A follow up to this and this.

The article is long, and can make you all teary-eyed with compassion for criminals, but here are bits and pieces. Click here for the entire thing.

The decision to leave was stupid and impulsive, Rose and Shannon said.

“He just wanted to take care of his family and have a life and just be away,” said Rose, in an interview from her mother’s home in Rawlins. “He didn’t want to hurt anybody or associate with anybody from prison. Nothing like that.”

I guess my question would be: Why is Rose not in jail for aiding and abetting in this escape?

Born and raised in southern Oregon, he came to Wyoming in 1984 to find work, after serving two years in a California prison for false imprisonment and assault with a deadly weapon, he said.

In 1985, Parazoo was arrested and charged with the murder of a Gillette man who’d been beaten and left unconscious near the Natrona County line. The man, Ronald Clay Tyler, died of hypothermia. Parazoo eventually pled guilty and was sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison.

The above is quoted, lest we forget Parazoo is a criminal.

While at the Wyoming State Penitentiary in Rawlins, Parazoo married Rose, a neighbor of his first wife, who had died.

Rose Parazoo, 42, said there is more to her husband than his criminal past.

“Shannon is very meticulous,” she said. “He is very artistic. When he does something, he is almost perfectionist about it. He’s talented and he’s very smart.”

Yes, too smart for a re-entry type program. He apparently needs maximum security. Just an idea.

I found this over at La Shawn’s site and thought to myself that I, too, should be blogging this story. Mostly because it has Wyoming roots. Thanks for finding this La Shawn.

By MARY CLARE JALONICK

Associated Press Writer

Sat Mar 24, 6:12 AM ET

Laura Brown, a mother with a son who fought in the Iraq war, is trying to improve conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center — one laptop computer at a time.

The 50-year-old from Cody, Wyo., was chatting on the Internet with the mother of a wounded soldier two years ago when the mother mentioned she had to print out her son’s e-mails and take them to him at Walter Reed because there weren’t enough laptop computers to go around.

Brown, whose own son had recently returned safely from the war, thought the solution to that problem seemed incredibly easy.

“It just kind of hit me,” she said. “If one person needed one, then there’s others. … I mean, my son had e-mail in Iraq. I was really stunned.”

So Brown formed a group, Laptops for the Wounded, to raise money for the cause.

Since its fundraising effort began in November 2005, Brown’s organization has donated 27 computers to military hospitals around the country — 24 of them to Walter Reed.

On Friday, Brown flew to Washington to deliver 10 donated laptops to the hospital in person.

Those computers, which were upgraded and refitted with new equipment, included Web cameras so soldiers could lay eyes on their families from afar.

“She basically just made it her mission,” said Lisa Ramdass, a case manager at the hospital who has been working with Brown to coordinate the donations.

Ramdass said the laptops are used for more than e-mail. One soldier who worked with a donated laptop couldn’t speak, and was able to communicate with his family and his doctors by typing on the computer. Others who have eye injuries use the laptops to watch movies or television up close.

The hospital, flooded with wounded from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has attracted media and congressional scrutiny in the last month, due to reports of shoddy living conditions for soldiers housed there.

Brown said she can relate with the loneliness and isolation of the wounded because she is also disabled, having suffered knee and back injuries in recent years. She is also inspired by her son, who lost his young wife to illness just weeks after they were married several years ago.

Wyoming Rep. Barbara Cubin (news, bio, voting record) said Brown’s efforts show the difference one person can make.

“Out of the goodness of her heart, she’s turned a few small donations into a national campaign,” she said.

Please note that if you click on La Shawn Barber’s Corner, she has a link you can make a donation through if you wish.

UPDATE: The Political Cowboy has been all over this — the more the merrier, though. Right, Scott?

Okay, time to post something new. I’m still out of town, but with the handy wireless signal in the waiting room area — I can get it done. I had to add a new category: hypocrites, but I figure if I just post a few stories regarding the left, it’ll get plenty of use.

I love this from One News Now:

Jim Brown OneNewsNow.comMarch 22, 2007

An outspoken global warming skeptic in the U.S. Senate questions the science backing up Al Gore’s dire predictions about climate change. Senator Jim Inhofe attempted yesterday to debunk the former vice president’s claim that global warming is a “planetary emergency” that threatens mankind.

On Wednesday Gore urged Congress to take immediate action to “save the planet” by adopting an immediate freeze on greenhouse gases. He told a Senate Environment Committee hearing that the debate on global warming is “over” because of the widespread consensus within the scientific community on the issue.

However, Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) challenged Gore’s contention that global warming threatens mankind. “You’ve claimed [there is a] strong, new, emerging consensus linking global warming to increase in hurricane intensity and duration …,” the senator observed. “Last year the World Meteorological Organization very clearly rejected this assertion, and other scientists agree.”

At the hearing, Inhofe asked Mr. Gore to take a “Personal Energy Ethics Pledge” to consume no more energy than the average American household. The Oscar-winning filmmaker would not take the pledge.

Inhofe, who has said global warming is the biggest hoax ever perpetuated on Americans, did not stop there, saying Gore lacks solid scientific evidence to back his assertion that the earth is getting sicker and needs a cure.

“This is a good one here — this scares everybody,” said Inhofe. “You said that the east Antarctica might melt, and this could raise sea levels by 20 feet — so we’re all going to die.

“However, according to many scientists, the Antarctica is gaining ice mass, not losing it,” the lawmaker continued. “In 2005, a study published in Science a team of researchers led by Dr. Curt Davis found that the overall ice mass in the Antarctica was actually increasing.”

Dang! I think I’m in love with the Senator from Oklahoma. Not many in Congress have the nerve (I can think of a better word to use, but won’t) to stand up against this charade. Thank you Senator Inhofe!

This just confirms what many conservative bloggers have been saying regarding the General Pace issue.

By Cliff Kincaid

The Washington Post claims in an editorial that there is an “uproar” over General Peter Pace expressing his view that homosexuality is immoral. (web site) This is another manufactured “scandal” designed to put a top official, in this case the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, in a bad light. This “uproar,” such as it is, has come from papers like the Post and homosexual rights activists. It is an effort at intimidation, pure and simple, and thought control.

At this point in the media-generated controversy, Pace has not apologized but has been forced to say he should not have emphasized his own personal views on the subject. Some stories are saying Pace has expressed “regret” or “mild regret.”

Whatever the outcome, and it is still possible that Pace could be forced to resign over this, the message has been sent: do not offend the powerful homosexual lobby, including the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA), which on Thursday, March 15, will be sponsoring a New York benefit hosted by ABC News reporter Brian Ross. The “special guests” will include Natalie Morales and Meredith Vieira of NBC News, Martha MacCallum of Fox News, Soledad O’Brien of CNN, and Robert Lipsyte of the New York Times. Corporate sponsors include ABC News, CNN, and NBC Universal.

As the NLGJA website puts it, the event is a “special evening for a great cause,” bringing together “a glittering collection of some of the brightest names in media, journalism and entertainment.”

Is it any surprise that the media have made the Pace comments on homosexuality into a national controversy, even scandal? The national media and the homosexual rights movement seem to be one and the same. But that’s a story that news consumers aren’t being told.

Leading the charge, the Post found Pace guilty of making “public expressions of intolerance.” The subheadline of the editorial was, “Gen. Peter Pace denounces gays and lesbians who are busy defending their country.” But he said nothing of the kind, and the paper knows it. The deceitful editorial is another attempt to intimidate people into not expressing opinions that contradict the politically correct views of the radical left. The Post, which runs announcements of homosexual “weddings,” will not be content until homosexuality is celebrated in the military and the schools as just another alternative lifestyle. (web site) Pedophilia, of course, can be defined by its apologists in that manner.

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth points out that the Pace view is consistent with the writings of the Apostle Paul, who denounced homosexuality as an unrighteous behavior that would keep someone out of heaven. (web site) So if the Post finds what Pace said objectionable, it is also taking issue with the traditional Christian view of homosexuality. Of course, it’s easier for the Post to write an editorial denouncing Pace than attacking a disciple of Jesus Christ who doesn’t serve in the Bush Administration.

This controversy says more about the Post than it does about Pace. It shows that a major American newspaper has become a virtual house organ of the gay rights movement. And it shows that this paper will not hesitate to use its power and influence to try to intimidate those with different views. It is the Post, in fact, which is being intolerant.

I was among those who strongly criticized Ann Coulter for using “faggot,” a disparaging term about homosexuals. What Pace did, by contrast, was simply express his personal view, in an interview with the Chicago Tribune, that homosexual conduct is immoral. (web site) The Post editorial said in passing that Pace was “entitled to his opinions, of course,” but went on to complain about the impact of his words. What the paper is really saying is that he is entitled to his opinions but he should keep them to himself. Frankly, the paper wants him to shut up.

We are living in strange times when smoking is considered a serious danger to one’s health, and something which cannot be tolerated in most areas of public life, but a lifestyle linked to a raging epidemic of disease and death is regarded as a civil right that must not be criticized and even deserves to be celebrated.

The Post, in its editorial, carefully avoided the issue of what exactly male homosexuals do. Howard Phillips of the Conservative Caucus calls them “anal-sex practitioners.” That may sound shocking to some, but it is a fact nonetheless. The Post omitted this information in order to make the case that open and out-of-the-closet homosexuals should serve in the U.S. military. We don’t want to think about such things but we must as long as we have a media establishment, led by the Post, which wants public approval for engaging in such practices in the U.S. military and other areas of society.

When the Post devotes some of its precious and limited editorial space to denouncing Pace for his personal view of homosexuality, this is a big deal. You can be sure the paper isn’t doing this just to be fashionable. It seems obvious that one or more editorial writers on the paper are card-carrying members of the homosexual rights movement or sympathizers. In this connection, it is interesting to note that the paper has made financial contributions to the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association. (web site)

Also consider the fact that the Post ran a February 24 editorial about the “Death of a Gay Rights Pioneer” by the name of Barbara Gittings. (web site) I have been writing about the homosexual rights movement for over 20 years and I had never heard of her before. It turns out, according to the Post, that she is the “Founding Mother” of the homosexual rights movement, a lesbian who led the fight to bring more homosexual propaganda into the public libraries. As long as we are on the subject, Post readers are also entitled to know that the founding father of the gay rights movement was Harry Hay, a communist who supported pedophilia as just another “sexual orientation.” (web site) But don’t look for any investigations by Post Watergate reporter Bob Woodward into the sordid history of the homosexual rights movement.

The Post is one strange paper. On some matters, such as its treatment of the Joe Wilson/Scooter Libby affair, the Post can break through the liberal mold and offer straightforward and well-researched editorials. But on the issue of homosexual rights, the paper is strident to the point of sounding like the Washington (Gay) Blade, the local homosexual paper.

The Post has not yet called for Pace’s resignation. But that could come if this media-generated “uproar” continues. Those who believe in freedom of speech, traditional values, and fair and responsible journalism should stand solidly behind Pace.

This just brought a smile to my face. I was telling a co-worker that Tieki Rae had text’d me the following message today from Washington DC:

Madam speaker just made the first anti-Iraq war statement. She got booed ha ha

I wondered to myself, “Was Tieki Rae the only one booing?”

Turns out, I guess not. I know booing can be considered as being rude, but when you bash our military and call them losers, well, I think you deserve to be booed.

By Ian Swanson

March 13, 2007

Members of the main pro-Israel lobbying group offered scattered boos to a statement by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) that the Iraq war has been a failure on several scores. The boos, mixed with some polite applause, stood in stark contrast to the reception House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) received minutes earlier. Most of the crowd of 5,000 to 6,000 stood and loudly applauded Boehner when he said the U.S. had no choice but to win in Iraq. Pelosi and Boehner were speaking at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) annual meeting. AIPAC has not taken a position on the war in Iraq or the supplemental spending bill to be considered this week by the House Appropriations Committee, but much of Boehner’s speech was about the future of the Iraq conflict. Boehner sought to link the fight in Iraq to the future of Israel, as he said a failure in Iraq would pose a direct threat to Israel. Pelosi said the U.S. military campaign in Iraq had to be judged on three accounts: whether it makes the U.S. safer, the U.S. military stronger and the region more stable. “The war in Iraq fails on all three counts,” Pelosi said. Some of the crowd applauded before catcalls and boos could be heard. A spokesman for AIPAC argued the boos were in response to those clapping for Pelosi. AIPAC leaders have said about 6,000 of their members are in town for this week’s annual meeting, which ends today. Members are set to lobby individual lawmakers on the Hill for the rest of today. A priority for the group is to convince Congress to approve tougher sanctions on Iran, which is seen as a growing threat to Israel.

I wonder if I was actually the first “reporter” to hear this news — right as it was happening?