"The Secretary General of the International Union of Muslim Scholars is outraged at a fatwa that declared that women were created only for pregnancy and childbirth. He's beside himself. But before you think that there is a Muslim speaking something rational, read on. He insists that in addition to being for pregnancy and child birth they are also perfectly fine candidates for suicide bombing missions as well. And that not letting them blow themselves up because they were created only for child bearing is absurd...."

Archaeologist think King David's spa has been found.

I think the Hedgehog has the whole take on why the North Korea problem exists today.  Did you catch McCain's appearance on H&C tonight?  He looked good.  I think he wiped Hil's clock today.

I hate giving Dems a break, but linking from our favorite liberal site, The Colorado Confidential is one you won't see on H&C.  Esquire Magazine has named Tancredo as the "Worst".  This comes from DemNotes.

"...This isn’t even up on the Web yet, so I had to retype the above from the print publication. Now, before you start saying, “Yeah, big surprise. A liberal publication endorsed all Democrats,” let me advise you that they endorsed an awful lot of Republicans around the country in key races, as well (Arnold Schwartzenegger in California’s governor’s race, for one). And they’re not afraid to take on progressive Dems, either. The 6th CD description refers to a sidebar, “The Worst Members of Congress.” Who joins Tancredo on that list? Nancy Pelosi! FYI, here’s what they said about Tancredo:

Tancredo is Tancrazy. Made his name calling for mass deportations of illegal immigrants. Recently was the featured speaker at a meeting of the League of the South, described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a “neo-Confederate hate group.” In a rare moment of clarity, he called his own suggestion that he run for President “idiotic.”..."

Another take on the Foley leak.  I was listening to the Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives - he makes me sick to look at - mouth that if the investigation shows that any of his staffers had knowledge - they're gonna' get it!  What gets me is the man did not have the (I'm not going to use the word I want to use as I am a lady) _____ enough to face his staff and raise hell with them himself?  Makes Rush's little Slick parody "The Buck Never Got Here" look bad, doesn't it?  I can't imagine this man not decimating his staff over this. Sure, it would be a PR ploy, but it would be a good one.  This man in not engaged in the reality of life.  He has been in the House way too long.  You need to check GOP Progress today for Liz's take on Kolbe's take on Hastert's no take on the Foley issue.  Called As Seen has a link to Mac'sMind about Foley.  Problem for me is I can never read anything on that site - the type overlaps.  (You are also going to want to see the Called As Seen update on NK.)

And on the subject of turnout.  Wednesday on the Web has a piece about turnout.  The problem, thought is RINOconservatives don't understand - don't comprehend the difference between their own, increasingly isolated, whacked out version on Conservativism and what real GOP Conservatives are all about.  Ann Coulter does not represent who the normal, rank and file Republicans are.  She is distasteful to us.  These people need to get a grip on reality.

 Read my favorite Limbaugh's column on conservative turn out.  I have this nasty feeling we are going to see the Biblical separation of the sheep from the goats this year.  RinoConservatives are going to be forced to put up or shut up.  They are going to show their true colors...enough clichés?  And the NON-Republican site, NewsMax has a piece that religious conservatives are going to sit this one out.  Aside from the fact that I think Newsmax has about as much credibility as WorldNutDaily.

Called As Seen links to Strata-Sphere where the posting duplicates my sentiments.

"...Personally, any conservative who fails to push through election day is one we can afford to go without. The only exceptions are those in CT voting for Lieberman. The rest are just doing “a Buchannan” and showing their petulance instead of their strength and dedication. If we find Speaker Pelosi in the House next year - it will be because of conservatives not fighting back . We have beat the liberal media just about every year since 1980. The one big exception was 1992, the last time conservatives got impatient and punished the country with Bill Clinton. Less punishment and more energy is what is needed now...."

These guys are being way to kind and generous with RINOconservatives.  I've said over and over, they don't give a DAMN about anything but their own little agenda.  They don't care about winning. They don't care about the Republican Party.  Sometimes I think they don't even care about the United States of America.  All they care about is promoting their agenda.  If they must go down and take the ship of state with them, so be it.  It is ideology over reason.  They're basically nothing more than the Taliban of the Right.  They would rather see Bush destroyed.  They would rather see us lose all our tax-cuts.  They would rather see us lose the War on Terror.  All that matters is their own agenda.  The worst part of it is they are going to be the ones belly-aching about House Speaker Pelosi more than anyone else.  Frankly, if they aren't going to go out and vote for the GOP I would rather just see them shut up and go away and never come back.  Like my grandfather Reidhead would say, "Have your own  nasty way and make everyone hate you!"

My real worry is someone like Romney is going to slip in and steal the nomination away from Giuliani.  I keep telling you I'm scared of this guy.  Something's not Kosher  here. Wiz Bang has some new Giuliani numbers.  The only way someone like Romney can pull it off is to mobilize the RINOconservative right that has absolutely nothing to do with real Republicans.  Romney is not electable, nationally.  I think the Giuliani Blog is too optimistic today when dealing with RINOconservatives.

Now back to my planned rant:

NOT ALL TEENAGERS ARE GOOD AND PURE

Sometimes adults need to be protected from them, not the other way around.

I know I’ve offended a few of you with some recent statements about teens, sex, pedophiles, and the age of accountability – consent to have sex with an adult.  Here is a listing of states and the age of consonant.  Now, did you know 17 states allow juvenile offenders to be tried as adults. Did you know juveniles can be executed if they commit a capitol crime after the age of 16.

I think this probably makes my point far more eloquently than I can possibly do.  The bottom line here is there are some people over the age of 16 who know what they are doing.  If they can be tried as adults and executed then if they have sex with an adult at that age, should anything be done?

Not all teenagers are innocent.  Look at the gangs?  Some teens are just plain evil. They know exactly what they are doing.  Last night I watched H&C interview John Walsh about the zero tolerance bill against pedophiles.  I agree with this up until the age of 16 with a kid.  Then, I think it needs to be on a case by case basis.  Yes, I think there is something a little odd (to say the least) about a man Mark Foley's age fooling around with a 18 year old page.  But, I also know there are times when there is absolutely nefarious about the situation.

Case in point.  I know someone who was disparately in love with a 17 year old girl.  They started dating when she turned 18.  He was 60.  At the funeral of his parents, she was seated with the younger grandchildren.  She was younger than his children.  She absolutely adored her.  She was a very talented artist with a four year scholarship to a major university.  She wanted to marry him.  He literally broke her heart by telling her she had to leave and go find her own future.  Before she left he was young and happy.  It has been ten years.  I've watched him grown into an old man.  She was the love of his life.  He loved her too much to allow her to stay with him.  This was love.  There was nothing evil, nothing perverted, nothing illegal about it.  But, he loved her enough to give her up.

I love working with teens.  When I was teaching, I was the "Cool Sub".  I treated them like adults.  My theory is simple.  They are adults.  Unless traumatic events occur their personalities are established.  They are who they are going to be...without reason, judgment, or wisdom.  That is what is gained in life.  If they are evil, they are evil.  If they are innocent, they are innocent.  The criminals are there.  The bad kids are there.  The good kids are established.  There are kids who can go either way.  You can't do much with the bad ones.  The good ones are established.  It's those 'could go either way' you need to spend the time and energy one.  Those are the kids who could be the most endangered or most helped by the bill John Walsh envisions. 

There is a difference between the true, honest, and honorable attachments of the human heart - pure love, than the &#@* promoted by the Mark Foleys of the world.  The problem is differentiating between the two.  The only this can occur is on a case by case basis.  There is a difference between smut, filth, pornography, prostitution and pure love.  The law needs to be able to adjudicated on a case by case basis as they do with juvenile criminal offenders.  BUT - for the most part, juveniles who are tried as adults are more likely to offend. 

The wisdom of Solomon is needed. 

We need to recognize the fact that there are teenagers who are just plain bad and don’t care what they do to people.  We also need to recognize these teens can come with the face of an angle and in the person of a cheer-leader of star athlete. We need to set aside our prejudices about kids being purely good.  Some are just down-right bad.

You see, if, in that rare, honorable instance the adult truly loves the teen, the adult will send the teen away to a better life.  I think that’s how you tell the difference.