ABC Addresses Outcry Against Crimes Committed by Illegals --8/22/2007

1. ABC Addresses Outcry Against Crimes Committed by Illegals
"We're going to take 'A Closer Look' now at how a brutal triple murder in New Jersey is fueling the outcry across the country against illegal immigrants," fill-in ABC anchor Elizabeth Vargas announced Tuesday night in setting up a look at a problem largely avoided by the mainstream media. Reminding viewers of "the senseless shootings of three college students in the city of Newark," Vargas related how "two of the suspects were in this country illegally. And some are saying it's a crime that would never have occurred if immigration laws were enforced." Reporter Jake Tapper explained in his World News piece that "their presence in Newark, a city hospitable to illegal immigrants, what conservatives are calling a 'sanctuary city,' is now part of the debate over illegal immigration." After soundbites from Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo and Newt Gingrich castigating the city for not enforcing immigration laws, Tapper noted how there's "a rising hostility to illegal immigrants, not just among conservatives, but in the inner city." To illustrate, Tapper ran soundbites from three people on the street who all argued for a crackdown on illegals.

2. CNN's Cafferty Deplores Dodd for Arguing Against Impeaching Bush
In the 7pm EDT hour of Tuesday's The Situation Room on CNN, Jack Cafferty expressed disappointment in Democratic presidential candidate Chris Dodd for rejecting efforts to impeach President Bush because of how it would hurt Democratic chances in 2008. "So, Senator Dodd is putting the election prospects of the Democratic Party next year ahead of whether or not President Bush might be guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors of a kind which would mandate his removal from office," Cafferty lamented. He noted that "Congress's job is oversight of the executive branch" and then, he sniffed, with a disapproving shake of his head: "Unless, of course, that oversight interferes with getting elected." Cafferty soon reiterated his displeasure with the liberal Connecticut Senator: "It's a pretty amazing statement to come out of Senator Dodd's mouth." AUDIO&VIDEO [1] [1]

3. Hume Highlights Studies Showing Warming 'Scare Vastly Overblown'
Citing recent peer-reviewed studies, Brit Hume informed viewers of his Fox News Channel program on Tuesday night that though "many media outlets...portray man-made global warming as a certified fact and those who deny it as conspirators," several "skeptics are increasingly certain that the scare is vastly overblown." In his "Grapevine" segment, Hume pointed to a study by a Brookhaven National Lab scientist who "contends that the Earth's climate is only about one-third as sensitive to carbon dioxide as the UN's recent climate study claims," a Belgian Weather Institute report "that carbon dioxide does not have a decisive role in global warming," a "study by two Chinese scientists" that discovered "CO2's role in warming is 'vastly exaggerated'" and "new research by University of Washington mathematicians" that "shows a correlation between high solar activity and periods of global warming."

4. New York Times Spies Phony Dangers in FISA Legislation
The New York Times ventured where even the ACLU fears to tread: "Broad new surveillance powers approved by Congress this month could allow the Bush administration to conduct spy operations that go well beyond wiretapping to include -- without court approval -- certain types of physical searches on American soil and the collection of Americans' business records, Democratic Congressional officials and other experts said." Sunday's lead story focused on the alleged dangers hidden in the updated version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act recently passed by Congress and signed into law by Bush. "Concerns Raised On Wider Spying Under New Law" emanated from James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, the same pair of reporters who put the terror-surveillance debate on public display back in December 2005 with a scoop that revealed the details of the classified National Security Agency program, which detailed methods of surveillance of international communications of terrorism suspects.

5. MSNBC's Scarborough Mocks Concept of CNN's 'God's Warriors'
On Tuesday's Morning Joe, MSNBC host Joe Scarborough mocked the very concept of CNN's "God's Warriors" specials on Muslim, Christian and Jewish extremism. Anticipating the possible moral relativism that the Christiane Amanpour-hosted series may take, Scarborough sarcastically observed: "They're going to study Muslim extremism, then Christian extremism, because we know Christians have, have slaughtered thousands of people across the globe in bombings." Comparing the CNN anchor to a liberal talk show host, an incredulous Scarborough added: "Is this Rosie O'Donnell or is this Christine Amanpour?" Returning to the subject later in the 7am EDT hour, Scarborough derided the cable network again: "But to say, as CNN appears to be saying, that Muslim extremism and Jewish extremism and Christian extremism, sort of, is equal, that there is moral equivalence...between those three, that's just ridiculous."

6. 'Top Ten Good Things About Marrying Into the Bush Family'
Letterman's "Top Ten Good Things About Marrying Into the Bush Family."

ABC Addresses Outcry Against Crimes Committed
by Illegals

"We're going to take 'A Closer Look' now at how a brutal triple murder in New Jersey is fueling the outcry across the country against illegal immigrants," fill-in ABC anchor Elizabeth Vargas announced Tuesday night in setting up a look at a problem largely avoided by the mainstream media. Reminding viewers of "the senseless shootings of three college students in the city of Newark," Vargas related how "two of the suspects were in this country illegally. And some are saying it's a crime that would never have occurred if immigration laws were enforced."

Reporter Jake Tapper explained in his World News piece that "their presence in Newark, a city hospitable to illegal immigrants, what conservatives are calling a 'sanctuary city,' is now part of the debate over illegal immigration." After soundbites from Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo and Newt Gingrich castigating the city for not enforcing immigration laws, Tapper noted how there's "a rising hostility to illegal immigrants, not just among conservatives, but in the inner city." To illustrate, Tapper ran soundbites from three people on the street who all argued for a crackdown on illegals, before he concluded with a nod to the other side and why that view doesn't matter: "Liberal immigration activists argue that illegal immigrants do not commit violent crimes more than any other group. But for many in mourning here in Newark, two illegal immigrants may have been two too many."

[This item was posted late Tuesday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [2] ]

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video for the August 21 World News story:

ELIZABETH VARGAS: We're going to take "A Closer Look" now at how a brutal triple murder in New Jersey is fueling the outcry across the country against illegal immigrants. We've told you about the killings, the senseless shootings of three college students in the city of Newark. It turns out that two of the suspects were in this country illegally. And some are saying it's a crime that would never have occurred if immigration laws were enforced. Jake Tapper has the story.

JAKE TAPPER: An illegal immigrant from Honduras, Melvin Jovel, was arraigned this morning for the shocking execution-style killings of three promising college students in Newark, New Jersey, this month. Jovel joins others in custody for the crimes, including fellow illegal immigrant Jose Carranza from Peru, who's been arrested twice before. Their presence in Newark, a city hospitable to illegal immigrants, what conservatives are calling a "sanctuary city," is now part of the debate over illegal immigration.
Rep. TOM TANCREDO (R-CO): Newark and its political leadership share a degree of culpability. Their actions have directly contributed to the deaths of these three promising young American kids.
NEWT GINGRICH: There is no excuse for city, county and state governments to not have a rule that when you pick up somebody for a felony, you automatically check to see if they're here legally of if, in fact, they are illegally in the United States.
TAPPER: Newark prosecutors say federal immigration authorities told them in writing to only alert them about illegal immigrants who have been convicted of a felony. Carranza had been twice arrested for violent crimes, but not yet convicted of anything. Beyond the finger-pointing is a rising hostility to illegal immigrants, not just among conservatives, but in the inner city.
UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN #1: They should stop illegal people from coming over here. They're trying to make it legal for them to come over here, and they shouldn't be, because they can't even really keep track of these people. And they're going out here committing all types of crimes.
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: The federal government will do what they want to do, all right? And we end up wearing the weight.
UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN #2: They should stop letting them in illegally. And when they commit a crime, they should do something about it, all right? Don't let them in. Send them back.
TAPPER: Liberal immigration activists argue that illegal immigrants do not commit violent crimes more than any other group. But for many in mourning here in Newark, two illegal immigrants may have been two too many. Jake Tapper, ABC News, Newark, New Jersey.

The longer, online, version of Tapper's report as posted on ABCNews.com: abcnews.go.com [3]

CNN's Cafferty Deplores Dodd for Arguing
Against Impeaching Bush

All but one of the e-mails he read about 40 minutes later either denounced Bush or Dick Cheney or called for Bush's impeachment. The first one declared that "a majority of Democrats and Independents would support impeachment of the entire administration," the next castigated Congress's "cowardice" in not being more aggressive toward the administration, another ridiculed Dodd as a "moron," and the next to last e-mail Cafferty read aloud contended "there will be plenty of time to send George Bush to jail after he leaves Washington, and after more incontrovertible evidence of his malfeasance comes out." Finally, Cafferty chuckled at this missive: "As much as I'd love to see Bush impeached, you have to ask yourself this: Who would take over? A man who shot an old man in the face while trying to shoot birds that can't fly."

[This item was posted Tuesday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [7] ]

Just before the 2006 election, Cafferty made clear his desire for Bush's impeachment and that of his viewers. The November 3, 2006 CyberAlert, "Cafferty: Bush Deserves Impeachment, Finds 'Amazing 98%' Agree," recounted:

CNN's Jack Cafferty listed a litany of supposed Bush misdeeds and how Bill Clinton "was impeached for telling a lie" before posing his "Cafferty File" question in the 7pm EST hour of Thursday's The Situation Room: "If the Republicans lose the election Tuesday, what should happen to President Bush?" Naturally, Cafferty's strong suggestion that President George W. Bush deserves the same generated matching e-mails, yet Cafferty expressed astonishment: "It's amazing. 98 percent of the ones that I read -- and I looked at several hundred of them -- said impeach him....There's a lot of anger out there over what this man's done."

Cafferty had charged: "This President has pulled off a power grab in the name of the war on terror the likes of which this country hasn't seen in a very long time. And in the process, people who are a lot smarter than I am suggest that he has broken this nation's laws over and over and over again. From invading a sovereign nation without provocation to torturing prisoners to the NSA spy program, to holding people without a right to a court hearing or a lawyer, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera." Amongst the e-mails Cafferty read, one declared: "Of course George Bush deserves to be impeached, and he should also be thrown in jail." Another writer recommended: "He should be 'legally' water-boarded until he can recite the Bill of Rights and define habeas corpus."

END of Excerpt

For the November 3, 2006 CyberAlert article in full: www.mediaresearch.org [8]

Cafferty set up and posed his "Cafferty File" question about ten minutes into the 7pm EDT hour of the August 21 The Situation Room:
"Here's an interesting statement, Wolf: 'Impeachment proceedings suck all the oxygen out of the room.' So says Democratic presidential candidate Chris Dodd. The Des Moines Register reports the Connecticut Senator told a political group in Iowa yesterday that it would be a mistake for Democrats to begin impeachment proceedings against President Bush and could jeopardize their control of Congress. He thinks Americans would object to Congress focusing on impeachment for 14 months instead of other problems facing the country. I wonder if he's right about that? Dodd also said this: 'If we become preoccupied with an impeachment process, I think we could turn off an awful lot of people who might otherwise be willing to support Democrats and be willing to change the direction of the country in the fall of 2008,' unquote.
"So, Senator Dodd is putting the election prospects of the Democratic Party next year ahead of whether or not President Bush might be guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors of a kind which would mandate his removal from office. Congress's job is oversight of the executive branch -- unless, of course, that oversight interferes with getting elected. Here's the question, then: 'Democratic presidential hopeful Chris Dodd says it would be a mistake for Democrats to impeach President Bush. Is he right?' E-mail caffertyfile@cnn.com [9], or go to cnn.com/cafferty file. It's a pretty amazing statement to come out of Senator Dodd's mouth, Wolf."

The DesMoines Register story: desmoinesregister.com [10]

Hume Highlights Studies Showing Warming
'Scare Vastly Overblown'

Citing recent peer-reviewed studies, Brit Hume informed viewers of his Fox News Channel program on Tuesday night that though "many media outlets...portray man-made global warming as a certified fact and those who deny it as conspirators," several "skeptics are increasingly certain that the scare is vastly overblown." In his "Grapevine" segment, Hume pointed to a study by a Brookhaven National Lab scientist who "contends that the Earth's climate is only about one-third as sensitive to carbon dioxide as the UN's recent climate study claims," a Belgian Weather Institute report "that carbon dioxide does not have a decisive role in global warming," a "study by two Chinese scientists" that discovered "CO2's role in warming is 'vastly exaggerated'" and "new research by University of Washington mathematicians" that "shows a correlation between high solar activity and periods of global warming."

Hume was apparently relaying highlights from an August 20 posting, "New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears," by Marc Morano of the minority staff of the Senate's Committee on Environment and Public Works. Morano's rundown summarized more than a dozen studies and reports: epw.senate.gov [11]

[This item was posted Tuesday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [12] ]
Hume's lead "Grapevine" item on the August 21 Special Report with Brit Hume on FNC:
"Many media outlets -- such as the recent Newsweek magazine cover story -- portray man-made global warming as a certified fact and those who deny it as conspirators. But skeptics are increasingly certain that the scare is vastly overblown. A new study by Brookhaven National Lab scientist Stephen Schwartz contends that the Earth's climate is only about one-third as sensitive to carbon dioxide as the UN's recent climate study claims. Schwarz's work will be published in The Journal of Geophysical Research.
"The study is just one of several peer-reviewed scientific studies challenging global warming alarmism: The Belgian Weather Institute concludes that carbon dioxide does not have a decisive role in global warming and a study by two Chinese scientists says CO2's role in warming is 'vastly exaggerated.' Plus, new research by University of Washington mathematicians shows a correlation between high solar activity and periods of global warming."

For more on the Newsweek cover story Hume cited, check the August 8 CyberAlert article, "Newsweek Cover Story Screed Against 'Denial Machine' on Warming," online at: www.mrc.org [13]

Also see the August 16 CyberAlert item, "NBC News Joins Newsweek in Smearing Global Warming 'Deniers,'" online at: www.mrc.org [14]

New York Times Spies Phony Dangers in
FISA Legislation

The New York Times ventured where even the ACLU fears to tread: "Broad new surveillance powers approved by Congress this month could allow the Bush administration to conduct spy operations that go well beyond wiretapping to include -- without court approval -- certain types of physical searches on American soil and the collection of Americans' business records, Democratic Congressional officials and other experts said."

Sunday's lead story focused on the alleged dangers hidden in the updated version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act recently passed by Congress and signed into law by Bush. "Concerns Raised On Wider Spying Under New Law" emanated from James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, the same pair of reporters who put the terror-surveillance debate on public display back in December 2005 with a scoop that revealed the details of the classified National Security Agency program, which detailed methods of surveillance of international communications of terrorism suspects. See: www.timeswatch.org [15]

Andrew McCarthy of the Foundation for Defense and Democracies responded, at National Review Online, to the Sunday story:
"The Times is engaged here in the worst kind of journalistic abuse. Risen and Lichtblau sprinkle their story with the names of several experts, but not a single one is identified as standing behind the explosive claims quoted above. Those are attributed to 'experts' -- unnamed. And unnamed for good reason: What the Times represents as a respectable, mainstream interpretation of the new law is actually a fringe construction unsupportable by any coherent reading."

[This item is adapted from a posting, by Clay Waters, on the MRC's TimesWatch site: www.timeswatch.org [16] ]

Back to the August 19 news story by Risen and Lichtblau:
"Administration officials acknowledged that they had heard such concerns from Democrats in Congress recently, and that there was a continuing debate over the meaning of the legislative language. But they said the Democrats were simply raising theoretical questions based on a harsh interpretation of the legislation.
"They also emphasized that there would be strict rules in place to minimize the extent to which Americans would be caught up in the surveillance.
"The dispute illustrates how lawmakers, in a frenetic, end-of-session scramble, passed legislation they may not have fully understood and may have given the administration more surveillance powers than it sought.'"

McCarthy noted: "Nor, moreover, does it seem plausible that, as the Times report suggests, Democrats voted for the reform bill without grasping what was in it. This was no omnibus, multi-volume budget extravaganza. We're talkin' 14 double-spaced pages -- straightforward, easily read, and reread in nothing flat, bereft of crevices for hiding explosive provisions."

For McCarthy's August 21 retort in full: article.nationalreview.com [17]

Risen and Lichtblau again emphasized the "complex" legislation that evidently befuddled the poor Democrats: "It also offers a case study in how changing a few words in a complex piece of legislation has the potential to fundamentally alter the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a landmark national security law. The new legislation is set to expire in less than six months; two weeks after it was signed into law, there is still heated debate over how much power Congress gave to the president.
"'This may give the administration even more authority than people thought,' said David Kris, a former senior Justice Department lawyer in the Bush and Clinton administrations and a co-author of 'National Security Investigation and Prosecutions,' a new book on surveillance law.
"Several legal experts said that by redefining the meaning of 'electronic surveillance,' the new law narrows the types of communications covered in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA, by indirectly giving the government the power to use intelligence collection methods far beyond wiretapping that previously required court approval if conducted inside the United States.
"These new powers include the collection of business records, physical searches and so-called 'trap and trace' operations, analyzing specific calling patterns.
"For instance, the legislation would allow the government, under certain circumstances, to demand the business records of an American in Chicago without a warrant if it asserts that the search concerns its surveillance of a person who is in Paris, experts said.
"It is possible that some of the changes were the unintended consequences of the rushed legislative process just before this month's Congressional recess, rather than a purposeful effort by the administration to enhance its ability to spy on Americans."

But as McCarthy sharply pointed out, the "experts" that agree with Risen and Lichtblau's strange interpretation were never actually identified.

The Times continued: "Some civil rights advocates said they suspected that the administration made the language of the bill intentionally vague to allow it even broader discretion over wiretapping decisions. Whether intentional or not, the end result -- according to top Democratic aides and other experts on national security law -- is that the legislation may grant the government the right to collect a range of information on American citizens inside the United States without warrants, as long as the administration asserts that the spying concerns the monitoring of a person believed to be overseas....
"The measure, which President Bush signed into law on Aug. 5, was written and pushed through both the House and Senate so quickly that few in Congress had time to absorb its full impact, some Congressional aides say.
"Though many Democratic leaders opposed the final version of the legislation, they did not work forcefully to block its passage, largely out of fear that they would be criticized by President Bush and Republican leaders during the August recess as being soft on terrorism."

For the Sunday article in full: www.nytimes.com [18]

Check TimesWatch daily for the latest instances of liberal bias in the New York Times: www.timeswatch.org [19]

MSNBC's Scarborough Mocks Concept of
CNN's 'God's Warriors'

On Tuesday's Morning Joe, MSNBC host Joe Scarborough mocked the very concept of CNN's "God's Warriors" specials on Muslim, Christian and Jewish extremism. Anticipating the possible moral relativism that the Christiane Amanpour-hosted series may take, Scarborough sarcastically observed: "They're going to study Muslim extremism, then Christian extremism, because we know Christians have, have slaughtered thousands of people across the globe in bombings." Comparing the CNN anchor to a liberal talk show host, an incredulous Scarborough added: "Is this Rosie O'Donnell or is this Christine Amanpour?"

(In 2006, O'Donnell famously stated that "radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam." See the September 13 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org [20] )

Returning to the subject later in the 7am EDT hour, Scarborough derided the cable network again: "But to say, as CNN appears to be saying, that Muslim extremism and Jewish extremism and Christian extremism, sort of, is equal, that there is moral equivalence...between those three, that's just ridiculous."

[This item, by Scott Whitlock, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [21] ]

The August 21 CyberAlert item, "CNN's 'God's Warriors' Equates Christian Activists with Taliban?," previewed the August 21-23 CNN mini-series: www.mrc.org [22]

An AP article about the series lends credence to the idea that Amanpour would promote moral equivalence between Islamic terrorists and a "fundamentalist Christian group." An excerpt:

The segment on Christians explores BattleCry in some depth, digging at the roots of an organization that fights against some of the cruder elements of popular culture and urges teenagers to be chaste. In noting how girls at some BattleCry events are encouraged to wear long dresses, Amanpour asks the group's leader how it is different from the Taliban.

For the AP story in full: news.yahoo.com [23]

CNN's page on the "God's Warriors" shows scheduled to air from 9-11pm EDT Wednesday (on Islam) and Thursday (on Christianity), with video excerpts: www.cnn.com [24]

The first installment, on Judaism, ran Tuesday night. Each two-hour episode will re-run at midnight EDT and will no doubt be re-run again this weekend or over Labor Day weekend.

A partial transcript of the discussion during the August 21 edition of Morning Joe on MSNBC:

# 7:20am EDT. Joe Scarborough: "I am upset a little bit about something right now. And I went on TV Newser and I and saw that CNN and Christiane Amanpour, they're going to study religious extremism. She's got this special. She's going to be on Larry King tonight. I'm going to be watching 'cause I'm going to be watching it because I'm going to be a little bothered if they're trying to say that there is moral relativity. They're going to study Muslim extremism, then Christian extremism, because we know Christians have, have slaughtered thousands of people across the globe in bombings-"
Willie Geist: "Oh, yeah."
Scarborough: "-and Jewish extremism. [Willie Geist starts laughing.] I'm sorry. Come on! It is okay to say that, right now, the vast majority of religious extremists are members of one faith. That doesn't mean that every Muslim is a terrorist. That doesn't even mean that even 99 percent of Muslims are terrorists. But to do a three part series on Muslim extremism, Christian extremism and then, uh, Jewish extremism? Is this Rosie O'Donnell or is this Christiane Amanpour? You understand what I'm saying here, Willie? I mean, come on."
Willie Geist: "Well, there are Christian extremists. There are Jewish extremists, but it means an entirely different thing to be a Christian extremist and a Muslim extremist these days. I think the evidence proves that."
Scarborough: "Right. Yeah, exactly. If you're a Christian extremist, then when you send your daughter to school, her, her, her dress is below her ankles and it's weighted so in case she jumps up, the dress stays down. Much different than the other type of extremism that we're talking about. So, I'm just a little bothered by it."

# 7:49am. Scarborough: "Chris, I understand though, we have been getting some e-mails regarding this CNN special report on extremism. Muslim extremism, Jewish extremism and Christian extremism. Right?"
Chris, MSNBC producer: "Yeah, we get, religion is always a big one with e-mailers. And, some, a lot of e-mail about saying that Christian radicals bomb abortion clinics."
Scarborough: "Yep. Sure."
Chris, MSNBC producer: "And we've got one that says, 'Joe, please don't demonstrate your ignorance, or is it your prejudice, by ignoring the fact of Christian religious extremism. You're apparently and educated man, ever hear of the Christian crusades? Duh.'"
Scarborough: "No, I never heard of those! When did that, you know, that's what I love, that's what I love. You know, it's like, Christopher Columbus, they will say, when you talk about extremism, they'll say, 'You know, it's all the same. Christian extremism is the same as Muslim extremism.' Because, as you were saying, Christopher Columbus, you were saying that a lot of people say, 'Christopher Columbus brought disease to the new world.' I was like, 'Yeah, in 1492.' I was like, earlier this summer though, we had bombings in London. We've got, I mean, look over the past 10 years. And, sure, yeah. Abortion clinics. Christian extremists bomb abortion clinics. I don't know the last one that was bombed, but let's just have a little tally, Willie, and compare that with Muslim extremism right now. And again, I'm not being prejudiced against Muslims. It is a religion of peace. In fact, I have a tattoo on, on the side, right here, that says Islam-"
Geist: "I love that one."
Scarborough: "You love that one?"
Geist: "Yeah. That's my favorite of your tats."
Scarborough: "-is the religion of peace. So, yes. I, I will repeat that mantra. Let's all say it together; Islam is the religion of peace. But it has been hijacked by a small group of people. And when you have a religion that has over a billion people, it doesn't take a whole lot to cause major havoc and that is what's going on right now. But to say, as CNN appears to be saying, that Muslim extremism and Jewish extremism and Christian extremism, sort of, is equal, that there is moral equivalence, I found the word, between those three, that's just ridiculous."

'Top Ten Good Things About Marrying Into
the Bush Family'

From the August 20 Late Show with David Letterman, the "Top Ten Good Things About Marrying Into the Bush Family." Late Show home page: www.cbs.com [25]

10. Great deals on Fallujah honeymoon

9. You'll inherit President Bush's extensive collection of Chuck Norris memorabilia

8. It's a good bet the wedding reception will have an open bar

7. Might see Cheney shoot an old guy -- still a reference, folks

6. Learning from Grandma Barbara how to spit chaw

5. Every Wednesday is Taco Night

4. What could be more fascinating than learning what makes Jeb tick?

3. If half the family hates you, you still have better approval rating that George Bush

2. W. can lend you the "Mission Accomplished" banner to put up in the bedroom

1. Little chance you'll be the dumbest guy in the family

-- Brent Baker