Upcoming Elections To Keep An Eye On

In 1993, we had a charismatic new Democratic president (some even called him the first black president), a vocal healthcare debate, and Democratic majorities in the House and Senate. Sound familiar? Well, it should. Many pundits have cited parallels between 1993 and 2009. Conservatives point out that the political revolution of 1994 really began in 1993, when the country became deeply unhappy with the new administration. Further momentum built in the wake of Republican victories in Virginia and New Jersey's gubernatorial races, and the New York city mayoral race. While this year's mayoral race is capturing virtually no attention (the incumbent seems like a safe bet to be re-elected without the blessing of either major party), the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial elections are again being cited as a bellwether.

Some caveats do apply. The 1994 Republican sweep was helped immensely by Democratic retirements. Empty seats are harder to defend. There are few Democratic vacancies this time around, but there are plenty of Democratic seats occupied by first-term Representatives. There are also powerful anti-incumbent feelings this time which add fluidity to the mix. Most importantly, in 1993 the Clinton healthcare reforms were soundly defeated and the president himself was an unpopular figure. This time around, we have yet to see what the outcome of healthcare reform will be, and president Obama still has a healthy level of personal popularity.

With all that in mind, I'd like to make some tentative predictions about what the outcomes of three races will tell us. These races are relatively high profile, and run the gamut of winnability for both parties. They are the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial races, and the race in California's 10th Congressional district.

The easiest win for Republicans is in Virginia. Virginia is still more red than blue, and Republicans have fielded an excellent candidate. In fact, they are leading in the polls for all three of the top statewide offices. Simply put, if Creigh Deeds were to pull off an upset in this race, the Republican party can kiss any chances to make gains in 2010 goodbye. They would be likely to lose some of their most promising potential challengers who are still on the fence about running, and would definitely see an impact in motivation and fundraising.

Somewhere in the middle lies New Jersey. This state is solid blue, but the incompetence of its current leaders coupled with high unemployment has put it into the mix. Chris Christie was leading handily over Democratic Governor John Corzine until recently. Attack ads from Corzine (he's outspending Christie 3:1), a lethargic Christie campaign, and an unusually strong independent challenger have brought Christie's numbers back down to parity with the governor. Short of a serious scandal breaking out, this is probably as close to a 50-50 race as anything is going to get. If Christie wins, it will be a serious morale boost for a badly discouraged Republican party. Look for every pundit with an "R" next to his name to cite it as proof that a 1994 repeat is in the offing for 2010. It will probably cause some fence-sitters to jump into congressional races they have been considering. Should Christie lose, it will definitely hurt, but not be a fatal blow like Virginia. Democrats will cite it as proof that Republicans are not going to repeat 1994, and Republicans will argue that New Jersey is just too blue a state. The margin of victory will matter most here. If Christie or Corzine squeak out a win, we probably haven't learned much. If either man squashes his opponent, look for good things in his party's future.

Last, but not least, is the California 10th Congressional District. With a large Democratic majority (Ellen Tauscher won re-election in 2008 by 30 points), it is an unlikely place for a Republican to win. However, special elections are tricky things, and the Republicans have recruited a very good candidate in David Harmer. John Garamendi, the state's lieutenant governor, is a fixture in California politics, which is both good and bad. He's seasoned, and knows how to raise funds, but he has a bit of a reputation as an also-ran who went after this seat only because his latest gubernatorial campaign (there have been several) never got off the ground. This election is still almost certain to be a Democratic victory, but if Harmer manages to pull off an upset, incumbent Democrats in red states had better batten down the hatches.

The Definitive Word On Obama's Nobel

I think it goes without saying the giving Barack Obama a Nobel Prize for the first 11 days of his presidency borders on farce. But just in case it doesn't go without saying, here are some folks who have said it. Please note that all of them supported him for president, as far as I know.

I can't get too upset about this decision. First of all, the award is given out by the same continent that produces this stuff. Suddenly I feel pretty good about Britney Spears. Besides, it may be a farce, but it's not an atypical one. Past Nobel Prize recipients have included: Al "I made a movie that was so inaccurate, British courts decided a disclaimer had to be provided before showing it in classrooms" Gore, Mohamed "Iranian nuclear program? What Iranian nuclear program" ElBaradei, Kofi "you only care about the widespread corruption and sexual crimes committed by UN employees because I'm BLACK" Annan, and Yasser "kill Jews" Arafat.

There is a long tradition of awarding Nobels either to thugs or useless but well-intentioned people and groups (I'm looking at you, International Campaign to Ban Landmines and International Physicians For The Prevention of Nuclear War). Meanwhile, the number of Nobel Peace Prizes won by the US Marines remains at zero. In fact, after looking at recent recipients I think the chances of the Nobel Committee picking any of the more deserving folks out there were probably pretty slim. Frankly speaking, at least giving it to President Obama means the committee will have to wait until next year to award the prize to Mahmoud Amadinejad. As Dennis Prager has often pointed out, if you know nothing about a person except that they've received a Nobel Peace Prize, be wary.

What's really interesting about this award though, is that it may actually make President Obama's life harder. After all, the main conservative criticism of the man is that he's all sizzle, and no steak. Even SNL has picked up on it.



Getting an award like this, for no better reason than, "He's so hopey-changey and speaks so pretty!" really doesn't help the president's agenda. Remember early on when comedians were lamenting a lack of obvious jokes to make about Barack Obama? Think they still have that problem?

The bottom line is that Obama has always had a gap between his rhetoric and reality. Obviously, this is true of most politicians. Few live up to all of their campaign promises. In Obama's case though, the distance is unusually pronounced. What he doesn't need is more build-up to further enhance the gap. This does nothing but deceive him in regards to what he can actually accomplish (see the Olympic fiasco), and build up expectations among his supporters to extreme and unrealistic levels. Just remember Obama fans, the higher he gets built up, the further he has to fall to get back to reality.

LCROSS Has Crash-Landed

The Lunar Crater Reconnaissance Observation and Sensing Satellite has crash-landed on the moon. LCROSS's impact is being used as a way to test for water in craters that never see the sun. They hit in exactly the spot they hoped for, but it will be a while before we have sufficient data to know whether they found anything or not.

Behold, The Traje-comedy That Is French "Capitalism"

Are French people committing suicide over their tough working conditions? Well, hope springs eternal.

The President Is So Vain, I'll Bet He Thinks This Post Is About Him

George Will has a particularly good column today about President Obama and his trip to Copenhagen. I'm not terribly bothered by the trip itself, unlike some folks. If the president wants to spend his time trying to help Chicago (a city that certainly needs help), at least it keeps him away from his typical mischief. However, Will's point about the narcissism displayed on the trip is a good one. He writes that, "In the 41 sentences of her remarks, Michelle Obama used some form of the personal pronouns 'I' or 'me' 44 times. Her husband was, comparatively, a shrinking violet, using those pronouns only 26 times in 48 sentences. Still, 70 times in 89 sentences conveyed the message that somehow their fascinating selves were what made, or should have made, Chicago's case compelling."

One might argue that Will's point isn't a fair one. After all, counting pronouns is hardly the best way to characterize a speech. Let's examine the content instead, shall we? The president starts off well enough. The first two paragraphs talk mainly about the importance of the games, with only one reference to the president's personal history thrown in. Things go off track a little in the following paragraphs as Obama tells the committee that they should choose Chicago for the same reasons he did. This seems innocent enough at first, but as he continues, you realize it's just an excuse to tell his thrilling personal story for the 10,482,598,938 time. He focuses back in for several paragraphs extolling the virtues of Chicago and America. Then things go irretrievably off the rails as he finishes by using the games as an excuse to talk about the budding greatness that is the Obama presidency.

Michelle's speech is actually worse. At least Barack Obama has the excuse of being the leader of America when he too closely identifies selling the location with selling himself. Michelle on the other hand, tells of sitting on her daddy's lap at the tender young age of 20 (Carl Lewis first competed in the 1984 games) to watch the games and be inspired to achieve something great. I assume that means "graduate from an Ivy and marry well". You know, the feminist dream. She goes on to talk about how her father taught her to play sports despite a debilitating physical condition, and finishes with a challenge to give Chicago the games because it would have made her dad happy.

Ok, so perhaps it was just a failed attempt to personalize Chicago's already substantive efforts to land the games. What other evidence do we have that the president is self-centered? Remember the president's recent speech to the UN? That was the speech in which he said, "For those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions we have taken in just nine months." In the president's mind, defending America on the world stage doesn't involve pointing out that the previous administration spent more on foreign aid to impoverished African nations than all previous administrations combined. It doesn't involve reminding Muslim countries about the number of the times in recent decades that American blood has been spilled to protect Muslims, or reminding Europe of the sacrifices made to protect them in two world wars and rebuild them in the aftermath. Our Cold War defense of free nations doesn't even cross his mind. All that matters, all that can redeem America in the world's eyes is the fact that Barack Obama supports cap-and-trade legislation. No, no hubris there at all.

Will ends his column by pointing out that presidents often come to have a defining word associated with them. "Tricky Dick", "Silent Cal", "Honest Abe". The concluding sentence summarizes things nicely, "Unhappy will be a president whose defining adjective is 'vain.'" I apologize to George Will for this criticism, but he seems to have come up with only half a nickname. After all, it wasn't simply "Tricky" or "Honest", but rather "Tricky Dick" and "Honest Abe". To complete his point, I'd like to humbly suggest calling the president "Vain Hussein". That is, if using the president's middle name isn't racist this week. I have trouble keeping track.

Don't Read The Bill

I'm sorry, but I just can't get too worked up by all of the liberal congressmen who admit that they have no intention of reading any of the healthcare bills before they vote on them.

First, let me stipulate that I agree that any Congressmen who ranted and raved about no one reading the Patriot Act before they voted on it, but are now willing to do the same on healthcare are hypocrites. Second, let me also say that, as a conservative, I'm more than willing to sign on to the idea that it probably says something not-so-good about our government that we've extended its size and scope to such a degree that people readily admit that they couldn't understand a bill if they did read it. After all, the founders were able to declare independence from England and create our political system in about 6,000 clear words (We seem to be heading downhill. After all, God created the entire world in about 1,400 words). And last, let me also acknowledge that, as a simple matter of political tactics, "read the bill" is effective. When people are confused and suspicious about legislation, forcing their representative to admit they have no intention of actually reading it certainly does sound devastating.

Having said all of that, the bottom line is that we are where we are. Government is huge. It overreaches, and federal legislation is scary, complicated stuff. I analyze state legislation for a living. I also made my way through college reading Shakespeare, Dante, and Dostoevsky (and enjoying it). And yet, on the few occasions that I've had to pick up a federal bill and do something useful with it, I find myself fighting the urge to curl up into the fetal position and suck my thumb. Talking about what a horrible state of affairs we've come to may be cathartic, but it doesn't do anything meaningful.

But let's pretend for a moment that this reality wasn't the case. Let's say each member of Congress was limited to a single, ten page bill per session. That would still require each member of Congress to read 5,350 pages of legislation per year. I seriously doubt even such a limited goal is within their reach. And since it seems to be an open question whether some members of Congress are even operating at a high school level, asking them to read this bill really seems to be a futile gesture.

Funny, But Not Ha-Ha Funny

Anti-semite and all-around nutter Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be Jewish. Then again maybe not. The author of the first article is asserting that President Squinty's original last name, Sabourjian, is the Iranian equivalent of a name like Goldberg. The second article argues that it bears little relation to his ethnicity, and actually derives from his father's profession. On top of that, his mother is a direct descendant of the prophet, and therefore an unlikely candidate to be marrying a Jewish man.

It looks like the theory probably isn't true, but there's one point I'd like to see addressed further. The first author says that, "The name is even on the list of reserved names for Iranian Jews compiled by Iran's Ministry of the Interior." I have no idea exactly what that means, but the author asserts it as if it is an uncontested fact. Oh well, even if it is true, it really only matters to armchair psychologists. I'm not sure the Jews of Israel really care if the guy who wants to "wipe them off the map" is himself Jewish or not.

This Year's Ig Nobel Prizes Are Out

Just in case you wanted to know whether it's better to be hit with an empty or full beer bottle.

Wither Conservatism?

There has been plenty of self-laudatory hand-wringing among both conservatives and liberals (yeah, I'm looking at YOU Rod Dreher!) about what a reprehensible group of mouth-breathers we have leading the modern conservative movement. These types generally spend much of their time decrying folks like Rush or Glenn Beck, without spending much time actually listening to them, and even less time listening to or talking about the Dennis Prager/Hugh Hewitt/Bill Bennett types that occupy the airwaves alongside them. Much of what they say is overwrought and under-thought, but it isn't without merit. A party needs intellectual guidance, and it needs a Bill Buckley to chase out the Birchers every so often. One of the things that has distinguished modern conservatism from the left is our rejection of the "no enemies to the left" philosophy of the other side. Every time Obama is called a "facist", reasonable conservatives should die a little bit inside.

On the other hand, there are conservatives who want to imagine that there is no problem at all within the modern conservative movement. No matter how often Glenn Beck says something transparently silly or Michael Savage does a Howard Dean impression, they can't be criticized because they're on the team. They say conservatives don't need to attract the center at all. We need to kick out the RINO's (i.e. anyone who doesn't agree precisely on every point with your particular brand of conservatism) and double down on Sarah Palin. This attitude is no more healthy than the first.

Obviously, a reasonable middle ground is needed between these two poles. I think Steven Hayward strikes a good balance in this piece. He discusses how the movement has always been balanced between its thinkers and doers, the philosophers and politicos. Right now, the balance appears to be heavy on the politicos, many of whom are...less thoughtful than one might hope. Some more good thoughts appear in the piece by John Derbyshire that Hayward links to in his article. Derb goes in for a little more hand-wringing than I'd like, but that's John Derbyshire. If he didn't believe we are all doomed, what would be the point in getting out of bed each day?

There is plenty of thoughtful, middlebrow conservatism out there. The symphony-conducting, happiness-extolling, honey-blogging Dennis Prager is my favorite example. But, for whatever reason, they're a much harder sell than the mud-throwers. This is true on both sides of the political spectrum. After all, Al Franken has his own Senate seat while Alan Colmes still needs ID when he uses his library card. I think a lot of it probably has to do with a 24/7 campaign cycle that leaves little time for reflection between "vital" battles. So support your local thinkers, not just the local doers. Maybe restoring the balance is possible. Or maybe Derb is right. Maybe We Are Doomed.

Where's The Story Here?

When I read a story about a scientists who has "discovered" that we cannot model human evolution on modern apes because we didn't evolve from them, I feel the need to wonder why the story was written at all. Wasn't that Physical Anthropology, day 1, lesson 1? No one has ever thought that humans evolved from chimps. I'd say the reporter is showing scientific illiteracy, but the quotes from the smart guy involved seem to indicate that the reporter was reporting the story as the professor told it to him. Odd.

The 2016 Olympics

Most conservatives are focusing on the "epic fail" aspect of Obama's mission to capture the 2016 Olympics for Chicago. Since massive events like the Olympics are difficult to organize, disruptive, and (at least in this case) not terribly popular with the locals, they are free to enjoy their schadenfreude without having to feel guilty over America losing out on something of great value. However, that isn't what I find interesting about the fiasco. What I find interesting is the gratuitous nature of the rebuff of President Obama. After all, this isn't the jingoistic American cowboy George Bush being slapped in the face. Just as Bill Clinton was America's first black president, Obama was supposed to be America's first foreign president (not in the crazy "where's his birth certificate" kind of way, but in the "going around apologizing for America's behavior and kissing up to tinpot dictators until even the president of France tells you to grow a pair" kind of way). And yet America didn't even make the second round of voting. That's the IOC equivalent of giving the president an atomic wedgie. Couldn't they at least have kept America around for a few more votes to allow him to save face? Am I allowed to feel insulted on his behalf and have a little bipartisan moment here?

Historically Black Colleges Diversify

Does this matter? On one level, I think it's a great thing. After all, most of these colleges are here because black students couldn't get a fair shake at other educational institutions. Now that talented black students have the same access to other colleges as everyone else, these schools no longer stand as symbols of unequal opportunities. On the other hand, every time a society loses something unique, no matter its practical value, it loses a part of itself. Hmm...

Moral Questions

There are vast arrays of moral issues out there to struggle through. Some are easy (the Holocaust, racism), and some are hard (Just War theory, embryonic stem cell research). On most topics, people don't graduate to difficult areas of the subject until they get the easy questions right. Can we all agree that people who cannot say that drugging and raping a 13 year-old should be punished with jail time have failed a pretty basic test of moral common sense and are probably not qualified to opine on tougher issues until they master the basics? Just think of the issue of child-rape as the training wheels of moral dilemmas.

Wow, Umm Seriously?

So Anne Applebaum, usually a fair-to-good columnist has decided that, his mom was killed in the Holocaust, so he's scared of "irrational" punishment is a compelling case as to why child-rapist Roman Polanski should be let off the hook after fleeing the country and spending decades avoiding his jail time. She also points to his advanced age, as if this were a case of justice delayed by the judicial system, rather than by the man's own work at avoiding the law. Worst of all, she wrote this column without seeing any need to notify readers that she has a serious conflict of interests.

Umm...Not Really

I'm sorry that this young girl died, but her friends...and the writer on this story...are not so good with the science. H1N1 is a virus. Viruses can be vaccinated against, but not cured the way bacterial infections can. All we can do is treat symptoms. They are using antiviral drugs with some severe cases, but these have to be given early (Even if she had walked in on her first day of illness, they wouldn't have given them to a healthy 22 year-old. It sounds from the story as if by the time her case became severe, she had already had her symptoms for a while, probably too long for antivirals to work.) and are not a cure. At most, they reduce symptom severity and length. So the ghouls trying to parlay her death into a lesson on healthcare should stop, and take a long look in the mirror.

An Extra Helping Of Creepy

I know the president can't be blamed for what his fans do, but can those of us who aren't weirdly obsessed with him agree that this is all kinds of inapproriate?



According to the school, this was an officially sanctioned event as part of black history month.

Hat Tip: Booker Rising

This Probably Isn't An Original Observation...

...but has anyone else noticed that Michael Moore's new film bashing capitalism requires you to PAY ADMISSION?

Good On Him

I think this was a funny, lighthearted way of making it clear how silly the "opposition to Obama's healthcare plan is due to racism" meme is. He does know how to separate himself from the crazies...unless they happen to pastor his church.

The Random Stuff That Pops Into My Head

-Probably the most famous line in the song "Ironic" by Alanis Morissette is, "It's like rain on your wedding day". The word irony describes something that is humorous in a coincidental, and yet unlikely and unexpected way. For example, the biblical story of Haman, who ends by being hung on gallows he erected himself for his enemy Mordecai, is an example of irony. Rain on your wedding day is many things, but it is not ironic. The song itself might be considered ironic though, given the unexpectedly inappropriate nature of its lyrics.
-You know a fight was one-sided when the post-fight dustup between the winner and a prospective future opponent provides more action than the previous 12 rounds.
-The long-awaited commission report on reforming California's tax system is out...and being soundly rejected. How much proof do we need before realizing that an idea's quality is inversely proportional to the likelihood of its implementation?
-When I read stories like this one, I'm not sure what to think. On the one hand, it's nice for these poor people. On the other hand, wouldn't it have been even nicer and you know...actually meaningful, to have done this when: 1. it might have helped them advance their careers (usually the point of attending college), 2. it might have taken some political courage, 3. most of the people involved were still alive? Apologies 60 years after the fact show more concern with our own self-image than they do concern for the folks who were actually wronged.
-Speaking of ironic, how about the lead-in to this story? The author praises the Internet as something the government did well. Actually, the initial development of what we now call the Internet was done by DARPA, which is more private sector than government. Some excerpts from the Wikipedia article describing their unique model.
-"DARPA avoids hierarchy, essentially operating at only two management levels"
-"DARPA has an exemption from Title V civilian personnel specifications, which provides
for a direct hiring authority to hire talent with the expediency not allowed by the standard
civil service process."
-"DARPA neither owns nor operates any laboratories or facilities, and the overwhelming
majority of the research it sponsors is done in industry and universities. Very little of
DARPA’s research is performed at government labs."
-The Universe may be the greatest non violence-related show currently on the air.
-Does it bother anyone else that no sci-fi show dealing with invisibility ever tries to explain how a person can be invisible without going completely blind? No? Ok, never mind.
-English is funny. Take the word overlook. It can either mean, "to look on from a higher position" (which makes something more easily visible), or it can mean "look beyond without seeing", almost the exact opposite of the previous definition.

Hey, Did Anyone Catch That?

Maybe I'm just slow, and this was noticed at the time. It's not all that vital, but I do find it funny nonetheless. I was reading this article over at the New Atlantis, and the following sentence jumped out at me. "Their efforts worked, and candidate Obama, especially on his Florida trips, took to speaking favorably about space and describing his memories of Apollo from his childhood in Hawaii, where the astronauts returning from space first came after they were plucked from the Pacific." I checked, and he really did say that. Anyone notice the problem? The Apollo program started with a series of unmanned test flights. The first manned flight was Apollo 7. (The earlier flights tested the various modules of the rocket) Apollo 7 occurred in 1968, the year following the president's move to Indonesia. As far as I know, we didn't splash any astronauts down off the coast of Indonesia. Fibbing about witnessing the Apollo landings just seems a little bit silly, doesn't it?

Here's Something You Don't See Every Day

Rasmussen (a poll that traditionally slightly overestimates Republican strength) has Bob McDonnell's lead over Creigh Deeds almost disappearing, while the Daily Kos' poll has McDonnell ahead by seven. Either Rasmussen had a screwy day, or Deeds needs to send the Washington Post a really nice fruit basket.

This Is Reprehensible

Nancy Pelosi might want to consider the part she has played in the coarsening of public discourse before getting quite so worked up over others. She also might want to...you know...stick to the truth. In a recent interview, she said, "I have concerns about some of the language that is being used, because I saw this myself in the late '70s in San Francisco. This kind of rhetoric was very frightening, and it created a climate in which violence took place."

This is despicable on two counts. First, it likens the vocal disagreement of people like Joe Wilson and the Tea Party protesters (and for the record I'm not 100% sold on either) to bigotry and willingness to commit violence. But secondly, and far more important, she's lying about the murder of Harvey Milk. His murder had nothing to do with his sexual orientation, or his politics. He and the mayor were murdered by a disgruntled ex-councilman, because he had vacated his seat and then changed his mind. When he tried to get his seat back, they wouldn't allow him to do so, and he killed them for it. In fact, one of the main reasons he was so angry at Milk is because the two of them had been friends prior to his resignation. But Nancy Pelosi would never let the truth stand in the way of a good blood libel.

Harvard's IATs

Interesting tests. Does anyone know much about the principles behind them? I took the test on race, and it asked me to group pictures/words as quickly as possible. Pictures of faces had to be classified as African-American or European-American, while words had to be either good or bad. At times you had to group pictures and words simultaneously. (For example, in one round, good and European-American are represented by the same button, while in the next round it might be good and African-American.)

I assume that they are looking for some sort of hesitance, since the test instructs you to react as quickly as possible. For the record, I apparently have no racial preferences. But couldn't this just as easily be an indicator of my ability to sort rapidly and accurately? As a control of sorts, I took the test on religious preference. Unsurprisingly, Christianity was the religion I viewed most positively, followed by Judaism. However, Islam scored higher than Hinduism. Any conscious preferences I have between the two faiths definitely fall out in favor of Hinduism. This leads me to another thought. Perhaps our brains are quicker at sorting the familiar than the unfamiliar? While I may prefer Hinduism, I have far less experience with it, and am far less likely to be using Hindu terms in daily conversation. If my suspicion is correct, it seems like it might have a material impact on how we assess the results of the racial test as well. Thoughts?

For some discussion of these tests, look here and here.

The First Rule Of Fighting Taylor Swift

is, you DO NOT fight with Taylor Swift. The second rule of fighting Taylor Swift is that you DO NOT fight with Taylor Swift.

Since I despise Kanye West, know little to nothing about rap, and think MTV is largely a thing of the devil, I'll keep the commentary to a minimum. Suffice it to say that it was funny and mildly enjoyable watching Kanye West discover that picking on wildly popular 19 year-old girls receiving their first MTV award will NOT go well for you. Especially if they are able to remain kind and classy in the aftermath, while you turn your "apology" into a whine-fest devoted to the problems of being Kanye West.

The Elephant In The Room

From First Read: "At what point do what a bunch of folks in D.C. believe privately become more public -- that there is a dramatic divide between how people in the South view Obama versus the rest of the country? Sure, the South has always been more conservative and has been increasingly more Republican, so it shouldn't be a surprise this region is less open to a Democratic president's ideas; it's no different than folks in New York City and San Francisco not being open to a Republican president's proposals. But is it really the “D” next to Obama’s name that has folks upset in the South? Yes, there was a "coastal" divide when it came to George W. Bush, and the election results of 2004, 2006, and 2008 proved that. But is it ALL just ideological? It's truly subjective... As defiant as some on the right are about the fact that this has nothing to do with race, there’s an equal group of folks who believe it's ONLY grounded in race. Bottom line: Whether it's fair or not, there is a perception growing that race is driving some elements of the opposition to Obama. It probably means this tumult will only grow for the time being."
Get it? If only those racist southerners could get over their thinly-veiled bigotry and get on board with Obama.
Here's the 2000 election map. No southern states voted Democrat, even though they ran a white guy from Tennessee.
Here's the 2004 election map. No southern states voted Democrat, even though they ran a white guy from North Carolina.
Here's the 2008 election map. This time, the black guy from Illinois wins three southern states. Curse those bigots!

This Is Kind Of Funny

Apparently technology can still lose the occasional battle with nature.

I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough...Well, You Know The Rest

I don't think Harvey is entirely fair about Al Franken's comedy career, though I do agree the rest of his existence seems largely to have been a waste of much-needed oxygen. However, we should all be able to agree that this may be the coolest thing Franken has ever done. And frankly, knowing where all 50 states go on a map probably puts him light-years ahead of about half his Senate colleagues.

**Update**
It has been brought to my attention that the above post included some unnecessary hyperbole in describing Al Franken. I'd like to correct that. The amount of oxygen consumed by Al Franken during the course of his lifetime is infinitesimal relative to total atmospheric oxygen and cannot therefore be described as "much-needed". I regret the overstatement.

Maybe Reporters Should Take Economics Classes

Can anyone tell me what is wrong with this story? Here's a hint. Compensation is a package. If you still don't understand, let me explain.

When an employer chooses to hire someone at a salary of $45,000 per year, they don't just treat it as an additional $45,000 to payroll. They look at the total cost of the hire, and subtract costs until they arrive at a salary. $3442.50 will need to be allocated for paying Social Security. Let's say there is a 401k matching program that could require the company to pay another $5,000 a year if fully utilized, and that there is also $10,000 a year allocated to medical and dental costs. So, what happens in reality is that the company decides they can pay an employee $63,442.50 per year, subtracts all of the other costs and arrives at a salary. If they increase what they'll pay towards health care, the salary is adjusted downward accordingly. Therefore, employers are not actually shifting additional health care costs to workers. Instead, they are deciding to allocate less of the total pot of compensation to health care and more to salaries. But no reporter would ever actually report a story that way.

Pro-Life Activist Shot

Police suggest he may have been targeted due to his protest. Obviously, no one should jump to any conclusions. Perhaps his murder is completely unrelated to his political activities. But, if it turns out that this was the reason for his murder, I'm sure we'll hear all of the same hand-wringing from the pundit class about the hatred inculcated by pro-choicers that we heard about pro-lifers after the Tiller murder...right?

Praying The Rosary For World Peace?

I saw a car on the road this morning with a bumper sticker that went something like this: "Pray the rosary for world peace". Obviously, the driver was Catholic. Assuming that they are a real Catholic, and not just one of those nominal types who likes the pretty candles, but ignores all of the icky stuff about sin and sacrifice, their Catholicism says certain things about their worldview. Specifically, it means they believe in original sin, the idea that humankind is in a fallen and rebellious state and is irredeemable without Christ. They also, one would assume, believe that wars, genocides, etc. are a result of this sinful state. Lastly, while this one is a little more complicated than it sounds when simply stating it, Catholics believe in free will.

So, if one believes in a world where fallen and sinful men are free to exercise their will, isn't praying for world peace a little like praying for a winning lottery ticket when you don't ever play the lottery? It's a beautiful idea, but one that seems unlikely to occur anytime soon. With God all things are possible, but might not a better use of our finite prayer time be intercession on behalf of more likely causes? Should we pray for things that seem to go against God's permissive will? Is it enough to pray for a beautiful idea simply because it is a beautiful idea?

New White Supremacist Party In California

Normally, I'd ignore a story like this, but I found one line by a professor unintentionally hilarious. Speaking of the party's "chairman", who has a criminal record, the article says, "Stephen J. Stambough, a professor of political science at Cal State Fullerton, said Cole's criminal record could make it difficult to establish a mainstream party." Yeah, THAT'S the big hangup. I've often heard that white supremacists are known for their scrupulously law-and-order mentality. If it weren't for that, I'm sure they'd just be registering up a storm of new voters.

Good Ole' Joe

He's always on message.

I Must Be Missing Something

This experiment amounts to a way to measure gravity much more precisely than ever before. This article on the experiment claims that it is a step towards unifying quantum theory and Einstein's descriptions of gravity in his relativity theory. How? I guess in the very general sense, more precise data will always be helpful, but what specifically does it do to aid unification?

For those who don't know, I'll give my history major's thumbnail sketch of gravity. Einstein's theory said that gravity was not some mysterious force that acted within the framework of space. Rather, gravity is a RESULT of the framework of space. Space itself is curved by large objects like stars or planets (and by smaller objects too, but we don't notice them) and what we see as gravity is actually this curved geometry of space sliding objects around. A good way to picture it is to imagine your mattress as space. When you place a "star" (heavy object) on the mattress, its mass causes the mattress to sink underneath it, creating "gravity" (a depression). Any small object placed nearby will roll towards the heavy object because of this depression. Now, add an extra dimension and a bunch of fancy math and you have Einstein's theory.

This worked beautifully until quantum physics came along and insisted that the big deal at the bottom of everything cool were particles. Photons, muons, bozons, electrons, etc. The cool kids were all particles, and gravity wanted to fit in. So, the competing quantum theory is that massless particles called "gravitons" are the ones doing all of the work of Einstein's depressed mattress. Both theories mostly work mathematically (gravitons don't in some cases), and seem to have equal explanatory force. I personally like Einstein's theory better, but that's because I'm completely unqualified to make any judgements about quantum gravitational theory, while the handy mattress analogy makes me an expert on Einstein.

So, to reiterate, I don't quite see how we come any closer to squaring the "invisible mattress versus tiny particles" argument by simply doing more precise measurements. If anyone has any thoughts that are expressible in terms that won't shatter my tiny, math-averse brain, feel free to pass them along.

There And Back Again

There's an interesting op-ed in the New York Times suggesting that the Mars mission should be a one-way trip in order to cut costs. The author rightly points out that this solution is infinitely more cost-effective than trying to return the astronauts home. Radiation shielding, fuel consumption, and other related factors mean that getting people there and back raises the difficulty exponentially. I think he's also correct in pointing out that the difficulties in implementing such a plan would primarily be political and social, rather than logistical.

I think the piece misfires in a couple of places, though. He draws an analogy between such a Mars mission and early explorers of the American continent. The fact that this is probably the most often-used comparison in conversations about the space program doesn't make it any less tenuous. The early colonists may not all have intended to get home someday (many did, assuming they would return in triumph after getting rich), but those that didn't intended to build a new home and a new civilization. No one believes any such possibility exists with Mars in the near-term.

More importantly, his semi-dismissal of the public opinion difficulties with such a plan misses a key point. NOTHING about manned space exploration is practical. There is virtually no scientific task that cannot be performed better and more cheaply by robotic surrogates than by humans. For evidence of this, look no further than Mars. We currently have two brave explorers already doing some incredible science on the red planet. Their names are Spirit and Opportunity. How many manned programs has NASA put together over the years that have exceeded expectations like these little guys? To dismiss the issue of the return trip as a mere public opinion challenge is to ignore the fact that public opinion is really the main point of manned space flight, and will remain so until it becomes cheaper and more practical (i.e. probably never).

The bottom line is that while a mission to, and return from, Mars would be a public triumph, a one-way trip would be a public embarrassment. Sending scientists to do work that could have been done by unmanned devices while tacitly acknowledging that we lack either the will or resources to bring them home safely again would not be a new Apollo program. It would be a stain on an agency struggling to find meaning.

It's Only Because They Don't Understand The Lyrics

Apparently it's Metallica that soothes the savage beast. No word yet on their reaction to Yanni.

Of Course This Couldn't Possibly Have Ramifications Regarding Global Warming Alarmism

Nothing to see here or here, move along.

Life Imitates Rush

Rush famously used to say that he was right 98.8% of the time. It's got to be higher than that by now...

Read this

Then this

And then this

Please Don't Sneeze On The Kilogram

You might break science.

We already use fundamental constants to define other important measures. The article gives the example of a meter, but a second has also been standardized this way. A second is defined using the natural decay of a cesium atom. These measures mean that anyone, anywhere, at any time can verify a measurement with the proper equipment. The problem with gravity (and hence measures of weight) is that gravity is incredibly weak. Think about it. If I throw a rock, I can temporarily defeat the total gravity of the entire mass of the planet earth. There are so many things that can counter gravitational force to one extent or another that the precise work needed to obtain a universal constant is not easy.

I also can't help but thinking that there must be a weight loss joke in this story somewhere...

Independent Commissions For Everyone!

So, let me get this straight. We have a commission to deal with redistricting because we can't trust the legislature to do it. The governor created another commission to update the tax code because they've messed that up as well. There's a coastal commission to deal with environmental and sustainability issues. Now they're voting on the creation of a prison commission and a water commission. For goodness sakes, we've even got a STRAWBERRY COMMISSION. At what point has the legislature devolved so much of its power into various commissions that we can take it as a tacit admission that even they know they're useless so we can send them home?

Best of the Web

James Taranto's Best of the Web column is, as it claims, one of the best daily roundups on the web. He made a telling point today that I thought was worth passing along, about presidential press coverage.

Here's a blast from the past. The New York Times, July 9, 2001, reports on George W. Bush's first summer vacation as president:
On Friday, as new unemployment figures painted a newly troubling portrait of the American economy, Mr. Bush placed himself in the same scenes--golfing and fishing in a New England paradise--that once caused his father electoral grief.
Simply amazing.
Here's the Bureau of Labor Statistics report, dated July 6, that "painted a newly troubling portrait of the American economy":
The unemployment rate was little changed at 4.5 percent, five-tenths of a percentage point higher than the average for 2000.
As Barack Obama embarked on his first summer vacation as president last week--also in a "New England paradise," Martha's Vineyard--the most recent unemployment rate was 9.4%, more than double the summer 2001 figure. Covering the Obama jaunt, the Times offers no hint that there's anything wrong with a president taking a vacation during a time of genuine crisis. Indeed, it offers this justification:
Mr. Obama, whom aides described as being amused by all of the gloom-and-doom prognosticating over his health care agenda, did not even consider skipping his vacation. Last year, he talked about the importance of taking a break to avoid "making mistakes."
That makes sense--and in any case, it's not as if the president actually escapes his responsibilities when he goes on "vacation." But the Times's coverage of Obama is a useful contrast to the paper's petty partisan sniping against Bush.

Quality Work MSNBC

What do you do if you're dying to run a story about how angry white protesters are toting guns to presidential events because they're scared of having a black man in charge, and the gun-toting protester in question ruins it by being a black man himself? If you're a professional reporter, you reconsider your presuppositions about the motivations behind the protest. If you're MSNBC, you just crop the video so that no one can see he's a black guy. Let's tale a look!

Objective Reporting



MSNBC

Threatening Protesters

Don't follow this link if you don't want to see some fairly explicit threats against the life of the president by deranged protesters. Of course, all of these were threats aimed at President Bush. Does it excuse any of the nutters currently holding any of the nasty signs aimed at President Obama? Of course not. Anyone who holds a sign advocating the death of the president should be turned into a Secret Service chew toy as far as I'm concerned. But I think it needs to be emphasized that this crazy isn't a conservative phenomenon, nor is it racially motivated. Crazy is universal unfortunately.

Fresh From The Department Of Nothing Better To Do

Mathematicians from the University of Ottawa (Go fighting Gee-Gees!) have discovered that zombie attacks may lead to the destruction of mankind unless dealt with quickly. Coming to such a profoundly revealing conclusion requires either a PhD in applied mathematics or a 3-day weekend, a George Romero* boxed set, and a VCR.

Apparently these math wunderkinds use the same sort of procedures that they would use for studying outbreaks of a real pandemic. It's a good thing that there are currently no real-world pandemic outbreaks that might distract them from this important work.


*Fun fact file: George Romero was inspired to go into horror directing after working on a segment of Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood.

It Frightens Me More Than A Little Bit

...to find myself on Barney Frank's side in this little spat.

Have You Ever Feared A Plant?

Because I do.

Go Chuck!

I hope he sicks the Libertarians on Babs.

Congresswoman Lee Multitasking

"Of course the Congresswoman values your input. What would make you doubt that?"

Reason 6,347,843 that gerrymandered districts are a bad thing.

Driving A Stake Through The Heart Of The "Prevention" Canard

If you've paid any attention at all to the federal health care debate, you know that "prevention" and "wellness" seem to be the Holy Grail of health care cost reductions. Everyone, including the president, seems to think that we can simply screen and manage our way to solvency. So, with such a simple solution facing us, why haven't health care plans already cut their costs? After all, it is in their best interest financially, and most of them cover preventative services while offering some kind of wellness program. And yet, as president Obama so helpfully pointed out, we keep cutting off diabetics' feet rather than simply helping them manage their medicine and weight.

The answer is that most of the benefits of wellness and preventative care are a myth, at least when it comes to lowering costs. Think about it for a minute. Is the 300 pound diabetic who is in danger of losing their foot really unaware that their weight is unhealthy? Is there one person left in all of America who isn't aware that being severely overweight, not exercising, and smoking are all bad for you? We are fat, lazy smokers because it is EASY, not because we want to be. Short of paying your doctor to follow you around and slap Twinkies out of your hand, that isn't going to change.

As for screening, it may save lives, but not money. Chew on this for a moment. The US has the highest cancer survival rates in the western world, in part because we have some of the best early detection practices. And yet, WE'RE HAVING THIS DEBATE PRECISELY BECAUSE OUR COSTS ARE TOO HIGH! Perhaps screening isn't a magical budget cure-all. The problem with screening is that there isn't a way to screen only the folks who will develop diseases. That means you screen tons of people who won't ever develop problems, and the costs of their screenings have to be factored in to your equation.

Take colon cancer, with its legendarily fun endoscopies. The third most common form of cancer in the west, an American has about a 7% chance of getting it. Assuming that you start screening at 50, and will, on average, live to be 75, you'll get 6 preventative exams. With 93% of the population never developing the disease, that means every population of 100 health conscious people will have around 550 unnecessary screenings and about 7 people who benefit. This is, of course, assuming that early detection will cut treatment costs for the 7 people who will develop colon cancer. And it doesn't take into account the fact that people who already engage in less healthy behavior are the ones who are most likely to develop colon cancer and least likely to come in for screenings, while the health-conscious folks who willingly submit to being on the business end of a sigmoidoscope are already at less risk.

In case you want a slightly more authoritative source for all of this, try the CBO. They are the people tasked with telling us if the current proposals can actually, you know, work. And they say no.

Cash For Clunkers

In addition to being a shining example of why breaking windows does NOT stimulate the economy, and creating an artificial shortage of used cars for people too poor to buy something better, apparently the program also stinks at helping clean up the air.

Hubble In 3D

I Keep Telling You It's Complicated

Temperature increases have led to a greener Sahara Desert. Vegetation there has been increasing for 20 years now. What does increased vegetation do? It removes more CO2 from the atmosphere. And this isn't an isolated phenomenon. But the computer climate models on which we are supposed to base the future of our economy can't even agree on whether desert greening will occur. Want to bet on whether their projections regarding its effects on atmospheric CO2 are accurate?

But don't worry, the Democratic party still has sound science to justify the Cap-and-Trade fiasco. Debbie Stabenow feels it when she's flying.

Note To President Obama

When everyone is already a bit freaked out that you put payments for end-of-life counseling in legislation dealing with COST CONTROL, it probably isn't the best time to tell them that you'd deny your own grandma a hip replacement. Oh wait, was this the bigoted old granny you threw under the bus next to Jeremiah Wright? Let me see if I remember how that story went correctly. He thought the government invented AIDS and America deserved 9-11, she got scared of an aggressive panhandler. Yup, both mean old racists. No wonder you didn't want the government to pay for a new hip...

Stupid ACLU

Listen, I stand second to none in my crazy religion-and-gun-clinging, talk radio-listening, and according to Paul Krugman, probably racist, fear of federal government intrusion into everyday life. But really? The ACLU is losing it over the administration's decision to use tracking cookies on federal websites. Are they aware that EVERY FRIGGIN' SITE IN THE WORLD EXCEPT THOSE OPERATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES THIS? My info may not be secure with the feds, but that's really a moot point, since everyone from the Drudge Report to Yahoo mail is already selling my Internet browsing habits to Nigerian bankers and discount Viagra suppliers. Perhaps one of the IT guys that maintains the ACLU's website should take them aside and calmly let them know that they can simply adjust their browser security settings to foil this vicious federal plot.

God Bless America!

You will NEVER see an interview quite like this one anywhere else...

What A Weird, Rambling, Incoherent Response

Apparently in Barbara Boxer's world wearing nice clothes to a townhall meeting is proof of "organization". She doesn't explain exactly why, other than that someone once yelled at her in Florida while wearing nice clothing, nor does she explain why being "organized" makes one's protest less valid. I'm sure CSEA and the other union thugs running our state will be glad to stop sending organized groups out on Senator Boxer's behalf. Godspeed, Chuck Devore!

It's Troubles On Top Of Troubles For The LHC

Hurry up Fermilab! Go! Go! Go!

Issue Drinking Licenses

I assume this idea was spawned by the fact that licensed teens drive so responsibly?

The Mood On Healthcare Is Ugly

Just watch this. It's precisely why they wanted to get something done before the recess started.

And this is Pennsylvania. Imagine what the mood is like for red-state congressmen.

P.S. I don't endorse the rudeness of the crowd, or enjoy it. Specter and Sebelius have the courtesy to come and try to have a townhall meeting with voters, the voters should show the same courtesy back. Being impolite is not constructive nor does it reflect well on the crowd.

Meanwhile Over At Justice

While Barack Obama has his "teachable moments" with wayward police officers, Eric Holder has decided to let the Black Panthers who threatened voters and brandished weapons at a polling place on election day off the hook...after the Justice Department had already won it's case. It's a good thing they didn't ask a black man to show ID, or they might have really been in trouble!

Here's video of the men.

John Stewart's Take On Gates Issue

Leave it to the fake news to get it right...

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Henry Louis-Gate - Race Card
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Joke of the Day

Even Worse

I thought Bud Light was the worst of it, but apparently Barack Obama is pushing for America to host the World Cup in 2018 or 2022. If we have to adopt a European sport, can't we go with rugby?

Fresh In From The Department Of Stupid Conclusions

Health insurance makes you fatter. Researchers at Stanford, University College London and RAND have come to that brilliant conclusion, by looking at BMI's of people with and without insurance. If a blogger with no degree in any relevant field can immediately come up with three or more flaws in your reasoning, chances are, your study is stupid. Let's apply the test:

1. Europeans are generally thinner than Americans, yet America has no nationalized health care while European nations generally do.
2. Younger people are less likely to be fat, and also less likely to have insurance.
3. Obesity and poverty are linked, and our poorest citizens have access to Medicaid, SCHIP, etc. that actually makes them more likely to be insured than lower-middle-class people.
4. White collar jobs (i.e. sedentary jobs) are more likely to offer insurance than jobs that keep people physically active.

Anyone else got any ideas?

Be A Man, Serve Scotch

Apparently, our president drinks wuss beer. I've got to say, I really enjoy Sam Adams beer, so I like the suggestion from Congressman Neal. (Although, in all fairness, I also enjoyed Red Stripe when I was in Jamaica.) But the real issue here seems to be the fact that our president drinks Bud Light. Sure it's popular. In fact, it's the best-selling beer in America. But let's face it, that's because we stock it for beer pong and for our girlfriends and wives. Do you really believe that George Washington, were he to show up in modern America, would sidle up to the bar and order a Bud Light? More likely, he'd want some of this. Every terrorist and two-bit dictator who finds out that our president drinks light beer is now going to be emboldened to strike at us. President Obama, haven't you spent enough time proving your wussiness to the world already?

There Is No Debate On Global Warming

Except when there is.

The point of posting this article is not to say that everyone should suddenly accept that all the temperature increases of the past few decades are based on ocean patterns. I don't believe that any more than I believe they should suddenly drink the global warming Kool-Aid. The point is just to emphasize the fact that the science is not settled, as Al Gore says. Richard Lindzen, Freeman Dyson, Ian Plimer, and many other brilliant scientists are not to be dismissed just because the former Veep says so. If the costs of wrongly believing that global warming is occurring are nearly as high as the costs of wrongly denying it, shouldn't we take a deep breath or two before destroying economies and condemning the poor in the third world to a continued life of poverty?

And How Many Terrorists Exactly Have You Met?

”If he’s a terrorist, he’s the nicest terrorist I ever met in my life. I don’t think he is,” said Charles Casale, 46, a neighbor in Willow Spring.

Two Random And Completely Unrelated Incidents

Tonight, as I was walking my dogs, a snake slithered out of a field onto the sidewalk in front of us. I am terrified of snakes. Blind, irrational, fear. I consider myself a fairly brave guy. I've gone rock climbing and rappelling, broken up a dog fight, backed down two guys who got in my face in a parking garage, etc. I'm no John Wayne, but for the most part, I'm confident in my ability to overcome and control my fear. Not so with snakes. It is, to the best of my knowledge, the only irrational fear I have.

After I managed to get around him (by waiting for him to crawl off the sidewalk and into the street), I continued with the walk. As I did, I saw a car coming. It was in the lane currently occupied by the snake. Suddenly, I found myself feeling concern and pity for the snake. I actually stayed to watch what would happen, because I knew that if I didn't, I'd be concerned for the snake all night. Fortunately, the car missed it. (I've never seen an animal about-face and get off the road as quickly as that snake did when the car whizzed by!) I found myself weirdly puzzled by my concern for an animal that scares the living daylights out of me. Had I found the thing in my yard, I would have unhesitatingly beaten it into oblivion with a shovel while screaming like a girl. Life is funny.



The other incident occurred last night. I was watching a History Channel documentary on Hannibal. As with most History Channel documentaries, it had poorly done and unintentionally comical re-enactments to illustrate the various events the show discussed. But here's the problem. The actor playing Hannibal was black. Carthage may be in Africa, but it was a Phoenician colony. The Phoenicians came from the northern part of Palestine. As I understand it, Hannibal would have been Middle Eastern (to the extent that modern ethnic divisions are transferable to that era). Later, the documentary referred to Hasdrubal as Hannibal's older brother. In fact, Hannibal was the eldest son (At least that we know of. The Carthaginians practiced infant sacrifice.).

Neither of these facts are germane to the documentary itself. But they are pretty basic facts. I've never focused much on that historical era, so if I can pick them out it means anyone with any expertise on the subject should be able to do so. It makes me wonder what other historical errors I've picked up from the History Channel.

There's A Surprising Amount Of Wisdom In This

Supplied by Jonah Goldberg.

I'm A Tad Confused

In Massachusetts, asking a black man for ID after someone reports a burglary is obvious profiling, completely unacceptable, and deserving of a rebuke from the president. However, throwing a brick through a white family's window with a note a note saying "Keep Eastside Black" isn't considered worthy of being classified as a "hate crime" by either the police or the NAACP? I'm not in favor of having a "hate crimes" classification in the first place (a discussion for another day), but if we have to have them, shouldn't they protect everyone equally?

Putting Their Mouths Where Their Money Ought To Be

PG&E, the local gas and power people, recently implemented a program called Climate Smart. It allows customers to voluntarily pay a higher rate ($3 or less in most cases). The money is to be directed into projects intended to fight global warming. So far barely more than one half of one percent of PG&E customers have opted to join. This means the program isn't taking in enough money to pay its bills, and may be cancelled. Or, it may just continue supplementing the program with funds taken from regular rate-payers.

California considers itself one of the most climate-conscious states in the country, and yet it can't break 1% participation in a program that costs less than many specialty drinks at Starbucks. Yet again, the green movement is forcing us to make the sacrifices they won't make themselves.

The Gates Arrest

I've been arguing the ins and outs of this case with friends and acquaintances of all races live and via facebook since it first occurred. Let me first stipulate that I think it was probably not a bright idea for the officer to choose to arrest Dr. Gates. When you have a man who is bound and determined to find racism in your actions, arresting him on a dubious charge like disturbing the peace is probably not the smartest move. However, given that we now know that the officer in question has struggled to save the life of a black man in the past, there was at least one black cop on the scene when the arrest took place, that the officer's fellow police of all colors are standing by his actions, and that he LITERALLY teaches the class on racial profiling, maybe some of the people (including Gates) who jumped to the conclusion that any of this was racial should rethink their positions.

On top of that, when I'm being lectured on America's racial intolerance by the black president of a country whose population is only 12.8% black, the black governor of a state whose population is only 7.5% black, and the black mayor of a city whose population is 11.9% black on behalf of a tenured black professor at an Ivy League university whose specialty is sitting around writing about being black in America, I reserve the right to not feel very guilty.

Health Care Rationing And You

They Must Be On The Take From Big Oil

A study published in Nature Geoscience claims that past increases in temperature may be due in large part to factors other than CO2 increases. In fact, only about half of past temperature gains can be explained using current climate models. Of course, we all know that anyone who questions or denies the absolute certainty of global warming is anti-science and probably on the take from industry. Meanwhile, no scientists who support global warming are getting any money at all, and Al Gore hasn't enriched himself many times over by buying and hawking "green". And there's no chance at all that trying to predict something as complicated as THE SIMULTANEOUS INTERACTIONS OF EVERY NATURAL SYSTEM ON THE PLANET FROM WEATHER TO SUNLIGHT TO GEOTHERMAL ACTIVITY might be a little beyond the capacity of our current computer models...

I'm in the same camp as Charles Krauthammer on global warming. Instinctively it seems to make good sense that pumping tons of extra CO2 into our atmosphere is probably not ideal behavior. I'd like to see it reduced as much as is practical. However, remaking our entire economy, giving the government vastly expanded control over our daily lives, denying impoverished 3rd world nations the right to improve their lot, and generally placing people in a subordinate position to the environment, all while castigating any scientist who utters a peep in opposition seems like a bit much based on the evidence we have so far. Climate modeling is inexact because our measurements of historical temperatures and carbon dioxide levels are inexact, our understanding of solar activity is inexact, our understanding of the atmosphere is inexact, our understanding of the ramifications of higher temperatures for land and ocean life are inexact, and our understanding of the interconnections between all of these natural systems are inexact. Why in the world would we commit economic suicide without better evidence?

Useless Words

David Klinghoffer has a post about the word "fundamentalist" up today. He argues that the term is no longer useful as anything but a negative epithet. This is because it is widely used to refer to any conservative religious person one doesn't happen to like, despite having a clear-cut and narrow historical definition.

His post got me thinking along similar lines about another oft-used term. In discussions of theology, people talk about interpreting the Bible "literally". Unlike fundamentalist, "literal" in this context is as likely to be used by a person defending the practice as it is by someone opposed to it. However, it doesn't make it any more accurate.

The problem with this way of describing a more traditional hermeneutical approach to the Bible is that it leads to misconceptions. I can guarantee you that, no matter how conservative your theology, you don't read everything in the Bible literally. If you don't believe me, check out Matthew 18:9. Unless you're reading this post while wearing an eye patch, there are at least some parts of the Bible you acknowledge to be metaphorical. Unfortunately, if you are a self-proclaimed literalist, it becomes pretty easy for the anti-Christian types to caricature you. "Man, this guy believes we should stone people who disrespect their parents!" Perhaps an acceptable alternative would be to tell people you read the Bible in its plain sense wherever possible. It's not quite as catchy, but may be more accurate.

Foreign Aid As Therapy

We send billions to impoverished countries like those in sub-Saharan Africa every year, but how often do we stop to assess how much good our aid does, and at what cost? Are we doing it to help Africans or ourselves?

Is That Still Going On?

Apparently the "Obama isn't a citizen" crowd are still working vigorously to make themselves look silly. A judge ruled in their favor...sort of, by saying that once they refiled their paperwork correctly, he would listen to the merits of their case.

I'm torn. Part of me wants this judge to dismiss the case out of hand, the way other courts have, because that's what should be done with frivolous cases. A judge should feel free to say, "That's so stupid, I'm not going to bother." On the other hand, not getting a hearing allows these people to go on believing that they might have a real argument if they could get someone to listen. Hopefully, having someone listen carefully, and then laugh in their faces, will convince them to give up.

On a side note, I'm sad to see that Alan Keyes (The man I voted for in the 2000 presidential primary. My first vote ever.) has continued his Hamlet-like descent into madness by becoming a plaintiff in this case.

---Update---
*Sighs loudly*

Wow!

A woman beat a fawn to death because it was messing with her garden. That's got to speak to some deeper issues with her, right? I mean, she killed Bambi in brutal fashion over some gardenias. She probably thought The Yearling was intended as a lighthearted comedy.

Which Is More Indicative Of American Decline?

The Michael Jackson Funeral Spectacular, or the fact that Alec Baldwin wants to run for political office? In even more shocking news, Alec Baldwin knows who Alexis de Tocqueville is.

Obama's Russian Love-Fest

Barack Obama has now made kissy noises with both the Russian president, and his boss, Wladimir Putin. Nothing truly useful or beneficial to the US has been agreed to, while Georgia and the Ukraine are still fair game for Russian hegemony. But I'm sure that over time, Barack Obama will win Putin over. After all, he isn't an undiplomatic and insulting cowboy like Bush, who had a terrible first encounter with Putin. Oh wait... But this time will be different, because everyone loves Obama.

What Are They Putting In The Water At The Republican Governor's Association?

Seriously? I'm not sure which is more confusing and unexpected, the Sanford fiasco or the Palin retreat.

First off, Sanford. I haven't posted anything since his bombshell (other than the unfortunately-titled post defending him when we still thought he was off taking a hike). I've always liked the guy as a politician, and it was disappointing to see him and his family so publicly embarrassed. Besides, I'm not of the opinion that every sexual event in a politician's life is our business. While I'd like to believe that there is a direct link between personal ethics and professional fitness for office, it doesn't seem to be universally true. I think we'd be much healthier as a country if we all acknowledged that men who fail in their commitments as a husband should only be required to grovel to their families, not the public.

But then things got weird. Governor Sanford's inability to keep his mouth shut, and seeming determination to humiliate his wife while depicting himself as some sort of tragic figure is weird and mildly unsettling. My only explanation for his conduct is that he is so wrapped up in his feelings for this woman that he truly sees this situation as something out of Romeo and Juliet, and has no clue about the damage he must be doing to his wife and sons. Meanwhile, Mrs Sanford has been nothing short of saintly in her actions and public comments. Here's hoping that the governor of South Carolina will soon remember that he's a man, and more importantly a conservative man. Suck it up, quit baring your muddled soul to anyone with a press pass, tell your girlfriend to take a hike, and stop feeling sorry for yourself!

As for Sarah Palin, I think everyone is at a loss. Of the sane explanations, the choices seem to be: 1. this is some sort of strategy to better launch a senatorial/presidential run, 2. some huge scandalous bombshell is about to drop, 3. the constant ridicule of her family, the spurious ethics complaints, and the frenetic life of a governor are taking their toll.


Number one makes no sense in any way I can imagine. I can see her not running for re-election, but quitting mid-term? Why? Can she really think letting down the people of Alaska is a good strategy for building up the necessary reputation to run for president? As it stands right now, unless she releases more information that sheds a whole lot of light on this decision, I wouldn't vote for her to be my town's dog catcher.

As for number two, I doubt it is the case, but unexpectedly resigning and offering only vague reasons for doing so isn't exactly the best way to quell that sort of talk, is it?

If the reason is number three, my feelings are more mixed. I have tons of sympathy for how hard the last year must have been on her family. Creeps like Letterman who attack her family deserve some alone time in a locked room with the "First Dude". The ethics complaints (all of which have been resolved in her favor) have cost tons and tons of money and time. However, having said all of that, my final thought is still to say, "Suck it up!" Yeah, it stinks to be a polarizing national figure faced with a hostile press. But you chose to be one. It doesn't give you the right to spurn your commitments.

Ok, now that I've got all of that off of my chest, everyone, please join me in a prayer for Tim Pawlenty, Bobby Jindal, and Mitch Daniels.

Not A Good Sign

What could be worse than all the ants of the world teaming up against humanity? If they joined forces with the bees. It's a natural alliance, after all. Once the ants remove all rival colonies, and the bees exterminate the wasps, who else could be next on their hitlist?

I guess Kim Jong Il isn't the only one who's no longer afraid of the American president...

Some Entertainment

Want to feel old?

When Care Bears and nightmares mix.

Canadians are good enough, they're smart enough, and darnit, people like them!

Wow. Just wow.

Why do they keep giving his license back?!?!

I'm not sure whether I like the grandpa or the judge more.

And finally, the All Blacks haka.