12/1/05
I have been reading an excellent book called Gates of
Fire, by Steven Pressfield. It describes the efforts of
a small number of Greek soldiers, led by 300 Spartans,
at Thermopylae. There they battled the enormous army of
the Persion king Xerxes.
It is a fictional account, but written with such
authority that I can't help but take it as a true
reckoning of Spartan and Greek life. There is content
that may be offensive to some, but to lovers of war
literature it is a must-read.
I first learned of this book by reading Michael Yon's
blog. Gates of Fire is standard reading for one of the
units he was with in Iraq, and it is easy to see why.
Some other books about war that I have enjoyed (all
non-Fiction):
Band of Brothers
We Were Soldiers Once...and Young
Black Hawk Down
The first is my favorite, but each has power.
Abortion may be the most divisive and ugly debate in American politics.
I can't think of any topic that brings tears and anger
to the surface more rapidly across a broad cross-section
of the populace.
Last Tuesday, the L.A. Times published an article about
an Arkansas abortion doctor. I found it stunning in many
ways. My friend J-Red at Right Wing Pundit has already
done an excellent job of pointing out some of the more
unnerving sections. I thought the topic deserved a
little more comment.
Here are some facts on abortion (from the article):
The U.S. abortion rate has been dropping since 1990,
but abortion remains one of the most common surgical
procedures for women. A quarter of all pregnancies end
in abortion. A third of all American women will have had
an abortion by the age of 45, according to the
Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that
supports abortion rights.
Just some thoughts:
1. It seems shameful that abortion would arise for a
matter like this one:
His first patient of the day, Sarah, 23, says it never
occurred to her to use birth control, though she has
been sexually active for six years. When she became
pregnant this fall, Sarah, who works in real estate, was
in the midst of planning her wedding. "I don't think my
dress would have fit with a baby in there," she says.
So she was too lazy to use birth control? Where is the
sense of responsibility? I guess it is her body and none
of my business.
2. Do men have any rights at all with regard to the
children they conceive?
Amanda, a 20-year-old administrative assistant, says
it's not the obstacles that surprise her — it's how
normal and unashamed she feels as she prepares to end
her first pregnancy."It's an everyday occurrence," she
says as she waits for her 2:30 p.m. abortion. "It's not
like this is a rare thing."Amanda hasn't told her
ex-boyfriend that she's 15 weeks pregnant with his
child. She hasn't told her parents, either, though she
lives with them."I figured it was my responsibility,"
she says.She regrets having to pay $750 for the
abortion, but Amanda says she does not doubt her
decision. "It's not like it's illegal. It's not like I'm
doing anything wrong," she says.
She never told her ex-boyfriend? It is definitely her
choice whether or not to do so. It just doesn't sit
right. Had she decided to keep the baby, it is likely
that he would have to pay child support. There is a
disconnect here.
Going back to the statistics I quoted above, the biggest
problem I have as I write this is that abortion has
become the way to compensate for a lack of personal
responsibility. I found this article highly disturbing.
Perhaps you will, perhaps you won't.
On Tuesday The Wall Street Journal published a piece by
Joe Lieberman entitled "Our Troops Must Stay." He
writies convincingly of the progress being made by U.S.
forces in Iraq as part of the broader War on Terror. He
correctly describes the conflict there as a war of 27
million versus 10 thousand, the former being the Iraqi
citizenry and the latter the terrorists. Iraqi leaders
are conscious of their current situation:
None of these remarkable changes would have happened
without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I am
convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and
throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces
are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable
of securing the country.
The leaders of Iraq's duly elected government understand
this, and they asked me for reassurance about America's
commitment. The question is whether the American people
and enough of their representatives in Congress from
both parties understand this. I am disappointed by
Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush
took America into the war in Iraq almost three years
ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about
whether the war will bring them down in next November's
elections, than they are concerned about how we continue
the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.
Lieberman also notes the effect of the Iraq situation on
its neighbors, including Lebanon. How sad that Iraq's
leaders cannot be sure of our commitment. We are making
progress and adapting as necessary. The Democratic party
does a disservice to our country when they demand
immediate troop withdrawl. Lieberman may be the only one
in his party that understands this fully. Read the whole
article.
11/21/05
I'm not sure that I will have a chance to write anything
before Lacy and I go to San Diego for Thanksgiving, so I
wanted to link to this handy summary of the Bush
administration's efforts to defend their handling of the
decision to go to war, courtesy of Instapundit. I hope
everyone has a great holiday. I know I will.
11/18/05
The war in Iraq continues to be a contentious issue.
Yesterday, a well-known Democratic Congressman urged the
administration to pull the troops out of Iraq soon. His
comments have been countered by Administration
officials, the U.S. commander in Iraq, and some
politicians. The reason his comments have received so
much attention is because he is a decorated combat
veteran. I respect his service to the country, but
disagree with his remarks and think his reasoning for a
pullout is flawed. Here is a letter written by U.S.
Soldiers that deserves a reading alongside his comments.
11/17/05
Christopher Hitchens, a well-known writer for online
Slate Magazine is not a Bush apologist. He is, at least
in this instance, a fair-minded person examining the
futility of the 'Bush Lied' rhetoric. Check out today's
piece and understand the inanity of this far-left
conspiracy talk.
11/16/05
The following is an unedited excerpt from last Sunday's
Meet the Press with Tim Russert (transcript here):
DR. DEAN: We have an alternative agenda. We made it
very clear. We want a strong national security based on
telling the truth to our people at home, our soldiers
and our allies. We want jobs in America that'll stay in
America, and we believe that renewable energy is one of
the areas where we can do that. We want a health-care
system that covers everybody, just like 36 other
countries in the world. We want a strong public
education system. And most of all, we want honesty back
in government. I think that's a pretty good agenda.
MR. RUSSERT: But those are words that will appeal to
people. But when you go behind them, for example, what
is the Democratic position on Iraq? Should we withdraw
troops now? What do the Democrats stand for?
DR. DEAN: Tim, first of all, we don't control the House,
the Senate or the White House. We have plenty of time to
show Americans what our agenda is and we will long
before the '06 elections.
MR. RUSSERT: But there's no Democratic plan on Social
Security. There's no Democratic plan on the deficit
problem. There's no specifics. They say, "Well, we want
a strong Social Security. We want to reduce the deficit.
We want health care for everyone," but there's no plan
how to pay for it.
DR. DEAN: Right now it's not our job to give out
specifics. We have no control in the House. We have no
control in the Senate. It's our job is to stop this
administration, this corrupt and incompetent
administration, from doing more damage to America. And
that's what we're going to do. We're doing our best.
Look at the trouble they're having putting together a
budget. Why is that? Because there's still a few
moderate Republicans left who don't think it's OK to cut
school lunch programs, who don't think it's OK to do
some of the appalling things that they're doing in their
budget. I saw a show last night which showed a young
African-American man in California at the UC of Davis
who hoped to go to law school. The Republicans want to
cut $14 billion out of higher education so this kid
can't go to law school. We're going to do better than
that, and together, America can do better than that.
MR. RUSSERT: But is it enough for you to say to the
country, "Trust us, the other guy's no good. We'll do
better, but we're not going to tell you specifically how
we're going to deal with Iraq."
DR. DEAN: We will. When the time comes, we will do that.
MR. RUSSERT: When's the time going to come?
DR. DEAN: The time is fast-approaching. And I outlined
the broad outlines of our agenda. We're going to have
specific plans in all of these areas.
MR. RUSSERT: This year?
DR. DEAN: In 2006.
Of course there was more to the interview than this, but
read it. What is your impression? Mine is of a party
that has no ideas, or at least ideas so poorly developed
that they are unable to provide any specifics. Check
especially the bold portion of Dean's remarks. Dean is
saying that his job is to be obstructionist without
offering alternatives. I don't mind different ideas. The
problem is that the Democrats are all criticism and no
ideas.
11/15/05
As if to punctuate yesterday's post, the Republican
Party has produced an advertisement that effectively
demonstrates the weakness of the Democrats on the issue
of pre-War intelligence. See it here.
11/14/05
Continuing last week's campaign to out the real Iraq War
liars, the following articles make a good case for why
President Bush's critics are guilty of much more than
partisan politics as usual. I make the assertion that
their lies and distortions ARE a disservice to the men
and women in the Armed Forces and do undermine our
mission there.
Michael Barone pulls together some quotes from President
Bush's speech, as well as a defense of the President by
John McCain. I don't understand how a fair-minded person
can read this and maintain that President Bush lied. It
is an untenable position to take in an age where a
Google search exposes their fraud.
More effectively even, Norman Podhoretz, editor-at-large
of Commentary, provides an absolutely comprehensive
dismantling of Bush Lied! crowd. If you can read this,
and still maintain that the President lied, there is no
hope for you. I don't expect people to agree with the
war. I don't expect people to agree with the war's
execution. I DO expect people to learn the facts and be
reasonable. I DO expect elected officials to tell the
TRUTH!
In other news, I am linking to the text of an excellent
speech given to the Federalist Society by Karl Rove . It
is on judicial activism and worth a look, even if Karl
Rove is the devil (because he is...oooooo).
11/11/05
I am writing from a Starbucks in Jacksonville, FL where
I am on business. As such I was unable to listen to
President Bush's speech, having to resort to reading the
transcript. I think it is a very good speech, and he
clearly calls out the liars in Congress for making false
and misleading statements. We needed a speech like this.
We need more motivation and clear declarations of fact.
Iraq is important! That is a fact, and we can win.
The recent bombings in Amman, Jordan occurred a world
away. Andrew Breitbart, who runs an excellent news site,
lost a friend in the attacks, and didn't even realize it
at first. The point is that terror is a danger to all of
us and must be stopped. This is a tragic story of lives
cut short. Terrorism is not cancer. It is preventable.
We have to fight if it takes decades or longer.
11/10/05
More on France...or is it Moron France? Well, the French
have problems. They are systemic and have nothing to do
with whether French people are nice to Americans. I know
more nice French people than not-nice ones (I don't know
many in absolute terms) and I don't feel like blaming
all French people for these riots. Nevertheless, these
are systemic problems. John Vinocur, a writer for the
International Herald Tribune, writes a scalding critique
of the embedded hypocrisy of French society. Based on
what has happened there, our political divides seem
relatively minor by comparison. It can't help but
bolster my already high degree of American superiority
vis-a-vis the failure of the European Welfare state.
11/8/05
The riots in France are unfortunate, but not surprising.
Europe has failed to assimilate its immigrants.
Unemployment in France is more than twice that of the
U.S. and for the young men composing most of the rioting
groups, it is more than 20%. In today's Wall Street
Journal, a man named Joel Kotkin writes about the
European welfare state. I think his statements are
valid, and his ability to prognosticate strengthened by
correctly predicting the eventual triumph of
U.S.adaptability over the Japanese in this book (via
Instapundit).
11/7/05
A hero of the anti-war left has been exposed as a fraud.
He looks pretty dweeby. Probably thought that becoming a
famous protester might get him some female attention. It
has if you count Cindy Sheehan (No thanks!). This
article from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch has a rundown
of Massey's lies and distortions. Who are the liars?
11/2/05
I think this is a disgrace. I don't care if I am white,
criticizing some African-Americans, you have to read the
article to get a sense of corruption of thought present
among Steele's critics. It's wrong.
More on Harry Reid's efforts to marginalize the
Democratic Party from Glenn Reynolds. You should read
the whole post, but I liked this part:
The anti-war fundraising base of the Democrats -- as
exemplified by organizations like MoveOn.org -- is
powerful enough to require Democratic politicians like
Harry Reid to pretend that all the WMD stuff began with
President Bush. That is, not to put too fine a point on
it, a gross and partisan lie.
There is no other way to characterize it- Democratic
leaders are lying on a regular basis and the Media is
broadcasting it for free.
And Joe Wilson is a liar. If you don't know who he is,
read this editorial from the L.A. Times. Either that or
pretend you never heard of him. Either is fine with me.
11/1/05
Harry Reid is a member of my Church and as such, I felt
inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. In the
time since he has become Senate Majority Leader he has
blown any consideration I might have shown him,
revealing himself to be inarticulate and foolish. His
latest stunt, to close the Senate and debate the merits
of Pre-Iraq War intelligence, smacks of political
opportunism. He is using the recent indictment of
Vice-Presidential aide Libby as justification, but
Michael Barone explains why this is not really pertinent
to the debate. If the law regarding the disclosure of
identities was not violated, then Reid's use of the
indictment to call for the session is weak.
I think this is a development that is under most
people's radar right now. This is major news, and will
require a major fight to bring about. Unfortunately,
precious few lawmakers are that interested in seeing
real reform as this will mean key interest groups may
lose clout.
More on the Alito nomination...From this morning's New
York Times comes this editorial from law professor Ann
Althouse. I particularly like her ending:
In a more general sense, President Bush should be
commended for nominating someone with so substantial a
judicial record. In the decades since the defeat of
Robert Bork's nomination, presidents have unfortunately
tended toward "stealth" nominees out of fear that actual
evidence of the person's jurisprudence would only give
ammunition to his opponents. Mr. Bush had followed that
pattern: his thwarted nominee Harriet Miers had no
serious constitutional law writings, and even Chief
Justice John Roberts had only a handful of
constitutional law cases from his two years on the
bench. Those Democrats who are already insisting that
Judge Alito's record on the bench makes him unacceptable
should keep in mind that someday they, too, will have a
president with a Supreme Court seat to fill, and it
would serve the country well if that president wasn't
forced to choose only among candidates with no paper
trail. To oppose Judge Alito because his record is
conservative is to condemn us to a succession of bland
nominees and to deprive future presidents of the
opportunity to choose from the men and women who have
dedicated long years to judicial work.
I find it frustrating that Democrats get so much airplay
while complaining about "changing the course of the
court." We live in a spoils system, where the winner
gets the spoils, in this case, the right to choose
judges. Those who think the Democrats have a point with
the argument that the Court's constitution must remain
the same have little understanding of history.
10/31/05
Today's Supreme Court nomination of Samuel Alito made my
morning! I was driving home from the gym and happened to
turn on NPR. They carried the nomination live, and I was
very impressed with Alito's statement. He showed a nice
touch, aluding to his first experience on the Court
opposite Sandra Day-O'Conner, the very justice he would
replace. Here are some first Reactions from various
prominent people. Their responses are fairly
predictable, and the detractors don't concern me a great
deal.
Much will be made of Alito's dissent from a 1991 case,
Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Slate has a clearly biased
article that still provides some important facts and
allows me to make a point. The author of the article
makes the issue of abuse a main point, and it should be
a consideration (rape was a justifiable exception to the
spousal notification law). The left makes a big stink
about the woman's right to choose, but this quote from
Glenn Reynolds nice sums up the other side of the
argument.
I am a big fan of Antonin Scalia. I like his judicial
philosophy and think that if Alito is anything like him,
the President made an excellent choice. If you want to
know why I like Scalia's philosphy, e-mail me (joe@spotd.net)
and I will send you an excellent speech where he gives a
brief look. More than anything, I am glad that Democrats
do not like him. I want a fight. I want to force the
Democrats to show their hands. I want to win what we
fought for when we reelected this president. Barone
writes that opposing him may be difficult for some
Democrats, either based on previous support or voting
bloc issues. The Italian-American angle is particularly
interesting. He also looks at the Casey case.
On another note,when it comes to Nuclear Terrorism,
don't believe the hype. Richard Miniter has written
several well-received books on the War on Terror. I
encourage you to read this article. There are things
that I believed that he debunks quite effectively.
Also, we now have over 2000 dead in the Iraq War. What
does this really mean? Victor Davis Hanson examines this
is an NYT Op-Ed piece, 2,000 dead, In Context
(registration required). The death of U.S. soldiers is
tragic, but the ignorance of history by the media even
more so.
10/25/05
The President has nominated Ben Bernanke to succeed Alan
Greenspan as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. It seems a
good choice, greeted warmly on all sides, and this
favorable look at his life indicates smooth sailing
through the confirmation process. He also is a bit of a
maverick in other ways (registration required for both
links).
More on the Plame issue and her weasel husband, Joseph
Wilson. He is being portrayed in the media as some kind
of courageous truth-teller, but he has serious
credibility issues. Read this and feel the sweetness of
clarification. This transcript of a radio interview with
Michael Barone also gives some background into the issue
and Wilson's character.
More Hollywood hypocrisy, courtesy of Opinionjournal.com.
I am not in favor of quotas, but I do question those who
are, but don't do anything to change the industry they
work in.
10/24/05
When I heard that Harriet Miers was a candidate for
Supreme Court Justice, I was underwhelmed based on my
limited knowledge of her. When I heard that she was the
likely pick, I hope the rumor was wrong. When Bush
introduced her, I felt no excitement. I still feel none.
Why? Lets go down the list:
1. The resounding victory of George Bush in 2004
prepared many conservatives to enjoy the spoils of that
victory. With a Congressional Majority and popular
majority, was there anything to prevent the appointment
of conservative judges to the Court? I didn't think so,
and I was hoping to see the kind of people that I felt
we had EARNED.
2. Miers' track record is one of distinction. But none
of her experience provides insight into what kind of
justice she would be. President Bush's assurances are
insufficient. When he says that she will be the same
person twenty years from now that she is today and will
vote accordingly, I think 'I hope not.' It is
unrealistic to believe that she will not change at all.
3. Although a conservative woman on the bench would be
welcome, why was it necessary to nominate a woman?
Coming to that decision at the start of the process
seemed premature and limited the President's options.
4. Conservatives are tired of being bitten. We've been
bitten by a high-spending Congress and an increasingly
liberal judiciary. Once bitten, twice shy.
I should make it clear that I don't have a problem with
her close relationship to the president. So much of life
is WHO we know. She should not be faulted for knowing
the president. I think that many human relationships
have a purpose, so that is not a concern to me. Do I see
anything in Miers' favor?
1. A knowledge of business law. I think views of
business that demonize it work counter to the interests
of our country. Someone sympthetic to that is a welcome
choice, though I can't help but ask if there is anyone
better.
2. I keep waiting for more....
In the coming weeks we will see the resolution, for
better or worse. Until then, I am neutral on the Miers
nomination.
The following are a few articles that I saw last week,
but didn't have a chance to place on the website.
It is far from politically correct, but is racial
profiling in the case of Islamic terrorism really
immoral? This man argues that whatever issues it may
involve, the facts do not justify its wholesale
exclusion from our arsenal of anti-terror techniques. I
think there are ways of accomplishing this that don't
involve humiliating someone or acting in a way that
demeans another. Something to think about.
The start of Saddam's legal proceedings allowed normal
Iraqis the chance to see his new situation, and their
responses are telling. Democrats are often saying that
Republicans are out of step, or in the extreme. Saddam's
Sunni followers would have to fall in that category,
being a minority of the populace, and disconnected from
Saddam's (and their) new reality.
The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) tackled
this today, and The Weekly Standard last week: The
criminalization of conservatism. Do the issues being
investigated by Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald merit
federal charges? Or was the "outing" of Valerie Plame
the result of hardball politics? By all accounts,
Fitzgerald has been ethical, responsible, and methodical
in his approach. I have no fault with him. My concern is
whether the American public understands exactly what
went on here. I don't think they do, and I don't think
they care. Maybe they should.
I like guns, but am far from an expert on issues related
to gun control. I found this piece by John Stossel very
informative and recommend it to you.
10/18/05
Heaven forbid that large numbers of Iraqis in some areas
are in favor of a constitution! That might not be
transparent! This piece from this morning's NYT is not
much a news story- Shiites & Kurds vote 'yes' in high
numbers, Sunnis 'no' in high numbers. Why not check the
results of union voters here in the states? I am
concerned about a lack of transparency in the education
process that leads some places to vote so heavily
Democratic.
10/17/05
More from Michael Barone, this time on the malaise
afflicting the Democratic party. The most critical part
of this post is the idea that there are liberals who are
more loyal to certain ideas than to their own country.
You really need to read the whole thing. And if you now
agree with me that this guy is an excellent commentator,
check out his blog for more entries on topics like the
economy, perceptions of the Iraq issue, and lying in
higher education.
Charles Krauthammer writes for the Washington Post, and
he brings up some important questions related to the
decoding of the Spanish Flu of 1918. I am a strong
believer in the important of science. I don't see
pharmaceutical companies as evil. Just the same,
scientists should ask themselves "Should we?" just as
often as they ask "Can we?" That is not censorship or
the squelching of ideas. It is moral inquiry and is
essential. One of my favorite authors, Orson Scott Card,
makes this a centerpiece of his books.
10/10/05
Michael Barone wrote an extended commentary on the
speech that President Bush gave last week regarding the
War on Terror. I think he makes some excellent points
and I hope each of you will take a look at it. I could
quote this guy every day. This speech by the president
was one of the better ones on this topic in his
presidency.
I don't know very much about Harriet Miers, the
president's choice to succeed Sandra Day O'Conner. I
don't have anything against her. I also don't have
anything for her. I think many pundits may have jumped
the gun with their criticism/support of Miers for the
post. John Fund provides some reasons why we
(conservatives) should be a little concerned.
10/7/05
It's hard not to like John Bolton. This article from the
Yale Daily News reports on his visit to his Alma Mater.
9/30/05
The SPOTD is all about truth. I think Michael Barone
does a great job of clarifying some issues related to
race and the political parties, all in the interest of
providing a truer perspective.
I didn't check until today, but a letter I wrote to the
BYU paper, The Daily Universe was actually published
yesterday (see it here). I was responding to an
editorial that I felt was ambiguous and poorly-written
(here it is). If the editorial board thinks we should
leave Iraq, I would rather see them say it than use a
trite and inaccurate story to hint at it. I often wrote
letters to the editor while a student there, and only
had one published (a fairly poor one) so this was fun
for me. Why am I still reading the BYU paper, 2+ years
after graduating? So I can point out lame articles and
write mean letters, of course. Something that I didn't
address in the letter, but later researched, was this
post by Michael Barone that provides more insight into
casualty figures and how they compare to this time last
year.
9/27/05
This is the article of the day, a harsh indictment of
some of the problems at American universities. I
personally have problems with rising tuition rates being
accepted as necessary. There is too little
accountability on such issues. Read it.
For more proof on the media as a major Public Enemy,
check out this story. Reporting rumor as fact has become
quite popular these days. Politicians use it to spread
rumor, saying this like, "I don't know if it is true or
not, but I heard..." or "Some have said..." thus
absolving themselves from blame because they themselves
never said they were facts. These are the most
pernicious kinds of lies and good reporters should be
more careful. Like Wyclef Jean says, "Don't believe the
hype."
Christopher Hitchens is no conservative, but he writes
an excellent piece in Slate dissecting the groups
responsible for last weekend's antiwar rally in
Washington.
9/26/05
I'm not a huge John McCain fan. I think he is a little
pleased with the way that the press is enamored with
him. Just the same, he is a smart man, and one who sees
many issues in a practical light. This post by Michael
Barone looks at spending and immigration. McCain speaks
frankly about both.
Spending is one issue that distresses me most about the
Bush administration. Lacy and I take great pains to
avoid debt, but our legislators are blind to it.
Fortunately, the recent hurricanes and subsequent relief
efforts have brought the issue of spending to the public
eye like never before. Some websites, like Instapundit
are leading the way toward offsetting the costs of
relief. If this concerns you it is worth a look.
The issue of rebuilding New Orleans is also at the
forefront. Americans have opened their wallets and
extended their hands to help, but now that the initial
efforts have begun, it is time for the nation to demand
accountability for the disbursement of these monies.
John Fund takes a moment to look at the serious issues
that have plagued Louisiana politics for decades.
Katrina and Rita may not be all bad if they allow things
to be put on a better footing in that troubled state. We
also have to ask the tough question- How much should
even be rebuilt?
9/25/05
This comment from Arnold Schwarzenegger demonstrates why
I like the guy:
"I have a daughter," Schwarzenegger said in an interview
with The [Sacramento] Bee. "I wouldn't want to have
someone take my daughter to a hospital for an abortion
or something and not tell me. I would kill him if they
do that."
I don't condone the killing part, though I sympathize
with it. I just like that it reflects a normal, human
response and one that he probably didn't go through his
advisors to concoct
9/20/05
Yesterday, James Taranto closely scrutinized a New York
Times editorial that questioned John Roberts as a
nominee for Chief Justice. Read the first piece of his
daily compilation to witness the contradiction that is
the NYT editorial page.
9/15/05
I have been following the Roberts hearings a bit and
found David Brooks' New York Times column very, very
funny. It is worth a read.
Glenn Reynolds has an interesting idea- why not make
senators ineligible to run for President? I love it, and
it might keep pontificating down a bit.
9/14/05
Michael Barone makes a statement about the broader
issues related to liberalism and the poor. It is true
that the Left has a poor record of providing sustainable
help to the poor. New Orleans is a prime example.
9/13/05
From Judge John Roberts' opening statement:
"I come before the committee with no agenda. I have no
platform. Judges are not politicians who can promise to
do certain things in exchange for votes. I have no
agenda, but I do have a commitment: If I am confirmed, I
will confront every case with an open mind. I will fully
and fairly analyze the legal arguments that are
presented. I will be open to the considered views of my
colleagues on the bench. And I will decide every case
based on the record according to the rule of law without
fear or favor to the best of my ability. And I will
remember that it's my job to call balls and strikes and
not to pitch or bat."
I like it...I like it a lot. As I have reviewed a little
bit of today's questioning, I think Roberts is
extraordinarily well-prepared, and handily outclassing
the senators.
From the Washington Post on yesterday's opening hearing:
Yesterday's opening of the John Roberts confirmation
hearings was a time for historic firsts. Sen. Charles E.
Schumer (D-N.Y.) made 49 first-person references in a
10-minute statement that was, ostensibly, not about
himself. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) showed exceptional
emotional versatility, working a crossword puzzle during
the hearing and then choking back a sob while making a
prosaic statement about partisanship.
What a joke! Some Senators also used the opportunity to
play on feelings related to Hurricane Katrina:
"Today, the devastation, despair facing millions of our
fellow Americans in the Gulf region is a tragic reminder
of why we have a federal government, why it's critical
that our government be responsive," said Sen. Patrick J.
Leahy, Vermont Democrat and ranking minority member of
the panel.
"We need the federal government for our protection
and security, to cast a lifeline to those in distress,
to mobilize better resources beyond the ability of any
state and local government -- all of this for the common
good."
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat,
said lessons should be learned from the hurricane.
"The powerful winds and flood waters of Katrina tore
away the mask that has hidden from public view the many
Americans who are left out and left behind," he said.
"As one nation under God, we cannot continue to ignore
the injustice, the inequality and the gross disparities
that exist in our society."
As reported by the Washington Times, Senator John Cornyn
said something worth reading and repeating:
Within moments, the office of Sen. John Cornyn, Texas
Republican and member of the committee, issued a
statement accusing Mr. Leahy and Mr. Kennedy of using
the victims of the hurricane "in an attempt to score
political points."
"I believe the American people will see this for
what it is," said Mr. Cornyn, according to the
statement. "We ought not to appropriate a national
tragedy in a misguided effort to further a political
interest of any sort."
The Cornyn statement went on to predict: "Others
likely will make similar attempts in a bizarre effort to
link Judge Roberts to the tragedies in the Gulf of
Mexico. But Katrina victims should not be used to score
political points."
Thank you Senator! Too bad so many of your colleagues on
both sides of the aisle are self-serving sycophants.
Good news from Iraq. A group of Iraqi soldiers made a
small contribution to the victims of Hurricane Katrina.
It is a wonderful gesture.
From Michael Barone, the Dutch demonstrate effective
coexistence with nature amid the threat of surging seas.
This article by Bruce Babbit, former Secretary of the
Interior, suggests radical change for the "City Beneath
the Sea."
President Bush has accepted responsibility for the
failures of the Federal Government with regard to
Hurricane Katrina. It seems an appropriate response for
a Chief Executive. Just how badly did the Feds fail? In
some respects they did not, at least not compared with
past performances, according to Jack Kelly of the
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Will the President catch more
flack based on his admission of responsibility?
Possibly, but it shows leadership in a time where blame
and finger-pointing have become its replacement.
9/9/05
I have made no effort to hide my support for the
President. I like that his response to 9/11 was to
reject business-as-usual with regard to terror.
Nevertheless, I have to admit that there are things
about the war in Iraq and the administration in general
that are troublesome. Unfortunately, these are not the
kinds of things that can be removed simply by changing
the Commander-in-Chief. As a nation, our defense
problems are systemic. Mark Helprin writes this painful
and scathing piece that I highly recommend. I don't
agree with it point-by-point and I emphasize that I
think Bush has done well, certainly better than any Gore
or Kerry would have. I just know we can do better. We
have to encourage these kinds of thoughtful critiques if
we are going to improve. It is not about assigning
blame- that is costly in time and energy, but about
doing a better job.
The director of FEMA was relieved of his duties related
to the Katrina effort, though not fired as the head of
the agency. It seems like a wise decision by Director
Chertoff of Homeland Security. I think that Michael
Brown, the departing director, has handled it quite
gracefully.
9/8/05
Go here to find a highly informative and comprehensive
timeline of the government response to Hurricane
Katrina.
I love Ben Stein. He is the guy from countless movies
and the ClearEyes commercials. You know, "Bueller...Bueller...Bueller."
He writes a truly excellent rebuttal of many of the
President's critics. I'd like to see the Democrats offer
point by point responses using FACTS. I don't think they
can or will. It is an issue of inclination & capability.
Finally, this is less suitable for inclusion on the
truth page than in the SPOTD e-mail, but I thought it
was clever enough that it merited placement in a timely
fashion. Greg Gutfield writes for the pretentious
Huffington Post, and today's entry is a winner! He's one
of the few independent voices there.
9/7/05
I've had quite enough of the Hurricane blame-game. It's
time to set the record straight on what went wrong in
terms of government involvement, and what continues to
go wrong. I will try to add some perspective:
New Orleans, as a city, was sick long before Hurricane
Katrina hit. This story from the New York Daily News
sheds light on the problems that the city government
created for itself. You have to read the article to
understand the systemic issues at play. From
OpinionJournal.com, this article breaks down the Mayor
and Governor's failings:
It must be made clear that the governor and locally
elected officials are in charge of the "first response."
I am not attempting to excuse some of the delays in
FEMA's response. Congress and the president need to take
corrective action there, also. However, if citizens
expect FEMA to be a first responder to terrorist attacks
or other local emergencies (earthquakes, forest fires,
volcanoes), they will be disappointed. The federal
government's role is to offer aid upon request.
Furthermore, the governor elected to wait before
formally requesting the Federal Government's help. For
more on New Orleans' systemic issues, check out this
post from U.S. News & World Report's Michael Barone. We
have to ask why New Orleans did not keep pace with its
peers. His conclusions are reasonable.
Also at issue is the amount of preparation for disaster.
Many people blame the Federal Government, and the Bush
Administration in particular for cutting this budget, or
that item. Michael Barone looks at the facts behind the
levees in New Orleans. This is an issue that should have
been settled decades before Bush took office. I have
trouble condemning him for this particular disaster's
damage.
The efforts of celebrities to aid storm victims is good.
John Grisham and his wife pledged $5 million to
Mississippi relief efforts. Many others are giving of
time and means. Unfortunately, politically minded
celebrities take the focus off the relief and onto
themselves. Witness Sean Penn, whose hubris has
distinguished him on past trips to Iraq and Iran:
Movie star and political activist Penn, 45, was in the
collapsing city to aid stranded victims of flooding
sparked by Hurricane Katrina, but the small boat he was
piloting to launch a rescue attempt sprang a leak. The
outspoken actor had planned to rescue children waylaid
by the deadly waters, but apparently forgot to plug a
hole in the bottom of the vessel, which began taking
water within seconds of its launch. When the boat's
motor failed to start, those aboard were forced to use
paddles to propel themselves down the flooded New
Orleans street. Asked what he had hoped to achieve in
the waterlogged city, the actor replied: "Whatever I can
do to help." But with the boat loaded with members of
the Oscar-winner's entourage, including his personal
photographer, one bystander taunted: "How are you going
to get any people in that thing?"
Penn's idiocy was preceded several days before by Kanye
West, a hip hop star whose skills as a producer do not
extend to the political arena:
Appearing two-thirds through the program, he claimed
"George Bush doesn't care about black people" and said
America is set up "to help the poor, the black people,
the less well-off as slow as possible." "I hate the way
they portray us in the media. If you see a black family,
it says they're looting. See a white family, it says
they're looking for food." While allowing that "the Red
Cross is doing everything they can," West — who
delivered an emotional outburst at the American Music
Awards after he was snubbed for an award — declared that
government authorities are intentionally dragging their
feet on aid to the Gulf Coast. Without getting specific,
he added, "They've given them permission to go down and
shoot us."
West's rant is particularly unfortunate (see it here).
It reveals an ignorance that stems from decades of
Democratic dogma. More to come later.
9/2/05
More on the Hurricane...What else is there to talk
about? Here are some interesting articles:
Will New Orleans ever Recover?
The Moral Depravity Unleashed by Katrina
The New Orleans Times-Picayune has one of the most
complete collections of hurricane photos. I think we
need to see these images, and learn the lessons they
teach.
The tenuous oil situation gives me cause to welcome this
bit of news. We need all the energy sources we can get.
Diversification is strength.
8/30/05
The situation in the Gulf Coast almost defies
description. I was in southwest Florida last year after
one of the hurricanes and was amazed by the destruction.
I cannot imagine that kind of result coupled with
tremendous flooding, something that the area I was in
was spared. This is a very comprehensive look at New
Orleans on the day after the storm. Their troubles are
just beginning. I hope we can all be sensitive to their
need.
8/29/05
More views from Mark Steyn on the reasons for Israel's
withdrawl from Gaza. I agree with him, and see the
rationale for a pullout as clear: We will give them Gaza
in exchange for nothing. When they continue their terror
attacks, we now have the high ground to crush them.
Gloria Salt agrees and fleshes it out here.
It is time for significant change in the American tax
system. I am in favor of the abolition of the sales tax
in favor of a national sales tax, but I would settle for
a flat tax. John Fund points out how America is lagging
behind its peers in this regard- and the reason is the
influence of special interest groups.
8/24/05
How will today's oil prices affect the energy prices of
tomorrow? According to Larry Kudlow, these high prices
are setting off a "tectonic shift" for the better. Read
it and have hope.
8/22/05
Senator Chuck Hagel is a Republican senator from the
state of Nebraska. He has done no great good for his
party or his President recently, and this is icing on
the cake. Breaking ranks with the party is not his big
sin in this case- it is his seemingly total ignorance. I
challenge any of the people who compare Iraq to Vietnam
to defend the comparison with facts. The insurgency in
Iraq is not nationalistic, is not supported and armed by
a rival superpower, and holds no territory. For someone
like Hagel, who fought in Vietnam, to make these
characterizations is irresponsible and intellectually
lazy.
Furthermore, the make-up of our military is
substantially different than it was during Vietnam. Mark
Steyn offers this spot-on diagnosis of the flaws in
modern media analysis of the soldier's plight.
8/18/05
With Joseph's recovery continuing I am back in action.
Some people think that vaccines are dangerous. I think
not vaccinating your child is much more dangerous. A lot
of vaccinationphobes point to a substance called
thimerosal as the reason for their fear. This excellent
article from Slate does a good job of debunking
thimerosal's alleged link to autism in children.
Needless to say, Joseph will have ALL his shots.
7/27/05
Needless to say, the Truth page is on hiatus, as is the
regular SPOTD e-mail. I hope to return soon.
7/25/05
More news and views of the impact that nominee Roberts
may have if confirmed to the Supreme Court. It seems
useless to speculate too much, but this review seems
very comprehensive.
Ted Kennedy has distinguished himself as a first-rate
bozo for the last several decades. His continual
involvement in national politics reflects very poorly on
the voters in Massachusetts. On a visit to Guantanamo
Bay recently, he was taken to task for his idiocy in a
much deserved and underreported exchange.
7/22/05
Grand Theft Auto is not a good game. It cannot have a
good effect on someone. In addition to the game's
violent theme, there is a modification available that
turns an implied sexual encounter- Hot Coffee- into an
explicit and viewable event. Obviously the sex and
nudity in the game are an issue, but the violence can be
just as bad. As this New York Times editorial states,
"It's proper to worry about what young gamers will see
when they stop for hot coffee. But what's more worrying
still is what they see on the way."
7/21/05
Busy day in the news:
The terror attack today in London prompted further
recriminations by leftist journalists regarding the
impact of British involvement in Iraq. The Prime
Minister of Australia, John Howard, provided a scathing
rebuke to one of those journalists. His answer is very
statesmanlike. Tony Blair provides succinct affirmation.
More on the nomination of John Roberts: He may not be a
radical constitutionalist in the mold of Scalia, but
incremental moves to the right may be just what
conservatives need.
This article from several years ago highlights a
refreshing bit of candor from Orrin Hatch to Charles
Schumer- "Dumbass Questions." Unfortunately, Schumer
seems to think himself the people's inquisitor, so he is
up to his old tricks again. He's just a special interest
puppet, and if he thinks he is representing me, he
presumes too much.
Finally, Charles Krauthammer offers an analysis of
neo-conservatism, the ideology vilified by opponents of
the Iraq war, which now finds some support in the uneasy
equilibrium that country has achieved. It is a helpful
look at how this ideology compares to that of earlier
Republican and Democratic administrations.
7/20/05
The nomination of John Roberts has returned abortion to
the forefront, and with it, wild assertions as to the
eventual danger to women of the overturning of Roe v.
Wade. Factcheck.org debunks one argument by Barbara
"Bonehead" Boxer.
7/19/05
President Bush has made his nomination for the U.S.
Supreme Court, John Roberts, Jr. He seems like a good
choice. You can find information about him here and
here. The latter link has illuminating commentary. He
may have problems with the abortion issue, based on some
prior statements. Notwithstanding the possible issues
surrounding his confirmation, he has received widespread
support in the past and is regarded as a conservative
that will interpret the Constitution based on original
intent and not judicial activism.
I am very pleased with the pick. O'Conner was seen as a
swing vote. Roberts is a conservative. President Bush
won the election outright, and he has a Congressional
Majority. For too long he has been overly accommodating
to the Democrats. To me, this pick is a bit of muscle
flexing we who voted for him deserve. If the Republicans
don't support the pick and get this guy confirmed, I am
going to be royally upset. We don't have to make the
Dems feel good. We won, and to the victors go the
spoils. These days the Supreme Court is as important a
spoil as it gets.
7/18/05
I try to separate politics and entertainment. I think
Spielberg's politics stink, but I enjoy his movies.
Unfortunately, the screenwriter for War of the Worlds
has gone too far, and I feel like warning people away
from the movie. He actually said that "the Martian
attackers in the film represent the American military,
while the Americans being slaughtered at random
represent Iraqi civilians." The linked column by John
Leo has a nice turn on that. That guy Koepp is a real
burro.
7/17/05
You have to check out this story of the U.S. Army medic
that was shot in the chest, saved by his body armor, and
then participated in the capture, arrest, and medical
treatment of the man who shot him! This is a great story
that, like many others, saw no coverage in the media.
7/15/05
To continue my criticism of Live8, here is an excellent
article by a Cameroonian (that's an African nation)
columnist, reprinted in today's New York Times. He says
it better and more succinctly than I could ever hope to.
7/14/05
This excellent article by David Brooks of the New York
Times, urges President Bush to pick the justice with
"the biggest brain." He makes a persuasive argument on
an issue that is critical to our future. Liberals claim
to want someone who is not controversial (to them) or
that would unify (the left), but someone like McConnell
is precisely what we need to protect our liberties and
to protect our freedoms. They are two different things.
*** This just in- an excellent response to Brooks'
article that brings up some important points. I think I
liked the McConnell idea so much that I didn't catch
onto the "Big Brain" problem.
I am hopeful that President Bush will do as Brooks
suggests. I am distressed that the President has not
flexed his muscles more, to the Democrats and even his
own party. Its time to act like he won the election, and
picking a justice that will help the country stay true
to the intent of the Constitution would be one way to do
that.
7/13/05
I have always believed in our efforts to explore
space. It gives us something to dream about, and the
by-products of the space program have blessed our
society tremendously. This excellent editorial
by Richard Blomberg in today's New York Times, does a
great job of explaining that effort and its perils.
There is danger to every endeavor that is worthwhile.
The space program is no different. Hopefully, the
cancellation of today's shuttle launch is a temporary
setback, and no more.
7/8/05
As I read this article, I was reminded why I like the
British. As different cultural currents serve to
distance us from our past, our kinship with the British
is really something to be proud of. This little island
sprouted an empire, from which this great country
sprang. Although we fought them to do it, our common
heritage has united us in ways that (I hope) will never
be erased.
7/6/05
One of the most interesting possible outcomes of Roe v.
Wade- the abortion of the Left. James Taranto, the
author of this article and an editor for the Wall Street
Journal, has argued his Roe Effect theory for some time,
and it is a fascinating and coherent idea. Admittedly,
it has not gone through the rigmarole of full
statistical testing, but it is still an idea that merits
full consideration. I'd be interested to know what you
think.
7/5/05
Live8 continues to be a topic of interest. I receive a
weekly e-mail from a guy named Kevin Hogan (his
website). He's an expert in persuasion, influence, and
other areas. This week's edition included some excellent
points on the issue. It is kind may seem long, but it is
right on:
Uganda, like all Africa needs free trade. But it's
not going to happen. Besides, Bono and Geldof would
never go for that. And before going further it's always
worth considering that debt relief to Uganda meant/means
that President Musevni will likely be able to win the
next election...for which by law he is not allowed to
run because of constitutional term limits he is fighting
to stay in power. But back to the core issue. What Bono
and Geldof won't tell their followers.... is that debt
relief is NOT the answer. It's not even a little answer.
The answer Africa is literally dying for is a lift of
import taxes INTO the US, the UK, Japan, etc....from
other countries and fully stopping protectionism. That
means, letting your kids buy shoes that are made in
Uganda that won't be made by American workers...or
Chinese workers... That is the reality in Africa today.
Because there is no real money coming IN to these
countries, *in a transparent fashion that gets to the
people*.....to create jobs there is poverty. What's
maddening is if these coordinators of Live 8 go on TV
and say the truth, "hey, come on UK, Japan, USA, let
free trade be cool so the African countries can make
shoes and shirts for 5 cents per hour to compete
with the CHINESE out who supposedly "stole" the jobs
from the US and UK," ...well you see where I'm
going.... But don't worry.... the people (voters) of
wealthier nations would freak out about what African's
so desparately need...jobs to earn money to buy
food...that the voters would vote the rascals out who
would allow such a thing to happen. Africa will get
"debt relief" because it sounds cool, is taxpayer paid
and APPEARS to solve a problem...when in fact it does
next to nothing. Almost nothing. Let's look at this debt
relief scheme and compare it to what would make a real
difference. If a country has 20 million people and the
the government has accrued a billion in debt, you're
looking at $50 per person. (This is nothing. In the USA,
each person has a debt to the US Government of
approximately $50,000.00, due on demand at any
time...really) If the country had free trade with every
country on earth but especially the G8 countries, that
would create enough jobs and income to give those
starving people food, a hut and clean water. About $2000
per annually person. But there is a belief in the
citizenship of G8 countries that if someone in an
impoverished country starts making shoes...they (our
friends in manufacturing in the USA or UK) could "lose"
their job. And "government" debt relief sounds so much
easier than losing UK manufacturing jobs or a US
autoworker job to someone in Rwanda. So instead, the
Live 8 slogan is "debt relief." And of course
politicians couldn't be happier. The rock stars look
good, the politicians look good and the people in Africa
get zero change. They starve. Literally. Some of these
countries are "run" by wacko war lords that make Saddam
Hussein look like a nice guy. In one sense, they'd be
getting the debt relief (historically that doesn't mean
food or anything good in most situations like this) and
like all these kinds of countries where the horrifying
leadership or anarchists are running the show, the
benefit is for the politicians and often armies in power
and not the people. The G8 has tried to work out a way
to make debt relief to countries happen so that history
doesn't repeat itself. One UK leader (Gordon Brown)
noted months ago, that IF the money relieved the
various countries (not all in Africa by the
way...another important point) would help health,
teachers and infrastructure then it would likely be a
go. This of course is wonderful (in theory again). In
THIS hypothetical world...the relief WOULD matter...a
little... Unfortunately with an event of Live 8
magnitude....what could have been done would be
to actually *raise* money AND bypass the bad guys in
power (something like we did in Indonesia, for
example, after the Tsunamia at Christmas) and get real
food and medicine to real people who need it. But that
extra step doesn't make for good TV and the blind sense
is that it will happen anyway, especially to today's
young viewer who doesn't know better. And the young
viewer will never know the difference... believing that
their spokespeople like Geldof and Bono have done
something that means something... (and we haven't said
that it means *nothing.* It's only naive...I hope.) The
request and action from the G8 for debt relief HAS
ALREADY HAPPENED for many African nations, and is
something they were going to talk about for others (in
and out of Africa) long before Live 8 came along. The G8
WANTS debt relief for these poor people. It's a cheap
way to make it look like current administrations are
doing something that makes a difference. But that too is
an illusion. Nothing new is happening here. For example,
Somalia (currently not qualifying for debt relief but in
need of LOTS OF HELP) owes a lot of money. Now, if the
G8 forgives their debt? Big deal. Geldof and Bono can
say they have done something cool. Right? Not
necessarily. Why? THERE IS NO GOVERNMENT IN SOMALIA to
pay or renege on debt.
Answer to the Problem? If we REALLY want to feed the
starving, we can open up completely free trade with
these countries. That is the ONLY long term solution
because without jobs there is no money and without money
there is no food. Pretty simple math we all get.
Finally, there is nothing wrong with 200,000 people
squeezing into Hyde Park to see McCartney and Bono, Sir
Elton and the rest for a good time....I wish I would
have been able to attend. You just hope people don't go
home thinking, "I did my part." Because it's like an
affirmation: They "thought" something "positive," but
nothing tangible for the starving child on the street
in Africa will "happen" because of this series of rock
concerts and the well intended and very good
hearted crowds that went to see their mostly well
intended heroes. A few years ago, Coffe with Kevin Hogan
did it's annual fundraiser for children in Rwanda. We
helped a little, but it was the least "successful" of
all of our fundraisers (Afghanistan and Iraq twice, the
other years.). The need is unfathomable in Rwanda. But
it's so ugly that no one wants to report it. Maybe
someday we'll all figure out that borders don't divide
the affection of the human heart and that the man in
Africa has the same right as the woman in China as the
teenager in the USA to live on a planet where they are
free to work and feed their family. That's the America,
the UK, the Japan, that I want to see emerge. Fearless
that we will evolve while we let innocent people who are
dying play the game of life on a level playing field.
In the British newspaper, the Daily Telegraph, Mark
Steyn makes some interesting points on the topic of
celebrity giving vis-a-vis celebrity earnings. Besides
making some good points, his bio page is a pretty funny
read.
7/4/05
I have always admired the ability of the private sector
to mobilize and do good and worthy things to alleviate
the suffering of others. Normally, something like the
recent Live8 concerts around the world would fall into
that category. However, I read a quote yesterday by
Chris Martin of Coldplay (one of my favorite bands) and
it says something about the elevated sense of importance
that seems to be a part of the whole event. My issue
with Live8 was its stated purpose to encourage
governments around the world, particularly those in the
G8, to forgive African debt and do other things of that
nature. To grossly oversimplify, the problems with
Africa are endemic and are based on issues of bad
government, more than the burden of foreign debt. Live8
is a missed opportunity to mobilize private citizens to
give of their money, rather than put pressure on
governments to do it.
Glenn Reynolds, quoted below in another post, provides
some other, possibly more meaningful, issues related to
Africa's future.
6/30/05
The new president of Iran may be a terrorist. Why is
this surprising? The international community treated
Yasser Arafat like a hero for years, despite his past
wrongs. I can't imagine that they will treat this guy
any differently. This does bring to mind an interesting
question- to what extent are people allowed to change?
Is a terrorist always a terrorist? I don't have a
problem making that statement regarding this man, or
anyone else that considers civilians in a diplomatically
shielded embassy to be fair game. In fact, no terrorists
of note have ever shown themselves to be anything
different. Please correct me if I am wrong.
This is a good interview with President Bush by The
Times (UK) on some of the issues related to the upcoming
G8 summit. As I read the introduction, I can't help but
think that the picture liberals paint of him is so
totally wrong. Whether you agree with his views is your
choice, but the personal attacks are so persistent and
prone to hyperbole that they lose all effect. By all
means Liberals, keep it up.
6/28/05
Bill Simmons has more about the useless blather that
passes for sports commentary these days. What does
tremendous upside potential mean? If someone didn't have
potential, why would they be drafted? And doesn't it
follow that with upside comes downside? It's all a
gamble.
6/23/05
The Supreme Court came out with a ruling that is a
complete and total disaster. See this post by University
of Tennessee law professor Glenn Reynolds. This is an
affront to property rights and is government
intervention at its most extreme, and Justice Thomas'
dissent highlighted this perfectly (Here and Here). He,
Rhenquist, O'Conner, and Scalia were the dissenters.
This is shockingly bad law.
6/16/05
The outcome of the Terri Schiavo ordeal has some
finality with the release of her autopsy. This case was
so muddled for me. I think the one lesson that each and
every one of us can draw is that we should have our
legal documents in order. I'm not all that comfortable
with what was done, or what was attempted. Everyone was
a loser here.
Is PBS worth saving? Peggy Noonan thinks so, and I am
inclined to agree. That is, if PBS would provide the
kind of programming she describes. There should be a
place for educational programming that is just not
profitable in the arithmetic of commercial television.
6/15/05
I for one don't plan to retire young. I think there is
something wrong with our culture. Do we really deserve
all that time? We certainly can't afford it anymore.
6/14/05
I thought this was an interesting piece, though
incomplete in its analysis of the Madrassa threat.
Madrassas are the Saudi Arabian schools known to be
breeding grounds for Fundamentalist Islam. This article
dismisses their danger because, of the persons known to
be involved in terrorist acts on U.S. soil, none of them
attended a Madrassa. We should know by now that
terrorism off of U.S. soil is just as detrimental to our
interests.
6/13/05
This excellent article, by the Wall Street Journal's
Daniel Henninger, demonstrates how the Supreme Court
decision allowing federal prosecution of medicinal
marijuana users wounds conservatism. I never thought of
this, and especially enjoyed reading the excerpt of
Clarence Thomas' dissent. Draw your own conclusions.
6/7/05
How diligent and intellectual was John Kerry during his
college years? Not very different from, and perhaps
inferior to, the President. Interesting.
6/6/05
Happy Anniversary to Lacy & I! 2 years come and gone,
and Big 'J' 6 weeks away!
Mitt Romney ran the Salt Lake City 2002 Olympic games,
and now he is the governor of Massachusetts. He is also
a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints. How is a Mormon doing as chief executive of one
the country's most liberal states? What does this, and
his faith. say about a run for the U.S. Presidency? The
Weekly Standard has some answers (Thanks to Right Wing
Pundit). It is a very well-rounded article.
In the same site, find this positive portrayal of the
French. I don't know many people who have as negative an
opinion of the French system as I do. Over the past
several years, I have been particularly tough on them.
Where I have been unfair, is in my mental lumping of the
French people with the system. While you can't
disconnect them completely from the problems of that
system, you must read the article to find the
commonality of thought that made them our allies for so
many years. Sovereignty matters.
6/2/05
Additional perspective on the identity of "Deep Throat"
by Peggy Noonan. As always, she looks at things on a
deeper level. This article from the New York Times
provides background on the story, and how the revelation
was even more unexpected for some.
5/24/05
Some of you may have heard that there was a deal to end
the impasse over President Bush's judical nominees. As a
conservative, I think this is a disaster. Senator George
Allen stated (quoted by the Washington Post):
Overall this is a major disappointment on
principle...This so-called deal is disappointing for all
of us who believe in the principle that persons should
be accorded the fairness and due process of an up or
down vote. Everyone should also clearly see that
ultimately, nothing has been settled when a vacancy
arises on the U.S. Supreme Court.
I thought we won this election. I thought that meant
that we would not only nominate conservative judges, but
use our newfound might to get them confirmed. The
Democrats have been dishonest about this issue, and
McCain and his six Republican allies have let down their
party, as well as those who elected them. I hope Bill
Frist ignores the deal, and forces them to take sides
and be counted.
5/23/05
Back from vacation, so here goes:
This article is by Daniel Okrent, the departing Public
Editor of the New York Times. He writes an excellent
column that sums up many of the problems with
journalism, and the NYT in particular. It is worth the
time of the free registration.
5/5/05
Anybody who doesn't think there are serious problems
with our educational system needs to read this article
in the New York Times. All that money parents spend on
preparation, all the tips and tricks for a higher score
come down to this simple plan: write longer. (free
registration required).
I read Peggy Noonan every Thursday on
www.opinionjournal.com. Her insights are excellent. This
week's column is apolitical, and touches on some very
interesting points on privacy and the sharing of
personal information. I guess there is some kind of
talent, if that's the right word, that allows people to
share such things with class and dignity, while others
often fail so miserably.
Link of the Day: Another great column by Bill Simmons on
Steroids and the loss of baseball's innocence. I don't
share his lackadaisical reaction to steroid use, but I
do agree 100% with his criticism of the whiners (I said
as much in my entry from March 22).
5/2/05
Check out this page for some really specific criticism
of American Idol. ABC is planning a major piece that is
highly critical of the show for different reasons, among
them a rumor that Paula Abdul had a relationship with a
contestant. It will air on Primetime Live sometime soon.
4/28/05
This is a great article about a man named Ted Hayes.
Hayes is a resident of Los Angeles, is a social
Activist, and a black Republican. It is worth checking
out. Here is a photo: . He has had an interesting life.
I am pretty pumped about some of the summer movies, but
in particular this one. I have always been a Superhero
fan, but if I had to choose a favorite, Batman edges
Superman and Spiderman. As a kid I did my share of
"flying" and "webslinging," but for some reason the Dark
Knight is the fave.
4/26/05
The Wall Street Journal has an excellent commentary
piece by Thomas Sowell. It takes a look at the effect of
culture vs. race, and its conclusion is one that Bill
Cosby would probably agree with.
And this is a pretty interesting article about a Utah
billionaire. Its worth taking a look at (links good for
7 days).
4/25/05
I find Russia's Putin a bit disconcerting. Bush is
friendly with him, which seems smart, but he is
definitely someone to watch. Check out this article for
more. I think Reagan would not be a big fan.
4/15/05
From John Fund of the Wall Street Journal's Political
Diary:
With a Supreme Court vacancy likely to open up in
June with the expected retirement of Chief Justice
William Rehnquist, Republicans are dithering on whether
or not to end filibusters of judicial nominations. They
should know that if they fail to use parliamentary
procedure to restrict future filibusters only to actual
legislation, they are inviting months of Senate gridlock
this summer over any Bush Supreme Court nominee.
"There's nothing in the Constitution that says that
there has to be 51 votes for that judge," claims New
York Senator Chuck Schumer, the mastermind behind the
Democratic filibuster strategy that has so far blocked
10 of Mr. Bush's appellate court nominees. He sang a
different tune back in 2000, when he wanted to dislodge
some Clinton nominees from the Judiciary Committee
before the November election. "I also plead with my
colleagues to move judges with alacrity -- vote them up
or down," Mr. Schumer said on the Senate floor. "But
this delay makes a mockery of the Constitution, makes a
mockery of the fact that we are here working, and makes
a mockery of the lives of very sincere people who have
put themselves forward to be judges and then they hang
out there in limbo."
Mr. Schumer had a legitimate point back then about
Republican obstructionism, which makes his current
turnaround on the issue shamelessly opportunistic. He
should know that the Constitution's Advice and Consent
clause clearly states that a simple majority of Senators
can confirm nominees, and a Supreme Court decision in
1892 upheld that interpretation. That standard is well
known and is the only logical answer to why Democrats
did not filibuster Justice Clarence Thomas' nomination
in 1991.
Back then, Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, now the
ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee,
flatly rejected calls by outside liberal groups for a
filibuster of the Thomas nomination. "The president and
the nominee and all Americans deserve an up or down
vote" on the nomination, Leahy said. "I am totally
opposed to a filibuster."
Mr. Leahy was joined in his opposition by Texas Senator
Lloyd Bentsen, who had been the Democratic vice
presidential nominee in 1988. In decrying a possible
filibuster of Mr. Thomas, he wrote: "As a matter of high
priority, the Senate should change its rules so that we
can act responsibly, more rapidly and with more
certainty on the major issues our nation faces."
Today, rather than face down the more extreme interest
groups urging filibusters of judicial nominations,
Senate Democrats seem to have abdicated their
responsibilities to them. On the Hugh Hewitt radio
program both Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for
Justice, and Ralph Neas, executive director of People
for the American Way, pledged this week to filibuster
any conservative Bush nominee to the high court. When
asked if he would oppose Mike McConnell, a widely
respected judge on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals who
has criticized the Supreme Court's Bush v. Gore decision
in 2000, Mr. Neas noted: "Mike was a colleague of mine
at the University of Chicago Law School. Lovely
individual, but truly extreme on a wide range of
issues."
Former Democratic Senator Zell Miller of Georgia told me
last year that his former colleagues are incapable of
saying no to the liberal groups that want to block any
Bush court nominee. But he also said that Republicans
are foolish if they believe Democrats will shut down the
Senate if filibusters on judicial nominations are ruled
out of order. "Senators need to get business done and
folks back home will demand they do," he said. "A work
stoppage wouldn't last long."
3/22/05
Recently, the U.S. congress held hearings regarding the
issue of steroids in baseball. This was really
irritating to me. I don't think Congress has any
business getting involved in this issue. Wouldn't our
money be better spent by working on some of the truly
substantive issues that we face.
All the business about the "sanctity of the game" is a
crock. Baseball is a business. Congress needs to get a
sense of perspective about this. Moreover, the issue of
teens and steroids will not go away because of federal
or state hearings. This is a cultural problem. I don't
want kids using steroids, but Congress' involvement does
nothing more than provide pre-election photo-ops
3/6/05
What to make of all the turmoil in the Middle East? What
has emboldened the Lebanese to stand up to their Syrian
occupiers? You have to credit the Palestinian and Iraqi
elections. You have to attribute at least part of it to
the presence of American troops in the region. The
everyday Lebanese likes America, just as the everyday
Iranian does. They like our culture and want to emulate
it, and now we are there, nearby. I don't think
democracy in the Middle East is as far away as people
think.
Liberals everywhere are forced to face the prospect that
this may be Bush's doing. They have to face the prospect
that using force to punish bad people leads to positive
shockwaves around the world. This is hard for some who,
having deep dislike for Bush, would see our failure in
the Mid East as a sort of blessing.
The truth is that people want freedom. The gift of
agency, to make decisions about your own life is a gift
from God. Each of us is born with a desire to choose for
ourselves, and given the opportunity, we will take it.
2/21/05
Some of you may be aware of the recent scuffle up at
Harvard University over remarks made by the current
president, Larry Summers. He made some comments to the
effect that women are underrepresented in careers in
Math and Science because of hard-wired genetic
differences. Basically, women are genetically less
capable than men.
My purpose here is not to debate the validity of his
opinion. I am shocked that the left, the self-proclaimed
champions of tolerance and openness, are skewering one
of their own because he said something contrary to
liberal orthodoxy. This is just evidence that some
liberals welcome only opinions that they agree with.
This is blatantly hypocritical. Just something to think
about.
|