Judicious Asininity

This is the Archive Page. Click Here for Main Page

Mon Jun 30, 2003

Black Panthers and New Republicans

Dialogue Shows Much in Common

The result of a recent meeting between the New Black Panther leader and the Young Republicans appears to show that these groups may have more in common that some believed possible:

Minister Quannell X and a roomful of Young Republicans found out last week that they have more in common than they might have expected.

You read that right: Young Republicans.

The New Black Panther Party leader was invited for what was billed as an "open-minded dialogue" during the group's annual meeting. The crowd, mostly white males, warmed up to the bombastic leader once he said he does not hate them or other whites, supports the GOP's stance on family values, opposes affirmative action, and belongs to the National Rifle Association.

But the most spirited applause came when Quanell X described Democrats as "pimps" who often trick blacks into supporting them, only to betray them once elected.

Pimp, that's a good description.

Run, Ralph, Run

Here's hoping Ralph Nader runs again

According to USA Today, Nader is considering running in 2004. In 2000 he pulled in just under 3% of the vote, which was a lot more than Bush's margin of victory. It would be a reasonable inference that most Nader voters would have voted for Gore if Nader had not run. Democrats are probably right to blast Nader for running again because he would cost them any chance of victory in a tight election.

Conventional wisdom has it that Clinton easily beat Bush in 1992. But Perot received an astounding 18.9% of the votes in that election, far more than the 5.6% that separated Clinton and Bush. Had Perot not run that election might have been much closer.

I suspect 2004 will be more like 1996, where a strong sitting President easily beat a weak opponent and the third-party candidate (Perot again) had little impact. But if the race tightens up, Republicans would breathe a little easier if Nader ran.

How the Left spreads lies

Widely syndicated NYT columnists are part of the problem

Did Cheney really say Saddam had nuclear weapons?

Nicholas Kristof spreads another whopper, as Eugene Volokh points out in his NRO guest column.

We've seen Dowd invert the meaning of the President's words by judicious use of an ellipsis. Now Kristol takes a sentence that, when seen in context, is obviously a verbal slip, and uses it to accuse the Vice President of lying.

Is it too much to ask NYT columnists to quote Bush administration representatives honestly? That seems to be the case.

Sun Jun 29, 2003

How long will the latest Palestinian Terrorist truce last?

I'd say, until it suits them to break it

While Westerners assume the Palestinians are acting out of enlightened self-interest, that assumption ignores the role of Islam in their thinking and actions. Over at LGF, Charles blogs on the ceasefire and links to a site that explains what such a treaty means to Muslims.

Robert Spencer, in "Islam Unveiled" reports on an incident witnessed by Jack Kelley of USA Today, "at a school run by Hamas , [where] he saw a youth of eleven years give a report to his class:

"I will make my body a bomb," said the boy, "that will blast the flesh of Zionists, the sons of pigs and monkeys...I will tear their bodies into little pieces and will cause them more pain than they will ever know". His classmates shouted in response, "Allah Akhbar," and his teacher shouted, "May the virgins give you pleasure."

Is this just bluster or was the kid deadly serious? If he wasn't, hundreds were, as the nation of the "sons of pigs and monkeys" knows only too well. Worse, thousands of Palestinians want to follow those martyrs to get at those virgins. One poor sap I read about had even taped protection to his genitals so they wouldn't be destroyed when his bomb when off.

Try transposing what that kid said to a Western context.

"I will make my body a bomb," said the boy, "that will blast the flesh of Muslims, the sons of goats and camels...I will tear their bodies into little pieces and will cause them more pain than they will ever know". His classmates shouted in response, "Praise the Lord," and his teacher shouted, "May the nuns in heaven give you pleasure."

Doesn't quite work, does it?

But what that kid said is little different from what Bin Laden and radical Imans across the Muslim world say to their followers. If we thought the way they think, they'd all be dead. Ain't they lucky we're not like them.

Britain's NHS

Once Again Proves its Value

Lest you forget here's another reminder of the value of "free national healthcare":

In a bid to overcome the long waiting lists in Britain's National Health Service (NHS), some patients suffering from heart and lung ailments may be flown to India for surgery quickly and at almost half the cost, a media report said on Sunday.

NHS chiefs are currently in talks with medical authorities in India to consider the proposals in a desperate bid to cut waiting lists, the 'Sunday Times' said.

Whadaya expect for free? Top notch, high quality, and timely service by highly motivated, well trained professionals? Ain't happened yet.

Fake Fags

Covering up the Government Warnings

In a move that gives further evidence that some people see smoking as a sign of defiance a U.K. company has taken to selling stickers to cover the government mandated warning on cigarette packs:

Smoking kills. You were probably as surprised as we were to see huge, black-bordered health warnings appearing on your favourite brand of cigarettes recently. We don't know why the government have decided to poison our fags, but we can help you do something about it. We sell realistic stickers to cover up the real health warnings on UK cigarette packets with something a little less stressful. Stickers are available in packs of twenty for just £3.99 (including UK postage and packing). Your friends will be coughing with amusement in no time.

Each pack of high-quality gloss stickers contains two each of ten designs, featuring slogans such as...

Smoking is cool
You could be hit by a bus tomorrow
Buy your own fags
Smoking makes you look hard
...and many, many more.

You can even submit your own ideas for a sticker on the company's website as well as join an affiliate program to show your own defiance of the double dealing hypocrites in government.
I've got a couple of ideas. How about:

Smoking Pays the Bills
Ban Tobacco.....Or shut the Hell Up!
Lose Weight Fast.........Start Smoking

Posted by: Randall on Jun 29, 03 | 11:22 am |
| [1] comments (1473 views) | | Permalink | [2335] TrackBack |

Reason to Strike

It Obviously Doesn't Take Much

In this particular instance, and probably many others, the reason for calling a strike seems to be ludicrous:

IG Metall workers in the east have been demanding a reduction in their working week by three hours to 35 to bring them into line with the west.

For a 3 hour shorter work week this union went out on strike. This is despite the fact that these particular worker's own productivity levels were primary cause for having to work longer than their brethren. Now, the pain that resulted from this move:

The strike has hit the country's car industry, prompting Volkswagen to halt production of its best-selling Golf model and BMW to lay off 10,000 workers because parts have not been delivered from eastern factories.

The effects of the strike have been felt across Germany as supplies to the car industry, which accounts for 10% of total industrial output and hundreds of thousands of jobs, dried up.

Both sides appear to have offered compromises at the talks which were rejected:

IG Metall proposed cutting the 38-hour week to 35 over a period of time to be determined by individual companies

Gesamtmetall appeared to be offering a 37-hour week
Correspondents say public sympathy for the strike is not widespread in the economically depressed east, where there are fears that such action will deter new investors.

The east's unemployment figure of about 19% is more than twice that of the west.

BMW has said it is reviewing the scale of its planned investment in the eastern city of Leipzig, where it is building a new factory which would create 5,500 jobs.

Maybe this union should express to its members that the solution to the problem may lie in their own work ethics. Pick up the pace a bit and the productivity levels may justify a work week reduction. But then, the union will probably want a pay increase to compensate for fewer hours worked and ........................................strike.

Germany Understands Taxes

Economics 101: Tax Cuts Stimulate the Economy

It seems that Gerhard Schroeder understands the effect tax cuts have on an economy:

Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder has decided to rush through deep tax cuts in an attempt to inject new life into Germany's stagnated economy.
The reduction in income tax - worth 18bn euros ($20.6bn; £12.3bn) - could now happen next year rather than in 2005.

The decision is designed to spur consumer spending and help the eurozone's largest economy to grow again.

The Chancellor said that advancing the tax cuts meant average wage-earners would pay 10% less income tax next year.

"10% less tax means 10% more consumption," he added.

The tax cuts now due to take effect at the start of 2004 would slash the top rate of income tax to 42% form 48.5% and the bottom rate to 15% from 19.9%.

I wonder why some people still don't understand this?

Sat Jun 28, 2003

Vote for PETA's Sexiest Vegan

Tough Choices

Just kidding, but just in case or if you want to see the candidates...... PETA

Fight Terror with Pigs

Good Enough for Black Jack Pershing

Here's an idea for fighting terrorism from a Massachusetts senator:

State Sen. Guy Glodis, D-Worcester, should be publicly reprimanded for circulating a flier that suggests the United States could prevent terrorist attacks by executing "Muslim extremists" with bullets covered in pig blood, a group of Muslim-Americans said yesterday.

The flier, which Glodis sent to Senate colleagues this week, purports to tell the story of how General John "Black Jack" Pershing captured and executed 50 terrorists while he was a military governor in the Philippines in the early 1900s.

Before they shot the terrorists, the soldiers supposedly slaughtered two pigs and soaked their bullets in pig blood. The ritual "horrified" the terrorists, who feared they would be "barred from paradise (and those virgins) and doomed to hell," the flier states.

"And for the next forty-two years, there was not a single Muslim extremist attack anywhere in the world," the flier reads. "Maybe it is time for this segment of history to repeat itself, maybe in Iraq? The question is, where do we find another Black Jack Pershing."

Might work. And if we capture any terrorists feed them pork and make them live with pigs. Debunk the virgin myth and ensure that word gets out that suicide and murder gets a trip to hog hell. I'm sure there's more we could come up with should it prove necessary. Never underestimate the ingenuity or ferocity of Americans.

What's with Greenpeace and GM food?

Are they latter day Luddites, protectionist, anti-American, anti-Capitalist, racist or all of the above?

Let's see if I've got this straight.

By using GM techniques, scientists can produce crops that are:

Against these obvious advantages, the GM opponents cite the problem of transgenes transferring to the wild through cross hybridization. There are two issues here. Firstly, it can only happen within species. There is no way for the transgenes in golden rice to show up in wheat, for example. Secondly, it is unlikely that transgenes would provide a selective advantage for the recipient in the wild.

The rest of the opposition boils down to invocation of the precautionary principle, which, if adopted as a general principle, would rule out any further human progress. There is also the resentment that private businesses might make a profit from selling GM seed stock to poor people.

By some estimates, golden rice can prevent half a million children from becoming blind every year and another million from dying of vitamin A deficiency. Let's just work with that figure of a million children per year.

Greenpeace and its political allies are fighting tooth and nail to prevent the introduction of golden rice. If they can stall the introduction of golden rice by six years, they will have condemned six million poor Asian children to death and blinded another three million. That's a record that would make Hilter proud.

Just trying to get a little perspective here, of course. I didn't even try to estimate the impact of denying GM technology to Africa.

Stirring the Immigration Pot

Rep. Tancredo Speaks His Mind

CNS has a report of one Congressman whose words were not welcome in DC:

If another terrorist attack is conducted on U.S. soil by illegal aliens, the fault will lie with Congress and the president, one lawmaker asserted Thursday.

"If we have another event, and it's perpetrated by someone coming into this country illegally, and we've done no more to protect our borders and actually enforce our immigration policy...then the blood of the people that are killed will be on our hands and the president's," Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) told CNSNews.com.

Tancredo said he has made the same statement to White House officials. Their response? "They told me never to darken the doorstep of the White House again," Tancredo revealed. "They went ballistic on me.

"They asked: 'How dare you say a thing like that?' I said: 'You tell me who people should blame - the Elks Club? Who's responsible?'"

With an election coming up Bush and company most likely feel the time is not right for them to attack the illegal immigration problem head on just now. Still, the Congress is ultimately responsible for making the laws. They should feel free, even obligated, to do what needs doing in this area. Any way one looks at the issue of Mexican illegal aliens there are problems. I can see two possible approaches. Either fortify the borders and keep all out or accept that these people are coming and make arrangements for them to contribute to the economy. The latter would require that "visiting" persons pay taxes and help support the country and local economies like everyone else. To accomplish this these people would need all the necessary documents to join the workforce. If this is accomplished it would have the added benefit of improving wages and living conditions for aliens. This second option is probably the most feasible but not necessarily the most desirable. Fortifying the border seems to be an impossible task that would require enormous amounts of manpower and money which would still not ensure that all illegals would be turned back. This strategy, or either strategy for that matter, needs cooperation on the south side of the border in order to be effective. Something needs to be done one way and the Congressman is correct to a certain degree that inaction on the part of elected officials would make them at least partly responsible for terror attacks by aliens in the future. But when realism comes into play we must all admit that it is impossible to guard all the borders and coastlines in this country 24/7. Smugglers prove this every day. That leaves us to do the best we can with border security and requires that we continue to take the fight to those who would attack us.

Fri Jun 27, 2003

Why we should be worried about Iran's nukes

To borrow a line (and the quote) from Mark Steyn, can we wait for "mullah time"?

Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran's former president said last year that on the day the Muslim world gets nuclear weapons the Israeli question will be settled forever "since a single atomic bomb has the power to completely destroy Israel, while an Israeli counter-strike can only cause partial damage to the Islamic world."

Mr. Ayatollah, don't count on Israel leaving any survivors if you carry out your threat.

Moonbats Shocked at Rainforest Loss

Vegetarians Destroying the World

Lee at Right Thinking from the Left Coast has the goods on environmentalists:

That's right, you moonbat vegans and lunatic vegetarians! Your diet choice is destroying the rainforest! I wonder when we'll see environmentalists protesting Big Soy.

This tongue lashing results from this bit of news:

The deforestation rate in Brazil's Amazon, the world's largest jungle, has jumped 40 percent, sparking alarm on Thursday among environmentalists and a promise by the government to launch emergency measures.

"This is shocking," said Mario Monzoni, a project coordinator for Friends of the Earth group in Brazil. "The rate of deforestation should be falling, instead the opposite is happening."

It shouldn't be shocking, you idgit. Where the hell do you think PETA gets their protein from?

Genetic Engineered Fish

Green Glowing Pet Attracts Attention

But will they catch on?

The Taikong Corporation took DNA from a jellyfish and inserted it into a zebra fish to make it shine a yellow-green colour.

GM animals are frequently used in labs and flocks of GM sheep make valuable proteins in their milk, but the "Night Pearl" zebra fish is the first gene-altered pet to go on sale to the public.

For some, the animal will be a fascinating novelty; for others, it will raise fears of a trend for bio-engineered "Frankenstein pets".

The Taikong Corporation reports strong interest in its creation from the UK, where the aquatic industry is worth millions. Taikong insists the GM fish, designated TK-1, is safe, sterile and that its additional fluorescent gene is harmless.

Don't think so.

Satellite TV Gets Expensive

Pirate Hit Hard by Fines and Time

Here's a case that proves that too much TV can be harmful to your well being:

A man who admitted scheming to steal satellite television signals has been ordered to pay $180 million in restitution in $500-a-month installments - a payment plan that would take 30,000 years to fulfill.
Steven Frazier, 28, pleaded guilty to conspiracy in a scheme to manufacture and sell devices to decode satellite TV signals and allow people to get premium service for free. He also received a five-year prison sentence.

Sha-zam

Blair vs the BBC

This should be an interesting fight

The BBC certainly earned its nickname of Baghdad Broadcasting Corporation during the recent war on Iraq. It is even more leftist than our public radio station, National Palestinian Radio. But what I really dislike is the fact that the BBC is funded by a special tax on TV owners. You pay your money but you get no choice. Disclaimer - I pay that tax, sorry, license fee.

Anyways, check out this story on the dispute between Alastair Campbell, Blair's communications supremo and the BBC. Blair's opponents have been taking him to task for the "missing" WMD and the BBC has been putting the boot in, as they say over there.

Stogner vs California

Another Close Call

Continuing the law theme here is another recent case that may cause legal problems as well as grief for victims. In Stogner vs California the SC ruled, 5-4, again, that extending the statute of limitations after a crime, in this case child abuse, violates the ex post facto clause. Here is part of the majority's summary:

But there is also a predominating constitutional interest in forbidding the State to revive a long-forbidden prosecution. And to hold that such a law is ex post facto does not prevent the State from extending time limits for the prosecution of future offenses, or for prosecutions not yet time barred.

In sum, California's law subjects an individual such as Stogner to prosecution long after the State has, in effect, granted an amnesty, telling him that he is "at liberty to return to his country ... and that from henceforth he may cease to preserve the proofs of his innocence," Wharton, Criminal Pleading and Practice §316, at 210. See also Moore, 43 N. J. L., at 223-224. It retroactively withdraws a complete defense to prosecution after it has already attached, and it does so in a manner that allows the State to withdraw this defense at will and with respect to individuals already identified. See supra, at 3-4. "Unfair" seems to us a fair characterization.

The statute before us is unfairly retroactive as applied to Stogner. A long line of judicial authority supports characterization of this law as ex post facto. For the reasons stated, we believe the law falls within Justice Chase's second category of ex post facto laws. We conclude that a law enacted after expiration of a previously applicable limitations period violates the Ex Post Facto Clause when it is applied to revive a previously time-barred prosecution. The California court's judgment to the contrary is Reversed.

The dissent:

Justice Kennedy, with whom The Chief Justice, Justice Scalia, and Justice Thomas join, dissenting.

The Court also disregards the interests of those victims of child abuse who have found the courage to face their accusers and bring them to justice. The Court's opinion harms not only our ex post facto jurisprudence but also these and future victims of child abuse, and so compels my respectful dissent.

This case has me leaning with the majority. Changing a law to allow prosecution for an offense that had previously been forbidden not only seems unfair, but is in fact, unfair. Granted, this particular crime is especially heinous but the basic principle that bans prosecution under a new law for conduct that was previously legal and committed prior to the enactment of that new law is clearly unconstitutional. Still, this case involves conduct that was illegal at the time committed and remains illegal today. The catch here is that the statute of limitations clearly bars any prosecution of those whose time limit has expired and changing the rules after the fact strikes me as clearly wrong. To remedy this the various legislatures have the option of changing the time limits for this crime to allow for its particular characteristics and apply those limits to future cases. It is unfortunate for the victims that can no longer seek justice but the law seems fairly clear on this. For blame, look to the lawmakers who failed to act in a timely manner to extend the time limits for the crime. There is a four-pronged ex post facto test outlined in Calder v Bull, 3 Dall. 386 (1798), one of the first Supreme Court opinions involving constitutional limitations on government power. That case says in effect that a law doesn't violate the ex post facto clause unless it does one of the following:

Criminalizes an act that had been acceptable in the past.

Increases the punishment.

Creates a new punishment.

Changes the evidentiary standard.

Stogner argued that Section 803(g) violated the ex post facto clause by exposing him to a trial and prison sentence that he would not have faced had the law not been changed. That certainly seems to be the case here. Once the statute expired Stogner was no longer eligible to be charged with that crime. To do so would violate rule one and criminalize an act that was acceptable in the past when the limits expired. The only solution is to enact a new statute of limitations for this type of offense and move on. Sad, but true.

« Collapse

More thoughts on Dowd's sliming of Judge Thomas

Funny how she can't see the irony of her position as the Time's token female columnist

Here's another choice quote from her column:

The dissent is a clinical study of a man who has been driven barking mad by the beneficial treatment he has received.

It's poignant, really. It makes him crazy that people think he is where he is because of his race, but he is where he is because of his race.

Let's try it again with some minor, but consistent rewriting:

Her column is a clinical study of a woman who has been driven barking mad by the beneficial treatment she has received.

It's poignant, really. It makes her crazy that people think she is where she is because of her sex, but she is where she is because of her sex.

I think that about nails it. She knows, in her heart of hearts, that she is a beneficiary of affirmative action for women, a female Jayson Blair. Affimative action is just about the only reason I can think of why the Times could give such prominence to a vapid gossip with a mean streak.

Sweden considers mandatory military service for women

Already Mandatory for Men

In a display of the principle of equal protection Sweden is considering drafting women:

The government in Sweden, one of the world's leaders in equal rights for women, ordered the armed forces Thursday to consider introducing mandatory military service for females.
The Defence Ministry said it was part of a move to make the Scandinavian country's military more efficient, as well as more egalitarian.

"It's important that the work for equality continues intensively within the armed forces," Defence Ministry spokesman Magnus Edin said.

He stressed the government has not taken an official stance on mandatory service for women, but said it wants to boost the number of women in the armed forces.

Women are allowed to perform military service, but aren't required to. It is mandatory for men, although less than a third of the Scandinavian country's eligible 19-year-olds are actually drafted each year because of budget cuts. Sweden has a population of 8.9 million.

Sweden's military has 12,000 active-duty officers, of which 430 are women.

The military has been ordered to present a report on women conscription by March 1. Parliament would have to approve any changes to the conscription law.

Looking for more than a few good women. Ten-SHUN!

A Concurring Opinion

In the Matters of the Court

James at Outside the Beltway offers his well informed view of the recent USSC decisions:

Essentially, I agree with the public policy outcome here but think this is horrendously poor Constitutional interpretation. And, in light of the Michigan rulings Monday, further evidence that the claims that this is somehow a "conservative" court--in either sense of that word--are laughable.

Well said.

Thu Jun 26, 2003

Regarding Sodomy

U.S. Legislative Court Does it Again

The Cornell Review lays into the Supreme Court's ruling in the sodomy case:

In an outrageous infringement on states’ rights, the United States Supreme Court has declared a Texas anti-sodomy law unconstitutional. In doing so, the Court has overturned the popular will of thirteen states—Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Virginia.
Once again, the Supreme Court invented privacy rights to impose its will on the American People.

You see, even if most reasonable people would agree that the government should keep its nose out of the bedroom, the proper venue to ensure that is at the state level, particularly the legislature.

Justice Clarence Thomas, along with Justices Scalia and Rehnquist, dissented, with Thomas writing:

“I join Justice Scalia's dissenting opinion. I write separately to note that the law before the Court today "is...uncommonly silly." Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479, 527 (1965) (Stewart, J., dissenting). If I were a member of the Texas Legislature, I would vote to repeal. Punishing someone for expressing his sexual preference through noncommercial consensual conduct with another adult does not appear to be a worthy way to expend valuable law enforcement resources.”

Thomas gets it exactly right—if you are opposed to an anti-sodomy law in your state, you should write your legislator and urge him to repeal the law. Or, if your state constitution has a specific clause that bans the state from intruding into private sexual matters between consenting, non-related adults, then take your case to state court. But to pervert the U.S. Constitution to force the residents of states to accept the legal equality of gay sex and straight sex is an outrage. This is a social question that the people should decide, not a nine-person legislature.

As expected, the gay rights lobby is on cloud nine. Andrew Sullivan is already trying on wedding dresses.

Legislation by the Courts. Again. This issue is one the people should decide not a group of lawyers in Washington. The "Court" has legislated a new law with this ruling and there is no other venue to appeal. What other social engineering issue do you suppose this court will mandate in the future?

The U.S. Supreme Court has disgraced itself by ignoring the Tenth Amendment and going along with the gay lobby. Justice Scalia, in his dissent, articulated this sentiment well:

“The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda… The court has taken sides in the culture war.”

The USSC has taken it upon itself to lay down the law instead of interpret it. Once again this court has disregarded the Constitution, particularly the Tenth Amendment:

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

With two back to back rulings the disregard for "the people" and for the states becomes obvious to all who will see. In the diversity case the Court fails to grasp, or ignores the concept of equal protection. Perhaps the "living Constitution" has a different definition for equal, but the old Constitution makes it perfectly clear in this area. Welcome to the New America. One ruled by lawyers. I like the old one better.

Australia understands the new world order

Aussies tells the UN to get lost

Here's the money quote from this Newsday account

The Australian government on Thursday branded multilateral forums such as the United Nations "ineffective and unfocused" and said its foreign policy will increasingly rely on "coalitions of the willing" like the one that waged war in Iraq.

Australia has been one of America's staunchest allies. It even committed troops to Vietnam, which the Brits refused to do. They also suffered their own 9/11 in the Bali bombing and saw, at first hand, the "bloody borders of Islam" in East Timor. I've been impressed by the job that John Howard has done.

Should the US save the UN buildings?

"Repairs would cost U.S. taxpayers about $600 million over 30 years" - Fox News

See the full story at Fox News
I'd say let it crumble and ship the headquarters off to the Congo. They sure need the UN over there.

More jewels in Clarence Thomas' Dissenting view

The one judge who allegedly benefited from affirmative action got it right

He demolishes the "compelling state interest" argument with a practical observation:

In sum, the Law School trains few Michigan residents and overwhelmingly serves students, who, as lawyers, leave the State of Michigan. By contrast, Michigan's other public law school, Wayne State University Law School, sends 88% of its graduates on to serve the people of Michigan. ... It does not take a social scientist to conclude that it is precisely the Law School's status as an elite institution that causes it to be a way- station for the rest of the country's lawyers, rather than a training ground for those who will remain in Michigan. The Law School's decision to be an elite institution does little to advance the welfare of the people of Michigan or any cognizable interest of the State of Michigan.

He points out that the Michigan Law School could use methods other than the LSAT test to select students.

In any event, there is nothing ancient, honorable, or constitutionally protected about "selective"' admissions. The University of Michigan should be well aware that alternative methods have historically been used for the admission of students, for it brought to this country the German certificate system in the late-19th century. ... Under this system, a secondary school was certified by a university so that any graduate who completed the course offered by the school was offered admission to the university. ... The facially race-neutral "percent plans" now used in Texas, California, and Florida ... are in many ways the descendents of the certificate system.

Once the Michigan Law School chose to use the LSAT test to select its entrants it should have used it constitutionally.

Having decided to use the LSAT, the Law School must accept the constitutional burdens that come with this decision. The Law School may freely continue to employ the LSAT and other allegedly merit-based standards in whatever fashion it likes. What the Equal Protection Clause forbids, but the Court today allows, is the use of these standards hand-in-hand with racial discrimination. An infinite variety of admissions methods are available to the Law School. Considering all of the radical thinking that has historically occurred at this country's universities, the Law School's intractable approach toward admissions is striking.

The Court will not even deign to make the Law School try other methods, however, preferring instead to grant a 25-year license to violate the Constitution. And the same Court that had the courage to order the desegregation of all public schools in the South now fears, on the basis of platitudes rather than principle, to force the Law School to abandon a decidedly imperfect admissions regime that provides the basis for racial discrimination.

I italicized the zinger in there! Does he dish it out to the majority, or what? The Judge needs a Blog.

He then zeroes in on the biggest problem with affirmative action programs:

It is uncontested that each year, the Law School admits a handful of blacks who would be admitted in the absence of racial discrimination. ... Who can differentiate between those who belong and those who do not? The majority of blacks are admitted to the Law School because of discrimination, and because of this policy all are tarred as undeserving. This problem of stigma does not depend on determinacy as to whether those stigmatized are actually the "beneficiaries"' of racial discrimination. When blacks take positions in the highest places of government, industry, or academia, it is an open question today whether their skin color played a part in their advancement. The question itself is the stigma-because either racial discrimination did play a role, in which case the person may be deemed "otherwise unqualified,"' or it did not, in which case asking the question itself unfairly marks those blacks who would succeed without discrimination. Is this what the Court means by "visibly open"?

I hope I've given a taste of what the good Judge had to say. Seek out the whole opinion and read it. It's worth it.

Hawkins on Coulter

John asks, Ann answers

John Hawkins interviewed Ann Coulter. Here's a good one from session:

John Hawkins: What do you say to your critics who claim that you attack liberals just as viciously as you say Conservatives are attacked by liberals?

Ann Coulter: Our insults are true.

Go see the rest.
Thanks to Kathy at On the Third Hand for this.

Freak Show at the Ag Expo

Leftists Descend Like Locusts on Sacramento

Here's a little sample of the loonacy that went on recently in California when the USDA sponsored a get together for some friends:

For five days, radical leftists throughout the country converged on Sacramento, California, to protest the International Ministerial Conference and Expo on Agricultural Science and Technology, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The agriculture ministers from over 100 WTO nations gathered to discuss the latest advances in biotechnology and how these techniques can be used to feed the 800 million starving people of the Third World.

The speakers were mostly incoherent; they rambled endlessly about everything from the presidential election of 2000, to how a free market in food will lead to mass starvation, to "U.S. imperialism" and other generalized anti-capitalist rants. My personal favorite was a young woman who called herself Mother Corn: "My children existed long before you humans discovered us and we have fed you for thousands of years! But now you are polluting our land and splicing our genes!" The young man next to me, in the Frankenstein's monster outfit, roared his approval.

Oh yeah, there's more. Much, much more.

Travesty

The Court failed to do its duty

In light of the recent disregard of common sense by the Supreme court in its ruling on the diversity issue a lot of criticism is warranted. The NRO editors get in some good licks with this editorial. One example cited in that piece is part of Justice Thomas' dissent:

One of the reasons the Court trusts the university's judgment about its need to discriminate is that the First Amendment supposedly protects the university's autonomy. Justice Thomas acidly notes that the Court showed no such concern seven years ago for the Virginia Military Institute's autonomy. There, equal protection was held to require the admission of women. VMI's judgment that it would have to sacrifice elements of its character received no "deference" then. The Court held that the changes necessary were "manageable." Concludes Thomas: "Apparently where the status quo being defended is that of the elite establishment — here the Law School — rather than a less fashionable Southern military institution, the Court will defer without serious inquiry and without regard to the applicable legal standard."

There you have it. This is exactly what is going on in the highest court in the land as well as the lower courts. There is a complete disregard for common sense, fundemental fairness, and the Constitution. No wonder the Democrats are fighting tooth and nail to prevent Bush from replacing this bunch of social engineers. That would crimp their style.

Those missing weapons of mass destruction

A few musings on why Saddam would risk war if he didn't have WMD

The discovery of pieces of a gas centrifuge buried in a scientist's garden provides a clue.

Here's my theory...(which I've been revising)...

In 1998 Saddam kicked out the UN inspectors and started to ramp up his WMD programs again. When 9/11 happened, and GWB called Iraq a founding member of the Axis of Evil, Saddam knew that having WMD would be very dangerous to his regime. However, he wanted to maintain the ability to reconstitute his WMD programs once the pressure of inspections, sanctions and GWB's war on terror abated. So he buried as much as could, destroyed what he couldn't hide, and threatened his scientists with death if they revealed anything.

Saddam also realized that his military was relatively weak, so he still needed WMD to deter his internal enemies, the Kurds in the North, the Shiite's in the South, as well as Iran and Israel, which both had unfinished business with Iraq. He maintained the threat of WMD by letting his enemies believe he still had them. Perhaps some of the evidence that Powell described, such as radio intercepts, were part of a campaign of deception by Saddam. The US military certainly believed he had chemical weapons at a minimum.

At the same time, the failure of the UN inspectors to find any WMD allowed Saddam to plausibly deny their existence, making it difficult for the US to make its case to the world and assemble a coalition against him. But Saddam was too smart by half.

Saddam nearly got away with it. The inspectors were finding nothing significant, the French and Russians were placing roadblocks in the way of the US, and "peace" protests erupted around the world supporting Iraq. Meanwhile, his propaganda machine was telling the world that sanctions were killing thousands of Iraqi children, so there was mounting pressure for sanctions to be lifted.

Thanks to GWB, Saddam's double-game on WMD failed.

If my musings are correct, the coalition will find a lot of hidden components of a WMD program but not much in the way of actual weapons.

What we are seeing now is his fall-back strategy. His loyalists are fighting a guerilla war against the US with the hope that the US will eventually turn tail and go home, just like they did in "Black Hawk Down." With the US gone, he and his thugs would be able to claw their way back into power.

One more thought. There is no doubt that Saddam knows/knew about Iran's nuclear weapons program and that the mad Mullahs would be dreaming of payback time. That is one more reason why he would be planning to reconstitute his nuclear weapons program. I think we'll find more evidence that he planned to do just that.

Input

Let Me Know

If anyone is having a problem leaving comments please let me know via email. I had initially set this blog up to NOT require membership/registration to comment but with the recent addition of Pat as blogger I had to set him up as a member with posting privledges. This caused the problem with the comment page the other day where the form fields disappeared. That happened because pMachine automatically switched to another comment template that used cookies to identify the person leaving comments thus there was no need to have the form fields. Well, if you can make sense of what I'm trying to get across let me know. If you have tried to comment and registration was required, let me know.
I noted that one person found the member registration form somewhere on the site and joined. Thanks for that. Now tell me where you found the form. I thought it was removed entirely but evidently not. Given that there has not been a lot of comments or any problems with trolls and the like it doesn't seem necessary or desirable to require a membership for comments. Well, I'm running in circles again. Just let me know if you are being asked to register before being allowed to comment. Thanks.

54 Miles in 12 Hours

Comrades Marathon Is Test of Endurance

For all you runners out there, here's something to shoot for:

At the end, some of the runners were taken away on stretchers while others skipped, sang and kissed the ground. Some had hobbled or crawled toward the finish line, others leaned on fellow runners for support.

Fat beads of perspiration rolled down the face of Mohamed Vorajee, a 42-year-old mechanic from Ladysmith. His dark green tank top and shorts were soaked. He had finished a few seconds too late to receive a medal, but he could not stop smiling.

"I feel great," he said. "I've never been this far in my life."

Almost 13,000 competitors wound their way through 54 miles of steep hill country to cross the finish line today in South Africa's Comrades Marathon, the biggest ultramarathon and one of the most unusual sporting events in the world.

Why?

Can women beat men in extreme sports?

USA Today recently included Marathon running in the Top Ten hardest things to do in Sports.

So, how do the women stack up against the men?

Take a look at this graph.
The men are hitting a plateau while the women, thanks to Paula Radcliffe, are falling off a cliff.
There's still a good ten minutes between the best men and the best woman but the gap is closing.

Looking out to longer distances, the women sometimes win. Like Pam Reed. I'm truly in awe of that performance. Absolutely unbelievable.

(Disclaimer: I run a bit)

Wed Jun 25, 2003

Maureen Dowd slimes Clarence Thomas

What a racist, condescending piece of work MoDope turns out to be, again

You'll have to visit the NYT Times to see what she wrote about one of the dissenting Supreme Court justices, the conservative one, the one who doesn't fit the Left's world view that Blacks should be eternally grateful for what the Left has done for them.

Here's one of her milder rebukes to the ungrateful wretch:

It's impossible not to be disgusted at someone who could benefit so much from affirmative action and then pull up the ladder after himself. So maybe he is disgusted with his own great historic ingratitude.

Why should he be grateful? Whatever he achieves, he can always hear that disgusting whisper - "He's only there because he's Black". That is the downside of affirmative action - the achievements of any Black, outside of sports and entertainment, are always cast in doubt. And God help them if they depart from the Left's script. There's plenty more where Anita Hill came from.

Eugene Volokh catches the Mistress of Ellipsis in another misquote and Andrew Sullivan takes after her, too. (His site is having conniptions just now so no URL).

Quick question - name all of Clinton's Black cabinet appointees. Follow-up question - name George Bush's Black cabinet appointees. The answers should demonstrate to any sentient being the difference between the Left and the Right on race today - the Left counts race before ability while the Right counts ability before race.
Read more »

Eeuu

Sanitized Life in EUland

If the world wouldn't be affected it would be fun to watch the EU tie itself in knots with liberal ideals. Take this one for instance:

Sexist or raunchy images on television or in advertising could be banned across the European Union, under draft proposals.

Such a directive could stop TV programs that stereotyped women - or men - and ban advertising that does not "respect human dignity".

It might also force insurance companies to stop using gender as a basis for calculating premiums or pension annuity rates.

Greek Social Affairs Commissioner Anna Diamantopoulou has ordered a study of gender questions outside the workplace. The plans, still in their infancy, are provoking bitter disputes in Brussels.

Oh yeah. It's really going to be a great success. With several countries such as France staring right into the eyes of socialism's failure it would seem that some lessons would be learned which would enable the EU to avoid similar problems. Guess not. Maybe Jock merely wants some company to spread the misery around.

Drudge Getting Uppity

Don't Call Me No Stinking Blogger

The Emperor Misha has a bit of a problem with Matt Drudge and in particular Drudge's attitude which manifests itself in Matt's aversion to being called a blogger.

Much as we freely admit to loving the Drudge Report and the wonderful stories that he provides, it DOES seem that he's caught a nasty case of holier-than-thou-itis as of late.

And we don't begrudge you your success, but it would behoove you to realize that, just like every one of those "bloggers" that you so despise, you'd be absolutely nothing without your readers.

The fact that you haven't realized this, unlike everybody who has ever posted a screed on the Internet, says to us that you ARE, indeed, nothing.

A loud nothing, to be sure, but still a nothing.

I would go take a look at this Drudge but somehow his link seems to be evading me. Maybe he won't notice my failure to visit his royal rag.

Torture

Yea or Nay

Amnesty International proclaims the following:

"Sadly, even in the 21st century there is work to be done to change public attitudes to torture. Torture can never be justified and we must continue to fight for a world in which it is universally regarded as unacceptable,"

Now most people will agree in general that torture is not something that civilized people should be engaged in. But, to say that torture can "never be justified" goes beyond reason. Surely we can all think of examples when, if all else fails, torture should be considered. For instance..........a group of terrorists has a plan to attack a major U.S. city with biological agents. One of them is captured but little is known about the rest of the group, their intended target, or their planned methods of attack. Yea or Nay?
Another example. A vicious criminal has kidnapped a child but when he is caught the child is not with him. There's good reason to believe that the child is alive but this animal simply laughs when asked to tell the location. Knowing that he has admitted burying the child alive the question arises, should he be tortured in order to extract the info needed to save that childs life? Yea or Nay?
There are probably plenty more hypothetical examples where the majority of reasonable people would agree that torture would be justified. This brings up the point of this rambling. When dealing with uncivilized people who hold life and death in their hands for perhaps thousands of civilized people the standard rules should not apply. You can be sure that terrorists and other criminals aren't concerned about our well being or the rules of civilized society. Which brings us to my answer. It is.................Yea.
Rip out their eyes, cut off fingers, castrate, burn, electrocute. Whatever it takes to protect the majority from the very small but vicious minority. Do it. In doing so some serious safeguards should be put in place to ensure that these methods do not migrate into common use. While working out the details get the cattle prods, batteries, and other necessary implements together so they are ready when needed. And they will be needed. And if they are not used when needed, innocent people will suffer. Yea or Nay?

More on the Trial Lawyers planned assault on the food industry

Check out Duane D. Freese's essay at TCS

Trial Lawyers are trying to achieve through litigation public health measures that are properly left to legislators. The next target is the food industry and the Trial Lawyers had a strategy session:

at Northeastern University in Boston, titled, with great expectations for the future, "The First Annual Conference on Legal Approaches to the Obesity Epidemic.

Guess what? The lawyers met in secret.

[the] Sunday workshop of the conference required participants to sign an affidavit that says in part: "I understand that the Legal Strategies Workshopp portion of the ... Conference ... (the 'Workshop') is intended to encourage and support litigation against the food industry and that information acquired at this Workshop is to be considered confidential in keeping with these interests."

I took my quotes from Freese's essay. Go read the whole piece.

There is an obesity epidemic but letting trial lawyers loose on the problem is no solution. The tobacco lawsuits haven't stopped people smoking; they just made a select group of lawyers obscenely rich at the expense of smokers. Suing Fast Food outlets won't stop people eating fast food, but the Trial Lawyers seem to think they can get more billions there.

Tell your local congress critter to vote for HR 339, the "Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act."

Race and Sport

Rev Jesse wants to exploit what should be a non-issue

Professional players and sports teams want to win. They pick the best people they can to do that, subject to the rules and regulations that maintain a semblance of parity in each sport. Over the last 40 years, race has become irrelevant in the pursuit of victory.

Yet racial representation varies greatly between sports. Basketball is the province of black superstars and fairer imports. Football is more black than white in most positions; there are more black quaterbacks than white wide receivers in the NFL. Baseball is the most racially balanced of the major sports while ice hockey remains snow white. But talking about these sports in racial terms is, well, so old-fashioned. The fans and owners don't care so long as their teams get the best players and win.

Why aren't the different sports more equal in racial composition? Some of it has to do with culture. Different groups have different sports preferences. If black kids play much more basketball than ice hockey, then more of them are going to become professional basketball players than ice hocky players. Some of it has to do with natural ability. American blacks seem to be better sprinters than whites. Conversely, the swimming pools are full of white kids swimming lap after lap. Distance running in America is largely a white sport yet the highest levels are dominated by black Africans. Economics is a factor; it costs more to play golf, ride horses and race cars, so cost can act to exclude minorities from getting started in those sports.

You can't change the racial composition of sports by fiat. You've got to change the inputs - the kids and parents who get interested in a sport - before you can affect the output. If the Rev Jesse's outfit thinks NASCAR is "the last bastion of white supremacy" in professional sports, then he can fix it by encouraging black and hispanic and asian families to start participating in the sport at the grass roots level. Maybe he could donate some of his own money to seed such an effort.

Shame on Nascar for letting the Rev Jesse shake them down. The least they could ask for is an independently audited accounting of where every last cent went.

Jesse's Bunch Attacking NASCAR

The Payoff Didn't Pay

The good ole boys of NASCAR tried to play Jesse's extortion game and as is usually the case when blackmail is involved the perps has raised the demands after receiving the initial payoff:

A board member of Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition says auto-racing organizations such as NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing) are "the last bastion of white supremacy" in professional sports.

Nascar is getting what it deserves with this for paying that bunch of shysters to begin with. But, as indicated by comments where one woman compared the discrimination turn-around of Denny's in 18 months to Nascar racing it should be obvious that some of these folks simply don't know jack shit. Yeah, go on down to the hood and get a busload of bros. Simply take'em to the track and put'em in a car. Tell'em to go peddle to the metal wide ass open. Just make sure that no real drivers or anyone else is on the track and use OLD cars. Forget the HANS devices and don't even worry about seat belts, just haul ass, and don't stop until you hear metal crunch and smell shit. They may as well include Jesse and crew in the race as well. Give'em all cars since they obviously feel there is a bevy of qualified black drivers out there.
Seriously, if NASCAR has any guts whatsoever they will break all contact with Jesse and his band of brigands. If not, they will lose fans. In fact, they have nearly lost one already, and he probably isn't alone.

Op Ed Balance

Our local newspaper relies on NYT columnists, giving its Op-Ed page a very leftist slant

So, who does the Plain Dealer serve up?

Maureen Dowd, the mistress of ellipsis
Paul Krugmam, the master of apples and oranges comparison
Bob Herbert, the token Black race baiter
William Safire, the token conservative running on empty
Thomas Friedman, self appointed Middle East "peace" broker
Bill Keller, rabid anti-Bush attack dog
Nicholas Kristof, ditto

In the interests of balance I suggested they try a few conservative alternatives and publish them side by side. I haven't seen that the PD appreciated my suggestion. How about this line-up?

Ann Coulter vs Maureen Dowd
Thomas Sowell vs Paul Krugmam
George Will vs Bob Herbert
Charles Krauthammer vs Thomas Friedman
Christopher Hitchens vs William Safire
Oliver North vs Bill Keller
Mona Charen vs Nicholas Kristof

Could this be a TV show - Celebrity Columnist Conflict? It'd be fun seeing Coulter vs Dowd - the intellectual equivalent of that infamous Miller light cat fight.

Comments

Ain't Working/Is Working......I think

There is a problem with the comment system and at the moment it is not working. Will get back on it tomorrow and try to get it going.

Update 9:30 a.m.
OK. I do believe that's fixed. Sorry for the problem. Now, use the comments to speak up.
You may have noticed that Pat has joined in the fun and is now making some excellent posts on this blog. If you haven't noticed, please do so now and leave those comments to let us know how you feel. Thanks to Pat for contributing to the content and thanks to all who visit this blog, especially those that LEAVE COMMENTS that are thought provoking and informative. Oh yeah, one more thing. COMMENTS, use'em.

Judicious Search

Asinine Stats

Most Popular Entries

Archives

Syndicate RSS

News Links

Contact Form

Your Email

Subject

Message