I’m very upset with this administration for it’s abuse of the very system of checks and balances that is supposedly being honored here.

Reading this paragraph:

Throughout our Nation’s history, we have been reminded repeatedly of the wisdom of the Framers’ design. Our system of separation of powers has safeguarded our liberties and helped ensure that we remain a government of laws. Law Day is an occasion for us to celebrate our Constitution and to honor those in the judiciary and legal profession who work to uphold and serve its principles.

I can’t help but notice that, while “honoring” (sucking up to?) judges and lawyers, he makes no mention of those who write the laws that he’s supposed to be enforcing. But then, he’s already as much as said that he plans on ignoring any law passed by congress that he finds inconvenient.

It’s my guess that he’s laying the groundwork for the fall, when he will quite possibly not enjoy the support of a sycophantic congress, and that at least one of the houses will be controlled by the Democratic party. If he can get enough judges on his side (and in the Supreme Court) and enough unchallenged precedents set, then he’ll be able to ignore congress as extraneous.

But remember, Mr. President. It’s also Loyalty Day. I for one am loyal to the founding principals of this country. Are you? I have my doubts.