For unto you is born...

Merry Christmas

And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.

And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.

And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

A "Smell Test" for payments from tax revenues?

In his Letter to The Editor at the WSJ, Hendrik Van den Berg of Lincoln, Nebraska begins by seeming to make the point that the ACLU has the right to question where public tax dollars are spent. At first, I give him the benefit of doubt that he seems to make the libertarian argument that tax dollars should not be spent on anything. Instead, he just creates his own "smell test" where only anything that has any reference to God, not be funded.

In your Nov. 26 editorial "Bashing the Boy Scouts" you bash the ACLU for pursuing legal actions to stop the use of public funds to support the Scouts, using the term "silly" to describe such actions and the military's reaction to the ACLU's suit -- but you present no compelling argument why the ACLU is wrong. Whether you think that the Boy Scouts are part of "the bedrock of American life" is irrelevant. That the Boy Scouts "build character in young men" is also irrelevant to the argument. Whether the Boy Scouts lose when the ACLU gets the courts to rule against the use of public funds is not just irrelevant to your argument, but this argument hints at exactly the problem the ACLU is attempting to address: The many alleged "bedrocks" and "character builders" in our country all have the right to make their cases, but they have no right to government funded sponsorship.

The fact is that the Boy Scouts require members to believe in God. They have every right to set requirements for membership, and the courts have supported that right. But that requirement makes them a religious advocacy group. The constitution is very clear in this case: we have freedom of religion, not official sponsorship of religion. I certainly do not want to have my taxes paying for the Boy Scouts brainwashing young boys with ideas that clash with my convictions.
Hendrik Van den Berg
Lincoln, Neb.

Brawl Erupts At Competition

Another incident involving overpaid professional sports figures? No. This brawl took place at a Pom Pon event for teenagers:

"'A brawl broke out in the gym,' said Bridgette Rhodes, whose daughter performed in the competition. 'People were fighting. Somebody threw cans. Somebody threw a trophy. It was just out of control.'"

As wrong as the NBA players were in the recent violence in Detroit, under-reported actions like this tell the bigger story. Our society has become more and more less civil. I don't argue that violence has increased. There has always been some level of violence historically. What is most troubling is how trivial the causes have become.

Thomas Sowell: Green bigots international

Yet again, Thomas Sowell brings a clarity to reality:

"African economist James Skikwati in Kenya put the case against affluent Western environmental extremists very plainly when he said, 'wealthy countries want the Earth to be green, the underdeveloped want the Earth fed.' He asked: 'What gives the developed nations the right to make choices for the poor?'"

Hmmm?

What matters to voters

From a recent NBC-WSJ poll, this insight from Al Hunt:

"Democrats do well on universally shared values; asked in the December WSJ-NBC News poll which values are associated with the Democratic Party, Americans say ensuring equal opportunity, tolerance and compassion. But it's Republicans who score high on strengthening families, raising standards of public decency, religion and faith or personal responsibility. These are the politically defining social issues, the ones that affect votes."

When it comes time to vote, people vote on issues where they see the bigger gap between what they desire and what they think exists. For the 'shared values' that the Democrats poll well in - equal opportunity, tolerance, and compassion - most people don't see a big enough gap, or need to fix compared to the those that Republicans score high on.

In other words, Democrats poll high in areas that most people think already work and they poll lower in areas where most people have concerns and are looking for change.

Another plank of personal responsibility removed?

WE Energies, a Wisconsin electric and gas utility that serves primarily the southeastern corner of the state has proposed a new rate plan as a pilot. The utility cites "... an “alarming trend” in the number of bills that customers are unable to pay..." as the reason for this new plan. In effect, the utility is willing to forgive past debts from delinquent customers and give them a reduced rate structure. These debts, and the difference in rate revenue, will be made up somewhere I'm sure.

This quote from the article:

"Charlie Higley, executive director of the Wisconsin Citizens' Utility Board, said he supports the concept because it's based on a customer's income and ability to pay."

Brings to mind another:

"From each according to ability, to each according to need."

Let's just remove all personal responsibility from these people. The "soft bigotry of low expectations" is alive and well in Milwaukee!

Peterson Verdict & Penalty

I have little to say on this matter.

The man committed a horrific act without remorse and the world will not miss him.

Will putting Peterson to death deter future murders? Only those that he may commit.

Will the world miss anything he could contribute in the future? Far less than anything Laci and his son would have contributed if they had been given a chance.

This Is Your Country on Drugs

I commented on this phenomenon in an earlier post, here a college professor re-enforces the idea that I have such a hard time comprehending. We are a nation of pill poppers:

"College students take Ritalin to improve their academic performance. Musicians take beta blockers to improve their onstage performance. Middle-aged men take Viagra to improve their sexual performance. Shy people take Paxil to improve their social performance. The difference is that if athletes want to get performance-enhancing drugs they go to the black market. If the rest of us want performance-enhancing drugs, we go to our family doctors."

The professor at first, attributes this to the free market:

Perhaps this is the inevitable result of turning our medical system over to the market, where making sick people well is often less profitable than making well people better than well. Procter & Gamble, for example, has decided that the profit margins of its ordinary consumer items like Crest toothpaste and Tide laundry detergent are not nearly as appealing as the enormous profit margins of prescription drugs.

But later, I think he makes an even more salient point:

America's appetite for stimulants, antidepressants and Botox injections looks less like enthusiasm and more like fear. It is the look of a Little Leaguer stepping up to the plate in the bottom of the ninth with two outs and the bases loaded, terrified that he is going to strike out.

My question is, "Who judges us more harshly: other people, or ourselves?"

UPDATE: Here is an essay from a doctor discussing the patient, doctor, drug relationship and the implications. Interesting insight, including this:

"The next, we discover once again that little known fact: There is a placebo effect for doctors, too."

Onscreen, It's the Season of Cynicism

Christmas films today take a far different approach than in the past, according to this article in The New York Times:

"Nowadays, 'you make fun of Christmas,' said the film historian David Thomson, who has just published a history of the industry called 'The Whole Equation' (Alfred A. Knopf). 'I think it's more current now to say that Christmas is this dreadful family occasion where relatives who don't like each other come together and get drunk and start fighting. A lot of Christmas movies are rather like that.' "

Fortunately, at our house, the cynicism hasn't set in as hard as at seems in other parts of the country. I'll take a little wholesome naivete over worldly skepticism any day:

"One of the main problems in the industry is that young kids do not take the story material seriously," Mr. Thomson said. "They think it's mocking. For that reason it's very difficult to play a straight Christmas film, with a straight Christmas sentiment, without looking ridiculously sentimental. If you tried to do 'A Wonderful Life' now, I don't think you could get away with it. The things we once took very seriously, we half-mock them now."

As for the kids not taking the material seriously - gimme a break. It isn't the kids, it's how the parents treat them. If the parents choose to be cynical and express it, the kids will pick up on that far more than anything that film contains. It isn't the film mocking the kids, it's the parents mocking them and not letting them be kids.

Christmas is a time for ALL of us to be kids again. Give it a try. You can even buy "It's A Wonderful Life" on DVD and watch whenever you want!

Why study math?

In the NYTs piece, "The Last Time You Used Algebra Was...", the age old question is raised to counter the annual rankings the US finds itself falling in year after year. As the Thomas Sowell piece earlier addressed, our educational priorities are often skewed by the 'professionals' who know better. In this story, the author suggests another aspect: "Why learn something we'll never use?" As he points out, this can be asked of nearly ALL subjects. When was the last time you used Voltaire, Shakespeare, dissected a pig, or cited the table of elements?

In our world of immediate satisfaction, we educate to, and expect, immediate results. We don't educate to think unless it's related to social issues. And even then, you're educated to think one way - diversely (which has become an oxymoron). The last paragraph, from an educator who understands, makes the point:

"'What we do isn't exactly what mathematicians do,' she explained. 'And I know more alums here become artists than become mathematicians. But kids don't study poetry just because they're going to grow up to be poets. It's about a habit of mind. Your mind doesn't think abstractly unless it's asked to - and it needs to be asked to from a relatively young age. The rigor and logic that goes into math is a good way for your brain to be trained.'"

We all need to think more - not just learn. There is a difference.

Educational priorities

Thomas Sowell: Phony 'ethics':

"We have known for a long time that teenagers in Japan scored much higher on international math tests than American teenagers do. But did you know that teenagers in Poland, the Slovak Republic, Iceland, Canada, and Korea -- among other places -- also score higher than our teenagers? Out of 29 countries whose teenagers took a recent international math test, American teenagers ranked 24th. Americans also scored near the bottom on tests of general problem-solving."

But no one should be able to get their college diploma at the University of Michigan without a Sex and Gender requirement being met! (see earlier post)

The stakes are higher than single issues

Thomas Sowell: Once in a lifetime:

"With the agenda of the political left increasingly rejected by voters at the polls, the only way to get the items on that agenda enacted into law is to have judges who will decree the liberal agenda from the bench. Too many judges have already done that on everything from gay marriage to racial quotas and the death penalty.

It is not these or other particular issues which are the highest stakes. The highest stakes are democratic self-governance versus judicial fiats that threaten to make a mockery of the American system of government by elected officials."

As always, Sowell has a way of looking past the immediacy of the moment in time and sees the bigger impact.

Welcome back Krugman

Paul Krugman is back and I must admit, in this statement, he's absolutely right!:

"If Mr. Bush were to say in plain English that his plan to solve our fiscal problems is to borrow trillions, put the money into stocks and hope for the best, everyone would denounce that plan as the height of irresponsibility. The fact that this plan has an elaborate disguise, one that would add considerably to its costs, makes it worse. "

However, since this is NOT Mr. Bush's plan, the premise of Krugman's story is the same old rant. As usual, Krugman does his best to misrepresent the intentions of George Bush and his administration while offering no plan of his own to solve a looming problem. It's easy to state a problem, imagine all the potential negatives of any plan, and present only the negatives as fact making the plan, therefore, an "unrealistic scheme".

One way or another, Social Security is going to cost us a lot of money. We're either going to pay to fix it, or fund it as is. To do the latter would require the greatest shift in wealth from one generation to another in the history of man. There are simply not enough future workers to pay for the benefits of the future recipients.

The Left believes in redistribution of wealth but I don't think even they can live with the impact this would have on the productivity and well-being of every American worker - not to mention the generational animosity brought on by the policy.

UPDATE: Apparently I missed an earlier piece (December 7th) from Krugman that discusses his plan: Leave Social Security alone and raise taxes!

Mother's Little Helper - for Everything!

WSJ.com:

"As for the politicians who turned out for the Sunday talk shows--e.g., John McCain recently suggested that the government step in to require more stringent testing if baseball owners do not quickly come around to that position themselves--they should at least acknowledge that there is a fair amount of hypocrisy behind all the righteousness. With everyone else relying on biotech to improve what nature has decreed for us, do not expect Mr. Giambi to be any different. As long as there are pills to boost performance, there will be consumers ready to take them. In a culture where we medicate every opportunity, the real surprise in the wake of baseball's steroid mess may be not how many players used the drugs to gain an edge, but how few."

I must be out of the loop on this but I can't believe our society has come to this. I understand there is a sub-set of our society which looks for the easy answer. I understand there are those who can't face the reality of aging. I can understand some people's pain threshold is lower than others. But I can't believe that the MAJORITY of Americans seek medication or surgical procedures to 'fix their ills'. For a doctor to suggest this gives it some credibility, but I think we need to examine what got us to this point in history where a pill can solve all our problems!

Campaign Kick-off?

Could this be the start of Democratic hopeful Jimmy Massey's 2036 Presidential campaign?:

"A former United States marine told a refugee hearing for an American war dodger Tuesday that trigger-happy U.S. soldiers in Iraq routinely killed unarmed women and children, and murdered other Iraqis in violation of international law. In chilling testimony intended to bolster the asylum claim of compatriot Jeremy Hinzman, former staff sergeant Jimmy Massey recounted how nervous soldiers trained to believe that all Iraqis were potential terrorists often
opened fire indiscriminately."

Just because it didn't work for Kerry doesn't mean that Massey can't pull it off. I can already see the ads by the "Humvee Vets for Truth" being blamed for his loss, however.

And this makes our graduates more competitive in what - exactly?

This, from Independent Women's Forum via John Miller at The Corner, is almost laughable if it wasn't possible:

"'A Gender and Sexuality requirement will create new dialogues, challenge hegemonic discourse, break taboos and stigmas, and open up realms of communication between all students, states the student's proposal, slowly being circulated among...faculty members. The plan would incorporate a wide swathe of issues, from classes on 'Hollywood Masculinity' to those on gender and health.'

As Erin writes:

'In other words, this is a course requirement that would force all UM students to undergo a mandatory process of political consciousness-raising.'"

This "enlightened" proposal is from the students at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.

Size doesn't matter

The New York Times > Opinion > A Family Portrait, in Red and Blue (5 Letters):

To the Editor:
David Brooks applauds parents 'who have enough kids for a basketball team,' a sentiment that takes my breath away. Does having many children signal a greater devotion to parenting? I think not.

My husband and I have one child, and our 'personal identity is defined by parenthood.' Our child's physical, emotional and spiritual well-being is our primary and deeply satisfying concern.

But I also know that we are part of a bigger family. And this is what Mr. Brooks overlooks.

Large American families consume resources and produce waste in glaring disproportion to most other families of the world.

These natalists value their own immediate nuclear families to the detriment of our human family.

Erin Anthony

Carbondale, Ill., Dec. 7, 2004

Here is an excerpt from the original Op-Ed which Erin responded to:

Very often they have sacrificed pleasures like sophisticated movies, restaurant dining and foreign travel, let alone competitive careers and disposable income, for the sake of their parental calling.

As a parent of three, living in a small (just over 10,000 people) town in Wisconsin (a blue state mind you), I can attest to some of the statements made by David Brooks in his Op-Ed piece. My wife and I have made other choices than some. In fact, most of the families in this small town have made the same choices. To call the things Mr. Brooks lists as 'sacrifices', misses the point.

As for Erin from Carbondale, she completely misses the point of having a family. She uses her letter to condescend and admonish those of us who have the audacity to produce more than one offspring. For her, it isn't the number of children as much as it is her attitude. Each of our three children is unique, with their own personality. Without families like those of us in 'wasteful' Port Washington, her precious progeny would grow up in world without much diversity.

In addition, there is a dynamic between siblings that can't be replaced. Brothers and sisters have to learn to get along with each other. They can't 'go home' and be alone. They share bedrooms, bathrooms, dinner tables, toys, and parents every day. Just like they'll share workspaces, transportation, resources and bosses in the future.

We didn't make our decision to have children on political grounds. We didn't intellectually calculate the impact that each of our kids would have on the environment to determine to proper number to produce nor did we calculate the 'life-time' cost of raising kids and the impact that would have on our portfolio.

We had children as an expression of the love that we have for each other based on the traditions of our own families and the faith we have in the future of mankind. As I think about our community and the families that make up this community, I believe that most feel pretty much the same way. We tend to be generally optimistic and conservative - even those who vote blue.

What is government's role?

In today's WSJ.com, Milton Friedman discusses how the non-defense spending by the US government has changed since the end of WWII. He rightly points out that while Socialism, in the true sense of the word, has been all but been eliminated as a government of choice throughout the world, in practice, the US is very close to operating a socialistic welfare and regulatory state:

"In the first postwar decade, 1945 to 1955, government non-defense spending, federal, state and local, equaled 11.5% of national income, varying from a high of 16% in 1949 to a low of 8.5% in 1952. From then on, spending rose rapidly. By 1983, government non-defense spending reached 30% of national income, nearly triple the average amount in the first postwar decade. In addition, over the same period, government intrusion into business and private affairs exploded (a small sample: Medicare, Medicaid, Americorps, Head Start, Job Corps, EPA, OSHA, CPSC, LSC, EEOC). No doubt the growth of government was one reason for the shift in public opinion. Big government in practice proved less attractive than big government in prospect."

Illegal Immigration Policy?

Malaysia has what may be considered an unusual punishment for illegal immigrants. Of course, nothing is as bad as anything the US does, whether it's prisoner abuse or it's own unfair immigration policies, but this might raise some eyebrows:

"A total 18,607 illegal immigrants in Malaysia were whipped under an amendment to the Immigration Act introduced in 2002, Deputy Home Affairs Minister Tan Chai Ho said Wednesday. "

Before you get too worried, there's this:

"Most were whipped for entering without valid documents but the women and men above (50) years who were caught were spared," he said.

It may be worth watching this situation as those that do not leave voluntarily may face further sanctions:

"We are unhappy many have still not left...if they don't leave they will face the full might of the law."

Hmm. I wonder where the International Red Cross is? That's right, they're in Gitmo fretting over terrorists being held against their will (so they don't kill anyone) rather than assisting innocents for crossing the wrong border to find work.

Nations Meet to Discuss Global Climate Change

I wonder what kind of wine and hors de oeuvres they are serving? "Story" [emphasis mine]:

"The Climate Change Convention will be the last before the Kyoto Protocol officially takes effect in February. The environmental community is still glowing from the recent decision by Russia to ratify the Kyoto Protocol which made it legally binding. The convention's Executive Secretary, Joke Waller-Hunter of the Netherlands, addressed the convention Monday and congratulated delegates for their achievements."

Perhaps they should reconsider the choice of Executive Secretary. Didn't anyone think that someone with that first name may not be the best spokesperson for a questionable cause?

'Tis the season? Apparently not for some...

Maureen Dowd, a voice of the left (by edict or self-appointment) makes a confession in her witty Op-Ed titled Jingle Bell Schlock:

"I've never said this out loud before, but I can't stand Christmas."

On the one hand, this epitomizes the left - they hate everything! Can anyone tell me ONE positive thing the left has had to say in the last, oh - 50 years? Especially MoDo?

On the other hand, it isn't a surprise that the main reason for her anxiety and negative thoughts during this season are self-focused and full of self-pity:

"It might be exacerbated by the stress I feel when I think of all the money I've spent on lavishing boyfriends with presents over the years, guys who are now living with other women who are enjoying my lovingly picked out presents which I'm no doubt still paying for in credit card interest charges."

Get over yourself, it isn't always about you! That goes for those of you on the left who commiserate with her too.

Steroids, Sports and Life

The WSJ.com - The Daily Fix has a story which compiles reactions from around the country to the latest scandal in sports:

"While fans immerse themselves in the ugly details, it's worth also recalling why this matters. Miami Herald columnist Linda Robertson reminds that we may lose a key element of enjoying sports: wonder. 'Fans who once marveled at the feats of their fellow humans will get bored watching chemically-enhanced mutants smash ever more meaningless records.' The International Herald Tribune's Rob Hughes, meanwhile, asks, 'What do we tell the children now of our grown up ethos that sport is good for the body and the soul?'"

As a fan and father, I have long since given up on that ethos in sports. There are too few who embody it anymore. Here in Wisconsin, we feel blessed to have Brett Favre as the quarterback of the Green Bay Packers. He has been the closest person to continue that ethos - playing for the love of the game and always giving his best (even when his best isn't good enough) - yet even he struggled with pain killers.

No one is perfect and we should never place anyone on that pedestal. As easy at is to blame the player (and justified) for not taking personal responsibility, others must assume blame as well. Owners, coaches, trainers and, perhaps most of all, the fans.

That's right. The fans. Those of us who feel the need to be entertained every minute of every game. Who will only respond to the big play, the slam dunk, the home run, a new record at every event. Those of us who will pay ungodly sums of money for memorabilia and will do almost anything to get it in the first place. And those of us who feel we are part of the game and are immune to any sanctions for our actions: "we paid good money for these seats, we can do what ever we want!"

Getting back to Brett Favre. He did something more important than win a Super Bowl and break multiple records. He grew as a human. Yes. He was addicted to pain killers and drank more than his fair share. But he had the heart and support to overcome these addictions, discontinue their use, and still perform at the top of his game. In addition, he still plays because he loves the game.

That's an ethos that I hope my kids learn. You can make mistakes. As long as you take responsibility for those mistakes, learn from them and put forth your best effort each and every day, you will be fine. And it wouldn't hurt to do what you love to do - not because others love you doing it.

JS Online: State's condom buy raises hue and cry

This article in the morning newspaper discusses the outcry over the purchase and distribution of novelty - colored and flavored - condoms by the state. While the cost is paid through grants from the CDC, the non-monetary costs don't seem to hit home:

"The intent of offering novelty condoms is to provide greater choices to those people who might be reluctant to use a condom or discuss the subject of protection with a partner, Vergeront said."

Rep. Sheldon Wasserman (D-Wasserman) offered this telling comment:

"Like it or not, we're going to be paying either way," Wasserman said, because taxpayers could foot the bill for health care costs if the state doesn't contain the spread of sexually transmitted diseases."

"Like it or not,"? If I engage in risky behavior - such as driving too fast on the highway - and I get in an accident through my own actions, does the state have the responsibility to pay for my medical bills? If I should die, does the state have the responsibility to compensate and take care of my surviving family?

"Religion is but a myth...

...and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds" ~ Freedom from Religion Foundation. This quote - certain to bring us closer together - was found by Professor Althouse at the Capitol building in Madison. Scroll down through the lovely pictures of the Christmas tree and other decor in the rotunda and you will see a picture of this quote on a sign which represents the foundations criticism of the tree.

Continue to read her comments about the quote. I agree completely.

Science and God

They can co-exist. Despite the extreme opinion on both sides of this argument, I think most people believe in the existence of both, as expressed by Professor Colling here, from the WSJ.com - Science Journal:

"Unlike those who see evolution as an assault on faith, Prof. Colling finds it strengthens his own. 'A God who can harness the laws of randomness and chaos, and create beauty and wonder and all of these marvelous structures, is a lot more creative than fundamentalists give him credit for,' he told me. Creating the laws of physics and chemistry that, over the eons, coaxed life from nonliving molecules is something he finds just as awe inspiring as the idea that God instantly and supernaturally created life from nonlife."

More on obesity

As a follow-up to the November 30th post from the WSJ, this story by Radley Balko at Tech Central Station details more of the harm that unquestioned statistics can cause:

"The CDC's announcement represents a tidy anecdote for what's wrong with the obesity debate. The problem, put simply, is that hysteria sells. It sells research to grant writers, it sells executive summaries to media outlets, and it sells newspapers to the public. Anyone taking a close look at the 400,000 number could see some obvious flaws in its computation. In the New York Times, for example, the University of Chicago's Dr. Eric Oliver pointed out that there are only 2 million deaths each year in the United States, total. Since obesity has little effect on the mortality rates of people over 65, and 70% of annual deaths are among people over 65, in order for the 400,000 figure to be correct virtually every single death among people under 65 would have to have been caused by obesity."

Later, there's this:

"The most troubling thing about the 400,000 fiasco is the way nutrition activists and politicians relied on the number to call for drastic new laws and regulations aimed at getting obesity under control, but which also represented potentially severe restrictions on the food industry, and serious trespasses on consumer choice, personal freedom, and personal responsibility -- and how the media let them get away with it without an ounce of skepticism."

We all need to have a healthy skepticism for all statistics thrown at us. If it sounds too good to be true - or in this case, too ominous - it probably is.

WI: School tax levies rise 7.3% in state

This story in today's JS Online reports that property tax levies by school districts will increase an average of 7.3%. This is more than double the rate of inflation. The story goes on to address some of the factors that have led districts to this 'need'. In addition, it quotes John Gard (R-Peshtigo) as saying his number one priority is to get a tax freeze bill passed in the next session, to end this. Everyone is pointing fingers - and they're all right. What they need to do is turn the finger around:

"Many involved in the school finance scene point to the decision by the governor and state Legislature two years ago to back away from the decade-old commitment to providing, on average, two-thirds of the money for general local school spending as the cause of the property tax increases now.

State Sen. Michael Ellis (R-Neenah) said: 'As the state goes south on participating (in paying for schools), the levy has to go north.' He predicted that, if nothing changes, levies in the next years will increase by 10% or more annually.

School officials also note that not only are they getting squeezed by a drop in the level of state aid, but they also have to cope with rising expenses, particularly the cost of health insurance for employees.

Stan Johnson, president of the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the state teachers
union, said leaders need to have 'some kind of discussion very soon' about how to fund schools in ways that maintain their quality."

We need to be grown-ups about this. We've created - or allowed to be created - a system that is almost unaccountable to anyone. As with most publicly run programs, politicians and bureaucrats have turned schools into the proverbial 'football' that they all use for personal gain.

We are far from unique in Wisconsin. The courts in New York have just ruled that funding for schools in New York city alone, have been under funded by $5.6 billion a year! What they haven't reported is, where the funding would go, what it would be used for, and ultimately, who'd pay for it.

Right now, we have no one representing us on either side with any objectivity. The schools are represented by the unions and administrators who don't believe there should be ANY limits to what we spend. After all, it's for the children.

On the other side, we have the politicians who are trying to make points with their constituents by 'freezing taxes' through a bill or state constitutional amendment. This will not solve the problem, but may get them re-elected.

Schools are important. They are necessary for our state and country to continue to be competitive and successful in the world - now and in the future. It is our responsibility as tax-payers to fund public schools because we all benefit from the product.

Schools must become more responsible. Just as it is the public's responsibility to fund schools, it is the school's responsibility to produce a product that meets the public need at a competitive cost. For too long, schools have evolved to focus more on the social needs of students, rather than the intellectual needs. It has been far more important to reward self-esteem, than results.

This focus has been a windfall for schools. Special needs programs have historically exceeded general funding increases over the last decade or so. Federal and State dollars have provided 'bonuses' to districts for special needs students - thereby incenting districts to redefine and attract (recruit) more special needs students. What is happening in our country that we are producing this ever increasing number of 'special needs' children?

Additionally, the story in the paper this morning quotes school officials who point to rising costs in health insurance as a major factor in the need for increased funding. First, this does nothing to increase the results - children who are better educated. Second, a major reason health care costs are out of line in Wisconsin schools is because they do not seek competitive bids - they self-insure. And finally, most private businesses have chosen to bite-the-bullet and ask their employees to contribute more to the cost of insurance and medical costs. Schools, with very rare exceptions, refuse to do so.

There is more than enough blame to go around and even more difficult decisions which must be made. Unfortunately, we don't have enough leaders - on either side - to take on the tough decisions. It's far easier to point fingers and promote band-aid 'solutions' like tax freezes. Schools happen to be the largest, single consumer of tax dollars, but all departments, agencies and tax funded programs could reduce costs as part of the solution. The vast majority of tax payers are more than willing to pay their share - when they believe they are getting what they pay for. Right now, we don't.

Thomas Sowell: A taxing experience

Thomas Sowell:

"There was a time when the purpose of taxes was to pay for the inevitable costs of government. To the political left, however, taxes have long been seen as a way to redistribute income and finance other social experiments based on liberal ideology."

And more times than not, the experiment fails with unintended consequences which have far greater undesireable impact.

WSJ.com - Round Figures

WSJ.com - Round Figures:

"Earlier this year the House of Representatives passed the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act, which would shield food vendors from civil claims premised on weight gain. Like a lot of other tort reform legislation, however, Senate Democrats blocked it. Perhaps the bill will meet a different fate next year. We hope so, because allowing trial lawyers to exploit the obesity epidemic -- and encouraging Americans to blame their dietary excesses on someone else -- isn't going to make anyone healthier."

What a sad commentary that we need our Representatives to actually attempt to pass laws that protect us from ourselves. I don't mean keeping us from eating too much and getting fat, I mean blaming others and suing them for something we did to ourselves. Shame on us!

Red Cross Finds Detainee Abuse in Guantanamo - No kidding!

It should be pretty clear in this NYT's story, that the International Committee of the Red Cross has an agenda that supports ALL prisoner rights and gives little credence to the efforts by those that hold prisoners in any positive terms. I believe that the ICRC would find abuse if the US gave each detainee their own home, brought their families over, and never spoke with them except to ask if there was anything else they needed to make their stay more comfortable:

"Ms. Megevand-Roggo, the committee's delegate-general for Europe and the Americas, acknowledged that the issue of confidentiality was a chronic and vexing one for the organization. 'Many people do not understand why we have these bilateral agreements about confidentiality,' she said. 'People are led to believe that we are a fig leaf or worse, that we are complicit with the detaining authorities.'

She added, 'It's a daily dilemma for us to put in the balance the positive effects our visits have for detainees against the confidentiality.'"

UPDATE: This editorial from the WSJ describes the evolution of the ICRC and the current state of their political agenda quite nicely.

Budget Trap - Really?

This WSJ.com op-ed piece discusses the current budget process and run-away spending practices of Congress. In it, they attempt to defend the Republicans by pointing out changes made by the then-majority Democrats under the Nixon administration and used successfully during the Reagan years. It isn't until the close of the editorial that they call for new changes. The answer is not to use the earlier changes as an excuse, but to change the process again now that the Republicans control both houses. After all, a Republican is no different than a Democrat if government over-spends and over-reaches. They are all, just politicians - not that that's a surprise:

"Democrats have also learned to skewer Republicans for their individual 'earmarks,' which by one account total 18,000 this year and add up to $22 billion. These pork-barrel classics -- e.g., $1 million for a 'Wild American Shrimp Initiative' -- obscure the larger truth that this year's spending bill is actually the first in years to show some restraint. Domestic non-defense
discretionary spending will rise by less than 2% in Fiscal Year 2005. But what many voters will remember instead is that Republican incumbents are as spendthrift as Democratic incumbents.

A solution here is for Republicans to change the current budget rules, which were passed by Democrats in 1974 over a Watergate-weakened President Nixon. Those rules were deliberately designed to obscure the budget process to make it easier to spend, and to reduce Presidential leverage over spending decisions. Republicans denounced them throughout the 1980s, but now they embrace them as tools of incumbent protection."

The knife's message - The Washington Times: Commentary

This commentary makes some strong points. They aren't points that the politically correct wish to hear or discuss. Radicalism - especially that based on religious belief - is dangerous. In today's world, the most radical - and therefore dangerous - are Muslims. It's just a fact:

"It is perfectly obvious to all but the most obtuse observer, which of course includes the editorial board of the New York Times, that an excess of tolerance is what got the Netherlands and the rest of Europe into this mess in the first place. The Netherlands has leaned over backward to welcome immigrants from the former Dutch colony of Indonesia - to the point where a majority of children under age 14 in the four largest Dutch cities are Muslims. Muslims now comprise 6 percent of the population, but their numbers are surging through large families and continued immigration (about 30,000 yearly).

Some 300,000 of the 1 million Muslims in the Netherlands fervently support the radical imams and mosques that preach jihad against the Jews, the West and all infidels. The Dutch have prided themselves on tolerating everything from legal prostitution, to euthanasia, to freely available marijuana and other drugs. But in tolerating the intolerant Muslims, they have swallowed a serpent. "

There are Christian radicals as well. The fundamentalists who, in recent years bombed abortion clinics in the "name of God", are as guilty as any when it comes to crimes against the general population. Those crimes, however, pale in comparison in terms of numbers and deaths.

All Muslims, as all Christians, are not radical. The problem is, the majority of Muslims are not condemning - at least publicly - the actions of the radicals. This was, and is not, the case with the Christians. Those that committed the violent attacks on the abortion clinics were loudly criticized by fellow Christians and others. The question for the majority of Muslims is, "Where's the outrage?"

Required reading?

While ScrappleFace is parody, it sure makes more sense than reality sometimes:

"'If we actually read these bills, then we would know the specifics about billions of dollars of pork barrel projects for all of our districts,' she said. 'And of course some unnamed Congressman would start leaking this to the media and, before you know it, Americans would start believing that the federal budget is just an elaborate scheme to defraud taxpayers of their hard-earned money in order to fund local projects that local citizens have already decided aren't worth the money. Our whole system of power...or rather, of democracy, would collapse.'"

Maybe our own Senator, Russ Feingold, could be a co-sponsor. He continually said he read the entire Patriot Act, so I'm sure he reads every bill. Right?

Lincoln's Thanksgiving Proclamation

Lincoln's Thanksgiving Proclamation:

"No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. "

Wow, read the whole thing and imagine the furor from the Church & State separatists if Bush gave this proclamation today!

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

Values - we know them when we see them

Many Who Voted for 'Values' Still Like Their Television Sin:

"'Desperate Housewives' on ABC is the big new hit of the television season, ranked second over all in the country, behind only 'C.S.I.' on CBS. This satire of suburbia and modern relationships features, among other morally challenged characters, a married woman in her 30's having an affair with a high-school-age gardener, and has prompted several advertisers, including Lowe's, to pull their advertisements.

In the greater Atlanta market, reaching more than two million households, 'Desperate Housewives' is the top-rated show. Nearly 58 percent of the voters in those counties voted for President Bush. "

It seems like every armchair psychologist and political pundit is out there trying to explain the 'values' issue in America. How can Bush voters say they voted on values one day, and then watch "Desperate Housewives" the next day? Isn't that hypocritical? Ummm, no.

Not everyone who feels that values are being attacked in this country are puritanical. As with most things, so-called experts tend to over analyze based on observations of the fringes rather than the fabric. Most of my friends, family and acquaintances are fairly well grounded. We tend to see the same boundaries and know when they are crossed - without being told by an expert.

"Desperate Housewives" is just the latest 'over analyzed' example. For the majority of us out here in normal-land, we get it. The show actually has some level of freshness. The plot lines - for the most part - are interesting and the writing is comparatively good. The problem that most of us have isn't the content of the show, as much as the when and how it is promoted. In addition, the time slot is a problem for some in the Midwest since it airs at 8:00pm - still a time for some children to be awake.

The show follows another that is very family-friendly: "Extreme Makeover-Home Edition." Families can watch the makeover show very comfortably with kids of any age. The underlying messages of helping your neighbor and volunteering your time are good 'values' that appeal to many. Then, just when you're waiting for the conclusion, the promo's start for "Housewives". And of course, the promo's aren't the witty dialogue or the subtle sub-plots of who the mysterious neighbor really is, it is one of them falling into bed with the underage gardener or another exposing herself in lingerie and fur. Add to this, the insulting promo prior to a football game, and you start to see why we are getting tired of messengers. [Here's something else - the show could probably be pretty good with NO sex.]

As an adult, I have no problem with other adults making their own decisions as to what they do or don't watch. As a parent, and someone who would rather continue to choose what I watch, I am appalled by the content of ads and promo's thrown in our faces. I understand advertising and marketing. I realize that to make more money, either more people have to buy your product or you have to raise your prices. [I may address the pulling of ads facet of the story in a later post]

The 'easy' answer, we're told, is turn off the television. The easy question right back is, "Why should we have to?" There are still many entertaining programs on television - not to mention the educational ones. In addition, even the programs being analyzed - "Housewives", "CSI", etc. - have entertainment value for many, and if people want to watch them, they should be able to. The difficulty is keeping children from being exposed to things that parents decide are inappropriate. The V-chip is all but useless. It may keep most programs from being viewed, but does nothing for promo's. Besides, almost any kid between 5 and up can de-program the thing if they want.

Perhaps more sophisticated folks in the blue recesses of this country see nothing wrong with this exposure. Maybe they believe that kids should mature more quickly. Learn the ropes of the real world as soon as possible. That's their choice, if they so desire. It just shouldn't be thrust upon the rest of us if we choose to let kids be kids.

The Polar Express

My wife and I took the kids (11, 9 and 6) to The Polar Express yesterday. The book is one of our favorite Christmas stories and the film did not disappoint anyone in our family. This despite the fact that I had read a number of reviews that were very unflattering (see below) and heard some of the story line - musical numbers, in Polar Express?

It was hard to imagine taking a 32 page children's book - mostly filled with illustration - and turning it into a full length feature that wouldn't travel too far from the authors theme. The movie, with the exception of the hobo and the 'ticket imagery', stayed pretty close.

Most of the negative reviews at Rottentomatoes address the 'lifeless' characters and the technology details. I find that somewhat ironic, because the I think the artwork of the movie came very close to the illustration in the book. The characters in the book always seemed 'lifeless' and surreal. Maybe like in a dream - not reality? In addition, the 'darkness' of the North Pole and other images - including the 'theme-park roller coaster' the film adds, presents the message of the story: The struggle between 'believing' and not.

One of the oddest reviews is the NYT's review. This excerpt is way over the top:

It's likely, I imagine, that most moviegoers will be more concerned by the eerie listlessness of those characters' faces and the grim vision of Santa Claus's North Pole compound, with interiors that look like a munitions factory and facades that seem conceived along the same oppressive lines as Coketown, the red-brick town of "machinery and tall chimneys" in Dickens's "Hard Times." Tots surely won't recognize that Santa's big entrance in front of the throngs of frenzied elves and awe-struck children directly evokes, however unconsciously, one of Hitler's Nuremberg rally entrances in Leni Riefenstahl's "Triumph of the Will." But their parents may marvel that when Santa's big red sack of toys is hoisted from factory floor to sleigh it resembles nothing so much as an airborne scrotum.

'Munitions factories', 'Hitler's Nuremberg' from Riefenstahl and 'scrotums'? This guy needs to get a grip. He must have had a very troubling childhood! If he expresses the east-coast intelligentsia point of view, there really are two Americas!

Later in the review, he suggests that an 8 year old (age of the boy in the story) is a little old to be 'pinning his hopes' on Santa. As a 43 year old, I take offense to that statement. My oldest kids are starting to make the transition from believing in Santa, to - what I think is even better - believing in the spirit of Santa. Maybe the world would be a little better place if we all lightened up, looked for the good in others instead of the bad, and acknowledged that sometimes, it's okay to BELIEVE!

UPDATE: I apologize to the NYTs reviewer. She is a woman, not a man. She is still wrong in her opinion of the movie, but I was incorrect when I suggested "he get a grip" and that "he must have had a troubling childhood". Please replace he with she!
Also, while the readers of the Times have a more favorable opinion of the movie and by and large feel the same spirit of the movie as I, there are still a few who obsess on the fact that the animation is lifeless and doesn't stand up to Gollum in LOTR. Let me say this: It's not suppose to!

Is this a surprise to anyone?

Can anyone really claim the melee in the NBA game over the weekend is a surprise? I think the surprise is that it didn't happen sooner. In fact, incidents have happened sooner - just not to this level. That's the way things happen in a culture. Small events (and this is still a small event in the big picture) happen and are rationalized and swept under the rug. Remember the 'fans' that attacked the umpire in a Chicago baseball game and the pitcher who threw the chair into the stands this summer?

We are not alone in the US. European football (soccer) has been dealing with hooligans for years. Melees' between fans and players - while not common - are certainly not rare. Also, it's not just professional sports or between fans and athletes. How many stories do you hear about the parents at high school or club events getting into fights in the stands?

The rationalization takes many forms. From the fans, "We paid good money for these seats so we can say and do almost anything we want!" to the players who have been treated like gods for most of their lives and have been never held responsible for much of anything. Add to the fact that they are younger and younger (drafted out of high school), is it any wonder the maturity level and basic responsibility is lacking?

For their part, the NBA benches 9 players in brawl has responded:

"'We have to do everything possible to redefine the covenant between players and fans - and fans and fans - and to make sure that we can play our games in a very welcoming and peaceful setting,' NBA commissioner David Stern said during a news conference Sunday afternoon at Madison Square Garden in New York.

'We'll do whatever is necessary to ensure that we exemplify the best of sports and not the worst. . . ."

Which is only a start. The real measure will be what else they do "to ensure that we exemplify the best of sports and not the worst. . . " and what other leagues learn from this experience. It will also be important for the rest of us to take responsibility. We didn't get to this point overnight. We've watched and allowed fellow 'fans' to push the limits more and more - because we've been intimidated, we chose not to get involved, or we buy into the 'rights' of individuals to express themselves. It's time to get over it.

Yeah. This is a good idea.

Fury over JFK assassin game:

"CYBER assassins can put themselves in Lee Harvey Oswald's shoes and attempt to kill John F. Kennedy in a global internet competition, with $128,000 going to the winner."

Does the winner then get to be shot by the 'winner' of the Jack Ruby Lottery?

I'm sure somewhere, some enlightened individual can provide brilliant insight into why this is OK.

Comments from the Left XVII

This article in the NY Observer was forwarded by a niece with the comment "for those of us in the middle". I think it does a good job of defining the 'middle' on a number of issues. I think if the Republican party moves too far to the right (too many on the left already scream that it has), especially toward evangelical causes, there will be letters from Republicans that look a lot like this Democrat's:

"Lest this sound like gloating, I confess to having a pronoun problem here, and will hereby switch from 'you' to 'we.' I voted for John Kerry. As a liberal separation-of-church-and-state type, I don't like the idea of a President who owes his political life to a conservative religious base. I can't fathom George Bush's policies on the economy and the environment. As for Iraq, while I find nothing of genius in the Democrats' prescriptions at this point, I find astonishing the idea that the administration's performance there is, on balance, something to reward rather than something to punish.

Curiously, then, it is not the party I voted against that is driving me nuts right now. It is the party I voted for. It's the same feeling that I got about the Democrats after 2000: I agree with them, but I can't stand them, in the exact same way I can't stand anyone who would rather whine than shine."'

Humans Ran Into Evolution

Yeah. Every day I'm on that damn treadmill, I think to myself, "I've evolved to this!":

"But new research suggests that developing the ability to run - especially long distances -- was actually more of an instrumental step in the evolution of humans. "

If we 'evolved' through running, why did we domesticate animals to ride and pull our wagons - which we rode in? Why did we invent the bicycle, the motorcycle, the car and the airplane? And what about the escalator and the elevator? Apparently our ancestors would be pretty disappointed in us, huh?

Well, I guess we invented the treadmill too - and without it, I'd just be a lump of clay in the evolution of man I guess.

This is too good! Bravo, good chaps!

OpinionJournal - Taste:

INSULT ART: Can anything top a British snub? Consider the reception planned for French President Jacques Chirac on his arrival yesterday in London: After alighting at Waterloo station, the Toronto Globe and Mail tittered earlier this week, Mr. Chirac was to watch 'Les Miserables,' the 'musical adaptation of the Victor Hugo novel so disliked by French elites.' The venue? Windsor Castle's Waterloo Chamber, 'specially built by King George IV as a secular shrine to the defeat of the French, where large portraits of the Duke of Wellington and other British victors will glare down at the French President.' "

How good is that college - really?

In a WSJ article, Hidden Knowledge, college rankings are taken to task. Not only doe the author suggest that higher education may be passing the buck:

"For instance, a majority of students spend less time studying than their teachers say they should, and 44% reported that they crack the books no more than 10 hours a week. But their grades aren't suffering: More than 80% earn mostly A's or B's. (Looks like grade inflation is alive and well.)"

But later in the article, he points out that the study cited - the NSSE - doesn't list results by college. Wouldn't want to give parents or students anything substantial on which to base their decision, now would we?

Actually, avoiding certain cold facts is the name of the entire game. Think about it: If colleges wanted us to make fully informed choices, they wouldn't just publish data on how their freshman class did in high school. They'd also tell us how seniors fare as they leave, on tests for law school, for instance, or in getting jobs. Until that time comes, one can only hope that a survey like Nessie helps colleges and universities make improvements on the sly.

We are not the "same as terrorists"

Excerpt from an article in Slate via Instapundit:

"Yet it is the differences between these two killings that reveal the most important truths about the Marine shooting in Fallujah. Hassan was, in every sense of the word, a noncombatant. She worked for more than 20 years to help Iraqis obtain basic necessities: food, running water, medical care, electricity, and education. The Iraqi insurgents kidnapped her and murdered her in order to terrorize the Iraqi population and the aid workers trying to help them.

By contrast, the Marines entered a building in Fallujah and found several men who, until moments before, had been enemy insurgents engaged in mortal combat. A hidden grenade would have changed everything, and the Marine would have been lauded. As it turned out, the Iraqi was entitled to mercy, but Hassan was truly innocent. There is no legitimate moral equivalence between a soldier asking for quarter and a noncombatant like Hassan."

In addition, besides the motives of the two killings, the response and ultimate fate of the people responsible will be decidedly different. The Marine will face potential charges and discipline if found in violation of military and international law by his own commanders while the people who carried out the execution of Ms. Hassan will be rewarded by their 'commanders'. The only justice that will come to them is when the Marines track them down and kill them. If that means they are shot like their commrade, 'unarmed' on the floor of their hideout after a firefight, so be it.

Democrat warns on CIA changes

Once again, the Democrats have a problem with results. While they were/are very comfortable making claims that the intelligence agency was failing and in need of reform, as soon as that reform actually started, they got concerned. Again, it's easier to maintain problems and keep them in the open for discussion and policy statements - in fact, I'll argue that it's a political strategy. Getting your face on the Sunday morning news programs and the prime-time cable shows, demonstrates to your constituency that you're on top of things. You're in the fray. For a party so proud of it's progressive roots, they sure like to keep things the same.

If problems go away, what would we have to talk about? How would we earn our keep?

I'm not saying that what Goss is doing at the CIA will solve all the problems. In addition, it may create new ones. But, it may not. It most likely will improve things. And it will be better than maintaining the status quo.

This excerpt from an e-mail, among other things, has Sen. Feinstein all upset:

"''We do not identify with, support, or champion opposition to the administration or its policies. We provide the intelligence as we see it -- and let the facts alone speak to the policy maker.'"

In other words, do your job and stop looking for the get-rich book deal.

Mark this date: Peace in Sudan?

I'm posting this as a reminder. It will be very interesting to see if this 'peace accord' comes to fruition. FromReuters:

"Sudan's government and southern rebels vowed on Friday to end Africa's longest civil war by Dec. 31, signing a pledge in front of 15 U.N. Security Council envoys who flew in from New York to demand the fighting stop."

First, there's no guarantee that when the UNSC gets back on their jet to scamper back to New York, the two parties will even complete the pledge to end fighting by December 31. The fighting has been going on for 21 years.

Second, IF this should happen to work, why did the UNSC wait so long to take the junket and swoosh in to be the hero? As mentioned, the fighting has been going on for 21 years. There have been numerous, public accounts of the atrocities for the last several months. I'm sure that some intelligence agency has brought this to the UN's attention long before the general public was fully made aware. Have the casualties (in the millions) reached a point where the UN feels that there aren't enough people left to carry on the fight, so the chance for success is greater?

I'm not holding my breath.

The continued hypocrisy of the left

Bad-Mouthing the President (directly from Best of the Web)
USA Today is trying to start a kerfuffle by accusing President Bush of being too affectionate toward some of his cabinet appointees:

Bush has bussed two women in public in the past two days. First, Condoleezza Rice, whom he kissed on the cheek twice when he nominated her for secretary of State on Tuesday. He went even further with Margaret Spellings, whom he smacked on the lips when he nominated her as secretary of Education on Wednesday. . . .

Risky business, says Amy Oppenheimer, a California business consultant on workplace harassment issues. Powerful men kissing their subordinates in public can be misconstrued by the kissee or people watching the kiss.

And there's the whole male-female thing, too: Bush didn't kiss his close pal Alberto Gonzales when he nominated him for attorney general last week.

"Kissing is social behavior, not professional behavior, and people have different boundaries about it," says Oppenheimer. "The only person who would know if (a woman is) uncomfortable with it is her--and why would she say anything if she weren't?"

We wondered if Oppenheimer had anything to say about Bill Clinton's behavior toward his female subordinates, and we weren't disappointed. In 1998, when Judge Susan Wright dismissed Paula Jones's sexual-harassment lawsuit, she was quoted in the Houston Chronicle:

Attorney Amy Oppenheimer, an expert on sexual harassment lawsuits, said no one should be shocked by Wright's decision. "It's not surprising that the court would find a one-time incident that was obnoxious and inappropriate wasn't enough to deprive her of her constitutional rights even if it could be proven," Oppenheimer said.

Of course, Clinton didn't actually kiss Jones; he just (allegedly) ordered her to "kiss it." On the other hand, when Kathleen Willey accused Clinton of groping her and the White House tried to discredit her by releasing friendly letters she'd subsequently written to him, Oppenheimer seemed to side with Willey in an interview with the Los Angeles Times:

"On the one hand, she wants to make it clear that she finds the behavior unacceptable," said Amy Oppenheimer, an attorney in Berkeley, Calif., who trains employers and employees and testifies as an expert in sexual harassment cases. "But on the other hand, she needs to make it clear that she's not going to betray him, she's not going to cut off the relationship, and she still wants the advantages of knowing him.

"I think that's a really understandable reaction."

Don't underestimate a good education

Apparently Bill Clinton learned something while studying in Russia during his formative years:

"Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge where there is no river."

~Nikita Khrushchev

"He has also said that he wanted it built on the bridge to symbolize his philosophy of bridging differences, and that the building's modern design represented his philosophy of looking toward the future."

~Bill Clinton

The Power of the Internet

Those crafty internet marketers use abandoned campaign sites to draw traffic to their sometimes, less-than-flattering products. For those of us in Wisconsin, we have link in this story:

"Dozens of recent candidates have seen their dormant Web addresses snapped up by everyone from cybersquatters to purveyors of pornography. The new owners hope to capitalize on traffic still flowing to the sites, or are looking to resell the addresses -- possibly back to the candidates who abandoned them.

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano's site for the 2002 election, gojanet.org, now advertises an herbal formula for penis enlargement. RayClatworthy.com, the erstwhile site of losing Delaware senatorial candidate Ray Clatworthy, features links for music by Stevie Ray Vaughan and books by Ray Bradbury. One of the strangest sites, Doyle2002.com, once promoted Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle but now intersperses advertising links like 'Madonna nude' and 'premium cigars' into the text of a children's story."

Monday Night Football

OK. Call me naive. Call me a prude. Call me over the hill and out of touch with the 'real' world. I understand that football is entertainment. I love football. It is, and has been, my favorite sport to watch for most of my life. But I enjoy football for football - not the 'entertainment' that has grown around it. I admit it. I don't get it.

Plenty of Blame to Go Around in Monday Night Meltdown:

"The league constantly talks about its so-called 'partnership' with its network and cable carriers. But with partners who keep trying to mix sex and football, perhaps the league ought to think about keeping a far more wary eye on the product. This is not about censorship, it's simply about good sense, which at least two of its 'partners' haven't seemed to demonstrate on a national stage within the last nine months. "

UN-OFF Scam Update

The plot thickens (or sickens):

"Congressional diggers have found that much more oil was smuggled out of Iraq from 1991 to 2003 than previously thought. They also report that Saddam pocketed some $2.1 billion more than anyone thought by buying imported goods at inflated prices. Saddam's Iraq signed deals to import rotting food and other damaged goods as if they were top quality; the vendors then kicked back much of the difference to the Iraqi government.

Oil for Food was designed to help feed poor Iraqis who were suffering under international sanctions."

The UN needs more than a facelift - it needs liposuction.

LILEKS: America is still the land of opportunity

LILEKS:The Bleat:

"Remarkable, but the best thing perhaps is that it's unremarkable: you walk into a hair salon, meet a stranger, and hear this tale by chance. Either she's unique, and this was a one-in-a-million story, or it's a fairly common example of the immigrant experience. How you answer that question depends on your view of the country, I suppose. Panglossian Polyanna that I am, I tend to think it says something good. Would you rather be dropped in America at 16 not knowing the lingo, or sent to Thailand alone in your teens unfamiliar with the local tongue? No question. I'm not saying this says EVERYTHING about America, but it explains why I am so instantly bored by those who insist that it really says nothing. By those who think the rest of the world has flaws, but we alone have sins. "

As always, read it all.

We are at War

There's been a decent amount of hand-wringing over this. I'm guessing that had this happened prior to the election, we'd have far more outrage:

The blacked out portion of the videotape, provided later to Associated Press Television News and other members of the network pool, showed the bullet striking the man in the upper body, possibly the head. His blood splatters on the wall behind him and his body goes limp.

Mr. Sites reported that a marine in the same unit had been killed just a day earlier when he tended to the booby-trapped dead body of an insurgent.

Interesting that the last line in the excerpt above [bold] was buried near the end of the article. Is it any wonder that the troops are uneasy and distrustful of the enemy? I don't defend murder or indiscriminate killings, but I also give the benefit of the doubt to our soldiers who are put in volatile situations with their lives on the lines at the hands of an enemy who has demonstrated that 'life' isn't their highest priority.

Perhaps it's telling how politics plays into war strategy. Had President Bush been assured that conducting the war would have been 'hands-off' in the campaign, we could have cleaned out Fallujah months ago and been in a much better situation in Iraq today.

UPDATE: From Althouse, here's more on the importance of Fallujah - from an Iraqi soldier's perspective - as well as more praise of what our soldiers are accomplishing.

Joe Klein: The Values Gap

This is one of the better "morals" analysis from the left:

"But they have also been enthralled by the most intolerant of their interest groups. The liberal hostility to funding faith-based social programs - which are provided mostly by poor black and Latino congregations who need the financial help - is a witlessly secularist reaction against some of the most successful antipoverty efforts in the U.S. The liberals' defense of abortion beyond the first trimester has no moral rationale unless the life of the mother is at risk.

Their full-throated embrace of freedom of speech ignores the social pollution caused by the arrant commercialization of the culture. If Democrats cannot concede even these points and show a real appreciation for the values of faith, they will have a hard time winning national elections anytime soon."

A big problem with the Democrats has been their insistence on government policy solving all that is wrong with the country and the world. It's as if they have no faith in the people despite the overwhelming evidence of success. Only the educated elite in Washington are capable of solving 'our' problems. This is what middle-America said no to. We still believe that the United States is a government "of the people, by the people" and we will not let it be taken by those who discard that principle.

McCarthyism Watch: The Progressive Magazine

Can we agree, regardless of the target, the act is deplorable? I think it terribly important to present both sides - at least now and then:

Anti-Bush sign lit on fire - from Progressive Magazine

Swastika burned into Madison family's lawn - from earlier post via JS Online

Unfortunately, for every example of "McCarthyism" the Progressive Magazine chooses to report, there is an equally disturbing example of tactics from the progressive left. I link to the Progressive in my blogroll for a couple of reasons: one, they are published in Madison, WI - my home state and the city where I graduated college; and two, I think it's important to read opinions from various perspectives.

Peterson verdict: Guilty

At least Scott Peterson won't have to spend the rest of his life tracking down the murderer of his wife and unborn child!

Our colleague and friend Andrew is moving on to a new venture. Returning to his roots in Iowa, he will be missed but not forgotten - especially when the Badgers defeat the Hawkeyes for their final "1-and-Oh" week! I'm sure Andy will keep in touch and we will do the same. Make sure you check in at his blog often. {by-the-way, it was nice to hit 'ignore' when "Hawkeyes" came up in the spell checker! Hah.}

Comments from the Left XVI

From WisOpinion Quotes of the Week:

"This is what it felt like three years ago, the day after 9/11."

--Cheese maker Willi Lehner, at the Wednesday Dane County Farmers' Market commenting on Madison's post-election hangover.

This provides little to comment on. Incredulous and shameful at the same time.

Comments from the Left XV

This letter to the editor at the NYTs is a piece of work:

To the Editor:
There is nothing utopian about the exurbs. They are without public space save the shopping mall parking lot, their people do not saunter, the landscape is uninspiring, neighborhoods are often gated, and there is no place to assemble for protest.

The exurbs are isolated from diversity, removed from the conversations of the world community and free from the sight of poverty, homelessness and class division.

Michael Oman-Reagan
New York,
Nov. 9, 2004

I always understood that a 'goal' of the enlightened left was to eliminate "poverty, homelessness, and class division." Not to have it available, for 'observation', so their own lives become validated? And, wouldn't Utopia be a place where there wouldn't be a need for a "place to assemble for protest"?

There is sooo much else to comment on within this letter, but I leave it to you.

Here's David Brooks original article: Take a Ride to Exurbia

The New York Times Editorial: The Bush Record on Civil Rights

The 'forest for the trees' analogy of this editorial is almost comical:

"The report, which is still available online, is a scathing 166-page assessment of an administration that has, at best, neglected core civil rights issues. It cites numerous examples of administration attempts to replace affirmative action with 'race neutral' alternatives, to focus on voter fraud rather than the more insidious problem of voter disenfranchisement and to recast taxpayers' support for religious institutions as a civil right for people of faith, rather than as a constitutional issue involving the separation of church and state. "

Again, the left is more concerned about the language and policy of government, rather than the actions and results. In the paragraph prior to above, there's this:

"...the apparent aim of the Bush administration is to break with long-established civil rights tactics and priorities. This question takes on a new urgency with the appointment of the White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales, as the next attorney general because he was deeply involved in the formulation of administration policy on these issues in the first term."

Forgive me, but isn't Alberto Gonzales an Hispanic. In fact, if approved, he would become the first Hispanic, Attorney General in US history! Was Colin Powell not the first African-American Secretary of State. And what about Condoleezza Rice, Linda Chavez, Norm Mineta, et al?

Are these appointments because George Bush wishes to have an affirmative action cabinet? Or is it because he really sees things as race neutral (i.e. equality) and selects the best candidates he can?

Politician admits to being a Politician

WisPolitics.com:

"'That's wrong, that's a lie on my part,' she said."

Winners and Losers

Daniel Henninger, in today's WSJ.com discusses the fallout of this year's election on one of the traditional 'winners' in politics - "the media":

"Large media institutions, such as CBS or the New York Times, have been regarded as nothing if not authoritative. In the Information Age, authority is a priceless franchise. But it is this franchise that Big Media, incredibly, has just thrown away. It did so by choosing to go into overt opposition to one party's candidate, a sitting president. It stooped to conquer."

He goes on to suggest - and I agree - that in the long run, this is a bad thing for the national conversation:

"In fact, it's too bad this abdication has occurred just as political opinions have become overheated by the kind of electronic technology deployed in the 2004 election. We really could use some neutral ground, a space one could enter without having to suspect that "what we know" about X or Y was being manipulated. The problem with being spun day after day by newspapers or newscasts is that it gets tiresome, no matter your politics. You end up having to Google every subject in the news (Guantanamo, gay marriage statutes, Tora Bora, the Patriot Act) to find out what's been left out or buried at the bottom."

In his conclusion, he offers a suggestion that may make sense and provide an alternative to formerly 'neutral' media reporting:

"Here's a low-tech solution to a high-tech problem. Why don't we finally institute an American version of the parliamentary question period common around the U.K.? If the likes of Messrs. Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Powell, Snow, Cheney and Bush had to appear before the House in this tightly regulated question-and-answer format, broadcast on C-Span, surely the public over time would acquire a clearer sense of which ideas are competing for their support and vote. Let's get to them, before they get to us."

My only disagreement with Mr. Henninger is that the public distrust of the media has been present far longer than he suggests. I think the advent of new technology has finally made it possible for the disgruntled to voice this distrust to a larger audience than their family, friends and colleagues.

Election day tire-slashing update

Police arrest ex-mayor's and newly-elected Congress woman's sons and in tire-slashing:

"Pratt and Sowande Ajumoke Omokunde, 25, the son of U.S. Rep.-elect Gwen Moore, are among six men who have been arrested and released. No charges have been filed. The district attorney's office said the case remains under review.

Federal authorities launched their own investigation this week. FBI agents are to interview potential witnesses who were in Wisconsin for the election but have returned to their home states. There were hundreds of out-of-state paid and volunteer staffers in Wisconsin for the election."

Proposal increases fees for vehicles in WI

Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle is proposing an increase in vehicle registration and licensing fees. The argument used is an old one. "Even with the $15 increase (from $55 to $70), residents in Wisconsin still pay less than in neighboring states." And that's suppose to make us feel good?

Vehicle fees are but a small component of the taxes and fees we pay to support a state government that has done little or nothing to control it's spending. The $15 increase amounts to a 27% increase. When combined with the $10 increase just one short year ago (October 2003), we're talking about a total increase of 55% in two years! With an average annual inflation rate below 3%, one might wonder why costs have risen so drastically? Other than a $150,000 'mistake' alluded to in the article, there is no mention of the reasons for this increase. Go figure!:

"'I hope we can do it for somewhat less' than what the department proposes, 'but we have to look ultimately at what the dollars are and what the real needs are,' Doyle said Thursday."

Gunfire Greets Arafat's Coffin Upon Arrival in Ramallah

Apparently some people STILL aren't convinced he's dead!

The Bill of Rights: Amendment I

The Bill of Rights:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I am not a lawyer, nor a legal scholar. The above is the text of the first amendment in the Bill of Rights from the US Constitution. This is the famous 'separation of church and state' amendment.

As you can plainly see, the amendment does not contain the words "separation of church and state".

My interpretation is that the framers of the Constitution wanted to make sure that the government of the United States did not advocate any single religion, as Great Britain at the time advocated the Church of England. Nor did the framers wish the US to be a theocracy based on any single religion.

I don't believe, however, that this amendment suggests that participation in government required leaving your beliefs on the doorstep (see Article VI). The fact that some advocate all separation, contradicts the second half of the religion standard written in the amendment: "...shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

For further reading, you can start here.

Blue 'people' insight at Althouse

Ann Althouse asks some pretty damning questions of celebrities who said they'd leave the country if Bush won. Once again, facts and rational thought are lost on these people.

Generosity Index 2003

This report adds some insight into the make-up of Red and Blue states. The highest ranking Blue state is New York (25th). That means 24 Red states have a higher 'Generosity' ranking than New York - including number one - Mississippi. I'm a little ashamed of where we in Wisconsin fall (46th). Of course, we are a Blue state.

The New York Times Obituary: Yasir Arafat

The New York Times Obituary: Yasir Arafat, Father and Leader of Palestinian Nationalism, Is Dead {a regular George Washington, he was!}:

"No other individual so embodied the Palestinians' plight: their dispersal, their statelessness, their hunger for a return to a homeland lost to Israel. Mr. Arafat was once seen as a romantic hero and praised as a statesman, but his luster and reputation faded over time. A brilliant navigator of political currents in opposition, once in power he proved more tactician than strategist, and a leader who rejected crucial opportunities to achieve his declared goal."

Declared goal? You mean the complete destruction of Israel and the elimination of all Jews on the planet?

"In the 1960's, he pioneered what became known as "television terrorism" - air piracy and innovative forms of mayhem staged for maximum propaganda value. Among the more startling deeds he ordered was the kidnapping that led to the massacre of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. In 1986, a group linked to Mr. Arafat but apparently acting independently seized the Achille Lauro cruise ship and threw overboard an elderly American Jew in a wheelchair."

Does changing the names: "air piracy" = hijacking; "innovative forms of mayhem" = suicide bombers; make the acts less revolting? Apparently they are to be admired. So says Judith Miller and the New York Times. After all, they refer to these deeds as "pioneered". I always thought of pioneers in a positive, optimistic light as in: open up an area or prepare a way; "She pioneered a graduate program for women students". Perhaps I need to adjust my definition.

In addition, Arafat only ordered the "kidnapping" of Israeli athletes? The fact that it "led" to the massacre of said athletes is not directly attributed to his order? Neither is the group "linked" to, but "apparently acting independently", that threw Leon Klinghoffer, overboard? Oh, by the way, the "obituary" fails to include the fact that they shot him first, in front of his wife!

Excuse the overuse, and improper use, of question marks, but I really do have a lot of questions - about all of this! And these comments are only based on the first six paragraphs of a seven page (online) lovefest!

UPDATE: The NRO is reporting that the UN and Kofi Annan, have ordered their flags flown at half mast. One can only imagine the ceremony they would have had for Hitler, Lenin, and Stalin? Or what they will have when Saddam and Osama are finally brought to justice!

Gerrymandering - the other election fraud!

Follow this link through Instapundit's site to David Broder's article discussing the impact partisan gerrymandering is having on democracy. Tom Delay's tactics in Texas are not unique to him or the Republicans, but rather than allowing a "wink-wink", tit-for-tat campaign to 'divide up the country', we the people, should call for an end to this practice. Regardless of which side of the aisle you're on!

The political genius of George W. Bush

Hat tip to Andy for this CNN analysis of W's political abilities:

"Instead of just crediting his family name or Rove, Bush's extraordinary political success is probably owed to at least five key things: (1) great political fundamentals, including an ability and willingness to raise large sums of money; (2) an ability to propose a clear, coherent and easily understandable policy agenda (e.g., 'compassionate conservatism'); (3) an ability to attract, manage and retain a strong team of advisers (e.g., Rove, Ken Mehlman, Ed Gillespie, Karen Hughes, Matthew Dowd and others); (4) a willingness to go for the jugular -- repeatedly and without remorse (e.g., the 'flip-flopper' label, gay marriage issue, South Carolina primary in 2000); and perhaps most important (5) a willingness to take a risk repeatedly (e.g., targeting Democratic Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle for defeat, offering a Social Security overhaul plan proposal, relying and counting on an evangelical turnout plan)."

WMD Update

NPR's Anne Garrels (audio link) is reporting that sarin nerve gas has been found in Fallujah. Considering it was found in a briefcase - four packages with 10 vials in each package - it will be viewed with some skepticism. When did it get in to the country, who brought it in, etc?

It does raise and support opinions about WMDs - they are easily transported and small amounts can be - and are - lethal. Whatever WMDs were in Iraq prior to the war on terror, they easily could have been buried or transported to other countries. Because they weren't immediately found in Iraq, does not mean they didn't exist: i.e. Bush lied.

A change of heart at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel?

It appears that the editors at the Journal-Sentinel have finally come to their senses regarding the Kyoto Treaty:

This does not mean that the ridiculous scenarios in the movie “The Day After Tomorrow” or that the most alarmist warnings of some environmentalists are true after all (although the melting of the Greenland ice sheet could have some serious consequences). Nor does it necessarily argue for adoption of the flawed Kyoto treaty on global warming, which was rejected overwhelmingly by the Senate for good reason.

Despite earlier arguments for President Bush to move forward with Kyoto. I guess now that the election is over - and their guy lost - they no longer feel compelled to blame everything on President Bush. Oh, oh - not so quick:

The Bush administration promised to come up with its own plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It has yet to come up with something that will do the job. Now that Bush has won a second term, it’s time for him to fulfill that promise. Getting behind the McCain-Lieberman bill would be a good way of meeting that obligation.

At least they haven't tied this around the President's neck - yet.

(hat tip to: CynicalB for the JS editorial)

Hypocracy of the French...

Read this article to see yet another example of France's global diplomacy views:

"Last Saturday, France's president Jacque Chirac ordered French fighter jets to destroy the entire Ivorian Air Force, including the official plane of the Ivorian president. The attack came in retaliation for a government air strike on the rebel-held north, which killed nine French peacekeepers and an American aid worker."

A unilateral decision mind you. But they, of course, are justified:

"French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie said, 'We deplore the deaths of the French soldiers and the American.' "

The 'other side', has another view. Where's the call for sanctions? Where's the call for UN resolutions to 'solve' this disagreement?

"But Ivorian president Laurent Gbagbo said the bombing was a mistake. In an exclusive interview by phone with CBN News from his presidential palace, Gbagbo accused Paris of trying to destabilize his nation. He said, 'The French are trying to derail democracy in my country. What the French have done is unbelievable.' "

I'm no expert regarding the political environemt in the Ivory Coast. For all I know, Gbagdo could be a Saddam Hussein-lite. Regardless, it's ironic that his argument is based on France's own international diplomacy concerns they raised about the US!

"Gbagbo also finds it unbelievable that the French did not even ask the UN Security Council for permission to intervene."