WITH THE STROKE OF HIS FRAUDULENCY'S PEN JUST YESTERDAY, Americans entitled to collect the special advance on 2008 tax refunds (otherwise known as tax rebates designed to protect socioeconomic cohesion and stability) will be given what amounts to a Government mandate to engage in wasteful, frivolous and unnecessary consumer spending orgies once the cheques arrive sometime before the Memorial Day long weekend.

In particular, the kind having no regard for the practical or utilitarian (especially so among the Lower Classes which His Fraudulency's Great Within expects to "benefit" from these advances on refunds all the more).

Might I suggest, for one, having said rebates put to practical use--as in a donation to reduce the National Debt, now $9 trillion and climbing (and being kept all the more so "for political reasons," but the Great Within doesn't want you to know this as fact, let alone Fox Noise).

*************

BECAUSE "IT'S A SMALL WORLD, AFTER ALL," HERE'S SOMETHING WE "MORALLY SUPERIOR" AMERICANS CAN IDENTIFY WITH:

The BBC's Urdu Service commissioned a public-opinion survey of 1,476 representative Pakistanis nearly a month ago, and found some rather interesting opinions among the Pakistanis as:

• 64% say the resignation of President Perez Musharaf would help improve the general stability of Pakistan;
• 49% think Musharaf's "election" in November was a sham and should be deemed null and void;
• 72% disapproved of President Musharaf's job performance in general;
• 44% believe that the upcoming Parliamentary elections will be free, fair and transparent; and
• 51% are optimistic that conditions could improve six months on.

Now, if the same general set of questions were asked of the Americans (with the necessary changes in questions), you could expect the GOP's propaganda machine to turn rather ballisto to the point of paranoid if the results turn out pretty much as in Pakistan's case.

*************

WHO AMONG THOSE IN POSITIONS OF CONFIDENCE AND TRUST ON THE RELIGIOPOLITICAL RIGHT will be the next to get caught in the Lindbergh Terminal Tap Dance?

Sen. Larry Craig (GOP/ID), perhaps its most infamous victim from last summer's entrapment arrest, was reprimanded by the Senate Ethics Committee for what it called "improper conduct which has reflected discreditably on the Senate."

As the Associated Press reportage on the reprimand adds:

The six members of the committee—three Democrats and three Republicans—told Craig they believed he "committed the offense to which you pled guilty" and that "you entered your plea knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently."

The panel said Craig only tried to remove his guilty plea after his attempts to avoid public disclosure had failed.

"Your claims to the court ... to the effect that your guilty plea resulted from improper pressure or coercion, or that you did not, as a legal matter, know what you were doing when you pled guilty do not appear credible," the letter said.

The panel also said Craig should have received permission from the ethics panel before using campaign funds to pay his legal bills. Craig, who is not running for re-election, has spent more than $213,000 in campaign money for legal expense and public relations work in the wake of his arrest and conviction last summer.

The committee said it had reached no conclusion about whether use of campaign funds was proper, but it said "it is clear that you never sought the committee's approval, as required," to use the money for legal expenses.

Any future use of campaign money for legal bills will be seen as "demonstrating your continuing disregard of ethics requirements," the ethics committee wrote in its three-page letter.

The panel also admonished Craig for showing the arresting officer a business card that identified him as a U.S. senator. Craig has been reported to have told the officer at the time, "What do you think about that?"

The committee wrote, "You knew or should have known that a reasonable person in the position of the arresting officer could view your action and statement as an improper attempt by you to use your position and status ... to receive special and favorable treatment."

Your Correspondent would certainly love to hear of where Rev. Fred "G-d Hates F***" Phelps or GOP Presidential wannabe Mike Huckabee, among other specimens of religiopolitical homophobia claiming openly to be acting in defence of "Traditional Moral and Family Values," gets caught in that Lindbergh Terminal Tap Dance.

And unwittingly, never mind their use of the same "wide stance" patsy Sen. Craig tried to use as a "get out of jail" card.

=============

IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MSP), as is @ the heart of this item, the Lindbergh Terminal is their facility for domestic and North American flights.

Its counterpart for international flights and charters is the Humphrey Terminal, about a mile to the southwest.

Both Lindbergh and Humphrey Terminals have free shuttle connexions on Metro Transit's light-rail line between downtown Minneapolis and the Mall of America via Ft. Snelling and the VA Medical Centre Minneapolis.

*************

IF YOU FIND IT RATHER DIFFICULT TO KEEP IN TOUCH WITH YOUR PARENTAL UNITS, imagine how Japanese Crown Prince Naruhito feels when he's been advised by the Imperial Household Agency to spend more time with his parents, Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko.

As the BBC explains:

Japan's crown prince has been told by the bureaucrat who runs the Imperial Household to visit his parents, the emperor and empress, more often.

The Grand Steward of the Imperial Household Agency, Shingo Haketa, used a news conference to reveal his unusually frank advice for the Crown Prince.

A year ago the emperor mentioned that he had not had many opportunities to meet his granddaughter, Princess Aiko.

Crown Prince Naruhito responded that he would try harder.

Mr Haketa's latest announcement was unusual, although perhaps not surprising.

He revealed that there was still a problem, and that he had taken the crown prince and his family to task for not visiting his parents often enough.

He said he had raised the issue with the crown prince on several occasions.

Now he has gone public with his criticism.

Whispers

So little information about the imperial family is released here that an announcement like this always causes a stir.

Japan's imperial household is portrayed in the gossip columns and society pages as a rigid, traditional institution.

The emperor and his family, it is whispered, are told what to do and when to do it by courtiers determined to preserve the majesty of the institution.

The crown prince's wife, Princess Masako is ill, and cannot carry out royal duties.

The illness is thought to have been caused by the strain of adapting to the strict rules imposed by her minders in the palace since she married into the imperial family.

Now there will be even more pressure on her and her husband. And when their next news conference comes around, you can be sure they will be asked just how often they take tea with the emperor.

*************

THE ARROGANT EGO TRIP OF WORLDNETDAILY, a conservative-leaning "news" portal notorious for its well-documented feast of distortion, "spin," misinformation and exaggeration, seems set to become unwound.

Witness the following statement of WorldNetDaily, as quoted by ConWebWatch, announcing out-of-court settlement of libel, defamation and malicious prosecution charges in a case they were claiming would decide the future of investigative journalism:

A lawsuit for libel, defamation, false light and conspiracy was filed by Clark Jones of Savannah, Tennessee against WorldNetDaily.com, Tony Hays and Charles H. Thompson II arising out of a press release issued by WorldNetDaily.com on September 18, 2000, and articles dated September 20, October 8, November 24 and December 5, 2000, written by Tony Hays and Charles H. Thompson, II, posted on WorldNetDaily.com's website.

The original news release by WorldNetDaily.com of September 18, 2000, and the article by Hays and Thompson of September 20, 2000, contained statements attributed to named sources, which statements cast Clark Jones in a light which, if untrue, defamed him by asserting that the named persons said that he had interfered with a criminal investigation, had been a "subject" of a criminal investigation, was listed on law enforcement computers as a "dope dealer," and implied that he had ties to others involved in alleged criminal activity. These statements were repeated in the subsequently written articles and funds solicitations posted on WorldNetDaily.com's website. Clark Jones emphatically denied the truth of these statements, denied any criminal activity and called upon the publisher and authors to retract them.

Discovery has revealed to WorldNetDaily.com that no witness verifies the truth of what the witnesses are reported by authors to have stated. Additionally, no document has been discovered that provides any verification that the statements written were true.

Factual discovery in the litigation and response from Freedom of Information Act requests to law enforcement agencies confirm Clark Jones' assertion that his name has never been on law enforcement computers, that he has not been the subject of any criminal investigation nor has he interfered with any investigation as stated in the articles. Discovery has also revealed that the sources named in the publications have stated under oath that statements attributed to them in the articles were either not made by them, were misquoted by the authors, were misconstrued, or the statements were taken out of context.

WorldNetDaily.com and its editors never intended any harm to Clark Jones and regret whatever harm occurred. WorldNetDaily.com has no verified information by which to question Mr. Jones' honesty and integrity, and having met him, has no claim or reason to question his honesty and integrity. WorldNetDaily.com wishes him well.

(The suit referenced was settled out of court for undisclosed and confidential terms.)

But then again, as ConWebWatch notes:

This is yet another black eye for WND's reporting. It retracted two articles in 2005 for making false claims and has a long history of shoddy journalism.

The funny thing is that at the end of the article, it links to the donation page to WND's legal defense fund, which states that "WND has never lost such a lawsuit." Time to update that, guys.