This year, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security bought Edward Koorse a new Ford pickup truck.

If terrorists attack somewhere near Cattaraugus County, where Mr. Koorse is the director of emergency services, he will use the $27,000 truck to haul a huge trailer full of the decontamination equipment that the state bought him last year. But that scenario doesn’t seem very likely in the quiet farmland of southwestern New York State.

So in the meantime, Mr. Koorse uses the pickup to drive to work.

"I went no frills," he said of his vehicle. "It doesn’t have the fancy-schmancy stuff."

Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Mr. Koorse and dozens of officials like him in rural counties around the state have found themselves with more federal money than they know how to spend on their modest counterterror needs. The Observer reviewed the three main 2004 grant programs, based on figures from the state Office of Public Safety and interviews with emergency-management officials in 32 of the 57 counties outside the city. The results showed that most local officials spent the money filling existing needs with doubtful connections to stopping Al Qaeda.

For example, Ontario County (pop. 100,000) is purchasing a climate-controlled mobile command post, said Jeffrey Harloff, director of the county’s emergency-management office. Mr. Harloff will buy the vehicle with his share of the Department of Homeland Security’s main grant to the state. How will he use the command post? It depends on who’s asking.

"If it’s the federal government asking me, it is for the intended purpose of W.M.D. incidents and HazMat incidents," Mr. Harloff said. "In reality, we’re going to use it for everyday stuff in our office."...

Kathryn,

The Supreme Court of Canada handed down a decision on same-sex marriage this morning. The Court opinion was sought by Parliament as a way of obtaining the green light for legislation proposed by the governor that would redefine marriage. In short, the government got its green light but the specifics of the case are still interesting.

The government had sent four questions to the court: (1) whether the national Parliament had sole authority to enact a redefinition of marriage (as opposed to the Provincial legislatures), (2) whether redefining marriage would violate Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, (3) whether the protection of religious freedom in the Charter prevented religious officials from being forced to perform same-sex marriages and (4) whether a redefinition of marriage was mandated by the Charter.

On the first question, the Court decided that the national Parliament had sole authority to define marriage but could not legislate on who may (or must) perform the marriages. On the second question, the Court ruled that the Charter did not prevent a redefinition of marriage (rejecting arguments that the definition of marriage was settled at the time the Charter was created and thus could not be changed) so Parliament could go ahead with its proposed legislation. On the third question, the Court held that “absent unique circumstances” the Charter prevents compulsion of religious officials to solemnize same-sex marriages or requiring religious facilities to be used for such marriages. Somewhat surprisingly, the Court did not answer the fourth question saying that since many Provincial courts have already redefined marriages and the government has not appealed those decisions, the answer is probably settled. This refusal, however, preempts any use by Members of Parliament that they were forced to enact legislation by the Court.

In theory, then, Parliament could reject the government bill to redefine marriage. So, the debate now shifts to the Parliament with news reports suggesting the bill will be formally introduced early next year. ... P.S. The decision is online here.

Mr. Robinson,
As [a] classical music archivist.., I get queries similar to yours fairly frequently so when I read your request on the Corner, I decided to have a go at it. Alas, I can find no carols that mention dogs. However, I do remember a children's hymn of thanksgiving, no. 313, in the Episcopalian 1940 Hymnal (a far better hymnal than the 1982) entitled, "We Thank You, Lord of Heaven." I've pasted it below. In the second stanza, please note the reference to "dogs with friendly faces," a line that delighted me as a kid and does so now.

According to website whence I copied the text the words are by "Jan Struther," pseudonym of Joyce Maxtone Graham, author of "Mrs. Miniver." We thank you, Lord of Heaven,
For all the joys that greet us,
For all that you have given
In earth and sky and seas;
The sunlight on the meadows,
The rainbow's fleeting wonder,
The clouds with cooling shadows,
The stars that shine in splendour?
We thank you, Lord, for these.

For swift and gallant horses,
For lambs in pastures springing,
For dogs with friendly faces,
For birds with music thronging
Their chantries in the trees;
For herbs to cool our fever,
For flowers of field and garden,
For bees among the clover
With stolen sweetness laden?
We thank you, Lord, for these.

For homely dwelling-places
For bread to stay our hunger
And sleep to bring us ease;
For zeal and zest of living,
For faith and understanding,
For hope of peace unending?
We thank you, Lord, for these.

Kuhn complains that we pajamahadeen have "no code of ethics, or even an employer, to enforce any standard." But help is coming: "Beginning next year, the F.E.C. will institute new rules on the restricted uses of the Internet as it relates to political speech."

Time for the blogosphere to fight back, given that, unlike, say, CBS and FOX., the pajamahadeen also tend to lack attorneys on retainer to defend our First Amendment rights. I have no desire to see NRO's Kathryn Lopez in the defendant's chair because an article in NRO criticized some politician three months before an election. Neither should the Bush Administration.

HarperCollins just released Michael Crichton’s latest novel, State of Fear, today. The subject matter was officially top secret until release, although a Crichton essay in last Sunday’s Parade magazine telegraphed the thesis comprehensively: the environmental movement is using junk science to scare the public. Mr. Crichton’s essay and -- from what I can glean today on the Internet -- his book, aim to debunk such fear-mongering.

First off, I’d like to welcome Crichton to the conservative movement.

But just a cotton-pickin’ minute: Isn’t the reason for Crichton’s fame the very fear-mongering he now decries? Crichton didn’t make his fortune from ER, after all. He built his reputation as a technical visionary through a series of apocalyptic novels warning the public about the dangers of whatever technology happened to be perceived as sufficiently leading-edge at the time. Consider that Crichton has asked us to be alarmed by the prospect of deadly viruses brought back by the military from space (Andromeda Strain); advanced computer technology producing homicidal robots (Westworld); seizure-preventing neuro-implants creating, instead, a Frankenstein’s monster (The Terminal Man); biotechnology used not to ameliorate disease or feed the hungry, but to reintroduce lethal – and hungry -- dinosaurs into the environment (Jurassic Park, The Lost World); and most recently, nanotechnology entrepreneurs (in order to appease rapacious venture capitalists!) creating an intelligent and inevitably malicious hive-like creature which immediately does its best to re-enact the Invasion of the Body Snatchers storyline (Prey). And this is just a partial list.

I suppose that I should just be grateful that Crichton – who definitely has a sense for what’s popular – is ratifying the growing conservatism of the American public. But the hypocrisy is still just a little mind-blowing

So, now is come our joyfulst feast;
Let every man be jolly;
Each room with ivy leaves is drest,
And every post with holly.
Though some churls at our mirth repine,
Round your foreheads garlands twine;
Drown sorrow in a cup of wine,
And let us all be merry.

Rank misers now to sparing shun;
Their hall of music soundeth;
And dogs thence with whole shoulders run,
So all things there aboundeth.
The country folks themselves advance
With crowdy-muttons out of France;
And Jack shall pipe, and Jyll shall dance,
And all the town be merry.

Winter Wonderland
(to the tune of "Winter Wonderland")
Dog tags ring, are you listenin'?
In the lane snow is glistenin'.
It's yellow, not white - I've been there tonight,
markin’ up my winter wonderland.

Q: Yes, Mr. Secretary. My question is more logistical. We’ve had troops in Iraq for coming up on three years and we’ve always staged here out of Kuwait. Now why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromise ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles and why don’t we have those resources readily available to us? [Applause]

SEC. RUMSFELD: I missed the first part of your question. And could you repeat it for me?

Q: Yes, Mr. Secretary. Our soldiers have been fighting in Iraq for coming up on three years. A lot of us are getting ready to move north relatively soon. Our vehicles are not armored. We’re digging pieces of rusted scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass that’s already been shot up, dropped, busted, picking the best out of this scrap to put on our vehicles to take into combat. We do not have proper armament vehicles to carry with us north.

SEC. RUMSFELD: I talked to the General coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they’re not needed, to a place here where they are needed. I’m told that they are being – the Army is – I think it’s something like 400 a month are being done. And it’s essentially a matter of physics. It isn’t a matter of money. It isn’t a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It’s a matter of production and capability of doing it.

As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time. Since the Iraq conflict began, the Army has been pressing ahead to produce the armor necessary at a rate that they believe – it’s a greatly expanded rate from what existed previously, but a rate that they believe is the rate that is all that can be accomplished at this moment.

I can assure you that General Schoomaker and the leadership in the Army and certainly General Whitcomb are sensitive to the fact that not every vehicle has the degree of armor that would be desirable for it to have, but that they’re working at it at a good clip. It’s interesting, I’ve talked a great deal about this with a team of people who’ve been working on it hard at the Pentagon. And if you think about it, you can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can be blown up. And you can have an up-armored humvee and it can be blown up. And you can go down and, the vehicle, the goal we have is to have as many of those vehicles as is humanly possible with the appropriate level of armor available for the troops. And that is what the Army has been working on.

And General Whitcomb, is there anything you’d want to add to that?

GEN. WHITCOMB: Nothing. [Laughter] Mr. Secretary, I’d be happy to. That is a focus on what we do here in Kuwait and what is done up in the theater, both in Iraq and also in Afghanistan. As the secretary has said, it’s not a matter of money or desire; it is a matter of the logistics of being able to produce it. The 699th, the team that we’ve got here in Kuwait has done [Cheers] a tremendous effort to take that steel that they have and cut it, prefab it and put it on vehicles. But there is nobody from the president on down that is not aware that this is a challenge for us and this is a desire for us to accomplish.

SEC. RUMSFELD: The other day, after there was a big threat alert in Washington, D.C. in connection with the elections, as I recall, I looked outside the Pentagon and there were six or eight up-armored humvees. They’re not there anymore. [Cheers] [Applause] They’re en route out here, I can assure you. Next. Way in the back. Yes.

My nomination and permanent appointment to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has been pending before the full Senate for more than one year. The recess appointment given to me by President Bush on January 16, 2004 expires when Congress adjourns. Opposition by some Democratic senators prevented an up or down vote on my nomination. A minority of senators prevented the majority from confirming me to a permanent position on the Fifth Circuit. The actions of the minority leave me with no alternative than to retire as Congress adjourns.

I thank Senator Trent Lott for fighting for my nomination. He made Herculean efforts on my behalf. I thank Senator Thad Cochran for his consistent and steady support. I thank my son Congressman Chip Pickering who fought hard for my nomination, my reputation and the image of Mississippi. I thank President George Bush for nominating me in 2001, in 2003 and in 2004. I am grateful for his strong support throughout the process, including his invitation to the White House to support my nomination, and then for giving me the recess appointment.

My confirmation struggle lasted four years. Although I would prefer confirmation, I am in good spirits and at peace with the result. My faith is strong. I will continue to be involved in community and civic affairs. I will also speak out on issues relating to confirmation reform. I feel I can be a constructive voice in this vitally important debate.

The bitter fight over judicial confirmations threatens the quality and the independence of the judiciary. The mean-spiritedness and lack of civility reduces the pool of nominees willing to offer themselves for service on the bench. For the first time in the history of the Senate, judicial nominations were blocked by filibusters.

The recent election demonstrated that the American people rejected this unprecedented obstruction by the minority Senate leadership. Those voices will continue to be heard until the confirmation process is reformed and judicial filibusters ended.

Extreme special interest groups opposed my nomination primarily due to their hostility to any nominee with strong religious convictions who personally disagrees with them on abortion, marriage and references to God at public ceremonies and institutions. They demonstrate their intolerance and religious prejudices not just in opposing my nomination, but also that of the Catholic nominees who hold deep religious beliefs. These groups believe nominees with committed religious values are not qualified to serve on America’s federal courts, despite the fact that our judicial records, statements and testimony demonstrate a commitment to uphold the law and current precedents. These far left groups cowed Democrat leadership into opposing my nomination. In doing so, they pushed those Senators out of the American mainstream, some out of their Senate seats, and the Democratic Party out of entire regions of the country.

I thank all of the Republican Senators who without exception supported my nomination. I also thank Democratic Senators Zell Miller, John Breaux and Ben Nelson and the only Senate Independent, Jim Jeffords, for supporting my nomination and their courage to fairly examine my record.

I will always be grateful to the people of Mississippi - both black and white, both Democrat and Republican - who supported my confirmation with their prayers, their words of encouragement, letters of support and trips to Washington to speak on my behalf. The people of Mississippi are a constant source of encouragement to me and my family. Most of all I want to express appreciation to my wife who walks with me each day through this journey. Margaret Ann and I are at peace. I look forward to the opportunities to contribute to my State and community in the future. I am blessed by my experiences on the Court and the work of all those who serve the Court and the administration of justice.

SEN. John Kerry's wife: "The job of a political spouse is to say, 'Hey, idiot . . .' It enables the partner to remind the person of who they are — or were — and of the sudden discrepancies of that person's inner core. You have to be able to say to them, 'You didn't used to think like that.' "

Great piece from Amir Taheri in the Jerusalem Post [Nod to Andrew Sullivan]:

In his recent foray into Ramallah, Britain's Foreign Secretary Jack Straw identified the Palestine-Israel conflict as the most important issue between the West and the Muslim world. Straw was echoing the conventional wisdom according to which a solution to that problem would transform relations between Islam and the West from what is almost a clash of civilizations to one of cuddly camaraderie.

But what if conventional wisdom got it wrong?

I have just spent the whole fasting month of Ramadan in several Arab countries, where long nights are spent eating, drinking coffee and, of course, discussing politics.

There are no free elections or reliable opinion polls in the Arab world. So no one knows what the silent majority really thinks. The best one can do is rely on anecdotal evidence. On that basis, I came to believe that the Palestine-Israel issue was low down on the list of priorities for the man in the street but something approaching an obsession for the political, business, and intellectual elites.

When it came to ordinary people, almost no one ever mentioned the Palestine issue, even on days when Yasser Arafat's death dominated the headlines. When I asked them about issues that most preoccupied them, farmers, shopkeepers, taxi drivers and office workers never mentioned Palestine. ....

"Right now there are 22 active conflicts across the globe in which Muslims are involved. Most Muslims have not even heard of most of them because those conflicts do not provide excuses for fomenting hatred against the United States.

Next time you hear someone say the US was in trouble in the Muslim world because of Israel, remember that things may not be that simple."

So, the whole family's up because Lucy's got a post vaccine fever, and well, we do these things as a group (note: trip to Mexico may be postponed). So I thought since I'm up anyway, I'd just sneak every single thing Kathryn doesn't want in the Corner in here with a single link!"

Behold the picture of everything!