His show, "Dog the Bounty Hunter," is going back into production, an A&E official told TMZ.com.

The network put Chapman's "Dog the Bounty Hunter" show indefinitely on hold last November after a private phone conversation between the reality star and his son Tucker was posted online.

The National Enquirer posted an audio clip of Chapman using a slur repeatedly in reference to his son's black girlfriend.

Chapman apologized and vowed never to utter the word again. He has met with several black leaders over the past several months.

A premiere date has not been set, but cars and houses have been rented, and camera crews and makeup artists have been hired, according to the report.

I'd love for there to be a photo-op between him and Arnold Schwarzenegger.  How cool would that be!  More power to the little powerhouse!

World's Smallest Bodybuilder, Aditya 'Romeo' Dev of India, Causing Huge Stir

A tiny Indian bodybuilder who is less than 3 feet tall and deemed the world's smallest is causing a huge stir in his hometown and gaining international recognition, according to the British press.

 

Aditya "Romeo" Dev of Phagwara, India, is a little person who is only 2 feet, 9 inches tall and weighs not even 20 pounds, the Daily Mail reported.

  

Throngs of people crowd into the local gymnasium on a daily basis to watch him work out, according to the Mail.

"I've been training as a bodybuilder for the last two years, and by now I think I must be the strongest dwarf in the world," Dev, 19, told the Mail. "My size has never stopped me."

In 2006, after months of intense exercise, the Guinness Book of World Records named Dev the smallest bodybuilder on the planet, the Telegraph reported.

  

In addition to his bodybuilding, Dev is also training to be a dancer, according to the Telegraph.

Unlike most little people, Dev's body is well proportioned, according to the papers.

The pint-sized weight lifter is famous around India and a great source of pride to his parents.

"He has never been bothered at being so small. He has no inferiority complex. He is the jewel of our family," his father told the Telegraph.

Here are more pictures of this mini-powerhouse from the London Daily Mail.

 

  

 

 

Kudos to the writers for sticking to their guns and sticking it to the money-grubbing studio execs.

Striking writers reach tentative deal with studios

Union leaders for striking Hollywood writers said they have reached a tentative contract deal with studios and urged members on Saturday to support it, calling for an end to a three-month walkout that has crippled TV production and overshadowed Oscar season.

The breakthrough was announced via e-mail to the 10,500 members of the Writers Guild of America (WGA) who launched the union's first strike in almost 20 years on November 5 in a dispute centering on compensation for work distributed over the Internet.

"While this agreement is neither perfect nor perhaps all that we deserve for the countless hours of hard work and sacrifice, our strike has been a success," WGA West president Patric Verrone and WGA East president Michael Winship said in the memo.

Members were scheduled to meet in New York at 2 p.m. EST and in Los Angeles at 10 p.m. EST to discuss specific terms, the ratification process and an end to the work stoppage, the union added.

If reaction from union members is positive, the governing boards of the WGA's East and West Coast branches are expected to move quickly to formally endorse the pact and order striking writers back to work while the deal is submitted to them for ratification, a process that normally takes about 10 days.

In that case, board action to lift the strike would probably come on Sunday, and writers could be back on the job as early as Monday.

"We believe that continuing the strike now will not bring sufficient gains to outweigh the potential risks and that the time has come to accept this contract and settle the strike," the union leaders wrote.

The WGA memo said the tentative deal "creates formulas for revenue-based residuals in new media, provides access to deals and financial data to help us evaluate and enforce those formulas, and establishes the principle that, 'When they get paid, we get paid."'

Click here to read the rest of the article.

Click here to read about the history of the Writers Guild of America Strike.

A friend of mine forwarded me this excellent article by Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby.  His analysis is spot-on; quoting the wisdom of a great Oscar-winning actor like Morgan Freeman is a nice touch, too.

The irrelevance of Obama's color
by Jeff Jabocy
February 10, 2008

ON THE SUBJECT of Black History Month, I'm with Morgan Freeman, who described it a few years ago as "ridiculous" - for the excellent reason that "black history is American history," not some segregated addendum to it. The only way to get beyond racial divisions, he told Mike Wallace of "60 Minutes," is to "stop talking about it. I'm going to stop calling you a white man, and I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man."

Amen to that. The sooner we resolve to abandon the labels "black" and "white," the sooner we will be a society in which such racial labels are irrelevant. And what better moment to make such a resolution than this one, when white Americans by the millions are proving that the color of a person's skin is no longer a bar to anything in this country - not even the presidency.

Whether or not Barack Obama's bid for the White House ultimately succeeds, it has already demolished the canard that America will not elect a black president. His impressive win over Hillary Clinton in the Iowa caucuses could perhaps be dismissed as a fluke, but after Super Tuesday there is not much left to argue about. Obama carried 13 states last week, and the whiter the state, the more imposing his victory.

He took Utah with 57 percent of the vote; North Dakota with 61 percent; Kansas with 74 percent; Alaska with 75 percent. Idaho chose Obama over Clinton by 80 to 17 percent.

Far from being a strike against him, Obama's color is manifestly a political advantage. Not only because black voters will vote for him with enthusiasm, but because tens of millions of white voters will, too. Countless Americans plainly relish the chance to prove with their vote that they are not tainted by racial bigotry. "I confess that I plan to be moved to tears," Leon Wieseltier, the literary editor of The New Republic, has written, "on the day that I vote for a black man for the presidency of this stained and stirring country."

It isn't only liberals and Democrats who find Obama attractive. Among his supporters is Jeffrey Hart, a former speechwriter for Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. Peter Wehner, a former assistant to President Bush, writes in The Washington Post that Obama is "an appealing figure to many Republicans," because, among other things, his campaign is not based on racial grievance. "Obama, more than any figure in America," Wehner suggests, "can help bind up the racial wounds of America."

Obama is infinitely preferable to black candidates before him like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, professional racial activists whose stock in trade is the exploitation of black victimology and white guilt. As the first black candidate with a realistic chance of becoming president, Obama is understandably attracting record-setting levels of black support. But what makes his candidacy so plausible is precisely his appeal to whites - an appeal that would dry up were Obama to make racial identity the focus of his campaign. This is the interesting paradox at the heart of a campaign that is so often described as "transcending" or "going beyond" race.

Yet real racial transcendence will be achieved not when a black candidate's race is no bar to his election, but when it is not even an issue in his election. When the Morgan Freeman standard becomes the rule - when there are no longer "black" candidates and "white" candidates, because Americans will be indifferent to such labels - only then will our politics have truly gone beyond race.

There was a time in US history when anti-Italian prejudice was so intense that the prospect of an Italian-American president would have been unthinkable. When 11 Italian immigrants were lynched in New Orleans in 1891, The New York Times described the victims as "sneaking and cowardly Sicilians, the descendants of bandits and assassins . . . a pest without mitigation." During World War II, thousands of Italian Americans were expelled from their homes, and hundreds of immigrants were interned in military camps.

Yet there was little if any attention paid to Rudy Giuliani's ethnicity during his recent campaign for president. No one blamed anti-Italian bigotry when his effort came to naught. For all intents and purposes, his Italian descent was simply not an issue.

The color of Obama's skin is irrelevant to his character and to his fitness for office. Would that its significance to his campaign were nil. No, we're not there yet. But there is no faster way to a society in which race doesn't matter than to stop talking and acting as if it does.

Jeff Jacoby's e-mail address is jacoby@globe.com.

I posted a blog on February 6 outlining two reasons why I will not vote for Sen. John McCain, if/when he ultimately secures the GOP nomination for President.  This time, I would like to add to that by looking at other aspects of Sen. McCain's political past and legacy, reiterating why, based on his track record, my conservative principles prevent me from voting for him.

3.  The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA, a.k.a. "McCain–Feingold Act")

The ultimate goal of this law was to remove corruption from the political process by banning soft-money and nonpartisan issue ads by corporations and labor unions 60 days prior to a general election, or 30 days prior to a primary election.  Conservatives believe this to be a violation political speech. The consequence of this ban was the proliferation of 527 organizations, which are tax-exempt groups that influence elections. These "527s" are not regulated by the Federal Election Commission, and do not operate under contribution limits. As a result of McCain-Feingold, 527s (which are constitutionally entitled to express their views) have effectively used campaign-finance loopholes to shanghai the campaigns of party candidates.

As Brian Darling of the Heritage Foundation puts it, "The McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law has failed to remove money from politics, largely because candidates simply cannot communicate their messages without it. The only practical and effective way to limit money in campaigns is to force transparency on all campaign activities and let the public use the power of the vote to regulate the activities of candidates."

4.  The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007

It's bad enough that nationals from Mexico and other countries have successfully entered the United States illegally.   It's bad enough that they are taking advantage of American taxpayer-funded social security, medicare, welfare and other benefits to which they are not entitled - because they are here illegally.  (Heritage Foundation researcher Robert Rector has published research on how much amnesty would have cost American taxpayers.)  It's bad enough that said illegals like to hold rallies across the country to flaunt their illegal status in our country and protest measures by state and local officials to crack down on their illegal butts.  This bill, if passed and signed into law, would have granted amnest to millions of immigrants currently residing in the United States illegally.  Note my emphasis on the word illegally.  If there was ever a piece of legislation that spat in the face of a bedrock conservative principle of secure borders and respect for America's immigration laws, by giving illegals a virtual pass, this bill was it in spades. 

5.  McCain's continued reference to his military service is wearing thin.

I have all the respect for anyone and everyone who has served or is serving in the military.  However, it has become evident that Sen. McCain is using his military service for politial gain. 

Thomas Sowell puts it best:

Senator McCain's trump card is his military experience. Some say his military experience is especially valuable when we are under threat from terrorists. But is it?

John McCain's military service was both honorable and heroic. But let's not confuse that with experience relevant to being President of the United States.

John McCain was a naval aviator, an important and demanding job. But a naval aviator is not like Patton or Eisenhower.

A naval aviator does not plan battlefield strategy, much less global military strategy, which a President must oversee, with the help of experienced generals and admirals.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was Assistant Secretary of the Navy in the First World War. But he depended on General George C. Marshall for military strategy in the Second World War.

Give McCain credit where credit is due: He supported the "surge" in Iraq, which rescued a deteriorating situation. But so did George W. Bush, who has never touted his military service and Dick Cheney who was never in the military.

The most charitable interpretation of Senator McCain's constant touting of his military service is that he is simply milking it for political advantage.

It would be truly dangerous if McCain really considers himself a military expert, who can therefore ignore the advice of real military experts as President of the United States.

A man like McCain, with a history of being headstrong and shooting from the hip, is the last thing we need as President, in an age of complex global threats, including terrorists who may get nuclear weapons within the next few years.

I listened to part of Sen. McCain's speech at the recent CPAC Conference.  He did nothing to change my mind about him, "maverick" or not.  To reiterate, I refuse to put true Congressional conservatives in the unenviable position of disagreeing and wanting to challenge Sen. McCain as President if/when he attempts to go too far to the left, but feel obligated by party loyalty to publicly support him.  Is that fair to them?  Is that fair to the voters who put them in office? Is that fair to the conservative base?

No, no and... no.

Prosecutors: NYC Woman Paid Hitman $20,000 for Killing Dentist Husband

A woman charged in the execution-style slaying of her orthodontist husband exchanged scores of phone calls with the suspected gunman, then paid him nearly $20,000 after the shooting, authorities said Friday.

Dr. Mazoltuv Borukhova was arrested at her Queens home on Thursday and ordered held without bail on charges she conspired to have Dr. Daniel Malakov killed on a playground in front of their 5-year-old daughter amid a custody battle.

One of Borukhova's relatives, Mikhail Mallayev, was arrested in November on charges he was the triggerman.

"We believe she paid the shooter, Mikhail Mallayev, to kill Daniel after the couple separated and he won custody of their daughter," Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said at a news conference.

District Attorney Richard Brown said evidence against the wife included phone records showing she and Mallayev had 90 phone conversations in the weeks before the shooting, and three more shortly afterward.

Bank records also show that, following a meeting in Borukhova's office, Mallayev deposited a total of $19,800 in 10 different bank accounts.

Borukhova's attorney did not immediately respond to a phone message Friday. Both Borukhova and Mallayav have previously denied any wrongdoing.

A gunman using a makeshift silencer and wearing a black leather jacket and a dark hat, shot Malakov in the chest in broad daylight on Oct. 28 and vanished, police said.

The victim had gone to the Queens playground to take his 5-year-old daughter to see his ex-wife, a specialist in internal medicine. The couple's daughter was placed in foster care following her father's death.

Police said they recovered the silencer at the scene and later determined that Mallayev's fingerprints were on it.

Berkeley, Calif., Mayor Apologizes to Military Members Following Flap Over Council Vote

The mayor of Berkeley, Calif., has issued an apology to servicemen and women serving in Iraq following a flap over a City Council vote that told the U.S Marine recruiting station there it should leave, and if it doesn't, is staying only as "uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

The apology follows the introduction this week of the Semper Fi Act of 2008, pushed by Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., that would rescind more than $2 million in federal earmarks destined for Berkeley. DeMint was joined by five other Republican lawmakers in introducing the bill Wednesday after they were angered over the Berkeley City Council's actions.

A companion bill entered in the House has the support of 45 Republicans. No Democrats are supporting either bill.

Following a public uproar, Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates argued Wednesday that the council's actions last week shouldn't be linked to federal money dedicated to schools and other services, according to tan San Jose Mercury News. Bates is a retired U.S. Army captain.

"There's really no correlation between federal funds for schools, water ferries and police communications systems and the council's actions, for God's sake," Bates said.

But, he said: "We apologize for any offense to any families of anyone who may serve in Iraq. We want them to come home and be safe at home."

Click here to read the full story in the Mercury News.

Berkeley city officials indicated they likely would withhold now sending a letter containing the message they agreed on at last week's council meeting.

On the introduction of his bill Wednesday, DeMint released a statement saying, "Berkeley needs to learn that their actions have consequences. Patriotic American taxpayers won’t sit quietly while Berkeley insults our brave Marines and tries to run them out of town. Berkeley City Council members have shown complete ingratitude to our military and their families, and the city doesn’t deserve a single dime of special pet project handouts."

The list of items that DeMint's bill target include:

DeMint's office provided a preliminary list of items that would be subject to his proposal:

— $975,000 for the University of California at Berkeley, for the Matsui Center for Politics and Public Service, which may include establishing an endowment, and for cataloguing the papers of Congressman Robert Matsui.

— $750,000 for the Berkeley/Albana ferry service.

— $243,000 for the Chez Panisse Foundation, for a school lunch initiative to integrate lessons about wellness, sustainability and nutrition into the academic curriculum.

— $94,000 for a Berkeley public safety interoperability program.

— $87,000 for the Berkeley Unified School District, nutrition education program.

Oh, the Horror!!!

I say we send all round up all radical feminists (especially all those anti-military Code Pink biyatches from Berkeley, CA), and ship them off to Saudi Arabia.  They'll be treated like royalty [wink].


American Woman Jailed in Saudi Arabia for Sitting With Men at Starbucks

A 37-year-old American businesswoman and married mother of three is seeking justice after she was thrown in jail by Saudi Arabia's religious police for sitting with a male colleague at a Starbucks coffee shop in Riyadh, according to a report in The Times of London on Thursday.

Yara, who does not want her last name published for fear of retribution, was bruised and crying when she was freed from a day in prison after she was strip-searched, threatened and forced to sign false confessions by the Kingdom's “Mutaween” police, The Times reported.

“Some men came up to us with very long beards and white dresses. They asked ‘Why are you here together?'. I explained about the power being out in our office. They got very angry and told me what I was doing was a great sin,” recalled Yara, who wears an abaya and headscarf, like most Saudi women.

The men were from Saudi Arabia's Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, a police force of several thousand men charged with enforcing dress codes, sex segregation and the observance of prayers.

Yara says she was interrogated, strip-searched and forced to sign and fingerprint a series of confessions pleading guilty to her “crime,” the Times reported.

Yara was visited yesterday by officials from the American Embassy, who promised they would file a report.

The Times of London reports:

Yara, whose parents are Jordanian and grew up in Salt Lake City, once believed that life in Saudi Arabia was becoming more liberal. But on Monday the religious police took her mobile phone, pushed her into a cab and drove her to Malaz prison in Riyadh. She was interrogated, strip-searched and forced to sign and fingerprint a series of confessions pleading guilty to her “crime”.

“They took me into a filthy bathroom, full of water and dirt. They made me take off my clothes and squat and they threw my clothes in this slush and made me put them back on,” she said. Eventually she was taken before a judge.

“He said 'You are sinful and you are going to burn in hell'. I told him I was sorry. I was very submissive. I had given up. I felt hopeless,” she said.

Yara's husband, Hatim, used his political contacts in Jeddah to track her whereabouts. He was able to secure her release.