***So, in Springfield, the St. Patrick'sDay Parade has now officially been handed over to the bars and the drunks.  There are two official 'family friendly' areas on the parade route - one block at the beginning of the parade and one two blocks at the end of the parade.  If you've ever been to a Spfld parade, you know that the last two blocks of the parade are the final dregs of the parade and nobody ever hangs out there to watch the parade. 

If Springfield just wants to have a HUGE St. Patty's Party in Downtown Spfld, do that.  Forget the parade, forget pretending that families should participate and just give yourself over completely.  This is ridiculous.

***From Dictionary.com:  ter·ror·ism  [ter-uh-riz-uhm] –noun

1.	the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.

2.	the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

3.	a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

I guess Ted Rall couldn't be bothered to look up the definition of terrorism when he wrote today's opinion piece in the SJ-R.  This is what Ted says is and isn't terrorism:

Terrorism — you can look it up — involves killing people. Hijacking a plane and flying it into a building is terrorism. Destroying property — property that, for the most part, made the world a worse place — is not.

There doesn't have to be death for terrorism.  If that were the case, each time a missile lets loose from Gaza but doesn't kll someone, that wouldn't be terrorism.  Each time a car bomb goes off in Baghdad and only injures people, that is terrorism.  Each time someone runs onto a runway in front of airplanes with a backpack on but doesn't kill anyone, that isn't terrorism.

To Ted, burning down homes, destroying property, letting research animals loose by groups like ALF and destroying years of necessary research, none of that is intended to 'coerce, esp. for political purposes.'  I guess, to Ted, all of these methods are just his brand of 'activism'.

***Really, Obama is a new kind of politician.  Really.  No, really.  Oh, that moneyfor his wife's employer?  That money right about the time she received a $200,000 raise?  Did I mention new kind of politician?