President Obama claims Eric Holder made the decision, without consultation, to try Khalid Sheikh Muhammad in criminal court in New York City. Presumably, this is a more fair trial because a military commission does not afford the same criminal procedures and includes a jury of military judges. Plus, it’s open, so everyone around the world can see how wonderful the American system is, and how we uphold our values.

Then, the President’s press secretary says he’ll be tried and executed, echoing President Obama himself assuring us of a conviction months ago. Clearly, this is an orchestrated message and not a slip of the tongue by one or the other. So, why would the White House insist on a civil trial as a better venue to showcase American values and then undermine their own argument by prejudging the case? And if they really were intent on seeing him executed, why not let him plead guilty to the military commission as KSM intended? Maybe they are inept or incompetent. Maybe they’re trying to taint the jury pool. Maybe they want to be seen as “tough” on terrorism and thus they are drawing this out while swaggering Dubya-style. I think they are simply counting on the short attention span of the press and the American people. A good bet if you ask me.

Fox News:

[White House spokesman Robert] Gibbs said that Brown may have campaigned on stopping the health care bill but that’s not why voters elected him over Democrat Martha Coakley.

“More people voted to express their support for Barack Obama than to oppose him,” Gibbs said.

The last time I heard denial like that was Kevin Bacon during the final scenes of “Animal House”:

Did you notice the beautiful pint of Guinness in the picture?  I didn’t think so.

Cheers!

Apparently, U.S. expirments with the Ionosphere are causing the cold weather.  Nice to see good ol’ American ingenuity is back!  (thought he Russians have a more powerful one). -  Norway Time Hole “Leak” Plunges Northern Hemisphere Into Chaos | Pakistan Daily.

Moments before she got ‘the beer’.

Inside the Foster’s Can:  “Think about baseball, football, anything.  What a touchdown!  No, wait.  It’s getting warm, and it’s so soft.  I’m starting to fizzle inside.  Hold it, hold it.  Ah crap, just give her the beer!”

HAPPY BEER DAY!

ITHACA, NY–Somewhere, the late great Charles Schulz is rolling over in his grave.

Schulz, the creator of the much-loved Peanuts comic strip (and a devout Christian), probably never envisioned a day when his characters would be appropriated for a “satirical story” about teenaged homosexuals.

But that’s exactly what happens in the new play, “Dog Sees God: Confessions of a Teenage Blockhead,” which the Ithaca Journal describes as “a satirical story that … features characters from the ‘Peanuts’ comic strip gang in their volatile teenage years”

It all begins with CB, Charlie Brown, who contemplates the death of his loyal dog, Snoopy, who ate his bird pal, Woodstock. The angst CB feels sets him off on a journey of not only searching for the answers to where his beagle has gone now that he’s dead, but who he, himself, is now that he can’t escape the overwhelming grief he feels pervading his soul.

As CB struggles with his identity, some members of the gang display their colorful insecurities and harsh beliefs when he explores his first homosexual relationship with Beethoven (think Schroeder from the comic strip), who still hides behind his piano and the music he plays during his lunch hour.

Eliza VanCort, director of the Actor’s Workshop, told the Ithaca Times that she found the play during a visit to New York City:

“I wanted material that I connected with personally and I wanted to produce thought-provoking art,” she said. “This play explores issues that I care deeply about. What happens to the bullied child when he or she grows up? Why do we sometimes single out the ‘other’? What makes people choose between running with the pack or breaking away? When I read this play, I simply loved it. It shines a light on all the messiness of life but offers hope that things can change for the better.”

According to Wikipedia, the producers of play identify it as an unauthorized parody, claiming that this protects it from a lawsuit by Schulz’s estate.