Bostondreamer

NEW BLOG!!!

2006-01-27T12:56:00.000-05:00

I started blogging again at a new blog: Dreaming of the Future. If you are interested, stop by! :)

Cervical Cancer: God's Justice on the Hussy

2005-11-04T16:21:00.000-05:00

Reason magazine's science correspondent, Ron Bailey, has a great article up on the effort of the FDA and certain social conservative groups to regulate not only drugs, but morality. Recently, it was announced that researchers had discovered and produced a vaccine for HPV, a virus that causes cervical cancer. Some, however, have argued that this vaccine is, basically, a tool of Satan, and could encourage promiscuous sex, so should not be given approval. Horrors! Bailey's response? (emphasis mine)

Federal agencies must reject the logic of values regulations. The FDA should stick to regulating medications solely on the basis of their quality, safety and efficacy—if even that. Bureaucrats should not be deciding whether or not people should be having sex, with whom they should be having sex, or what type of sex they should be having. If a medicine makes it safer to engage in an activity of which some people disapprove, so what? If anyone must be punished for putting his or her genitalia where other people think they shouldn’t, then leave that regulatory decision up to God—or whatever agency is in charge of morals enforcement in the hereafter.

I couldn't put it any better. As Bailey argues, why pursue a cure or treatment for HIV then? Surely THAT is a punishment from our angry God as well? I wonder when the theocracy begins. Just kidding. Really.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

I hate reading. I REALLY hate reading.

2005-11-04T15:44:00.000-05:00

I have previously posted something of a diatribe/self-pity party about my ongoing experiences in education. While things have certainly improved and I am over my yearly funk, I am still rather saddened and frustrated with some of the approaches and issues that I am seeing daily.

Recently, in a faculty meeting to discuss the progress of our school's attempts to raise reading scores through the introduction of reading 'strategies' and a heavy use of those strategies (to such a degree that students have told me that they are sick and tired of them), I was informed by our reading coach that my content comes second; I am to put a heavier emphasis on teaching reading strategies for students to use later in life and in school. If I don't cover all of my material, if I skip over some parts of history because I am teaching reading strategies, well, that's okay. It's simply important that I am using and demonstrating and emphasizing and beating into them the reading strategies. No matter that I am a history teacher, my first love is history, and I have high standards and expectations for my students. I need to change my approach and fill up my day with strategies. Screw history.

have very rarely been so angry at someone (non-Yankee fan) in my life. It is so frustrating. You try to teach, you think you are doing a good job, your students enjoy the material, but no, you are doing everything wrong and you need to do it this other way.

'Your content comes second.' That's complete and utter horse&%$#!!!Please forgive the tone of this post. I still love teaching and the classroom; I'm just sick of priorities that take away from true learning.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

State of the (Red Sox) Nation

2005-11-04T15:14:00.000-05:00

So, anything new going on in the world of the Red Sox? Hmmm...should be a quiet off-season. It's only been a year since we won the World Series, after all. How bad could things be?

Really?

Damn it.

Knightmare of the Know Nothings

2005-11-04T15:10:00.000-05:00

Amy Sullivan has an interesting column up over at Beliefnet that wonders just what may be coming down the pike in the future for the Supreme Court (assuming that Alito wins confirmation). Next year at this time, there could be a majority of Catholics on the bench, and will the Church take the same attitide towards Catholic judges has they have taken toward Catholic politicians: toe the pro-life (abortion) line, or be denied communion? From the piece:

In an ominous note bordering on a spiritual threat, the bishops wrote, “We urge those Catholic officials… to consider the consequences for their own spiritual well-being, as well as the scandal they risk by leading others into serious sin.” Catholic public officials are appropriate targets of attention and pressure, they explained, because their high-profile status puts them in a position to influence ordinary Catholics. They have a special responsibility to be model Catholics and to uphold the Church’s teaching.

After all, if it applies to politicians, it most certainly applies to judges. I would point out, however, that as Sullivan states, being Catholic does not always translate to complete social conservatism. Only time will tell what direction the Court will go.

Well, what ever happens, (gratutious history reference coming!) one thing is for sure: the Know Nothings are surely screaming from beyond the grave!

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

On Liberalism and Christianity

2005-10-16T00:01:00.000-05:00

From a discussion I had in a seminar on democracy. It holds some truth, I think, though it is perhaps a bit rambling:

In reading the print media and in discussions with fellow students on the campus of this university, I am struck by the fact that at least among some of us, there is an antipathy towards religion interacting with public policy. Indeed, the statement has been made by some who call themselves liberals that generally speaking, 'religion is too dangerous to allow it to influence public policy' and it must be opposed at all costs. This is an argument without merit, and I am, I must confess, quite bothered by such a blanket condemnation of religion in the public sphere. While I may not be as liberal as some, I do consider myself a progressive. A hallmark of liberalism and progressivism, at least in my admittedly limited view, is tolerance and a willingness to consider a variety of opinion and influences if such opinions and influences can provide solutions to the problems of the day. To blanketly reject the idea that religion can have a positive and beneficial impact on public policy and democracy is, simply put, illiberal and close-minded. While there are obvious examples that some have cited of the negative influence of Christianity in public policy, of the 'atrocities done in the name of Christ,' it would serve us well to examine the long and positive tradition of religion in the public sphere, and how it has influenced democratic matters for the better. I speak from the perspective of one who is not a currently practicing Christian, though I was raised Catholic and my own wife is a semi-regular church-goer of the Protestant stripe. Please note that I focus on Christianity because of its great impact on American democracy, and no disrespect of other faiths is intended.
Examining the expanse of American history, one cannot help but note that much of the Progressive movement and the effort to create a more socially progressive public policy in the late 19th century was influenced by Christian thinking. William Jennings Bryan stands as the liberal lion of this era, and modern liberals err in ignoring his
contributions to the progressive cause, emphasizing instead his unfortunate last days and the fiasco that was the Scopes trial. And yet, it is Bryan's strong Christian beliefs that led him to advocate for causes that today might classify him as socialist. His 'Cross of
Gold' speech is a stirring call for relieving debtors of their unfair burden, placed on their backs by a system that increasingly ignored the needs of the working man. Throughout his career, he argued in favor of the so-called 'Social Gospel', supporting female suffrage,
anti-imperialism, regulation of business for consumer and worker protection, and even his anti-evolution crusade, while unfortunate, was a progressive response in its own way. Doug Linder has argued that Bryant fought evolution less from a literal interpretation of the Bible but because it "...provided ammunition for those who, calling it "survival of the fittest," would sterilize the abnormal or forget the weak. Given a choice, Bryan said, "I would rather begin with God and reason down than begin with a piece of dirt and reason up." " Bryan, Linder argues, was almost single-handedly responsible for turning the Democratic Party toward an embrace of the working classes and the suffering classes (with certain unfortunate and obvious exceptions that would not be dealt with until the mid-20th century).
To reject the role of religion in public policy is to reject the efforts of Jewish reformers in the late 19th and 20th centuries to create a stronger, better America. It is to reject their call for Social Justice as demanded by God, which insists on the freedom of man
to make his own choices unfettered by the constraints of inequality.
To reject the role of religion in public policy is to reject the demands of the Social Gospel. It is to reject the driving force behind abolition, the belief that the Creator created all men equal, and that to enslave a man is to create an abomination before God. These men and women, these lovers of freedom, certainly sought to create a public policy where democracy mattered, and they did so not in spite of their religious beliefs, but because of them.
To reject the role of religion in public policy is to reject the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's. It is to reject the very foundation which inspired such men as the Christian Martin Luther King and Muslim Malcom X (as he thought and spoke upon his return from the Hajj).
To reject the role of religion in public policy is to reject public education. It is to reject the common schools of Horace Mann, himself a Christian Socialist, which were centered around a vague, amorphous, but very present Protestant morality. Mann and other public
education advocates did not separate the need for a Christian morality from the obligation for positive public education for all students. Dewey himself, while rejecting the idea of an all-knowing Creator and a true Christian outlook, accepted the universality of ideals and the demand for justice, embracing education as the means to ensure social justice and democratic education. He was influenced, in part, by his own association with the Unitarian faith and his early liberal Protestant background.
Ultimately, I believe that religion and democracy go hand in hand. The Christian Religion in particular, with an emphasis on the Divine call for justice and equality, is a natural partner to democracy, which demands an equal voice for all peoples. Democracy untempered by Christian charity is the tyranny of the majority; Christianity untempered by democracy is theocratic foolishness. A true lover of democracy, a true believer in liberal principles, will not reject the important contribution that religion can make to formulations of public policy. To do so is simply foolish, and again I say that it rejects
many of those liberals and progressives that came before us.

Kevin Drum Channels Monty Burns

2005-10-10T14:08:00.000-05:00

I'm sorry. I can't help but picture Kevin Drum tapping his fingers together and looking very Burns-like as he wrote the post below. I added a sound effect for, well, effect. :)

From the Washington Monthly:

MIERS....Speaking about the Harriet Miers nomination, John Podhoretz tosses out this unsubtle warning today:
IT'S GETTING WORSE [John Podhoretz]
The White House needs to know this. Really. It's getting worse. Trust me.

Excellent. [ed: added sound!]

Monty Burns and Kevin Drum: Separated at Birth?

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

We Have Excellence and Service. Where's the Integrity?

2005-10-10T13:52:00.000-05:00

As an active duty veteran of the Air Force, I am proud of my military service and proud of those who continue to serve in uniform stateside and in theater. I encourage my students to join the military; despite the obvious dangers today, it can be an excellent career, with a decent enough benefit package and a way to gain discipline in yourself and pride in your country. I am most certainly a minority in this view, but the semi-fascist side of me believes that serving your country in some manner should be a requirement for elective office at the very least, if not for the franchise. The rational, liberal side of me wishes to put that other side in a locked room with combat disabled veterans. All of that being said, recruiters who mislead or lie to recruits are some of the lowest scum in the service. From the Boston Globe:

Brian Shepard thought he had the perfect plan: a special program, offered by a Marine Corps recruiter last spring, that would let him finish four years of college before he faced active duty.

Instead, the 18-year-old was notified last week -- less than one month into his freshman year at New Hampshire Technical Institute -- that his Marine Reserve unit will be sent to Iraq early next year, a development that Shepard said his recruiter never told him was possible.

I will grant that this young man should have read the (very) fine print, but it is up to the recruiter, I feel, to ensure that there are absolutely NO misunderstandings prior to signing that paperwork. This is young person's life we are talking about here, not an automobile lease. The enlistee needs to go in with eyes (and mind) open. In a related topic, the recruiters should also make recruits aware of the whole concept of Stop-Loss. When I was Stop-lossed a few years ago, I couldn't believe they could do that. Fortunately, it was only a couple of weeks. Integrity, Excellence, and Service Before Self was the motto of the USAF when I was in. Recruiters need to start paying attention to the Integrity part again.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Bombing Them Back to the Smurf Age

2005-10-10T13:17:00.000-05:00

From the Telegraph by way of Reason:

It seems that Unicef has begun a new antiwar campaign, emphasizing the impact on children.

Philippe Henon, a spokesman for Unicef Belgium, said his agency had set out to shock, after concluding that traditional images of suffering in Third World war zones had lost their power to move television viewers. "It's controversial," he said. "We have never done something like this before but we've learned over the years that the reaction to the more normal type of campaign is very limited."

I find it kind of disturbing that people would be more bothered by a crying Baby Smurf and a devastated Smurf Village than by, you know, actual death. The ad campaign could have been even more gruesome:

Julie Lamoureux, account director at Publicis for the campaign, said the agency's original plans were toned down.
"We wanted something that was real war - Smurfs losing arms, or a Smurf losing a head -but they said no."

And the very first comment over at Hit and Run is this, which reminds one of a Fox News pundit at the least:

"If you are going to to there, you need to show the whole story. We need to see "Beloved Papa" and his roving death squads, disfigurment of Smurfette when she gets out of line, and mysterious happenings in Handy's garage. It could be nothing, but there is an awful lot of unaccounted for fungicide ..."

Check out the Hit and Run bit here. Original article here.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

A Bitter End to the Red Sox Season (But You Just KNEW It Was Coming!)

2005-10-10T13:00:00.000-05:00

So I guess it's time to focus on the Patriots.

Damn Graffanino. He fields that groundball and we at least do not get swept. I almost got thrown out of freaking Alehouse for cursing at the TV that night.

Oh well, still a Red Sox fan until I die. And Go Angels.

The Church Speaks: 'The Bible is NOT a history or science text!'

2005-10-10T12:52:00.000-05:00

So it is perhaps time to give props to the Catholic Church, church of my forefathers and source of much supression of knowledge and science in the not-so-distant past. Recently, it seems, the Church has declared that the Bible may NOT be 100% accurate when discussing science and history, a response to the recent upsurge in calls for a fundementalist or literal interpretation of the Holy Book of the Christianity, particularly in the United States. In discussing what is to be interpreted literally and what is intended as a spiritual lesson,

"...the bishops cite the early chapters of Genesis, comparing them with early creation legends from other cultures, especially from the ancient East. The bishops say it is clear that the primary purpose of these chapters was to provide religious teaching and that they could not be described as historical writing.

Similarly, they refute the apocalyptic prophecies of Revelation, the last book of the Christian Bible, in which the writer describes the work of the risen Jesus, the death of the Beast and the wedding feast of Christ the Lamb.

The bishops say: “Such symbolic language must be respected for what it is, and is not to be interpreted literally. We should not expect to discover in this book details about the end of the world, about how many will be saved and about when the end will come.” "

It is refreshing to see the Catholic Church taking a stand for science as well as for faith, rather than supressing either. It is unfortunate that many of those in the United States that should heed these words tend to view Catholicism and the Vatican as a false church with some good ideas at best and the 'whore of Babylon' at worst.
H/T Andrew Sullivan!

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Greetings from the Land of the Almost Dead

2005-10-10T12:50:00.000-05:00

Hi! Well, it's been great fun so far this year, being a full-time doctoral student as well as a full-time high school teacher. And of course, my wife has been gone almost 6 weeks writing insurance claims. I have been trying to post some stuff, but hey, you know, I am enjoying my current laid back and stress free existence!

'News Alert: Heaven now closed to children of sinners; fundies rejoice'

2005-09-24T09:20:00.000-05:00

So it seems that the best way to educate some children in the principles of Christian faith, forgiveness of sin, and all of that stuff is to expel them from school for the supposed sins of their parents. From the LA Times:

"Your family does not meet the policies of admission," Supt. Leonard Stob wrote to Tina Clark, Shay's biological mother. The policy, he added, states that at least one parent cannot engage in practices "immoral or inconsistent with a positive Christian life style [sic] such as cohabitating without marriage or in a homosexual relationship."
The letter included two checks refunding $3,415, Shay's tuition for half the school year and an art fee. Attempts to reach Stob were unsuccessful.Clark and her partner, Mitzi Gray, have been together for 22 years, and have three daughters; the others are ages 9 and 19. Clark and Gray said school officials learned of their relationship after Shay and another cheerleader were reprimanded for talking to the crowd during a football game Sept. 16.

My, what a quite sinful life her parents lead. In a committed, monogamous relationship for 22 years, a mother named Mitzi, the parents of 3 children, and geez, their daughter was a cheerleader for goodness sake! How much more American could a family possibly get?
All of this being said, this IS a private institution, entitled to do whatever it likes and admit whoever it likes. This does, however, provide a strong argument against vouchers. My public money better not go to support an institution such as this.
Check out the libertarian blog Hit and Run for a great discussion in the comments section on this issue.

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

'I just want to teach.'

2005-09-16T12:59:00.000-05:00

Sometimes, I wake up in the morning, and I cry. There are times when I want to just quit, to walk out the door and say, ‘So long, and thanks for all the fish.’ These are the days, the times, when I think that teaching was the wrong profession for me.
Sometimes, I wake up in the morning, and I smile. There are times when I cannot wait to walk into my classroom and say, ‘Hi folks. It’s great to see you, let’s get started.’ These are the days, the times, when I think that teaching was the best profession for me.
Lately, I cry more than I smile. I am so tired of a lot of everything. I have been repeating a new mantra, a bitter mantra: ‘I just want to teach history!’ I hate this mantra, because it makes me feel like I am not a team player, that I am somehow failing to do what must be done to help my students.
My school is all about ‘the team’ and all about ‘the students.’ I understand, and on the surface, I agree with it all completely. And yet, I cannot help but feel that being all about ‘the team’ and all about ‘the students’ leaves out the individual teacher. I want to teach my students the joy of history, the passion that I feel for a subject near and dear to my heart, and sometimes I succeed, I think. But now, now I must place a heavier emphasis on specific methods of delivery, and I must take almost full responsibility for the success or failure of my students. And this bothers me. It shouldn’t, I know. Teachers SHOULD bear some responsibility for the success or failure of their students…but not at the expense of removing all of the responsibility from the shoulders of the students. That is where education and education ‘reform’ seems to be going.
There is no box on the IEP or the 504 or the AIP for helping a student overcome laziness or attitude or anger or socio-economic status. There is no box that will allow the student to get a new set of parents that will make him care about learning, or a new set of goals that will make her want to go beyond getting a boy or a baby. There is nothing I can do about a lack of will in the student. But I am responsible 100% for the success of that student.
I am tired. I am angry. I recently spent 45 minutes in a training session on the proper use of word walls. Word walls. In high school. I know how to use word walls. I simply choose not to use them because I have not found them effective, research be damned. The students at this level find them amusing, if anything. They mock them, and they mock the whole idea of using elementary level strategies on high school level students.
Paperwork. Paperwork. It all about paperwork. Document everything, build a file, write a letter, beg, plead, hope, pray, for the student to care about learning.
I am not sure I can care much longer. I’m not sure my students, many of them, want me to care.
I love history. I love teaching. I wish I could teach history.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Fu--No, Scratch that. LOVE the Police!

2005-09-04T12:13:00.000-05:00

Regular readers of FloridaBlues and, really, the whole bloggerverse, are aware that there are enough villians in the cock-up that is New Orleans to fill a Flash Gordon movie. This post is not about them. Rather, I want to take this time to thank those men and women of the New Orleans Police Department who stayed behind to fight the good fight. Brian MacQuarrie of the Boston Globe has a moving piece about these officers, and it is well worth the read.

On the reactions of officers to the disaster:

Across from the mass human suffering at the fetid convention center yesterday, before a convoy of Humvees finally delivered hundreds of National Guard troops to this crime-ridden intersection of dashed hopes and mounting anger, a city police officer touched his finger to his eye and began to cry.

''I'm going to stay here till everything's done," the officer said. ''I love this city."

On why the officers in the article requested not to be named:

In the morning, when the police officer cried, he spoke caustically about the supplies that had yet to arrive for the storm victims, and the lack of food and equipment for the officers. Whatever they needed to eat, the officer said, they had taken from the looted stores around them. The officers asked not to be identified for fear of retribution from the department.

(Retribution? For doing their jobs in the only manner open to them?)
On how they survived, and on how they are trying to do their jobs:

The officers had been shot at every night, he and his colleagues said, by criminals who entered the teeming convention center to rob, assault, and rape some of the hurricane victims. Given their own vulnerable circumstances, the officers said, they took over an empty Hampton Inn to serve as a command post, positioned a backhoe as a barricade, erected a bogus ''Raw Sewage Danger" sign to keep away meddlers, and bulked up their firepower, supplementing the department-issue .40mm Glock pistols with their own shotguns.

''We had to arm ourselves," said another officer, a nine-year veteran who had been on duty for 29 straight hours. ''It's against regulations, but they're shooting at us constantly."

In one foray for supplies, the officers said, they broke open a store's safe containing a cache of weapons and added the firearms to their own stash at the Hampton Inn.

(Against regulations? Screw regulations in this case!)
Finally, on why they are doing what they are doing, and what their prescence, however symbolic, means to those they are sworn to serve and protect:

Outside the convention center, as edgy National Guard troops began taking up position shortly after noon, the New Orleans police who had been there since Sunday posed for photographs with some of the storm victims.

''Y'all did a wonderful job," said Yolanda Camese, 49, as she hugged one of the officers. ''You made us feel safer. I watched you every night."

''I made a commitment to the city," said the officer, who paused for nearly a minute as he looked at the pavement. ''I made a commitment to my [police] district, and I made a commitment to these people out here and to my fellow officers. That's why I'm here."

Lord knows the New Orleans Police Department has had its share of corruption and shame. It is important, I think, to point out those times when the department goes above and beyond the call of duty. Folks, many of us on the left justifiably attack law enforcement when they place themselves beyond the pale. Now, it is time that we honor these officers in New Orleans and other ravaged areas for going beyond their duty and staying after others, understandably and blamelessly, abandonded it. Heroes, all of them. One hopes that they will be recognized as such when this is all over. Read the article!!!!!
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Night of the Living Dead in New Orleans

2005-08-31T14:27:00.000-05:00

All of these people are going to hell. All of them. Where is their humanity? Who loots a freaking hospital?????????????????
Brutal thoughts cross my mind when I read that. Shoot them all.

Defending Science in Florida: Fighting the Good Fight

2005-08-31T07:05:00.000-05:00

Wesley R. Elsberry, in response to my earlier post about Florida's new chancellor, informs us that he is leading an effort to defend science in Florida. His comment:

"I am working on organizing "Florida Citizens for Science". Citizens for Science groups have been instrumental across the country in defeating or ameliorating the antievolution attacks on science education. Please drop by the Austringer and leave your email address if you would like to join Florida Citizens for Science. There's a lot of hard work ahead. We need people who want to see science taught in science classes and non-science taught elsewhere. For more information on getting involved, please see the National Center for Science Education site, where I work."

I have signed up. Have you done your part? Defend science in Florida now.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Derbyshire gets it right on ID

2005-08-31T06:52:00.000-05:00

John Derbyshire of National Review, not my favorite person, has an excellent piece up that trashes the idea that schools should teach Intelligent Design. He argues, basically, that if science classes teach Intelligent Design, they should also teach such fun fantasies as hollow-earth theory, astrology, and all of the other nonsense pseudo-science that plagues man. To those that feel the faith of their child would be threatened by the teaching of evolution, he has this to say:

If you are afraid that your children, being confronted with science in school, will turn into atheists and materialists, you have a wide variety of options available to you in this free nation. Most obviously, you should take your kids to church regularly, encourage them to pray, say grace before meals, and respond to those knotty questions that children sometimes ask with answers from your own faith. Or you could homeschool them, or send them to a religious school, and make sure they are not exposed to the science you fear so much.

What a great line. God forbid we gain exposure to anything that we fear, and that might challenge our worldview. Thank you, Mr. Derbyshire, for a strong defense of science education and a powerful take down of what amounts to 'faith-based' science. Wow, I'm thanking John Derbyshire. Weird.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Thanks, Minnesota. Thanks a bunch.

2005-08-30T07:47:00.000-05:00

Via Pharyngula, I see that Florida gets the lovely Cheri Yecke as the new K-12 Chancellor. This is not a good omen for education in the state. You see, Cheri Yecke wishes to 'avoid' the controversy of evolution, or, barring that, allow school boards to introduce 'alternative' theories. She is, simply, another face of the creationist-id movement. Interesting that Florida hired her despite not being retained by Minnesota, due in part to the controversy of her 'leadership.' One wonders if the fact that science standards are up for review next year has anything to do with her hiring.
The good chancellor is not only bad news for science, however; she has also been known to stick her finger into the history pie. For example, she has argued that history standards should not refer to the 'genocide' of Native Americans; rather, she has put forward the notion that it was all one big misunderstanding, an accident really. A committee she organized and led to push new history standards was not really in favor of alternative viewpoints. From the Organization of American Historians, we get a nice glimpse into the inner thinking of Yecke's committee:

For example, in a discussion of the kindergarten Civics standard describing the “virtues of good citizens,” the subcommittee decided to omit “sharing and cooperation” because these were too “socialist.” At another meeting, the subcommittee agreed that it would be inappropriate to teach middle school students about the economics of slavery, because the knowledge that human beings were bought and sold as merchandise might “prejudice the students against a free market economy.” In response to a critique that urged the inclusion of protest songs (“We Shall Overcome,” “This Land is Your Land”) as well as patriotic songs (“American the Beautiful,” “God Bless America”), one committee member even suggested that they list the controversial Confederate anthem “Dixie” as the sole example. In response to another critique noting the absence of organized labor from both the U.S. History and the Economics standards, a different committee member sputtered, “unions! Don’t even go there!” In general, they were only interested in those facts and interpretations that reinforced a triumphalist view of the United States and glorified individualism, as they grudgingly corrected some of the most evident errors and addressed a few of the most conspicuous omissions.

Oh yes, this is most definitely a good sign. What a joke. I shudder for the status of public education in this state in 10 years. It won't be pretty.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

WRKO And Me

2005-08-20T16:24:00.000-05:00

I am scheduled as a guest on the Jay Diamond Show, from 7 to 9 on WRKO in Boston, along with my FloridaBlues co-blogger Gatorchick. No idea what it will be like, but I hope it goes well. She was actually the one invited, and I am going along as sort of a secondary guest. Still, its cool. :)

Swimwear for the Conservative Set

2005-08-20T16:17:00.000-05:00

John Cole links to this catalog for women. Like all fashion catalogs, it features attractive models wearing the latest in swimwear. Unlike most fashion catalogs, however, it is Saudi Arabian, and most of the models are covered from the neck to the ankles. Somehow, I don't think Hasema is going to give Maxim or even Abercrombie a run for their money. Still, is it me, or are some of these outfits kind of nice? I would buy one for my wife to wear out as semi-casual wear. Am I wrong?Interestingly, some of the outfits show quite a bit more flesh than would be expected. Of course, I suppose the pools and beaches ARE segregated. Kind of removes the joy of the beach for me. To each their own, I suppose. (Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Half the Taft, Twice the Corruption

2005-08-20T15:47:00.000-05:00

So, Governor Taft demonstrates yet again that the rules do not apply to the Republican Party. Perhaps part of his punishment should be to, oh, I don't know, invest in rare coins. If it was a Democratic governor pleading no contest to ethics charges, he would be lambasted on talk radio and hounded until he quit. From CNN:

The governor has forced out underlings for ethics offenses, but he said those cases were different. Taft said his golf outings were mostly weekend events with friends and he didn't know they needed to be reported. The Ohio Ethics Commission found no evidence that he had given political access in exchange for the outings.

Taft, 63, entered the cramped city courtroom Thursday accompanied by his attorney, his wife and two state troopers. He stood respectfully as he apologized to Froehlich.

"As governor I have made it clear that I expect all state workers to comply and follow both the spirit and the letter of Ohio's ethics laws, and I have demanded no less of myself," Taft said.

But at a news conference minutes later, Taft said repeatedly he would not resign, saying he had too much to do in his remaining 16 months as governor.

Certainly, both Democrats and Republicans have been guilty of such things, but for some reason, the pundits and blowhards only pay attention if the guilty party has 'D' somewhere after the name. One wonders if Ohio might have swung the other way in 2004 if Taft is shamed sooner.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

ID: Strawmen and Silliness

2005-08-19T14:41:00.000-05:00

In today's Gainesville Sun, a letter to the editor by someone named Robert Ausband attempts to claim intelligent design as a legitimate scientific endeavor rather than crank science. I wrote a response to the letter, leaning heavily on the website PandasThumb for my information. The man's letter really bothered me, because while I do not teach biology, I do teach history, and I have struggled at times these past two weeks to get some of my students to understand or accept the fact that man has changed since he first appeared, and that the evidence indicates an Earth millions of years old. It is crap like intelligent design that makes my life difficult and closes the minds of students to what science has made obvious. I have no problem with religion, and while I am Catholic, these days I tend toward deism. But even the Catholic Church has accepted the idea of evolution in some form. Anyway, here is my response to the straw arguments and silly claims of Mr. Ausband. Whether it is published by the Sun, I don't know.

Robert Ausband, in his letter to the editor of August 19, comes across as rather misinformed concerning the concept of so-called 'intelligent design.' He argues that there is no relation to religion; in fact, a "broadly theistic understanding of nature" is one of the main goals of the whole ID movement, as evidenced in the Discovery Institute's own 'Wedge Document.' That document lays out a broad strategy for recreating science with an increased emphasis on religion "to replace it [materialistic science] with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions." Please keep in mind that those are the words of the leading ID organization, the Discovery Institute, and not those of critics of the idea. The whole 'Wedge Document' and the strategy behind it can be found at http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.html.
Mr. Ausband also claims that ID theory is simply an effort to 'fill in the blanks' of evolution theory, and provides examples without bothering to explain them. It must be noted, then, that his example of evoloution theory being unable to 'reconcile the mathematics of information theory with the nearly infinite complexity of the DNA molecule' demonstrates a clear misunderstanding of both. I assume here he is referring to the creation of 'new information' in the form of new genes; the work of Manyuan Long at the University of Chicago, as well as other researchers, has shown that the development of 'new information' is not that difficult and quite common. As for the concept of 'irreducible complexity,' recent research continues to break down the myth. For example, the March 18, 2005 issue of Science has an article discussing the evolution of the swim bladder of a fish, something with according to the theory of irreducible complexity could not have evolved because it would supposedly be useless unless it was in it's present form.
Where Mr. Ausband really misleads readers is when he implies that Stephen Jay Gould, one of the leading advocates of evolutionary theory, rejected evolution prior to his death. In fact, Gould, like most proponents of evolution, had long since argued that the theory of evolution had moved beyond the ideas of Darwin and the 'survival of the fittest.' He was in no way giving credence to the idea an 'intelligent designer.' Truthfully, if science were to accept the idea of intelligent design, it would be the end of science as we know it. After all, if we can not yet explain something, then we can just say, "oh, it was created by an intelligent designer, so let's just forget trying to understand it or explain it."
Finally, let me pose this question: if there is no relationship between religion and intelligent design, then just who does Mr. Ausband believe was the creator, and just what are we supposed to teach students about that creator? If Mr. Ausband believes what he has written, then it would be perfectly acceptable to teach students that the designer was simply an advanced alien architect, not evolution or the Big Bang or a deity. Somehow, I doubt that Mr. Ausband would support that sort of teaching in a science classroom.
(For a detailed discussion of the flaws of intelligent design theory, I suggest checking out the website www.pandasthumb.org, which is run by actual scientists in an effort to rebut the claims of both intelligent design and creationism.)

God, I hope one of these days some ID'er comes back from Heaven and reports that in fact, God was an Australopithicene. That would be justice.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

On the Gaza Withdrawal

2005-08-19T07:07:00.000-05:00

And so the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip continues, and it seems to have been a quicker task than the Israeli government expected. It has not been without difficulties however. From the Washington Post:

Using water cannons and cranes, Israeli forces broke through barricades of tables lashed together with rope, coils of razor wire and a hail of rocks,paint-filled light bulbs and what military officials said was acid thrown by scores of settlers holding out on the roof. Dozens of commandos, climbing ladders and being lowered onto the roof inside shipping containers, took more than three hours to clear the building.
"This was the most difficult place,no question about that," said Gideon Meir, a senior Israeli Foreign Ministry official who was splattered with paint as he watched the scene. "But in the end it went faster than anyone imagined."

I think the image of Jewish soldiers storming a synagogue is not going to sit well with some significant percentage of the Israeli public. That being said, the Israeli government is doing the necessary thing for security and the hope for peace...but especially for security. Not having to defend illegal settlements will free up the resources of the IDF, and serve notice to the Palestinian Authority that Israel is washing its hands of the region.

I think, as well, that the resistance to removal offered by the settlers and their supporters demonstrates again that religion can motivate people to do dangerous things and to take actions that they might frown upon if others did them. For example, many of the settlement supporters believe that the Gaza Strip and the West Bank have been promised to Jews by God, and it is a crime against God for the government to remove them by force. This is a dangerous belief, and I wonder whether or not we will see some sort of violent reaction among the most religious of the settlers. It is fortunate and prudent that the Army has not entered the synagogues or homes with weapons beyond batons, for one could imagine something bad happening.

And naturally, much of the outrage about removal compared the Israeli government to the Nazis, a comparison that is unfortunate and simply wrong. It is, however, driven by those twin beasts of zealotry and passion, and is to be expected. Still, it is disturbing to read this:

Just after 3:30 p.m., a group of teenagers poured motor oil and water over the long ramp leading up to the doors of the synagogue. A gray-bearded man emerged a few moments later carrying an Israeli flag, which he set on fire.

"Heil, Hitler!" he yelled, drawing scattered howls from the hundreds of onlookers gathered for the final showdown in Gaza's largest settlement.

I wonder, really, what that man was thinking. I might have reversed the comparison myself, for the actions of the settlers seem more akin to the idea of a natural right to territory that was pushed by the Nazis. They, too, believed that they had a divine destiny to seize and control the 'living space' on their borders. But just as it is wrong for the settlers to equate the Sharon government with the Nazis, it is inappropriate, I think to equate the motivations of the settlers with those of the Nazis.

Religion, sometimes, is a dangerous thing.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Lifting the Rock and Exposing the Bugs

2005-08-19T06:39:00.000-05:00

Well, I just thought that I would share with the appreciative audience of this blog some of the fine intellectual thinking from our friends over at the kinist Reconstructionist blog, Little Geneva. Some of the most recent posts are below. Please be aware that the comments below do not reflect the outlook or values of myself or this blog. It is important, however, to be aware of the comments and thoughts of people such as the bloggers over at Little Geneva, for they reflect a dangerous but growing trend of thought. From Little Geneva:

Minority populations on the rise. What on earth is happening to North Carolina? Maybe the name should be changed to North Chihuahua.
What results when blacks are left to their own devices in a large city? Twelve thousand abandoned homes and 36 square miles of vacant land. Now there is a proposal to turn swaths of Detroit into farmland! So it turns out that this is a wonderful recipe for agrarianism. Hand the big cities over to blacks, and in no time at all the farmers can move in.
The New Jersey Attorney General gets involved when a waitress writes the words "Jew couple" at the bottom of a bill. But Jews aren’t litigious or anything. Perish the thought.
Brenda Berrios and Karissa Smith are the first mother-daughter military team to make war in Iraq. This is a huge victory for ugly women.

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

Catching the Gay

2005-08-15T19:20:00.000-05:00

Economist and fellow Red Sox fan (Go Sox!) Dan Drezner has an amusing post up about a recent do-it-yourself checklist provided by Focus on the Family that is intended to help you determine if your child is, you know, 'different.' From 'Is My Child Becoming Homosexual,' we see the top seven signs your child might be catching the gay (drumroll please!):

Evidences of gender confusion or doubt in boys ages 5 to 11 may include:

1. A strong feeling that they are “different” from other boys.

2. A tendency to cry easily, be less athletic, and dislike the roughhousing that other boys enjoy.

3. A persistent preference to play female roles in make-believe play.

4. A strong preference to spend time in the company of girls and participate in their games and other pastimes.

5. A susceptibility to be bullied by other boys, who may tease them unmercifully and call them “queer,” “fag” and “gay.”

6. A tendency to walk, talk, dress and even “think” effeminately.

7. A repeatedly stated desire to be — or insistence that he is — a girl

Drezner comments:

Well, as a child, I certainly suffered from 1, 2, 4, 5, and maybe 6 (Depends how you define "think effeminately").

If you'll excuse me, I have to go tell my wife and children about my latent homosexual qualities and accompanying gender confusion. I fear that my son will probably cry and feel different.

Geez. One would think that wanting to be in the company of girls would be a sign of heterosexuality. And the whole 'roughhousing that other boys enjoy'? Yeah, um, as Dan Drezner implies, guess it depends on how you define 'roughhousing.' Me, I prefer to be in the company of girls. I will leave the roughhousing with other guys to my gay friends. :)
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Oops! Breaking a few eggs and all that...

2005-08-15T18:53:00.000-05:00

So, the gentleman killed by police in London last month? The one that was acting all suspicious, wearing a bulky coat, jumping the turnstile, running to the train and looking dangerous? Yeah, well, seems he was none of those things. According to the Observer,

The questions are mounting. Initial claims that de Menezes was targeted because he was wearing a bulky coat, refused to stop when challenged and then vaulted the ticket barriers have all turned out to be false. He was wearing a denim jacket, used a standard Oyster electronic card to get into the station and simply walked towards the platform unchallenged.

So why didn't the young man stop when he was being chased by the plains-clothes officers? Well, the Observer may have the answer:

Two weeks before he was killed, de Menezes had been attacked by a gang of white youths, seemingly at random. According to friends this experience left him shaken and nervous.

Gee, if I had just been beaten up by a bunch of thugs a couple weeks earlier and then was being chased by guys who dressed and looked and sounded like them, I wouldn't stop either. One wonders, really, if anyone will be held accountable for this tragedy. Interestingly, all of the cameras seem to have not been working in that station that day. Go figure.
Read the Observer piece for more details.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

The 19th Amendment: Pointless?

2005-08-12T20:01:00.000-05:00

Just thought I would share this lovely perception on the inherent flaws in the 19th Amendment. I was cruising the web, checking out some lovely Dominionist and Kinist sites when I found it. You should read the whole article from Vision Forum Ministries concerning the need to return to patriarchy. I think it is quite enlightening. I know that I was converted. Just don't tell my wife.

In regards to a woman’s right to vote; if husband and wife are truly “one flesh”and the husband is doing his duty to represent the family to the wider community, then what PRACTICAL benefit does allowing women to vote provide? If husband and wife agree on an issue, then one has simply doubled the number of votes; but the result is the same. Women’s voting only makes a difference when the husband and wife disagree; a wife, who does not trust the judgment of her husband, can nullify his vote. Thus, the immediate consequence is to enshrine the will of the individual OVER the good of the family thus creating divisions WITHIN the family.

You know, this country DID start going downhill when those women got the right to vote. Now excuse me. It's my turn to do the dishes and laundry. (Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Gay Adoptions: The Next Gay Marriage?

2005-08-12T15:38:00.000-05:00

The newest issue of the libertarian mag, Reason, has a great article on the increasing trend toward restricting the rights of gay couples to adopt children. The whole article is worth a read, but the closing paragraph, authored by Reason editor Julian Sanchez, is killer:

Better still, they could visit Florida and ask a child in foster care which makes him feel more threatened: the thought of being raised by homosexuals, or the prospect of an indefinite number of years spent passing through an indefinite number of homes. They could ask whether “family values” are best served by attempting to marginalize gay couples who raise families, by “protecting” abused or sick children from people who want to give them a home, by forcing parents to worry whether they’ll have the legal authority to bring their kids to the hospital in an emergency. They could ask Charlie.

Read the article to learn just who this Charlie is, and for more examples of complete insensitivity, such as this doozy:

In 2003, as he introduced a bill to ban gay foster parenting, Texas legislator Robert Talton (R-Pasadena) told the state’s House of Representatives: “If it was me I would rather [leave] kids in orphanages as such—this is where they are now if they’re not fostered out. At least they have a chance of learning the proper values.”

Excuse the language, but what an asshole.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Bizzaro Hillary and the Mob

2005-08-12T15:13:00.000-05:00

Bad news for the NYGOP, if this story is in the least bit accurate. From the Daily News:

Jeanine Pirro declared "I have taken on the mob" when she announced her run for U.S. Senate this week, but she could have said "I have taken from the mob."

The Westchester District Attorney pocketed nearly $12,000 in campaign checks from firms and associates with alleged links to organized crime, the Daily News has found.

A review of campaign and court records shows at least six donors with ties to mob families who've contributed to Pirro since 2003. That casts a shadow on Pirro, who's basing her run against Sen. Hillary Clinton in part on her reputation as a tough prosecutor.

On top of that, the same article reports that Pirro's husband discussed a case of her's with a mobbed up contractor. Not good. Now, I'm not exactly Hillary's biggest fan, but I am glad to see that the NYGOP continues to shoot itself in the foot. Or insists on wearing concrete galoshes, in this case.
I listened to part of Pirro's interview on Hannity (shiver) the other day as I was trying to drill a hole in my head...I mean driving... and it occured to me why the NYGOP wants her to run: she is the Bizzaro Hillary! I mean really: both women, both lawyers, both married to men that do stupid things, both rising stars (or risen, in Hillary's case) in their respective parties. Yup, from now on, Jeanine Pirro will be known as Bizzaro Hillary, the dim mirror image of SuperHillary. At least by me. Maybe it will catch on.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Young Young Earthers, New Old Headaches

2005-08-12T13:43:00.000-05:00

So, the school year has begun, and I have something that I have never had to deal with before in my classroom: vocal young earth creationists. Not IDers. Young Earthers. I am about to begin a discussion of the Origins of Man and the rise of civilizations. Can any readers recommend any sites or articles that might be appropriate for 10th graders concerning the validity of anthropological and archaeological research (they asked me for proof about dating methods today!). Also, um, it needs to be written in such a way that I can present it without getting fired. I am currently perusing The Panda's Thumb for some help, but I have feeling that that will not be enough.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Update: Hell is other people...especially upset students

2005-08-11T12:51:00.000-05:00

The first week of school has been hell. I'll update once things are settled down (this weekend).

Breaking News: The ACLU May Not Be Evil!

2005-08-07T16:16:00.000-05:00

Eugene Volokh of the libertarian lawyer blog 'The Volokh Conspiracy' has a thoughtful, eloquent, and somewhat passionate defense of the ACLU against those who argue that that organization is pro-terrorist, anti-American, and makes a practice of filing frivolous lawsuits. Volokh argues that

In fact, my sense is that most of the criticism that the ACLU faces comes because their arguments are too successful -- not only nonfrivolous, but actually ones that win in court. If the ACLU only filed complaints that were such clear losers to be frivolous, they wouldn't much bother people: At most, they'd waste some government lawyers' time, but since government entities tend to have lawyers on salary (and generally not very high salary), they wouldn't even waste much government money. In those frivolous cases, the government would fight the ACLU, win (by definition, since if the government lost, the case wouldn't be frivolous), and even get sanctions against the ACLU.

Later in the post, Volokh says that while he disagrees with many of the positions of the ACLU on certain issues, it is simply wrong to throw around misleading labels when arguing against them.(emphasis mine)

But stop calling them "criminal" for exercising their constitutional rights. Stop calling their lawsuits "frivolous" when the lawsuits bother you precisely because they may well prevail. Stop calling them "pro-terrorist" when there's absolutely no reason to think that they indeed favor terrorism, and lots of reason to think that they favor (whether soundly or misguidedly) legal rules -- such as limits on government power to search -- that unfortunately sometimes protect terrorists while at the same time protecting law-abiding citizens. (It's far from clear to me that random searches are going to do much good at stopping suicide bombers, or that bans on random searches will help terrorists; but I acknowledge that some constitutional rules that the ACLU defends do at times protect terrorists as well as protecting law-abiding citizens.)

He finishes his defense of the ACLU with a strong and, I think, well put argument about what the REAL problem between the ACLU and its most vocal detractors actually is (emphasis mine):

What is in question here, indeed, is "the definition of freedom." There is lots of room for good faith disagreement about the scope of our freedoms. But that some people have a broader view than you do -- whether it relates to the right to bear arms, the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, the right to counsel, the right to spend one's money for political causes -- doesn't make them criminals, doesn't make them pro-criminal or pro-terrorist, and doesn't make their arguments frivolous.

There is, as Volokh points out in later posts on the ACLU here and here, a common misperception that the ACLU is this monolithic liberal entity intent on crushing Christian expression, conservative thought, and advancing a liberal, anti-American agenda. I think that perhaps the ACLU needs to do a better job of publicizing the fact that it has actually worked to defend the rights of ALL Americans, defending the right of a student to wear a pro-NRA t-shirt and condemning campus speech codes, for example. Arguments like Volokh's, a figure of some significance in the legal circles of the conservative blogosphere, will go a long way to perhaps cleaning up the image of the ACLU. Yes, it may continue to take on silly cases (such as removing the tiny cross from a city seal), but it does far more good than harm in the defense of American freedoms. As Volokh argues, you are free to criticize the goals of specific ACLU-backed lawsuits, but to question the groups motivation is just uncalled for.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

Texas: The Men are Big, The Frauds are Bigger

2005-08-05T15:18:00.000-05:00

Robert A. George, one of my favorite bloggers of the right, responds to a Bob Tyrrell column blaming, in part, Bill Clinton for the steroid scandal in MLB and for the allegedly fraudalent testimony of Rafael Palmiero in front of Congress. George points out that

If we go back to that era, one is forced to note a rather significant figure in Rafael Palmeiro's life.
Who was the principal owner of a Texas Rangers team over a period that when its roster included at one time or another Palmeiro, Jose Canseco AND Sammy Sosa-- all of whom testified before Congress on steroids? (Um, that is, they testified on the SUBJECT of steroids -- though, actually, Palmeiro might have been ON them at that moment. Ironically, the one whom engendered nearly universal contempt at the time -- whistle-blowing author Canseco -- looks to be the one telling the truth.)
Who was the man who still calls Palmeiro a friend and -- despite this week's revelations -- says that he believes him?
Early in Clinton years, the Wall Street Journal once famously deplored the import of "Arkansas morés" to Washington. They were somewhat prescient. Fair or otherwise, the fact is that Texas--most decidedly NOT Bill Clinton country--seems to have been Ground Zero for this sports-substance scandal which is only now exploding. (The late Ken Caminiti -- the pre-Canseco poster boy for steroids--was a member of the Houston Astros in the early '90s.)
Texas morés? Well, when it came to steroids it was obviously "the moré, the merrier!" (Well, they do say that they grow 'em bigger in Texas. )

But of course, President Bush knew NOTHING about the steroids pumping through the veins of his players while he owned the team. Plausible deniability and all that. But George Soros? Now that is someone who does not belong in an ownership group! Who KNOWS what kind of problems he cound bring Major League Baseball!
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

'I do not think that word means what you think it means!

2005-08-05T14:50:00.000-05:00

Via Wonkette, we get this lovely little rundown about Bill O'Reilly's...misunderstanding...of the word 'fascism.' How fascist are we? Let me count the ways!
From Wonkette:

Last night on "The O'Reilly Factor," in a debate about the teaching of intelligent design Bill O'Reilly dropped his own personal F-bomb:

O'REILLY: But what the argument is is that nothing about intelligent design should be introduced. And I think that's fascism.
Kind of a low bar, really.
We wondered what else O'Reilly might think is fascism.
Via Nexis, a partial list:
• The tactics of the ACLU
• Not letting city halls have a nativity display
• Prohibiting schools from calling winter break "Christmas holidays"
• Laws that ban discrimination against people with piercings
• The Virginia Military Institute not allowing time for voluntary prayer
• A flat tax on the wealthy
• Really, the tactics of the ACLU
• The Justice Department not answering his questions
• Crowds who shout down Arnold Schwarznegger
• Seriously, the ACLU is bad
• Liberal 527 groups
• Exposing kids to racy images is "libertine fascism," and we're just going to let that lie.

Boy, there sure are alot of fascists running around these days. And here I thought Generalissimo Francisco Franco was still dead!(Hat tip to Jesse Walker at Hit and Run for the link!)(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

The Courage of His Convictions

2005-08-03T10:39:00.000-05:00

Stephen Vincent, a journalist and war hawk, was killed in Iraq. He was abducted by armed insurgents in a police car, along with his interpreter, and was found shot to death in Basra.

While he was a hawk, Vincent was no right-wing toadie or flack for the Bush Administration. His blog, In the Red Zone, documents his experiences living and working in the most dangerous parts of Iraq.

Brad DeLong, no fan of the Bush Administration or the Iraq War, had this to say about the author:

He was another of the mad dreamers of the last few years who confused hopes with plans, but he stood head and shoulders above his fellows, first for his courage, secondly for his absolute refusal to start moving goalposts. He saw the liberation of Iraq as the great cause of his day. So rather than sit home and talk to anonymous bureaucrats or retype governent press releases, he went to Iraq, twice. His great passion was women's rights, in the Arab world generally and Iraq in particular. He is dead because he refused to trim his sense of justice to fit the latest fashions in colonial PR - on the ground in Basra, he reported the facts as he found them, blowing the whistle on Allied accomodation to theocracy and the increasing oppression of Iraq's women.

Yes, this journalist supported the war from the start, but as DeLong says, he was 'head and shoulders above his fellows.' He was no Limbaugh loudmouth or Corner flack. He lived among the danger and exposed the rising theocracy in Iraq, the erosion of women's rights, and the incredible failure of the Administration to plan for a post-war Iraq. He will be missed. More hawks need to have the courage of their convictions, as this man did.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

More Dead Marines

2005-08-03T10:21:00.000-05:00

Another brutal day in Iraq. 14 more Marines were killed when a bomb exploded under their vehicle. And these fine Marines were from the same unit that lost six men earlier this week. From the Boston Globe:

The 14 Marines killed in Iraq on Wednesday by a roadside bomb were members of the same Ohio-based battalion that lost six Marines two days earlier, a Marine Corps spokesman said.
The Marines were members of the 3rd Battalion, 25th Marines based in this Cleveland suburb, according to Gunnery Sgt. Brad R. Lauer, public affairs chief with the unit.
(SNIP)
The 14 died when a Marine armored vehicle on patrol during combat operations near the Syrian border hit a roadside bomb. It was one of the deadliest single attacks in Iraq against American forces. A civilian interpreter also was killed.

Personal Note: My former intern, one of the best teachers and best men I have ever had the pleasure to observe and work with, was supposed to have deployed to Iraq recently after OCS. I hope to God that he is okay.
These Marines killed today just add to the anger I feel at the Bush Administration for screwing up this Iraq Adventure. 'Mission Accomplished'? Bullshit.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

Raging about Raffi and the 'Roids

2005-08-02T11:33:00.000-05:00

Gatorchick comments here on Rafael Palmeiro testing positive for a banned substance, despite repeated denials in front of Congress and the public. Some commentators have argued that this could keep him out of the Hall of Fame. Some have accused him of being a liar and something approaching a fraud.
Well, I might be a minority in this view, but so what if he took performance enhancing drugs? It does not really bother me all that much, at least anymore than a player that scuffs or alters a ball or corks a bat (Bucky (*&^*^% Dent aside), or really any player that tries to seek an advantage to help him perform at a high level and help his team win. Nick Gillipsie reflects my own feelings, I think, over at Hit and Run:

Performance-enhancing drugs are simply one tool among many that top-level athletes use to maintain their edge. Yes, yes, if a given organization or sporting authority bans them, players should respect those rules. But I'm convinced that one of the main reasons drugs are banned is simply because they are "drugs" and we have a bizarre, fucked-up relation to drugs: We all practice better living through chemistry but we are quick to cordon off good drugs from bad.

And of course, there are other ways to improve the body beyond so-called 'natural' ability: Lasik surgery, weight training, and the always-popular Tommy John surgery, which somehow seems to make a pitcher better than he was before the procedure. Gillipsie comments:

Much of the anti-drug rhetoric in sports is that certain substances screw up the "natural" essence of the players and that they disrupt "the level playing field." If any of that is true, then why not ban weight training? Or off-season conditioning? Or players who fall outside of certain heights and weights that might give them "advantages"...Why are drugs seen as contaminating sports in a way that other interventions--all of which are precisely designed to give indivduals and teams an advantage in competition--are not? Especially since, in the end, it's far from clear that drugs, any more than hugs, "raw talent," or a winning attitude, make the player?

I would also like to point out that the Palmeiro suspension was for the use of a banned substance, not necessarily steroids. And note, too, that unlike other supected abusers, he does not have the prototypical 'look' or history; unlike Giambi, Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, McGwire (Nomar?), he has avoided the DL and did not suddenly pack on muscle.
Look, if a ballplayer wants to improve his game and help his team by taking something to enhance his performance, he should be able too; don't forget, there is a strong likelihood that pitchers have also juiced. I won't comment on that traitorous bum Roger 'I want to pitch closer to Texas so I'm going to Toronto and New York' Clemens. (Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Fighting for Truth, Justice, and the Conservative Way...One Liberal at a Time

2005-08-01T16:52:00.000-05:00

So, this should no doubt be a fair and balanced look at conservative and liberal politics in an easily accessible comic book form. Check out the synopsis of Liberality for All:

America’s future has become an Orwellian nightmare of ultra-liberalism. Beginning with the Gore Presidency, the government has become increasingly dominated by liberal extremists.

In 2004, Muslim terrorists stopped viewing the weakened American government as a threat; instead they set their sites on their true enemies, vocal American conservatives. On one dark day, in 2006, many conservative voices went forever silent at the hands of terrorist assassins. Those which survived joined forces and formed a powerful covert conservative organization called “The Freedom of Information League”, aka F.O.I.L.

The efforts of F.O.I.L. threaten both the liberal extremist power structure and the U.N.’s grip on America, the U.N. calls F.O.I.L. the most dangerous group in the world. It seems the once theorized Vast Right Wing Conspiracy has now become a reality.

So, who are the heroes of this upcoming comic classic? Why, none other than your favorite radio hosts!

The New York City faction of F.O.I.L. is lead by Sean Hannity, G. Gordon Liddy and Oliver North, each uniquely endowed with special abilities devised by a bio mechanical engineer affectionately nicknamed “Oscar”.

And the President in 2021, when the story takes place? Why, it's Chelsea Clinton, with VP Micheal Moore at her side! And the Afghan amabassador? Usama bin Laden!

Geez...this comic is probably going to make The Watchmen seem like a love poem to Richard Nixon and make the fascist Batman of The Dark Knight Returns (graphic novel, not movie) look soft on crime. I look forward to reading it (and if you have never read those two graphic novels, do so. They are classics, like this new Liberality surely will be.) Thanks to Jesse Walker at Hit and run for the link.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Still Here

2005-07-31T19:40:00.000-05:00

Manny was not traded today; instead, he drives in the winning run. Thanks, Theo, for NOT pulling the trigger!

Lords of the Flies

2005-07-31T15:36:00.000-05:00

From CNN, we learn that no matter how much we complain about our cities and our youth, there are far, far worse places and far, far worse youth.

Two boys, both 13, have been arrested in connection with the killing of a U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agent in an apparent bungled robbery attempt, Honduran Security Minister Oscar Alvarez announced Sunday.
DEA Special Agent Timothy Markey was shot to death on Friday while on vacation visiting a popular Roman Catholic shrine in Tegucigalpa.

The article goes on to describe the two boys as seasoned gang members at 13...and one was the bodyguard of the other. But it gets scarier:

Honduran authorities are struggling to combat high rates of violent crime, much of it involving ruthless youth gangs, known as "maras," concentrated in urban areas.
The Mara Salvatrucha and rival Mara 18 have about 100,000 members and control poor neighborhoods in Honduras' principal cities using violence, threats and extortion.

Imagine...It is like Lord of the Flies on a grand scale. How can a government or a society combat such things without resorting to brutality? How does a society eliminate the devastating poverty that contributes to these conditions?I leave the discussion about whether there is a point to the whole 'War on Drugs' that helped lead to this agent's death to others.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

A Little Delay Goes A Long Way

2005-07-31T15:24:00.000-05:00

According to the Associated Press, the new Iraqi Constitution has hit a stumbling block:

"Key members of the committee writing the new Iraqi constitution said Sunday they need another month to finish the draft, threatening U.S. efforts to maintain political momentum to combat the insurgency.

Later, President Jalal Talabani insisted the Aug. 15 deadline for parliamentary approval must be met, and the United States stepped up pressure on the Iraqis to stick by the timetable."

It seems to me that both Iraq and the United States would be better served by creating the best constitution, NOT the quickest. That is just asking for immediate rejection by disgruntled elements.

"The United States had mounted considerable pressure on the Iraqis to meet the Aug. 15 deadline. U.S. officials believe a new Iraqi constitution will help calm the insurgency by encouraging the country's disaffected Sunni Arab community, which forms the core of the militants, to abandon the conflict and join the political process."

Well, you know, I'm not sure just how calm the insurgency will become with a new constitution that could be seen as imposed by Americans. The men and women working on this new document need to take their time and avoid American pressure to wrap it all up in time for the mid-term election. To do otherwise is to encourage failure, and there has been enough of that in Iraq.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

Gammons on Game 6 and the Home Run

2005-07-30T00:56:00.000-05:00

Peter Gammons, formerly of the Boston Globe and now an analyst and 'inside' reporter, is about to be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame in the area reserved for great baseball journalists...and he is, truly, among the best. ESPN is reprinting some of his classic columns. Here is an example of just what makes a great baseball columnist:

At 12:34 a.m., in the 12th inning, Fisk's histrionic home run brought a 7-6 end to a game that will be the pride of historians in the year 2525, a game won and lost what seemed like a dozen times, and a game that brings back summertime one more day. For the seventh game of the World Series.

Classic prose for a classic game. They don't write like that anymore.

James Dobson is Most Certainly NOT Amused

2005-07-30T00:38:00.000-05:00

Well, it seems that in Utah at least, some people may have to deal with their own biases. From Newsday:

The state of Utah can't block a woman from using her license plate to tell the world "GAYSROK," a judge has ruled. The state has no good reason to prevent Elizabeth Solomon from having that plate -- which can be read "Gays are OK" or "Gays Rock" -- or another one saying "GAYRYTS," according to Jane Phan, an administrative law judge with the Utah State Tax commission.

"The narrow issue before us is whether a reasonable person would believe the terms 'gays are OK' and 'gay rights' are, themselves, offensive to good taste and decency. It is the conclusion of the commission that a reasonable person would not," Phan wrote.

Imagine that. People thinking that Gays are okay. How very offensive! Why in the name of Leviticus would one possibly want to advertise such a thing? Well,

Solomon, of Park City, on Wednesday said she considered the judge's decision as a victory for her daughter, who is gay, and for two gay male friends.

Good for her, and hey, if that means that it leads to other 'offensive' plates, oh well. We all could use a little offending now and then. Don't forget that Florida has those silly official 'Choose Life' plates, and pretends that there is no political message by the state there. Thanks to Lindsay Beyerstein at majikthise for the link.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

'Moderate' Islam and Suicide Bombing

2005-07-30T00:12:00.000-05:00

Mona Eltahawy is a New York-based columnist for the pan-Arab newspaper Asharq al-Awsat, and no fan of the Iraq war, Israel, or George W. Bush. That being said, in a recent column in the Washington Post, she attacks the failure of 'moderate' clerics and Islamic leaders to condemn suicide bombing.

I'm sure it was also those dog-eared statements that our clerics and religious leaders read out telling us that Islam means peace--it actually means submission--and asking us to please forget everything they had ever said before July 6, because as of July 7 they truly believe violence is bad. Their backpedaling is so furious you can smell the skid marks.
Some are not even bothering to put their feet on the pedals, such as the 22 imams and scholars who met at London's largest mosque to condemn the bombings but who would not criticize all suicide attacks.
Sayed Mohammed Musawi, the head of the World Islamic League in London, insisted "there should be a clear distinction between the suicide bombing of those who are trying to defend themselves from occupiers, which is something different from those who kill civilians, which is a big crime."

Certainly, the failure of 'moderate' Islamic clerics and leaders to assume control of the conversation is partly to blame for the suicide attacks. Who defines just what is a civilian and what is an occupier? Who were those children killed in Iraq a couple of weeks ago? Occupiers?
Ms. Eltahawy continues, questioning whether the European Muslim community has made much of an effort to become part of the general European community as a whole.

But rather than dwelling endlessly on these issues, we would do well to spend time encouraging our young people to become more active members of their communities and to not live caught between two worlds: a Muslim one at home and in the mosque, an "infidel" one outside.

And what about assimilation? It is not bigoted to ask Muslims if they are integrating into the societies they are living in. Just as the British government has responsibilities toward its citizens, immigrants included, so too do those immigrants. Muslims ask for time off work for prayer, for example, and they often get it. But are they truly living in Britain or are they perpetuating an existence that even their relatives "back home" long ago left behind?
Domestic policy is too often ignored by many Muslims who are more concerned with Palestine, Iraq or any other place where Muslims are believed to have suffered injustice.

She has a point; certainly the Muslim community within Europe has been notoriously insular. After all, one must avoid associating with the infidels, especially when those infidels do not seem to want you there. However, Europe has not made much of an effort to make the immigrant Muslim community part of the whole, instead viewing it as a source of cheap labor. As London shows, we may be seeing the consequences now (though evidence indicates that the bombers in London were at least on the surface pretty well integrated; they may be an exception to a general rule).
Ms. Eltahawy concludes by attempting to reclaim the faith of her ancestors from the extremists:

I raise these questions because London might have done it for me, but I'm not done with Islam. The clerics and the terrorists will not take it away from me.
God belongs to me, too.

Well said, and hopefully simply one of the first of many loud voices within Islam to try and take back the faith from those who would corrupt it.
(Crossposted by Bostondreams at FloridaBlues)

Please, Theo, Don't Hurt Them!

2005-07-29T23:22:00.000-05:00

Look, I'm as pissed off about Manny as the rest of the Nation, but you do not replace Manny with freaking Aubrey Huff or Mike Cameron. DO NOT TRADE MANNY! Unless you are blown away with prospects, do not trade the idiot! We need him. I'm scared; please do not trade Manny!

Manny Wants Out

2005-07-26T22:31:00.000-05:00

According to this CNN SI article, Manny Ramirez, who approaches demi-God status in Boston, wants out. I haven't been able to read the whole thing (Premium subscription crap), but he is unhappy living in Boston. Geez. What the hell. The man never has to buy food, drink, clothes, automobiles, or anything else as long as he is alive in Boston, thanks to the glorious 2004 season. And he wants out?????
On a positive note, the Sox pulled one out against the fearsome D-Rays tonight. Still in first. How?? I'm taking my nephew to see them play again Wednesday. I hope the Sox win. For my sanity's sake, and for my little nephew's own safety, cause otherwise it's an angry drive back to my sister's house.
Let's hope Matt Clement is okay!

The Future of Iraq

2005-07-26T21:11:00.000-05:00

Iraq, the Model has a translation what will apparently be the final draft of the Iraqi constitution to be submitted to the National Assembly for approval and then ratified in October. Some key points, with Omar's (the fine blogger at Iraq the Model) comments in red and my own in blue.
Fundamental Principles and Rights:

Islam is the official religion of the state and it is the main source of legislations and it is not allowed to make laws that contradict the fundamental teachings of Islam and its rules (the ones agreed upon by all Muslims) and this constitution shall preserve the Islamic identity of the majority of the Iraqi people (with its Shea't majority and its Sunni component) and respect the rights of all other religions.

This is the deadliest point if approved; Islam or any religion cannot and must not be the main source of legislation.

Omar has a point. How do you 'respect the rights of all other religions' when the basis for legislation is one specific religion. Worse, what about what should be secular matters, such as divorce, marriage, property, inheritance, etc.?

Arabic language is the official language of the Iraqi state and Kurdish language is (together with Arabic) the official language in the region of Kurdistan and for the central government, regions and provinces have the right to choose any local language as an additional official language if the majority of its citizens approved the choice in a referendum.

No real problems there!

The Iraqi state is part of the Islamic and Arabic worlds or (the Iraqi state is a founding member of the Arab league and the Islamic conference organization).

Do we really need to put that in the constitution? After all, our "Muslim and Arab brothers" brought us nothing but troubles.

Omar makes a point there. Shouldn't it be obvious that Iraq is part of both worlds?

The Iraqi state is one entity in land, people and sovereignty.

I suppose this is to try and prevent the creation of some sort of Kurdistan. Good luck with that.

All ideologies that include racism, terrorism and "takfir" (or promote or publicize these concepts) are banned and especially the Saddmist Ba'ath and this one cannot be part of the political plurality of the state.

I wonder. Does this include anti-Semitism?

The state protects the basic rights of women including equality with men in accordance to the Islamic share'at and the state helps the women in creating
balance between their duties within their families and their duties within
the community.
Equality according to Islamic Share'at? Thia is totally new to me!

Historically, law according to Share'at has not done much for women. Not good. Is this really what Iraqi women would want? Consider that at least until the 1990's after the first Gulf War (when Hussein went all Islamist), Iraqi women had some of the most comprehensive freedoms in the Arab world (as free as possible in a totalitarian state, at least). This section needs to go.

You really need to read Omar's translation and commentary. I really am not doing it justice. He finishes his analysis with this fine close:

Although this document will be subject to further negotiations and modifications, my first look at it made me decide that I'm going to say "NO" to this constitution.Islam has been introduced in many clauses and not only Islam, sectarianism was introduced into the draft in a disgusting way and frankly speaking, such things will make me feel so unsafe if results of the referendum came positive for this draft...

And later:

We have fought for a long time to reach the point where we can write a constitution that serves our needs and protects our future from oppression and dictatorship.I say it once again, we're practicing AND learning democracy at the same time and the people may be fooled once but they can't be fooled all the time.

Look, say what you will about Iraq, the War on Terror, the Insurgency, the incompetent Administration...we have to hope that this man's dreams do come true and that this, at least, is something that the US doesn't screw up in Iraq. Lord knows we have screwed up enough already (CPA anyone?).
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Confederate Theocrats and Christian Exodus

2005-07-26T20:18:00.000-05:00

Gatorchick links and comments here to an article on the 'Christian Exodus' movement, an organization of what basically amounts to Confederate Theocrats that seeks to turn South Carolina in a pure Christian 'traditional' state based on Biblical and 'Constitutional' principles. For a detailed, in-depth look at the views of people such as this, check out the blog 'Little Geneva,' which also bills itself as 'Reformed Confederate Theocrats.' It's quite a read. The comment section of the site is almost as good as the site itself. And the blogroll is...well...a must-see.

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Losing the Key to Boston's Heart

2005-07-25T12:19:00.000-05:00

The MBTA, which oversees public transportation in Boston, Cambridge, and throughout my home state, has a little problem:

While transit systems focus on spotting suspicious people and packages to thwart terrorists, the MBTA says it is trying to fix another vulnerability in Boston's subways: thousands of master keys that provide access to all subway stations, which are locked overnight.

T officials say that the existence of so many keys is a problem and that it is difficult to track who has them. The keys open all exterior doors and gates at subway stations, plus men's restrooms inside, but do not allow access to ''safety sensitive" areas such as control rooms.

The ''P keys," which look like regular house keys stamped with a P, are in the hands of more than 5,000 operations employees, including bus drivers and others who rarely work underground. Since the keys aren't numbered, Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority officials aren't sure whether any unauthorized people have them.

This is NOT a good thing. But these keys are hard to get ahold of right? Um, no.

''They do fall into the hands of people that shouldn't have them," said Mike Flaherty of Weymouth, who retired last year after two decades as a supervisor on the Green Line. ''I've closed Arlington Station some nights, and by the time I'd close one part and got in my truck to go close the second half, I'd view the homeless people from the Public Garden opening the doors and going into the stations.

''Where they obtain these keys, I don't know."

At least these keys are hard to duplicate, right? Again, um, no.

The T says it requires employees to turn in keys when they leave their jobs. But the authority can't do much if the key isn't returned. For instance, the T says it does not have the authority to dock pensions.

But Flaherty said T management has never paid much attention to controlling access to keys. When new supervisors came on the job, he'd often lend them his key so they could make a copy, he said.

''Believe it or not, the new inspectors, that is how they would get their keys," Flaherty said. ''They'd take it to a hardware store near Canal Street. That's where most of the keys were made."

I love Boston. Greatest city in the country. But c'mon guys, get your act together! You would not even need a suicide bomber, and seraching bags would be pointless; the bastards could just go in at night and plant the bombs. Copley Plaza or Harvard Square at rush hour? My God.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

The Life Preserver Presidency

2005-07-25T11:46:00.000-05:00

Jonathan Rauch of National Journal and Reason has a new article analyzing the poll numbers and apparent lame duck status of this Adminstration, and questions just how long the Republican Party can remain in power. His conclusion? If the current disgruntlement of the center continues, not for long. It is only in one issue that the Republicans maintain an advantage with the center, which we shall get into in a bit. First, the key 'graf of the article:

From independents' point of view, the problem is not the process ("getting things done"). The problem is getting things solved. Independents are pragmatists. They want to see results, or else they want to see Plan B. On some of the country's most pressing problems—Iraq, Iranian and North Korean nuclear proliferation, the deficit—they see neither. Instead, they see a Republican establishment that seems to relish teeing up confrontations over social issues while North Korea builds nukes and gasoline prices rise. On issue after issue, in short, independents look like Democrats. Moderate Democrats, to be sure. Unlike Democratic partisans, they don't hate Bush. But they don't share his priorities, don't like his program, and don't feel he has the country's problems well in hand.

Rauch makes a great point, here, and I think summarizes the attitude of independents and moderates like myself pretty well. It seems that way too much emphasis is placed on so-called 'social issues' as a distraction from the real problems of the world: fuel prices and research, North Korea, China, Iran, the looming Medicare crisis...
So, what then is the saving grace for the Republican Party? Terrorism. Rauch argues that poll after poll indicates that

On terrorism, independents flip: They side with Republicans. They disapprove of Bush's handling of the economy and Iraq (according to the CBS News poll), but they approve, by 50 to 38 percent, of his handling of the war on terror. True, they have reservations. They think the government could have done more. But a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll taken just after the London bombings, earlier this month, tells the story: 54 percent of independents (against 91 percent of Republicans and 43 percent of Democrats) said they had a great deal or a moderate amount of confidence in the Bush administration to protect Americans from terrorism, versus 45 percent who had not much or no confidence. Similarly, majorities of independents side with Republicans, and against Democrats, in supporting continued operation of the Pentagon's detention camp at Guantanamo and in approving of the treatment of prisoners there.

So it is terrorism that is keeping this Administration afloat. I'm not sure I really agree with those independents that say the Administration is doing an effective job; after all, the so-called 'flypaper theory' has obviously been proven a failure, our borders remain incredibly unsecured, Homeland Security has done little about inherent security flaws in shipping and harbors, and much of the cost of protecting tunnels and subways has been passed off to the states.
Rauch finshes his piece comparing the Republican advantage on terrorism with the Democrats old advantage in the economy; if it disappears, so does the power of the party.

Think of Bush's administration, then, as a life-preserver presidency, kept afloat by a single crucial issue...The trouble with a life preserver, after all, is that you neglect to swim.

How long until the Republican start to sink?
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Damn Treasonous POW War Heroes!

2005-07-23T11:51:00.000-05:00

Regarding the fact that the Administration is trying to strong arm Republican senators Graham and McCain, Andrew Sullivan writes:

It beggars belief that, after Abu Ghraib, Bagram, Gitmo and the dozens of deaths in interrogation that the administration wouldn't want some way out of its own impasse. But no: as so often, it sticks its heels in, and refuses to acknowledge an obvious and terrible mistake in the war. I look forward to the hard right describing McCain as a leftist or unpatriotic because he wants to restore America's reputation as a country that acts ferociously but always humanely in its own defense.

Well put. As I said in an earlier post, both of these men are conservatives and I do not agree with Graham and McCain on many things, but on this issue, they deserve credit. McCain, especially, should be listened to by this Administration; who better to explain just what the boundaries of 'cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment' should be?
(Crossposted by Bostondreams at FloridaBlues)

Why They Hate Us, Part 2

2005-07-23T01:09:00.000-05:00

Again, the Islamist terrorists bomb a target with no military value, and indiscriminately murder over two dozen people, wounding hundreds and destroying a hotel in the Egyptian resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh. Sharm el-Sheikh is a popular resort destination for foreign tourists in Egypt. According to CNN,

Twenty-eight of those injured are non-Egyptian citizens, said Hala el-Khatib, spokeswoman for the Egyptian Tourism Ministry. They include 13 Italians; five British; three Spanish; three Saudis; one Turk; one Ukrainian; a Russian; and an Arab-Israeli, she said.
About five non-Egyptian citizens are among the dead, she said, but their nationalities were not available.

This was a stupid, stupid move on the part of the terrorists, and does nothing to influence a government or intimidate a people. How is this action a protest against Western influence in the Middle East? My God...they killed their own co-religionists!I'm sorry. This really bothers me. Insane. Insane.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

How DARE You Think You Have Power!

2005-07-22T17:42:00.000-05:00

According to the Washington Post, President Bush has at last discovered his veto pen, and is threatening to veto any spending bill that, in the words of the administration, "interfere with the protection of Americans from terrorism by diverting resources from the war."
Now, I am pretty sure that the Constitution gives the Congress the right to decide how money should be spent and provides for checks on presidential power, wartime or not. The Administration's position is that the President has the right to do whatever is needed to for 'the protection of Americans' in the War on Terror. This would include, I assume, rendition, forms of torture, the holding of 'ghost' detainees, and permanent confinement without trial or hearing, as well as no outside oversight of military prisons such as Abu Ghraib or Guatanamo. From the article:

"If legislation is presented that would restrict the president's authority to protect Americans effectively from terrorist attack and bring terrorists to justice," the bill could be vetoed, the statement said.

This, of course, is all along the lines of 'Fighting them in Iraq so that we don't fight them here,' which has worked so well. We know from experience that torturing prisoners gives accurate and helpful information. And hey, if you limit the ability of the President to do what he wants, then you are endangering America, you damn commie, Muslim-loving traitors John McCain and Lindsey Graham!
Say what you will about Graham and McCain, both conservative Senators are at least making an effort to rein in the excesses in prisoner abuse and to ensure Congressional oversight of Executive actions, and paying more than lip service to the so called 'culture of life.'
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Raising the Age, Lowering the Standards?

2005-07-22T17:06:00.000-05:00

According to recent reports, the Pentagon is seeking approval to raise the maximum enlistment age to 42 years old, up from the current 35 years old. This would apply to all services, but focus primarily on the Army, as the other branches have met recruitment goals so far this year. This is not a good sign. How long could you expect these soldiers to serve on the front or in high intensity combat positions? 8 years? 10 years? How long until they begin to show their age?
Perhaps I am wrong. Roger Clemens is 42 years old and is one of the best pitchers in baseball today (though I shudder saying that as a Red Sox fan!). Nolan Ryan pitched into his forties, and Julio Franco continues to play at a high level closer to 50 than 40. One hopes, then, that our old soldiers would be able to function at the level of these men, or close to it.
It is a bad omen that we are now close to relying on older men to fill the ranks. I wonder, within twenty years, will we be lowering the minimum age?
I guess this gives me ten more years of 'Re-enlist! Join the Army, Become an Officer' stuff in the mail.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

Young Earth, Old Fools

2005-07-22T14:37:00.000-05:00

Ronald Bailey, Reason's science correspondent and author of Liberation Biology: The Scientific and Moral Case for the Biotech Revolution, has been attending the 2005 Creation Mega-Conference in Lynchburg, Virgina. For the past few days, Bailey has been posting a journal of his daily experiences at the conference, with a surprisingly limited amount of snarkiness. He does a great job of commenting on the logical fallacies and misleading arguments of the Young Earth creationists he has been listening to, and his closing thought on the conference is, really, one that makes you sad for these people and concerned for the future:

"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."

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why religion and science must be balanced. Should science be completely adrift from religion, it could lack morality and turn to Mengelism (though certainly religion is not the only source of morality, it is an important one). Should religion control science, science ceases to explore the big questions and consider data and research beyond religious text. As Bailey says, according to some conferees, 'God said it, so it is true.'
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

Why They Hate Us

2005-07-22T13:44:00.000-05:00

Olivier Roy, a professor at the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences and the author of "Globalized Islam,"has an op-ed in the New York Times attempting to explain just why Islamic extremists are blowing themselves up and attacking Western societies. Others will most certainly disagree with this piece, but I think it does make some strong points. For example, Roy argues that we need to look beyond the Western prescence in the Middle East and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Rather, we need to better examine 'the radicalization of young, Westernized Muslims.'
He has a point. Consider the recent bombings in London. These do not seem to be the actions of poor, ill-educated Muslim immigrants, but of radicalized and Westernized British Muslims. Roy argues that these young men have bought into the following idea:

From the beginning, Al Qaeda's fighters were global jihadists, and their favored battlegrounds have been outside the Middle East: Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya and Kashmir. For them, every conflict is simply a part of the Western encroachment on the Muslim ummah, the worldwide community of believers.

Bin Laden's mentor, Abdullah Azzam, did not support the PLO because he felt that 'to fight for a localized political cause was to forsake the real jihad, which he felt should be international and religious in character.'
Roy also asks us to consider who exactly is involved in the terror attacks in Iraq, Afghanistan, Bali, London, and other locales. He wonders why

"...if the conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine are at the core of the radicalization, why are there virtually no Afghans, Iraqis or Palestinians among the terrorists? Rather, the bombers are mostly from the Arabian Peninsula, North Africa, Egypt and Pakistan - or they are Western-born converts to Islam. Why would a Pakistani or a Spaniard be more angry than an Afghan about American troops in Afghanistan? It is precisely because they do not care about Afghanistan as such, but see the United States involvement there as part of a global phenomenon of cultural domination."

I would note that in Iraq at least, a significant percentage of the insurgents are certainly native Iraqis, though the most recent horror of murdered children was almost certainly the work of foreign jihadists. Still, he makes a good point. Much of the rage goes beyond simple Western involvement in Middle Eastern disputes.
Roy continues in the op-ed, arguing that this newest generation of terrorist, the radicalized and Westernized young Muslims, are no different than the 'Red' terrorists of the 1970's and 1980's, rebels seeking a cause and claiming to fight for a worldwide utopia they have no idea how to create. They are isolated, excluded, and angry young men turning to radical religion to find a place for themselves.

"What was true for the first generation of Al Qaeda is also relevant for the present generation: even if these young men are from Middle Eastern or South Asian families, they are for the most part Westernized Muslims living or even born in Europe who turn to radical Islam. Moreover, converts are to be found in almost every Qaeda cell: they did not turn fundamentalist because of Iraq, but because they felt excluded from Western society (this is especially true of the many converts from the Caribbean islands, both in Britain and France). "Born again" or converts, they are rebels looking for a cause. They find it in the dream of a virtual, universal ummah, the same way the ultraleftists of the 1970's (the Baader-Meinhof Gang, the Italian Red Brigades) cast their terrorist actions in the name of the "world proletariat" and "Revolution" without really caring about what would happen after."

As Roy points out, since Spain withdrew from Iraq, the Spanish police have continued to discover and prevent terror attacks in Madrid. Would pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan cause the Islamic terrorists to cease their actions? From Roy's point of view, probably not. Consider, for example, the fact that much of Bin Laden's early rhetoric was directed at American troops stationed on 'holy' Saudi ground (and was a justification for 9/11). Since American troops have left Saudi Arabia, he has found new reasons and new excuses for advocating terror against Western targets. His goal, and the goal of related Islamic terror groups, is the establishment of a pure Islamic caliphate encompasing the boundaries of the old Ottoman Empire, if not beyond.
Leaving Iraq and Afghanistan, while desirable, would not stop the terror attacks.
Roy finishes his piece with this disturbing close:

"The Western-based Islamic terrorists are not the militant vanguard of the Muslim community; they are a lost generation, unmoored from traditional societies and cultures, frustrated by a Western society that does not meet their expectations. And their vision of a global ummah is both a mirror of and a form of revenge against the globalization that has made them what they are."

A lost generation. Perhaps a good phrase to use in describing these young men who die for the ravings and rantings of self-proclaimed imams and religious scholars. The question I leave you with is simple: what do we do to save this 'lost generation'? How, indeed, do they save themselves?
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Definitely NOT Money, Baby!

2005-07-22T13:33:00.000-05:00

Back from Vegas. Wow. They give out porn in the streets there. I could get a whole collection of nice little cards of naked women if I wished. Such a family friendly place! That being said, what a trip. I lost money, but I developed a newfound appreciation for blackjack. Upon reflection, that may not be a good thing.
Anyway, I want to welcome back Gatorchick to Floridablues and say what fun I had posting on the blog. I hope to continue contributing, with I think a bit different perspective than miyazaki and the others. :)

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

Money, baby!

2005-07-18T11:58:00.000-05:00

I'm off to Vegas. See ya later this week, hopefully richer! :)

Lipstick Lesbians and Islam

2005-07-18T11:45:00.000-05:00

There is a great article at Times Online about Irshad Manji, 'a lipstick lesbian, a Muslim and scourge of Islamic leaders,' who wrote the book 'The Trouble With Islam' (which I admit I have yet to read). An excerpt from the article:

The underlying problem with Islam, observes Manji, is that far from spiritualising Arabia, it has been infected with the reactionary prejudices of the Middle East: “Colonialism is not the preserve of people with pink skin. What about Islamic imperialism? Eighty per cent of Muslims live outside the Arab world yet all Muslims must bow to Mecca.” Fresh thinking, she contends, is suppressed by ignorant imams; you can see why she has been dubbed “Osama’s worst nightmare ”.

“The good news,” she insists, “is it doesn’t have to be like this.” She wants a reformation in Islam, returning it to its clever, fun-loving roots. “The world’s first ‘feminist’ was an 11th-century Muslim man. Baghdad had one of the first universities in the 9th century; the Spanish ‘Ole!’ comes from ‘Allah’; Islam even gave us the guitar.”

Interesting. I never thought I would hear the words 'fun-loving' and 'Islam' in the same sentence. It's an intriguing article, and she makes some great points, particularly about the imperialistic nature of early Islam and Arabia; check it out! (Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan)
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Kill All the Liberals!

2005-07-18T11:33:00.000-05:00

Isn't this lovely. Dave Neiwert of Orcinus gives us the lovely background on this admirable sticker. Save America! Kill a Liberal! (Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

No Principal? Who Will Micromanage?

2005-07-18T11:03:00.000-05:00

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has a story about an interesting new trend in education: schools without principals. According to the article, instead of a traditional administration, the school is run as a sort of co-operative, and decisions are made by the teachers.

The teachers make decisions about the curriculum, the budget and student discipline. They perform peer evaluations of each other. Often, they come to decisions through discussion and debate, taking a vote if a consensus is not reached. The buck stops with them, not in the principal's office.

As an active member of my local union, this particular part of the article gives me hope for the future of the educator unions:

But in 2001, the IDEAL Charter School, a more pure "teacher cooperative," opened. "We take a lot of pride in the fact that we all have a vote and say in things," said Barbara Ernest, a teacher. "It's a lot of work sometimes, but it's worth it."

Ernest said union officials from New Jersey and school officials from Boston visited IDEAL to see how the teacher cooperative model looks in practice. "This idea has gained a lot of acceptance in recent years," said Jennifer Carter, a teacher.

It is important, I think that with the amount of venom directed at the so-called 'Education Establishment,' the unions become active and visible in studying and supporting this sort of major reform.
Naturally, with the program in infancy, it is difficult to judge just how effective it will be in reforming and improving schools. And I honestly question whether it is right for every school. It depends, I think on the personnel. Consider, for example, how decisions are made at the IDEAL Charter School:

Although specific tasks at the school might be delegated, everyone has a say in the major issues. "There is one main teacher in charge of the budget, but everybody has input and knowledge about it," Ernest said.

At IDEAL the teachers have many meetings, where they sit in a circle and go around, giving each of the 10 teachers the chance to speak. Usually, the teachers arrive at a decision through discussion. Occasionally, they vote.

My own school might have some difficulty with that; it seems, at times, that the faculty cannot agree on the color of the sky! Part of that could be because we have a number of teachers set in their ways, unwilling to embrace change. Or just because we all want to be chiefs.
Whatever the case, I am excited by this experiment. Think of the money that might be available with the removal of administration. And teachers actually working together to make decisions, and CONTROLLING THE BUDGET AND DISCIPLINE. I like it, I like it a lot.
Too bad it will all probably end up on the right wing scrap heap as some stupid socialist experiment. Communalism is always bad, donchyaknow.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

'A Gayer, Fatter America'

2005-07-18T10:49:00.000-05:00

Once again, the Bush Administration is seeing the consequences of dividing attention and stretching forces thin. It seems, alas, that according to the always reputable Borowitz Report, the Administration is admitting that it will be unable to fight the War on Terror, War on Gay Marriage, and the War on Obesity all at the same time. According to spokesman Scott McClellan,

“It turns out that these insurgents are more determined than we originally expected, and so are these damn gay couples.”

Mr. McClellan also raised the possibility that the insurgency in Iraq could prevent the U.S. from continuing to fight the war on obesity.

“Let’s face it, folks,” Mr. McClellan said. “For the near term at least, we may be looking at a gayer, fatter America.”

Damn this Administration. Next thing you know, we will have overweight gays dying in Iraq because of this Administration's incompetence.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamers at FloridaBlues)

I Hate Them SO Much

2005-07-15T11:10:00.000-05:00

I really hate the Yankees. Really I do. After that fiasco last night, I need a good memory. Here it is:

Some Persective on the Rove Debate, from the Right

2005-07-15T10:48:00.000-05:00

John Cole of Balloon Juice has a great post up addressing his fellow travellers on the Right that criticize the sometimes over-the-top nature of the left wing reaction to the Rove/Plame Affair (sounds like a bad movie, no?). He notes that

But, it is worth examining- What if this had happened during the Clinton administration? What if it was Paul Begala or someone like him who was accused of outing a CIA agent? What would the right be doing?

If your answer is anything other than what the left is doing, only louder, you are fooling yourselves. Rush Limbaugh would have talked about nothing else for 3 years, and unlike 2004, this WOULD have been the chief issue of the election. G. Gordon Liddy would be having fund-raisers to erect a hangman's scaffold on the White House lawn. The legal 'analysts' at NRO would be claiming that the statutes currently being applied to the case are inadequate, and that we should be looking at charges of treason and the application of the Federal death penalty.

He closes the post by saying

And you know I am right. So while I think some (many) on the left are going off the rails, I understand it. And I don't think our side would be any better.

Just saying. Flame away.

It is important to remember, I think, that not all on the other side of the aisle are Rushbots or Dobson Disciples. If you want reasoned, eloquent, logical, and humorous discussion of the issues from the perpective of the Right, you couldn't do better than John Cole.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Repealing Godwin's Law

2005-07-15T10:17:00.000-05:00

David Weigel, a contributing writer at the libertarian blog Hit and Run, tells us that it is time to consider repealing Godwin's Law. Godwin's Law, formulated by Mike Godwin, basically states that the first person in a discussion to invoke Hitler (or later, the Nazis) as a conmparison has automatically lost the argument. For example, 'Bush is the new Hitler' or 'Mike Moore is the new Goebbels' would be considered automatic losers. Weigel does make a good point, I think, when he says that

You can't really downplay this stuff or cheapen it through overuse. Think about this another way: You can say your sandwich tastes like a urinal cake. This emphasizes that the sandwich is truly awful, and gives your listener an idea or image of exactly how awful. But you don't lose sight of how bad the urinal cake can be. It's a poisonous sanitary product, and nothing will ever change that.

While it had never occured to me to compare anything to a urinal cake, his analogy is disgustingly apt. Just because you compare something to the Nazis, or a Nazi, or the Holocaust, it does not cheapen or minimize the horror that was Nazi Germany.
Weigel continues later in the piece:

But obviously, Nazi analogies in humanitarianism and foreign policy aren't intended to cheapen Nazism and the Holocaust. They're meant to put underreported, ugly stories into a frame that everyone immediately understands. It's the same thing with the workaday Nazi arguments, and with situations like Durbin's.

Thus, despite all efforts at regulation, the market has repeatedly decided in favor of the N-bomb. There simply isn't any other tableau, in history or fiction, that offers the same variety of evil and oppressive examples as the Third Reich. Why compare some propaganda to 1984 and some slaughter to Srebrenica when you can double down and link both of them to Nazism?

In other words, there should be nothing wrong with dredging up the horrors of old to discuss the horrors of today.
That being said, I myself am often quite reluctant to compare anyone to Nazis. Many on the left like to compare President Bush to Hitler, and it seems that the left tends to throw around the word 'Nazi' just as much as the right likes to throw around the word 'Communist' (or 'traitor'). I don't like it; to me, it cheapens the dialogue and does nothing to further the debate. While it may, as Weigel says, be time to repeal Godwin's Law, I wonder whether it is a good idea.
I think I am having a hard time expressing myself on this issue. I'm a Pole; while we were victims of the Nazis, my people were often complicit in the Nazi horrors, and were at times active participants. A bit of ethnic guilt on my part, perhaps. I just think that it does cheapen the debate and should be avoided at all costs. I will stop ranting now.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Harry Potter: A Tool of Satan

2005-07-13T19:35:00.000-05:00

Pope Benedict XVI, with nothing really pressing in the Catholic world, does his best to speak out about the evil that is Harry Potter. Check out this link to lifesite to find scanned images of his letters to Gabriele Kuby, a German critic of the Potter novels who believes that they lead one away from Christ and are seductively and subtly evil. According to Michael O'Brien, the Harry Potter novels are part of a new front of spiritual warfare in the 21st century.

"This discernment on the part of Benedict XVI reveals the Holy Father's depth and wide ranging gifts of spiritual discernment." O'Brien, author of a book dealing with fantasy literature for children added, "it is consistent with many of the statements he's been making since his election to the Chair of Peter, indeed for the past 20 years - a probing accurate read of the massing spiritual warfare that is moving to a new level of struggle in western civilization. He is a man in whom a prodigious intellect is integrated with great spiritual gifts. He is the father of the universal church and we would do well to listen to him."

I am pretty sure that the Church is responsible itself for more important contributors to Lucifer; the molestation coverup (abetted by Ratzinger/Benedict himself) comes to mind.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

On British Stoicism

2005-07-13T19:19:00.000-05:00

Andrew Sullivan gives us his 'Quote of the Day,' one which, I think, says alot about the different approaches to horror taken by the American and British publics. It's from Rob Corddry of the Daily Show (one of the best shows on TV!), in reference to the London bombings:

"Where are the country singers threatening to put boots up peoples' asses? ... Who grieves this privately? This American likes his sorrow in t-shirt form"

Maybe Toby Keith can write a song about it.

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Liberal Perversions

2005-07-13T18:58:00.000-05:00

Rick Santorum , in comments made to 'Catholic Online' a few years ago, blamed Boston liberalism for the pedophilia and sexual molestation scandals that have rocked and continue to rock the Catholic Church in Boston and throughout the nation.
From the Boston Globe:

Santorum, a leader among Christian conservatives, was responding to questions about remarks he made three years ago on a website called Catholic Online. In those comments, Santorum said, ''It is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political, and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm" of the clergy sexual abuse scandal.

As a native of Massachusetts, a (lapsed) Catholic, and someone who believes Boston to be the greatest city in the country, talk like this just, well, pisses me off. Since Santorum made the remarks in 2002, the scandal has spread far beyond 'liberal' Boston. Naturally, then the good Senator from Pennsylvania/Virgina has withdrawn those remarks, correct? WRONG.
From the same article in the Globe:

Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, the third-ranking Republican in the Senate, refused yesterday to back off on his earlier statements connecting Boston's ''liberalism" with the Roman Catholic Church pedophile scandal, saying that the city's ''sexual license" and ''sexual freedom" nurtured an environment where sexual abuse would occur.

''The basic liberal attitude in that area . . . has an impact on people's behavior," Santorum said in an interview yesterday at the Capitol.

My God. Could the man be any more clueless, insensitive, or moronic? I'm not a big fan of Bob Casey, Jr., but I hope he waxes the floor with the esteemed Senator in 2006. Schmuck.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

The Death of Innocents

2005-07-13T18:37:00.000-05:00

A suicide bomber struck again in Iraq, this time killing 27 people, mostly children who were receiving candy from American soldiers. One US soldier was killed, with most most, if not all, of the remaining dead children.
Horrible. Horrible. Say what you will about the American presence in Iraq and the 'insurgency', this kind of action is nothing more than pure murder, with no strategic goal beyond inflicting terror. Where in the Koran does it say anything about killing children? If one were so inclined, it could be argued that American soldiers were a valid target (which I will NOT argue and AM NOT arguing), but children? These men are monsters. With actions like this, support for the foreign insurgents among the general Iraqi population and among native Iraqi insurgents can only decrease. I hope.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

The Gay Agenda Intimidates Another Corporation

2005-07-13T18:01:00.000-05:00

John Cole of Balloon Juice, one of my favorite blogs of the right, points us to the outrage of the American Family Association over the fact that Johnson and Johnson will be advertising Tylenol in (gasp!) a gay magazine!
From the press release of the AFA:

Johnson & Johnson will be advertising its brand, Tylenol PM, in the July 19 issue of The Advocate, a leading gay magazine.
The ad shows two shirtless men in bed side by side. The text over one reads: "His backache is keeping him up." Over the other: "His boyfriend's backache is keeping him up."
Johnson & Johnson has been advertising in gay media since 1996. Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute, said people need to take notice.
"A lot of corporate America has bought into the idea that they can secretly promote homosexuality without their consumers noticing out there," he said.
Mike Haley, director of the gender issues department at Focus on the Family, said the gay and lesbian community has a lot of expendable income, so they are targeting big corporations who are caving to their pressure.
"I think it's a critical issue," he said, "because it's one more way that the issue of homosexuality is being normalized and sent out as though it's not harmful—as though it's not against what God originally intended."

Cole says it best, I think:

"There is nothing wrong with Johnson and Johnson placing ads to sell their product. Little boys all over the country are not going to look at a Tylenol PM ad in a gay magazine, say to themselves, "all of a sudden I like penises and I deny the existence of Christ" and become card-carrying members of the homosexual agenda. IT JUST DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT, no matter how much Focus on the Family think homosexuals are on a mission to 'gay up' the whole country. People don't just 'turn' gay.

These people really need to get a grip of themselves."

Earlier in his post, Cole points out the fact that the idea that gays have a great deal of disposable income is a myth...a positive myth for the community, but a myth nonetheless. And honestly, I could not say it any better than John Cole, when he says that

"...Focus on the Family just DOES NOT WANT THESE PEOPLE TO EXIST. This isn't an ad in Sports Illustrated for Kids, or a commercial on the Cartoon Network. It is an ad in a magazine the Advocate, a magazine for people who are homosexual (or, in the vernacualr [sic] of the folks at Focus in the Family, "people who have already become gay"). In other words, it is the same thing as (horror of horrors) Johnson & Johnson using ads with black people in them for placement in Jet or Ebony. Or MTV showing commercials with young kids in skateboard punk get-up."

God forbid that companies practice a little good old-fashioned American capitalism by targeting a specific group within a publication aimed at that group. Just how advertising in a gay magazine actually promotes 'gayness' is beyone me. I bet that the AFA went into seizures when they say the Orbitz ad promoting gay vacations. That would be a funny sight to see I think. Disturbing, but briefly funny.
(Cross-posted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

Ignorance isn't Bliss, it's Stupidity.

2005-07-12T18:30:00.000-05:00

Over at SFWeekly, Tommy Craggs reveals ESPN Baseball Analyst and former Reds great Joe Morgan as a stubborn, ignorant, and pretentious idiot. The interview and article center around the fact that Morgan despises the Moneyball theory of baseball, with its emphasis on OPS, On Base Percentage, and a reluctance to take risks on the bases. One of my favorite bits of the article is this one, as I share the sentiment of Craggs, especially about Tim 'I love the Yankees' McCarver:

It's inevitable: One day, The Game will welcome the nerds; they will use stats like VORP and WARP and BABIP on SportsCenter; there will be new metrics that are as pretty and precisely turned as a 6-4-3 double play, and they will be cheered in similar fashion; Bobby Grich will be in the Hall of Fame; Joe Morgan will be institutionalized, and his roommate will be Tim McCarver (and McCarver's partner, Joe Buck, will simply be neutered); baseball's furious mythmaking will continue apace, but this time they'll be telling half-truths and exaggerations about Bill James' eureka moments in a Stokely-Van Camp pork-and-beans plant. Until then, the nerds will watch Sunday Night Baseball with a finger hovering just above the mute button. They will read Joe Morgan's chats with disgust, then chuckle at him on blogs and in chat rooms and over games of Stratomatic Baseball.

Morgan really demonstrates his cluelessness in the following exchange:

When it was suggested that the world-champion Boston Red Sox were a
Moneyball team -- after all, they had Bill James in their employ -- Morgan
snapped back (and you could almost hear his furious jabs at the keyboard): "The Red Sox had the second highest payroll in baseball next to the Yankees!!! The most important play last year was Dave Roberts stealing second base in game four ... that is NOT the moneyball theory. Without the stolen base or just the THREAT of the stolen base Dave Roberts provided, the Red Sox would have been eliminated."

What Morgan ignores is just how Dave Roberts got on base: he was pinch running for Kevin Millar, who had walked, which, according to the Moneyball theory, is just as valuable a way to get on base as a hit. And Roberts was driven in by Bill Mueller, a Moneyball style player.

Theo, ignore Joe. He is an idiot; great player, but an idiot.

The Sox lead, but for how long?

2005-07-12T18:14:00.000-05:00

So as we enter the second half of the baseball season, the Red Sox sit in first place by the skin of their teeth, they find themselves completely unable to beat the damned Orioles, and the Yankees are actually winning games (for now). The Sox bullpen is, well, crap, and they have stumbled through the last homestand and roadtrip of the first half. They open the second half against with four games against the still-evil Empire. They need, I think, to take three of four against them, to put them in their place: below the Sox.
Please God, let us make it two in a row. I want to go back home for another parade!

Church Sign of the Day

2005-07-12T17:39:00.000-05:00

Church Sign of the Day

I wonder if those that insist that the Government recognize Christianity as the national and favored religion really know just what they are asking for. (Crossposted at FloridaBlues)

Apples to Oranges

2005-07-12T17:19:00.000-05:00

Igglephan, a commenter over at the always interesting libertarian legal blog, The Volokh Conspiracy, reacts to the following joke posted by Todd Zywicki:

While we all sit waiting for an eventual nominee, I thought I would fill the
time with a joke making the rounds in some conservative legal circles:
Q: Do you know the translation for "Gonzales"?
A: It's Spanish for "Souter."
(Insert rimshot).

Igglephan comments:

That joke is pretty old, but it raises some interesting points. When someone unearths evidence that, as Attorney General of New Hampshire, Justice Souter authorized the indefinite detention of speeders or authored memos as poor as Gonzales' death penalty memos (see the Atlantic story on this), we can talk. Even in his abortion decision, Gonzales let out enough dicta and subtext to suggest how he'd rule on Roe, i.e. his views "as a parent." (Totally in contrast to the idea that abortion is grounded in personal liberty, the very idea that the parent -- or any other person or entity -- could possibly be relevant to the process.) Gonzales should not be on the Court not because he might use his powers of legal reasoning on his own -- the right's apparent objection to Souter, and it's revealatory that the objections are only to the political consequences of his opinions (or dissents!)and never to the quality of his legal reasoning -- but because Gonzales' entire career has revealed a willingness not to concern himself with the Rule of Law, especially the importance of procedural safeguards.

Calling him a "closet moderate" is probably false, just from the record we have, but the specific comparison to Justice Souter, really insults both Souter's independence, legal skill, and professional dedication to the rule of law.

Igglephan makes a good point about comparing the two men, though I might go farther and say that Gonzales really seems to have no difficulty in justifying telling the President exactly what he wanted to hear concerning the use of torture and detention, and that should concern anyone, left or right. As Igglephan says, he is less about the rule of law and more about the exercise of authority. That is not something we need in a Supreme Court justice when it comes to personal liberties.
(Crossposted at FloridaBlues)

Regrets, I've had a few...

2005-07-12T17:03:00.000-05:00

Belgravia Dispatch links and excerpts from this Washington Post article, an interview with Eliot Cohen, a neoconservative and key supporter of the Iraq War. In it, we at last see some major criticism of the Bush Administration from a hawk. He actually refers to the administration's decision making as incompetent, a refreshing change from the usual right wing echo chamber. My reaction to his comments are in blue.

Cohen, in contemplating whether or not he would have supported the Iraq action had known what he knows now, says:

So it is not an academic matter when I say that what I took to be the basic rationale for the war still strikes me as sound. Iraq was a policy problem that we could evade in words but not escape in reality. But what I did not know then that I do know now is just how incompetent we would be at carrying out that task.

He continues later in the piece,

But a pundit should not recommend a policy without adequate regard for the ability of those in charge to execute it, and here I stumbled. I could not imagine, for example, that the civilian and military high command would treat "Phase IV" -- the post-combat period that has killed far more Americans than the "real" war -- as of secondary importance to the planning of Gen. Tommy Franks's blitzkrieg. I never dreamed that Ambassador Paul Bremer and Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the two top civilian and military leaders early in the occupation of Iraq -- brave, honorable and committed though they were -- would be so unsuited for their tasks, and that they would serve their full length of duty nonetheless. I did not expect that we would begin the occupation with cockamamie schemes of creating an immobile Iraqi army to defend the country's borders rather than maintain internal order, or that the under-planned, under-prepared and in some respects mis-manned Coalition Provisional Authority would seek to rebuild Iraq with big construction contracts awarded under federal acquisition regulations, rather than with small grants aimed at getting angry, bewildered young Iraqi men off the streets and into jobs.

I did not know, but I might have guessed.

Many of these construction contracts went to our friend Halliburton and related subsidiaries; but had we focused more on using Iraqi construction firms and workers, would that have really changed anything? I wonder. Dr. Cohen continues, saying later in the piece that

This is an unusually invertebrate insurgency, without a central organization or ideology, a coherent set of objectives or a common positive purpose. The FLN in Algeria or the Viet Cong were far more cohesive and directed. The decentralized ad hoc nature of the insurgency makes it harder to figure out, but also less likely to succeed; there is a reason why it is well-organized and disciplined guerrillas who eventually occupy presidential palaces.

The question, of course, is whether the insurgents actually have any goal beyond removing the US prescence in Iraq. As Dr. Cohen points out, this insurgency is far less organized and focused than that we faced in Vietnam, lacking a clear leader or unity, let alone common goals. This is negative in that we will be unable to destroy the insurgency by destroying the leadership, but a positive in that they are unlikely to work together for long; recent reports indicate that native Iraqi insurgents are growing increasingly frustrated with the foreign fighters involved in 'al Qaeda in Iraq.'

Later, Cohen comments on continued mismanagement of the servicemen and women fighting this war:

It is a flicker of rage that two years into an insurgency, we still expose our troops in Humvees to the blasts of roadside bombs -- knowing that even the armored version of that humble successor to the Jeep is simply not designed for warfare along guerrilla-infested highways, while, at the same time, knowing that plenty of countries manufacture armored cars that are. It is disbelief at a manpower system that, following its prewar routines, ships soldiers off to war for a year or 15 months, giving them two weeks of leave at the end, when our British comrades, more experienced in these matters and wiser in pacing themselves, ship troops out for half that time, and give them an extra month on top of their regular leave after an operational deployment.

It flames up when hearing about the veteran who in theory has a year between Iraq rotations, but in fact, because he transferred between units after returning from one tour, will go back to Iraq half a year later, and who, because of "stop-loss orders" involuntarily extending active duty tours, will find himself in combat nine months after his enlistment runs out. And all this because after 9/11, when so many Americans asked for nothing but an opportunity to serve, we did not expand our Army and Marine Corps when we could, even though we knew we would need more troops.

We are wearing out our military, running it dry. The use of stop-loss and an idiotic rotation system is weaking both manpower and equipment, and I fear that it will come back and bite us in the long run. Finally, Dr. Cohen finishes with this comment:

The scholar in me is not surprised when our leaders blunder, although the pundit in me is dismayed when they do. What the father in me expects from our leaders is, simply, the truth -- an end to happy talk and denials of error, and a seriousness equal to that of the men and women our country sends into the fight.

While it is refreshing to hear a major war supporter criticize the blunders and fiascos that this Administration is responsible for (particularly when he criticizes the 'Clintonian' parsing of words when member of the Administration are referring to the manpower losses and the protracted insurgency, not quoted in this post by a good read in the article), I question whether he would have had this reaction had his son not been going off to serve as an Army captain in theater. Perhaps that is too harsh; he does deserve credit for speaking up. The question, of course, is just who is listening?

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

We are the Boys of Old Florida...

2005-07-08T00:51:00.000-05:00

One of the soldiers killed in the ambush of the rescue mission of the missing SEAL team in Afghanistan was a graduate of the University of Florida, my alma mater twice over. Here is an excerpt from a good piece on this brave young man in a recent edition of the Gainesville Sun:

A Navy SEAL killed in an Afghanistan helicopter crash June 28 fostered his hopes of joining the elite special forces branch while studying statistics at the University of Florida.

After his first year of college, James Erik Suh came home for summer break transformed from a skinny teenager to a muscular man, said Linda Cleveland, a Boca Raton woman whose son was best friends with Suh growing up in Deerfield Beach.
SNIPSuh graduated from UF with a bachelor's degree in 2000, then enlisted in the Navy in 2001. His SEAL training began about five months later.

The 28-year-old was ranked petty officer 2nd class when he deployed to Afghanistan this year.

SNIP

He was not allowed to tell anyone where he was, but Cleveland "had that feeling in the pit of my stomach" when she heard that a Chinook helicopter carrying a special forces unit was shot down last week in eastern Afghanistan. Suh's sister, Claudia Suh Bown, of San Francisco, later called and confirmed that James Suh was among the 16 soldiers killed. A rocket-propelled grenade hit their helicopter during a rescue mission above the mountains of Kunar Province.

Shortly before the attack, Suh's father, Solomon Suh, found a Father's Day gift hidden in his bedroom with a letter from his son that said, "When we were growing up we were poor. But we never felt poor because you took us to the beach every day, taught us how to play tennis and took us to the library."

Rest in Peace, Soldier. May Heaven be covered in Orange and Blue for your arrival.

The Fight Goes On

2005-07-08T00:21:00.000-05:00

So far, over 1700 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq, and over 100 in Afghanistan. We should never have gone into Iraq; it was, I think, the wrong war and the wrong time. As I posted elsewhere, we should have finished the job in Afghanistan first. That being said, we have an obligation to see the job in Iraq through, and to hold those who got us involved responsible (but how?????). From the Dropkick Murphys:

"Last Letter Home"

Hello there my dearest love
Today I write to you about our sons
The boys start school today
They're the spitting image of you in every way

Hey son it's Dad
I hope this letter finds you well out of harm's way
We saw the news today it frightened your Mom
Now all she does is pray

[Chorus:]
If I lead will you follow?
Will you follow if I lead?

Hey Melissa it's me don't be afraid
I'm in good hands I'm gonna be home soon
It's time to watch the children grow up
I wanna be more than a voice on the phone

Thanks Ma I got your package today
I love "The Fields Of Athenry"
I swear I want 'em to play that song on the pipes
At my funeral when I die

[Chorus]

I stand alone in the distance
And the foreground slowly moves

[Chorus]

"We regret to inform you that on January 28th Sgt. Andrew
Farrar died while serving his country in the Al-Anbar province
of Iraq words cannot convey our sorrow"

[Chorus]

When there's nothing on the horizon
You've got nothing left to prove

If I lead will you follow?

The story behind this song is interesting. Sgt. Andrew Farrar is a real hero, killed in Iraq, and a big fan of DKM. The song, 'Fields of Athenry,' was played by the DKM at his request, and these lyrics are taken in part from one of his last letters home.

On Pointless Death

2005-07-08T00:18:00.000-05:00

I don't know why I am posting this. This song just makes me cry. It's from the new CD from one of my favorite groups, the Dropkick Murphys. As a history teacher, I am using this next year! I know everyone reading this can tell me what it refers to!

"The Green Fields Of France"

oh how do you do, young willy mcbride
do you mind if i sit here down by your graveside
and rest for a while in the warm summer sun
i've been walking all day, and im nearly done
and i see by your gravestone you were only nineteen
when you joined the great fallen in 1916
well i hope you died quick
and i hope you died clean
oh willy mcbride, was is it slow and obscene

[Chorus]
did they beat the drums slowly
did the play the fife lowly
did they sound the death march as they lowered you down
did the band play the last post and chorus
did the pipes play the flowers of the forest

and did you leave a wife or a sweetheart behind
in some loyal heart is your memory enshrined
and though you died back in 1916
to that loyal heart you're forever nineteen
or are you a stranger without even a name
forever enshrined behind some old glass pane
in an old photograph torn, tattered, and stained
and faded to yellow in a brown leather frame

[Chorus]
did they beat the drums slowly
did the play the fife lowly
did they sound the death march as they lowered you down
did the band play the last post and chorus
did the pipes play the flowers of the forest

the sun shining down on these green fields of france
the warm wind blows gently and the red poppies dance
the trenches have vanished long under the plow
no gas, no barbed wire, no guns firing down
but here in this graveyard that's still no mans land
the countless white crosses in mute witness stand
till' man's blind indifference to his fellow man
and a whole generation were butchered and damned

[Chorus]
did they beat the drums slowly
did the play the fife lowly
did they sound the death march as they lowered you down
did the band play the last post and chorus
did the pipes play the flowers of the forest

and i can't help but wonder oh willy mcbride
do all those who lie here know why they died
did you really believe them when they told you the cause
did you really believe that this war would end wars
well the suffering, the sorrow, the glory, the shame
the killing and dying it was all done in vain
oh willy mcbride it all happened again
and again, and again, and again, and again

[Chorus]
did they beat the drums slowly
did the play the fife lowly
did they sound the death march as they lowered you down
did the band play the last post and chorus
did the pipes play the flowers of the forest

Church Sign of the Day

2005-07-07T23:50:00.000-05:00

A new feature here at BostonDreams is the Church Sign of the Day. Some will be dumb, some will not. Some will be...ah, hell, let's face it, they all will be dumb. So what? It's fun! Here is today's entry:

Run, Kathy, Run!

2005-07-07T23:01:00.000-05:00

From the Orlando Sentinel, we learn that the potential Senate nominee of the Florida Republican Party, the charming Katherine Harris, is quite interested in alternative science:

Four years ago, as the state labored to eradicate citrus canker by destroying trees, officials rejected other disease-fighting techniques, saying unproven methods would waste precious time and resources.

But for more than six months, the state, at the behest of then-Secretary of State Katherine Harris, did pursue one alternative method -- a very alternative method.

Researchers worked with a rabbi and a cardiologist to test "Celestial Drops," promoted as a canker inhibitor because of its "improved fractal design," "infinite levels of order" and "high energy and low entropy."

But the cure proved useless against canker. That's because it was water -- possibly, mystically blessed water.

(This is the part that really gets me!)

Harris seemed surprised Friday that the product she once hoped might cure canker may be nothing more than blessed water. In fact, after being contacted by the Orlando Sentinel, she called Hardoon. She said he blamed Celestial Drops' poor test performance on state scientists.

"He said they didn't follow the proper protocols," Harris said.

Oh, I hope she wins the nomination. I think that the Dems might then have a chance. The woman has all of the wattage of dead firefly.

Thanks to Balloon Juice for the link.

Where have you gone, Calvin Schiraldi?

2005-07-07T22:32:00.000-05:00

Our new closer struggled in relief at Pawtucket this evening. From the Globe:

Curt Schilling's first relief appearance looked a lot like his last start: not very good. The injured Red Sox ace pitched a sloppy ninth inning in Triple-A Pawtucket on Thursday night as he began his conversion from starter to reliever. The 38-year-old right-hander allowed two runs -- one of them earned -- on two hits, striking out two.

Jesus. What the hell are we going to do with the damn pen. I don't blame Theo or Francona. The pen just has not done its job, especially the two firebugs, Foulke and Embree. Now, I am incredibly grateful to those guys for the title last year, but c'mon! Dammit, I am going crazy following this team.
What's that you say? We are in first by 3 games? So? 18 in '78. Sigh. Paranoid freak, I know.

GO AWAY!

2005-07-07T22:31:00.000-05:00

Another damn hurricane. I almost miss the nor'easters I grew up with. Never thought I'd long for a blizzard.

The Flypaper Strategy at Work

2005-07-07T22:24:00.000-05:00

From CNN:

Osama bin Laden and his deputy in al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahri, have threatened Britain along with other countries in their recent messages, he noted.

"It proves that they still exist and at a large scale despite the war against terrorism," he said of the London bombings.

Look, whatever you think about the war in Iraq, you cannot convince me that going after the thug Hussein, no immediate threat to the United States, was more vital to national security than hunting and destroying Osama and the Afghani/al-Qaeda terror network. Our resources should have been deployed to Afghanistan in full force, not diverted to freaking Iraq before the job was done. Recent events, including the horror in London and the tragedy of the US Seal teams, indicate that far from being the central front in the war on terror, Iraq began as a diversion that we are now committed to, at the expense of our security and the stability of Afghanistan. Rather than being 'flypaper,' one could argue that instead Iraq is inspiring new terror in Europe, such as that in London and Madrid, and our troops are still fighting hard in Afghanistan. How long until Afghanistan becomes forgotten and neglected?

Bloody Thursday

2005-07-07T21:54:00.000-05:00

Our hearts and our prayers go out to those killed and wounded by the terrorist attack in London. As of now, 37 killed and over 700 wounded.

Back from Dixie

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

So I am back from South Carolina. A pleasant and relaxing trip, all said. The first drive of more than 3 hours where my wife and I weren't screaming at each other. basically, she did the city driving, I did the highway driving. Fixed everything. :) Anyway, I thought I would post some of the more interesting pictures, just because I can, and hey, it is free!

Monument to the Confederate Dead

CSS Hunley
Dedicating the Site of Treason

Not surprisingly, there were a number of memorials to the Confederacy. And I saw a lovely book in the window of Waldenbooks: 'The Myths of American Slavery,' by the same author of 'The South was Right.'

Wedding Bells

2005-07-01T11:06:00.000-05:00

I'm off to South Carolina, the heart of the Confederacy, for the wedding of a good friend. I wonder if I should wear my 'The South was WRONG' t-shirt. Hmmm..perhaps inappropriate.
See you next week, for the Supreme Court Confirmation fun!

Vice President Rove?

2005-06-28T01:23:00.000-05:00

Def over at Roachblog posts a scary thought: what if Karl Rove is plotting to assume an elected office, even VP?

What if Rove's more public face has something to do with Rove's future? Is it possible that Rove might actually be contemplating a position of some sort? Elected perhaps? (They'd vote for him in his home state of Texas.)

What about an appointed post? And to be completely paranoid.....

... didn't they just take Dick Cheney to the hospital, *again*.

I shiver to think about it. Imagine Karl Rove in an elected position. Well, as a plus, the possibility of impeachment might arise. Or, (fingers crossed), Rove actually getting reamed in the press.

Your Friendly Neighborhood Theocrats

2005-06-28T00:58:00.000-05:00

The dominionists over at Little Geneva continue to demonstrate what charming individuals they are. A sample of the most recent posts, word for word (PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE ARE NOT MY OWN THOUGHTS):

The Jews get a taste of their own medicine as heroic Russians consider charging THEM with incitement. "Jerusalem sources following the affair said this is the first time since Stalin’s regime that Russian officials have described holy Jewish scriptures as prohibited incitement." (ed note: I blogged about this issue here).
Jew Spielberg has signed his name to a piece of propaganda called "Into the West" that will air on the TNT channel of Jewish Fable Machines. As we all know, approving of - or better yet, participating in - interracial marriage is the only way to prove that you are not a racist, and you get bonus points for producing ugly children.
Well, there’s history, and there’s JewTV, and never the twain shall meet. The trouble is that young imbeciles (too many of whom are Christians) think they are one and the same. Those of us who dare to dissent are vilified by those who pass non-vilification laws.
"It might seem odd for an African American to join a faith that once supported slavery, but…" Odd? The only thing that sounds odd to me is the idea that barbarians and savages would not adopt the superior faith of the Christian planter class in the South.
A huge victory for religious liberty is coming soon to North Carolina. This would be a good time for the Constitution Party to change the language of their platform, because as it now stands, they are encouraging this sort of thing. And when they revise the document, some explicit support for white Christians - the true Americans - would be nice. We kinists would be happy to send a delegation.

Such interesting people, these so-called 'kinists.' I wonder if they realize that Jesus was, in fact, Jewish and that slavery was actually NOT a positive thing. Oh, and that the South was actually fighting for slavery (read the secession declarations!) while the North was fighting for Union. I will continue to post parts of their posts here, just because I think they need to be read. Look at their blogroll; it's not small.

Anti-semitism in Russia: A Growth Industry

2005-06-28T00:26:00.000-05:00

From Ha'aretz, by way of Eugene Volokh:

The Moscow district prosecutor has ordered an examination into the Shulhan Arukh - a code of Jewish halakhic law compiled in the 16th century - to ascertain whether it constitutes racist incitement and anti-Russian material.

The prosecutor ordered the probe against a Jewish umbrella organization in Russia for distributing a Russian translation of an abbreviation of the Shulhan Arukh.

(SNIP)

The inquiry was launched following a letter signed by 500 public figures, including some 20 members of the nationalist Rodina party, urging the district prosecutor to outlaw the Jewish religion and all the Jewish organizations operating in Russia.

On a positive note:

Rodina's leader, Dimitri Rogozin, sent a letter to Moscow Chief Rabbi Pinhas Goldschmidt over the weekend, criticizing the anti-Semitic displays in his party. "Theological sources cannot be subjected to judiciary procedures," he wrote.

Goldschmidt told Haaretz that he welcomed Rogozin's statement, but called on Rogozin to take firm steps against his party members who signed the letter.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind anyone that cares that the most referenced anti-Semitic document still in use today, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, was created by the Czarist secret police as a method to incite pogroms against the potentially revolutionary Jews. This is not a positive for our friend the Russians.

Batman Begins: Best... Batman...EVER

2005-06-27T23:52:00.000-05:00

I have now seen Batman Begins twice, and the second viewing was as good as the first. I thought I would post a review, because, well, I can. :) Note: Spoilers will be included and written in white, so highlight if you want to read them!

First of all, I thought this Batman was most true to the origin and the character, at least the one that I grew up with. Joe Chill and his links to the mob, and (SPOILER) the implication that the Wayne murders were a mob hit (END SPOILER) was true to the comic origin of Batman.
Ra's al Ghul was well played, and while I think it was silly that they changed the League of Assassins to the League of Shadows, the film character was a pretty good interpretation of the comic villian, right up to the (SPOILER) wanting Bruce Wayne to follow in his footsteps. (END SPOILER) No daughter for Ra's in the film, though! Perhaps good for Ra's, as in the comic, one of his two semi-immortal offspring kills him, in part to abandoning her during the Holocaust (part of his overall plan, we later learn).
I thought that Gary Oldman did a fantastic Sgt./Lt. Gordon. I wonder, in the scene where he is taking out the trash, did we see a brief glimpse of his (superheroic but eventually tragic) niece?
I hated the Batmobile. A bit too Dark Knight Returns for me.
The cameo appearance of the Batman serial killer, Mr. Zsasz, who marks his totals on his own body. Note the scars on his neck.
Michael Caine as Alfred: fantastic.
Jonathan Crane, aka Scarecrow, was in the film just enough, and quite true to the comic!
I thought the slight alteration to the role of bats in the life and mind of Bruce was acceptable.
The interesting development of the Bat Signal.
The way they discussed the potential escalation of the criminal element in manner and method thanks to the appearance of the Batman was well done and quite on point.
Hmmm...the film closes with Gordon mentioning to Batman that they have a new criminal, a double murderer and bank robber who (SPOILER) leaves a rather interesting calling 'card' behind. (END SPOILER). Has me excited for the next film!

All in all, I enjoyed it quite a bit. As a huge DC buff, I hope that the new Superman film lives up to the standards of Batman Begins. I also hope my wife lets me start buying my comics again!

Speaking the Truth?

2005-06-27T23:36:00.000-05:00

I found this image over at Robert A. George's Ragged Thots, though originally an AP photo. Says alot, I think, and speaks the truth, but I think that a different shirt might have served better at a Bill Clinton book signing!

The Boy Whose Skin Fell Off

2005-06-27T23:22:00.000-05:00

I recently watched one of the most moving, funny, and sad documentaries on TLC that I have ever seen. It is about a young (mid-30's) Englishman named Jonny Kennedy who has one of the scariest genetic diseases ever, and one I had never heard of, dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa. Basically, his skin is so fragile that it cracks and comes off at barely a touch. I think I will be contributing to the research against this horrible disease. If you ever get a chance, see the film. If you don't cry, you are inhuman.
Check out Debra.org for more information.

Is It Okay If I Call You an Ass, or Would That Be Wrong?

2005-06-27T23:15:00.000-05:00

Over at Florida Blues, we see that our eloquent Commander in Chief wonders if it is okay to call the President of the EU a 'piece of work' to his face:

In terms of your Prime Minister, he's a -- interesting guy. He's a lot of fun to be around. He promotes, uhh, serious business in a, in a, in a way that, uhh, endears himself to people. And so, uhh, I think his presidency has been an important presidency for the EU during difficult times, and he's handled it well. And, umm, I was gonna say he's a piece of work, but that might not translate too well. Is that all right, if I call you a piece of work?

As Gatorchick points out, calling someone a 'piece of work' is a bit undiplomatic in any language.

That's a nice exemption you have there...shame if something happened to it.

2005-06-27T22:51:00.000-05:00

So now the Republicans are deciding who can or cannot own a Major League Baseball Team. From the DCCC Weblog, as reported in Roll Call:

While the Soros-Ledecky group is not seen as the frontrunner to win the bidding for the Nationals, who should be awarded to their new owner at the end of the 2005 season, the very prospect that Soros could have a stake in the team is enough to irritate Congressional Republicans.

"I think Major League Baseball understands the stakes," said Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis (R), the Northern Virginia lawmaker who recently convened high-profile steroid hearings. "I don't think they want to get involved in a political fight."

Davis, whose panel also oversees District of Columbia issues, said that if a Soros sale went through, "I don't think it's the Nats that get hurt. I think it's Major League Baseball that gets hurt. They enjoy all sorts of exemptions" from anti-trust laws.

But of course it is okay for, oh I don't know, George W. Bush to have owned the Texas Rangers. Fred Vincy points out more examples of Bush contributors owning baseball teams without fear of retribution. I would note that the Boston Red Sox ownership seems to lean towards the Democrats. Again, an example of the Team of Good prevailing over the Evil Empire!

Let's Just Tempt Fate, Shall We?

2005-06-27T22:43:00.000-05:00

This is why I hate Dan Shaughnessy:

It's OK to say it. Don't worry about jinxing them. The 2005 Red Sox are going to win the American League East. By a landslide. Come late September, this is going to look like Secretariat at the Belmont in 1973.

After looking up at the Orioles for two frustrating months, the Sox moved into first place Friday night and they are there to stay. Stop worrying about the Yankees, Orioles, and Jays. It's not even going to be close.

Yeah, Dan, way to ask God to, you know, strike us down. Go write another stupid book about the curse. Geez.

See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil

2005-06-23T11:10:00.000-05:00

Posted without comment, for sale from the right wing website MoveAmericaForward.

Read the press release and sales pitch for some interesting reading.

A Bush Pandering to the Base? Shocking!

2005-06-23T10:47:00.000-05:00

Jon Alter writes a great piece comparing Jeb Bush and Schiavo to Al Sharpton and Tawana Brawley. Read the whole thing. My favorite part:

Bush has a daughter who, sadly, is a convicted drug abuser. When she passed out (as all drug abusers do), did he immediately call 911? Does he remember the exact time of the call? Was there a gap between the time he first saw that she might be ailing and when he took her for treatment?

A good question. I think there needs to be an investigation.

Burning One and Flying the Other

2005-06-23T10:33:00.000-05:00

Eugene Volokh links to his previous critique of the flag-burning amendment he wrote a few years ago, and I find it so blindingly obvious that I cannot believe it never occured to me before. The key 'grafs of his piece:

"Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States, and the flying of the Confederate flag."

OK, so that's not exactly how the proposed flag protection amendment reads -- I've added the Confederate flag phrase. But this little thought experiment helps show that the flag protection amendment is a bad idea.

After all, burning the U.S. flag and flying the Confederate flag are similar in many ways. Some people argue that flagburning shouldn't be protected by the First Amendment because it isn't "speech." Well, burning one flag and waving another are pretty similar on that score. I think both are traditional terms in our political language, and should be constitutionally protected; but if I'm wrong, then both should be unprotected.
-SNIP-
But what would we say when flagburning is banned but other offensive symbols are allowed? "We in the majority get to suppress symbols we hate, but you in the minority don't"? "Our hatred of flagburning is reasonable but your hatred of the Confederate flag is unreasonable"?

If you were black and saw the Confederate flag as a symbol of slavery and racism -- and millions of blacks do, whether you agree with them or not -- would you be persuaded by these arguments? Would you feel better about America because of them?

Read the whole piece. It is a powerful bit of writing.

On the Flag Burning Amendment

2005-06-23T10:27:00.000-05:00

Everyone's favorite Cranky Yankee has a great post up on his feelings about the flag burning amendment. This short excerpt captures my own feeling perfectly:

So does my stance on Flag Burning make me a bad Liberal? Maybe. I would not join a protest in which flags were being burned, but I would join one to protect the right to do it. Is there something wrong with my morals because I believe something is morally detestable but don't think it should be outlawed? I don't think so.

Way to sum it up for many of us, Cranky.