LA County, California, Paris Hilton.

http://www.california-drunkdriving.org/laws.html

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/lis/dui/felony.htm

California

Vehicle Code §§23152, 23550, & 40000.15

non-injury DUI offenses are generally misdemeanors, a 4th or subsequent offense is a felony if offender is sentenced to incarceration in a state prison

http://dui.findlaw.com/articles/1448.html

ANSWER:

In recent years, the liberal press has become increasingly upset with conservative religious people who maintain the rightfulness of having their political views stem from their religious ones on issues like abortion, gay rights, and welfare. Such views, according to the media, are illegitmate and even threaten the balance of church and state within our society.

Trouble is, though, liberal journalists don't apply this standard consistently. While the media are adamantly opposed to religious motivations on cultural issues, rarely do you hear the media grouse about Christians and Jews who oppose capital punishment on religious grounds. That's because religion is like anything else to the radical left--a means to an end. In the eyes of the media, the moral value of anything or anyone is directly proportional to its usefulness to liberalism.

It's for this reason that I highly doubt you'll hear any complaints from the press gallery about the latest initiative of Pope Benedict XVI, promoting the idea of human-caused global warming:

Does it get much lower than this?

After first extolling the "F--- Bush" headline, MSNBC's David Shuster, substituting for Tucker Carlson today, later engaged in a grotesque game of "gotcha," exploiting an Amercan soldier killed in Iraq to make his partisan point.

Chatting with Newsweek's Richard Wolffe and MSNBC analyst Craig Crawford, talk turned to the controversy surrounding the editorial in the Colorado State student newspaper headlined "Taser This: F--- Bush" [f-word spelled out in headline].

Wolffe went first, and was patently delighted by the incident. With a hearty grin, he observed . . .

If you are a Clinton and a magazine has a negative story on you…then just bribe or threaten them.

Early this summer, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign for president learned that the men’s magazine GQ was working on a story the campaign was sure to hate: an account of infighting in Hillaryland.
So Clinton’s aides pulled a page from the book of Hollywood publicists and offered GQ a stark choice: Kill the piece, or lose access to planned celebrity coverboy Bill Clinton.

Despite internal protests, GQ editor Jim Nelson met the Clinton campaign’s demands, which had been delivered by Bill Clinton’s spokesman, Jay Carson, several sources familiar with the conversations said. Source

Ed Morrisey has the ultimate question:

Scott Pelley conducted a very tough interview with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad which aired on Sunday's 60 Minutes, but on Monday’s Early Show Pelley was very generous in his personal assessment of the man. Host Harry Smith and Pelley agreed that Ahmadinejad is "crazy like a fox" while Pelley also hailed Ahmadinejad as "incorruptible" and "modest." Pelley contended the dictator, who denies the Holocaust, wants Israel destroyed and is causing the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Iraq, is a lot smarter than Westerners believe and is even a "friendly" guy:

The important thing, I think, Harry, to understand, he's described in the West as a madman, crazy, that's not the case. I found him to be as many politicians are, very engaging, very friendly, he's clearly not mad, he's sane. In fact, he's very wily I would tell you.

Maybe Ahmadinejad should announce his candidacy for 2008?

MSNBC.com highlights the AP story with the headline "Gay characters disappearing from network TV." But as is often typically the case, the situation is not as dire as it seems. The first paragraph reads:

A new report says a total of seven series on the five broadcast networks feature regular lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) characters this season, down from nine last season. The number has dropped for the past three years, according to the annual "Where We Are on TV" study by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.

"Studies" of this type will never produce "satisfactory" results since they would require an increase every year! In addition, with the "massive" decrease of two whole shows not featuring gay characters this season, doesn't this mean that it is likely some other "underrepresented group" thus gained representation?

Update below

Heavens no
Say it ain't so
She's bloggin' yet again
Ms. Rosie O., aka Ro
On Dan Rather, her tragic friend:

yes
it has to shift
dan rather
saying there is a man behind the curtain
that he will not pretend
at one time being a journalist meant something
when we had a free press in this country

when we didnt try to dumb down
america
fast food
crap

it will kill u
in the end

While ABC’s Chris Cuomo played softball with Columbia University president Lee Bollinger on the upcoming speech of Iranian president Ahmadinejad, CNN’s John Roberts directed tough questions to John Coatsworth, dean for Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs. Roberts opened the interview with a question which summarized Ahmadinejad’s record. "Here's a leader who's advocated the destruction of Israel, denied the Holocaust, and is accused by our government, the United States government, of supplying both fighters and equipment to insurgents in Iraq, to kill U.S. troops. Why would you ever want him on your campus?"

Hello everyone. I find sites such as this very interesting, not specifically sites that call them conservative but also those that claim they're liberal. I've been browsing these sites for some time now and it's very evident that there's a lot of hate and anger towards those who live in the same country as yours, by the way I live in Canada.

There's of course a lot of information these days about the USA that's going around in the world and it's quite sad, frankly, to see a country like the US so... divided. It's as if, either you're conservative, or you're liberal, and to those who are conservative only conservative ideals are correct. If you're liberal, only liberal ideas are correct. I don't like to call any idea conservative or liberal but I'm just saying them for the sake of this post. Is there no middle ground? Why is the US brought to such a simplistic idea that either you're conservative or liberal? I'm sorry but I just can't quite understand why people seem so frustrated. Reading sites like this and other, so called "news busters" for the left or right just seem so childish.

That great liberal electronic short bus that is the Daily Kos offered the blogosphere another gem yesterday morning. DKos diarist laxmatt posted a poll on Sunday giving readers two choices for U.S. president, the current occupant George W. Bush or Iran's Mahmoud "Holocaust? What Holocaust?" Ahmadinejad.

The question reads, "I would rather have as President of the United States..." and lists the aforementioned presidents. I suppose this is on the same wavelength as the HuffPo blogger who said that at least Hitler, unlike President Bush, "meant well."

Roughly 24 hours after laxmatt posted his poll, Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs found that Bush was leading but A-jad still had a respectable plurality in his favor: 45 percent.

At the time of this posting, Bush's lead is up, but roughly 4 in 10 poll respondents still would prefer the music-hating, Sharia law-loving A-jad.

For a comprehensive listing of NewsBusters coverage of Daily Kos, click here.

The recently notorious "F*CK BUSH" publication was very intriguing to me. Once again the left seems to enjoy their usual double-standards on current issues - when it comes to free speech the world's fasciast dictators and terrorists are welcomed to our universities with open academic arms...

But would they also welcome Pat Robertson - a combat-decorated U.S. Marine - in this same glorious spirit of "free speech?" Or would even our president be accorded the same respect as Iran's is right now...?

Based upon my extensive observations over the years I would have to say F*CK NO! When it comes to conservatives our universities magically shift from "free speech champions" into glorious prosecuters of "hate speech" for assertations such as Robertson's against abortion and the homosexual life style, as well as many others... 

So what's the deal lefties? Does an intention to "wipe Isreal off the map" qualify as hate speech in any way? If not then why not?

Democratic presidential aspirant Hillary Clinton appeared on all five Sunday morning interview shows, but not all raised two controversies of interest to conservatives and, even when they did, not all took a tough approach to her lack of condemnation of MoveOn.org's “General Betray Us” ad and the donations gathered for her by now-captured fugitive Norman Hsu. ABC's George Stephanopoulos and NBC's Tim Russert brought up both matters -- though Stephanopoulos did so in the gentlest way -- CBS's Bob Schieffer asked about Hsu and not “Betray Us,” while Fox's Chris Wallace and CNN's Wolf Blitzer skipped Hsu but raised “Betray Us.”

No one pressed Clinton on how at the hearing with General Petraeus she said his report required “the willing suspension of disbelief.” Only Wallace, on Fox News Sunday, pointed out how Clinton had voted against a Senate resolution condemning the MoveOn ad: “Senator, you have refused to criticize the MoveOn.org ad about General Petraeus. And in fact, this week you voted against a Senate resolution denouncing it.” In contrast, on ABC's This Week, Stephanopoulos presumed Clinton was disturbed by the ad as he asked: “Why not speak out earlier?” On the Hsu case, Stephanopoulos approached the issue from the concerns of other Democrats: “A lot of people look at this and say they're afraid they're going to go back to the days of 1996 when there were some campaign finance violations that many Democrats feel cost President Clinton a couple of points in the final days of the election. How do you assure them that's not going to happen again?” Only NBC's Russert, on Meet the Press, used Hsu to remind viewers of Johnny Chung's illegal 1996 donations to the Bill Clinton campaign.

Los Angeles Times reporter Matt Lait failed to inform readers that a critic of overcrowded jails is himself a convicted felon. [No, this is not a NewsBusted joke but check the bottom of the post if you want to make it one.]

What's more, Stephen Yagman is no petty one-time offender, notes Patterico:

There’s just one little thing about Yagman that The Times’s Matt Lait neglects to mention: Yagman is going to have a hard time continuing to represent these inmates . . . because he has been convicted of numerous felonies in federal court, and is likely headed to federal prison.

Indeed, the State Bar has taken notice, and has put Yagman on interim suspension. As the Metropolitan News-Enterprise reported on September 14:

Journalists like to tell us about their professionalism and the many layers of editors that ensure their accuracy. However, somewhere in those layers of editors, have reporters lost the ability to perform basic research? In the case of Reuters reporter Jeff Mason, it would seem to be so. Mason wrote an article on California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's Monday speech on global warming, in which he wrote,

President George W. Bush pulled the United States out of the Kyoto accord, saying it unfairly burdened rich countries while exempting developing countries like China and India.

It's not enough that the media is waving the white flag of defeat in Iraq but now they're declaring yet another war lost. NBC's "Today" co-host Meredith Vieira seemed so convinced that the U.S. had lost the war in Afghanistan she was perplexed when Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai didn't share her assessment of failure. On the Monday "Today" show, in a taped interview, a bewildered Vieira responded to Karzai's statement of victory with: "What have you won?"

The following exchange occurred in the 7am half-hour of the September 24, NBC "Today" show:

On Monday’s "Good Morning America," co-anchor Chris Cuomo conducted a mostly softball interview with Columbia University President Lee Bollinger about his decision to host Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the prestigious school. Rather than grill the University president about the unpopular decision, Cuomo offered friendly questions, such as when he wondered, "What value do you think Ahmadinejad's comments will add to the debate in this country?"

The ABC host also appeared to have left an actually compelling question on the cutting room floor. At the end of what was apparently a pre-taped piece, Cuomo observed to co-host Diane Sawyer that Bollinger would consider inviting Osama bin Laden. He claimed, "Even when we brought up Osama bin Laden for an invitation, it wasn't dismissed. No one was dismissed." And yet, that query isn’t actually in the segment at all. Wouldn’t such a shocking answer be big news? At the very least, one would assume, that quote would be included in the interview. It should also be noted that Sawyer responded defensively to Cuomo even referencing the missing bin Laden question. She quickly added, "Yes, but [Bollinger] says the invitation has not gone to Osama bin Laden."

Scientists from all over the world are coming out strongly against an inexcusably hysterical article recently published by the planet's leading wire service.

As NewsBusters reported Saturday, the Associated Press published an unbelievably disgraceful article about global warming induced sea level rises supposedly destined to wipe out large amounts of American coastal communities in the next 100 years.

Sen. James Inhofe's (R-Oklahoma) communications director, Marc Morano, has received e-mail messages from all parts of the globe in the past 24 hours strongly denouncing this piece:

Do student journalists understand the difference between free speech and common sense? If they are at Colorado State University, the answer appears to be a resounding no. According to the Associated Press, the editorial staff of the student-run Colorado State University newspaper The Rocky Mountain Collegian published an editorial which in its entirety read'Taser This... F*** Bush'. Then the student staff claimed that it was all about free speech,

Collegian Editor David McSwane said a group of seven student editors discussed the statement for several hours before agreeing to publish it. "We felt it illustrated our point about freedom of speech," McSwane told 7NEWS. "I think we could write 250 words and ramble on and I don't think anyone would pay attention."

So what exactly was their point?

When liberal journalists put on their political pundit hats to ostensibly handicap the policy stances of Republican politicians, you can rest assured that conservative or center-right stances will almost always be panned as political/electoral suicide.

Time magazine's Karen Tumulty is no exception in her recent Swampland blog post, "SCHIP: A Really Dumb Fight for Bush to Pick." in which the veteran reporter took President Bush to task for his veto threat for Democratic legislation that seeks to expand the size and mandate of the federally-backed State Children's Health Insurance Plans (SCHIP).