This is astonishing

Climate change now is a "lawful excuse" for radicals to cause property damage, according to a British court. This is a press release from Greenpeace hailing the decision:

British Court Acquits Greenpeace Activists; Says Property Damage from Global Warming Justifies Attempt to Shut Down Coal Plant
Verdict marks a 'tipping point' for climate change movement

In a victory for Greenpeace and efforts to stop global warming, a British court today acquitted six Greenpeace volunteers of attempting to shut down a coal-fired power plant in Kent, England on the grounds that they had a “lawful excuse.” The court said that the coal plant was causing so much property damage around the world from global warming that it exceeded the property damage done through shutting operations of the plant.

The acquittal is the first case where preventing property damage from climate change has been used as part of a 'lawful excuse' defense in court. The defense has previously been successfully deployed by defendants accused of damaging a military jet bound for Indonesia to be used in the war against East Timor before independence.

The Maidstone Crown Court heard testimony from NASA climate expert James Hansen, an Inuit leader from Greenland and the British Conservative Party’s environment adviser. The jury was told that the Kingsnorth Power Plant emits 20,000 tons of CO2 every day - the same amount as the 30 least polluting countries in the world combined – and that the British government had advanced plans to build a new coal-fired power station next to the existing site on the Hoo Peninsula in Kent .

The 'not guilty' verdict means the jury believed that shutting down the coal plant was justified in the context of the damage to property caused by CO2 emissions from Kingsnorth.

Lipstick on a donkey

The first "change" I would love to see in this election is everyone retiring their demands for apologies. Much to my disappointment, John McCain's campaign has now launched its own demands for an apology, something usually eminating from thin-skinned Democrats. We've got to apologize for this and for that, and it's getting so that the person who can coral the most is declared the winner. But, so what if Barack Obama referred to the McCain campaign as "lipstick on a pig?" Who cares? It was a banal comment, anyway.

Speaking of banal, Obama now is really, really mad at Republicans for allegedly trying to "swift boat" his campaign, a reference to the truth squad of Navy veterans who surfaced in the last election to challenge John Kerry's self-proclaimed heroism in the Vietnam War. If that's what Republicans are doing to Obama, I'm for it, because Kerry needed to have his fake claims smacked down. And it wouldn't hurt to have some of Obama's challenged too.

See: Obama accuses Republicans of 'swift boat politics' - CNN.com

On aborting "defective" children

You're protected by law against discrimination by employers and insurance companies for illnesses and defects that genetic testing might turn up.

But how about protecting people whose genetic diseases are turned up by testing before they are born?

Read more in the Chicago Daily Observer