I didn't make bracket picks and pass them on the LJ as earlier described. Love "Nostradamus" Johnson made the picks and graciously provided them to me. Guys in my office thought I was a hoops genius. They got suspicious though when, during the inevitable coffee break post-mortem, I was reluctant to share my analysis of the Final Four. My fate as a fraud was sealed when my secretary (enjoying the reflected moment in the sun as much as I was and thinking she was doing me a favor) asked whom I had picked to win.
I couldn't remember whom Love Johnson had picked.
I might have bluffed, but was feeling so awful and guilty at this point that I was ready to give up the game. I pulled back the curtain and revealed LJ as THE MAN.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
History International Channel
Was watching History International’s (link might work) The Conquerors last night and the subject was Napoleon’s Greatest Victory at Austerlitz in 1805 (or thereabouts) with roughly 150,000 total combatants. While Messr. Napoleon certainly kicked some Russo-Austrian butt, that is not the point of this post.
Periodically with some of the programming on Discovery or History or History International or …, I occasionally find myself sitting with mouth agape at some of the things an expert might say, wondering from where in h--l this PC c--p comes. Last night, however, just as I was about to click to another channel, Victor Davis Hanson gave some commentary. Some confidence restored.
Periodically with some of the programming on Discovery or History or History International or …, I occasionally find myself sitting with mouth agape at some of the things an expert might say, wondering from where in h--l this PC c--p comes. Last night, however, just as I was about to click to another channel, Victor Davis Hanson gave some commentary. Some confidence restored.
Boomsday
Tom Wolfe calls Christopher Buckley one of the funniest writers in the English language. At least that's what the back cover of Boomsday says. I'm a big fan and have read most of Buckley's novels. This one is among the best -- wild plot turns, diabolically cynical characters, dazzling dialogue. Boomsday is even more cinematic than Thank You For Smoking and I'm sure will be filmed soon. (If you didn't like TYFS on the screen, don't let that dissuade you from reading the book.) In addition to TYFS, I can also heartily recommend Little Green Men and God Is My Broker.
The Last Mimzy
Ugh. Odd and disagreeable mishmash of sci-fi, New Age, and eco-nonsense, with a helping of Incompetent Homeland Security thrown in for no apparent reason/good measure. Mom and Dad are painful to watch; this guy is brutally miscast. There is a lot of choppiness -- jumping from unconnected episode to unconnected episode -- indicating I'm guessing a longer movie that was edited pretty severely.
Son thought it was OK. And he doesn't like everything he sees. He really disliked Flushed Away.
Mixed reviews here.
Son thought it was OK. And he doesn't like everything he sees. He really disliked Flushed Away.
Mixed reviews here.
Final Four
Had all of the Elite 8, have the Final 4, and lead in my pool. Shared my picks with LJ so I assume he's doing well also.
UPDATE: Confession here.
UPDATE: Confession here.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Good heavens…
My copy of the History of the English Speaking Peoples Since 1900 (buy there, sales help JWR) was next on my list, however, at 752 pages, I might have to rest a while before tackling.
If Bushitler was really able to tackle it, my hat’s off to him. Since he read the English publication, maybe it came with lots of pictures.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Re: Savage
Can't listen for even a minute. There are many who allege that he's really a lib and that his is all shtick.
Re: Dennis Miller
In my mind he was at his best on SNL. On HBO he had his moments but he got lazy, relying far too heavily on f-bombs and the like for laughs rather than working hard for the really good joke, but one did get to see a few of his conservative leanings.
At one point, I think it was on his HBO show (didn't he have a network talk show for a while, a la Aresenio Hall?) he said, "The difference between an environmentalist and a developer is that a developer wants to build a house in the woods and an environmentalist already has one."
He is still anti-gun, pro-choice and thinks very little of the religious right.
Then, after 9/11, he really seemed to make the hard turn sincerely.
Having said that, like her whose name we dare not speak, much of what he does now is pure marketing. Still, I appreciate him when he's on and will take a 9/11 ally wherever I can find him.
At one point, I think it was on his HBO show (didn't he have a network talk show for a while, a la Aresenio Hall?) he said, "The difference between an environmentalist and a developer is that a developer wants to build a house in the woods and an environmentalist already has one."
He is still anti-gun, pro-choice and thinks very little of the religious right.
Then, after 9/11, he really seemed to make the hard turn sincerely.
Having said that, like her whose name we dare not speak, much of what he does now is pure marketing. Still, I appreciate him when he's on and will take a 9/11 ally wherever I can find him.
1776
Of course one doesn't get it in Elementary or Jr. High history classes, but I would have expected better from my high school AP history teacher... 1776 was a very dire year for the young nation. His Excellency got very lucky on a number of occasions that year both in victory and defeat. Providence, perseverance and character seemingly seems to have prevailed over experience, cowardice and resources, but only by a thread.
The war would continue for another six years and take a toll of a full one percent of the male population, second only to the Late Unpleasantness in the latter regard.
What an amazing time. Thanks to David McCullough.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Argentina - el regreso
Las noticias emocionantes como C y yo vuelven a visitar Argentina en Mayo. Seremos idos 9 días y a menos que un viaje del fin de semana a Rosario sea planeado para nosotros por nuestros amigos Argentinos, nosotros estaremos en Buenos Aires el tiempo entero.
Desde que nosotros acerca de 90% de las cosas "de tipo" turista en nuestro primer viaje, nuestros planes son de ir a los barrios, o a los vecindarios, que nosotros no llegamos a. Quisimos agarrar un desempeño en el Teatro Colon, pero es cerrado para renovaciones.
Por supuesto, tendré los retratos que anunciaré sobre nuestro regreso, así como lo que estoy seguro será muchas historias humorísticas e interesantes
Desde que nosotros acerca de 90% de las cosas "de tipo" turista en nuestro primer viaje, nuestros planes son de ir a los barrios, o a los vecindarios, que nosotros no llegamos a. Quisimos agarrar un desempeño en el Teatro Colon, pero es cerrado para renovaciones.
Por supuesto, tendré los retratos que anunciaré sobre nuestro regreso, así como lo que estoy seguro será muchas historias humorísticas e interesantes
Re: Dennis Miller
Like Mike, or you Scooter, will set your alarm for 3am to catch Dennis' show. Nice time-slot, very Art Bell-ish.
It's interesting that you brought up the subject of Dennis Miller. I of course know him from SNL and from his "Rant" series, but since I'm probably the only person who doesn't have (nor ever has had) HBO, I lost touch with him. If you would have asked me where he leaned politically, I would have said somewhere more towards the left. But just a couple of days ago, Mike Gallagher was talking about comments Dennis made on "The View" or some other morning show and was agreeing with him, talking about how much he admired him, etc. That planted the seed in my mind that perhaps Dennis was more conservative than I thought. So when I clicked on the link you had to KRLA and saw the head-shots of the other talk show hosts on the station, I was a bit surprised. Dennis..on the same station as Michael Savage? Laura Ingram?
So I went to wikipedia (probably my favorite of all internet sites) and here is a snippet of what it says about Mr. Miller:
"...He has more recently become known for his conservative opinions, from an
aggressive stance on U.S. military action to a disdain for the Democratic
Party. He now appears regularly on Fox News Channel's The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity and Colmes."
Once I read that he is a regular on H&C, then I knew he was lost to the dark side.
It's interesting that you brought up the subject of Dennis Miller. I of course know him from SNL and from his "Rant" series, but since I'm probably the only person who doesn't have (nor ever has had) HBO, I lost touch with him. If you would have asked me where he leaned politically, I would have said somewhere more towards the left. But just a couple of days ago, Mike Gallagher was talking about comments Dennis made on "The View" or some other morning show and was agreeing with him, talking about how much he admired him, etc. That planted the seed in my mind that perhaps Dennis was more conservative than I thought. So when I clicked on the link you had to KRLA and saw the head-shots of the other talk show hosts on the station, I was a bit surprised. Dennis..on the same station as Michael Savage? Laura Ingram?
So I went to wikipedia (probably my favorite of all internet sites) and here is a snippet of what it says about Mr. Miller:
"...He has more recently become known for his conservative opinions, from an
aggressive stance on U.S. military action to a disdain for the Democratic
Party. He now appears regularly on Fox News Channel's The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity and Colmes."
Once I read that he is a regular on H&C, then I knew he was lost to the dark side.
Dennis Miller's New Radio Show
I've loved him ever since he projected Nancy Reagan as the Riddler on SNL. He starts a new radio show on Monday. He starts at 6:00 PM Pacific Time or 8:00 Central.
If you don't get him in your local area he can be accessed at the KRLA website.
Michael: 3 am on KPRC, 950 on your AM dial, in Houston.
CORRECTION: 8pm on KTRH, AM790.
If you don't get him in your local area he can be accessed at the KRLA website.
Michael: 3 am on KPRC, 950 on your AM dial, in Houston.
CORRECTION: 8pm on KTRH, AM790.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Monday, March 19, 2007
My niece...
I was carrying my four year old niece to my parents' house from a nearby park this weekend when she started playing with my beard and said, "You know what, Uncle Scott, you look just like Moses."
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Texas Developing Nukes—Alert the UN!
From Dallas Business Journal yesterday:
"TXU Corp. has chosen Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to design up to three nuclear reactors in Texas, the companies said Wednesday.
…
Dallas-based TXU (NYSE: TXU) also is looking into installing two to three additional nuclear reactors at a separate site in Texas, TXU said in a March 9 letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
TXU still must submit applications for construction and operating licenses to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which are expected to be submitted in 2008, according to an announcement the company made in August."
Leave it to the private sector to finally get us moving.
"TXU Corp. has chosen Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to design up to three nuclear reactors in Texas, the companies said Wednesday.
…
Dallas-based TXU (NYSE: TXU) also is looking into installing two to three additional nuclear reactors at a separate site in Texas, TXU said in a March 9 letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
TXU still must submit applications for construction and operating licenses to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which are expected to be submitted in 2008, according to an announcement the company made in August."
Leave it to the private sector to finally get us moving.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
We dare not speak her name...
but Ann Coulter has some great thoughts on Walter Reed:
"Noticeably, the problems at Walter Reed are not with the doctors or medical care. The problems are with basic maintenance at the facility.
Unless U.S. Army generals are supposed to be spraying fungicide on the walls and crawling under beds to set rattraps, the slovenly conditions at Walter Reed are not their fault. The military is nominally in charge of Walter Reed, but -- because of civil service rules put into place by Democrats -- the maintenance crew can't be fired."
...
"You will find the exact same problems anyplace market forces have been artificially removed by the government and there is a total absence of incentives, competition, effective oversight, cost controls and so on. It's almost like a cause-and-effect thing."
"Noticeably, the problems at Walter Reed are not with the doctors or medical care. The problems are with basic maintenance at the facility.
Unless U.S. Army generals are supposed to be spraying fungicide on the walls and crawling under beds to set rattraps, the slovenly conditions at Walter Reed are not their fault. The military is nominally in charge of Walter Reed, but -- because of civil service rules put into place by Democrats -- the maintenance crew can't be fired."
...
"You will find the exact same problems anyplace market forces have been artificially removed by the government and there is a total absence of incentives, competition, effective oversight, cost controls and so on. It's almost like a cause-and-effect thing."
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Global Warming...
Though I think I'm somewhat of a reluctant believer, the New York Times publishes an article that, at a minimum, raises some doubts even if only as to degree:
While reviewers tended to praise the book and movie [Inconvenient Truth], vocal skeptics of global warming protested almost immediately. Richard S. Lindzen, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a member of the National Academy of Sciences, who has long expressed skepticism about dire climate predictions, accused Mr. Gore in The Wall Street Journal of “shrill alarmism.”
While reviewers tended to praise the book and movie [Inconvenient Truth], vocal skeptics of global warming protested almost immediately. Richard S. Lindzen, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a member of the National Academy of Sciences, who has long expressed skepticism about dire climate predictions, accused Mr. Gore in The Wall Street Journal of “shrill alarmism.”
Monday, March 12, 2007
Carol Platt Liebau
She's hosting Hugh Hewitt tonight. When I was outside watering the plants, I first thought she was Michelle Malkin of Hot Air.
Saturday, March 10, 2007
300: the video game
Just a fun flick for what it was...a glorified video game. It was, though, the first movie I've watched in digital. Not sure my 47 year old eyes could really tell a difference.
Sin City is the only other movie I've seen using these techniques and 300 is certainly better than that. These techniques are very interesting but they have not yet been mastered.
If one is looking for Herodotus or Gates of Fire, he will be disappointed. Still, I did have tears in my eyes at the end.
Sin City is the only other movie I've seen using these techniques and 300 is certainly better than that. These techniques are very interesting but they have not yet been mastered.
If one is looking for Herodotus or Gates of Fire, he will be disappointed. Still, I did have tears in my eyes at the end.
Friday, March 09, 2007
Re: Walter Reed
Michael Arnold Glueck, M.D on the scandal and its bigger meaning in today's JWR:
"In this sense, the Walter Reed situation is symbolic of a much deeper dilemma. Governance no longer even tries to solve problems. It has become, instead, a self-referent, self-sustaining monster that consumes more and more of the nation's wealth and future while giving back less and less. And the American people put up with it and refuse to consider alternatives. "
"In this sense, the Walter Reed situation is symbolic of a much deeper dilemma. Governance no longer even tries to solve problems. It has become, instead, a self-referent, self-sustaining monster that consumes more and more of the nation's wealth and future while giving back less and less. And the American people put up with it and refuse to consider alternatives. "
Pleading guilty when guilty
Fox asked Garrison whether he wanted to plead not guilty.
"No, your honor," said Garrison, 26, who appeared in court dressed in a brown pinstriped suit, dark purple tie and lavender shirt.
Defense attorney Harland Braun broke in: "Mr. Garrison feels a deep sense of responsibility. ... The real issue is the level of culpability."
Braun said Garrison "doesn't feel comfortable" with a not guilty plea.
"He is going to be accepting responsibility for his conduct; the only question is the level of responsibility," the lawyer repeated.
"No, your honor," said Garrison, 26, who appeared in court dressed in a brown pinstriped suit, dark purple tie and lavender shirt.
Defense attorney Harland Braun broke in: "Mr. Garrison feels a deep sense of responsibility. ... The real issue is the level of culpability."
Braun said Garrison "doesn't feel comfortable" with a not guilty plea.
"He is going to be accepting responsibility for his conduct; the only question is the level of responsibility," the lawyer repeated.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Coulter 3
Ok, she can be a little funny:
The Republican former House Whip Tom DeLay is currently under indictment for a minor campaign finance violation. Democratic prosecutor Ronnie Earle had to empanel six grand juries before he could find one to indict DeLay on these pathetic charges -- and this is in Austin, Texas (the Upper West Side with better-looking people).
The Republican former House Whip Tom DeLay is currently under indictment for a minor campaign finance violation. Democratic prosecutor Ronnie Earle had to empanel six grand juries before he could find one to indict DeLay on these pathetic charges -- and this is in Austin, Texas (the Upper West Side with better-looking people).
The New F-word and Old N-word
Bruce Thornton on the word police and hyper-sensitivity:
The other glaring problem with this obsession with hurt feelings is that it is politically selected, just like those phony claims of “diversity,” which usually means creating a multicolored herd of the politically like-minded. Just about every university in this country insults the beliefs of Christians, Republicans, athletes, white males, and conservatives on a daily basis. Anti-Semitism, thinly camouflaged as “anti-Zionism,” is indulged constantly. The culture of white Southerners is mocked and demonized with glee. No one pays attention to complaints about this insensitivity. Nor should he (apologies to any women offended by my sexist use of the masculine pronoun). Part of being an adult is learning to deal with a world in which you, your beliefs, and your feelings are no more important than anybody else’s. What’s objectionable is the double standard and the censorship, particularly glaring in a university, supposedly the bastion of free speech and free thought, no matter whose ideological or political ox is gored (apologies to any oxen who are offended by this metaphor).
Most importantly, however, this obsession with individual feelings is incompatible with democratic freedom. A political system that allows large numbers of citizens to participate in public debate is necessarily raucous, insulting, and often vulgar. Just look at ancient Athens, where the level of political invective and insult makes our political campaigns sound like a Jane Austen novel. That’s why elitist snobs like Plato disliked democracy. When you give average people free speech, the debate is going to be rough and tough. If you want to participate, you have to be able to take it. The only alternative is some sort of control by an elite that always ends up stifling the expression of ideas and serving a narrow political interest — exactly what we see today in our universities and media. I learned this lesson the few years I was condemned to my university’s Academic Senate. As soon as the debate on an issue started getting close to the truth, someone would jump up and start squealing about “civility,” and nothing useful happened.
The other glaring problem with this obsession with hurt feelings is that it is politically selected, just like those phony claims of “diversity,” which usually means creating a multicolored herd of the politically like-minded. Just about every university in this country insults the beliefs of Christians, Republicans, athletes, white males, and conservatives on a daily basis. Anti-Semitism, thinly camouflaged as “anti-Zionism,” is indulged constantly. The culture of white Southerners is mocked and demonized with glee. No one pays attention to complaints about this insensitivity. Nor should he (apologies to any women offended by my sexist use of the masculine pronoun). Part of being an adult is learning to deal with a world in which you, your beliefs, and your feelings are no more important than anybody else’s. What’s objectionable is the double standard and the censorship, particularly glaring in a university, supposedly the bastion of free speech and free thought, no matter whose ideological or political ox is gored (apologies to any oxen who are offended by this metaphor).
Most importantly, however, this obsession with individual feelings is incompatible with democratic freedom. A political system that allows large numbers of citizens to participate in public debate is necessarily raucous, insulting, and often vulgar. Just look at ancient Athens, where the level of political invective and insult makes our political campaigns sound like a Jane Austen novel. That’s why elitist snobs like Plato disliked democracy. When you give average people free speech, the debate is going to be rough and tough. If you want to participate, you have to be able to take it. The only alternative is some sort of control by an elite that always ends up stifling the expression of ideas and serving a narrow political interest — exactly what we see today in our universities and media. I learned this lesson the few years I was condemned to my university’s Academic Senate. As soon as the debate on an issue started getting close to the truth, someone would jump up and start squealing about “civility,” and nothing useful happened.
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Paul Johnson today at JWR
I just love the perspective of historians. One should really read the whole thing but here are the first three paragraphs:
America is the reluctant sheriff of a wild world that sometimes seems mired in wrongdoing. The UN has nothing to offer in the way of enforcing laws and dispensing justice, other than spouting pious oratory and initiating feeble missions that usually do more harm than good. NATO plays a limited role, as in Afghanistan, but tends to reflect the timidity (and cowardice) of Continental Europe. Britain and a few other nations such as Australia are willing to follow America's lead but are too weak to act on their own.
That leaves the U.S. to shoulder the responsibility. Otherwise — what? Is brute force to replace the rule of law in the world because there's no one to enforce it? I wish some of those who constantly criticize America's efforts and the judgment of President Bush would ask themselves this simple question: Would you really like to live in a world where the U.S. sits idly by and lets things happen?
Life in such a world would be like the bestial existence described in Thomas Hobbes' great work, Leviathan. If people "live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war, and such a war as is of every man against every man." In that lawless state there will be "continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."
America is the reluctant sheriff of a wild world that sometimes seems mired in wrongdoing. The UN has nothing to offer in the way of enforcing laws and dispensing justice, other than spouting pious oratory and initiating feeble missions that usually do more harm than good. NATO plays a limited role, as in Afghanistan, but tends to reflect the timidity (and cowardice) of Continental Europe. Britain and a few other nations such as Australia are willing to follow America's lead but are too weak to act on their own.
That leaves the U.S. to shoulder the responsibility. Otherwise — what? Is brute force to replace the rule of law in the world because there's no one to enforce it? I wish some of those who constantly criticize America's efforts and the judgment of President Bush would ask themselves this simple question: Would you really like to live in a world where the U.S. sits idly by and lets things happen?
Life in such a world would be like the bestial existence described in Thomas Hobbes' great work, Leviathan. If people "live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war, and such a war as is of every man against every man." In that lawless state there will be "continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."
Re: Coulter Part Deux
LJ wrote, "It doesn’t matter whether he or Ms. Coulter don’t think it is – if someone is offended, its offensive."
Not sure you really mean that. If someone is offended, it's offensive to that person. But that person may be unreasonable.
Not sure you really mean that. If someone is offended, it's offensive to that person. But that person may be unreasonable.
Re: Coulter
In my schoolyard we used to plead, "Why are you upset about being called a 'bundle of sticks?'"
Ann Coulter - Part II
So I was driving to work Monday morning and instead of listening to a sports talk station as I normally do, I’m listening to Mike Gallagher. He is doing a 15-20 minute diatribe about not only Ms. Coulters’ statement, but the reaction and response by “fellow conservatives”. First, he is blasting away at Laura Ingram, Hugh Hewitt, Bill Bennett and some other woman whose name I don’t know. Saying that they “have turned on her” and “unlike Ann Coulter, who isn’t afraid to attack liberals, they seem to wagging their fingers at her and telling her bad girl, bad girl.” He applauds Ms. Coulter for her statements and in fact, doesn’t seem to think there was anything wrong about what she said. Again, echoing the sentiment that the term used wasn’t meant as an anti-gay slander, but as a “schoolyard” insult. That it was a joke – a joke that everyone in the room understood because they laughed. He went on and on about how it wasn’t offensive, that it wasn’t derogatory anyway since Edwards isn’t gay.
What I found amusing during this rant was that he kept saying that “the word”, “the term”, the “slang word” she used wasn’t offensive. Yet…he would never say it. Why not, if it isn’t offensive? If he agreed that it was meant in a “schoolyard taunt” manner, why didn’t he say the word? If the word isn’t offensive, if it was “a joke” or “part of a joke”, why not repeat the joke? Probably because he knows she crossed the line and the term IS offensive. It doesn’t matter whether he or Ms. Coulter don’t think it is – if someone is offended, its offensive.
Of course, he concludes by saying that even if it WERE offensive, “liberals” having been calling “conservatives” and “republicans” worse. Why is OK for them to say offensive things, but not “conservatives”? Great argument. Instead of trying to get both sides to get out of the gutter, to stop the hate-speak and attack-dog journalism, so we can get some intelligent debate and discussion on issues and policy, he takes the position of a child caught in the act of doing something wrong who says…”well, THEY did it first”.
Just another reminder why I gave up on talk radio. Why I thought anything had changed is beyond me. I’m going to stick to sports scores and sports talk…until I get sick of hearing about how the Cowboys are going to win the Super Bowl.
What I found amusing during this rant was that he kept saying that “the word”, “the term”, the “slang word” she used wasn’t offensive. Yet…he would never say it. Why not, if it isn’t offensive? If he agreed that it was meant in a “schoolyard taunt” manner, why didn’t he say the word? If the word isn’t offensive, if it was “a joke” or “part of a joke”, why not repeat the joke? Probably because he knows she crossed the line and the term IS offensive. It doesn’t matter whether he or Ms. Coulter don’t think it is – if someone is offended, its offensive.
Of course, he concludes by saying that even if it WERE offensive, “liberals” having been calling “conservatives” and “republicans” worse. Why is OK for them to say offensive things, but not “conservatives”? Great argument. Instead of trying to get both sides to get out of the gutter, to stop the hate-speak and attack-dog journalism, so we can get some intelligent debate and discussion on issues and policy, he takes the position of a child caught in the act of doing something wrong who says…”well, THEY did it first”.
Just another reminder why I gave up on talk radio. Why I thought anything had changed is beyond me. I’m going to stick to sports scores and sports talk…until I get sick of hearing about how the Cowboys are going to win the Super Bowl.
Re: pleading ''not guilty" when guilty
The Jewish Ethicist on "Can I plead innocent if I did it?" Conclusion: Yes, unless it's big:
"If there is a high-profile case where a "not guilty" plea would create an impression of contempt for the law, then there would be special value in coming clean in court and accepting the prescribed punishment. Not long ago a prominent member of one North American Jewish community pleaded guilty to wrongdoing partly for this reason. And psychologically, the acknowledgment implicit in a guilty plea can sometimes be a helpful step in repentance and reconciliation with the community. But these considerations are hardly relevant for a relatively anonymous individual who has been charged with a minor crime."
ht: SJJ
"If there is a high-profile case where a "not guilty" plea would create an impression of contempt for the law, then there would be special value in coming clean in court and accepting the prescribed punishment. Not long ago a prominent member of one North American Jewish community pleaded guilty to wrongdoing partly for this reason. And psychologically, the acknowledgment implicit in a guilty plea can sometimes be a helpful step in repentance and reconciliation with the community. But these considerations are hardly relevant for a relatively anonymous individual who has been charged with a minor crime."
ht: SJJ
Re: Bart Whitaker took the stand
I distinguish between making one's plea and testifying. The former being the system and the latter being the very definition of bearing false witness.
Lileks on Walter Reed
"As many have pointed out, there's a shining example of a government-run hospital already: Walter Reed. Imagine that example replicated across the land. Then again, imagine if the government was the defendant in every single medical malpractice case in the land.
If nothing else, we'd get tort reform."
If nothing else, we'd get tort reform."
Bart Whitaker took the stand
yesterday in the punishment phase of his trial, having been found guilty of capital murder. He admitted he was the mastermind of the plot to kill his family. I'm not a criminal lawyer, but it seems to be an odd strategy. On the other hand, if the options are life in prison or the death penalty, what does he have to lose by testifying?
But had he pled guilty, wouldn't that have precluded the prosecutor from putting on a parade of witnesses to testify about this plot and other plots in the past? Maybe not. Did Whitaker think he might be found not guilty? "Felcman asked Whitaker why he did not plead guilty to begin with and what would have happened if the jury found him not guilty. 'I didn't think that was possible,' Whitaker said."
Whitaker claims "he is a different person now and has found God."
Does a Christian who knows he is guilty as charged have an obligation to so plead? Is a "not guilty" plea a lie, or just invoking one's rights in a system that requires the prosecution to put on and prove its case?
And what about that last speeding ticket I got where I pled not guilty, hoping the cop wouldn't show at trial (he didn't), and forcing the judge to dismiss the case?
But had he pled guilty, wouldn't that have precluded the prosecutor from putting on a parade of witnesses to testify about this plot and other plots in the past? Maybe not. Did Whitaker think he might be found not guilty? "Felcman asked Whitaker why he did not plead guilty to begin with and what would have happened if the jury found him not guilty. 'I didn't think that was possible,' Whitaker said."
Whitaker claims "he is a different person now and has found God."
Does a Christian who knows he is guilty as charged have an obligation to so plead? Is a "not guilty" plea a lie, or just invoking one's rights in a system that requires the prosecution to put on and prove its case?
And what about that last speeding ticket I got where I pled not guilty, hoping the cop wouldn't show at trial (he didn't), and forcing the judge to dismiss the case?
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Ann Coulter - Part I
As I was doing research for a much longer post I'm planning to make about Ms. Coulter, I ran across this quote from her appearance Monday night on "Hannity and Colmes":
"Faggot isn't offensive to gays; it has nothing to do with gays," Coulter said on 'Hannity and Colmes' Monday night. "It's a schoolyard taunt meaning 'wuss,' and unless you're telling me that John Edwards is gay, it was not applied to a gay person."
Perhaps I'm not as intelligent as Ms. Coulter, so I might not understand what she is saying. What it looks like she is saying (to me) is that the term isn't offensive nor does it even apply to the group most of us think it applies to. But, since Edwards isn't gay, it wasn't applied to a gay person.
But, Ms. Coulter, you just said that the term has nothing to do with gays, nor is it offensive to gays, so why add the qualifier..."and unless you're telling me John Edwards is gay, it was not applied to a gay person." So....if John Edwards were gay, it would have been applied to a gay person. But, that wouldn't be a big deal, because (1) the term has nothing to do with gays and (2) even if it did, it isn't offensive to gays. The qualifier makes it appear (again to me) that she really doesn't believe the first part of her quote and is defending her use of the term by saying, since he isn't gay, it can't be offensive. So does that mean that if he were gay, it would be offensive? That is the impression I'm getting, even though she contradicts that by the first part of the quote.
I'm so confused. And, how can a non-gay person say what is or isn't offensive to a gay person? Can I say what is or isn't offensive to women? To minorities?
"Faggot isn't offensive to gays; it has nothing to do with gays," Coulter said on 'Hannity and Colmes' Monday night. "It's a schoolyard taunt meaning 'wuss,' and unless you're telling me that John Edwards is gay, it was not applied to a gay person."
Perhaps I'm not as intelligent as Ms. Coulter, so I might not understand what she is saying. What it looks like she is saying (to me) is that the term isn't offensive nor does it even apply to the group most of us think it applies to. But, since Edwards isn't gay, it wasn't applied to a gay person.
But, Ms. Coulter, you just said that the term has nothing to do with gays, nor is it offensive to gays, so why add the qualifier..."and unless you're telling me John Edwards is gay, it was not applied to a gay person." So....if John Edwards were gay, it would have been applied to a gay person. But, that wouldn't be a big deal, because (1) the term has nothing to do with gays and (2) even if it did, it isn't offensive to gays. The qualifier makes it appear (again to me) that she really doesn't believe the first part of her quote and is defending her use of the term by saying, since he isn't gay, it can't be offensive. So does that mean that if he were gay, it would be offensive? That is the impression I'm getting, even though she contradicts that by the first part of the quote.
I'm so confused. And, how can a non-gay person say what is or isn't offensive to a gay person? Can I say what is or isn't offensive to women? To minorities?
Re: Walter Reed
Boortz had the same thought here:
While they're cleaning up this mess at Walter Reed ... here's what you need to know. This treatment that was being delivered to our injured soldiers is the future of your health care. This is what you, if you're somewhat young, and most certainly your children have to deal with as the United States moves inexorably toward socialized medicine. Government health care.
...
It's coming ... and it's going to be ugly as hell. The long waits for simple diagnostic tests that have become commonplace in Canada will become the norm here. It may come to the point ... most likely it will come to the point that you will be assigned to a doctor just as your child is assigned to a school. Remember Hillarycare? Under that system if you decided to take your own money and go hire your own doctor outside of the Hillarycare scheme (somewhat like taking your child out of a government school and putting him in a private school) you could be charged with a crime. It may be necessary to adopt that policy again after people discover what a disaster their precious "universal health care" is going to be.
While they're cleaning up this mess at Walter Reed ... here's what you need to know. This treatment that was being delivered to our injured soldiers is the future of your health care. This is what you, if you're somewhat young, and most certainly your children have to deal with as the United States moves inexorably toward socialized medicine. Government health care.
...
It's coming ... and it's going to be ugly as hell. The long waits for simple diagnostic tests that have become commonplace in Canada will become the norm here. It may come to the point ... most likely it will come to the point that you will be assigned to a doctor just as your child is assigned to a school. Remember Hillarycare? Under that system if you decided to take your own money and go hire your own doctor outside of the Hillarycare scheme (somewhat like taking your child out of a government school and putting him in a private school) you could be charged with a crime. It may be necessary to adopt that policy again after people discover what a disaster their precious "universal health care" is going to be.
Walter Reed
Hasn't the Veterans' Administration been a mess for a long time? I've deposed lots of veterans about their medical conditions over the last twenty years and it seems that the nearly universal sentiment is that one avoids the VA if at all possible. Isn't this a prime example of the federal government getting involved with and screwing up medical care, and if so, isn't it an argument against any sort of government-sponsored or administrated health care plan?
Monday, March 05, 2007
RE: Thune neck deep in pork
A reader writes:
Don't always believe what you're reading. Thune didn't sneak anything by anybody behind any closed doors. There were all kinds of hearings. Here's a link. Sure its to a railroad site supporting DM&E, but from there you can link to any number of congressionals or other info that will FACTUALLY set the record straight as to when and where the hearings took place. If you made a campaign contribution to John Thune it was money well spent.
Me: I'm less concerned about the behind closed doors aspect of this than Thune's connection to DM&E. I probably would have served my reader better by being more diligent with my quotes. I don't regret my contribution to Thune, yet...but the pork has got to stop as do the connections.
Don't always believe what you're reading. Thune didn't sneak anything by anybody behind any closed doors. There were all kinds of hearings. Here's a link. Sure its to a railroad site supporting DM&E, but from there you can link to any number of congressionals or other info that will FACTUALLY set the record straight as to when and where the hearings took place. If you made a campaign contribution to John Thune it was money well spent.
Me: I'm less concerned about the behind closed doors aspect of this than Thune's connection to DM&E. I probably would have served my reader better by being more diligent with my quotes. I don't regret my contribution to Thune, yet...but the pork has got to stop as do the connections.
Thune neck deep in pork...
Novak on Thune:
The Federal Railroad Administration handed a rare victory to the American taxpayer last week by denying a questionable $2.33 billion loan application by the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern (DM&E) Railroad. What makes this news of special interest is the paramount role Republican Sen. John Thune of South Dakota played in boosting the loan. Here is a cautionary tale of political life in Washington and how it corrupts.
Legislative changes that made the loan possible were guided through Congress behind closed doors by Thune. But the assessment that DM&E is a poor credit risk was shared by Thune's fellow conservative senators -- Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Jim DeMint of South Carolina -- who took the extraordinary step of advocating rejection of a colleague's pet project. Making matters worse, Thune is a former paid lobbyist for the South Dakota-based railroad and has received political contributions from the company's executives.
And I sent money to this guy?
The Federal Railroad Administration handed a rare victory to the American taxpayer last week by denying a questionable $2.33 billion loan application by the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern (DM&E) Railroad. What makes this news of special interest is the paramount role Republican Sen. John Thune of South Dakota played in boosting the loan. Here is a cautionary tale of political life in Washington and how it corrupts.
Legislative changes that made the loan possible were guided through Congress behind closed doors by Thune. But the assessment that DM&E is a poor credit risk was shared by Thune's fellow conservative senators -- Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Jim DeMint of South Carolina -- who took the extraordinary step of advocating rejection of a colleague's pet project. Making matters worse, Thune is a former paid lobbyist for the South Dakota-based railroad and has received political contributions from the company's executives.
And I sent money to this guy?
Friday, March 02, 2007
Thursday, March 01, 2007
RE: Biggio Cliché Watch
From IMDB with apologies to Costner and Robbins:
Crash Davis: It's time to work on your interviews.
Ebby Calvin LaLoosh: My interviews? What do I gotta do?
Crash Davis: You're gonna have to learn your clichés. You're gonna have to study them, you're gonna have to know them. They're your friends. Write this down: "We gotta play it one day at a time."
Ebby Calvin LaLoosh: Got to play... it's pretty boring.
Crash Davis: 'Course it's boring, that's the point. Write it down.
Crash Davis: It's time to work on your interviews.
Ebby Calvin LaLoosh: My interviews? What do I gotta do?
Crash Davis: You're gonna have to learn your clichés. You're gonna have to study them, you're gonna have to know them. They're your friends. Write this down: "We gotta play it one day at a time."
Ebby Calvin LaLoosh: Got to play... it's pretty boring.
Crash Davis: 'Course it's boring, that's the point. Write it down.
Biggio cliche watch
"Former KPRC (Channel 2) sports director Chris Wragge has switched from sports to news and now anchors midday afternoon newscasts on WCBS in New York. He also will fill in next month on CBS' The Early Show. He e-mails: 'I continue to, if I may quote Craig Biggio, take it day by day and treat every newscast like it's my last.'"
Wraggee refers to Biggio's well-known penchant for giving interviews that are laden with sports cliches. If you're a sportswriter and you want a quote with some insight or originality, Bidge is not your man. It would be interesting if someone went back over the twenty years of Bidge's career and tabulated the cliches. [Note to LoveJ: Great project for your next hiatus!]
I'm second to none in my admiration for Bidge and his talents, but listening to his interviews is painful.
I heard just such an interview on the radio this morning and intended to put it up, but it doesn't look like the Chronic has it. So to demonstrate that the exception proves the rule, here is a profile of Bidge from a few days ago that is largely (and remarkably) cliche-free.
Wraggee refers to Biggio's well-known penchant for giving interviews that are laden with sports cliches. If you're a sportswriter and you want a quote with some insight or originality, Bidge is not your man. It would be interesting if someone went back over the twenty years of Bidge's career and tabulated the cliches. [Note to LoveJ: Great project for your next hiatus!]
I'm second to none in my admiration for Bidge and his talents, but listening to his interviews is painful.
I heard just such an interview on the radio this morning and intended to put it up, but it doesn't look like the Chronic has it. So to demonstrate that the exception proves the rule, here is a profile of Bidge from a few days ago that is largely (and remarkably) cliche-free.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Re: Leaving the Scene of the Crime
I really did "scoot" away from the Miata. Didn't even think anything wrong about it...until I actually started to think.
Bart Whitaker
is on trial. Dad was the first witness for the prosecution. Description of creepy message Whitaker left on a gaming site lamenting the death of his brother.
Monday, February 26, 2007
RE: I guess it was worth it
Scooter - have you seen the "Children of Men" movie? C and I went to see it about a month ago, after reading all the hype and glowing reviews. I didn't see what the fuss was all about. It was OK, but I was more interested in why the world was as it was, why children weren't being born. The movie didn't address any of that....only that it was just that way and had been for many years. Does the book, to your knowledge, address these subjects?
Re: 2008 Election
I agree with Michael at the moment that Rudy is the current hands down favorite on the Republican side. Romney has a long way to go but I think he can make a run, even if just to secure the number two spot. The big advantage over sitting senators? Execs have to do.
Senators are non-executives. Their job is to dicker, not decide. Accordingly, there is no sound any Senator loves more than his or her own voice.
The exception in this election is that there is one sitting Senator in the running with a great deal of executive experience...Hillary. She may not have been the one signing the bills or (formally) issuing orders, but she was there right next to the Arkanasas Chief Exec and the US Chief Exec for what was it..20 years? Was it 12 as gov'nuh and then, of course, the 8 as Prez? That's a lot of experience.
Senators are non-executives. Their job is to dicker, not decide. Accordingly, there is no sound any Senator loves more than his or her own voice.
The exception in this election is that there is one sitting Senator in the running with a great deal of executive experience...Hillary. She may not have been the one signing the bills or (formally) issuing orders, but she was there right next to the Arkanasas Chief Exec and the US Chief Exec for what was it..20 years? Was it 12 as gov'nuh and then, of course, the 8 as Prez? That's a lot of experience.
Re: LJ cameo
I can only attribute it to 1 of 2 things:
1) She refers to herself as a "liberal Democrat" and while I'm not a "liberal", I am a Democrat and we have a telepathic connection, thus she found SSJ and commented, or (and I think this is more likely)
2) she googled "love johnson" and since I am #1 on Google, she found SSJ.
1) She refers to herself as a "liberal Democrat" and while I'm not a "liberal", I am a Democrat and we have a telepathic connection, thus she found SSJ and commented, or (and I think this is more likely)
2) she googled "love johnson" and since I am #1 on Google, she found SSJ.
I guess it was worth it...
On Saturday I went to lunch at a newly opened Hyde Park Grill in South Austin (nowhere near Hyde Park, by the way). I pulled into a parking spot next to a new black Mazda Miata convertible with the top down. I carefully opened my door until it caught in that first groove so I wouldn’t ding him. If I’d opened the door to that last groove I would’ve dinged him for sure. I reached over to grab PD James’ Children of Men and my reading glasses when a thirty-five miles per hour gust caught my door. Ugh. It wasn’t a little ding. It was five inches in diameter and three quarters of an inch deep, high on the passenger door since my truck (even my little truck) rides so much higher than the Miata.
First reaction? You know d--n well what was my first reaction. I started the truck and moved it three rows over and went into the restaurant. I did everything right. I’m always careful. I didn’t do the slamming, the wind did.
Second reaction? Nausea. I asked the waiter for a pen, wrote a note on my business card (see World's Ugliest Business Card below) and lodged it in the driver’s seat.
He just called to thank me. Can't wait to get that bill.
First reaction? You know d--n well what was my first reaction. I started the truck and moved it three rows over and went into the restaurant. I did everything right. I’m always careful. I didn’t do the slamming, the wind did.
Second reaction? Nausea. I asked the waiter for a pen, wrote a note on my business card (see World's Ugliest Business Card below) and lodged it in the driver’s seat.
He just called to thank me. Can't wait to get that bill.
Re: Sitting Senator's Direct Move to Oval Office
Only two, JFK as you mentioned and, everyone's favorite....Warren G. Harding.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Friday, February 23, 2007
2008 Election
Yes, I'm back. For how long and how often will I post, I can't say. Just enjoy me while you can...
So, I hate to even bring this up because the election cycle/coverage/discussion is WAY too long and it pains me to be even a small part of that. But as I was driving to work this morning, listening to a right-wing (of course) talk show host giddy over the "Clinton-Obama" feud, it got me to thinking about this....
Who was the last "sitting" Senator elected President? If memory serves, it was JFK. And before him...? I have no idea and I don't want to find the answer on the internet. Guesses?
I've read/heard various discourses on why Senators traditionally do not get elected to the highest office, yet they seem to be the majority of the candidates. And in looking ahead to 2008, I would think that most pundits would agree that as of today, the winner will come from either Clinton, Obama or McCain. History (and who can argue against that), however tells us that it will NOT be a "sitting" Senator. So among those who have declared who are not Senators, who would that front-runner be? I'm glad to be able to say that while I know there are more than 3 declared candidates, I can only name 4 (the 4th is John Edwards). So, my fellow SSJ's, who is the non-Senator front-runner? I'm sure you 2 have been keeping up with this....
So, I hate to even bring this up because the election cycle/coverage/discussion is WAY too long and it pains me to be even a small part of that. But as I was driving to work this morning, listening to a right-wing (of course) talk show host giddy over the "Clinton-Obama" feud, it got me to thinking about this....
Who was the last "sitting" Senator elected President? If memory serves, it was JFK. And before him...? I have no idea and I don't want to find the answer on the internet. Guesses?
I've read/heard various discourses on why Senators traditionally do not get elected to the highest office, yet they seem to be the majority of the candidates. And in looking ahead to 2008, I would think that most pundits would agree that as of today, the winner will come from either Clinton, Obama or McCain. History (and who can argue against that), however tells us that it will NOT be a "sitting" Senator. So among those who have declared who are not Senators, who would that front-runner be? I'm glad to be able to say that while I know there are more than 3 declared candidates, I can only name 4 (the 4th is John Edwards). So, my fellow SSJ's, who is the non-Senator front-runner? I'm sure you 2 have been keeping up with this....
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
World's Ugliest Business Card
...is what I have in my wallet as of today.
The only good thing about it is that the accent color it has gone from aTm maroon to blue.
Print is too small.
Print is too light.
Worst aspect: the "notes" section on the back. As if I didn't know I could write notes on the back, but at least now I have half the space.
The only other only good thing is that they didn't make me put my picture on it.
The only good thing about it is that the accent color it has gone from aTm maroon to blue.
Print is too small.
Print is too light.
Worst aspect: the "notes" section on the back. As if I didn't know I could write notes on the back, but at least now I have half the space.
The only other only good thing is that they didn't make me put my picture on it.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Pardon my schadenfreude: Airbus a Disaster
From American Thinker via Real Clear Politics:
Yesterday, Airbus humiliated itself before the world civil aviation community. Already suffering a massive loss of credibility due to the repeated delivery delays for the A 380 super jumbo, the company was to have unveiled its recovery plan, dubbed Power8, consisting of restructuring and cost saving measures intended to save $2.8 billion per year by 2010.
Instead of triumphantly presenting Power8 to the world, the company admitted it could not come to an internal agreement on cost-saving measures, and word leaked out of heated arguments among the members of its board of directors. So much for boldly moving forward to solve its many problems. Airline customers cannot be comforted by the company's continued internal squabbling, the principal factor said to be at the root of the 380's repeated delivery delays. [emph. mine]
Yesterday, Airbus humiliated itself before the world civil aviation community. Already suffering a massive loss of credibility due to the repeated delivery delays for the A 380 super jumbo, the company was to have unveiled its recovery plan, dubbed Power8, consisting of restructuring and cost saving measures intended to save $2.8 billion per year by 2010.
Instead of triumphantly presenting Power8 to the world, the company admitted it could not come to an internal agreement on cost-saving measures, and word leaked out of heated arguments among the members of its board of directors. So much for boldly moving forward to solve its many problems. Airline customers cannot be comforted by the company's continued internal squabbling, the principal factor said to be at the root of the 380's repeated delivery delays. [emph. mine]
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Victor Davis Hanson
I had the distinct pleasure of hearing one of my favorite authors speak tonight at a guest lecture sponsored by the University of Texas Liberal Arts College Western Civilization Program. Of course, that was Dr. Victor Davis Hanson.
The lecture and Q & A were taped for podcast and as soon as I find out where, I'll post a link.
The subject was "The Ancient Greeks & Western Civilization: Then and Now." Dr. Hanson was very engaging (much more so than on the radio). He certainly was unafraid of sticking his neck out in what he clearly believed could be a somewhat hostile environment. When asked about what could be done about the "clash of civilizations," he said, "I suppose I'm the only person in the room who believes the only solution is to bring transparent, representative government to the Middle East." I paraphrase but that was the gist...the Bush Doctrine or at least part of it.
I'm not sure I heard anything new in the lecture (except for his sense of humor) that I hadn't already read in his columns and books. He touched on Xerxes and Cortes and Alexander and Socrates and Phillip and Penelope. He discussed property rights and freedom of speech. Capitalism, Communism, Fascism, Democracies, Oligarchies, Theocracies all made the discussion. Heck, even female circumcision found its way in. Again, nothing he's not written about before.
In many ways the stereotypical professor. Balding and bespectacled, he was disheveled and his coat was missing a button. The tan (from his farming?) was a bit out of place.
I'm glad I didn't miss a minute.
The lecture and Q & A were taped for podcast and as soon as I find out where, I'll post a link.
The subject was "The Ancient Greeks & Western Civilization: Then and Now." Dr. Hanson was very engaging (much more so than on the radio). He certainly was unafraid of sticking his neck out in what he clearly believed could be a somewhat hostile environment. When asked about what could be done about the "clash of civilizations," he said, "I suppose I'm the only person in the room who believes the only solution is to bring transparent, representative government to the Middle East." I paraphrase but that was the gist...the Bush Doctrine or at least part of it.
I'm not sure I heard anything new in the lecture (except for his sense of humor) that I hadn't already read in his columns and books. He touched on Xerxes and Cortes and Alexander and Socrates and Phillip and Penelope. He discussed property rights and freedom of speech. Capitalism, Communism, Fascism, Democracies, Oligarchies, Theocracies all made the discussion. Heck, even female circumcision found its way in. Again, nothing he's not written about before.
In many ways the stereotypical professor. Balding and bespectacled, he was disheveled and his coat was missing a button. The tan (from his farming?) was a bit out of place.
I'm glad I didn't miss a minute.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
My only Anna Nicole Smith post...ever.
I’ve been trying to figure out why I had any reaction at all the recent death of Anna Nicole Smith. Because she was originally from nearby Mexia? Maybe that had a tiny part in it. Because she married the rich, old guy in Houston with almost no perceptible phoniness...everyone involved knew what was going on and it seemed to make him happy? A bit.
But Larry Miller really seemed to capture it. As tragic and silly and sad as her life has been, there was something likable about her. Miller, from the Daily Standard (Weekly Standard’s site):
I DID the Tonight Show back in '93 or '94, and she was on it. Leno came in before and said, "She's a nice girl. See you out there." And she was. I've never had the slightest problem digging the different gifts people bring to show business and beauty is a gift as much as anything else. Anyway, it was a good show. And, frankly, sitting next to her wasn't exactly a chore.
But that's not the story. The story happened just a month or two later.
My wife and I were invited out to dinner with two friends of ours, other writers. We were newly married and they took us to one of the fanciest places in town. There were a couple of well-know folks there, but the place was so swank that no one even noticed. Then, very suddenly, the room got quiet. Hushed, in fact. My back was to the door, and my wife said, "Oh, wow . . ." and tapped me, and I turned, and, of course, you know who came in and stopped the presses.
Worth reading the whole thing. Great story about her date at the restaurant.
But Larry Miller really seemed to capture it. As tragic and silly and sad as her life has been, there was something likable about her. Miller, from the Daily Standard (Weekly Standard’s site):
I DID the Tonight Show back in '93 or '94, and she was on it. Leno came in before and said, "She's a nice girl. See you out there." And she was. I've never had the slightest problem digging the different gifts people bring to show business and beauty is a gift as much as anything else. Anyway, it was a good show. And, frankly, sitting next to her wasn't exactly a chore.
But that's not the story. The story happened just a month or two later.
My wife and I were invited out to dinner with two friends of ours, other writers. We were newly married and they took us to one of the fanciest places in town. There were a couple of well-know folks there, but the place was so swank that no one even noticed. Then, very suddenly, the room got quiet. Hushed, in fact. My back was to the door, and my wife said, "Oh, wow . . ." and tapped me, and I turned, and, of course, you know who came in and stopped the presses.
Worth reading the whole thing. Great story about her date at the restaurant.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
More on Recycling
Hat tip to Michael for a derivative hat tip to LGF further derivative hat tip to youtube for this Penn and Teller slam on recycling. The best point is that made about aluminum cans...profit makes the whole deal work.
Best point: aluminum recycling works. Why? Because you can make a buck doing it. No, that's not really right...better to say that the fact that you can actually make a buck doing it is evidence that it consumes less resources than it costs. Better Allocation of Resources than an $8B annual subsidy. If this were going to Exxon/Mobil, the screams would deafen us.
D--n Capitalists get it right again!
Best point: aluminum recycling works. Why? Because you can make a buck doing it. No, that's not really right...better to say that the fact that you can actually make a buck doing it is evidence that it consumes less resources than it costs. Better Allocation of Resources than an $8B annual subsidy. If this were going to Exxon/Mobil, the screams would deafen us.
D--n Capitalists get it right again!
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
P.J. O'Rourke
You've seen her on Youtube! From Larry Kudlow on today's Corner:
It's worth noting that Hillary Clinton doesn't want corporations to pay any taxes at all-not a single penny. Hillary plans on confiscating their profits altogether! (In our CNBC interview Friday night, P.J. O'Rourke referred to Mrs. Clinton as "Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit.")
It's worth noting that Hillary Clinton doesn't want corporations to pay any taxes at all-not a single penny. Hillary plans on confiscating their profits altogether! (In our CNBC interview Friday night, P.J. O'Rourke referred to Mrs. Clinton as "Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit.")
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
UT and Google Partner Up
From my Alma Mater's press release:
The University of Texas at Austin has become the newest partner in a broad book digitization project with Google.
The partnership between the University of Texas Libraries and Google is part of the Google Books Library Project, a project started in December 2004, initially to digitize books drawn from the libraries of the University of Michigan, Harvard University, Stanford University, Oxford University and the New York Public Library.
In the course of the multi-year project, Google will digitize at least one million volumes from the University of Texas Libraries’ collections....
The University of Texas at Austin has become the newest partner in a broad book digitization project with Google.
The partnership between the University of Texas Libraries and Google is part of the Google Books Library Project, a project started in December 2004, initially to digitize books drawn from the libraries of the University of Michigan, Harvard University, Stanford University, Oxford University and the New York Public Library.
In the course of the multi-year project, Google will digitize at least one million volumes from the University of Texas Libraries’ collections....
Monday, January 29, 2007
Reagan's Free Speech Legacy
Was just listening to a podcast of Michael Medved on the effort to bring back the "fairness doctrine." I'm sure it's not an original thought, but Reagan's greatest legacy, after the ruination of Communism, may have been the removal of the "fairness doctrine." I loved the battering of the air traffic controller's union, but what a legacy that was.
Political speech has never been freer than today and in spite of the current state of the Right's political position, I would never want it to change. If we regulate the radio and FoxNews, which is what they are really after here, how long before venues like this or any of those listed on the right side of this webpage are similarly regulated?
Let the marketplace of ideas work itself out. Even Air America found additional funding, even if Mr. Franken is leaving to test the waters in Minnesota. What does Congressman Hinchey fear?
Political speech has never been freer than today and in spite of the current state of the Right's political position, I would never want it to change. If we regulate the radio and FoxNews, which is what they are really after here, how long before venues like this or any of those listed on the right side of this webpage are similarly regulated?
Let the marketplace of ideas work itself out. Even Air America found additional funding, even if Mr. Franken is leaving to test the waters in Minnesota. What does Congressman Hinchey fear?
MORE BLACK HELICOPTERS...
Ok, I’m not sold on the whole North American Union thing (not even close) and cannot abide the New World Order nutters, but this does bug me a bit.
It does appear that an affiliate of Macquarie did acquire a bunch of those Texas and Oklahoma newspapers. It also appears that a Macquarie entity is involved with Cintra, the entity involved in the Trans-Texas toll road/corridor. It just smells bad. What if Wal-Mart were to buy all the entities owning publications spewing bile at them? I’d hate that, too. The fact that they are foreign entities makes it all the more uncomfortable.
In light of Kelo, I'm a bit concerned about where all this is going. 500,00 acres?
The only article I could find today is at WND. Read if you like but watch out for those helicopters.
It does appear that an affiliate of Macquarie did acquire a bunch of those Texas and Oklahoma newspapers. It also appears that a Macquarie entity is involved with Cintra, the entity involved in the Trans-Texas toll road/corridor. It just smells bad. What if Wal-Mart were to buy all the entities owning publications spewing bile at them? I’d hate that, too. The fact that they are foreign entities makes it all the more uncomfortable.
In light of Kelo, I'm a bit concerned about where all this is going. 500,00 acres?
The only article I could find today is at WND. Read if you like but watch out for those helicopters.
More on the Unnamed Health Insurance Issue
Jeff Jacoby makes a good start on the teaching needed on the subject in today’s JWR. As in education, we need to let the market back in to the world of medicine. I know it sounds simplistic, but it works every where else. Jacoby mentions the WWII point I made last week but the more interesting discussion involve the common thought that because medicine has become so high tech that the costs must soar:
Why is health insurance so expensive? .... The revolution in cardiac care, the myriad new drugs, the invention of CAT scanners and MRIs, the ability to transplant organs — these and so many other lifesaving medical miracles didn't come cheap. It stands to reason that insurance covering the cost of such miracles doesn't come cheap either.
But wait — [why does] it stand to reason? Information technology has exploded in recent decades too, yet computers have never been as affordable as they are now. Agriculture is far more advanced, and the quality and variety of food available to consumers far greater, than they were 50 years ago, yet the real cost of food has plummeted. The price of a primitive color television in 1954 was equal to three months' wages for an average American worker; today that worker gets a sparkling picture on a 25-inch screen for just three days of work.
"Why is it," asks David Gratzer, a physician and scholar at the Manhattan Institute, "that in every other field where enormous technological strides have been made, total costs have fallen over time, but in health care they have increased?" The answer, he writes in The Cure, a lively and engrossing new book on the American health care mess, is simple: Health care costs so much because most of us pay so little for it. And we pay so little — out-of-pocket expenses amount to just 14 cents of every health dollar spent in this country — because a third party nearly always picks up the tab. For most working Americans, that third party is an insurance company paid by their employers.....
Why does it matter whether Americans pay for medical care directly or let insurers cover their bills? Because thrift and price awareness usually go out the window when we're spending other people's money. Under the present setup, most Americans have little incentive to be economical consumers of health care. As a result, health care expenditures — and insurance premiums — have been racing ahead at three and four times the rate of inflation.
Why is health insurance so expensive? .... The revolution in cardiac care, the myriad new drugs, the invention of CAT scanners and MRIs, the ability to transplant organs — these and so many other lifesaving medical miracles didn't come cheap. It stands to reason that insurance covering the cost of such miracles doesn't come cheap either.
But wait — [why does] it stand to reason? Information technology has exploded in recent decades too, yet computers have never been as affordable as they are now. Agriculture is far more advanced, and the quality and variety of food available to consumers far greater, than they were 50 years ago, yet the real cost of food has plummeted. The price of a primitive color television in 1954 was equal to three months' wages for an average American worker; today that worker gets a sparkling picture on a 25-inch screen for just three days of work.
"Why is it," asks David Gratzer, a physician and scholar at the Manhattan Institute, "that in every other field where enormous technological strides have been made, total costs have fallen over time, but in health care they have increased?" The answer, he writes in The Cure, a lively and engrossing new book on the American health care mess, is simple: Health care costs so much because most of us pay so little for it. And we pay so little — out-of-pocket expenses amount to just 14 cents of every health dollar spent in this country — because a third party nearly always picks up the tab. For most working Americans, that third party is an insurance company paid by their employers.....
Why does it matter whether Americans pay for medical care directly or let insurers cover their bills? Because thrift and price awareness usually go out the window when we're spending other people's money. Under the present setup, most Americans have little incentive to be economical consumers of health care. As a result, health care expenditures — and insurance premiums — have been racing ahead at three and four times the rate of inflation.
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Scooter starting to see black helicopters?
I'm starting to get a bad feeling about the toll roads. An Aussie company partners with the Spanish company (Citra [sp?] building the first of the toll roads) and then the Aussie company buys twenty Texas newspapers along the toll road corridor. Of course, these were papers editorializing against the the toll roads.
I've got to look for some independent articles/sources rather than the scary source from which I learned this; but if true, it's ugly.
I've got to look for some independent articles/sources rather than the scary source from which I learned this; but if true, it's ugly.
Friday, January 26, 2007
Tried to move SSG to the new format....
but got a message that only my scooterblog could be moved. Said the original creator had to do the moving...
Moving scooterblog was easy...just had to set up a google account.
Moving scooterblog was easy...just had to set up a google account.
More on the Health Insurance Plan with No Name (can you hear the crickets chirping?)
GWB makes the proposal and it’s DOA. But per Mike Franc at HumanEvents:
To [Dick] Armey [(R.-Tex.)] and [Pete] Stark [(D.-Calif.)]-, the solution [in 1999] was obvious: Use the tax code to help increase [health insurance] coverage. "We think Congress should create a new refundable tax credit to enable all Americans to buy decent health coverage." Other liberals agreed. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.), and Reps. Barney Frank (D.-Mass.) and Jim McDermott (D.-Wash.) sponsored legislation creating tax credits or deductions for individuals to purchase health coverage.
...
Stark refused to even hold hearings on it in the health subcommittee he chairs, saying the plan was "designed for disaster." Rep. Charles Rangel (D.-N.Y.), dismissed it as "a dangerous policy that … shifts cost and risk from employers to employees."
This knee-jerk opposition prompted some journalists to scold Democrats. The Post’s Steve Pearlstein noted that the plan "actually involves raising taxes on the rich and lavishly insured and giving the money to the working poor and the uninsured...."
To [Dick] Armey [(R.-Tex.)] and [Pete] Stark [(D.-Calif.)]-, the solution [in 1999] was obvious: Use the tax code to help increase [health insurance] coverage. "We think Congress should create a new refundable tax credit to enable all Americans to buy decent health coverage." Other liberals agreed. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.), and Reps. Barney Frank (D.-Mass.) and Jim McDermott (D.-Wash.) sponsored legislation creating tax credits or deductions for individuals to purchase health coverage.
...
Stark refused to even hold hearings on it in the health subcommittee he chairs, saying the plan was "designed for disaster." Rep. Charles Rangel (D.-N.Y.), dismissed it as "a dangerous policy that … shifts cost and risk from employers to employees."
This knee-jerk opposition prompted some journalists to scold Democrats. The Post’s Steve Pearlstein noted that the plan "actually involves raising taxes on the rich and lavishly insured and giving the money to the working poor and the uninsured...."
Simple Health Insurance Plan needs better explanation (Does it even have a Name yet?)
How many people know that employer funded health insurance was the market’s not so great response to FDR’s wage freeze (itself obviously grossly anti-market)? Amity Schlaes has a pretty good article today at bloomberg.com explaining how this would work but this project is going to take a LOT of selling. I mentioned it to a medical technician about to give me an MRI a year and a half ago and he was dumbfounded, having assumed that this was the way things HAVE ALWAYS BEEN DONE.
Ms. Schlaes:
Back in the 1930s, Congress and President Franklin Roosevelt created Social Security over corporate protests. A national system of payment for health care seemed next. (In 1945 Harry Truman would go around talking about "the right to adequate medical care.'')
Terrified employer raced to preempt FDR and Truman by proving they could handle health themselves. They contracted with Blue Cross and Blue Shield to provide benefits for employee pools. The tax treatment came last -- in fact no one knew for a while whether companies really could claim the insurance deduction.
But World War II made the new arrangement seem doubly logical. Congress imposed an "excess'' profits tax of as much as 90 percent and froze wages. Paying for health insurance was a way to reduce tax bills and keep workers, who were suddenly scarce. Unions were pleased. By 1945, 32 million Americans were in health-insurance programs, many sponsored by companies, up from 12 million to 13 million just five years before.
Bush has been awful at marketing his domestic agenda except for the early tax breaks, No Child Left Behind (and that was as much Kennedy’s doing as the POTU) and Medicare Part whatever.
I fear that she’s right and that these reforms will only begin to take root now while we most scratch our heads and try to think things through. For those of us who have decent employer provided coverage, we will be hard-pressed to allow any monkeying with it.
She concludes:
But if the Democratic leadership is already rejecting the Bush idea, is it still worth thinking about? The answer is yes. Parties come up with some of their best ideas when they are down -- ideas that tend to become law five or 10 years later.
Several other Bush proposals have been fakes -- programs that called themselves free market but actually extend the role of government, such as the Medicare Part D prescription-drug plan.
The standard-deduction plan, by contrast, truly is free market and anti-Washington. Though it may have come at the wrong time, this increase is one all can endorse -- even the tax warriors.
This is going to be a hard but necessary sell. First they need a great acronym.
Ms. Schlaes:
Back in the 1930s, Congress and President Franklin Roosevelt created Social Security over corporate protests. A national system of payment for health care seemed next. (In 1945 Harry Truman would go around talking about "the right to adequate medical care.'')
Terrified employer raced to preempt FDR and Truman by proving they could handle health themselves. They contracted with Blue Cross and Blue Shield to provide benefits for employee pools. The tax treatment came last -- in fact no one knew for a while whether companies really could claim the insurance deduction.
But World War II made the new arrangement seem doubly logical. Congress imposed an "excess'' profits tax of as much as 90 percent and froze wages. Paying for health insurance was a way to reduce tax bills and keep workers, who were suddenly scarce. Unions were pleased. By 1945, 32 million Americans were in health-insurance programs, many sponsored by companies, up from 12 million to 13 million just five years before.
Bush has been awful at marketing his domestic agenda except for the early tax breaks, No Child Left Behind (and that was as much Kennedy’s doing as the POTU) and Medicare Part whatever.
I fear that she’s right and that these reforms will only begin to take root now while we most scratch our heads and try to think things through. For those of us who have decent employer provided coverage, we will be hard-pressed to allow any monkeying with it.
She concludes:
But if the Democratic leadership is already rejecting the Bush idea, is it still worth thinking about? The answer is yes. Parties come up with some of their best ideas when they are down -- ideas that tend to become law five or 10 years later.
Several other Bush proposals have been fakes -- programs that called themselves free market but actually extend the role of government, such as the Medicare Part D prescription-drug plan.
The standard-deduction plan, by contrast, truly is free market and anti-Washington. Though it may have come at the wrong time, this increase is one all can endorse -- even the tax warriors.
This is going to be a hard but necessary sell. First they need a great acronym.
Krauthammer Joins Scooter's Chorus on Ethanol
In today's JWR, Dr. K echoes my earlier post and Robert Samuelson's column from earlier this week:
This is nonsense. As my colleague Robert J. Samuelson demonstrated this week, biofuels will barely keep up with the increase in gasoline demand over time. They are a huge government bet with goals and mandates and subsidies that will not cure our oil dependence or even make a significant dent in it.
...
So much easier to say ethanol. That it will do farcically little is beside the point. Our debates about oil consumption, energy dependence and global warming are not meant to be serious. They are meant for show.
This is nonsense. As my colleague Robert J. Samuelson demonstrated this week, biofuels will barely keep up with the increase in gasoline demand over time. They are a huge government bet with goals and mandates and subsidies that will not cure our oil dependence or even make a significant dent in it.
...
So much easier to say ethanol. That it will do farcically little is beside the point. Our debates about oil consumption, energy dependence and global warming are not meant to be serious. They are meant for show.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Friday, January 19, 2007
Embracing the Suck
The best movie example I’ve ever seen of that concept is Tom Berenger’s character in Oliver Stone’s Platoon "encouraging" a wounded soldier to, "Shut up and Take the Pain!"
Obama’s conversion from Islam
If Obama converted to United Church Christ from Islam, isn’t that punishable by death in most of the Muslim world? Especially given that the UCC is way out in front of the Episcopal Church on most issues that would particularly upset a more radical Wahhabi type?
Thursday, January 18, 2007
California Citrus Damage exacerbated by EPA
In today's TCSDaily's article by Dr. Henry I. Miller entitled "Feds Freeze Out Antidote, Costing Billions", we see once again why the scariest words in the US remain, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
A couple of paragraphs:
In the early 1980's scientists at the University of California and in industry devised a new approach to limiting frost damage. They knew that a harmless bacterium which normally lives on many plants contains an "ice nucleation" protein that promotes frost damage. Therefore, they sought to produce a variant of the bacterium that lacked the ice-nucleation protein, reasoning that spraying this variant bacterium (dubbed "ice-minus") on plants might prevent frost damage by displacing the common, ice-promoting kind. Using very precise biotechnology techniques called "gene splicing," the researchers removed the gene for the ice nucleation protein and planned field tests with ice-minus bacteria.
Then the government stepped in, and that was the beginning of the end.
What else do you need to know? (But read the whole thing if only for the science.)
A couple of paragraphs:
In the early 1980's scientists at the University of California and in industry devised a new approach to limiting frost damage. They knew that a harmless bacterium which normally lives on many plants contains an "ice nucleation" protein that promotes frost damage. Therefore, they sought to produce a variant of the bacterium that lacked the ice-nucleation protein, reasoning that spraying this variant bacterium (dubbed "ice-minus") on plants might prevent frost damage by displacing the common, ice-promoting kind. Using very precise biotechnology techniques called "gene splicing," the researchers removed the gene for the ice nucleation protein and planned field tests with ice-minus bacteria.
Then the government stepped in, and that was the beginning of the end.
What else do you need to know? (But read the whole thing if only for the science.)
Monday, January 15, 2007
The new F-35 from Lockheed lets the fighter pilot be more fighter than pilot
This is very cool. From today's NRO:
On Wednesday afternoon, a few hours after testing the F-35, Beesley explained why the new nine-G, Mach 1.6 (just over 1,200 miles per hour) fighter is unlike anything ever flown.
"I’ve never felt any airplane that had better performance coming off the ground," Beesley tells National Review Online. "I had a very good idea of how I would climb out, but [because the single Pratt and Whitney F135 engine generates more thrust than any fighter engine ever built] I had to keep pulling the nose up. I was thinking, ‘this is interesting.’"
MORE FIGHTING THAN FLYING
In September, I talked with with Marine Lt. Col. Arthur "Turbo" Tomassetti. Tomassetti, who had flown the X-35 (the stripped-down experimental version of what would evolve into the current F-35) explained that, "Mission stuff — killing things and blowing things up — should be what is most challenging. You don’t need to complicate a pilot’s life by making the hardest part of his combat mission getting back aboard ship."
On Wednesday afternoon, a few hours after testing the F-35, Beesley explained why the new nine-G, Mach 1.6 (just over 1,200 miles per hour) fighter is unlike anything ever flown.
"I’ve never felt any airplane that had better performance coming off the ground," Beesley tells National Review Online. "I had a very good idea of how I would climb out, but [because the single Pratt and Whitney F135 engine generates more thrust than any fighter engine ever built] I had to keep pulling the nose up. I was thinking, ‘this is interesting.’"
MORE FIGHTING THAN FLYING
In September, I talked with with Marine Lt. Col. Arthur "Turbo" Tomassetti. Tomassetti, who had flown the X-35 (the stripped-down experimental version of what would evolve into the current F-35) explained that, "Mission stuff — killing things and blowing things up — should be what is most challenging. You don’t need to complicate a pilot’s life by making the hardest part of his combat mission getting back aboard ship."
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Firetrucks disturb Scooter's sleep....
From News8Austin:
A million-dollar new home under construction in Tarrytown was destroyed by fire early Thursday morning.
LOUD SIRENS for an hour straight...dogs in the 'hood (in honor of our new subtitle) went crazy.
A million-dollar new home under construction in Tarrytown was destroyed by fire early Thursday morning.
LOUD SIRENS for an hour straight...dogs in the 'hood (in honor of our new subtitle) went crazy.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Paul Greenberg
One of the things about the Internet, generally, and Jewish World Review, specifically, for which I’ll always be grateful: they introduced me to Pulitzer Prize winner for editorial writing, the editorial page editor of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Paul Greenberg.
Excerpts from today’s column:
Dear Ozark Correspondent,
It was wholly a pleasure to hear the newest euphemism in your part of the state for the now politically incorrect term, hillbilly: Ozark-American.
...
So are hillbillies the same as rednecks? Those categories may overlap, but they're certainly not the same. You gotta hand it to rednecks; they don't care who calls 'em rednecks. Indeed, the true redneck takes pride in the name, and it does beat all heck out of the more scholastic classification, Southern Yeomanry.
....
The least appealing may be the professional Southerner, aka the More Southern Than Thou variety. The species can often be found up North or on the fringes of the Old Confederacy. It seems that those most removed from the center of any ethnic group may be most insecure in their identity and most bent on exaggerating it. [Me: the professional Texan is so annoying that Bud Light dedicated a "Real Men of Genius" commercial to Mr. Way Too Proud of Texas Guy.] The way Austrians make the most fanatic German nationalists. Or American Jews the most fervent Zionists.
One of the best, funniest and warmest columists in America.
Excerpts from today’s column:
Dear Ozark Correspondent,
It was wholly a pleasure to hear the newest euphemism in your part of the state for the now politically incorrect term, hillbilly: Ozark-American.
...
So are hillbillies the same as rednecks? Those categories may overlap, but they're certainly not the same. You gotta hand it to rednecks; they don't care who calls 'em rednecks. Indeed, the true redneck takes pride in the name, and it does beat all heck out of the more scholastic classification, Southern Yeomanry.
....
The least appealing may be the professional Southerner, aka the More Southern Than Thou variety. The species can often be found up North or on the fringes of the Old Confederacy. It seems that those most removed from the center of any ethnic group may be most insecure in their identity and most bent on exaggerating it. [Me: the professional Texan is so annoying that Bud Light dedicated a "Real Men of Genius" commercial to Mr. Way Too Proud of Texas Guy.] The way Austrians make the most fanatic German nationalists. Or American Jews the most fervent Zionists.
One of the best, funniest and warmest columists in America.
My Morning Chill
From Mark Steyn at National Review:
There are ten million people in Moscow. Do you know how many of them are Muslim? Two and a half million. Or about a quarter of the population. The ethnic Russians are older; the Muslims are younger. The ethnic Russians are already in net population decline; the Muslim population in the country has increased by 40% in the last 15 years. Seven out of ten Russian pregnancies (according to some surveys) are aborted; in some Muslim communities, the fertility rate is ten babies per woman. Russian men have record rates of heart disease, liver disease, drug addiction and Aids; Muslims are the only guys in the country who aren’t face down in the vodka.
Faced with these trends, most experts extrapolate: thus, it’s generally accepted that by mid-century the Russian Federation will be majority Muslim. But you don’t really need to extrapolate when the future’s already checking in at reception. The Toronto Star (which is Canada’s biggest-selling newspaper and impeccably liberal) recently noted that by 2015 Muslims will make up a majority of Russia’s army.
More scary stuff....
There are ten million people in Moscow. Do you know how many of them are Muslim? Two and a half million. Or about a quarter of the population. The ethnic Russians are older; the Muslims are younger. The ethnic Russians are already in net population decline; the Muslim population in the country has increased by 40% in the last 15 years. Seven out of ten Russian pregnancies (according to some surveys) are aborted; in some Muslim communities, the fertility rate is ten babies per woman. Russian men have record rates of heart disease, liver disease, drug addiction and Aids; Muslims are the only guys in the country who aren’t face down in the vodka.
Faced with these trends, most experts extrapolate: thus, it’s generally accepted that by mid-century the Russian Federation will be majority Muslim. But you don’t really need to extrapolate when the future’s already checking in at reception. The Toronto Star (which is Canada’s biggest-selling newspaper and impeccably liberal) recently noted that by 2015 Muslims will make up a majority of Russia’s army.
More scary stuff....
Monday, January 08, 2007
Avian Flu or the commencement of the the 80th Texas Legislature???
KLBJ reports:
They've closed off most of Congress Avenue for the morning downtown -- along with all side streets between Colorado and Brazos streets. That's after dozens of birds were found dead in the area.
They've closed off most of Congress Avenue for the morning downtown -- along with all side streets between Colorado and Brazos streets. That's after dozens of birds were found dead in the area.
It’s not quite the same as the “recycling” scam, but it’s close...
This is just nuts and another example of (i) good intentions driving policy without examining the bad results and (ii) what happens when the market is influenced by subsidies rather than, well, the market.
From John Fund’s column at WSJ’s opinion website:
As for corn-based ethanol, Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute calls the current mania to subsidize it "the closest thing to a state religion America has." Corn farmers have done a good job of disguising the fact that it still takes more than a gallon of fossil fuel — 29% more is the best estimate — to make a gallon of ethanol. [emph added] In addition, various mandates requiring the use of ethanol significantly increased gasoline prices last summer and led to spot shortages because ethanol can't be carried through pipelines and requires special blending plants. James Glassman, an economist with J.P. Morgan Chase, notes that expensive ethanol was a big factor in the sticker shock consumers encountered at the pump this summer. "We'd probably have retail gasoline prices between $2.30 and $2.40 a gallon if not for ethanol," he told The Wall Street Journal last June, when pump prices were topping $3 a gallon.
So, it takes a almost 1.3 gallons of gasoline or oil or the equivalent of natural gas or coal to create a gallon of ethanol. And not only that, I paid an extra $0.50 per gallon of gasoline this summer because of it.
Terrific policy. Right up there with recycling.
From John Fund’s column at WSJ’s opinion website:
As for corn-based ethanol, Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute calls the current mania to subsidize it "the closest thing to a state religion America has." Corn farmers have done a good job of disguising the fact that it still takes more than a gallon of fossil fuel — 29% more is the best estimate — to make a gallon of ethanol. [emph added] In addition, various mandates requiring the use of ethanol significantly increased gasoline prices last summer and led to spot shortages because ethanol can't be carried through pipelines and requires special blending plants. James Glassman, an economist with J.P. Morgan Chase, notes that expensive ethanol was a big factor in the sticker shock consumers encountered at the pump this summer. "We'd probably have retail gasoline prices between $2.30 and $2.40 a gallon if not for ethanol," he told The Wall Street Journal last June, when pump prices were topping $3 a gallon.
So, it takes a almost 1.3 gallons of gasoline or oil or the equivalent of natural gas or coal to create a gallon of ethanol. And not only that, I paid an extra $0.50 per gallon of gasoline this summer because of it.
Terrific policy. Right up there with recycling.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Christmas
One really interesting thing (at least to me) about this Christmas: my mom kinda adopted her bridge partner who has little family around. The partner, probably in her 80s, was invited to spend Christmas with us.
My first thought was, "INTERLOPER!" Then as I got to know the woman, I really liked her. As things progressed, the whole affair came to remind me of any Christmas with my mom's mom, Sweet (that is what her grandkids called her). It was great.
To be so reminded of Sweet was melancholy, but nice.
The "interloper" even broke out her violin and performed Christmas Carol duets with my mom (on the piano). It sounds corny, I know, but it was great.
Thanks, Mom.
My first thought was, "INTERLOPER!" Then as I got to know the woman, I really liked her. As things progressed, the whole affair came to remind me of any Christmas with my mom's mom, Sweet (that is what her grandkids called her). It was great.
To be so reminded of Sweet was melancholy, but nice.
The "interloper" even broke out her violin and performed Christmas Carol duets with my mom (on the piano). It sounds corny, I know, but it was great.
Thanks, Mom.
Friday, December 22, 2006
Bloodcurdlingly (Is that a word?)
I remember thinking my mom was all wet in the 60’s when she told me not to believe that nonsense about it hurting the eggs of bald eagles, but I was naïve. From Human Events, this sickening paragraph:
Bloodcurdlingly, Berlau cites several prominent environmentalist leaders who explained that their opposition to DDT was based on their desire for Third World people to die. For example, Sierra Club Director Michael McCloskey said in 1971 in order to explain his organization’s opposition to DDT, “By using DDT, we reduce mortality rates in underdeveloped countries without the consideration of how to support the increase in populations.” Alexander King, co-founder of the Club of Rome, wrote in 1990, “So my chief quarrel with DDT in hindsight is that it greatly added to the population problem.” That’s right—prominent and influential environmentalists oppose DDT because it saves human lives.
Bloodcurdlingly, Berlau cites several prominent environmentalist leaders who explained that their opposition to DDT was based on their desire for Third World people to die. For example, Sierra Club Director Michael McCloskey said in 1971 in order to explain his organization’s opposition to DDT, “By using DDT, we reduce mortality rates in underdeveloped countries without the consideration of how to support the increase in populations.” Alexander King, co-founder of the Club of Rome, wrote in 1990, “So my chief quarrel with DDT in hindsight is that it greatly added to the population problem.” That’s right—prominent and influential environmentalists oppose DDT because it saves human lives.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Monday, December 18, 2006
B.C.E. ???
My favorite historian used this term. I don't really object but who decides these things?
The context was immediate:
This catchy sobriquet, however, is only a new name for something very old. In fact, radical transformations in military practice have marked Western history at least since Sparta and Athens squared off in the Peloponnesian war in the 5th century B.C.E.
The context was immediate:
This catchy sobriquet, however, is only a new name for something very old. In fact, radical transformations in military practice have marked Western history at least since Sparta and Athens squared off in the Peloponnesian war in the 5th century B.C.E.
Friday, December 15, 2006
Don't tell Mama...
I have to admit my knowledge of Harold Ford is primarily limited to what I've seen of him on the evil Fox News Network but that limited knowledge led me to agree with NRO's Larry Kudlow:
If the Democrats really want to embrace a rising star, they need look no further than Harold Ford, the young African American congressman from Tennessee who nearly captured a senate seat last month. Ford appreciates free markets and capitalism. He has boldly crossed party lines to vote to extend the investor tax cuts and expand tax-free savings accounts. He avoids class-warfare platitudes and embraces the Ownership Society. He’s optimistic — Reaganesque. And his pro-growth vision stands in stark contrast to Obama’s nanny-state predilection.
I know he lost (and I admit to Repub. dirty tricks) but I think Tenn. made a mistake.
If the Democrats really want to embrace a rising star, they need look no further than Harold Ford, the young African American congressman from Tennessee who nearly captured a senate seat last month. Ford appreciates free markets and capitalism. He has boldly crossed party lines to vote to extend the investor tax cuts and expand tax-free savings accounts. He avoids class-warfare platitudes and embraces the Ownership Society. He’s optimistic — Reaganesque. And his pro-growth vision stands in stark contrast to Obama’s nanny-state predilection.
I know he lost (and I admit to Repub. dirty tricks) but I think Tenn. made a mistake.
Apocalypto
Hugh Hewitt is really right about the movie...at least as far as its "art" goes. It is beautiful. It is a step similar to the one Spielberg took with Saving Private Ryan. The plot and characters though....
Victor Davis Hanson disappoints and then sates...
Victor Davis (or David, as Laura Ingraham says) Hanson irked me then made up for it today:
From today's NRO:
This week Iran hosted an international conference on Holocaust denial. The gathering was as bizarre as a bar out of Star Wars [emph. added], a collection of every crackpot anti-Semite the world over, all there for a scripted, tightly controlled hatefest advertised as a “free” exchange of ideas unknown in Europe.
Jimmy Carter, silent about Iran’s latest promotion for its planned holocaust, is hawking his latest book — in typical fashion, sorta, kinda alleging that the Israelis are like the South Africans in perpetuating an apartheid state, that they are cruel to many Christians, and, as occupiers, are understandably the targets of suicide bombers and other terrorist killers. Sadly, all that shields this wrinkled-browed, lip-biting moralist from complete infamy is sympathy for a man bewildered in his dotage [emph. added].
From today's NRO:
This week Iran hosted an international conference on Holocaust denial. The gathering was as bizarre as a bar out of Star Wars [emph. added], a collection of every crackpot anti-Semite the world over, all there for a scripted, tightly controlled hatefest advertised as a “free” exchange of ideas unknown in Europe.
Jimmy Carter, silent about Iran’s latest promotion for its planned holocaust, is hawking his latest book — in typical fashion, sorta, kinda alleging that the Israelis are like the South Africans in perpetuating an apartheid state, that they are cruel to many Christians, and, as occupiers, are understandably the targets of suicide bombers and other terrorist killers. Sadly, all that shields this wrinkled-browed, lip-biting moralist from complete infamy is sympathy for a man bewildered in his dotage [emph. added].
Re: McConnell
Somehow someone "commented" with a unremovable link. At least there is no little trash can to click.
Star Wars Bar Scene
I read it once this morning and then heard it on the radio and I want it stopped. Edict: Thou shalt not invoke the "Star Wars Bar Scene" to describe a motley crew.
RE: Violent crime is up in Houston after Katrina (Part One*)
Aggravated assault up a mere 2%
Auto theft up 11%; I’d have thought that would be much higher with many of the evacuees going from N.O. to Houston (must have auto)
Burglary down 20%
Burglary of auto up 1%
As Michael mentioned, DWI down a staggering, slurring amount (75%?)
RAPE UP 120%! What is that?
Negligent manslaughter too small to take into account
Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter up 23% (how much of that will be old time Houston gang versus new New Orleans gang members and/or NO gang versus NO gang members?)
Drug violations up 16% and
Robbery up 6%
With the exception of the two biggies (rape and murder), I'm guessing there was not much of a per capita increase.
Auto theft up 11%; I’d have thought that would be much higher with many of the evacuees going from N.O. to Houston (must have auto)
Burglary down 20%
Burglary of auto up 1%
As Michael mentioned, DWI down a staggering, slurring amount (75%?)
RAPE UP 120%! What is that?
Negligent manslaughter too small to take into account
Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter up 23% (how much of that will be old time Houston gang versus new New Orleans gang members and/or NO gang versus NO gang members?)
Drug violations up 16% and
Robbery up 6%
With the exception of the two biggies (rape and murder), I'm guessing there was not much of a per capita increase.
Friday, December 08, 2006
Violent crime is up in Houston after Katrina (Part One*)
I was asked recently if my concerns immediately after Katrina about the New Orleans evacuees coming to Houston had been realized. [Very soon after Katrina I was worried about reports that the crime rate in New Orleans was much higher than in Houston, and predicted that we were going to see increased crime in Houston as the result of our New Orleans neighbors coming to visit. I posted some anecdotal stuff along the same lines here, here, here, and here.]
After looking a bit I found a chart created by Pat Ramsey at Southwestern University that compares crime stats for the eight months before Katrina (Jan-Aug '05) to the same period in 2006. [I'm grateful I found Pat's work because it makes the point and saved me a lot of work, but it seems a better comparison would be the year before (Sept '04-Aug '05) to the year after.]
Look at Pat's chart and you'll see crime was up in most catagories tracked, and significantly up in some (interestingly, burglary and DWI were down).
But, my correspondent wanted to know, was there an increase in the per capita crime rate? In other words, was the increased crime due simply to the fact that there were more people or were the evacuees in fact committing crimes at a greater rate than Houstonians had before Katrina?
To answer that question one needs population numbers: Houston before Katrina and the number of New Orleans refugees. The Census Bureau, in a special project to assess the effects of Katrina, made estimates of the Houston population before and after Katrina. In Part Two, I'll look at those numbers and show that per capita crime rate increased in several catagories.
* I left my analysis of the per capita figures at the office and I'm too lazy to rerun it now. So there's a Part Two. While you wait, chew on this: My correspondent contends that everyone is one bad break away from destitution and criminality (in her case, crack whoring). "There but for the grace of God go I." Discuss.
After looking a bit I found a chart created by Pat Ramsey at Southwestern University that compares crime stats for the eight months before Katrina (Jan-Aug '05) to the same period in 2006. [I'm grateful I found Pat's work because it makes the point and saved me a lot of work, but it seems a better comparison would be the year before (Sept '04-Aug '05) to the year after.]
Look at Pat's chart and you'll see crime was up in most catagories tracked, and significantly up in some (interestingly, burglary and DWI were down).
But, my correspondent wanted to know, was there an increase in the per capita crime rate? In other words, was the increased crime due simply to the fact that there were more people or were the evacuees in fact committing crimes at a greater rate than Houstonians had before Katrina?
To answer that question one needs population numbers: Houston before Katrina and the number of New Orleans refugees. The Census Bureau, in a special project to assess the effects of Katrina, made estimates of the Houston population before and after Katrina. In Part Two, I'll look at those numbers and show that per capita crime rate increased in several catagories.
* I left my analysis of the per capita figures at the office and I'm too lazy to rerun it now. So there's a Part Two. While you wait, chew on this: My correspondent contends that everyone is one bad break away from destitution and criminality (in her case, crack whoring). "There but for the grace of God go I." Discuss.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Mitch McConnell
Straps it on: “And as odd as it sounds, some of the high points of my Senate career have been killing things”
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
