In Whack

Go Crimson!

2008-11-22T17:27:00.000-06:00

Harvard wins 10 - 0!

Go Crimson!

2008-11-22T15:39:00.000-06:00

Harvard wins 10 - 0!

Bush = Truman?

2006-06-16T10:35:00.000-05:00

Gene Healy over at Cato@Liberty has a post on how the Republicans and Democrats are fighting over whether President Bush is governing in the spirit of Truman. Apparently, we can determine if Bush is doing the right thing by asking WWTD (What Would Truman Do)? Unfortunately, that's not a good thing:

But when you look at behavior on the home front, it seems to me that George W. Bush has as good a claim to Truman’s legacy as anyone. Domestically, HST was as unilateral as all get-out. Look at the Steel Seizure case. Facing down a nationwide steel strike in the midst of the Korean war, Truman ordered his secretary of commerce to seize the steel companies and operate them for the government. He did so using a constitutional theory that’s by now familiar. Here’s assistant attorney general Holmes Baldridge laying it out before federal district court judge David A. Pine in 1952:

Judge Pine: So you contend the Executive has unlimited power in time of an emergency?
Baldridge: He has the power to take such action as is necessary to meet the emergency.
Judge Pine: If the emergency is great, it is unlimited, is it?
Baldridge: I suppose if you carry it to its logical conclusion, that is true….
Judge Pine: And that the Executive determines the emergencies and the courts cannot even review whether it is an emergency.
Baldridge: That is correct.

Later, Pine asked Baldridge: “So, when the sovereign people adopted the Constitution, it enumerated the powers set up in the Constitution, but limited the powers of the Congress and limited the powers of the judiciary, but it did not limit the powers of the Executive. Is that what you say?” Baldridge replied, “That is the way we read Article II of the Constitution.”

Yes, it does sound like Bush is doing a great job of channeling Truman.

Really, the question to ask is WWJBD - What Would Jack Bauer Do? That's all you need to know. Though I suppose in Truman's day that would have resulted in a lot of dead striking steel workers.

"Republicans are a disgrace"

2006-05-17T12:14:00.000-05:00

So say Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren about the GOP's efforts to "fix" America's energy problems. The Republicans are abondoning their free-market roots in order to propose central-planning "solutions" based on bad information. Please read the whole thing. A taste:

Here's what they got: a pitch to have the feds establish a goal of reducing oil consumption by 20 percent by 2025. To get there, Kingston proposes to compel auto manufacturers to make flexibly fueled vehicles, to further expand the subsidies provided to those who buy hybrid-powered cars, and to unleash another avalanche of subsidies on exotic energy technologies far and wide. If we adopt this bill, Kingston believes that America will be energy independent by 2015.

Let's dwell on this for a moment. Government pronouncements that the economy produce x amount of this or consume y amount of that are the characteristics for which Soviet five-year plans were famous. Unfortunately, such dictates are all the rage in Washington today. One might expect free-market Republicans to be leery of such ham-handed intervention. But one would be wrong.

Indeed.

Learn to count

2006-05-17T07:48:00.000-05:00

And learn to funk with this classic 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12 pinball action. One of my favorite Seseme Street memories, though I don't recall the shoutout of numbers changing at random like that. As I recall, they'd pick a number and stick with it throughout.

Tip to Signal vs. Noise.

Folly and profit

2006-05-16T12:16:00.000-05:00

Over at NRO, Deroy Murdock considers the silliness of taxing oil companies for supposedly making too much profit. If anything is clear from this, it is that they are all statists, Republican and Democrat.

The discussion club to which I belong is meeting this Friday with immigration being the scheduled topic. An important subject, to be sure, but I'd rather talk about the bigger problem: there are no (significant, reliable) representatives of free-market, Liberty-loving ideas in the Federal government. Let's acknowledge it and do something about it.

Some advice to Jack Bauer

2006-05-16T09:36:00.000-05:00

The writers seem to be going out of their way this season to make Jack look like an idiot. I realize that the show would have to change its name to 3 if Jack did these things, but there have to be more clever ways to keep the show going without dumbing Jack down:

Next time you get a recording, especially an easily-duplicated digital one, make a stinkin' copy.
Ask the bad-guy-turned-mole what his plan is so you don't come busting in and mess it up.
Instead of hijacking a plane, consider asking the air marshal for help instead.
Let Audrey go - she makes you compromise.
Go ahead and, er, get all Jack-Bauer on the evil IT guy. He's asking for it, and he'd be unable to do any more damage.

By the way, if Aaron the secret service guy ends up dead, I will be very put out.

Over-used phrases

2006-05-15T07:54:00.000-05:00

There's a law in discourse that as a political discussion progresses, the odds of someone being compared to Hitler approach 1. The corollary is that the one who makes said comparison automatically loses the argument.

I'd like to propose something similar. It goes something like this:

Any use of some form of the phrase "drinking the [insert evil name here] Kool-Aid" is boring. The invoker of said phrase automatically loses the argument for lack of creativity.

We need a new yet similar phrase, something that makes no sense and borrows from popular culture. And here it is: "toading the [insert evil name here] sprocket". An example of usage:

Bill, if this is "no-spin zone" then you should stop toading the Republican sprocket.

You are welcome.

C for Cookie

2006-05-04T15:12:00.000-05:00

With a tip to Joe, check this out. Makes me feel poetic:

Remember, remember
I once was so slender
Until cookies were all that I got
I see no reason
They were so pleasin'
But my tummy loves them a lot

Can I get mine with mayo?

2006-05-03T07:51:00.000-05:00

Last night I saw one of the new Apple ads that pits a nerdy (Bill Gates lookin') PC against a cool (isn't that the guy that was clobbered by wrenches in Dodgeball?) Mac. There's a whole series of them, the point of this one being that Macs come with all kinds of cool software but Windows does not. While Dodgeball guy is talking about how the Mac has iThis and iThat, the Gates clone brags about how Windows has Calculator.

Uh, it was just a few years ago when Microsoft was taken to court because they supposedly bundle too much with Windows. Now one of its competitors is bagging on them because they don't bundle enough. That's a plot twist.

Don't vote for John McCain

2006-05-01T07:58:00.000-05:00

Apparently he thinks that First Amendment thingy can be a nuisance.

Love and basketball

2006-03-14T13:25:00.000-06:00

This is sweet, a trick played on a USC basketball player by the opposing fans.

Reminds me of this one time in [band camp?] college, my buddies and I were at a women's basketball game, and one of my friends (let's call him "Mark" because that's his name) made the mistake of saying one of the opposing players was cute (let's call her "Sharon" because I don't remember).

So we moved to the front row and chanted her name every time she got the ball. The poor girl had to have no idea why we were picking on her. At some point when she was sitting on the bench, we yelled her name in unison, which got her attention (small school, small gym), and we immediately pointed at Mark and yelled, "Meet Mark". I think Mark literally died at this point. I remember Sharon just had a giant WTF look on her face. At half time we got a big piece of poster board, wrote Mark's phone number on it, and waved it at here the entire 2nd half.

Ah, priceless. Sadly, she never called.

A message for my wife

2006-03-09T07:43:00.000-06:00

Thought you might want to take a look at the Carnival of Homeschooling (via Sauron).

The space shuttle and a horse's butt

2006-03-01T12:51:00.000-06:00

Sahil Malik has the details.

Jack Bauer is my hero

2006-02-15T07:47:00.000-06:00

With a hat-tip to John Papa, here are the Top Sixty Facts on Jack Bauer. My favorite:

Superman wears Jack Bauer pajamas.

And for the nerds such as myself, there's Jack Bauer - .Net Programmer. A sample:

JACK BAUER always uses a radio button collection to display a finite list of options. JACK BAUER drops down for no man.

Genius.

Let's give credit where it's due

2006-02-02T15:15:00.000-06:00

Excuse me, Mr. InstaPundit (if that is your real name - sounds made-up to me), but Mad Magazine was all over this long before The Onion was forged [warning: The Onion article contains rough language]. I remember reading about the Trac LXXVI Razor when I was but a youngin' and thinking, "Wow, that looks painful". Probably why I don't like to shave to this day.

And no, I'm not sure how one would forge an onion.

Reminder: President Bush is not a conservative

2006-02-01T11:58:00.000-06:00

Just refer to the following lines from Veronique de Rugy at NRO:

Last night there were two State of the Union addresses, and they offered radically different visions for America's future. One vision endorsed smaller government, permanent tax cuts, and individual liberty. The other approach offered a much more statist and paternalistic future for America, one where every possible problem, no matter how small, requires federal government action.

These two descriptions refer not to two addresses — one being George W. Bush's State of Union 2006 address and the other the Democratic response. Rather, these completely inconsistent messages were both part of the president's address.

...

Unfortunately, the president also used a New Deal script for part of his speech. Much of his time was used to propose over two-dozen new or expanded spending initiatives.

...

So which speech should we believe: The small-government or big-government speech? Do we believe the message of budget restraint from the White House or the calls for spending increases on the president's favored programs? The track record does not leave much room for optimism.

...

So when the president says the administration is really committed to fiscal responsibility, one should not let hope triumph over experience.

...

Today it is impossible to square the president's rhetorical support for free markets and limited government with the long list of programs and new initiatives that he claims to support.

Mr. President, if National Review doesn't trust you, you've got problems.

The most accurate quiz ever

2006-01-25T12:27:00.000-06:00

Instapundit readers know that he loves his Mazda RX-8. Well, he took the Which Sports Car Are You? quiz, and you can guess what the results were.

So I took it, and it said this:

I'm a Chevrolet Corvette!

You're a classic - powerful, athletic, and competitive. You're all about winning the race and getting the job done. While you have a practical everyday side, you get wild when anyone pushes your pedal. You hate to lose, but you hardly ever do.

Take the Which Sports Car Are You? quiz.

Those that know me are not surprised.

C. S. Lewis: Libertarian?

2006-01-03T12:38:00.000-06:00

Perhaps so, according to R. Andrew Newman.

That may be clear to those who've read the books, but unfortunately libertarian themes don't come through in the film. If you want to see a good, recent libertarian movie, you gotta see Serenity. Or heck, watch the entire TV series. As Mal, Serenity's captain, says:

Sure as I know anything I know this, [the big, bad government] will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, they'll swing back to the belief that they can make people...better. And I do not hold to that. So no more running. I aim to misbehave.

Right on! Compare that to a passage Newman quotes in his piece on Lewis (emphasis mine):

In an essay that deserves to be better known, "Is Progress Possible? Willing Slaves of the Welfare State," Lewis argued that the state no longer exists to "protect our rights but to do us good or make us good — anyway, to do something to us or to make us something. Hence the new name 'leaders' for those who were once 'rulers.' We are less their subjects than their wards, pupils, or domestic animals. There is nothing left of which we can say to them, 'Mind your own business.' Our whole lives are their business."

Hmmmm...makes me wonder if Joss Whedon reads Lewis.

The Chronic of Narnia Rap

2005-12-21T12:46:00.000-06:00

Saw this rap on Saturday Night Live this weekend, about going to see "The Chronicles of Narnia". Awesome.

And for my next trick, I'll make God appear

2005-12-07T09:41:00.000-06:00

Just a quick post to let you know (yes, you) that Penn Jillette penned [oooh, marvel at my wit] an essay for NPR's "This I Believe" series entitled "There Is No God". I didn't know Jillette is an atheist, and it turns out he's a "research fellow at the Cato Institute" to boot (not that the two have anything to do with each other). And here I thought he was just(!) a magician. Who knew?

Anyway, it's a nice optimistic piece on why being an atheist is a good thing. I invite you to read it for yourself. Here, I think, is the most controversial passage:

Believing there is no God means the suffering I've seen in my family, and indeed all the suffering in the world, isn't caused by an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that isn't bothered to help or is just testing us, but rather something we all may be able to help others with in the future. No God means the possibility of less suffering in the future.

"No God means the possibility of less suffering in the future." Discuss.

God Hates Shrimp!

2005-11-16T11:35:00.000-06:00

I know I'm supposed to be incommunicado, but this is worth it.

What a great site: God Hates Shrimp.

Don't forget to look at their banner ads.

ELCA goes gender-neutral.

2005-08-27T14:22:00.000-05:00

Tired of references to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost in your services? Rather pray to Holy Eternal Majesty, Holy Incarnate Word, and Holy Abiding Spirit? Well, the ELCA just approved new language for their hymnals and prayer books, which are going to be reprinted in 2006, and that language is going to be far more gender-neutral. References to God as the Father, King, Lord, etc. are all in jeopordy. Which makes me wonder what's going to happen to hymns like "King of Kings."

A game recommendation.

2005-08-26T14:02:00.000-05:00

I just finished playing through Half Life 2. In a word: Amazing. Remember how you felt the first time you played through Deus Ex (the good one, not the crap sequel)? Got that feeling here, too. Immersive story line, incredible (memory hogging) graphics, great gameplay. Creepy, without being a digital horror film.

Hey, and the voice acting's pretty good, too. Robert Culp, Louis Gossett Jr, and Robert Guillaume all lend their talents.

One of the things that really impressed me was the physics of the game. Stuff actually obeys the laws of buoyancy, for example, and you need to use that knowledge at various stages of the game.

The AI is pretty good. Smart enemies (i.e. not the zombies) will actually use cover and suppressing fire while you're zipping about. Sniping is made more difficult because enemy troops will actually bob and weave instead of just standing there like morons. Now, that's not to say the AI's perfect. I saw more than one soldier blow himself up by trying to throw a grenade through an obstruction, but that just added to the humor.

Speaking of which, the game has some actual moments of wit. Notice the password used by some of the rebels during one of the later levels. Love it.

Tidy little scam.

2005-08-25T16:08:00.000-05:00

I received a curious postcard in the mail today. Two peanuts on the front are having a spastic fit, and the caption read, "We're going nuts trying to reach you." It's from some company called ARC, Inc. located in Cumming, GA. The reverse reads, "We have been trying to reach you! It is real [sic] important that you call Toll [sic] free," and it gives a number and time window.

Since I have never had any messages from anyone purporting to represent this company, I googled them. Good thing I did. From complaints.com:

Today was the first time I heard of these people. I got a little postcard in the mail saying they were trying to get a hold of me. So I called the toll free number. I called twice.

First operator I spoke to said I get the postcard because I had been automatically entered into the "Grand National Sweepstakes." My name was on the card along with a PIN number. I asked what sweepstakes and how?

The first reply she gave was "do you subscribe to any magazines?"

"Well, sure I do."

"That is how you were entered."

I asked her what magazine did this and she couldn't tell me. I subscribe to several but I know they aren't all part of one group!

I asked her to tell me more about ARC and she refused. Then she said

I was entered in the sweepstakes because I carried a MasterCard, Visa, American Express or Discover card. She asked which one I carried. I would not tell her.

Then she asked for my age and birth date! If a credit card company or magazine company had entered me, they already have that info! I would have also known about it.

This sounds like total fraud!

I told the girl I would not give out any personal info and I hung up.

I called back to see what would happen this time.

The second operator I spoke to told me I had been automatically entered into this "Grand National Sweepstakes" but again would not tell me any more information about it. I asked her how I was entered. She never mentioned magazines but did give me the schpeel about carrying a major credit card.

Then she asked if I had a checking account! She wanted to know my birth date!

I asked to speak to the manager and she said she was out and wouldn't be back all week. When I told her this sounded like fraud she got rude and said she would delete my information. I said fine but told her I was still going to report them. None of this sounds legitimate! Everyone should know these days do not give out ANY personal info to a stranger!

This ARC is just out to steal peoples money------ Watch Out!

Be on the look out, intrepid readers.

A sticky wicket.

2005-08-23T10:16:00.000-05:00

As I point out every six months, I'm wishy-washy pro-choice when it comes to abortion. I haven't really worked out my thoughts on so-called "morning-after" contraception, but, at this moment, I don't really have a problem with it.

I do, however, have a great deal of sympathy for pharmacists who don't believe in filling prescriptions for these drugs. If you believe that taking one of these pills to block implantation of a fertilized egg is tantamount to abortion, and you are also ardently pro-life, I understand how being asked to fill a prescription for the drug might offend your moral sensibilities.

Well, I guess Illinois has passed a rule saying that a pharmacy that fills prescriptions for standard contraceptives must fill prescriptions for morning-after pills. Given the extremely emotional nature of this issue, and how deeply held these beliefs can get, I wonder how many pharmacists are going to lose their licenses.

Blagojevich, a Democrat elected in 2002, says pharmacists who deny customers any form of legal birth control could lose their licenses.

"It's really just as simple as making sure that women don't get hassled or harassed when they go to the drugstore to buy their birth control," said Blagojevich. "It's a very simple concept and it shouldn't be threatening anybody."

Blagojevich can't be this naive. If you believe that abortion is wrong, and that taking these pills is tantamount to abortion, then a pharmacist who fills is aiding and abetting an immoral act.

So, which is worse? A young lady has her prescription refused by her pharmacist, and she has to go elsewhere to get it filled, or a pharmacist whose told that his conscience belongs to the state?

Only soldiers can declare war, I guess.

2005-08-23T09:39:00.000-05:00

FoxNews has an exceedingly lame op-ed from Rep. Martin Frost (D-TX), a member of the U.S. House from 1979 to 2005. Though claiming not to know the answer to a question no one asked, Martin is saddened by the lack of military experienced possessed by so many U.S. Congressmen and other government officials.

I do know that it is a sad commentary that so few of the people making our laws — members of the U.S. House, the U.S. Senate, the president and vice president, and the president’s cabinet — have much military experience, let alone combat experience, to draw from.

This is a softer take on the "chickenhawk" cry that so many liberals like to throw out: "You haven't served, yet you make military decisions? CHICKENHAWK!" What stupefies me, though, is what a thoroughly dunderheaded, ahistorical criticism that is. One of the greatest achievements of Western civilization is the subordination of the military branch of government to the civilian branch. Putting some regular schmo in charge of all the generals is breathtaking in its brilliance. A quick thought experiment: Take all the countries where the civilians are in charge of the military (the U.S, Canada, Sweden, France, etc.) and compare them to the governments headed by the military (Libya, Venezuela, Iraq under Saddam, Uganda under Idi Amin, Panama under Noriega, etc.). Where would you rather live?

It amazes me that liberals are so quick to sweep aside hundreds, if not thousands, of years of progression toward our current civilian-military relationship. Talk about being out of touch.

An advance in gay rights in California.

2005-08-23T09:34:00.000-05:00

Not only are they becoming more accepted as parents, now they have the same responsibilites as straight couples: If you separate/divorce, you have to pay child support.

Paparazzi party.

2005-08-23T09:27:00.000-05:00

Now I see that they're hounding Scarlett Johansson. This isn't quite as bad as the incident involving Lindsay Lohan a few months ago (where a photographer actually rammed her car), but it still seems a bit nuts.

The Los Angeles County district attorney's office is investigating whether increasingly aggressive celebrity photographers are initiating confrontations to capture lucrative photos.

I wonder how long it will be before states start passing laws regarding the activities of paparazzi and how and when they can take photos.

Here's a question: How does anti-stalking legislation affect this? Could a celebrity invoke those kinds of statutes to get paparazzi to lay off?

Libidinous nuns. What's next?

2005-08-23T09:22:00.000-05:00

A nun gets reprimanded for her, um, over-zealous dancing.

Daily Het Laatste Nieuws showed pictures of a dancing Johanne Vertommen being held up in the air by the missionary, and then clinging to him with her legs wrapped around his body.

I'm sure there a lot of "missionary position" jokes that could be had here, but I don't want to get into a pun fight.

Robertson gets itchy.

2005-08-23T09:04:00.000-05:00

I thank our only reader, Jesse, for pointing out that Pat Robertson has gone off the deep end. I first thought there was a little weirdness when the Daily Show had a clip of him praying for more vacancies on the Supreme Court. Given that the only way most of those judges are going to leave the Court is in a body bag, I thought it a bit inappropriate -- I mean, was he really praying for death to strike members of the Court?

Now I see that he's calling for the assassination of Hugo Chavez. To be fair, he has precident in Christian theology for this; see the writings of John of Salisbury, who wrote about the right of tyranicide and how an oppressed people may pray for God to send someone to kill the tyrant. Not that this somehow means that Robertson's comments aren't batty. I doubt he meditated over John's writings and struggled with their relevance today.

Of course, we shouldn't be too surprised that Robertson is saying crap like this. He's got a history:

Robertson has made controversial statements in the past. In October 2003, he suggested that the State Department be blown up with a nuclear device. He has also said that feminism encourages women to "kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."

Going on a hiatus.

2005-08-22T07:45:00.000-05:00

Well, as you can see, that title should be past tense. I kinda feel duty-bound to make posts, but I have too much to do to have that kind of distraction. Best just to walk away for a while.

More cowbell!

2005-08-17T07:39:00.000-05:00

Today's Day By Day, with its refrence to a favorite SNL skit, made me laugh. And there is a Christopher Walken for President website.

"Once again, Lucas: you suck."

2005-08-14T10:36:00.000-05:00

So sayeth Brad Wilson.

I will have to say, though, that I bought Garden State on DVD without having seen it first - assured in the great reviews and that it written by, directed by and stars Zach Braff from the hilariously funny Scrubs - that I would love it. Well, er, what a strange movie. I've only watched it once, a waste of $20.

Useless trivial post of the day

2005-08-12T07:58:00.000-05:00

Last night I attempted to make a new super hero named "Able Danger", but alas, the name was already taken.

Other hero names worth using (they may already be taken, too):

Wingnut - kinetics defender with flight

Kerfuffle - dark defender

Rightwing Hack - broadsword scrapper, because conservatives have no nuance

Leftwing Hack - katana scrapper, because liberals are all about nuance

Shock and Awe - electrical blaster

C130 - ultimate taxi, can't be a scrapper or blaster

Rogue State - illusion controller

Rush to War - assault rifle blaster with super-speed

Global Struggle - earth/storm controller, which would certainly struggle early on to get xp at a decent pace

The Whistle-Blower - mind controller

Anonymous Official - dark/psi defender

Bunker Buster - radiation defender

The Extreme Moderate - ice tanker, since they are moderately effective

The Corporate Monolith - invulnerable/super-strength tank, untouchable and oppressive

The Patriotic Kill-Bot - assault rifle blaster

Bob Novak, CNN, apathy

2005-08-10T12:30:00.000-05:00

Given what I've read on other blogs and NRO, I seem to be the only one that couldn't care less that Novak was banned from CNN. The media sure loves stories about itself, doesn't it?

Be careful of video games.

2005-08-10T07:42:00.000-05:00

They could kill you:

A South Korean man who played computer games for 50 hours almost non-stop died of heart failure minutes after finishing his mammoth session in an Internet cafe, authorities said Tuesday.

The man actually quit his job so he could have more time to play games. To put a positive spin on it, at least he died doing what he loved.

Click4Cathy

2005-08-10T07:37:00.000-05:00

Chris Muir, the author of Day By Day, is asking you visit his site and click the link he has to the American Cancer ablation Center. To quote today's strip:

Why? To raise the Yahoo rating of a small clinic that's keeping Chris Muir's sister Cathy alive and well - but could use some PR. A high listing is vital to the clinic's visibility with a timed ad on a local CNN cancer special August 14th and 20th.

So go there and click it. The ad is directly below the comic strip.

It's like they were written for each other.

2005-08-09T12:51:00.000-05:00

National Review has an article by Peter Wood about why Intelligent Design is not so bad. And Reason has an article by Cathy Young arguing ID has no place in a science class.

Handy Lefty blog reference.

2005-08-08T12:29:00.000-05:00

Jon Henke at QandO has created a list of some interesting liberal blogs.

V.D.H. on our division over Iraq.

2005-08-08T12:18:00.000-05:00

NRO has the article, wherein Hanson summarizes the contrasting opinions on what should or should not be done in Iraq and who the members of those camps are. He then concludes:

My own view remains absolutely unchanged — that we were right, in both a practical and a moral sense, in removing Saddam, that despite depressing lows and giddy highs, the democratic reconstruction of Iraq will work out, that an emerging constitutional government will make both Americans safer and the Middle East in general more stable, that preexisting jihadists are flocking to Iraq and being defeated rather than being created ex nihilo, that anti-Americanism will gradually subside in the Muslim world as millions see that we are consistent in our support of democratic reform, that the United States military has proved itself the preeminent fighting force in the world today and is on the offensive in Iraq and winning a difficult asymmetrical campaign, and that old allies in Europe and Japan and new ones from India to Russia will slowly come to appreciate American constancy and leadership as never before.

Let us hope Hanson is right.

Glenn Beck is all over Fred Phelps this morning.

2005-08-08T09:42:00.000-05:00

Glenn found out about Phelps and his church (if it can be called that) recently and he's horrified. He should be.

The NRA goes overboard in Oklahoma

2005-08-08T08:06:00.000-05:00

As noted by Jacob Sullum at Reason, the NRA is boycotting ConocoPhillips because ConocoPhillips wants to ban guns in its parking lot. But to be able to do so, the company has to challenge an Oklahoma law preventing ConocoPhillips from doing just that.

From Sullum:

If the NRA were simply objecting to ConocoPhillips' policy of barring guns from its parking lots, I would have no problem with the boycott. Instead, the NRA is objecting to the company's defense of its right to determine the gun policy on its own property. "We're going to make ConocoPhillips the example of what happens when a corporation takes away your Second Amendment rights," declares NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.

That statement makes no sense, since the Second Amendment is a restraint on government. The Second Amendment does not mean a private employer has to welcome guns in its parking lot, any more than the First Amendment means I have a right to give speeches in your living room.

Exactly.

InstaPundit has guest bloggers this week.

2005-08-08T07:53:00.000-05:00

Three of them: Michael Totten, Megan McArdle and Ann Althouse. And as of 7:51 this morning, the three of them haven't made as many posts as Glenn would. Lazy bums!

Considering it's the only kind of coffee I drink...

2005-08-08T07:43:00.000-05:00

it makes sense, I suppose. But "cheap and angsty"?:

You are a Black Coffee

At your best, you are: low maintenance, friendly, and adaptable

At your worst, you are: cheap and angsty

You drink coffee when: you can get your hands on it

Your caffeine addiction level: high

What Kind of Coffee Are You?

Republicans are big spenders, too.

2005-08-05T12:16:00.000-05:00

With a tip to Dale Franks, who's noting an article by Jeff Jacoby:

...it might surprise younger readers to learn that spending discipline was once a basic Republican principle. Hard to believe in this era of bloated Republican budgets and the biggest-spending presidential administration in 40 years -- but true. Once upon a time Republicans actually described themselves with pride as fiscal conservatives. That was one of the reasons they opposed the promiscuous use of pork-barrel earmarks, which are typically used to bypass legislative standards, reward political favorites, and assert political control over state and local affairs.

We talked about this a bit at the last discussion club meeting. Some of the members said, and I agree, that this behavior is an unfortunate result of the nature of the Washington beast. Politicians are motivated to stay in office, and the easiest way to get elected and stay elected is to promise goodies to consituents. There are different factors at play here:

The disregard for the limits to powers on the government

The incentives for becoming a career politician (power, prestige, ...)

The lack of term limits and other measures [limited powers!] to curb these incentives

The public's expectation of something for nothing

As long as these factors are in play, the majority party will be tempted to spend like nuts to protect its position.

New element discovered.

2005-08-04T07:39:00.000-05:00

I don't know who originally wrote this - something going around in e-mail:

A major research institution (could it be Florida Tech) has recently announced the discovery of the heaviest element yet known to science. The new element has been named "Governmentium." Governmentium has 1 neutron,
12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 11 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.

These particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert. However, it can be detected, as it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of Governmentium causes 1 reaction to take over 4 days to complete, when it would normally take less than a second.

GOVERNMENTIUM has a normal 1/2-life of 4 years; it does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, Governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes.

This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as "Critical Morass."

When catalyzed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium - an element which radiates just as much energy, since it has 1/2 as many peons but twice as many morons.

Evolution, ID, passion and truth.

2005-08-03T13:21:00.000-05:00

David Klinghoffer has a piece on NRO about evolution and why there is cause for doubt.

First, he notes how we (or at least men) have evolved a competitive streak, an instinct to pass on our DNA to future generations at the expense of all rivals. Klinghoffer goes on to extend this instinct past mere genetic survival and into battles within the realm of ideas. So he talks about the specific tactics used to belittle ID and says they are signs of our evolved sense of status protection:

One prominent evolutionary psychologist, Harvard's Steven Pinker, has written frankly about rivalry in academia, and the use of cutting rhetoric in the defense of established ideas: "Their champions are not always averse to helping the ideas along with tactics of verbal dominance, among them intimidation ('Clearly'), threat ('It would be unscientific to'), authority ('As Popper showed'), insult ('This work lacks the necessary rigor for'), and belittling ('Few people today seriously believe that')."

I bring this up because Intelligent Design aggressively challenges the status of many professionals currently laboring in secular academia. And because one of the hallmarks of the defense of Darwinism is precisely the kind of rhetorical displays of intimidation, threat, authority, and insult that Pinker describes.

For instance in a section on the website of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, entitled "Q&A on Evolution and Intelligent Design," you will find numerous statements as if lifted almost verbatim from Pinker's examples - ridiculing ID as "non-scientific," an idea whose "advocates have yet to contribute in a scientifically rigorous manner," who "may use the language of science, but [who] do not use its methodology."

Yes, we should all play nice and be polite to our fellow men. But sometimes something is called "non-scientific" because it is indeed non-scientific. It doesn't matter how you spin it or if your feelings are hurt by it, but ID is non-scientific. There's status protection, and then there's calling a thing what it is.

Moving on...

When you consider that ID theoreticians have published their findings in peer-reviewed scientific journals, in formidable academic presses such as those of Cambridge University and the University of Chicago, such denunciations start to sound like a worried defense of status more than a disinterested search for truth.

Yeah, well, peers have reviewed ID and have rejected it.

Lastly...

In a wonderful irony, the only intellectual framework in which people can genuinely be expected to pursue truth dispassionately, even if that truth undermines our sense of personal prestige, happens to be the religious framework, in which people aren't animals at all but rather beings created in the image of God.

That's patently false. The only way to be truly dispassionate about any pursuit is to have no beliefs at all, of any kind. I'm no more dispassionate in my support of science as, for example, Ken Ham is dispassionate about Creationism. As I would reject any "scientific theory" that is anything but, Ham and hiscientificject anything actual scientic theory that challenges their notion of God.

Not to mention that a God-ly framework is the ultimate appeal to authority, which is, as Klinghoffer notes, supposedly a no-no.

And I think this inability to be truly dispassionate is found in everyone - no one has a complete lack of idealogy. Scientists may be dispassionate within the framework of science - allowing their work to lead them were empiricalithin the bounds of emperical evidence, yada yada - but they are quite passionate about science itself. The deeply religious will be passionate about their faith and reject all sorts of science because of it.

To discount the pursuit of knowledge because the pursuers have an interest in the pursuit is to discount all knowlege.

What's really interesting is that Klinghoffer uses the evolution of specific instincts to cast doubt on evolution, which doesn't make any sense. To my mind, it's like arguing that if 1 + 1 = 2, the existence of 2 somehow invalidates the concept of addition.

On the other hand, Klinghoffer seems to be arguing that we are nothing more than our instincts (our instincts tell us to bash on our rivals, I have quoted writings that do just that, therefore we always act on instanct, Q.E.D.).

But the neat thing about us humans [yes, I said "neat"! perhaps "keen" suits you?], what makes us more, uh, capable than other animals is our ability to rise above instinct. I suppose you could call this free will, self-awareness or a combination thereof. But we have evolved the capacity to process what our instincts tell us and to choose to act on them or not, to think instead of to simply react.

So while I believe nobody can be truly dispassionate about the pursuits they take, I believe our free will allows us to come close. We have the means to recognize fact as fact, to reason and to react in ways contrary to our instincts. Now, whether we choose to utilize these means is a different matter.

My apologies the long, rambling post. Apparently as an observer of such topics, I'm certainly not disinterested but am highly disorganized.

Hand guns that stamp their bullets.

2005-08-03T11:18:00.000-05:00

California (yes, all of it) is working on a bill to force gun manufacturers to produce guns that stamp a serial number on shell casings as it fires.

I will leave the commentary to Scott Fenstermacher:

So, the logical time to stamp the cartridge is when the firing pin is released. You've got 1 pin heading at the cartridge already, why not a few more? I've taken apart more guns than I care to count (part of my Nebraska heritage), and if I don't want this incriminating pin to leap forward, it would be childs play to leave the spring out or even remove the entire pin assembly. I'm guessing this minor surgery could be performed in under 15 minutes, easily.

You know, I almost want to say that any legislation aimed at curbing gun violence is a good thing. Part of me would like to think that this bill's authors only have the best of intentions. Then the realistic side of me kicks the idealistic side of me in the keester and reminds me that I KNOW better. Bills like this, that force the industry to make changes that will bear more impact on legitimate consumers than on criminals is just stupid.

But it's politics, as usual. It's a way to get headlines, to make the politician seem like he/she is on the higher ground, while vilifying their opponent (in this case, the gun manufacturers). The police organizations support this bill... of course, they have to. How would it look for them not to support a bill aimed at reducing crime? But they have to know better, they have to know it won't work, yet they can't say that... Doesn't that just suck?

Yes, it does.

As long as it keeps its noodly appendage to itself.

2005-08-02T13:27:00.000-05:00

Bobby Henderson is pushing for Kansas, if it must teach Intelligent Design in its public schools, to teach his version. Why not? I especially appreciate his tangential contention that global warming is caused by a lack of pirates. That's hilarious.

He has even received a couple of responses from Kansas School Board members.

My question: is the Flying Spaghetti Monster all covered with cheese?

Tip to Right Thinking.

Take the high road.

2005-08-02T12:54:00.000-05:00

Right Thinking has taken notice of Fred Phelps and wishes death upon him. Nah, that would just make him a martyr. Best just to heap piles of ridicule upon him. Or ignore him altogether, which is hard to do, I admit.

An alternative interpretation of The Lorax

2005-08-01T13:09:00.000-05:00

Maybe it's more about property rights than you would have believed.

My lessons gleaned from other Dr. Seuss books:

Green Eggs and Ham - persistence works.
There's a Wocket in My Pocket - don't do drugs.
Cat in the Hat - what is done without Mom's knowledge is A-OK.
ABC's - "Four fluffly feathers on a Fiffer-Feffer-Feff" is fun to say.
The Grinch - Christmas has nothing to do with Jesus.

Over There not so good.

2005-08-01T12:48:00.000-05:00

Actually, the so-called realistic depiction of the Iraq war is crap. Don't take my word for it ('cause I wouldn't know better anyway). Take it from someone who was there. It's a lengthy evisceration of the show, with a comparison of what the show depicts v. what would really happen. A sampling:

In the FX war, the soldiers are given orders to advance towards the building. So, in keeping with the 'reality' of this 'gripping' drama, they all stand up on-line and walk towards the building. Wrong.

A fire team advancing over open terrain towards a building they took fire from would be in 10 yards sprints, one team member at a time.

Finally, there is the shoot out. The terrorists rush out of the buildings in a mob and the Hollywood tacticians have members of the fire-team rush at them as if recreating a scene from Braveheart.

In real life, the grunts would just sit back and pick the terrorists off. But, evidently that isn't dramatic enough for FX.

There's much more. Check it out.

Tip to You-Know-Who.

A divided government is a better government.

2005-08-01T12:34:00.000-05:00

Virginia Postrel is calling for the return of gridlock. She's completely right.

I'm reminded of when I used to be a subscriber to The Intellectual Activist, back when it was Clinton v. Dole. They recommended voting for Clinton. It wasn't an endorsement by any means, but a way to curtail Dole's rubber-stamping of anything the GOP Congress would throw his way. They recognized then that the Republicans are no different than the Democrats when it comes to spending. Better to have a Democrat in office to veto their spending bills.

I'm more inclinded to "Bob".

2005-08-01T12:25:00.000-05:00

Andrew McCarthy:

So, the folks who brought you "compassionate conservatism" now offer "The Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism." Perfect: A war that's not called a war for fear of making people think about war, which is waged against an enemy who is not identified for fear of offending mass-murderers and the people who coddle them, and which occurs everywhere on the planet so no one is left out, but nowhere specific so no one is put in.

I have another suggestion. Let's call it "The Thing Involving the Teeny-Tiny Number of People Who Made Certain Things Go Boom After Reading that Book that We Didn't Flush and Who Absolutely, Positively Do Not Represent the Vast, Enormous Majority of Very, Very Nice People Who Read the Same Book Without Making Anything Go Boom."

Or maybe we could just call it "Mabel" — without, of course, meaning any offense to Mabel. Or Mabels. Or anyone. Really.

One would expect President Bush to not be so P.C., but whatever.

And the next thing you know, we'll be plugged into a big matrix.

2005-07-29T16:54:00.000-05:00

Because the machines will rise against us, even if they do look like us.

Walter Williams deserves his own radio show.

2005-07-29T11:52:00.000-05:00

He's guest-hosting for Rush Limbaugh right now and I am enjoying. He focuses much more on history and the principles of liberty. Quite educational, quite good.

My favorite amendment.

2005-07-28T13:08:00.000-05:00

The 9th! It tidies up so many loose ends. To wit:

First, that the entire purpose of the bill of rights was to protect liberty from democracy - to insure that no majority, no matter how large, could violate the rights of individuals. Second, that there was a raging debate over whether such a bill of rights was a good idea because, many of the founders argued, if you enumerate a list of specific rights, future governments will presume that anything not specifically enumerated is fair game for the government - i.e. the majority - to regulate or prohibit or do with as they will. All of the founders, as near as any historian can tell, agreed that this would be a bad thing because all of them agreed that no list of rights could possibly be exhaustive. Madison came up with the 9th amendment as a means of avoiding this negative outcome.

Pity it's not currenlty interpreted that way.

So, if the 9th amendment implies that we have rights that are not explicitly listed in the Constition [hear that, Santorum?!], how do we determine what they are? Why, via the classic formula, of course:

As long as they do not violate the rights of others (as defined by the common law of property, contract and tort), persons are presumed to be Â?immuneÂ? from interference by government. This presumption means that citizens may challenge any government action that restricts their otherwise rightful conduct, and the burden is on the government to show that its action is within its proper powers or scope. At the national level, the government would bear the burden of showing that its acts were both Â?necessary and properÂ? to accomplish an enumerated function, rather than, as now, forcing the citizen to prove why it is he or she should be left alone. At the state level, the burden would fall upon state government to show that legislation infringing the liberty of its citizens was a necessary exercise of its Â?police powerÂ? - that is, the stateÂ?s power to protect the rights of its citizensÂ?

This is exactly the opposite of what we really have now, where the government can do pretty much whatever it wants.

Here's one for Bart.

2005-07-25T14:21:00.000-05:00

Jane Fonda to Oppose Iraq War on Bus Tour:

"I have not taken a stand on any war since Vietnam," she said. "I carry a lot of baggage from that."

No [bleep]!

This is big.

2005-07-25T14:00:00.000-05:00

The Teamsters and the SEIU are leaving the AFL-CIO.

Feel the love.

2005-07-25T09:55:00.000-05:00

Jon Henke: "Increasingly, I find that what I like least about libertarianism are the libertarians."

Freakin' big brother!

2005-07-25T09:08:00.000-05:00

No, that's not a reference to myself, Joe.

A legislator in New Jersey wants to ban smoking in cars. Arg!

What is worse?

2005-07-25T08:37:00.000-05:00

Having Fred Phelps and his ilk protest a military funeral, or having a state official do the same.

Discuss.

More on the Mega-Conference

2005-07-25T08:07:00.000-05:00

Jason Rosenhouse at The Panda's Thumb continues his coverage of the Creation Mega-Conference here and here, and he says there's more to come.

What does this guy take us for?

2005-07-23T11:12:00.000-05:00

John Kerry is demanding the release of all documents and memos, "in their entirety," from John Roberts' judicial tenure. Isn't Kerry the same guy that refused to have his complete military and scholastic records released during his campaign for president?

Sure, he released them after his failed bid for the White House and the findings were quite humorous. The supposed intellectual candidate actually had a lower GPA than President Bush and don't even get me started on those Purple Hearts.

Anyway, to take my cue from the old Rolaids commercial..."How do you spell hypocrite?"

K-E-R-R-Y.

Young Earth Reminisance

2005-07-22T21:19:00.000-05:00

David, I'm surprised, actually, that all your friends are old-earthers. I had a number of classmates who were very strict young-earthers. I remember staring with incredulity at one classmate who insisted that dinosaur fossils were intentionally created by God to test the faithful -- who're you going to trust, your senses or the Bible?

I've also heard that "Well, no one was around, so how do you know" crap, too. To which I respond, "Well, no one saw God create the world, either."

More on the Mega-Conference

2005-07-22T16:46:00.000-05:00

Ronald Bailey's accounts of the Creation Mega-Conference are mostly matter-of-fact, whereas The Panda's Thumb is much more critical.

Over at one table a DVD is playing. On the screen is a handsome young man lecturing to a roomful of obviously enthralled students about the nature of geology. With a bemused tone he says that modern geologists insist that various geologic processes unfold over millions of years. “But how do they know that? Was anyone there to see it happen? Has geological science been going on for millions of years?” The video is galling for many reasons: The utter lack of respect for the work geologists do, the patronizing tone of the speaker, and the fact that no one really believes that if you didn't see something happen then you can't speak with confidence about it, immediately come to mind.

My wife and I have seen this DVD, given to us by the homeschooling group in an effort to convince us to participate. I had the same reaction, "Are they really saying you can't know something unless you witness it yourself?" Crazy talk, I say!

[Jerry Falwell] then asserts that all the polls show that 2/3 to 3/4 of Americans agree with AiG on this issue, which is total nonsense. The polls have consistently shown that the percentage of people accepting the Young-Earth position is just under fifty percent.

Wow, even just under 50% is a lot of people. Not what I was expecting. Where I grew up, in small-town central Kansas, I know none of my friends were Young-Earthers. Now, here in SW Missouri I'm sure the number is above 50%. Still, I would have thought the number to be more like 10% to 25% nation-wide. Oh, well.

The account goes on here, and after a bit our correspondent gets a little, er, defensive:

But what really bugged me about the talk was not the extreme shallowness of Kerby's thinking. No, I'm used to that. What bugged me were his incessant imprecations that we be humble before the glories of nature.

Humility? How dare these people talk about humility! You know what scientists do when confronted with nature's complexity? First they spend five years or more in graduate school, living in near-poverty, having no life, studying all the time while being used as cheap labor by the university, just to get a PhD. Then they go out into a job market that presents the very real possibility of unemployment as the reward for all that hard work. If they're lucky they'll land a post-doc, and bounce around the country for a while struggling to find a permanent position. Even if they are lucky enough to land a permanent position they could very well find themselves in some two by nothing town in the middle of nowhere. They spend years trying to get a research program off the ground, scrapping for grant money, and fighting with ornery referees to get their research published.

And why do they do that? They do it because they know that's what it takes if you want to understand nature's complexity just a little bit better. That's what it takes to make the tiniest dent in the sum total of human ignorance.

That's humility.

What isn't humility is having a used car salesman give you a brief description of some complex system, conclude after five seconds' reflection that it could not have evolved, and then decide that only an omnipotent God could be responsible for such a critter. That's not humility, that's supreme arrogance. That's pride and sloth all wrapped up into one.

He's right, but still, take a breather. Take a deep breath and count to 10. All better? [No, I never get fired up in my posts. Why are you laughing?]

Good times, good times.

My kind of Justice?

2005-07-22T13:25:00.000-05:00

Jacob Sullum says John Roberts may be okay if what his detractors say about him is true. Check it out.

VDH on terrorism

2005-07-22T13:09:00.000-05:00

I'd like to post VDH's entire article here, since every paragraph is significant, but I'll use some restraint.

On how Israel gets the shaft:

From 1967 we witnessed 40 years of bombers, child murdering, airline hijacking, suicide murdering, and gratuitous shooting. We in the West usually cried crocodile tears, and then came up with all sorts of reasons to allow such Middle Eastern killers a pass.

Yasser Arafat, replete with holster and rants at the U.N., had become a “moderate” and was thus free to steal millions of his good-behavior money. If Hamas got European cash, it would become reasonable, ostracize its “military wing,” and cease its lynching and vigilantism.

When some tried to explain that Wars 1-3 (1947, 1956, 1967) had nothing to do with the West Bank, such bothersome details fell on deaf ears.

When it was pointed out that Germans were not blowing up Poles to get back lost parts of East Prussia nor were Tibetans sending suicide bombers into Chinese cities to recover their country, such analogies were caricatured.

When the call for a “Right of Return” was making the rounds, few cared to listen that over a half-million forgotten Jews had been cleansed from Syria, Iraq, and Egypt, and lost billions in property.

Let me interject here. I recall a conversation with a colleague a year or so ago where I mentioned this very same thing, and I was treated like I was nuts. No, this fact is not widely known or accepted.

There's more about Israel and terrorism, but I'll leave it to you to read the rest.

But there is this:

Typical after the London bombing is the ubiquitous Muslim spokesman who when asked to condemn terrorism, starts out by deploring such killing, assuring that it has nothing to do with Islam, yet then ending by inserting the infamous “but” — as he closes with references about the West Bank, Israel, and all sorts of mitigating factors. Almost no secular Middle Easterners or religious officials write or state flatly, “Islamic terrorism is murder, pure and simple evil. End of story, no ifs or buts about it.”

Funny he should say this when LGF posted this today:

Senior Muslims have warned the Government that it needed to revise British foreign policy if it wants to put an end to the violence.

Dr Azzam Tamimi, from the Muslim Association of Britain, said the country was in real danger and that this would continue so long as British forces remained in Iraq.

He described the July 7 bombings and the attempted attacks in London on Thursday as “horrifying” BUT said it was not enough to simply unite in condemnation of the bombers.

A point made in the discussion group last night - we'd all feel a lot better about this if more mainstream Muslims vociferously condemned terrorism. The fact that this hasn't been the case is troubling. I fear that people will begin to think of Islam as a whole as an enabler.

Okay, maybe I don't want to be a Republican after all.

2005-07-22T12:41:00.000-05:00

Like I was considering in this post, because if that means I have to agree with people like Rick Santorum, well forget it. They're printing excerpts from his book It Takes a Family on NRO, and today's is about gay marriage:

The village elders on the Massachusetts court reasoned that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts could not discriminate against people simply because they were exercising their constitutional rights. They went so far as to say that there is no “rational basis” for treating heterosexual unions differently from same-sex relationships: The only conceivable reason for barring same-sex couples from state-sanctioned marriage had to be “animus” — hatred. That’s right, the Massachusetts court said the only reason you could possibly want to protect the sacred institution at the core of every civilization in history is because you are a bigot. Welcome to village legal scholarship.

Well, yeah, it is bigotry. And it is funny how he spins his bigotry into some noble defense of a "sacred institution". What does he fear?

Gay marriage is not an attack on capital-M Marriage. If you believe it is, it's a sign of your own doubts with the institution. Perhaps you don't take marriage as seriously as you should. Look, if Bob and Jim decide to get married, I'm not going to turn to my wife and say, "Well, I guess it's all a sham, honey. See ya!" That's ridiculous. If you think you would, well...may I recommend a visit to a good marriage counselor?

I've said this before, and I'll say it again: this all boils down to individual rights. The act of two men or two women getting married hurts no one. It does absolutely no harm to you or anyone else. Your rights are not infringed by this act (sure, you may take offense, but there's no right to not be offended). Therefore, it should be allowed.

Pretty simple, really.

Does Britain have the ACLU?

2005-07-22T11:56:00.000-05:00

I've been watching the story of the suspect that was shot in the London Underground this morning. According to eyewitnesses, the police tackled the suspect then shot him five times at very close range. It will be interesting to see how long it takes for organizations like the ACLU to start accusing the police of brutality even though there could be several different reasons why they acted in the manner they did. The suspect may have had a weapon or could have been attempting to detonate some type of device. However, unless the London Police come forward with evidence pointing to those possibilities, they're likely to be drawn and quartered.

It's Evolution Day at In Whack

2005-07-22T09:38:00.000-05:00

First off, Ronald Bailey completes his series on the Creation Mega-Conference by noting:

With Batten's lecture, my time among the creationists came to an end. Just as the Reverend Jerry Falwell promised, there were no snake-handlers at the Creation Mega-Conference. Instead the conferees were a bunch of decent people trying to make sense of the world and live good lives. The deeply saddening thing is that these decent people have come to believe they have to reject modern science in order to do so.

Indeed, I find their rejection of science unfortunate as well, and is one of the reasons I supported pulling our kids out of a home schooling group that was going to teach this very thing.

Meanwhile, over at TCS, Frederick Turner says evolution is proven. He points out that, naturally, biological studies and journal accept evolution "without question":

By my calculation, then, opponents of evolution must find a way of matching and disproving, experiment by experiment, observation by observation, and calculation by calculation, at least two million pages of closely reasoned scientific text, representing roughly two million man-years of expert research and perhaps trillions of dollars of training, salaries, equipment, and infrastructure.

But the task of the opponent does not end here. For biology is not the only field for which the theory of evolution is an essential foundation. Geology, physical anthropology, agricultural science, environmental science, much of chemistry, some areas of physics (e.g. protein folding) and even disciplines such as climatology and oceanography (which rely on the evolutionary history of the planet in its calculations about the composition of the atmosphere and oceans), are at least partially founded on evolution. Most important of all for our immediate welfare, medicine is almost impossible as a research discipline without evolutionary theory. So perhaps the opponent must also throw in another 4 million pages, four million man-years, and ten trillion dollars -- and be prepared to swallow the billions of human deaths that might follow the abandonment of the foundations of medical, mining, environmental, agricultural, and climatological knowledge.

Well, let me say that I disagree that volume matters. All it takes is one verifiable counter-example to refute evolution. But he's right to say that, should we abandon the science that is built upon evolution, it would cause much suffering.

A theory on property and Kelo

2005-07-22T07:55:00.000-05:00

I attended a discussion group meeting last night where we talk about this and that - well, they talk about this and that, I mostly listen. They talked about property rights and the Kelo decision for a time, and someone mentioned that he expected it to go the other way, that he was surprised the Court decided against the home owners. Why would they do such a thing?

And then it occurred to me...if the Court said it the government does not have the power to take personal property from one private entity to turn it over to another, wouldn't that extend beyond real estate? Wouldn't that destroy the welfare state?

Money is property, too. And social security, welfare and all kinds of other stuff are, at base, the taking of property from a group of people and giving it to another group of people for private use. So perhaps Kelo could have brought the whole thing to a halt had it gone the other way.

But perhaps not. Though in principle it's all private property, I'm sure someone would find some legal distinction between real estate and money.

Anyway, just throwing it out there. Any thoughts?

And the weather is nice.

2005-07-22T07:53:00.000-05:00

Bart, in reference to your post that mentions San Diego, I am reminded of a bit by stand-up comedian Lewis Black. I've been unable to find a transcript, so excuse me while I paraphrase from memory:

The easiest weatherman job in the country has to be in San Diego.

"Now over to Bob for the weather. Bob?"

"Thanks, Jim. Well, here in San Diego today the weather will be...nice. Tomorrow it will be...nice and looking into the weekend it will be...nice. Back to you, Jim."

Or something like that.

This one will get your blood-pressure up.

2005-07-21T21:25:00.000-05:00

I received a Force Protection Advisory Message (FPAM) from Northern Command (NORTHCOM) yesterday that really gave my stress ball a workout.

NORTHCOM is the joint forces command that covers North America and they are responsible for coordinating all branches of the military as they relate to the defense of that region. That said, they are the major player when it comes to homeland defense. (For you fans of the film "Wargames," NORTHCOM is headquartered with NORAD at the famous Cheyenne Mountain complex on Peterson Air Force Base. It's really cool.)

The FPAM stated that a threat existed regarding the possibility of protestors and picketers at funerals of military personnel killed in the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). I could hardly believe my eyes! Have the American people sunk so low as to protest a servicemember's funeral? I continued reading and it all started to make sense. The FPAM went on to say that the threat came from none other than the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) of Topeka, Kansas.

Fred Phelps strikes again.

I read the entire FPAM which included background information, tactics used by the threat entity, and procedures personnel should use to avoid or defuse any contacts with the picketers. It was very accurate in its discussion of the baiting tactics Westboro protestors use to get people to attack them, resulting in lawsuits which feed their so-called "ministry."

I decided to check out the information for myself. I just couldn't believe that these people would do this. Sure enough, the website http://www.godhatesamerica.com/ hits you right in the stomach with its foul and utterly repulsive language. The following is only a small sample of their sheer hatred for everything America stands for.

"Thank God for IEDs killing American soldiers in strange lands every day. WBC rejoices every time the Lord God in His vengeance kills or maims an American soldier with an Improvised Explosive Device (IED). 'The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked' (Ps. 58:10)."

"To most effectively cause America to know her abominations (Ez. 16:2), WBC will picket the funerals of these Godless, fag army American soldiers when their pieces return home. WBC will also picket their landing spot, in Dover, Delaware early and often."

It literally makes me sick to my stomach and I apologize for having to subject all of you in Bloggerland to its filth. However, I felt it was important to get the word out about these hate-mongering fools. More to come as I investigate the matter further.

"I'm Not Dead!"

2005-07-21T21:09:00.000-05:00

Yes, I may have been MIA, but I managed to foil the Grim Reaper's plans for me once again.

Work has been uber-busy of late due to a fresh round of deployments and redeployments. The Army seems to like making the summer our busiest time of year so we can enjoy the 110 degree temperatures in all parts of the country.

I did get to spend another week in San Diego last month. I never thought I would say this, but I would love to live there. Sure, it's the left coast, but the weather in San Diego is absolutely wonderful. Plus, it's a big military town, so the hippies only outnumber the normal people by a margin of two to one, as opposed to the rest of California where the margin skyrockets to five to one.

Yeah, let them rest!

2005-07-21T17:48:00.000-05:00

Is it just me, or does the headline imply that they were forced to call dead people?

Marketers May Stop Calling Dead People

A good day for two tech giants.

2005-07-21T17:46:00.000-05:00

First there is: Microsoft's 4Q Profits Jump 37 Percent. And yes, the article indicates that is a jump up, not down.

And then there is: Google's 2Q Profits Quadruple. I think this means that Google's profits are quadruple the size of France's GDP.

Good for them.

Terror is in retaliation of the Iraq war?

2005-07-21T17:41:00.000-05:00

The Anchoress has a pictorial reminder of order of events. Tip to Michelle Malkin.

The point is, the West didn't start this.

Another attack in London

2005-07-21T08:52:00.000-05:00

Thankfully, it looks like it may have been foiled. Explosions reported on London tube:

Up to four explosions hit London's transport system on Thursday, exactly two weeks after more than 50 people were killed in blasts on underground railway trains and a bus.

No one was reported injured in the blasts that caused major disruption and shook the nerves of an already jittery city.

Witnesses said they had seen what could have been a would-be bomber running away after dropping a rucksack on one of the trains.

"We all got off on the platform and the guy just ran and started running up the escalator," one witness who gave her name as Andrea told the BBC.

"Everyone was screaming for someone to stop him. He ran past me ... and he ran out of the station. In fact he left a bag on the train," she said.

A blast blew out the windows of a bus in Hackney in east London, but there were no reported injuries.

How to ask a question

2005-07-21T08:46:00.000-05:00

I'm surprised Microsoft would publish an article like this, particularly since it uses terms like "RTFM" and "STFW". There are some helpful tips in it, but I wasn't expecting the bits of humor.

I wonder if "JFGI" (just freakin' Google it) has already been coined.

Silly site of the day.

2005-07-21T08:41:00.000-05:00

Stuff On My Cat, which is a collection of photos of, well, stuff on people's cats.

I particularly like the one with the baby and the one with the pizza boxes.

We have two cats at home, but I doubt either one of them would tolerate having any sort of stuff placed on their bodies.

UPDATE: Huh, yesterday it was a public site, but now it prompts for a user name and password. Strange.

Reconciling creationism and science.

2005-07-21T08:35:00.000-05:00

(With a tip to All-Seeing Glenn.) Reason magazine sent their science guy, Ronald Bailey, to the Answers in Genesis Mega-Conference. So far Bailey has published two articles about some presentations given that attempt to reconcile strict Creationism (Earth was created in literally six days, is about 6,000 years old, no death or disease before Adam and Eve ate from the wrong tree, etc.) with scientific observations and theories. Those pieces are here and here.

Bailey gets to the heart of the matter in his first article:

However, the longer I listened the clearer it became that creationism is not about science. It's about morality. Specifically, creationists worry that biological evolution undermines people's moral beliefs, leading to lawlessness, family breakdown, homosexuality, pornography, and abortion. The real heart of creationism is existential dread.

Philip Bell, former British cancer researcher and now fulltime creationist, in his talk "Ape Men, 'Missing Links' and the Bible," explains, "If Adam is your ancestor then you were created specially and have a purpose in life. If evolution is true, we are descended from ape-like animals with no morality, no aesthetic sensibility and no soul." If evolution were true, Bell tells the conferees, then "you would have no purpose for your existence."

In his welcoming remarks, the Reverend Jerry Falwell similarly declares, "If we don't understand the young earth and how God created it in six 24-hour days, then our values are skewed. If we believe that we evolved from a blob of protoplasm, we have zero values then... If we evolved, then there was no Fall in the Garden and there is no sin and no need for redemption and Christ's death was unnecessary and meaningless."

If I were religious, I would argue that there's obviously still sin regardless of whether the events of the Garden of Eden literally occurred or not, so Christ still has meaning.

Since I'm not, though, I'll say that human life has value and purpose, period.

I take particular note of this since it's because of Answers in Genesis that we have switched home schooling groups. The group my kids attended last year has decided to spend all of this coming year focusing on some kind of curriculum from AiG. No thanks.

There's a lesson in this.

2005-07-20T17:13:00.000-05:00

As far as a video game's rating being changed to "Adults Only". Apparently, the game designers had created a rather graphic sexual scene in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas for their own amusement but it was supposed to be locked away from everyone else. That is, until someone else figured it out and released a patch that unlocks the scene. Doh!

Lesson: Don't leave that kind of stuff in the game. Well, actually, don't create it in that codebase in the first place.

This reminds me of a story I was told about an engineering company that was having a hard time getting paid by its customer. So the boss made a joke-threat saying he'd have the system programmed to shut down on January 1 if they hadn't paid by then. The programmer overheard this conversation and, sure enough, placed code in the application to do just that as a joke. Well, the poor soon-to-be-fired programmer must have forgotten to take it back out, 'cause guess what happened on January 1?

I hope we can handle the truth.

2005-07-20T16:12:00.000-05:00

Reason has 7 questions for Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. I particularly like question number 5:

You're on a lifeboat, but it can only hold 8 of the original 10 amendments without sinking, killing your whole family. Which ones go?

Toughie. I can tell you the two that absolutely need to stay: the 9th and the 10th. It may be that the other 8 are implied by these two. Unless, of course, you believe rights are derived from the Constitution, like Rick Santorum and (regrettably) just about everyone else.

Maybe it's a trick question:

"Sir, I would gladly sacrifice myself and my family for the sanctity of the Bill of Rights and not dispose of a single one."

Uh huh.

Oh, the movies I've seen.

2005-07-20T14:17:00.000-05:00

From James Newkirk, italicize the ones you've seen and bold the ones you actually liked. Conclusion: I see a lot of movies.

1. Titanic (1997) - $600,779,824
2. Star Wars (1977) - $460,935,665
3. E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982) - $434,949,459
4. Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999) - $431,065,444
5. Spider-Man (2002) - $403,706,375
6. Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, The (2003) - $377,019,252
7. Passion of the Christ, The (2004) - $370,025,697
8. Jurassic Park (1993) - $356,784,000
9. Shrek 2 (2004) - $356,211,000
10. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, The (2002) - $340,478,898
11. Finding Nemo (2003) - $339,714,367
12. Forrest Gump (1994) - $329,691,196
13. Lion King, The (1994) - $328,423,001
14. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001) - $317,557,891
15. Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) - $313,837,577
16. Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002) - $310,675,583
17. Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983) - $309,125,409
18. Independence Day (1996) - $306,124,059
19. Pirates of the Caribbean (2003) - $305,411,224
20. Sixth Sense, The (1999) - $293,501,675
21. Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) - $290,158,751
22. Home Alone (1990) - $285,761,243
23. Matrix Reloaded, The (2003) - $281,492,479
24. Shrek (2001) - $267,652,016
25. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) - $261,970,615
26. How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000) - $260,031,035
27. Jaws (1975) - $260,000,000
28. Monsters, Inc. (2001) - $255,870,172
29. Batman (1989) - $251,188,924
30. Men in Black (1997) - $250,147,615
31. Toy Story 2 (1999) - $245,823,397
32. Bruce Almighty (2003) - $242,589,580
33. Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) - $242,374,454
34. Twister (1996) - $241,700,000
35. My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002) - $241,437,427
36. Ghost Busters (1984) - $238,600,000
37. Beverly Hills Cop (1984) - $234,760,500
38. Cast Away (2000) - $233,630,478
39. Lost World: Jurassic Park, The (1997) - $229,074,524
40. Signs (2002) - $227,965,690
41. Rush Hour 2 (2001) - $226,138,454
42. Mrs. Doubtfire (1993) - $219,200,000
43. Ghost (1990) - $217,631,306
44. Aladdin (1992) - $217,350,219
45. Saving Private Ryan (1998) - $216,119,491
46. Mission: Impossible II (2000) - $215,397,30
47. X2 (2003) - $214,948,780
48. Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002) - $213,079,163
49. Back to the Future (1985) - $210,609,762
50. Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me (1999) - $205,399,422
51. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) - $204,843,350
52. Exorcist, The (1973) - $204,565,000
53. Mummy Returns, The (2001) - $202,007,640
54. Armageddon (1998) - $201,573,391
55. Gone with the Wind (1939) - $198,655,278
56. Pearl Harbor (2001) - $198,539,855
57. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) - $197,171,806
58. Toy Story (1995) - $191,800,000
59. Men in Black II (2002) - $190,418,803
60. Gladiator (2000) - $187,670,866
61. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) - $184,925,485
62. Dances with Wolves (1990) - $184,208,848
63. Batman Forever (1995) - $184,031,112
64. Fugitive, The (1993) - $183,875,760
65. Ocean's Eleven (2001) - $183,405,771
66. What Women Want (2000) - $182,805,123
67. Perfect Storm, The (2000) - $182,618,434
68. Liar Liar (1997) - $181,395,380
69. Grease (1978) - $181,360,000
70. Jurassic Park III (2001) - $181,166,115
71. Mission: Impossible (1996) - $180,965,237
72. Planet of the Apes (2001) - $180,011,740
73. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) - $179,870,271
74. Pretty Woman (1990) - $178,406,268
75. Tootsie (1982) - $177,200,000
76. Top Gun (1986) - $176,781,728
77. There's Something About Mary (1998) - $176,483,808
78. Ice Age (2002) - $176,387,405
79. Crocodile Dundee (1986) - $174,635,000
80. Home Alone 2: Lost in New York (1992) - $173,585,516
81. Elf (2003) - $173,381,405
82. Air Force One (1997) - $172,888,056
83. Rain Man (1988) - $172,825,435
84. Apollo 13 (1995) - $172,071,312
85. Matrix, The (1999) - $171,383,253
86. Beauty and the Beast (1991) - $171,301,428
87. Tarzan (1999) - $171,085,177
88. Beautiful Mind, A (2001) - $170,708,996
89. Chicago (2002) - $170,684,505
90. Three Men and a Baby (1987) - $167,780,960
91. Meet the Parents (2000) - $166,225,040
92. Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991) - $165,500,000
93. Hannibal (2001) - $165,091,464
94. Catch Me If You Can (2002) - $164,435,221
95. Big Daddy (1999) - $163,479,795
96. Sound of Music, The (1965) - $163,214,286
97. Batman Returns (1992) - $162,831,698
98. Bug's Life, A (1998) - $162,792,677
99. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004) - $161,963,000
100. Waterboy, The (1998) - $161,487,252

The Waterboy made the list?

This has to be a joke.

2005-07-20T12:25:00.000-05:00

QandO has the goods on this:

The word "fail" should be banned from use in classrooms and replaced with the phrase "deferred success" to avoid demoralising pupils, a group of teachers has proposed.

Members of the Professional Association of Teachers (PAT) argue that telling pupils they have failed can put them off learning for life.

A spokesman for the group said it wanted to avoid labelling children. "We recognise that children do not necessarily achieve success first time," he said.

"But I recognise that we can't just strike a word from the dictionary," he said.

"Deferred success". Holy cow.

It could easily carry over into football:

Deferred touchdown = punt
Deferred reception = incomplete pass
Deferred carry = fumble
Deferred gain = tackle for loss
Deferred participation = sent to the bench/ejected from game
Deferred snap = delay of game
Deferred sportsmanship = personal foul

Google is doing more than taking over the world.

2005-07-20T09:49:00.000-05:00

They're taking over the moon as well. Cool stuff.

Try zooming in all the way and see what you get.

Status confirmed.

2005-07-19T13:20:00.000-05:00

It is a slow news day.

This is silly.

2005-07-19T13:17:00.000-05:00

LGF has a CBS memo on the use of the dreaded "T" word:

Rather than calling assailants “terrorists,” we can refer to them as bombers, hijackers, gunmen (if we’re sure no women were in the group [humor!]), militants, extremists, attackers or some other appropriate noun.

[...]

As CBC News editor-in-chief Tony Burman has pointed out: “Our preference is to describe the act or individual, and let the viewer or listener or political representatives make their own judgment.”

Ah, but they'll be more than happy to use labels like "ultra-conservative" whenever they feel like it. Let the viewers make their own judgement, my butt.

Must be a slow news day.

2005-07-19T11:11:00.000-05:00

The local talk radio station I listen to carries reports from Fox News every half-hour. They wrapped up the latest session with a report about Jude Law cheating on his girl friend/fiance/wife/whatever with his kids' (or maybe kid's, don't know, don't care) nanny. The reporter even threw in a joke: "Talk about laying down the Law". Ugh.

Can't they save this stuff for People Magazine? Let me make this clear - people tuning in to listen to Rush don't give a rip about stuff like this. Yes, I speak for all of them, thank you. And to hear it from Fox News, of all outfits. Bleh.

A review of the lastest Harry Potter book.

2005-07-19T08:07:00.000-05:00

Over at OpinionJournal. My wife and son are reading it together and then I'll consume it.

I'm currently reading The Reality Dysfunction, which is freaked-out. Imagine what it would be like if Stephen King wrote outer-space tales. I'm not sure if I like it - guess it'll depend on how it ends.

UPDATE: Michael Graham says the new Harry Potter book is dull.

Our rights are derived from government.

2005-07-19T07:53:00.000-05:00

Or so Senator Rick Santorum believes. Pity.

100 People Who Are Screwing Up America

2005-07-18T09:08:00.000-05:00

NRO has an interview conducted by Kathryn Jean Lopez with Bernard Goldberg on his book 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America: (and Al Franken Is #37).

First, I think singling out Al Franken in the title is silly.

Second, I saw John Stewart interview Goldberg on The Daily Show, and Stewart kicked his butt. Given, it's not exactly fair, since Stewart will often interject jokes or play to his audience and it looked to me that Goldberg didn't know how to handle that. But in the end, Stewart claimed we should be more worried about what the government is up to instead of these 100 individuals, and Goldberg didn't have a good response to that.

Third, like Lopez suggests, I'd be more interested in The 100 People who Make America a Better Place.

See Unleashed.

2005-07-18T07:57:00.001-05:00

What a good movie. I saw it yesterday at the cheap theatre and am regretting not seeing it earlier. It has to be about the most touching action flick I've seen. It is full of some fantastic - often rough - fight scenes. But it's really about music, family and what it means to be human. Can Danny shed his upbringing - having been literally raised like an attack dog - and live as an oridinary person?

Oh, the things a guy will do for a piano!

UPDATE: One of the things they talk about in the karate I do is how many of the moves we learn are appropriate for in-close fighting - "fighting in a phone booth", they call it. Well, there's a great fight scene in Unleashed that takes place in a bathroom stall that reminds me of this. I'm sure I couldn't get my leg up to kick a guy in the head in that tight of a space, though.

It is okay to walk away from the blog, you know.

2005-07-18T07:57:00.000-05:00

The All-Blogger makes something like 30 posts over the weekend and then apologizes because, and I quote, "blogging has been rather light this weekend". As Pooh would say, Oh bother!

True character.

2005-07-15T16:56:00.000-05:00

With a tip to Michelle Malkin, take a look at this:

During a routine patrol in Baghdad June 2, Army Pfc. Stephen Tschiderer, a medic, was shot in the chest by an enemy sniper, hiding in a van just 75 yards away. The incident was filmed by the insurgents.

Tschiderer, with E Troop, 101st “Saber” Cavalry Division, attached to 3rd Battalion, 156th Infantry Regiment, 256th Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, was knocked to the ground from the impact, but he popped right back up, took cover and located the enemy’s position.

After tracking down the now-wounded sniper with a team from B Company, 4th Battalion, 1st Iraqi Army Brigade, Tschiderer secured the terrorist with a pair of handcuffs and gave medical aid to the terrorist who’d tried to kill him just minutes before.

Such restraint. I don't know if I could be so nice to someone who just shot me in the chest.

They have video showing Tschiderer [spell that 5 times fast!] taking the shot and getting right back up. Rock on.

Bad, bad people come in all forms.

2005-07-15T15:55:00.000-05:00

Like T-ball coaches:

A T-ball coach allegedly paid one of his players $25 to hurt an 8-year-old mentally disabled teammate so he wouldn't have to put the boy in the game, police said Friday.

Mark R. Downs Jr., 27, of Dunbar, is accused of offering one of his players the money to hit the boy in the head with a baseball, police said. Witnesses told police Downs didn't want the boy to play in the game because of his disability.

Police said the boy was hit in the head and in the groin with a baseball just before a game, and did not play, police said.

"The coach was very competitive," state police Trooper Thomas B. Broadwater said. "He wanted to win."

No [bleep]. Jerk!

But then there's this:

If Downs is convicted of any crime, he won't be allowed to be a coach next year, Forsythe said.

Say what? If he's convicted of putting a hit on any player - much less his own - the SOB should be banned for life.

Yeah, but the tunnel scene!

2005-07-15T08:16:00.000-05:00

Glenn Beck is going off about the Gene Wilder version of Chocolate Factory saying it's better than the new one. Maybe it is and maybe it isn't, since I haven't seen the Johnny Depp version yet. But I'll tell you this: I'd like the Wilder version a lot more if not for that freaked-out, horrific tunnel scene. That just does not belong. Gives me the heebie-jeebies.

This is not comforting.

2005-07-14T11:41:00.000-05:00

From the Village Voice:

How true that was, because basically this is what the Qur'aan says.

Surah 2

190. And fight in the Way of Allah against those who fight you.

191. And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Fitnah (reversion to polytheism, turning a disbeliever after one has believed in Allah) is worse than killing.

Surah IV-Women

if they (Disbelievers) turn back to enmity then take them and kill them wherever you find them, and choose no friend or helper from among them. (v 89) The Mujahideen understand this to mean exactly what it says. There are no boundaries. The Crusade is global and so the Jihad has to be global.

Surah 2 section 194:

The sacred month is for the sacred month, and for the prohibited things, there is the law of retribution (redress, equality in retaliation) (Qisas). Then whoever transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with the pious.

This means you do to the Crusaders what they do to you. Islam allows retaliation-like for like. This means that the relatives of the Iraqis who were beaten to death in Abu Ghraib have the right to beat to death the crusaders who killed their loved ones. The Muslims who had their transportation, hospitals, water treatment plants and industries bombed continuously since 1991 have the right given by Allah to do to the Kuffar what the Kuffar did to them! This is what happened in London today.

Tip to LGF.