By Debbie Schlussel
Thanks to several readers who notified us, recently, that the Digg button was not working. We’ve fixed the problem and invite you to Digg DebbieSchlussel.com stories, so that more people around the world will see them.
Thanks for your continued Digging.

By Debbie Schlussel
Last night, I met “Rocky Balboa” star Sylvester Stallone at the Detroit premiere of the movie (my initial, first-glimpse review here). It was a benefit for legendary Detroit boxing gym, Kronk Gym. Tommy “The Hitman” Hearns (a former neighbor of mine, more on that later) was also there, as was Kronk chief and well-known boxing trainer Emanuel Steward.
Seeing the movie again with a crowd of Rocky and boxing fans, I liked it even more. It got a standing ovation and lots of cheers–a big contrast to Wednesday when I saw it with snobby critics and media types, who panned it. It is not a “great!” movie, but it’s not bad, and I liked it.
It’s uplifting, and it’s a classic Rocky deal. It’s also something you can take your whole family to–rare these days. It’s the kind of movie I keep complaining that Hollywood doesn’t give us enough of–politics-free/agenda-free, no sex/violence/obscenity, and a positive story.

I asked Stallone about his upcoming “Rambo” flick, “Rambo IV: In the Serpent’s Eye.” Yes, there is a sequel in the works for Rambo, too. In the movie, he rescues Christian missionaries who’ve been kidnapped. I asked him whether or not the kidnappers are Muslims, and he said, no, that they are Burmese thugs of some sort. Too bad. We know who kidnaps Christian missionaries, these days, and it’s generally Muslim terrorists, like Abu Sayyaf.
Rambo II was ahead of its time, since he portrayed the guys we were fighting with (against the Soviets) in Afghanistan (now, the Taliban) as the bad guys. And decades later, he was right (though not right about our own military operatives there, which he also portrayed as the bad guys).
The one thing I may ask in a future interview–but didn’t get a chance last night (it was crazy there)–is why we have to see Rocky crying and Paulie doing water color painting (two girlie-man behaviors in the same scene!).
I gotta say, Stallone is just not very photogenic. This picture doesn’t show it, but he looked very hot–way better than in the movie (sucks that I got cut off in the pic). A very handsome guy (and with the salt-and-pepper, his hair looked more natural than the Grecian formula look in the flick). Never thought I’d say that about a 60-year-old.
But the man is in great shape and looks like he’s in his late 40s. He put his arm around me for a quick pic and the man is cut rock-solid. Most 30-year-olds are not in this kind of shape. Very hot.
Can’t help it. I’m a fan.
He does have this weird thing going on with his eyebrows (which is even more pronounced in the movie) that looks kind of transvestite-ish. As for the rumors that he’s short, those are false. Unless he’s wearing lifts or elevator shoes (and I couldn’t see his feet–it was crazy and crowded at the event), I’d say he’s between 5’10” and 6′, so taller than the average American male. I’m about 5’1″/5’2″ and was wearing my normal four-inch heels. He was still quite a bit taller as you can see in the pic.
****
As for “The Hitman” (Hearns), when I was in junior high or high school, one Thanksgiving on the local news, they did a story on how Hearns bought his mother a house for Thanksgiving. It was in our average, middle class suburban Detroit subdivision, and he and his whole family (all his siblings) moved in.
We saw every bizarre expensive car and limo in every pastel color imaginable in front of that house–even a lavender Excalibur. I went to high school with one of the Hitman’s brothers, who was later convicted of murdering his girlfriend. Eventually, the payments stopped being made on the house, and the bank foreclosed. My friend, Mickey and his family now own and live in the Hearns house.

By Debbie Schlussel
Today’s Wall Street Journal features a story with this headline:

More New Mothers Are Staying Home Even When It Causes Financial Pain

Yes, in a good reversal of a bad, long-term trend, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the seven-year trend of new mothers dropping out of the work force is even broader than previously thought and extends to all strata of American society (regardless of income and education level).
Among the reasons given:

* Desire to nurture babies in their first years
* Poor quality of available child care

* Lack of extended maternity leave
* Lack of flexible return-to-work options
* Decision to switch to a more family-friendly career

All reasons why mothers simply shouldn’t be in the workforce, period.
Unfortunately, none of these conditions exists with new mom The ICE Princess a/k/a Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) unqualified chieftess Julie L. Myers. When you’re the politically-connected boss of a failed government agency, you can set the rules for yourself and your fellow cronies and let the taxpayers foot the bill.
Still, since she doesn’t care about the country, we’d hope The ICE Princess would care a tad about her kid and stay home from ICE . . . forever, now that her progeny is spawned.

By Debbie Schlussel
I’ll be on the “The Mike Church Show” on Sirius Patriot Channel 144 at 5:05 p.m. Eastern, today. Joining the “Red, White & Dude Nation.”

By Debbie Schlussel
We’re constantly hearing from feminist whiners about this discrimination or that discrimination against women. But all of the feminists are completely silent regarding the female firefighters of the Minneapolis Fire Department who’ve sued over bias and sexual harassment perpetrated by the Minneapolis Fire Chief.
Hmmm . . . . Maybe it might have something to do with the fact that the harasser/discriminator–and their boss–isn’t a man. She’s a woman . . . and a lesbian who discriminates against straight women and all men. Heralded as the first openly gay (and lesbian) fire chief in the nation, here’s yet another example of how “diversity” for the sake of “diversity” isn’t a good thing:

MINNEAPOLIS — A city panel recommended yesterday that officials fire Bonnie Bleskachek, the nation’s first openly lesbian big-city fire chief, following lawsuits filed by firefighters accusing her of harassment and discrimination. . . .

Lesbian Fire Chief Bonnie Bleskachek Harassed the Non-“Queer as Folk”

Bleskachek, 43, was hailed as a trailblazer when she was promoted to the top job two years ago, but her tenure has been troubled.
Three female firefighters have sued, alleging various acts of discrimination and sexual harassment. Two of the lawsuits were settled, but this month a male firefighter brought a lawsuit alleging he was denied advancement because he is male and not gay.
A city investigation is still underway . This summer, a separate investigation by the city’s Department of Civil Rights into a 2003 complaint by a male firefighter — brought when Bleskachek was a battalion chief — found it “likely” that the department gave preferential treatment to lesbians or those who socialized with them.
Bleskachek was ill yesterday and unavailable for comment on the severance agreement. She has denied wrongdoing in the past.
Burg said the chief’s employment agreement calls for her to be reassigned as battalion chief. She would then request a demotion to captain, he said. The agreement, Burg said, included a cash payment of $30,000 to $40,000 — the difference in annual pay between a chief and captain.
Rybak aide Jeremy Hanson said before the panel’s meeting it was not a “certainty” that Bleskachek would remain with the department.
The city has spent more than $410,000 on the investigation, legal settlements, and compensation of Bleskachek during her paid leave, which began March 22.

Incredibly the city originally did not want to fire her (only give her a demotion) and was going to give her a a cash settlement of tens of thousands of dollars. What fireman would want to work with her, given what’s happened? Fortunately, an outcry from angered Minneapolis residents changed the outcome.
Excerpts from a great column on this by Minneapolis Star-Tribune columnist Nick Cannon:

“She has made the Minneapolis Fire Department the most well-known fire department in the world,” one (male) fire captain with 20 years’ service says sarcastically, adding that he and his colleagues are often asked by firefighters in other cities to explain what’s wrong with the department in Minnesota’s largest city. “You just can’t buy that kind of publicity. Thanks to Bonnie B for making the MFD the No. 1 comedy hit show in the country.” . . .
It’s not fighting fires or fighting sexism that got Bleskachek in hot water. It is that she is accused of abusing her rank to reward or punish women firefighters. Not for how they put out fires, but for their willingness — or their refusal — to put out. For her.
If a chief named Bernie, not Bonnie, had pulled that stuff (there have been four lawsuits and four civil rights complaints against Bleskachek) there would be no dawdling over what to do. As I wrote after Bleskachek was placed on paid leave, a Guy Chief would be lucky to end up as a volunteer firefighter in Palookaville. . . .
As things go when these kind of things happen, there has been some sugarcoating of the problem. Let’s cut through the smoke: Bonnie Bleskachek isn’t losing her job because she let her love life “color her ability to manage the fire department.” She is losing her job because she managed the fire barns to make sure her love life didn’t go cold. That’s a big no-no, no matter what side of the plate you may swing from.

Personally, I’m opposed to most female firefighters, straight or not. Most simply don’t have the strength to pull people out of a burning building while lugging heavy equipment and protective gear on their backs. And many fire departments around the country–in an effort to practice affirmative action recruiting–lower standards for the women they hire. And the women simply aren’t of any use when a real rescue is needed.
They can’t put out fires. But apparently, at least one of them knew how to light her own fire . . . especially when she was the boss. (I think it’s safe to say she was probably the “he” in “her” relationships.)

By Debbie Schlussel
It’s official. As I noted here, recently, USCIS (U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services) is testing out new questions for the Citizenship Test. And today, at noon, the agency posted the sample new questions.
Unfortunately, there seems to be little difference between the new and old questions. They are still rote memorization questions with one correct answer. And it still includes questions that are the same as the old test.
What we need is an open-ended test, where people answer in a verbal essay form . . . after truth-serum has been administered. We need to insure that those who enter the country, but lie (a/k/a give the right answers) on the test, will tell us what they really feel.

Recently, I proposed my own test. And, oddly, one of the new questions is the same as that on my own suggested test (What is the Supreme Law of the Land?). However, it only includes one right answer–an answer that those who hate us will give (while they’re really thinking something else).
So, today, I’m posting a few of the questions, with the answers Islamists, for example, will give (all those labeled with “A”) versus what they’re really thinking:

1. Name one important idea found in the Declaration of Independence.
A: People are born with natural rights.
A: The power of government comes from the people.
A: The people can change their government if it hurts their natural rights.
A: All people are created equal.
What They’re Really Thinking: 1) Allah Hu Akbar. Allah is greater than your Infidel god.
2) Who Cares? When we take over, all of these “rights” will be null and void. Until then, we will use all of these rights to advance our cause. All Muslims are created equal, unless they are the Black Muslims of Sudan or the Indonesian Muslim slaves of Saudi grad students living in the U.S.
2. What is the supreme law of the land?
A: The Constitution
What They Really Think: The Koran and whatever my imam says. Fatwas tell me what to do.
3. What does the Constitution do?
A: It sets up the government.
A: It protects basic rights of Americans.
What They Really Think: Gives me a way to prevent federal law enforcement from deporting me or arresting me for planning terrorist attacks. It prevents me from forcing the chick, next door, to cover her face . . . for now.
4. What does “We the People” mean in the Constitution?
A: The power of government comes from the people.
What They Really Think: We the Muslims, You the Infidels (soon to be, you the Dhimmis).
5. What do we call changes to the Constitution?
A: Amendments
What They Really Think: Suras and Hadiths.
6. What is an amendment?
A: It is a change to the Constitution.
What They Really Think: Something we will pass when enough American Infidels “convert” to the “Religion of Peace.”
7. What do we call the first ten amendments to the Constitution?
A: The Bill of Rights
What They Really Think: My new printed toilet paper. It goes well with my bathroom’s black and white decor.
8. Name one right or freedom from the First Amendment.
A: Speech
A: Religion
A: Assembly
A: Press
A: Petition the government
What They Really Think: 1) My right to say, “Death to America,” and then assemble with my fellow jihadists at the mosque to take steps to make sure that happens. My right to communicate with the Brothers of HAMAS and raise donations for “orphans” at my mosque.
2) I think I’ll send death threats to Debbie Schlussel. And U.S. Attorney Stephen Murphy III a/k/a Abu Porno will do nothing about it.
9. How many amendments does the Constitution have?
A: Twenty-seven (27)
What They Really Think: Hmmm . . . Remind me again how many Suras and Hadiths there are.
10. What did the Declaration of Independence do?
A: Announce the independence of the United States from Great Britain
A: Say that the U.S. is free from Great Britain
What They Really Think: Create a nation from which I will conduct my base of jihadist operations.
11. What does freedom of religion mean?
A: You can practice any religion you want, or not practice at all.
What They Really Think: 1) The right to raise money for terrorists and call for jihad on America in my mosque. The right to force my wife–no, my four wives–and daughter to wear face veils.
2) There is freedom of religion? Don’t tell that to my daughter who wants to be a Christian like her boyfriend. I have to honor-kill her first to maintain the dignity of my family.
3) You mean there are evil Zionists in this country? Time to put a stop to that. I think I’ll send them death threats.
12. What type of economic system does the U.S. have?
A: Capitalist economy
A: Free market
A: Market economy
What They Really Think: Huh? Welcome to Islamo-capitalism. Muslims will own all the gas stations and the means of transportation in most of the U.S. They will pay no taxes. Infidels will pay a jizya (tax for not being Muslim). Yes, that’s definitely a market economy. Welcome to our shouk.
13. What are the three branches or parts of the government?
A: Executive, legislative, and judicial
A: Congress, the President, the courts
What They Really Think: Mosque, Koran, Sword (a/k/a Department of Homeland Beheading)
14. Name one branch or part of the government.
A: Congress
A: Legislative
A: President
A: Executive
A: The courts
A: Judicial
What They Really Think: See above.
15. Who is in charge of the executive branch?
A: The President
What They Really Think: Allah and Grover Norquist.
53. Name one thing only the federal government can do.
A: Print money
A: Declare war
A: Create an army
A: Make treaties
What They Really Think: Produce CDs for federal law enforcement on how to take their shoes off at the porch of a Muslim’s home when they’ve come to arrest and/or question him/her.
68. Who is the Secretary of State now?
A: Dr. Condoleezza Rice
A: Condoleezza Rice
A: Dr. Rice
What They Really Think: HRH King Abdullah (of either Jordan or Saudi Arabia–take your pick).
73. What is the “rule of law”?
A: Everyone must obey the law.
A: Leaders must obey the law.
A: Government must obey the law.
What They Really Think: Do it, or we’ll chop your head off.
74. What are “inalienable rights”?
A: Individual rights that people are born with
What They Really Think: Illegal Aliens have more rights than you.
76. Name one responsibility that is only for United States citizens.
A: Vote
A: Serve on a jury
What They Really Think: Playing the role of Infidel sucker and bending over backwards to America’s enemies.
77. Name two rights that are only for United States citizens.
A: The right to apply for a federal job
A: The right to vote
A: The right to run for office
What They Really Think: 1)The right of Jihadists like Suhail Khan and Faisal Gill to get high-ranking, national security-related jobs in the Bush Administration.
2) The right to be an Infidel sucker and victim.
3) Voting? Huh? My illegal alien cousin, Mahmoud, thanks to Motor Voter legislation. Thanks, Bill Clinton.
78. Name two rights of everyone living in the U.S.
A: Freedom of expression
A: Freedom of speech
A: Freedom of assembly
A: Freedom to petition the government
A: Freedom of worship
A: The right to bear arms
What They Really Think: The right to have four wives, rip off the Infidels and make halal money, jihad, martyrdom. Only Muslims can bear arms, Infidels not allowed (unless their name is Grover Norquist).
79. What is the Pledge of Allegiance?
A: The promise of loyalty to the flag and the nation
What They Really Think: It goes like this: Allah Hu Akbar.
84. Name two of the natural, or inalienable, rights in the Declaration of Independence.
A: Life
A: Liberty
A: The pursuit of happiness
What They Really Think: Jihad, Martyrdom, and the Pursuit of Extremist Islam.
112. What did Susan B. Anthony do?
A: She fought for women’s rights
What They Really Think: The right to be one of my four wives, wear black, cover her face, and be my baby factory. A high birth rate is very important in order to rule over the Infidels.
122. What did Martin Luther King, Jr. do?
A: He fought for civil rights.
A: He strove for (worked for, fought for) equality for all Americans.
What They Really Think: The Abeed [“slaves”–the word Muslims use for Black people] have rights?
123. Martin Luther King, Jr. had a dream for America. What was his dream?
A: Equality for all Americans
A: Civil rights for all
What They Really Think: The right for Black Americans to be murdered at my gas station (and not allowed to use the bathroom–I tell them it’s out of order).
124. What movement tried to end racial discrimination?
A: The civil rights movement
What They Really Think: The 19 hijackers made everyone bend over backward for us.
110. What did the Emancipation Proclamation do?
A: Freed slaves in the Confederacy
A: Freed slaves in the Confederate states
A: Freed slaves in most Southern states
What They Really Think: Ha, that’s what you think, Infidel dummy. We still have slaves.
133. Name one U.S. territory.
A: American Samoa
A: The Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands
A: Guam
A: Puerto Rico
A: U.S. Virgin Islands
What They Really Think: Israel and Iraq.
134. Name the state that is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.
A: Hawaii
What They Really Think: Hawaiistan.
135. Name one state that borders Canada.
A: Alaska, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Vermont, or Washington
What They Really Think: ISLAMerica.
136. Name one state that borders on Mexico.
A: Arizona, California, New Mexico, or Texas
What They Really Think: ISLAMerica.
137. What is the capital of the U.S.?
A: Washington, D.C.
What They Really Think: Dearbornistan or Mecca.
144. Name two national U.S. holidays.
A: New Year’s Day
A: Martin Luther King Day
A: Presidents’ Day
A: Memorial Day
A: Independence Day
A: Labor Day
A: Columbus Day
A: Veterans Day
A: Thanksgiving
A: Christmas
What They Really Think: Eid Al-Fitr, Eid Al-Adha, September 5, 1972, September 11, 2001.

The point is this: This revamping of the Citizenship Test is a waste of time and money, especially since–as we reported–CIS personnel, like Sultan Farakhan, have exposed the fact that CIS rushes through applications of terrorists, without checking terrorism databases.
That’s where the money should be going–to do those checks thoroughly and slow them down. A new revamped set of rote facts to memorize–when the memorizer doesn’t really believe in them-is a waste of our time and money.
And does nothing to help assure we’ll get patriotic citizens who really love America as our new Americans.

By Debbie Schlussel
Dear President Bush:
What was the message you got from the resounding loss of your party in the recent elections? Was the message you heard from America something like this?:

President Bush, We want to make it easier for terrorists and other sordid “visitors” to come to America. We need them to shop at our 7-Elevens and Wal-Marts to pump up our economy while they plan their next attacks on America.

Apparently, you must think that was the message. Either that, or you are on crack . . . or mushrooms . . . or some other mind-altering drugs.

Otherwise you would not tell Europe, as you did, yesterday, in Estonia, that you want to enable Estonians and other foreign nationals to get into America without visas. You want to expand a disastrous Visa Waiver program that should, instead, be cancelled.
Mr. Prez, did you forget that the shoe-bomber, Richard Reid, 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, and assorted other Islamic terrorists got into the country with passports from visa-waiver nations?
Don’t you know that by expanding–instead of canceling–this absurd program, you are allowing more dangerous individuals to get into America without having to go through lengthy security interviews and checks required for those who must apply for visas?
Didn’t you read the September Government Accountability Office report that

stolen passports from visa-waiver countries are prized travel documents among terrorists, criminals, and immigration law violators?

Mr. Bush, check out the visa waiver, pictured above, for Michael Steger, issued in 2005. Did it occur to you and the folks at Homeland “Security” that there is no longer an East Germany (and there hasn’t been for some time, FYI)? Doesn’t this tell you that maybe your silly program isn’t working? That maybe it’s jeopardizing American lives on our own shores?
As Steger comments:

Funny guys! How can they secure their homeland when they can’t even read? No, Mr. President, East Germany does no longer exist! And I have never even been there

Don’t believe your so-called Homeland Security expert Michael Chertoff a/k/a “Mr. Burns” who claims that it’s okay to expand this absurd program. He claims that if those countries provide more info about airline passengers before takeoff, that U.S. officials will have more time to check names against terrorist watch lists.
That won’t change a thing. Terrorist watch lists are not as extensive as a personal interview and other checks the State Department conducts for visitor visas.
Why won’t you listen to real experts, like your own former appointee, Clark Kent Ervin, former Inspector General of Homeland Security, who says that your proposed expansion of this ill-advised program is “a step in the wrong direction”?
My friend, Michael W. Cutler, a retired senior agent with the former INS, told The Washington Times he is “outraged” by your attempt to expand this program and further damage national security:

The president is apparently willing to ignore high refusal rates for visa applications and is claiming that because aliens from visa-waiver countries generally leave the United States within [the authorized period], it is reasonable to have the citizens of those countries participate in a program that creates inherent national security vulnerabilities.
He makes those assertions even though he knows our government lacks the ability to know when these aliens leave our country.

Your and Ohio Republican Senator Voinovich’s attempts to expand this failed program tells us that neither he nor you have heard America’s outcry against lax immigration policies, since we know that many of those who get visas under this program become illegal aliens who’ve overstayed their visa ad infinitum.
The Washington Times says Voinovich

planned to introduce a bill next week to extend visa-free travel privileges to countries allied with the United States in the global war on terrorism.

But two of those countries reportedly “on the doorstep” to become part of the visa-waiver program are Malta and Cypress, Muslim-dominated countries that are hotbeds of terrorism. Did you not forget the PLO’s use of Cypress as a base of operations? How about the fact that in 2002, the Nativity Church Palestinian terrorists (who murdered several innocent civilians, including four Americans) were welcomed to freedom in Cypress? Apparently, you like Cypress Muslims’ Haloumi cheese better than you like our safety.
If so many countries will qualify for visa waviers, why even have visas? Why have borders? Let’s just let everyone in, no strings or questions.
The only people applauding this ludicrous suggestion are travel industry professionals who don’t care if dangerous people come here, so long as they pay top dollar for their ticket, car, and hotel package. Rick Webster of the Travel Industry Association said,

It’s good for our economy . . . . The end of the program would mean tens of billions of dollars in lost revenue and a worsened U.S. image.

Remember how bad our economy was for years after 9/11? The best thing for our economy is to prevent another attack like that from happening. Image may matter in sports and entertainment, but an image of kowtow nation won’t keep America secure.
The only image we should be concerned with is that of a tough, take-no-prisoners-in-the-War-on-Terror nation. Until then, we will be a magnet for terrorists and criminals, who laugh at your silly visa-waiver program.
End it. Don’t “mend” (or expand) it.
Regards,
Debbie

By Debbie Schlussel
I just returned from screening, “Rocky Balboa,” a/k/a Rocky VI. It’s not bad. But Girlie-Man Alert: Did we really need to see Rocky cry? Et tu, Rocky?
Parts of it were a little slow (like the first hour) and kinda cheesy, but it was okay. If you liked the Rocky quintology (Yes, I made up this word), you’ll like this one. The boxing part is fun (with real-life boxer Antonio Tarver playing Rocky’s opponent). And I wonder how much Mike Tyson got paid for his cameo. (To me, that was the funniest part of the movie, though there are some good lines, too.) Michael Buffer (“Let’s Get Ready to Rumbllllllllllllllle”) is in it, too, as well as some familiar sports commentators.
The new version has everything you expect in a “Rocky” movie. It is vintage Rocky: Rocky running up and down the steps in Philadelphia in front of the museum to the tune of “Gonna Fly Now,” Paulie (now painting water colors?!), etc. As I said when I wrote about this movie in January, Sylvester Stallone looks pretty good for a 60-year-old (the Black hair is a little to Grecian formula, though; a little gray would have been fine).

No “Yo, Adrian,” though. She’s dead (though he does utter it once to her tombstone and she’s shown in flashback footage).
Remember, the original “Rocky” movie is almost 31 years old! Feel old?
Stay tuned for my complete review when the movie debuts. Fave DebbieSchlussel.com Rocky character: crotchety trainer/manager Mickey Goldmill played by the late Burgess Meredith (who also makes an appearance in Rocky 6, in flashback footage).

Rocky Balboa/Sly Stallone: Now and Then

By Debbie Schlussel
Possible good news on the immigration enforcement front is the news that John Wood, Chief of Staff for Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, is leaving his post. Why is that good news?
Well, his wife is Julie L. Myers a/k/a “The ICE Princess,” the incompetent and extremely unqualified head of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement). If he leaves–and he will very soon, given his resignation–that means she will probably be gone soon, too . . . not a bad thing. We hope that the President will take this opportunity to appoint someone who, at least, has a clue about law enforcement and immigration. But don’t count on it. Whoever it is, though, it’s gotta be better than the status quo.
We’ve heard for some time that Wood was looking for a job with a big law firm in the Midwest or a Bush appointment as a U.S. Attorney. Hopefully, it’s the former and not the latter. We need to get this family OUT of the Homeland Security biz, where they’ve mucked it up and made us less secure.

Family Affair: Homeland Security’s John Wood, Julie Myers & Company
(Artwork by David Lunde/Lundesigns)
Also looking for a job for quite some time (including at the Bush Justice Department), we hear, is The ICE Princess’ overgrown spoiled brat, frat boy assistant, Daniel T. Fahner. His official title is “Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security.”
We reported on Fahner and his “position” as Myers’ little helper at ICE back in early January, though we’d known about it since he arrived at ICE last November or December as The ICE Princess’ little spy.
Fahner got the job at ICE because he is the son of the well-connected multi-millionaire, former chairman of the Mayer Brown law firm. Sources say Fahner’s father is close buds with Republican Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska and that Daniel Fahner occasionally serves as Senator Stevens’ wife Catherine’s escort to events. Supposedly, there is a photo of all three on a fishing trip. Wonder if the Fahners had anything to do with the “Bridge to Nowhere.”
Writes one ICE agent about Fahner:

Arrogant Jekyl and Hyde with the foulest mouth in DC. No0one here will miss his lousy temper, but then who’s ever seen the boy before 10:00 AM or on a Friday. Guess he thought Julie Myers’ maternity leave applied to him. ICE deserves true leadership, not political paybacks for Daddy’s money.

Amen. Unfortunately, we can’t count on the Prez to apoint that “true leadership.”
Wrote another:

There’s been quite a flap going on about his [“interaction” with] female secretarial staff at ICE. . . . I think it goes to the point being made – extreme immaturity manifesting itself in a “kid in the candy store” mentality, typical of those whose power base is solely founded on a political appointee.

Immigration Enforcement?:
Unqualified Crony Myers’ Unqualified Crony Daniel Fahner
Time for a clean sweep at ICE–of Myers, Woods, Fahner, and hopefully the man at the top.

By Debbie Schlussel
So three racists walk into a bar. Unfortunately, there’s no punchline.
What Michael Richards said about Blacks at an L.A. comedy club was racist. His career should be over.
But so should the careers of two other racists, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Instead, they’re thriving.
While Richards made a gazillion phony apologies for uttering what he really thinks at age 57 (and blamed it on the War in Iraq–huh?), Jackson and Sharpton have never apologized even once for constantly telling us what they really think, over decades.

It’s a little strange–no, make that, absurd–to see one racist groveling and apologizing to two other racists, especially when the latter two have made it a career. Even more ludicrous is the media’s blindness to the thick irony of it all.
Take Jackson. Perhaps everyone forgot his comments that Jews are “Hymies” and New York is “Hymietown,” for which he never apologized to America’s or even New York’s Jews. But check out these other Jackson utterances you probably don’t even know about because they didn’t get the “Kramer” treatment:
* He said he spit into White customers’ food when he worked as a waiter because, “[It] gave me a psychological gratification.”
* “You can’t trust the Jews. I never have trusted those people.”
* He claimed Nixon’s policies were harsh on the poor because, of Nixon’s top aides, “four out of five of them are German Jews.” Someone forgot to tell him that Erlichman and Haldeman were not “Hymies.”
* In working up a Black church about the Jews, he claimed Jews conspired to keep the Black man down (shown on PBS’ McNeil-Lehrer Report).
* Jews are “not willing to share power.”
* He told an Ohio County Commissioner, “You Jews are much too sensitive.”
* He said the Democratic Party was “perverted by a reaction . . . to the Jewish element within the party,” and that the relationship between Jews and Democrats was “a kind of glorified form of bribery. Financial bankrolling and moral bankruptcy.”
* He claimed labor unions were insensitive to Blacks because “Jews dominate the leadership at the top.”
* “I’m sick and tired of hearing about the Holocaust.”
* “I have seen very few Jewish reporters who are objective about Arab affairs.” Unfortunately, Jackson is right about this. Most Jewish reporters bend over backwards to portray the Arabist position positively and the Israeli position negatively.
* When discussing his media critics, he said they were few in number (unfortunately, true) and “all Jewish.” (Not true).
Then, there’s Sharpton. At least Richards’ racist rant never resulted in murder. Al Sharpton’s words led to at least two killing sprees:

Weird Al Sharpton: Race Merchant, Coke Dealer & Kramer Critic
* At a 1991 funeral of a Black child accidentally killed by an out-of-control car driven by a Jew, Sharpton delivered this eulogy:

Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights.

Oppenheimer is the Jewish family that is a big player in the diamond industry, and Crown Heights is a Chassidic Jewish community, some of whose residents are in the diamond industry. It was clear he was denouncing the Jews. Sharpton spoke of how these “diamond merchants” had “the blood of innocent babies” on their hands and exhorted the crowd to commit violence in the Crown Heights, Brooklyn Jewish community:

If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house.

Shouting, “No Justice, No Peace” with the funeral crowd, he incited riots in Crown Heights where a mob shouting, “Kill the Jews!” surrounded Jewish rabbinical student Yankel Rosenbaum and stabbed him to death.
* In 1995, Sharpton incited the shooting and arson murder of seven employees of Freddy’s Fashion Mart. When the Black landlord raised the rent on Freddy’s White (and Jewish) owner, he was forced to raise the rent on his Black subtenant. Sharpton organized a protest, at which he announced:

We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business.

Sharpton stood by and nodded in agreement as speakers and the crowd shouted: “Burn down the Jew store!” “We’re going to see that this cracker suffers.”
A protester shot four employees and set fire to Freddy’s. It burnt to the ground and seven employees–all of them minorities–died.
Jackson and Sharpton. These are the new gods of race merchantry to which all others must apologize?
Next, the kettle will be apologizing to the pot. And the pot will say it’s not enough.
***
For the record, Michael Richards–contrary to reports in the media and by his own misinformed publicist–is not Jewish. He is a lapsed Catholic of Italian descent (and neither of his parents are Jewish).
He made a similar rant against Jews, back in April, calling them “Christ-killers.” But, unlike the two Black targets of Richards’ latest tirade, Carol Oschin and J. P. Fillet, two Jews who were in the audience–and were the targets of those comments, did not hire a lawyer. They are not seeking money or any kind of redress.
Maybe they know that prostituting your dignity to seek money from a bigot only takes away your dignity even more. And maybe they know that desperate, insincere apologies won’t change a thing. Richards’ rants–just as Jackson’s and Sharpton’s and Mel Gibson’s, too–are what he really thinks.
We should leave it at that. And all of their careers should be over forever.