Unknown Show None - None
On Air Now.
Two spots behind California. I find that interesting.
It happened in South Dakota. I didn't think this was possible. As the story points out, .40 is considered lethal in about half of the population. .708??? That's approaching hard liquor! It seems almost impossible to me that the human body, ANY human body can function with that level of alcohlic toxicity. (h/t to loyal listener and contributer John)
This sounds a bit extreme. I'm usually a big believer in local control. I guess the question for me is this: how much are Madison residents complaining? Is Grothman speaking up for residents who feel powerless to deal with this problem. Seems to me most every Wisconsin City sees its residents complain about this. Is Madison really that much worse than the rest as Grothman claims?
I've received several listener emails inquiring as to what this E.O. actually means. Jake Tapper at ABC News has this take on it.
Senator Joe McCarthy was once famously asked whether "at long last have you no shame?" You could ask that of Harry Reid,or for that matter, just about any lib exploiting this attempted act of terrorism to benefit unions.
It's bad enough families of the wealthy have to wrestle with keeping them on life support until January first purely for estate tax reasons, but the truly macabre element of this story comes near the end; will some "near end of life" wealthy commit euthanasia in 2010 to take advantage of the one year window for the benefit of their heirs? The entire scenario is just ghastly.
Some news stories are suggesting that the end of the year dispute between Time Warner Cable and Fox could disurpt some Fox network programming, such as "24" and "Idol." However, that is NOT the case in Wisconsin, including Fox 11 in Green Bay. Fox 11's Pat Krohlow explained to me in an email this morning why this doesn't impact network content on Fox 11:
The negotiation is between Network owned stations and TWC. The nearest network owned station is Chicago. This does not affect local affiliates like Fox 11 in Green Bay. Our deal withTWC was done last year. It will affect some cable channels like Speed, Fuel, FX and Fox Sports Channel.
So now you know.
Isn't it funny how you adjust to that which was once unthinkable? For example, two years ago, when Brett Favre was leading the Packers to a 13-3 record, it would have been unthinkable to see Favre and Aaron Rodgers on the same Pro Bowl Roster just two years later. The notion would have been unthinkable because you couldn't consider Favre in another jersey, let alone in the Viking's purple. But there they are: Drew Brees, Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers. Given Favre's recent history with the Pro Bowl, and especially given Rodgers' presence on the roster, I'm guessing Favre will skip it, which will mean a bit more playing time for Rodgers, most likely.
Overall, I agree with the Green Bay Press Gazette's Pete Dougherty, all the Packers on the roster deserve to be there and the only missing Packer with any real beef is LB Clay Matthews. I disagree with Dougherty on this though; it's a bigger beef than he thinks. Matthews has been all world. The Vikings led the way with 8 players and quite frankly I think they do have more talent than the Packers. Yet, it's still possible they'll finish with the same record(though unlikely). Consider this; if the Giants do manage to beat the Vikings, the upgrade from Tarvaris Jackson to Brett Favre will have resulted in one additional regular season win, although odds are Favre will carry the Vikes deeper into the playoffs than Jackson did. If he doesn't, it'll be interesting to see what impact there is on Childress for pushing so hard to get Favre.
And one more zinger for you Favre first fans: Double digit wins, the playoffs and the pro-bowl: tell me again how keeping Favre was our best chance for "winning now?" You might want to check the calendar; it's now right now.
This time it's Fox
President Obama today said a "systemic failure" allowed a passenger to board a Detroit-bound flight with explosives. He also said there are flaws in the system that has been in place for years, which seems to me to be yet another effort to blame something on George W. Bush. If our security system was systemtically flawed when he took office, shouldn't it have been a priority to fix it? That's what we heard from the left about Sept. 11, 2001. It happened on Bush's watch, so it was his fault; he had 9 whole months to fix whatever deficencies existed in our security system.
So I'm assuming the same is true now, right? Right? Of course not. We'll be seeing the evidence soon of how the dysfunctional system installed during the Bush years allowed this to happen. It's the only card that has worked for the left in the past 8 years, why stop playing it now? And I repeat, do you notice how all terror threats are real now that Obama is president?
Clearly, Iran is trying to show the Western World that if it supports the protesters efforts, the protestors will pay. President Obama's words from his Hawaiian vacation:
“For months, the Iranian people have sought nothing more than to exercise their universal rights,” Mr. Obama told reporters. “Each time they have done so, they have been met with the iron fist of brutality, even on solemn occasions and holy days.”
He added that the protests in Iran had nothing to do with the United States or other foreign countries. “It’s about the Iranian people, and their aspirations for justice, and a better life for themselves,” he said. “And the decision of Iran’s leaders to govern through fear and tyranny will not succeed in making those aspirations go away.”
Actually, the President is wrong about that. If the protesters come to believe all they can expect from the West is platitudes, fear and tyranny will, in fact, succeed in making those aspirations go away.