Paper plane to fly in space?

Just saw the most recent report on Fox News this morning with Jane Skinner and some dude from Roll Call on the Hillary "Donor" gripes about Pelosi's rather public role in the question of the super-delegates.

The pundit must have been a Hillary hack because he kept talking about how obvious it was that Pelosi wanted to see Barack Obama win the Democrat nomination.

So I wonder if I am the only one who sees this issue as being fairly innocent for Pelosi?

See I tend to see things like 20 Hillary thugs (eh donors) sending the sitting Speaker of the House (the third most powerful seat of Government in the nation) telling her to basically, "shut the heck up" as some what infringing upon her 1st Amendment rights.

The Roll Call moron argued that because of her position she should take a back seat in the public discussion.

Why? So that BILL CLINTON can cheat the scales heavily?

Why wouldn't the democratic party want their highest elected office holder making it clear that she advocates for fairness in staying with the election process?

Isn't that what we used to call leadership?

ALL Pelosi has argued for is that the super-delegates should more or less follow the will of the dedicated delegates, which we can all assume is reflective of the voter's will. Can't we?

Pelosi seems to me to have been very even-handed in her rationale for the behavior of how super-delegates should proceed. In essence it seems to me she has argued for fairness in the process.

I was in the car yesterday listening to Rush, and he kept referring to Hillary's new soundbyte where she argues that even the dedicated delegates don't have to vote for the candidate they have been dedicated too.

UNBELIEVABLE!

The Clinton's are losing this battle, and God help us all, finally exiting the stage of political office for good. But they will try to cheat, bend, intimidate, manipulate and Vince Foster us all if necessary to see their goals achieved, and this thuggish note to Pelosi is just the most recent example...

In a year in which more change has occurred than I expected, and in which I truly lack for nothing - possible exception of a job aside - how does one measure a GREAT birthday?

10. 66 Facebook friends, and 128 MySpace happy birthday notes...
9. Many invites from long lost friends to catch up when back in town.
8. A really good conference call as to the pending future of Baldwin/McCulloughRadio.
7. Seeing little Stefani helped by a caring reader to this blog - thank you Lindsay!
6. A call from the Lovely Bride's father wishing me a happy b-day
5. A copy of David McCullough's JOHN ADAMS
4. Getting my first internet, bed-side, WiFi Radio
3. Text Messages from my Aunts, Uncles, and Cousins
2. 1 hand-made birthday card from my special needs son that simply says, "I Love You Dad!"
1. 1 Lovely Bride's pillow top kiss and whispering, "happy birthday sweetheart!"

One of the really BIG reasons that John McCain sought to limit our freedom of first amendment speech (and one of the reasons George W. Bush should have vetoed the stupid bill attempting to do so) was because, according to McCain, it would seek to stem the flood of money in the election cycle, and we could return the elections to ideas...

Uh... yeah... ok...

How do they say "big fact crock of rat poo" in Arizona?

The family of a high school senior are blaming the doctors, and of course planning on suing. (If there was legitimate malpractice in the procedure so be it.)

But I've got a much more important question: "What the heck is wrong with these parents?"

Since when do 18 year olds NEED to go under the knife for implants anyway?

Why should a college girl be so concerned with whether or not her breasts are asymmetrical or that she has an inverted nipple that they take these sorts of risks?

Most importantly - why aren't parents today emphasizing to the next generation of girls that real, honest to goodness beauty has nothing to do with what you look like in your bikini - but rather what shines from your heart?

It seems to me that as the trend in pop culture continues to put ALL the emphasis on looks and outward appearance that we will have more of these sad stories to deal with.

The shocking horror of it all - is that it didn't have to be...

Couldn't help but notice last night that the overwhelming trend in American Idol is replaying itself out again. Last night it was the "late bloomers" in the contest that stole the show and is really pushing this year's competition on Idol into a whole new dimension.

Here's how I scored the evening:

BEST PERFORMANCES:
1. Michael Johns
2. Syesha Mercado
3. David Cook

BEST SONG CHOICES:
1. Kristy Lee Cook
2. Michael Johns
3. Syesha Mercado

MOST OVERRATED:
1. David Archuletta
2. Brooke White
3. Carly Smithson

WORST SONG CHOICE:
1. Ramiele Rubay
2. Jason Castro
3. Chekieze

The night was owned by the more mature performers who did a lot more than just come out and look cute. Beginning with Syesha - who has put together a string of three weeks in a row where she has improved each week, she had the big breakout vocal everyone knew she could produce.

Speaking of vocals - Michael Johns took on TWO Queen songs, and not just any Queen tunes - but THE 2 songs that band will always be known for - and he NAILED them. David Cook was perhaps the most original taking Michael Jackson's "Billie Jean" and doing something different with it.

I have to admit - Cook's treatment of the classic Jackson piece was NOT my cup of tea for that tune - but he owned, sang it, and sold it.

The most important question after each Idol performance is "could I hear that on the radio today?" Even though I hated the arrangement - the answer to David Cook's version was YES!

Speaking of Cook - Kristy Lee may not be the most graceful performer Idol has put through in recent years, but she is smart cookie on song selection. Last night her song choice, coupled with a strong enough performance - will keep her in one more week.

Biggest disappointment of the night? How about a three-way? Ramiele never hit the top of the pitch on the biggest part of a very hard song. Archuletta looked like a Disney-channel reject. And the arrangement of Brooke White's tune was forgettable - and NOT something you would expect to hear on the air today.

Dial-Idol has the science of the busy signal... and if they are right - Jason or Chekieze is headed home... either one probably deserve it for overall effort.

In our home - I think the Lovely Bride voted for Brooke a couple of dozen times. I split my vote two ways 2/3 for Syesha, 1/3 for Johns. Results tonight...

Uh... it's been all of four minutes since I hit the send/receive button...

PEOPLE who send excessive texts and emails may have a mental illness, according to an article in a leading psychiatric journal.

As more people leave the office computer, only to log on as soon as they get home, the American Journal of Psychiatry has found addiction to text messaging and emailing could be another form of mental illness.

The article, by Dr Jerald Block, said there were four symptoms: suffering from feelings of withdrawal when a computer cannot be accessed; an increased need for better equipment; need for more time to use it; and experiencing the negative repercussions of their addiction.

Dr Block said that although text messaging was not directly linked to the Internet, it was a form of instant messaging and needed to be included among the criteria.

"The chief reasons I see to consider it are motor vehicle accidents that are caused by cell phone instant messaging, stalking and harassment via instant messaging, and instant messaging at social, educational, (and) work functions where it creates problems," he said.

"It should be a pervasive and problematic pattern, though, not isolated incidents."

Man... if the shrinks are to label email/texting addicts mentally ill... what on earth do you call BLOGGERS?