Kids and parents love the highly-successful series of “Shrek” movies, starring Cameron Diaz, Mike Myers and many others. “Shrek the Third” opens May 18, and that means the cast is on a promotional tour. Several cast members gave an interview to Michael Ordona for the Tribune Newspapers, which own the Chicago Tribune and the LA Times, and disclosed that “Shrek 4” might continue a relatively recent Hollywood trend.

The trend in children's movies has been propagandizing them, usually about environmental issues, and it looks like the the upcoming “Shrek 4” will be no different, especially if Diaz has anything to say about it.

Cameron Diaz wants “Shrek 4” to involve an eco-friendly story line about a threatened swamp environment. Fellow cast members Myers, Julie Andrews and Amy Poehler are also in the below interview excerpt where Diaz revealed her propagandist goal (emphasis mine):

In going on Paula Zahn's CNN show this evening, was Al Sharpton's goal to quell the controversy surrounding his comments about Mormonism, or to inflame it? If the former, he failed miserably. If the latter, he succeeded admirably. Far from retracting his earlier allegation that Mormons aren't real believers, he repeated it, adding an allegation of racism for good measure.

Let's recall Sharpton's original statement, that in going on the Zahn show he presumably was seeking to explicate. Debating Christopher Hitchens recently, Sharpton said:

"And as for the one Mormon running for office, those that really believe in God will defeat him anyway. So don't worry about that. That's a temporary, that's a temporary situation."

After the idiot questions Chrissy asked in last week's Republican debate, what would we like to ask of the dem's if we had the chance?

Kindly phrase your questions in the form of...."CANDIDATE": "Question" "Follow-On Question"

For example:

HILLARY: What was your reaction when the stain on the blue dress turned out to prove your husband had sex with "that woman"? Really...and how did you convince the Secret Service not to shoot you?

And to make it fun, why don't we provide the answers, too? Choose your own format for answers (but if it's Hillary, you must specify the accent used...my forum topic, my rules).

Hat Tip to Gary Hall, and the other posters here who had some great questions on last weekned's thread.

It had to happen sooner or later. A natural disaster was destined to hit a town in another state led by a Democrat governor who was willing to feed the waiting media activists with a swipe against President Bush and the War in Iraq. Such a tragedy happened over the weekend when a category five tornado hit Greensburg, Kansas and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius immediately blamed the war in Iraq for a lack of response by depleted National Guard units. The situation was so politically opportunistic that even Presidential candidate Barack Obama stated while on a campaign stop that 10,000 residents had been killed in the devastation.

Despite its huffy, self-righteous editorial page, the New York Times never has been anywhere close to a paragon of moral consistency. The latest example of the Grey Lady's hypocrisy is on the subject of data-mining, a subject which the editorial side of the paper repeatedly condemned last year. Data-mining is basically a fancy way of compiling user data in an advanced manner. According to the Times, data-mining is wrong when it is done to help fight terrorism. When it's done to fatten the wallets of fatcat liberal newspaper execs then it's ok.

The left-wing Village Voice caught the Times:

Barely a year after their reporters won a Pulitzer prize for exposing data mining of ordinary citizens by a government spy agency, New York Times officials had some exciting news for stockholders last week: The Times company plans to do its own data mining of ordinary citizens, in the name of online profits.

"Recruiting the next generation of militants. A Mickey Mouse-like character reaches out to Palestinian children."

That's how CNN's Jim Clancy, co-host of "Your World Today" teased a May 9 story about the infamous rodent that hosts an Hamas-funded TV show geared towards little children. (see related NB post here)

Video (0:34): Real (960 kB) or Windows (1.06 MB), plus MP3 (492 kB).

After the theme music for "Your World Today" concluded, Clancy and co-host Rosemary Church took turns setting up the terror mouse story.:

This week’s Newsweek cover story on political courage ("Wanted: A New Truman") is truly baffling. Evan Thomas has a strange way of assessing what marks courage in our presidential contenders. He easily acknowledges that John McCain’s long tenure as a prisoner of war trumps everyone else. But he writes "All the candidates will use their life stories to show a sense of moral purpose." How did Hillary display her sense of moral purpose?

You may not believe it, but Thomas claimed: "Hillary Clinton had a stark moral choice: whether to stay with her husband when President Clinton's philandering with Monica Lewinsky was exposed. Her decision to stand by him could not have been easy." Inside the media-Democrat complex, moral courage is not displayed by condemning adultery. It is displayed by tolerating adultery and maintaining political viability for the party in power – not to mention nicely setting up your own senatorial and presidential campaigns down the line.

A rocket attack on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad depressed one of the largest online Democratic communities today, when members of the Democratic Underground discovered that Vice President Dick Cheney survived the attack:

According to Wikipedia, the Democratic Underground claims more than 101,000 registered users, and the online community has been investigated by the Secret Service for past threats. (Cross-posted at Confederate Yankee)

I got into a pretty good discussion with my sister the other day, and I am fascinated by the ways certain battles change history. In my opinion the Battle of Hastings and Stalingrad are the 2 most influential battles of all time. I had argued with her that I thought Stalingrad beat out Hastings, but barely. I knew there were many many reasons that Hastings could be the most influential, but I took Stalingrad, because it marked the decline of the German offensive on the Eastern Front. They lost 250,000 soldiers to death or capture. The Germans were instructed to fight to the death, but 90,000 surrendered, of which only 5,000 survived the conlusion of the war. The Germans launched another offensive later called Operation Citadel, which was a huge undertaking in which the battle of Kursk took place. For those who like tanks I would suggest researching about this battle. It is the largest tank battle ever. This offensive failed as well, and they were in retreat afterwards. After the defeat of Stalingrad, the Germans had to continue to send many men and supplies to the Eastern Front. If Stalingrad had been a victory for them, they could have used many of the men and supplies they were sending to the Eastern Front, to the Western Front, and this would have created much more difficulties for the Allies in the West. Their defense in the West could have been much more formidable with those extra troops and supplies, and the outcome of the Western Front could have been much different. I think Stalin's paranoia would also affect the Soviets, because if he lost the city named after him, I think serious heads would have rolled at the Kremlin. The Battle of Moscow is also a very significant battle on the Eastern Front as well, as that also stopped the German offensive. So in the end I barely pick Stalingrad over Hastings, based on my opinion that WW2 takes on a whole new outlook if the Germans are victorious there. I thought I would open up this forum for those who are intersted in listing what you might think the most influential battle of all time is and why. You can really go back as far as you want, and say if this battle hadn't occured and these people been victorious, then you never even would have had a Stalingrad, and I concur with that, but I think the Germans have a very good chance of controlling Europe if they win at Stalingrad.

FoxNews.com is following up on the Fort Dix terror plot by probing how the three illegal immigrant suspects got into the country in the first place.

Below the jump I've posted a creencap taken shortly after 2 p.m. EDT from the Fox News front page.

Fox News correspondent Catherine Herridge contributed to the story, entitled, "Sources: Brothers Charged in Alleged Fort Dix Terror Plot May Have Been Smuggled Into U.S.":

FORT DIX, N.J. — The three brothers being charged as part of the alleged Fort Dix terror plot may have been smuggled across the border, FOX News has learned.

[...]

Four of the arrested men were born in the former Yugoslavia, one was born in Jordan and one came from Turkey, authorities said. Three were in the United States illegally; two had green cards allowing them to stay in this country permanently; and the sixth is a U.S. citizen.

Federal investigators are now checking whether the latter three lied on their immigration paperwork to remain in the United States.

http://www.townhall....

Read and enjoy.

While covering media mogul Rupert Murdoch's offer to buy The Wall Street Journal from, New York Times reporter Richard Perez-Pena uncovered a news organization with a political slant: Fox News Channel.

On the front of Monday's Business section ("Ottaways Deplore Bid By Murdoch"), Perez-Pena reported:

"Two members of the Ottaway family, a minority partner in Dow Jones & Company, released scathing statements yesterday saying that a takeover by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation would ruin Dow Jones and its crown jewel, The Wall Street Journal.

"The controlling Bancroft family said last week that family members representing 52 percent of shareholder votes opposed Mr. Murdoch’s $60-a-share bid, a steep premium for a stock that had recently traded around $36. But their statement was vague, leaving it unclear whether family members objected to the price, to Mr. Murdoch or to a sale on any terms.

Think all Hollywood elites are Bush-bashing liberals falling in lockstep with the leftwing dogma being espoused by Democrat leaders and the media that support them?

Well, if you do, you'd better prepare yourself for an alternate reality.

Actor Jon Voight, on MSNBC’s “Scarborough Country” Tuesday evening, made some statements that are likely to get him tossed out of Club Hollywood if he’s not careful.

After a brief discussion about his film “September Dawn,” Voight went into a shocking monologue about what he sees wrong in the nation today, including shots at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) and "extremists who really believe all the propaganda that they are being fed on a daily basis by very cunning professionals" (video available here):

I saw this on Drudge:

http://news.yahoo.co...

Here is another example of government sticking their hands into the affairs of a private business that was providing a service to it's customers. The gas discounts undoubtedly cut into the profits of the business, but the owner felt it was worthwhile as it brought return and loyal customers which is always in the interestes of any business that seeks to be successful (and what business doesn't want to be successful?). Apparently the state of Wisconsin is concerned about the fractions of a cent they would lose on every gallon of gasoline as a result of the discounts offered by this business. This is the kind of government interference the Founding Fathers were concerned about when they wrote and spoke about the importance of a limited government. The demands the state of Wisconsin are making are completely uncalled for and illustrates the lengths lawmakers will go to squeeze every penny they can from us and the businesses we patronize. I would not be surprised if the government's "intervention" with this business will actually turn away customers and therefore the state of Wisconsin will ultimately collect less tax revenue than they would have from this business than they would have if they left well enough alone. The law of unintended consequences is a cruel mistress...

"Good Morning America" clearly favors government parenting over the real thing.

On May 9, GMA targeted all-terrain-vehicles (ATVs) as unsafe and promoted regulation rather than parental responsibility.

The program used frightening video of an ATV rollover and undercover footage that made retailers look criminal, and interviewed a woman who lost two relatives in accidents, as well as a doctor who said ATVs are much harder to drive than cars.

"Eight states have no laws at all regulating these vehicles, 12 others have no minimum riding age," said consumer correspondent Elisabeth Leamy.

Leamy also interviewed Pam Saylor, a woman who lost her son and another relative in separate ATV accidents, but failed to point out that she is a regulation advocate.

A day after downplaying the Fort Dix terror plot story, MSNBC is promoting an NBC-Telemundo investigation into Hezbollah training camps in South America. (see screen capture below jump)

In "Hezbollah builds a Western base," Pablo Gato and Robert Windrem of NBC News report:

An investigation by Telemundo and NBC News has uncovered details of an extensive smuggling network run by Hezbollah, a Shiite Muslim group founded in Lebanon in 1982 that the United States has labeled an international terrorist organization. The operation funnels large sums of money to militia leaders in the Middle East and finances training camps, propaganda operations and bomb attacks in South America, according to U.S. and South American officials.

U.S. officials fear that poorly patrolled borders and rampant corruption in the Tri-border region could make it easy for Hezbollah terrorists to infiltrate the southern U.S. border. From the largely lawless region, it is easy for potential terrorists, without detection, to book passage to the United States through Brazil and then Mexico simply by posing as tourists.

Diane Disney Miller, the only surviving child of Mickey Mouse creator Walt Disney, condemned a Palestinian rip-off that has been used to glorify terrorism and murder to children. She called the character, named Farfur, "pure evil." (h/t LGF)

Diane Disney Miller said she was disgusted that a rip-off of her father's iconic cartoon character was being used on a new Hamas TV show to encourage Palestinian children to take up arms against Israel and America.

"Of course I feel personal about Mickey Mouse, but it could be Barney as well,'' Ms Miller, 73, told the New York Daily News.

"It's not just Mickey, it's indoctrinating children like this, teaching them to be evil,'' said Ms Miller, who owns a winery in northern California.

Here’s something you’re unlikely to see in an American newspaper or magazine: global warming might actually be good for the planet and its inhabitants.

This radical idea was advanced Monday by the German magazine Der Spiegel which did something I can’t imagine a U.S. publication having the nerve to do in this highly politicized environment: offer readers a comprehensive, balanced view of the pluses and minuses inherent in a warming earth.

How delightfully extraordinary.

Unlike most American media reports on this issue, Spiegel, in an article ironically titled "Not the End of the World as We Know It," wonderfully began with a little history on the subject to put things in a proper perspective (emphasis added throughout):

Milwaukee Alderman Micheal McGee, Jr. is definitely a chip off the ol' racist, hateful, block. After his father was recently suspended from WNOV for stating that the death of a conservative talk show host's mother was the "vengeance of God", Michael McGee, Jr. has taken over the show for him. On his first day on the job he lost no time in referring to whites as "dumb devils" and starting his own blog. Here is a quick sample of of his racist rambling:

Three of the six Fort Dix terror suspects are in the United States illegally, so I thought I'd look at how three major metropolitan newspapers reported that fact in today's papers.

Looking through coverage in the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, and the Washington Post, I found that the first two put mention of the illegal immigration status of the Duka brothers one-quarter of the way through their respective articles, while the Post buried the mention more than halfway through the article, paragraph 14 out of 26 to be exact.

Here's how each paper reported the illegal status of three of the suspects:

Los Angeles Times (paragraphs 8-9 of 36)

The suspects include three brothers, ethnic Albanians from the former Yugoslavia: Dritan, Eljvir and Shain Duka.

[U.S. Attorney for New Jersey Christopher] Christie said they were living illegally in the United States and working at a roofing business in Cherry Hill.

For general discussion and comment...

Please utilize the education with which most of you have each been blessed, and let Hillary Clinton know that a measure to revoke authorization of the Iraq War simply will not happen. It is appalling how the Democratic Party is so openly, blatantly, and willingly prepared to use the lives of our American Soldiers as a means to political gain.

It is clear that Ms. Clinton merely is suggesting such legislation because of her current political quandary. She authorized the war, but does not want to imply she made a mistake, because she would rather have others imply it for her. It is a means to allow her leverage with her own part in the Primary, as well as saving face for the general election.

This kind of delusional thinking, in the same vein as a Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore, and a traitor to the country like Harry Reid, is very dangerous to our society, our way of life. And quite frankly, it is embarrassing that the potential first female President of the United States can so easily step on the backs of our dying countrymen, to ascend to such heights.

... long live citizen journalism!

I ran across this article from the Guardian last week on Lightstalkers, and didn't really get a chance to sit down and read it through until this morning.

Is photography really dead? Andrew Brown, an accomplished English journalist in his own right, says it is. He points to the ease-of-use of modern photographic equipment, and lamenting the fact that it is "so easy" for the Everyman to take a photograph now, claims that the overall quality of pictorial stock is in decline.

In some ways, Andrew seems to be on the right track. It is infinitely easier to take a photograph today than it was, say, 50 years ago. The equipment necessa