Euphemisms: Gotta love 'em

An AP article today was headlined "Saudi's Back Mideast Plans." Metro picked this one up as a top international story. The lead read - brace yourself, this is my favorite part- "Saudi Arabia said Wednesday that it would seriously consider attending a Middle East peace conference proposed by the Bush Administration for later this year..."

"Seriously consider."

Let's contimplate all of the things I seriously consider on a daily basis:

Quitting smoking. Buying a house. Filing bankruptcy to avoid medical bills. Moving to Canada. Jumping from roof to my nieghbors roofs, just to say I did it. Dying my hair green... hey you only live once. Stalking Angelina Jolie. The amount of profit generated by Pat's Steaks. Parenting. The best blend for an Apple Martini. And, more.

So, let's see... according to the AP definition of "seriously consider," I must be an un-American, suicidal,alcoholic stalker with self-image problems, conflicted ideas of finance, and a deep seeded desire to procreate.

"Seriously consider."

I think I will seriously consider taking every story I read on the Mideast with and entire box of Morton's Salt.

Optimism for reception of lesbian family rights

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in favor of a non-biological lesbian mother, granting her custody over the children she helped raise. The court found that the it was in the best interest of the children to stay in the custody of the non-biological mother, citing her ability to provide more stabilty for the children. This was a break from the traditions of the court which has historically ruled in favor of the biological parents in custody cases.

Reaction from the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community emphasized the importance of providing healthy homes for children and family rights, finding that aspect of the case to be more essential than LGBT equality.

A Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article quoted LGBT leader Lee Carpenter:

"These things are frequently framed as gay rights issues, in terms of the parents' rights. That's partly true. But the part of the story that's missing is it's very important for kids," said Leonore F. Carpenter, legal director for Center for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights, which represented Ms. Jones, along with attorney Maureen Gatto, Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights.

"A child in a homosexual household deserves the same rights as a child in a heterosexual household," she said. But she emphasized that "This isn't just about gay families. Any [third party] who has been acting as a parent can apply this."
Read More!

I was pleased to find on a LiveJournal account by Booju_Newju a posting that presented the Post-Gazette article with a question: Should biology play a part in custody?

Comments invariably said that the interest and safety of the child must come first in custody cases, even from those who stuggled with the idea of a same-sex couple raising children.

McCain still unclear on gay marriage

I have been looking for a breif statement by John McCain on same-sex marriage. While I think this one is a bit too brief, McCain is not even afforded time to elaborate, the question does come across loud if not clear:

He is for a ceremony, but not for same-sex marriage. In other words, he is still being elusive on the issue.

I included the commentary from Netscape, because I thought it was interesting to see how this clip was percieved by many people across the country. It never ceases to amaze me how the majority of the population has not yet learned Politician-Speek. You have to listen carefully to these guys because they are paid to be our servants, yet they are masters of spin and vagueness.

Check out the link to the clip under View Story.

Get your news here, its better than USAToday

First, forgive me for the series of posts linking to other blogs. I went browsing through Technaroti and found some quality material. Amidst it was this gem: Five Public Opinions.

I found a new source for my daily dose of culture, politics and world affairs, and of course, it is coming from abroad. I only looked at the last couple of days, but these pieces got me hot enough that I felt they needed to be shared.

Hillarious, and dead on.

There's a "week that wasn't" piece with some priceless stories.

• A kid burning down his churche because they weren't teaching the Bible in his way. What a postmodern revolutionary this kid is.
• The Pentagon downgrades homosexuality from a "mental disorder" to a "condition." It always makes me feel good to know that we are 5 years behind China on anything, especially when it's on social matters.
• And, A Texan launches a complaint for non-hostile coverage of a gay marriage... I have nothing to say to that.

I also dug the piece on the Klan. Unreal.

This guy is motivating me to move to Australia. Is everyone this openminded down under? I wonder.

Google is taking over the world

Next stop... YouTube.

For those of you who haven't heard, YouTube and Google are in negotiations. Google has proposed nine figures to the creators of YouTube. Startling when you realize that YouTube is presently not for profit.

Media experts believe that Google's size, combined with the sheer size of audience at YouTube will create a new market that broadcast companies simply can't compete with, changing viewing patterns. Finally, American broadcasting is going to be without commercials... or will it?

Google may sell advertising rights within the content of video steams, which would suck, and most people would stop using it. Otherwise, we may truly be walking into unkown territory... open forum broadcasting without commercials. Keep you eyes peeled.

Read more on the details at PoMo.

Pope "Eggs" Benedict and the Turkey. Or, was it Bologna?

Perhaps the media is having a hard time processing the importance of the palpal visit to Turkey.
Reuters is raving about Turkey's "welcome" to the Pope Benedict XVI. United Press International says that the Pope's visit is "easing tensions." But, the Muslims in Turkey don't seem to be singing the same tune.

Let the gainsaying begin.

Reuter's went on to say that fears of large protests were "unfounded." Why, then, were there 3,000 police officers needed to keep order?

If the response was so "positive" to the Pope's visit, why, according to the Pope's own blog, were there only 250 people in attendance at the open air mass he conducted at the shrine at Efes?

(BTW, I think its awesome that the Pope, 79, has a blog, even if it is pure PR. I conjured the image of the Pontiff sitting at an iMac typing away at his Blogger account and laughed for about 15 minutes solid.)

ABC, Small Gov Times, and CNN say that thousands have been in protest since prior to the Pope's arrival. All of them pulled the story from the contradictory Reuters wire.

Nicely done modern media.

Perhaps the coverage should be contradictory. It's fitting, considering that Pope "Eggs" Benedict is under such scrutiny in the Muslim world.

Recall September, when Eggs made a speech in Regensburg, Germany that inflamed the Muslim world quoting 14th Century Christian Emporer Paleologus who said that the Prophet Muhammad had brought the world only "evil and inhumane" things. (Read more on this statement)

Muslim protests followed.

The "Sausage-fest" of Vatican cronies apologized. Even after Muslim extremists destroyed a couple of churches and murdered a nun in Somalia, Eggs did not.

On the issue of Christian-Muslim relations, Eggs seems to be set on saying and doing all that the politicians cannot, and speaking with a firm, intellectually conservative voice.

So, why is he in Turkey, a Muslim country? After all, Eggs publically objected to Turkey's application for membership into the EU in 2004, saying the country is "in permanent contrast to Europe."

The media's message: (If you read between the lines)

Eggs and his sausage-fest of advisors still believe that Islam is connected with violence. When al-Qaeda in Egypt spoke out to say that the Pope's visit is part of a "crusader campaign," the Vatican spokesman Rev. Federico Lombardi translated it as a threat of violence.

He said that they are not concerned, but that "[T]his type of message shows once again the urgency and importance of a common commitment of all forces against violence."

The Issue of Palestine
The Pope is not a Crusader. Rather, he is a firm believer in non-violence. He believes that an intellectual conversion is the only genuine one and that violence corrupts the process of personal conversion.

But, the Palpal history is not unblemished when it comes to Muslim-Christian relations, and when Egg's positions on Islam, Turkey and the EU are brought to the table for a discussion about violence, crusading and Palestine, that history cannot be disregarded.

Eggs recognizes that the Turkish people are different. Unlike the majority of Christians in Europe, they are strong supporters of Palestine. Without a reconcilitation on such a volatile issue in world politics, the two idealogical sides have no place entering into an economic or a political contract.

Forget violence. Forget John Paul's legacy of cooperation and mediation. Forget the EU. The root of this visit is, on the eve of Turkey's enduction into the EU, to remind the world that the Turkish people stand against Israel.

And who better to highlight a religious divide in Jerusalem than the Pope himself?

More election follow-up: Nearly the worst report I have ever read.

I hate to bring disrespect to other people's writing, but if this is the product we are printing, there is no wonder why the public is not interested in news anymore.

John Smith is the editor of the Religion section of the Reading Eagle. He wrote a report on the key issues that brought voters to the polls this midterm election, headline: "Moral issues key in election results."

It seems that the point he was trying to come to was that voters were displeased about the moral stances of the candidates, and this was there primary motivation in hading to the voting booth.

Quote, after quote, after quote.

There is no rhyme or reason here.
In fact, the truth that I came to out of quotes in Smiths' report is this: First, middle Pennsylvania, like middle America is far more conservative than the rest of the state; and second, more people turned-out because they were dissatisfied with the status quo.

We're at war, John, and everyone hates it.
Remember.

I think what John was trying to say is that voters do have an array of issues on their collective radar, but he failed to convey the message effectively, because he failed ot recognize the growing disconnect between rural and city life. He may have hit his audience in Podunk, PA, but it was dishonest and incomplete.

Check out the same argument, more complete and sure of itself, from a city dweller.

Now if we could only merge these two discussions.

The Philadelphia Inquirer tried, but they missed by making the same mistake as John Smith in Reading: a declaritive statement about the political landscape. It is a good assessment though, if we are forced to make an educated guess.

Wikipedia Blocked in China

Less than one week after lifting a year-long ban the infamous user-created and edited encyclopedia, the Chinese government has again denied access to Wikipedia in several areas of China.

The People's Republic of China reportedly blocked access to the site in October of last year to prevent over-exposure on controversial issues such as Tibet and Taiwan. The block was officially lifted in the english version on October 21, and the Chinese version on November 13.

But, many users report recieving an error message when trying to access the site. Residents and reporters in the region believe this is a false message, that the government is still regulating access on the site.

Read more.

Philadelphia newspaper strike, Temple News ignorance

The Philadelphia Newspaper Guild voted overwhelmingly to strike this week if their contract demands aren't met. Will Bunch was impressed according to his sentiments on Attytood, the Daily News blog.

As for me, I received a hillariously frantic email from one of the Temple News, who shall remain nameless. According to this email, the Daily News planned to send Temple students out wandering the streets of Philadelphia on Halloween night, roaming in search of a story. They then planned to use whatever we came back with for a City Section... I have to tell you, if this is the level of understanding that the editors at Temple News have of teh newspaper industry, I am terrified!

Stay on your toes.

As much as the people complain about media bias in America, there remains the startling reminder that people throughout the world face far more censorship and progandizing. With the death of prominent Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya, we should take a moment to be reminded of the First Amendment and the quality of balanced journalism produced in this country.

Although American media outlets often place an undue emphasis on profits, an content does suffer as a result, the fact remains that places such as China, Russian and Iran do not have access to information as we do here in the States.

In Russia, a journalist was just shot for her coverage of human rights violations. Ted did an excellent write-up on it. In China, to mention criticizing the government is taboo, even for a media scholar. In Iran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad began, in mid-September, filtering the Internet in an attempt to cease all "citizen reporting" via blogs, and return the country to a more controlled state as it was under the Shah.

But, let us not forget the responsibilty we hold in preserving our rights to free speech in the US. And, let us not become apathetic in our pursuit of informed news. As al-Jazeerah pointed out in an opinion article, the United States is guilty of censorship of a different kind: sanitation. Let us not forget that it was the credulousness of the American media that allowed us to go to war in Iraq. A tenacious media would have doggedly pursued the claims of the Bush administration. Instead, propaganda was taken at face value, until it was too late.

stay on your toes.

Gay Marriage: A threat to the family?

According to Stuart Laidlaw, the Faith and Religion Reporter for the Toronto Star, same-sex marriage has become a threat to the foundation of society.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, the comment was framed as paraphrase of the Catholic church. However, Laidlaw made an unattributed reference to same-sex marriage being harmful to "the very foundation of society - the family." Check it out. It's in the second to last paragraph.

Let us reflect on why this statement is out of line:
1. It is unethical to editorialize in a piece written as news.
2. A news piece should include responses from more than one stakeholder in order to
provide balance.

Maybe Laidlaw should give a stab at The Kid by Dan Savage, a lesson in Savage Family Values. He just might find a more, shall we say, academic undestanding of marriage.

Marvin Harris, the late professor of anthropolgy at Columbia University, studied what he called "cultural infrastructure," a term that is, in the philosophical sense, close to Laidlaw's "very foundation of society". Harris taught practical ways of viewing sociological devices. On marriage, he said that its universal application is the creation of "affinal ties" (in-laws).

According to this view, same-sex marriage is healthy for society because all individuals are linked to one another through affinal ties, creating an increasingly vast network throughout the society. The focus then becomes on social, political and economic strengths built through a marital union rather than sexual behaviors.

I am certain that Harris' theories would be dismissed as he was a Marxist.

Laying the smack down.

Don Walten, evangelist preacher and founder of Truth Ministries, went on a rant this week about Rosie O'Donnell in a Florida magazine called Witness (see the full article). In his bluster, Walten addressed a variety of topics ranging from the national doctorine of seperation-of-church-and-state to Islamic values. He turned each of these topics on their head, shook them out and then used them to accuse O'Donnell of ignorance.

The piece was birthed out of a comment that O'Donnell made on ABC's morning talk-show The View. Apparently, O'Donnell's fellow co-host, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, was in the middle of a speech about the dangers of militant Islamic extremists, when she was interupted by a statement that sent Walten on a writing-spree. O'Donnell compared fundamentalist Islam with fundamentalist Christianity saying, "Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America where we have separation of church and state."

Walten decided to refute that statement in a "humorous way".

"While poking fun at Rosie for her serious gray cell deficiency is tempting, [I limited] myself to poking holes in her absurd assertion," Walten said.

Walten first attacked the notion that there is an actual seperation of church and state in the United States.

"To begin with, there is no such thing as separation of church and state in America," he said. "The words 'separation of church and state' are nowhere to be found in our Constitution."

He quoted the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment to prove it.

While Walten is correct in respect to the Constitution, he failed to recognize that the doctorine is recognized in Supreme Court law and is found in the texts and writings of our Founding Fathers (proof). The doctorine was referred to in numerous cases that have defined our concept of civil rights, and in conjunction with the Fourteenth Amendment, it has been applied to states and localities as well.

An example that Walten should be familiar with is Abington School District v Schempp (1963), which officially banned prayer in public schools. A follow-up case, Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), created the "Lemon test", which established that a publicly sponsored school must have a secular purpose, must neither advance nor inhibit religion, and must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion.

A history/ civics lesson:
A government that does not have seperation of church and state would, in fact, have a state sponsored church. For example, in the United Kingdom there is the Church of England - also known as the Anglican Church - which was founded by Henry VIII when the Catholic pope would not grant him a divorce. Henry VIII made himself, as king, the head of the church. Today, Queen Elizabeth II is the "Supreme Governor of the Church of England".

Our government allows room for the practice of any and all religions, and is not directly tied to any religious organizations in order to prevent biases. Although Christian principle's are central to the government and moral structures in the United States, they are not protected by the law any more than those of Jehovah's Witnesses, Jews or even Muslims.

Walten would have us believe that freedom of religion is corrupt. He would have us believe that allowing people to choose for themselves is dangerous. And, he would have us believe that the United States is as much a theocracy as, say, Iran or Saudi Arabia.

"In Rosie O'Donnell's twisted interpretation of the Constitution, our government must never act in accordance with Christian beliefs or convictions. If it does, it is acting in cahoots with the church and in violation of the Constitution," he said. "Thus, if the church condemns homosexuality, the government is constitutionally bound to condone it by legalizing its practice and sanctioning same-sex marriages."

Walten also stated that O'Donnell would be killed for her statements in an Islamic state. He said that "...Rosie O'Donnell, who would be imprisoned or executed for the crime of homosexuality in a Muslim country, to denounce Christianity, the very faith upon which our country's freedoms were established, as tantamount to Islam is more than a little preposterous...In a Muslim country, however, she'd still be in the closet; or worse, she'd be in the gulag or a grave."

(An imporant note: A Muslim Country is one in which the majority of is citizens are Muslim. The majority of these countries have secular governments and are governed by secular laws. An Islamic country is one that is government by Islamic law. The laws against homosexuality are not related to a region, but rather, a religion.)

The United Nations Commission on Human Rights and organizations such as Amnesty International have given numerouse reports on the issues of gender identity and sexual orientation in recent years. Although there are laws prohibiting "homosexual acts" in Islamic nations, the excerise of these laws is dependant on the country itself. For example Iran, a country notorious for its human rights violations, has recently been in the spotlight for the beheading of two homosexual men.

Walten's rant had O'Donnell killed in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. In Riyadh, 250 people in attendence of a gay wedding were arrested in August. However, 230 of them were released the same day. It is believed that the rest of the people were detained for illegal drug use.

As an aside, Honduras, a Catholic country, has been in on the Amnesty International watchlist for killings and discrimination as well.

In truth, Islam as a religion, is evolving on the issue of homosexuality in the same way that Christianity is. There are many unanswered questions, and in countries where civil and human rights are not held to the same standard that they are in the United States, there is still a great deal of intolerance toward homosexuals. However, Muslims are bound by teachings of the Qu'ran to love others as themselves - same as Christians are by the Bible. The right to judge is left to God alone. Don't believe me, read what an imam had to say, or check our what the Qu'ran says.

Foley artistic sound-off.

Fo‧ley  /fo~li/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[foh-lee] –adjective :
of or pertaining to motion-picture sound effects or soundtracks: a Foley artist; the Foley editor.

Apparently the Mark Foley scandal has become a mirror to the media. While many in the American public are standing on the sidelines gasping for the various reasons that they find this scandal offensive, the media is using it for catharsis.

The true political leanings of a newspaper have always been broadcast on the editorial pages, and it is interesting to see the variety of perspectives being taken by papers nationwide. Here is Philadelphia, the opinions range from utter disgust and accusations of hypocracy (The Philadelphia Inquirer), to anger at the fact that Foley is hiding behind "gay" and defaming the gay community (Philadelphia Gay News).

Nationwide, the opinion is even more diverse than that.
Media Matters gave an impressive, comprehensive rundown of what the papers are saying.

Whatever the stance on the Foley scandal is, the fact that these papers are taking a hardline approach on it proves that the public has a plethora of hardline opinions as well. Remember that a paper dies without circulation, and therefore, it will not print material that scares the public away. People are prone to read the papers that they agree with... at least that's the way its supposed to work. In the case of Foley, many issues that divide this country have come to the surface:
-Gay Marriage, the weapon of mass distraction.
-Government corruption, the conspiracy theorists never go away they merely gain different supporters.
-Child pornography, we can't leave out the Catholic Church.
-Obsession with scandal, what will one day be the death of us all.

Now, take a look at that slate. Do you see any real political issues? Anything that shakes the earth? Any discussions of war, Iraq, people dying, soldiers doing multiple tours in at Fort Sandbox, or how the Bush Administration and Congress lied to the American public about its intellegence in order to create a conflict with an old foe? No. Not here.

My dad always says, "The best play in baseball is the sqeeze." (For clarification on the sqeeze, click here.) Mark Foley has laid down the best bunt in recent history, and the Republican Party is giving is on its way to sqeezing the media to another Democratic defeat. Although they are trying to spin it as the "rank hypocrisy" of "GOP leaders" in a scandal that has served as a "hard lesson for a party in which 'family values' has been a political mantra," (Lebanon Daily News) the truth is that the massive amount of attention being paid to Mark Foley is only a distraction from the real issues facing this country in the midst of election season.

Mark Foley. The greatest Foley artist of them all. Creating background music for the Bush Administrations cover of an unfounded war. God forbid that be a topic for election debate.

The best I've seen.

Hu Jintao, President of China, and Shinzo Abe , the new prime minister of Japan are scheduled to meet in Beijing.
WII FM - What's in it for me?, Right?

Reuters created a "Fact File" on the relationship between the two quarreling nations that is the best I have seen yet. It summarizes the history of conflict between the two nations, touches on the utter hatred that they have for one another and manages to explain the reasons why this is important to the rest of the world in 500 words or less.

And where was it published? None other than Aljazeera.

So, what is in it for the average American? According to Reuters, the US should be concerned about the development of a relationship between the two Asian powers. Japan topped the US in trade with China in 2004, and Japan is working to quicken its role as a world policing agent, stepping up its relations with China to create a buffer as North Korea expands it nuclear missle tests.

Great summary. Check it out, here.
If only American journalism could be so informative.

Focus on Foley failure.

Focus on Michael Gaynor, a lawyer from New York summed this one up well on renewamerica.us:

Finley Peter Dunne (1867-1936), American writer and humorist, was right:"Politics ain't beanbag." The Mark Foley scandal demonstrates that yet again.

Mr. Foley, a Republican Congressman who rejected some fundamental values shared by the bulk of Republicans, promptly resigned as a Congressman (thereby avoiding expulsion); took the rehabilitation clinic route Congressman Patrick Kennedy, Democrat of Rhode Island, had followed (again) earlier this year; publicly announced that he is gay; and, in addition to claiming an alcohol problem, claimed that forty years ago he was molested for a couple of years by a clergyman he never saw fit to accuse before and whom he still has not named.

Want to read more?
At what point does gay become something other than a freak show?
LGBT community should give Foley a nice big thank you for his contribution to the betterment of their image. Perhaps he will win a lifetime achievement award from GLAAD.

Google Santorum

After Senator Rick Santorum, R-Pa, stood before Congress denounced homosexuality a spectacle ensued. When he equated gay sexual relations to sex with a dog, an LGBT community storm rose against him nationwide and he recieved his own place in history: Santorum has now become synonimous with "the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex".

We can thank sex-columnist Dan Savage, author of Savage Love and editor of The Stranger in Seattle, for this. He made it a personal quest to defame the name of Penssylvania's Senator for his statements in the AP Interview.

SANTORUM...It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality —

AP: I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about "man on dog" with a United States senator, it's sort of freaking me out.

SANTORUM: And that's sort of where we are in today's world, unfortunately...

Philadelphia Weekly ran a feature on Savage and all of his hostilities. A previously well-known and frequently syndicated writer, he rose to a new level by making his web site, www.spreadingsantorum.com the number one hit on Google searches for "santorum". His site ranks above Santorum's own site. Check it out, click here.

Although it is an excellent profile, it leaves out one key element: by taking a political stance as Savage has alienated himself. Although he may have risen to a new level of notoriety and put Santorum's comments on a massive public display, he has pulled the pulpit out from beneath himself and now stands among the ranks of Michael Moore. Ouch. Ouch. and More Ouch.

True, Savage's reasons for hostility are indisputable (right?). Check out the full text of the AP interview. But, when you are having donations checks returned from Bob Casey's camp because they don't want to be affiliated with you, something needs to be said for the solidarity of the gay civil rights campaign. Notoriety cannot be gained at the price of self-respect, and we can't expect the religious right to take LGBT rights seriously when we are throwing scat in their faces. Though it is funny Mr. Savage, perhaps you have gone too far.

In Addition

A new found favorite of mine:

http://www.mudvillegazette.com

Some of the best wartime journalism is happening right here at "The Mudville Gazette". Produced by a soldier and his stateside wife, it includes contributions by more than 20 other military bloggers. This is a revolutionary new look at the soldiers diary and war documentary.

The Mudville Gazette pleads that "The reader will kindly forgive any tendencey to rough language or behavior on the part of our site owner.."

Tupac: A playa' to the grave.

The Supreme Court declined to revive a libel lawsuit filed against two Philly newspaper by a critic of violent rap lyrics.

Longtime civil rights activist C. DeLores Tucker, who died last year, accused the papers of mischaracterizing her dispute with the estate of slain rapper Tupac Shakur and others. Shakur wrote lyrics that rhymed Tucker's name with an obscenity in his 1995 release "how do you want it?".
Delores Tucker/ You's a mother-fucker/ instead of tryin' tp help a nigga/
you destroy a brother/ worse than the others/
Tucker had sued Shakur, alleging, among other things, that her husband, William Tucker, had suffered loss of "consortium" because of the emotional distress brought on by Shakur. hmmm..(??) Loss of consortium has been defined by AAOS as "loss of services, comfort, society and conjugal relations because of a spouse's injury".

The Philadelphia Daily News and The Legal Intelligencer, a daily newspaper covering legal affairs in Philadelphia, were among the news organizations that reported on the lawsuit and interpreted loss of consortium to mean harm to the Tuckers' sex life. Tucker said the claim had nothing to do with sex, but with "advice, society, companionship, i.e., defendants' effect upon the 'family union.'"

William Tucker pursued a libel suit on his and his late wife's behalf. Pennsylvania state courts dismissed the libel claims.

The man is still pursuing a case in protection of his wifes opinion of his "consortorium" after the poor woman is dead. Need I say more?