WisdomIsVindicated

Good thing this is an anomaly

2009-11-22T10:43:00.000-06:00

My Way News - Pa. university students upset about fitness class:

A Pennsylvania university's requirement that overweight undergraduates take a fitness course to receive their degrees has raised the hackles of students and the eyebrows of health and legal experts.

Well, at least we don't have to worry about the gov't ever sticking its nose into our health and healthcare, right?

". . . it's only because of all the fact-checkers' copies"

2009-11-22T10:35:00.000-06:00

My Way News - "Going Rogue" is going big:

Publisher HarperCollins said Friday that Sarah Palin's memoir sold 300,000 copies its first day, among the best openings ever for a nonfiction book. In 2004, Bill Clinton's 'My Life' debuted with sales of 400,000 copies. The year before, Hillary Rodham Clinton's 'Living History' started at 200,000.

TN gun ruling: whose Constitutional right is at stake?

2009-11-21T21:49:00.000-06:00

Reuters is reporting . . . Tennessee judge blocks law allowing guns in bars | U.S. | Reuters

Nashville Judge Claudia Bonnyman said the law was 'fraught with ambiguity' and ruled in favor of a suit brought by restaurant owners who argued gun owners would not be able to determine if an establishment met the criteria.

Legal gadfly Gordon Bonnyman's wife may be a bit of a gadfly herself; except she's a judge. Under what theory of "standing" does a restaurant owner sue against a law on behalf of patrons who might (or might not) be unsure about whether they're breaking the law? Regrettably, it appears that Judge Bonnyman, like her husband, is inclined to use the courts to legislate her policy preferences.

Bureaucratic boobs

2009-11-21T19:41:00.000-06:00

Sister Toldjah nails the mammogram story ("Obama admin starts its health care 'cost cutting' measures")which probably could not come at a worse time for Obama and the Democrats as they prepare to foist government-run (aka "single-payer," "universal," "socialized," "public" etc.) healthcare on Americans. Nonetheless, the story reminded me of an interesting NYTimes article I came across a couple weeks ago--"Cancers Can Vanish Without Treatment, but How?". . . about studies which reflect that early and often cancer screens may be catching cancers that would otherwise disappear on their own.

Healthcare is complicated stuff . . . it's comforting to think that gov't bureaucrats may soon be making all these decisions for us, huh?

So-called scientists

2009-11-21T15:33:00.000-06:00

Here's a great article in the WSJ about emerging evidence of deception by so-called scientists working on global warming. Hacked Emails Show Climate Science Ridden with Rancor - WSJ.com. From the article:

In several of the emails, climate researchers discussed how to arrange for favorable reviewers for papers they planned to publish in scientific journals. At the same time, climate researchers at times appeared to pressure scientific journals not to publish research by other scientists whose findings they disagreed with.

Yep . . .

2009-11-10T12:33:00.000-06:00

Higher Ed crisis!

2009-11-09T13:38:00.003-06:00

The cost of higher ed is rising faster than the cost of health insurance . . . let's pull an all-nighter to solve the problem!

It is interesting to note that Democrats are in the process of "disadvantaging" non-governmental education loan companies . . . sounds a lot like the likely problems with making non-governmental health insurance companies compete with a "public option."

Back to the drawing board on same-sex "marriage"?

2009-11-04T16:02:00.001-06:00

Yesterday, Maine voters became the 31st state body politic to reject same-sex "marriage," but Maine is unique in that the defeat at the polls came after a majority of the Maine legislature had approved of the concept.

Thus, the results of yesterday's referendum in Maine have national significance inasmuch as they lay bare the political strategy of homosexual activists like Tim Gill ("They won't know what hit them."-- The Atlantic). In sum, it's a little disingenuous to contend that the so-called legislative route is/was, pardon the pun, out in the open, as is implied in this TIME story. After Maine Gay-Marriage Defeat, Activists Look Ahead - TIME From the article:

In order to counter that argument [that homosexual marriage is being "foisted" upon Americans by "out-of-touch" judges], [attorney Mary] Bonauto and other gay-marriage activists in Maine who began organizing to press for gay marriage there decided to avoid taking the issue to court. Instead, they set about electing lawmakers who were friendly to their cause two years ago, and this year successfully convinced the legislature to become the nation's first to establish gay marriage by statute, rather than by decree. "Frankly, we had heard the criticisms about going the court route, and so we said, 'Fine, we'll go to the legislature,'" says Bonauto. "And it has been an incredible campaign."

I'd say it's one thing to present an issue/platform squarely to voters and let them vote, and another to simply get people elected who covertly share your agenda. The latter looks more like a coup than republican government.

He invented climate-alarmism profiteering

2009-11-03T10:14:00.002-06:00

Gore’s Dual Role - Advocate and Investor - NYTimes.com From the article:

Mr. Gore says that he is simply putting his money where his mouth is.

“Do you think there is something wrong with being active in business in this country?” Mr. Gore said. “I am proud of it. I am proud of it.”

In an e-mail message this week, he said his investment activities were consistent with his public advocacy over decades.

“I have advocated policies to promote renewable energy and accelerate reductions in global warming pollution for decades, including all of the time I was in public service,” Mr. Gore wrote. “As a private citizen, I have continued to advocate the same policies. Even though the vast majority of my business career has been in areas that do not involve renewable energy or global warming pollution reductions, I absolutely believe in investing in ways that are consistent with my values and beliefs. I encourage others to invest in the same way.”

It's one thing to be in business and another thing to be intimately involved in crafting the policies that lead to GOVERNMENT contracts. And you gotta love the word-smithing of "global warming pollution reductions." Read: Carbon Dioxide. Which reminds me of the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide.

The audacity of spendthriftiness

2009-10-30T09:17:00.000-05:00

Wow.
Obama team makes it official: Budget deficit hits record. By a lot. - The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency:

The deficit for fiscal year 2009, which ended Sept. 30, came in at a record $1.42 trillion, more than triple the record set just last year.

In addition, future deficits are currently projected to total $9.1 trillion in the coming decade.

Waging Obama's non-war

2009-10-28T10:00:00.000-05:00

BBC NEWS--"US warned on deadly drone attacks":

The US has been warned that its use of drones to target suspected terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan may violate international law.

UN human rights investigator Philip Alston said the US should explain the legal basis for attacking individuals with the remote-controlled aircraft.

He said the CIA had to show accountability to international laws which ban arbitrary executions.

Drones have killed about 600 people in north-west Pakistan since August 2008.

At first I was struck at how this article hardly referenced our current Commander in Chief, but Obama is mentioned in the next-to-last sentence:

Mr Alston's warning came as US President Barack Obama reviews US strategy in the Afghan campaign.

Which leads me to think that drones may perfectly illustrate Obama's uninspired war-by-proxy strategy in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Sloppy policy thinking

2009-10-24T11:53:00.000-05:00

I came across a great post (and seemingly great blog) via Post Politics this morning.

The writer is pointing out that some women resist Feminism because of its Big Gov't baggage more than its presumed stances on "social issues." From the article (The Libertarian Side of Global Feminism? « Cosmopolitan Conservative):

As a social conservative in America, you would think that my main issue with feminism would be abortion. However, it is feminism’s deep commitment to socialism that bothers me the most. Feminists believe that to empower women, you need to weaken men. In order to help the poor, you have to take away resources from the rich through taxes, lawsuits, anti-discrimination laws or quotas. Feminists believe that in order to change society, the federal government has to step in and pass a law. It’s as though freedom, wealth and liberty are in limited quantities and must be rationed out to the masses in different levels determined by arbitrary perceptions of discrimination.

If feminists spent more time trying to alter society’s perceptions instead of bullying people through lawsuits, mandates and laws, I believe that a lot many more Americans would embrace the movement. However, feminists have allowed their cause to be co-opted by the Democratic party in order to maintain political power and relevancy. They’ve sacrificed the “principles” of their movement for short-term gains. Allowing a political party to take o[]ver your movement only weakens it. (Sadly, that comes from watching Republicans all but destroy the fiscal conservatism on the right. )

As I thought about how easy it is to blur party and principles, I was thinking about the perils of sloppy thinking on policy. For example, her last point about the GOP and fiscal conservatism. It is tempting for all of us to put on the ideological cruise control. And thermodynamically speaking it does not work to just rubber stamp the activities of Political Party.

The Pup tent Dems

2009-10-24T11:13:00.000-05:00

Interesting email from my inclusive friends at Democrats.com:

Dear Ned,
After months of debate, an overwhelming majority of Americans support a "robust public option" similar to Medicare.
And thanks to the heroic efforts of progressive activists, we have almost enough votes in the Senate and House to pass it.
The Democratic majorities in the Senate (60/40) and the House (258/177) are large enough to pass a "public option" even with no Republican support. But a handful of conservative "Democrats" are blocking the will of the Democratic majority.
These conservative "Democrats" refuse to listen to the Democratic voters who elected them. That means it's up to our Democratic leaders - Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and President Obama - to persuade them.
Join the Democratic Donor Strike for a Robust Public Option . . .

I have missed the poll that showed "an overwhelming majority of Americans support 'a robust public option'" (though the quotation marks in the original email are indicative of hair-splitting, I think), and I like how they put the word Democrats in quotation marks when referring to those Democrats who are bucking purported overwhelming majorities.

Under moral siege

2009-10-22T10:29:00.001-05:00

Somer Thompson Body Found: Sheriff Matches Birthmark, Clothing - ABC News:

As investigators examined a child's body found in a Georgia landfill, they hoped they wouldn't find what they were looking for. But a birthmark and clothing told them that they had, indeed, found 7-year-old Somer Thompson, who disappeared Monday while walking home from school in her Orange Park, Fla., neighborhood.
. . . .
[Clay County Sheriff Rick] Beseler said detectives are following up on leads today and trying to finish locating all of the more than 90 sex offenders who live in a three-mile radius around Somer's home.

(emphasis added) That is astonishing. 90 people who have committed sexual crimes. How could you not feel under siege, morally speaking, in that neighborhood?

While mowing the lawn the other day, I got to thinking about how far my personal morals--about pornography or "adult entertainment"--should influence the public policy I push. How open am I to being a Libertarian in political terms? I had watched some of Penn Jillette's "penn says" online videos and was wondering to what degree I could cooperate with him on public policy. (I had ventured to the site to watch Jillette's comments (profanity advisory) about a nasty confrontation with surely non-mean-spirited, tolerant, Liberal Tommy Smothers.) The report about Obama's laxening of Federal interest in laws (here) relating to marijuana use also got me to thinking about such things.

As I ruminated on the ramifications of Libertarian policies, I was thinking of comparisons with industrial pollution in a community or with other passive dangers to humans, but they all seem to fall short of the danger that messed up humans pose to humans. I suppose what constitutes moral pollution is more subjective than biological/environmental pollution. And though all people aren't affected the same way by their use of pornography or marijuana (or alcohol), laissez faire treatment of such vices would be a difficult argument to make to Diena Thompson today. How could she not be concerned about the impact--on appetites and psyches and families--of cultural messages and public policies reflecting the view that people are objects and self-gratification is harmless? Where are the appropriate moral and political boundaries?

I'm seriously interested in hearing different viewpoints on the matter . . .

Bad actors on several levels

2009-10-19T10:41:00.000-05:00

Frankly, after watching a couple youtube clips of the infamous Heenes, there is certainly one element of their story that is rather incredible: the parents, Richard and Mayumi, have received acting instruction. From a CNN story ("Authorities: 'Balloon boy' incident was a hoax" - CNN.com):

The parents, Richard and Mayumi Heene, met in a Hollywood acting school . . .

If they're guilty of this costly hoax, they are guilty of bad acting on various levels.

Thanks, AP, for giving us the expert's "qualifications"

2009-10-18T14:26:00.000-05:00

This AZ sheriff has always fascinated me--especially the pink prison boxers and tents for inmates, so I was curious to hear about a dust up he is having with the Obama Administration. In the AP's report (here) of the controversy, they are careful to "qualify" the opinion of one legal expert:

Kris Kobach, a law professor at the University of Missouri at Kansas City and an advocate of expanding local immigration efforts, said Arpaio's office — like every other local police agency — can detain people suspected of immigration violations for a day or two until federal authorities come to pick them up.

In the past, Arpaio could have held such immigrants for longer than two days and conducted investigations of smuggling rings, Kobach said.

'It's really a slight narrowing, but it's not much,' said Kobach, who worked as an immigration law adviser to then-U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft from 2001-2003.

(emphasis added) This is almost humorous, if it wasn't so transparently biased and if its source wasn't so unduly influential at framing public debate. I'll be eager to see future background info on every legal scholar with a Liberal opinion.

Hey MSM, we need you to be our eyes and ears for the news, not our brains.

Ramming through healthcare "reform"

2009-10-15T14:19:00.000-05:00

Yesterday while leaving the post office, I was targeted for a scam by two conmen (I'll share more about that in another post), and one thing that I realized as I interacted with these guys is how valuable a perception of haste is scamming a "mark."

I've been ruminating over a soundbite I heard from John F. Kerry the other day, something along the lines of, "We've been waiting since Teddy Roosevelt to do this" (in reference to socializing healthcare or whatever he's acting like this bill is going to do). That sounds about right and it's consistent with what I've been reading in Liberal Facism. The Dems' efforts on healthcare seem like a big rush for those of us who appreciate free markets (and free people), but maybe not for people like Kerry.

While radio channel surfing this morning I heard a great interview by Fred Thompson with healthcare expert James Capretta about the blushingly presumptuous (not to mention disingenuous) predictions from the Left about actual costs of current Liberal healthcare reform proposals. For example, the $821 billion estimate presumes $100 billion of reduction in fees paid to physicians that anyone in the know will admit are cuts that will not happen.

Another example was upwards of $100 billion that the Feds are presuming they can pass along to the States. Which was corroborated by candid statements from Gov. Bredesen. Terry Frank links to it at her place. terryfrank.net » Bredesen Predicts Even Larger Costs to Tennesseans

And now there's word (via Drudge) that Harry Reid is admitting the gross underestimate of likely costs for taxpayer-funded health insurance. Let's slow down a little Dems.

Al of Freddy's Fashion Mart fame speaks out on Limbaugh and NFL

2009-10-15T07:40:00.000-05:00

From the master of division and incendiary-ness ("Group Cuts Ties With Limbaugh to Buy NFL Team" - FOXNews.com):

[Al] Sharpton added in a telephone interview that major sports leagues shouldn't welcome owners who are "divisive and incendiary."

Way to go TNRtL

2009-10-14T15:14:00.004-05:00

It is intriguing to read Tennessee's Left (and Squishy Right) decry the TNDP's (a) failure to appreciate that "the Man" is more important than the party ("Why didn't they recruit a better $?%&@# Candidate?!?!?) and (b) failure to choose a candidate who was strong on their (Democratic) Principles while simultaneously assailing Tennessee Right to Life for making a non-partisan, principled choice to endorse a candidate who was solid on their issues over someone cool/arguably indifferent on their issues.

I have to say that I pretty much agree with Adam Kleinheider's assessment of the race . . . below is some of the less-informed buzz about Pat Marsh's win over Ty Cobb in the special election for Tennessee House District 62:

AuntB

Southern Beale

Left-wing Cracker

And comments at Post Politics.

Obama lets handlers handle this one

2009-10-13T09:58:00.001-05:00

The question of where, if at all, the Obamas would attend church in D.C. had not even crossed my mind until I heard today that they were still church hunting. But I thought the following paragraph on the subject was ironic, given Obama's history of apparently indiscriminate pew-filling "Washington Churches Eye the Obamas" - NYTimes.com):

"Mr. Obama’s search for a church home has touched off a frenzied competition among ministers of various colors and creeds who are wooing the first family. The president, in turn, has sent emissaries to observe worship services, interview congregants and scrutinize pastors. (His aides even searched YouTube to vet one local minister.)"

(emphasis added) And later in the article we read this choice detail:

In January, Mr. Obama prayed at his first Sunday service here at Nineteenth Street Baptist Church, where hundreds of black professionals worship in a gleaming white sanctuary well beyond this city’s corridors of power. (The president took notes.)

(emphasis added)

Though I can hardly imagine how it is possible to be a part of a church when you are president or a president's family member, godspeed in finding your church, Mr. President.

Obama's Nobel [Ap]Pea[s]e Prize?

2009-10-12T12:05:00.000-05:00

The whole "story" about Obama's Nobel Peace Prize is fascinating to me. Sour grapes (here) might explain some of my feelings upon hearing the news, but really it is more of plain ol' disbelief. I think even honest Liberals would admit they couldn't believe the news when they heard it.

And it has led to an interesting car conversation with my 10-year-old. When I told her the news, and my take on it (the award was based on what Obama had promised to do) she really impressed me by referring to a joke she had told me about a year ago (aren't young minds impressive?). Here's the joke.

But what prompted this post was something from Jay Nordlinger at The Corner on National Review Online providing some interesting back story about the Nobel Prize:

I’ve read some commentary that the Nobel Committee has handed Obama a “poisoned chalice,” because now his freedom of action will be constrained: How can he take military action, when necessary — or persevere in war, when necessary — while holding the title of “peace laureate”? As it happens, this issue arose in Norway, about Norway, long ago. Let me explain.

Continue reading about the Nobel Prize's poison chalice history here.

Because Norwegians don't get to vote in American elections . . .

2009-10-09T09:23:00.001-05:00

This paragraph provides all the necessary context for the Nobel Peace Prize Committee's controversial pick of simply-successful-presidential-candidate Barack Obama ("Nobel Committee Courts Controversy Over Obama Peace Prize Decision" - WSJ.com):

The committee has also been criticized for political bias, especially after it awarded the Nobel to Jimmy Carter in 2002 and Al Gore in 2007 -- moves that were both seen as rebukes to the then U.S. President, George W. Bush.

UPDATE: Thankfully, even Obama supporters are acknowledging--and calling the Nobel Committee out regarding, this silly decision.

PostPartisan - A Nobel for a Good Two Weeks?:

This is ridiculous -- embarrassing, even. I admire President Obama. I like President Obama. I voted for President Obama. But the peace prize? This is supposed to be for doing, not being -- and it’s no disrespect to the president to suggest he hasn’t done much yet. Certainly not enough to justify the peace prize.

'Extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples?” “[C]aptured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future?” Please. This turns the award into something like pee-wee soccer: everybody wins for trying.

Amazing software not-too-crudely "automates" graphic design

2009-10-07T15:37:00.001-05:00

PhotoSketch: Internet Image Montage from tao chen on Vimeo.

Unhealthy healthcare

2009-10-07T14:16:00.000-05:00

Deroy Murdock shares some salient data on how unhealthy government-run healthcare is ("Government Medicine Kills"):

The Senate Finance Committee should sink Obama-Baucuscare and instead craft a patient-friendly, pro-market, limited-government approach to health-care reform. Perhaps some senators cannot fathom the Hippocratic Oath’s key insight: First, do no harm. If that’s Greek to them, here it is in language they understand: First, don’t kill your voters.

Iron[ies] of ironies

2009-10-07T10:51:00.003-05:00

While reading about Ahmadinejad's Jewish heritage, I happened upon a photo album on the Telegraph's (UK) website. The album's introductory copy reads:

When Lennart Nilsson's pictures of developing embryos were published in Life magazine in 1965, they caused a sensation. Within days, the entire print run of eight million had sold out. More than 40 years later, the photographs have lost none of their power.

(emphasis added) I agree, and I encourage you to give 'em a look see. ("A Child is Born: Photographs of the foetus developing in the womb," by Lennart Nilsson)

But I had to comment on the irony of the caption beneath a stunning photo of a two-month old "embryo" (here):

Eight weeks. The rapidly-growing embryo is well protected in the foetal sac

Well, in light of Liberal American abortion policy, not really protected.

Which reminds me of the 40 Days for Life being conducted locally by Nashville Right to Life through Nov. 1st. I just read this account of a conversation between a crisis pregnancy counselor and a woman who changed her mind about getting an abortion:

She told me that she already had four children, was not financially sound, and had to work full time. She then added, "But that's not my baby's fault."

(40daysforlife.com)