NeoCons to take over Canada...Pirates!...Kerry says no to Alito

Good Morning...

Well, you can cross Canada off your list of "safe" places to seek asylum after today. Looks like the Conservatives (re: Bush Allies) are about to be placed in power with a 'limited mandate'. Bush had one of those too, and look what it got us.

ST. ANDREW'S WEST, Ontario -- Among the regulars at Quinn's, an old stone tavern in this small town east of Ottawa, the decision was unanimous: Every man at the bar planned to support the Conservative Party in Canada's national election today, after years of voting for Liberals or not voting at all.

What they hoped to gain was simple: ''Change, hopefully for the better," Fern Guindon, 57, a semi-retired police dispatcher, said one afternoon last week. ''The Liberals have been in too long, and it's time to clean up the government."

An appetite for change has swept Canada this winter, bringing a surge in support for the country's Conservative Party. Heading into the final weekend of campaigning, the Conservative candidate for prime minister, Stephen Harper, was leading in some polls by 10 percentage points over the incumbent Liberal leader, Paul Martin. The Conservatives appeared poised to end 13 years of Liberal Party rule, a tenure marked by increasing economic prosperity but marred by a government kickback scandal and deteriorating relations with the United States.

Such a shift in attitudes would be striking in a country known for leaning left, where the government provides healthcare, and whose citizens applauded the decision by former Liberal prime minister Jean Chretien not to send troops to Iraq. The Conservatives have attracted voters with a platform that echoes priorities of Republicans in the United States: lower taxes, a beefed-up military, tougher sentences for drug crimes, and less federal government interference in local affairs. (Continued...)

Folks, I've spent an awful lot of time in the Maritimes....and they don't like the government any more than we do. (and this was under the liberals.) There was always an undercurrent of tension, and often idle talk about secession. Considering how disaffected us New Englanders are, maybe there's hope for my little fantasy nation of the "Federated States of Amerada" after all. (New England and the Maritime Provinces joining together.) Ah, one can dream!

And how about this little tidbit? Seems that two hundred years after defeating the Barbary Pirates ("To the shores of Tripoli....) the US Navy is still at it.

DUBAI -- US sailors boarded a suspected pirate ship in the Indian Ocean and detained 26 men for questioning, the Navy said yesterday. The 16 Indians and 10 Somali men were aboard a traditional dhow that was chased and seized Saturday by the US guided missile destroyer USS Winston S. Churchill, said Lieutenant Leslie Hull-Ryde of US Naval Forces Central Command in Bahrain. The dhow stopped 54 miles off the coast of Somalia after the Churchill fired warning shots, the Navy said. US sailors boarded the ship and seized a cache of small arms. Sailors aboard the dhow told Navy investigators that pirates hijacked their vessel six days ago near Mogadishu and used it to stage attacks on merchant ships. The crew and passengers were being questioned aboard the Churchill yesterday to determine which were pirates and which were legitimate crew members, Hull-Ryde said. (AP)

I'm really glad we have that letter of Marque and Reprisal from Queen Stephanie Miller!

Lastly this morning, as we near the vote on Justice Alito, it's worth it to remember what the fight is about...who do you want making YOUR medical decisions....you, your doctor, or Congress? They're about to make that decision for millions of women in these United States.

INDIANAPOLIS -- Taking direct aim at Roe v. Wade, lawmakers from several states are proposing broad restrictions on abortion with the goal of forcing the US Supreme Court -- soon to include two new justices -- to revisit the landmark ruling issued 33 years ago yesterday.

The bill under consideration here would ban abortion except when continuing the pregnancy would put the woman's life or physical health in danger of ''substantial permanent impairment." Similar legislation is pending in Ohio, Georgia, and Tennessee.

The bills are in direct conflict with the Supreme Court's 1973 rulings establishing abortion as a constitutional right. Roe v. Wade and its companion case, Doe v. Bolton, asserted that doctors may consider ''all factors . . . relevant to the well-being of the patient," including emotional and psychological health.

In the years since, states have adopted a variety of laws designed to restrict access to abortion or require women to consider alternatives. Those efforts are expected to continue this year; many states are considering proposals to impose new licensing standards on abortion clinics or to require women seeking abortion first to view ultrasound images of their fetus and discuss with a counselor the pain a fetus might feel during the procedure.

More than 50 such bills were passed in 2005 -- twice as many as in 2004, according to the abortion rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America.

Increasingly, lawmakers opposed to abortion are seeking bolder measures.

Republican Represenative Troy Woodruff, serving his first term in the Legislature, wrote House Bill 1096 knowing that it would conflict with Roe v. Wade. That was precisely his point: He wants his ban appealed to the Supreme Court, in hopes that the justices will overturn Roe and give states the power to make abortion a crime. ''On an issue that's this personal, it should be decided as local as possible," Woodruff said. ''We either want these procedures, or we don't. . . . And I don't."

The debate is unfolding as the Senate prepares to vote this week on Supreme Court nominee Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr.

At least a dozen states have criminal laws banning abortion. They cannot be enforced as long as Roe v. Wade remains binding. In theory, they could take effect immediately upon a reversal....(Continued)

So, there you have it. Let's get busy.