Hillary Clinton had the nerve to say this yesterday:

"There has never been an administration, I don't believe in our history, more intent upon consolidating and abusing power to further their own agenda," Mrs. Clinton told the audience at a "Women for Hillary" gathering in Midtown Manhattan this morning.

Now either Hillary's been smoking some really great crack, or she takes the American people for a bunch of absent-minded fools.  If Hillary Clinton wants to find a president who abused power more than this one, all she needs to do is look for her husband, who has had more indictments and convictions around his dealings inside and outside of the White House than any other president in history. 

The White House had illegally obtained over 700 FBI files of Republican Party members.  Hell, her former campaign finance director is standing trial right now in regards to filing false disclosures of a fundraiser in Los Angeles during her 2000 campaign.  And that's not forgetting about the countless campaign finance violations through the 1996 and 2000 elections, the pardons of 2000, the impeachment charges, and her involvement in Whitewater.  I suppose the American public is supposed to brazenly ignore these things among the several scandals that made a mockery out of the Oval Office.

The truth is, Hillary Clinton as well as the Democrats are hoping the public somehow forgets or even ignores their corruption in order to focus on Republican ethics; Tom DeLay's in particular.  But the truth is that nothing DeLay has done could ever measure up to the crimes and abuses that went on by the Clinton duo and their friends.  Clinton better hope the American people do indeed have short-term memories, or she has no chance to win the presidency.

Anger is seen from both the left and the right after today's opinion was made public today.  Stevens, Souter, Scalia, Ginsberg, and Kennedy voted to confirm while O'Connor, Thomas and Rhenquist dissented, making it a 6-3 decision.

The case came down to the question whether Congress had the right to regulate intrastate marijuana use, and do federal authorities have the right to arrest and jail violators in those states that approve it's use.

I think the latter was fairly obvious; if it's a federal law, then federal authorities have jurisdiction within any American state or territory.  Hence, really this case was only to reargue whether the marijuana bans by Congress was unconstitutional, something that was only argued about five years or so ago.  And if I'm not mistaking, Thomas actually sided for Congressional power in that instance.

Although Scalia's siding with the more leftist members of the court is a surprise to many, it really isn't.  There are a number of conservatives criticizing him for the overturning of a state law, but he's also a traditionalist.  Scalia isn't willing to overturn drug laws that have been on the books and upheld by every SCOTUS since the 30's.  I have no idea of what his exact reasoning is, but as far as I know he's upheld them all, and will continue to do so.  Call that activism if you like, as it might be a fair accessment.

As for the other supporters, it's real simple:  the legal justification of the marijuana bans were tied into the interstate commerce clause, which allows Congress to regulate all interstate commerce.  During the time of the New Deal, this clause has been used to justify a number of government programs, taxes, etc that allowed FDR's programs to be declared legal.  If those justices were to throw out Congress's marijuana laws, that would mean the interpretation of the clause would have to be reconsidered, and that's a no-no. 

The idea that Congress doesn't have the express right to regulate everything that's made a law would bring other Congressional regulations to question by that same judicial precedent.  So it's not surprising to me that the other supporters upheld it either.  It's a small negative to maintain a bigger positive.

Hopefully this will be more entertaining than the other Game 7's we've seen in the playoffs this year, but I'm not so sure if it will be.  The Heat have a lot more obstacles to overcome than the Pistons do, and it's going to be tough for the Heat to pull out a win.

I'm not set on Shaq putting up a big game to save the day.  As we saw in Game 6, Shaq is too banged up to put enough points on the boards in order to beat the Pistons.  That means Dwayne Wade will have to put up a big game in the face of injury in order to get to the Finals.  And he might have to put up at least 30.

On Inside the NBA the E.J., Kenny, and Charles were saying this is the perfect opportunity for role players to step up and make things happen for their team.  But the only one that might have some success against this Detroit defense is Eddie Jones, and I don't think he'll have enough to make a difference in tonight's game.

Miami's main hope is that Detroit has the same offensive hiccups they had in Game 5, and that they are able to get some kind of production from the bench.  Wade will play in this game, but I don't know if he can have the kind of impact needed to place his team over the top.  The one good thing going for the Heat is that they are at home, where they should have a rabid Miami crowd that will be able to keep them motivated and intense.  Hopefully the home factor will help them keep this close.

If I were the Spurs, I would want Miami to win.  They are wounded and fatigued right now, and could easily be swept by a team that will have over a week off by the time Game 1 of the Finals tips off.

It was a good fight, but very poorly called.  The referee allowed it to get as dirty as it could have been, but only gave "warnings", and never bothered to penalize either boxer. 

Tszyu had an obvious knockdown in the fight, but the ref called it a low blow.  Now I can somewhat give him a pass for that, but then you're not going to penalize Tszyu for it?  Later in the fight, after Tszyu was warned for a low blow, Hatton lept in with a low blow that was obviously intentional.  Once again, no point deduction.

There is no excuse for Tszyu to quit in that fight; I don't care if he was losing every round (and the judges as well as the press had the fight pretty close throughout).  But Tszyu will think twice about going overseas to fight another contender in his home country.  That was probably the most rabidly biased crowds that I've seen in for a fight, and there's no question it gave Hatton the edge intensity-wise and probably influenced the judges as well.

Tszyu should have finished the fight, and it was wrong for his trainer to tell him to quit when there was no dehabilitating injuries.  This is the 2005 equivalent to "No Mas", and it has tarnished an otherwise great career.

But regardless, Ricky Hatton deserves props.  He is a very scrappy fighter, and gave Tszyu all he could handle in this fight, and then some.  Coming in as a 4-1 underdog, Hatton had nothing to lose.  However, I hope there's a rematch, and it'll be on American or even Australian soil.  I doubt it, but we'll see.

I have been a big fan of Larry Brown for many years.  After all, he is a Tarheel, and I recall Kansas vs. Oklahoma as the first national championship game that I watched.  I always thought he was the reason the Sixers got to the NBA Finals in 2001, and Detroit is currently the defending champions.  It's a virtual tossup between Brown and Greg Popovich as to who is the best coach in the league.

However his recent actions have been both shocking and deplorable.  I don't recall any coach in a professional league that has been playing the shell game that he has.  He should have never talked about working for another franchise (President of the Cavs) in the middle of the conference finals series .
What has the Pistons franchise done to Brown to warrant him acting in this manner?  You would think he would be somewhat gracious towards the Pistons given that he got his first world title with a team that was virtually created before he got there (I think the only starter who got there after Brown was Sheed).  Even if Brown planned to stop coaching and wanted to do something else, there's no question that he should have waited until the end of the season.

And leave it to Larry Brown to do something that would get me and Bill Walton to agree.  Listen to this rant that Walton lays on Brown on ESPN's "Mike and Mike In the Morning" that leaves no question that Brown is in the wrong.  Brown wouldn't condone a player asking to be traded in this situation.  Brown wouldn't allow this type of drama to be created in his locker room, yet he's creating it here.  Why?  This isn't fair to the players he coaches, the front office that helped create that atmosphere to win the NBA title last year, and it isn't especially fair to the fans, who's going to be pointing to all of this drama if they knocked out of the playoffs tonight or in Game 7.  Brown's actions have no justifiable excuse.

Now that I think about it, I'm glad he didn't take the Carolina job.  I don't think Baddour would have given it to him anyway, but he was definitely a name that consistently came up for it once Dean, Guthridge, and Doherty left.

Kids, here's a bit of advice:  if a cop pulls you over and tells you to get out of the car, stop what you're doing and get out of the car.

A woman in Boynton Beach, Florida had to learn that the hard way.  As you'll see in the first of two videos, the woman was pulled over for speeding - the cop said she was going 51 in a 35 - and she had a broken tail light, cracked windshield, and wasn't wearing a seatbelt.  As soon as the cop out out of the car she tried to open the door of the SUV and get out.  When the cop told her to stay in the vehicle she informed him that she would do what she wanted, and cursed him out at every turn.

The officer calls for backup, finally gets her license and registration, and goes back to the car to run a check on her.  In the second video, he comes back and tells her to get out of the vehicle, but she refuses, saying she's on the phone with someone to come to the scene.  The cop told her to get out of the SUV SIX TIMES, and in the last four warned her that she would be tasered if she did not comply.   Another officer came on the scene on the passenger side, and when he tried to take the cell phone out of her hand, she swung at him. 

That's when the officer finally tasered her.  You'll hear a very high pitched scream from the woman as she was tasered, and she hit the ground.  After she failed to place her hands behind her back, she was tasered again.

After hearing about a prior incident that left a man dead, I haven't been a big fan of taser use.  But in this instance, the officer appropriately did his job.  This woman was hostile the whole time, despite knowing she was in the wrong from the get-go, she cursed the officer out, she never responded to his requests, he asked her several times to get out of the vehicle yet failed, called someone on a cell phone and told him they had a gun pointed at her, and started to resist when they moved in on her.

She had no one to blame for that incident but herself, and even in that I bet she was being a bit melodramatic.  She acted as if she was about to die.

Last week in Durham, NC three burning crosses were found in different places around the city.  One was near St. Luke's Episcopal Church on Hillandale Rd, another was found on South Roxboro St. just off MLK Parkway (is there a city in the nation that doesn't have something named after MLK?), and there was one found downtown on Dillard and Holloway streets.

Sean Hannity is demanding an apology by Arizona State Representative Krysten Sinema over her incorrect allegation that he broke federal law by crossing the U.S./Mexico border in April. 

On his radio show today, Hannity says if he doesn't get the apology in a week, he will sue Sinema for defamation of character, and he'll have legal counsel and fellow talk radio host Mark Levin defend him in court. 

I'm not the biggest Hannity fan, but I think the woman should apologize.  If she didn't know the law, and didn't know where the actual border was, then she shouldn't have said anything about it.  Period.  She was in the wrong, and I don't think she wants to call Levin's bluff.  If the apology hasn't been given by next Friday, I wouldn't be surprised to hear about a lawsuit being filed in Arizona on the following Monday.

Now sure, this incident didn't hurt Hannity at all.  All he wants to do is embarrass this woman and the Arizona Democratic Caucus.  If I was the judge, I'd award Hannity a $1 judgement and charge Sinema with court costs, which would be stiff for wasting the court's time.  It's nothing more than a trivial lawsuit, so the best thing for Sinema to do is apologize and get this over with.

It's not that hard to figure out, actually.  The Spurs is probably the most adaptable team in the league, and can adjust their performance to suit their opponent.

But the Suns only know how to play one way:  run and gun.  Sure, Stoudamire can go buckwild on offense, but what is he going to do on defense?  Nothing.  Steve Nash has never been a defensive threat (his defense is about as easy as walking through a bubble), and thus never provided a threat to either Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili.

In other words, Steve Nash left the old Dallas in order to go to the new Dallas.  And just like the old Dallas, the new Dallas will watch the NBA Finals either at home or in the stands.  Meanwhile, the Spurs can take eight days off while they await Detroit or Miami.  That's what happens when teams try to play on only one end of the court.

Ha.  I wonder if Ambra heard about this.

At a Seattle concert featuring rapper Snoop Dogg on Saturday night, a fan caught a beatdown after getting on the stage and grabbing Snoop's shoulder.  The fan, Richard Monroe, claimed they allowed fans to come on stage.  Once he came towards Snoop and touched his shoulder, the other rappers on stage grabbed him and they gave him the worst whupping of his life.

This is the result of the beatdown: